I found you post interesting!
Posted By: DW on 2007-11-16
In Reply to: Not that you want to hear from me, but... - Observer
Setting any views you may have aside, you admitted Hillary was at least good at handling herself!! That is the main reason why I still think she's in the race. I was shocked that she faltered at the last debate, so I'm glad she redeemed herself at least a little at this one. Other than that, I missed it so I can't comment.
Overall, I think Senator Biden says some very powerful things, but the debates are the only time I see him. If he would've been able to get out there as much as the other three, he might've done well.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I found this interesting
Actually I was looking for a physician name and this came up with their name on it.... Got to looking at it and you can put in a name, zip code, etc. and it will show you who has financially supported different candidates...... the link I'm putting here has "jones" just as a general name.
http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?type=name&lname=jones&fname=&search=Search
I found something interesting about US healthcare.
Because I am infinitely quizzical about most things and the rising cost of healthcare was on my mind, I did a little browsing and came across this document:
http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm
Now keep in mind this is information compiled is from a think tank funded by some of the biggest corporations, including insurance corps for the betterment and furtherance of the regressive conservative ideal, so I was rather surprised to see these numbers so beautifully printed in black and white.
It shows exactly how much we are paying for healthcare in the United States and it is rather astounding. Far more of our GDP, about 15.5% (the highest in the world) goes to healthcare. Almost double that other industrialized nations that have socialized healthcare.
I think this is a pretty good argument against a free market healthcare system being the most efficient and the best, it is just the most expensive and at the rate it has been exploding, it is going to increase the number of uninsured.
Why is it so expensive? Because the insurance companies are pacing the market. Some things should just NOT be included in the free market enterprise, and healthcare is one of them. We get sicker and the insurance companies get fatter.
That is interesting....in looking further found this...Bilderberg
and Obama....and the Virginia meeting this year.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9270
I found this interesting too. What a mess this will
nm
I found several opposition articles and will post the high points....
and actually I was surprised to see that there were some common concerns and actually very little concerning *a move toward socialized medicine.* This is what I found:
Proposals to expand coverage to children from families earning three or four times the federal poverty limit ($61,940 and $82,600, respectively, for a family of four) also highlights the question of just how many should be subsidized, necessarily at others' expense. The $61,940 eligibility limit would cover median-income families in 14 states, and the $82,600 limit would do so in 42 states. Parents earning such incomes do not need additional subsidies for their children to get health care.
************************
Baucus, Grassley Comment
Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and the committee's ranking Republican Chuck Grassley (Iowa) jointly requested the CBO study but "had divergent views of its findings," according to CQ Today.
Baucus, who supports spending $50 billion over five years to expand SCHIP, said the report validates the program. CQ Today reports that Baucus "expressed little concern" that people would leave private insurance plans to enroll in SCHIP, saying that every public health insurance program provides coverage to some people who might be able to obtain private health insurance (CQ Today, 5/10). Baucus said, "The fact that uninsurance for children in higher-income families has stayed about the same means that SCHIP is helping the lower-income families it's meant to serve."
Grassley said the report supports his argument that SCHIP eligibility should not be expanded beyond 200% of the poverty level. He said, "This report tells us that Congress needs to make sure that whatever it does, it should actually result in more kids having health insurance, rather than simply shifting children from private to public health insurance" (CongressDaily, 5/10).
****************************
SCHIP is a joint state-federal program that provides health coverage to 6.6 million children from families that live above the poverty line but have difficulty paying for private insurance. Already, the program is generous. A family of four with an income of more than $72,000 (350% of the federal poverty level) is eligible for SCHIP's subsidized insurance. Now, Congress wants to expand coverage even further, to families making up to 400% of the federal poverty level ($82,600 for a family of four). But, according to the Congressional Budget Office, 89% of families earning between 300% and 400% of the federal poverty level already have coverage. The CBO estimates that some 2 million kids already covered under private insurance would be switched over to government insurance. The only purpose of all of this seems to be to turn children's health insurance into an outright entitlement — part of the Democrat's broader push to move all of America's health-care industry under government control.
Along with expanding SCHIP coverage to include people higher and higher up in the middle class, the Democrats' bill would also give states incentives to sign up aggressively new "clients," by loosening requirements to join the program and encouraging states to market the program (anyone who rides the New York City subway knows how active the Empire State is already being on this front). How is all of this to be funded? Well, the bill would impose a 61-cent increase in the 39-cent a pack federal cigarette tax, bringing it up to an even dollar. We've written before on how corrupt is the government's interest in the cigarette business. It turns out that the government needs to keep people smoking; the Heritage Foundation estimates the government would need to sign up some 22 million more Americans to take up smoking by 2017 to fund this increase in SCHIP. To add to the irony, most smokers are low-income Americans, meaning that the poor essentially will be funding the health insurance of the middle class. Mr. Bush would be right to veto it while working to increase access to private insurance through tax breaks and deregulation.
