I bet the Washington "bigwigs" didn't sm

• Oh, I am so angry and so tired! sm - tired
  • Its not just the elderly drawing SS - lots of recipients have never paid a cent
    • I use to work for SS and if you are sm - MT30+
      • Thanks much for that clarification! - assume this work horse will die in harness
        • You are very welcome. Its hard sm - MT30+
  • Do you draw social security or do you know - Sallysue
  • My son is being told in high school - Sunflower
  • Borrowing from the fund is not the only problem -- - Amanda
  • I think the quickest way to fix Social Security... - Zville MT
    • I totally agree with that! nm - passing thru
    • I want the platform that Ron Paul .. - Evelyn
      • I agree completely with Ron Paul - nm
    • I've always said................ sm - m
    • Amen, Zville MT, Amen - MTPockets
    • That is the truth!!!!!!!!!!! nm - MT30+
  • At the risk of sounding cold - AnudderMT
    • there has been an increase the last sm - MT30+
    • It doesn't just sound cold - cj
      • Oh my...seriously... - Trigger Happy
      • you are right it is cold, selfish and sm - MT30+
      • Maybe you need to read it again - AnudderMT
        • Interesting that there is money for........... sm - m
        • I bet the Washington "bigwigs" didn't sm - MT30+
          • Of course not. Duh! LOL! - Trigger Happy
        • what you are not getting - cj
          • This is just another example why - Trigger Happy
          • That is not the case - AnudderMT
            • oversimplified - cj
              • Most beneficiaries draw out FAR more than they ever paid in. - CrankyBeach
                • Social Security is a retirement "insurance" sm - MT30+
              • But still not simple enough - AnudderMT
                • I give up - cj
    • The reason "they" have their houses paid off - sm - sammypot
      • My parents were smart like that too. - Trigger Happy
        • in the same boat! If hubby loses sm - MT30+
      • Eligible for Medicare.............sm - m
        • What problems did we cause? - AnudderMT
        • Elderly parents - MT2
          • Wow. We've become a 3rd world country. :( NM - AnnuderMT
    • Right on! If we workers made more money, we'd - be putting more into SS. - Topaz

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

My math isn't wrong. Gov. Blago+Mrs. Blago (real estate agent, or did you forget?)+Rezko=Obama. Can I make it any clearer?

How about this isn't a new story at all?  How about the government lied to these poor parents, who lost their SON?!  How about the COMMANDER IN CHIEF dishonored and disrespected Pat Tillman and his family?  How about being so blind while unquestioningly idolizing a very false idol, a flawed, lying, devious, unethical, warmonging leader that you, as well, dishonor this woman and her son by still trying to use him as a Bush poster boy?  

I have a feeling that when Fitzgerald is finished with his investigation (the crux of which is the nonexistent Iraq nuclear threat/lie that Bush used to sell this country on an illegal, immoral war) and the facts are disclosed, Bush and his cronies and his followers will be headed down the toilet.  Maybe the Tidy Bowl Man will throw you a life preserver, not that you'd take it.  People like you would be honored to drown in the same S***T as Bush. 

Pat Tillman and his parents deserve to be honored.  How many of YOUR children were killed in Iraq or Afghanistan by this lying president?  Until you've lost one, you're simply not qualified to demean and disrespect those who did.  You think you're some sort of proud American who claims to support the troops?  You're a fraud.  You're nothing but a heartless war monger and deserve no respect whatsoever. 

Here. Have some more Kool Aid.

FROM THE WASHINGTON POST EARLIER THIS YEAR:

Tillman's Parents Are Critical Of Army
Family Questions Reversal On Cause of Ranger's Death

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 23, 2005; A01

Former NFL player Pat Tillman's family is lashing out against the Army, saying that the military's investigations into Tillman's friendly-fire death in Afghanistan last year were a sham and that Army efforts to cover up the truth have made it harder for them to deal with their loss.

More than a year after their son was shot several times by his fellow Army Rangers on a craggy hillside near the Pakistani border, Tillman's mother and father said in interviews that they believe the military and the government created a heroic tale about how their son died to foster a patriotic response across the country. They say the Army's lies about what happened have made them suspicious, and that they are certain they will never get the full story.

Pat had high ideals about the country; that's why he did what he did, Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son's death. The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting.

Tillman, a popular player for the Arizona Cardinals, gave up stardom in the National Football League after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to join the Army Rangers with his brother. After a tour in Iraq, their unit was sent to Afghanistan in spring 2004, where they were to hunt for the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. Shortly after arriving in the mountains to fight, Tillman was killed in a barrage of gunfire from his own men, mistaken for the enemy as he got into position to defend them.

