Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

I think Lieberman puts Country first. -has guts.nm

Posted By: Independent on 2008-09-03
In Reply to: Zell gave that speech exactly 4 years ago to the date... nm - Clean-up Hitter

nm


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

Not enough people in this country have the guts for a tax revolt.
Unfortunately, the game is rigged against that too, because you need to be able to defeat an incumbent in the primary (in order to have another candidate of your party), and many incumbents run unchallenged in their primaries. This means you have to vote against them in the general election by voting for a candidate of another party. Many people find this very repugnant to do unless the candidate is truly very moderate.

When you really look at how the major parties have rigged the electoral process to keep themselves in office, you can see the extent of the corruption. On the other hand, when you look at countries that have more than two major parties, those don't work any better because two of them will get together to collude against the third party, etc. Israel is a good example of the mess you get into with multiple parties, none of which can get elected by themselves. They end up forming "alliances" with other parties and it gets very complicated just trying to figure out "who" is going to be in power or what they will do.

Perhaps there's a really big question here: Is mankind capable of competent self-government that is free of corruption, influence-peddling, secret deals and lies? I am beginning to think not.
Lieberman: 'I'm not Bush.'
Make sure you read the last paragraph...

Lieberman to Opponent: 'I'm Not Bush'
U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman tells opponent, newcomer Ned Lamont: 'I'm not George Bush'

WEST HARTFORD, Conn., Jul. 7, 2006
By SUSAN HAIGH Associated Press Writer
(AP)


(AP) U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman sought to distance himself from the Bush administration during a televised debate with his upstart Democratic primary challenger Thursday, telling him: I'm not George Bush.

Lieberman's opponent, political newcomer Ned Lamont, has gained in statewide polls by accusing Lieberman of straying from his Democratic roots. Just six years after being his party's nominee for the vice presidency, Lieberman has fallen into disfavor among some Democrats for his perceived closeness to President Bush and support for the war in Iraq.

I know George Bush. I've worked against George Bush. I've even run against George Bush. But Ned, I'm not George Bush, Lieberman said during the debate, televised nationally by MSNBC and C-SPAN. So why don't you stop running against him and have the courage and honesty to run against me and the facts of my record.

Lieberman, 64, who is running for a fourth term, is facing an Aug. 8 primary battle.

The founder of a cable television company, Lamont has dumped more than $1.5 million of his own money into the race. He has said he is prepared to invest up to $1 million more. During the debate, he cited rising gas prices and health care costs as problems, and repeated his opposition to the war in Iraq.

In Washington, we're making a lot of bad choices right now, Lamont said in his opening statement. We're losing a lot of our good paying jobs here in the state of Connecticut, and I wonder about the opportunities for our kids as they get older.

And Senator Lieberman, if you won't challenge President Bush and his failed agenda, I will, he said.

Lieberman announced Monday he would begin collecting signatures to petition his way onto the November ballot as an independent candidate should he lose the primary.

Polls by Quinnipiac University have shown Lamont's support among registered Democrats increasing from 19 percent in May to 32 percent in June. Lieberman's support in the same period fell from 65 percent to 57 percent.

But the same poll predicted Lieberman winning with 56 percent of the vote if he runs as an unaffiliated candidate, compared with 18 percent for Lamont and 8 percent for Republican Alan Schlesinger.

In an interview on CNN's Larry King Live Thursday, Bush said he was not going to weigh in on Lieberman's primary race and declined to say whether he would support Lieberman if he ran as an independent.

First, the Democrats have to sort out who their nominee is going to be and that's going to be up to the Democrats. And the rest of it's hypothetical, the president said.

When pressed about his liking Lieberman, Bush responded, You're trying to get me to give him a political kiss, which may be his death.


MMVI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Lieberman indirectly

questioned Obama's patriotism last night at RNC, but in 2006 his campaign begged Obama for support in his race against Lamont.  Obama came through for him.  Joe L., what an upstanding guy.  Also, Lieberman is "down with" that "country first" slogan but has dual citizenship with Israel?  Will anyone from the convention not be unmasked as a hypocrite?


 


Yes, and did you hear the comments about Lieberman...
"We wrote him off a long time ago." "He will find it very difficult from now on." Geez. And they call themselves the Democratic party (I am talking about the DNC, the power brokers..who seem to speak for everyone tho)
Wasn't Lieberman a democrat?
He switched from the democratic party and I believe he is supporting McCain.
Lieberman supports McCain
I heard about that and also Juliani also supports him.  I think that's great.
I think Lieberman has an identity problem.
x
Lamont Says He'll Challenge Lieberman..sm

March 13, 2006



In Connecticut, Lamont Says He'll Challenge Lieberman

Saying voters deserve a choice and reiterating his opposition to the Iraq war, Ned Lamont (D) formally said today that he will challenge Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) for the Democratic nomination this year, the AP reports. Lamont will be Lieberman's first opponent from within the party during his three terms in the Senate.