****************************
So, it would appear to me that the major problems some have against it are: it will shift children who are now covered by private insurance onto a program unncessarily; it will allow for more adults on the program, something that was never intended; that paying for it with a tobacco tax targets the very people who need the assistance, the lower income families as statistically that is where the most smokers are...essentially shifting the burden for adding middle class families to the lower income families...and I think we can all agree that is not a good thing.
In my research I also found something VERY interesting...
I am sorry to say I did not know the particulars of the President's proposal regarding insuring children...only his proposal extends to everyone, not just children...sure have not seen the media report it....
Opposing view: President's plan is better
Extend SCHIP program without spending billions to expand it.
By Mike Leavitt
We all want to see every American insured, and President Bush has proposed a plan to see that everyone is. Congress, instead, is pushing a massive expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) that grows government without helping nearly as many children.
The president's plan, announced last January, would fix our discriminatory tax policy so that every American family received a $15,000 tax break for purchasing health insurance. If Congress acted on the president's plan, nearly 20 million more Americans would have health insurance, according to the independent Lewin Group.
In contrast, Democrats in Congress would more than double government spending on SCHIP and extend the program to families earning as much as $83,000 a year. But their plan would add fewer than 3 million children to SCHIP, and many of the newly eligible children already have private insurance. So instead of insuring nearly 20 million more Americans privately, Congress would spend billions of dollars to move middle-income Americans off private insurance and onto public assistance.
The Democrats' plan has other problems. It would fund SCHIP's expansion with a gimmick that hides its true cost. It would allocate billions of dollars more than is needed to cover eligible kids. And it would allow states to continue diverting SCHIP money from children to adults. This is a boon for the states but costs the federal government more.
Ideology is really behind the Democrats' plan. They trust government more than the free choices of American consumers. Some in Congress want the federal government to pay for everyone's health care, and expanding SCHIP is a step in that direction.
SCHIP is part of the fix for low-income children, and Congress should put politics aside and send the president a clean, temporary extension of the current program. Expanding SCHIP is not the only way or the best way to insure the uninsured. The president's plan is better. It would benefit many more Americans. It would focus SCHIP on the children who need help most. And it would move us more sensibly toward our common goal of every American insured.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I think a $15,000 tax break would help more American families afford health insurance, thereby covering more kids AND adults, which is the goal, right? And no raising of taxes or targeting the lower income families with a tobacco tax...sounds like a win-win. I don't care if it is Bush's idea or the Democratic Congress' idea...it is a good idea. This time it happened to be Bush's.
Just my take on it.
If you want to find the articles, just put *expanding SCHIP* in a Google search. I read several articles in support of both sides. I did not see much about the income leveling, except in one article, which did mention that New York had a "sliding scale." It did not define it, but I am thinking it is at the purview of the states, and if New York did it others probably could too?
Hi, Your llink did not show up, only 'page not found.' so I post my link inside...sm
NewsWorld newsIran
Tehran braces for crackdown as protesters vow to defy KhameneiSupreme leader warns Mousavi supporters against bloodshed
guardian.co.uk, Friday 19 June 2009
Iran's opposition faces a critical test of resolve and the country an uncertain future tomorrow after the Islamic regime's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a blunt warning to those involved in mass protests over last week's "stolen" presidential election that they would "bear the responsibility" for any bloodshed.
Khamenei rejected accusations of fraud in the poll, confirmed the incumbent, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as the winner, and gave no ground to the millions of Iranians demanding their votes back.
Mir Hossein Mousavi, who claims he beat Ahmadinejad in the race, was said by an ally to have no plans for unauthorised rallies tomorrow following the warning, but supporters vowed to go on protesting.
Fears grew tonight of an intensifying crackdown on media and opposition activists. Students at the fine arts faculty of Tehran University – where scores of students were injured and some reported killed after raids by security forces earlier this week – announced an indefinite sit-in starting tomorrow.
Khamenei's closely watched speech at prayers at Tehran University could hardly have been tougher. It had been hoped he might adopt a more conciliatory tone that would help defuse the gathering crisis, the worst in Iran's 30-year post-revolutionary history. But he warned: "If there is any bloodshed, the leaders of the protests will be held directly responsible. The result of the election comes from the ballot box, not from the street. Today the Iranian nation needs calm."
Tens of thousands of worshippers cheered as he told them: "It is your victory. They cannot manipulate it."