Immediately, the Army kept the soldiers on the ground quiet and told Tillman's family and the public that he was killed by enemy fire while storming a hill, barking orders to his fellow Rangers. After a public memorial service, at which Tillman received the Silver Star, the Army told Tillman's family what had really happened, that he had been killed by his own men.

In separate interviews in their home town of San Jose and by telephone, Tillman's parents, who are divorced, spoke about their ordeal with the Army with simmering frustration and anger. A series of military investigations have offered differing accounts of Tillman's death. The most recent report revealed more deeply the confusion and disarray surrounding the mission he was on, and more clearly showed that the family had been kept in the dark about details of his death.

The latest investigation, written about by The Washington Post earlier this month, showed that soldiers in Afghanistan knew almost immediately that they had killed Tillman by mistake in what they believed was a firefight with enemies on a tight canyon road. The investigation also revealed that soldiers later burned Tillman's uniform and body armor.

That information was slow to make it back to the United States, the report said, and Army officials here were unaware that his death on April 22, 2004, was fratricide when they notified the family that Tillman had been shot.

Over the next 10 days, however, top-ranking Army officials -- including the theater commander, Army Gen. John P. Abizaid -- were told of the reports that Tillman had been killed by his own men, the investigation said. But the Army waited until a formal investigation was finished before telling the family -- which was weeks after a nationally televised memorial service that honored Tillman on May 3, 2004.

Patrick Tillman Sr., a San Jose lawyer, said he is furious about what he found in the volumes of witness statements and investigative documents the Army has given to the family. He decried what he calls a botched homicide investigation and blames high-ranking Army officers for presenting outright lies to the family and to the public.

After it happened, all the people in positions of authority went out of their way to script this, Patrick Tillman said. They purposely interfered with the investigation, they covered it up. I think they thought they could control it, and they realized that their recruiting efforts were going to go to hell in a handbasket if the truth about his death got out. They blew up their poster boy.

Army spokesmen maintain that the Army has done everything it can to keep the family informed about the investigation, offering to answer relatives' questions and going back to them as investigators gathered more information.

Army officials said Friday that the Army reaffirms its heartfelt sorrow to the Tillman family and all families who have lost loved ones during this war. Brig. Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, an Army spokesman, said the Army acts with compassion and heartfelt commitment when informing grieving families, often a painful duty.

In the case of the death of Corporal Patrick Tillman, the Army made mistakes in reporting the circumstances of his death to the family, Brooks said. For these, we apologize. We cannot undo those early mistakes.

Brooks said the Army has actively and directly informed the Tillman family regarding investigations into his death and has dedicated a team of soldiers and civilians to answering the family's questions through phone calls and personal meetings while ensuring the family was as well informed as they could be.

Mary Tillman keeps her son's wedding album in the living room of the house where he grew up, and his Arizona State University football jersey, still dirty from the 1997 Rose Bowl game, hangs in a nearby closet. With each new version of events, her mind swirls with new theories about what really happened and why. She questions how an elite Army unit could gun down its most recognizable member at such close range. She dwells on distances and boulders and piles of documents and the words of frenzied men.

It makes you feel like you're losing your mind in a way, she said. You imagine things. When you don't know the truth, certain details can be blown out of proportion. The truth may be painful, but it's the truth. You start to contrive all these scenarios that could have taken place because they just kept lying. If you feel you're being lied to, you can never put it to rest.

Patrick Tillman Sr. believes he will never get the truth, and he says he is resigned to that now. But he wants everyone in the chain of command, from Tillman's direct supervisors to the one-star general who conducted the latest investigation, to face discipline for dishonorable acts. He also said the soldiers who killed his son have not been adequately punished.

Maybe lying's not a big deal anymore, he said. Pat's dead, and this isn't going to bring him back. But these guys should have been held up to scrutiny, right up the chain of command, and no one has.

That their son was famous opened up the situation to problems, the Tillmans say, in part because of the devastating public relations loss his death represented for the military. Mary Tillman says the government used her son for weeks after his death, perpetuating an untrue story to capitalize on his altruism -- just as the Abu Ghraib prison scandal was erupting publicly. She said she was particularly offended when President Bush offered a taped memorial message to Tillman at a Cardinals football game shortly before the presidential election last fall. She again felt as though her son was being used, something he never would have wanted.

Every day is sort of emotional, Mary Tillman said. It just keeps slapping me in the face. To find that he was killed in this debacle -- everything that could have gone wrong did -- it's so much harder to take. We should not have been subjected to all of this. This lie was to cover their image. I think there's a lot more yet that we don't even know, or they wouldn't still be covering their tails.

If this is what happens when someone high profile dies, I can only imagine what happens with everyone else.

The thing that everyone is forgetting is that not everyone is in Washington right now working - there are some people there trying to work out the details and everyone else will just vote when it is handed to them. 

In fact, they said that things were going better before McCain and Obama got there, that once McCain got there things started going downhill because there are a group of Republicans who do not want to support the package that their Republican President is wanting passed. 

Now, I don't know if I would support it or not if I was there, but I don't think that it is a requirement that every Senator be in that room while they are working on the details. 

I am not a Democrat, I am not a Republican - don't know yet for sure which way I am going - but I do not fault Obama for not automatically running to Washington just because McCain did.  In fact, from all the information I have gather this morning, McCain did not contribute anything to the conversation yesterday anyway. 

I found and joined resistnet.com because I love my country.  It is a very sad, sad day to see it marching towards marxism/socialism, which has failed in every country it has been tried. 

Do you love this country?  Does the blood shed for our freedoms still matter to you?  If so, then please take a moment and join the "We the People" March on Washington DC.  This group is a grassroots planning and organizing effort to put on a peaceful demonstration on May 30, 2009. We are looking for conservatives to join us and assist us in preserving our Consitution and holding our elected officials accountable to the oath of office they have sworn to. We need you to join us and get involved on the State level marches that will also be held across the country.  Every state is participating!

Don't you think it's time we fire any elected official who doesn't uphold, protect, and preserve our 'We the People's" Constitution?

Please join us and invite your friends and families also.

http://www.resistnet.com/group/wethepeoplemarchonwashington

He's really getting ticked off again.

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/20937/

Draw your own conclusions on the state of the MT industry. Should we be worried? I would be as the gov't NEVER moves fast on anything unless it benefits them somehow. I had never heard of the HIMSS until I read the article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/15/AR2009051503667.html?wpisrc=newsletter

George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation
(1789)

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted' for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3rd day of October, A.D. 1789.

 

After C Span aired the 911 Scholars Symposium in LA for 3 days, the questions and information has started to flow.  Looks like some are starting to do some CYA.  There are articles in the NYT, Vanity Fair, and even the Washington Post.  For a change, they are not calling skeptics names.  It is only a baby step, but this has made my day. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html?sub=new

Reprinted in Boston Globe.  Sorry!

his own personal reasons.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php

The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.

Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."

Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.

In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.

"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"

Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.

Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.

Conversations With Bush The Candidate

Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.

The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.

I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."

Debating The Timeline For War

But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.

The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.

On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"

I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."

"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …

"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.

Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.

Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"

Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.

Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."

Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.

Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.

in AR's post that she was against it.  Instead, she acted as if the topic has no place on this board and shouldn't be discussed... like some kind of dirty little secret.

The *attack the messenger* technique has been used constantly in the last 5 years by the current administration (and his followers) when someone gets too close to the truth.  Don't believe me?  Ask Valerie Plame.

Same old.  Same old. 

But, it IS the RNC, so they are damned either way with socialists oops I mean democRATS like yourself. 

I received a call from an friend who was so upset and said Obama called Palin a pig in lipstick.  I responded, surely no, you must be mistaken.  Obama is running for office of the President of the United States.  Why would he ruin his chances of winning by calling this lady a pig.  That doesn't sound like rational behavior for a presidential candidate.  However, to my surprise I opened several different news sources (both liberal and conservative) and sure enough he did.  I'm thinking why, why in the world would you fall down that path of being so low that you would call Palin a pig saying "you can put lipstick on a pig and it will still be a pig".  If he was trying to make a joke in reference to her joke about the difference between a soccer mom and a pit bull is lipstick, this joke could not have come at a worse time for him.  How in the world is he going to explain that one.

Shame shame Barack Obama.  This has to be one of the lowest comments anyone can make about another candidate. - Not funny!  Why would you go and ruin any chance you had that people may have thought you had a little bit of "class" to you.

I haven't watched MSNBC but am curious as to how they are going to respond.  How can they support someone when this is his opinion of other people.

Talk about low class.  One more reason I will not be voting democrat this election. 