Mousavi, a moderate former prime minister whose "green" movement scared the regime with the support it was attracting, ignored a call to attend the prayer meeting and now faces a dilemma over his next step. Ignoring Khamenei's message risks bloodshed on a far larger scale than the eight people killed last week. Accepting it means surrender to the regime.
The reformist cleric Mehdi Karroubi, another candidate for the presidency, added to the pressure tonight by also calling for the election to be annulled. "Accept the Iranian nation's will by cancelling the vote and guarantee the establishment's survival," he urged.
Khamenei attacked opponents at home but also lambasted Iran's enemies abroad in hardline remarks that bode ill for any opening to the US, where Barack Obama is seeking talks to tackle worries over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Britain was attacked as "the most evil", but the US, Israel and "Zionist-controlled" media were also abused, as was Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state. "The enemies are targeting the Islamic establishment's legitimacy by questioning the election and its authenticity before and after [the vote]," said Khamenei.
The speech underlined the sense of profound crisis, since the supreme leader usually only speaks in public at the end of Ramadan and on the anniversary of the 1979 revolution.
Analysts and commentators were dismayed by its implications. Sadegh Saba, chief analyst for BBC Persian TV, said: "Mousavi wants the protests to continue but Khamenei is saying if they do there might be bloodshed – and it will be on your hands."
Issa Saharkhiz, a Tehran-based pro-reformist commentator, said Khamenei's speech had transformed the crisis from a conflict over the election result into a trial of his own political authority, which was now being openly questioned. "Now the issue is that the supreme leader's sense of justice, management and competence is under question," he told Deutsche Welle. "The leadership of the country cannot be left in the hands of such a person, who for the sake of preserving himself and his own power, threatens people with mass murder."
Crucially, Khamenei ruled out any cheating in the election, apparently dashing hopes that a partial recount ordered by the guardian council, a supervisory body of senior clerics, will mitigate the crisis.
Khamenei's call for Mousavi and Karroubi to confine their protests to legal avenues prompted mockery. "This means that Imam Hossein [the third most revered figure in Shia Islam], instead of making a last stand at Karbala, [should have] pursued his grievances through the legal process," one blogger said on the Farsi blogsite Balatarin.
Balatarin was flooded with messages voicing outrage at Khamenei's warning that opposition leaders would be held responsible for further unrest and bloodshed. One correspondent wrote: "Mr Khamenei, the direct responsibility for any damage to people's lives or property from now on lies with you."
In Washington, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to condemn Tehran's crackdown on demonstrators. It was the strongest message yet to Iran.
Thank you, gt, interesting post
I think that historically the highest socioeconomic class has always sent the lowest socioeconomic classes to carry out their wars.
My boyfriend has said since this Iraq debacle began - if you're truly in support of this war, hey, why aren't you over there?
There is an interesting post
on the Faith board posted by sbMT titled Democracy under Theocracy. Interesting read.
Interesting post regarding US Citizenship on another board...
Not true at all, even if your parent is a us citizen, if you are born in another country, you are a us citizen, but you are forever disqualified from running for president. This does not apply to military bases and diplomats. That is the law. My boss happens to have been born in canada to us citizens working there at the time. Took him 3 years to be able to get a passport to leave the us on vacation and yes they notified him he could never run for president. That is the difference between being a us citizen and a naturalized us citizen.
I believe it is also the same for anyone whom has ever claimed citizenship outside of the us, once you claim citizenship anywhere else, you are disqualified from running for president.
An interesting read from the Washington Post. sm
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
Interesting story regarding a post below about the so-called "racist" John Gibson...
A reporter for an NBC affiliate in Baltimore who inserted a racist remark into a video clip of FOX News' John Gibson and posted it on YouTube is no longer employed A reporter for an NBC affiliate in Baltimore who inserted a racist remark into a video clip of FOX News' John Gibson and posted it on YouTube is no longer employed by the station.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,499525,00.html
What I found so far
I see where Perle and Rice take exception to some of his statements, but that's all I could find. And I guess that would expected as they do have to protect themselves. Also, it's very hard to find opinions that do not have a noticeable right or left slant. If anyone out there has suggestions on middle-of-the-road, non-politically-sided information sites please let me know.
My point was how many people have to step forward and report that the White House manipulated the truth before it gets addressed? How many can you dismiss as saying they had a book to sell, or they were protecting their careers, etc.? At what point does some of what they are saying (Clark, Tenet, Powell to name a few) become believable?
I found it for myself sm
An eagle-eyed reporter for the ABC affiliate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, noticed something missing from Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama's, D-Ill., lapels.