Subject: Bet Ya didn't hear about this on NBC Family with Down Syndrome Child Meets John McCain and Sarah Palin September 9, 2008 ((( BEGIN PHONE TRANSCRIPT WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH ))) RUSH:  Kurt in Pittsburgh, hello, sir.  Nice to have you on the EIB Network, and how about the Steelers defense? CALLER:  How about those Steelers, huh? RUSH:  How about that? CALLER:  Hey, listen, Rush, longtime listener, first-time caller, one of those Bible, family, gun clingers from western Pennsylvania. RUSH:  Thank you. CALLER:  And I wanted to share a story with you.  A week ago last Saturday we went to the Palin-McCain rally in Washington, Pennsylvania, was the day after he announced her, and we have a five-year-old daughter with Down syndrome, and we made a sign that said: "We Love Kids with Down Syndrome."  So when they pulled in their bus, the sign did catch their eye (McCain and Palin and the rest of their family) it caught their eye, we could tell, they gave us a thumbs-up from the bus, so we were all excited just by that -- RUSH:  Wait, wait, wait.  Who gave you the thumbs up, McCain and Palin? CALLER:  McCain, Palin, Cindy McCain, we could see them from the bus. We were in a position where we had eye contact with them -- RUSH:  Oh, cool! CALLER:  My wife was holding our daughter. RUSH:  Very, very, very cool. CALLER:  It was really cool, Rush. I was like, "Wow, that's awesome," because I love Governor Palin and so I thought that's really neat.  So then we moved around as the bus was getting ready to pull out, we kind of positioned ourselves so we could just wave them on and a Secret Service agent came up to us and said, "Hey, can you come with us?"  I was like, "Do we have a choice?" RUSH: (laughing) You shouldn't have worried.  It's not the Clinton administration. CALLER: Right. So we accompanied them up the hill, we went right to the bus, where it was, and Governor Palin, Senator McCain, Cindy, Todd Palin, they're all standing there. We're in this inner circle with just us and them, and the Secret Service agent, and they came right up to us and thanked us for coming out, said they loved our sign, and Governor Palin immediately said, "May I hold your daughter?" and our daughter Chloe, who's five, went right to her, and I have some pictures I'd love to send you maybe when I'm done here, but Governor Palin was hugging Chloe, and then her little daughter brought their baby Trig who has Down syndrome from the bus, he was napping, and Chloe went right over and kissed him on the cheek, and my son Nolan who's nine, he thanked her. RUSH: This is amazing. CALLER: I will send you all the stuff, Senator McCain was talking to my son, and we thanked him for his service, and he asked my son if he wanted to see the bus, and we were hanging out and it was very surreal. I felt like we could have had a pizza and a beer with them, they were so warm. RUSH: You know what? I want to put you on hold. I want Snerdley to give you our super-secret, known-only-to-three-people here, e-mail address. CALLER: I will send you everything, Rush. RUSH: And then could you send us these pictures? Would you mind if we put them on the website? CALLER: I would be honored, and my main thing is they are warm, kind, genuine people, and they represent the best of this country. RUSH:  That's right.  And when you send these pictures, make sure you identify them.  I mean, we'll know Palin and McCain, of course.  Identify yourselves. CALLER:  I will, I will identify everybody in the picture, Rush, and God bless you for being a beacon of hope and truth in this country. RUSH:  Oh, no, no.  It's nothing, it's nothing.  You're doing the Lord's work. CALLER:  Well, we're very blessed and I want people to know what a blessing it is to have a child with Down syndrome. These kids, they're angels. RUSH:  That's the thing.  There's always good to be found in everything that happens.  It may be a while before it reveals itself. CALLER:  Absolutely. RUSH:  Right, and when she hugged my daughter I said, here's the difference, this candidate embraces life and all its limitless possibilities. RUSH:  All right. CALLER:  That's what she is. RUSH:  Terrific, okay, I gotta run here, but I'm going to put you on hold. CALLER:  Thank you, Rush. RUSH:  Thank you, Kurt.  I really appreciate it. ((( END TRANSCRIPT )))

you didn't agree with everything in that propaganda.  Therein lies the problem.  Don't put stuff out there as fact if you don't agree with it.

Sorry the Dems didn't have enough votes to pass the bail-out without their Pub counterparts.  They are all a greedy bunch of vipers and I intend to vote AGAINST my Senator (Democrat) and Represent (Republican) when they come up for re-election and I have told them so!  Both have voted to support big business in their district and gone against the will of there constituents on every issue.