"You don't have the American flag pin on. Is that a fashion statement?" the reporter asked, at the end of a brief interview with Obama on Wednesday. "Those have been on politicians since Sept. 12, 2001."
Catch David Wright's report tonight on "World News with Charles Gibson."
The standard political reply to that question might well have been, "My patriotism speaks for itself."
But Obama didn't say that.
Instead the Illinois senator answered the question at length, explaining that he no longer wears such a pin, at least in part, because of the Iraq War.
"You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest.
"Instead," he said, "I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism."
In Iowa, some Obama supporters applauded the candidate's fashion statement. Said Carrie Haurum of Waterloo: "He doesn't need to wear that flag on his lapel. He wears it in his heart."
But talk radio and cable news quickly pounced on the issue.
"It just shows you he's not ready for the big time," conservative Laura Ingrams opined on Fox News.
Said Sean Hannity: "Why do we wear pins? Because our country is under attack!"
The Obama campaign declined to expand on the senator's statement. Spokesman Bill Burton said, "His comments speak for themselves."
But, Obama responded to the mini controversy.
"I'm less concerned with what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart," Obama said Thursday while campaigning in Independence, Iowa.
"You show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those who serve. And you show your patriotism by being true to your values and ideals. And that's what we have to lead with, our values and ideals," Obama said.
Of course, if he had said that in the first place, he might have avoided any controversy.
I found this almost sad...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml
found what I found..
This was actually on the wall street journal on line this morning. It was edited in. Here is what I found: Unfortunately, I can't provide the link; sorry. This is a quote from it, though.
"Take a closer look. It's a jpg screenshot of a webpage, easily edited. Seeing as they're running pidgin instant messenger in the background, I'd guess that the GIMP is probably the likely photo editing software of choice."
Bth of which can be found there.
nm
I found this....sm
I could only find these two. The first video won't play, and had this line on it. And when I put the whole line in google, I got the aol video.
"Senator Obama proposes a tax credit in the form of a check in the mail for mortgage interests, college tuition savings, childcare, clean cars, earned income tax credit to be expanded, a make-work-pay credit. All of these credits will be refundable to those people who don't pay taxes anyway in the form of a check in the mail. 63 million Americans would pay no federal income tax whatsoever, and most of them would get a check in the mail every January."
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=196103
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/obamas-tax-plan-annual-tax-credit-check-for-tens-of-millions-of-filers-who-dont-pay-tax/3755547671/?icid=VIDURVGOV06
Okay....it took some looking but I found it....
o A $1,000 “Making Work Pay” Tax Credit. For 95 percent of workers and their families—150 million
workers overall—the “Making Work Pay” credit will provide a refundable tax cut of $500 for workers or
$1,000 for working couples. This credit will benefit over 15 million self employed workers and for 10
million low-income Americans, will completely eliminate their federal income taxes.
o A Refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a $4,000 fully refundable
tax credit to ensure that college is affordable for all American families. This credit will cover
100% of the first $4,000 of qualified tuition expenses, making community college essentially free and
covering about 2/3 of the cost of public 4-year college.iv
o A Universal 10% Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a 10% refundable credit to
offset mortgage interest payments and make homeownership more affordable for lower- and middle-income
families. This universal credit will provide an average tax cut of $500 to 10 million homeowners who do not itemize.
I see refundable in there a few times. And there you have the low income folks who will, with the help of this "credit," ELIMINATE their federal taxes. Who is going to take up that slack?
THERE is the bottom we were hunting.
Happy now?
Here's what I found
1. The 57 states. I think that was an honest mistake. I had not actually heard him say that, but that is not one of the main issues we were talking about. Him saying 57 states was not talked about very much and not one of the main concerns we had. Anyway...I think O just made an honest mistake, but here is the video clip.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
2. His muslim quote. The way you phrase it by wanting to see at least one minute prior and after the quote I already know you're going to come back and say that is going to be a slip of the tongue. I'll grant you that - it could have been, and then again it could have not been. If Stephanopolis had not said anything it would have been let go. Again, it could have been a slip of the tongue and people will believe one way or the other. The only people who know if he is really a muslim or christian is him and his family. But then again how many muslims sit and say "my christian faith" by accident. Do you think in Iran or Libya or any of the middle eastern countries they would ever say "my christian faith" by accident. I don't think so, just like you don't hear christians accidently slip and say my muslim faith or my jewish faith. Particularly I don't care if he's christian, muslim, jewish, hindu or athiest. When people talk about their faith, they usually say what their true faith is. Also you will see in this video that Stephanopolis was defending McCain and said that McCain was not going after Obama because of his faith. He kept repeating it over and over that McCain is not going after him because of his faith, but Obama kept ignoring and making it to look like the "poor me they're going after me", and like your original post said if its not true you can't make it up. But then again that would not have given him much sympathy from voters by admitting McCain left the religion out of the campaign.
Anyway...because you wanted to videotape here is it.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=iQqIpdBOg6I
Just let me know what other lies you imply we were saying so I can provide credible sources for you.
I usually like him, but found this very
nm
Found it. See inside.
I'm forwarding this to Alan Combs, Greta Van Sustern (sp) and Bill O'Rielly. Thanks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
AIKEN -- The 6-year-old Aiken girl who'd been dead for up to 14 hours before being taken to a hospital was beaten to death, authorities said Thursday.
And the woman who called Chaquise Gregory her life and her baby is being charged with homicide in the child's death.
![](http://chronicle.augusta.com/images/v4.5/story/photos_top.gif")
![](http://chronicle.augusta.com/images/v4.5/story/photo_prev.gif") 1 / 2![](http://chronicle.augusta.com/images/v4.5/story/photo_next.gif") Special
Aiken County Department of Public Safety officers lead a handcuffed Kathy Salley away from her residence in the 500 block of Abbeville Avenue. She is charged with homicide by child abuse.
Aiken police arrested Kathy Salley, 26, at her Aiken home Thursday evening and booked her into the Aiken County Deten¤tion Center.
She'll be charged with homicide by child abuse this morning, Aiken Public Safety Sgt. David Turno said.
Police arrested Ms. Salley on an outstanding warrant for fraudulent checks to get her in jail, he said.
An autopsy found that Chaquise, who'd moved to a home in the 500 block of Abbeville Avenue in Aiken with Ms. Salley in May or early June, died from a severe beating, he said.
Authorities had already revealed that Chaquise had been dead between 10 and 14 hours when Ms. Salley took her to an Aiken hospital June 23.
"That's all we can tell you," Sgt. Turno said. "I do not believe they're going to go into the full evidence of the case, but we do know it was from a severe beating."
Aiken County Coroner Tim Carlton said he couldn't release many details about what killed Chaquise, except that the beating "caused some internal-type malfunction in the body that caused her death."
Mr. Carlton said there were no drugs found in the child's system, but "there were some older injuries that we're looking into that may or may not have been related to previous abuse."
The autopsy found no broken bones, but there was evidence of past breaks.
Mr. Carlton said the initial results indicate that the child was not sexually abused, but he would not rule it out completely.
She was not molested "that I'm aware of at this point," he said.
Capt. Maryann Burgess, who has been the investigator in the case, said she can't say how many others may have been involved in Chaquise's death or what charges they face.
"We know where they are," she said.
She said investigators also have not been able to verify that Ms. Salley had legal custody of Chaquise, which she claimed.
If convicted of homicide by child abuse, Ms. Salley faces between 20 years in prison and a life sentence.
In an interview with The Augus¤ta Chronicle on June 27 - five days after Chaquise was pronounced dead - Ms. Salley denied any wrongdoing in her death. Ms. Salley said she'd raised Chaquise since she was 3 years old.
"She was the only child I could ever have," she said, and questioned how the girl's biological family could think she was responsible.
Ms. Salley hinted that another person living with her and Chaquise - and who m she said she'd left the child with the night before - may have had something to do with the little girl's death.
"I can't point fingers when I don't know what went on in this house while I was gone," she'd said.
According to preliminary autopsy results that were released soon after her death, Chaquise had been dead between 10 and 14 hours before Ms. Salley took her to Aiken Regional Medical Centers.
Capt. Burgess said the additional autopsy results she received Wednesday led to Ms. Salley's arrest.
Ms. Salley told The Chronicle that authorities found bruises on Chaquise's arm and bottom, and cigarette burns on her shoulder and back.
Mr. Carlton said investigators are still trying to determine whether those marks were cigarette burns.
"It's just a tragic incident that was visited on a defenseless child," Mr. Carlton said. "And if the allegations are all true, then we certainly hope that the law and criminal justice system will be the defender of this child's rights."
I did some research on this and what I found is that he DID NOT
get paid for this case, it was pro bono.
"Roberts' work on the case was one of several he helped handle as part of his pro bono work at Hogan & Hartson, a prominent Washington law firm that expected its partners to volunteer their time to assist in community service.
Source - LA Times
In his answers to the Senate questionnaire, Roberts talked more generally about his volunteer work.
"My pro bono legal activities were not restricted to providing services for the disadvantaged," he wrote, explaining that he often donated his time and expertise on projects by working behind the scenes."
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:Uy77hebjJ60J:www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi%3FArtNum%3D103923+roberts+paid+pro+bono&hl=en
I found the answer.
It supposedly was a mistake, and it's been changed. Unfortunately, the groups involved in complaining about this are much less than credible, and it's impossible for me to just take what they say at face value. I don't believe they're above just inventing propaganda just so they can blame it all on the immoral liberals.
If it truly was a mistake, it was a stupid mistake, and I'm glad they fixed it. It's too bad that I just don't know who I can believe and who I can trust any more. 
Barbie Accused of Being Part of the Transgender Movement
By JAKE TAPPER
WASHINGTON, D.C., Jan. 3, 2006 — - The Concerned Women for America were ... well, concerned. Outraged, even. Was Barbie becoming part of the transgender movement?
On Dec. 30, CWA, a leading Christian conservative group, noted on its Web site that on the Barbie Web site, www.Barbie.com, there is a poll that asks children their age and sex.
You can see a screen grab of the poll here.
The age choices were 4 to 8 but children are given three options for their choice of gender: I am a Boy, I am a Girl and I Don't Know.
Bob Knight, director of CWA's Culture and Family Institute, said Barbie manufacturer Mattel was being influenced by the transgender movement.
To pose this transgender question at little girls, they've really crossed the line, Knight said, who added that bisexuality gender confusion is the Web site's agenda, which is very dangerous.
The concern comes after a conservative boycott of Mattel's American Girls dolls. The American Family Association and the Pro-Life Action League protested that some American Girls dolls were wearing I Can wristbands, which support Girls Inc. Girls Inc. is a national, nonprofit organization that promotes education and self-esteem programs, as well as sex education, and supports abortion rights and the acceptance of gays and lesbians. The Mattel-Girls Inc. partnership ended on Dec. 26.
But Mattel, which also manufactures Barbie, said the Barbie incident is much ado about nothing.
This was just an innocent oversight, says Lauren Bruksch, a spokeswoman for Mattel. As a rule of thumb, Bruksch said, the questionnaires at barbie.com always try to have a neutral answer or nonresponse option. For gender, this third option should have been I don't want to say, rather than I don't know. The Web site has since been fixed.
Knight had said CWA would contact Mattel to investigate the matter, but Bruksch said Mattel first heard of the complaint when ABC News called for comment.
I only found one story on this. sm
From an obscure site called Rogers Cadenhead. The remainder of the stories, from the LA Times, etc., did not include anything about U.S. Troops protecting the Hezbollah sympathizers.
Found it. Cute!
My 5-year-old just happened to walk into the room when I clicked on it, and of course he liked it too! Thanks. That's actually based on a true story right? I had forgotten about that story until watching that. Makes my heart ache. Thanks for posting.
I think I found the answer. sm
1. persecution complex
One of the top fifteen factors that can transform a reasonable, amiable, friendly person with reasonable, friendly beliefs and ideas into a ranting, screaming, judgemental zealot with poisonous, nauseating, self-righteous dreck for beliefs.
Persecution complex can strike anyone, regardless of belief, creed or religion, or whether they disagree with you or not. Once you start believing that the whole world is against you, you begin to justify your abominable actions by the presumed hostility of the world. Mind you, it's a great way to not only make enemies, but also an excellent way of making people reject your beliefs and idealogy.
yep, I found this and a couple more, see above....sm
haven't had time to read through it all, though.
This is what I found on McCain
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm
You know, really....I'm sure Hillary would have found out if any of this...sm
were true. I'm sure she had hundreds of people trying to find anything like this on Obama, and if it would have stuck, she would have been like glue on it....lol....
I would have to say none of it flies.
That said, if I or anyone in this country ever found out that any person we put in the white house had lied about something like this, I would vote for immediate impeachment and jail time.
That would include McCain, not just Obama, if any of these allegations were true.
Anyone with me on this last point?
Never mind - I think I just found it - nm
x
found this for you, Kaydie -
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29203
Happy. I actually found it myself just now....along with
So, it seems that McCain also has a refundable tax credit in his plan too...larger, in fact than Obama's. $2500 for individuals and $5000 for couples for health insurance. This begs my original question, which yet have to answer.
Whe Obama adjusts taxs rates within our historical progressive tax structure, it's socialism. When anybody else does it, it's not. So, I am wondering...if Obama has a smaller refundable tax credit in his plan than McCain, why is it welfare under Obama and not under McCain?
says page could not be found???
s
I just found it ironic
The way she describes Obama is how the serpent is described. That's all. Relax.
Obama is not everything to assume I see evil in everything. Besides, I never said he was evil. I just haven't been lured into his candy promises just because of his "velvety" voice and great rhetoric. He's good, I'll give him that.
My point is, that many here have said nothing ever found...
I know people that were there and have said WMDs were found. Think I would believe them before all these reports. Those same reports got us into this war. Hmmmm.
If I found something to laugh about...... sm
I would. I just don't view the whole concept of abortion as funny in the least, and I find jokes about it, in any capacity, to be especially sick and demented. 
An article I found
I found this after I posted. I can't tell if the writer is for or against Bush. That's why I like the article. It states the facts, not someone's opinion showing their hatred for someone.
http://www.antiwar.com/eland/?articleid=13452
I found that comical but.....
it is really sad when you think about it. Makes you wonder WHAT will stimulate this economy. 
Found this on another site..........sm
Granted, it is just an opinion (of someone else) but I think this plan would work to achieve the desired results much more so than the current plan. Granted, it does not create jobs, but if it were implemented, then the money would be there for spending and that would, in turn, create jobs in most of the areas where they have been lost - retail sales and manufacturing. It might also create jobs in construction as folks might be more inclined to make home improvements or even buy a new home with the money freed up.
DEAR PRESIDENT OBAMA, VP BIDEN AND CONGRESS;
.
YOU WILL PROBABLY NEVER SEE THIS, READ IT, CONSIDER IT OR USE IT, BUT HERE GOES! I AM WHITE MALE, REGISTERED INDEPENDENT, 62 YR OLD TEAMSTER RETIRED FROM A COMPANY THAT USED TO BE CALLED AIRBORNE EXPRESS. WHICH WAS BOUGHT OUT BY A GERMAN COMPANY DHL. WHICH NOW HAS CLOSED DOWN ITS DOMESTIC OPERATIONS AND CENTRAL DISTRIBUTION HUB/AIRPORT, DELIVERY STATIONS AND CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTERS. LAYING OFF 9,000 AMERICAN WORKERS ACROSS AMERICA AND DESTROYING ONE PARTICULAR AMERICAN TOWN, WILMINGTON OH!
.
TAX CUTS ARE FINE BUT EITHER THEY DONT WORK OR DONT PUT MONEY IN OUR POCKETS TO SPEND AND STIMULATE THE ECONOMY FROM THE BOTTOM UP! THE “TRICKLE DOWN THEORY” EITHER DIDNT WORK OR WASNT FAST ENOUGH!
.
ALSO, THANKS TO THE LAWYERS IN CONGRESS, THE STIMULUS PACKAGE 2009 POSTED ON LINE IS NOT DETAILED ENOUGH FOR THE AVERAGE AMERICAN TO UNDERSTAND! PLEASE SIMPLIFY IT AND GO ON PRIME TIME TV AND EXPLAIN IT TO US LINE BY LINEEXACTLY HOW EVERYONE OF OUR DOLLARS IS TO BE SPENT, WHAT KIND OF JOBS WILL BE CREATED AND WHERE THEY WILL BE!
.
BESIDES THE ABOVE I PROPOSE THE: “TRICKLE UP THEORY”
.
1.
A. GIVE EACH LEGAL U.S. ADULT CITIZEN $1MIL TAX FREE! YES THATS A LOT (SO IS THE $50 BIL A MONTH BEING SPENT ON THE WAR FOR THE PAST 8 YEARS). BUT IT WILL DO A LOT MORE GOOD THEN THE PALTRY SUMS CONGRESS IS TALKING ABOUT! BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY DEEP FINANCIAL HOLE WEVE GOTTEN OURSELVES INTO THAT WE MUST NOW CLIMB OUT OF!
.
B. EACH OF US MUST SIGN A LEGAL CONTRACT BETWEEN US AND THE GOVERNMENT AGREEING TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS OR FORFEIT THE MONEY ALL WITHIN A 1-2 YEAR TIMELINE!
.
2. MUST BE SPENT ON;
.
A. EITHER TO RECLAIM OUR FORECLOSED PRIMARY RESIDENCES OR TO PURCHASE ONE. (NO VACATION HOMES, INVESTMENT/SPECULATION OR BUSINESS PROPERTIES!)
.
B. MUST BE SPENT TO IMPROVE OUR PRIMARY RESIDENCES IE; ENERGY EFFICIENT INSULATION, WINDOWS, DOORS, ROOFS, SOLAR PANELS ETC!
.
C. YOU MUST PAYOFF ALL MORTGAGES, LOAN, DEBTS, ETC!
.
D. YOU MUST SETUP FULL COLLEGE FUNDS FOR YOUR CHILDREN UNDER 21 YEARS OLD. YOU MUST SETUP FULL HEALTHCARE PLANS FOR YOU, YOUR SPOUSE AND ANY CHILDREN UNDER 21 YEARS OLD!
.
E. YOU MUST PURCHASE THE MOST EFFICIENT U.S. MADE APPLIANCES, CARS, TRUCKS, ETC!
.
IN CLOSING WE MUST STOP THE BICKERING AND WHINING IN CONGRESS AND GET THIS DONE ON TOP OF THE PRESIDENT’S 2009 STIMULUS PACKAGE! IT MUST BE DONE NOW, BECAUSE THERE ARE FAMILIES OUT THERE SUFFERING, NO JOBS, NO FOOD, NO HEALTHCARE, NO HOUSING! THEYRE SLEEPING AND STARVING OUT IN THE WOODS AND UNDER THE BRIDGES ACROSS AMERICA!
.
GIVE US THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS/CITIZENS OUR OWN MONEY BACK AND LET US INFUSE THE ECONOMY WHICH WILL CREATE THE JOBS AND INFUSE THE TAX BASES! TRUST US TO DO THE RIGHT THING LIKE WE TRUSTED YOU WHEN WE VOTED FOR YOU TO REPRESENT US!
.
I WOULD HAVE SENT THIS DIRECT TO WHITEHOUSE.GOV OR STRONGMIDDLECLASS.ORG BUT THEY ONLY ALLOW 500 CHARACTERS/LETTERS NOT WORDS AND THAT IS NOT NEARLY ENOUGH!
.
TO ALL OF MY FRIENDS OUT THERE I ASK YOU TO PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS LETTER AND IF YOU AGREE PLEASE BY ALL MENAS, SIGN YOUR NAME TO IT AND FORWARD IT TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS. EMAIL IT TO ALL THE SENATORS AND CONGREEMEN/WOMEN IN CONGRESS, TO ALL THE NEWSPAPER EDITORS ACROSS AMERICA!
.
IF YOU DONT AGREE THEN PLEASE COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER! BUT PLEASE BY GOD DO SOMETHING WITH THIS BEFORE THEY LET THIS WONDERFUL COUNTRY AND US GO TO RUIN!
I found something about that on MSNBC also..sm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29256639
I wonder if I can get in on that action. LOL. I am one of those people who did not buy more house than they could afford and did exercise due diligence by NOT getting an ARM. Oh well....
I just found out too from my husband.
I guess there is so much news to report that Barbara Bush was not important. So sad. Hope she is fine and has a speedy recovery.
I found Pee-Wee's Playhouse!!!
I found it hillarious, too (sm)
Rachel Maddow doesn't even know what the movement is all about and doesn't care to find out. She makes a big joke out of it, all the while ridiculing and making an a$$ out of the people who are going to participate and only because Fox News will be there to cover it.
I think she needs to come down to earth.
I keep getting "Page not found" (nm)
.
Then how come so many are being found out? What was that again about moral values? nm
:
I found it rude and disrespectful. sm
But that's a liberal for ya!
and now they've found out all 3 candidates'
Reminds me a lot of LA hospital employees getting fired for snooping in Britney Spears' medical records. I don't know what exactly there is to snoop in passport records, but it's still a privacy breach.
There are plenty of misspeaks to be found
from ALL the candidates from both parties. That doesn't make it right but arguing over whose misspeak is the worse doesn't get us anywhere.
So don't bother to duck. I'm not gonna throw anything.
I found the same kind of information.
I don't know where some of these people are finding positive information about this stuff but it definitely sounds scary to me. To me is sounds as racist as the KKK and I don't want part in either one. Yes, that church may do a lot of things for the black community, but they still spew out hate messages. If people are ignorant enough to believe that Obama doesn't agree with this.....nothing I say will change that ignorance. You don't spend 20 years in a church, exposing your kids to that stuff, referring to the pastor as your mentor and then turn around and say that you don't agree with that. If I don't agree with the pastor of a church and find his sermons disturbing....I stop going there. The only reason Obama threw his pastor and mentor under the bus was to save his own political rear end. End of story!
Curious about where you found this article. Why?
nm
Nevermind....I found it, although it doesn't say....
anything about a measley buffet...lol. Actually, at Barb's bash, it was $28,500 for dinner and an additional $2,500 to hear her sing.
It says he raised 5.1 million (McCain). I don't see anywhere except on a blog that it was $50,000 a plate though.
That being said...you are correct. They both went to big fundraisers. Not any happier with one than the other on that score. I know it is politics as usual on both sides...don't have to like it, tho...on either side.
Thanks for posting. That is what this board is about. Getting all the information out there.
|
![](http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/playsoftheDay_071128_mc.jpg")
![](http://a.abcnews.com/images/Site/abc_default_image_mc.jpg")
![](http://augustachronicle.com/images/headlines/071505/48568_170.jpg")