Lamont hopes to garner support from Connecticut Democrats dissatisfied with Lieberman's pro-war stance and his perceived closeness with President Bush's administration.

Someone needs to say it, wish more had the guts.sm
What he said was the truth. Everything has gotten so Orwellian it is creepy. The silence about it from both left and right is disturbing.

Truth = nuts.
Free speech = treason.




Any thoughts on Joe Lieberman endorsing John McCain....
just wondering.  I think that could have a real effect on undecided Independents as to which way they fall.  Might result in a lot of Independents registering as Dem or Repub now to vote in the primaries who might not otherwise have done so.  Very interesting development. 
Wow....I know most of you hate his guts but...
he is a human being after all, and he just looks to me like he hs the weight of the world on his shoulders, and doesn't try to hide it for a photo op. I don't agree with all the decisions he has made, but I am firmly behind him on his terrorism stance, and I appreciate the fact that he doesn't mind showing his emotions. He is the FIRST President I have ever seen in tears talking with fallen soldiers' families, and he is not the first President to be in power in wartime. Yet many will say he doesn't care that soldiers die. Which is a ridiculous statement. Like I said, I do not agree with many decisions he has made, but I don't think he is the devil incarnate. As much as I have heard Obama say he was against the war, he wouldn't even go and visit wounded soldiers still living, and I certainly have never seen him in tears or even the least bit emotional talking about the losses. To him it is numbers it would appear...to Bush those numbers have faces and families. I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't what was on his mind in this photo.

I just don't understand the demonization of one man. I didn't see that treatment of Kennedy during Viet Nam or Clinton during Somalia and Kosovo...but of course, those men were Democrats. I guess that makes a difference in the minds of some. In mine...not so much.
Well, if you have the guts, go to the site...
http://www.abort73.com/ and view that video. The one that starts out with warning, graphic images. Then you come back here and tell me about baby mutilation.

And frankly, the way a bill is worded means nothing. If you would vote against a bill designed to save a child born alive for ANY reason, you are, in MY opinion, morally bankrupt. That is putting politics above the life of a child, and that tells me all I want to know about Barack Obama's decision-making process. If that sits okay in your books, fine, you certainly have the right to your opinion. I have the right to mine as well...and it does not sit okay with me.
I saw her. The lady has guts too!
nm
So, you don't have the guts to comment on
the mass execution of 3000 women, children and elders in Sabra and Shatila? Sort of reminiscent of Nazi concentration camp tactics, don't you think? Line 'em up single file and gun 'em down. Fine by you, yes? Children, no problem, right? After all, they are born terrorists, according to you.


OBAMANOMICS: In your guts you know he's

So, we all know that California is absolutely on the brink of bankruptcy - perhaps as soon as July.   The state desperately needs to make certain wage cuts - and the Obama administration responds by threatening to rescind the state's share of stimulus money!!  Can you say "oxymoron"?? 


Now, if the more cynical among you might be wondering if a union could be behind this ridiculous situation...well, you'd be right.  The infamous SEIU - just another boil on the backside of this nation.


Zell Miller is the man!! That man has guts. That is the ONE...
Democrat I vote for. What are you gonna fight them with? Spitballs?? Love him. lol.
It was the truth & I admire Colbert's guts. sm
Typical neo-conservative, do not like the message shoot the messenger. Colbert said what MOST of us think, but are afraid to say. The looks on their faces were priceless.
Yep. She has smart and has guts. Leftists hate her.
nm
He tells the truth. has guts. Shows compassion
nm
It puts you
at the top of my list of level-headed Christians from whom the rest of the party/religion could learn a thing or two, & that is no lie.

I am quite reassured to know that there are some very religious people out there who still manage to separate church & state. I wish there were more of you, or at least, more who were willing to insist that this view be part & parcel of the Republican party. If there were, I'd still be a Republican, but I left the party long ago because of its exclusionary principles.




Still, nobody puts a gun to their heads

and makes them sign on the dotted line.  You can always change your phone number and address.


Personaly, I don't believe much of that crap you're posting is true.  I know recruiters can be persistent, but all this conspiracy theory is just that, conspiracy.


Bush puts name to everything...sm

















Americas
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/grey.gif




















src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif





The Times March 24, 2006






src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,281993,00.jpg
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif
src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif


Bush puts name to everything


src=http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif






President Bush has become the longest-sitting President since Thomas Jefferson — who occupied the White House between 1801 to 1809 — not to exercise his veto, surpassing James Monroe.










Monroe had been in office for 1,888 days before he vetoed his first Bill on May 4, 1822. Jefferson, America’s third president, never exercised his veto.

Yesterday was Mr Bush’s 1,889th day in office. Congress has sent him 1,091 Bills and he has signed them all. His refusal to wield the veto has angered fiscal conservatives. They have become dismayed by his failure to block legislation stuffed with “pork barrel” special interest projects, at a time of growing national debt and runaway spending.

Last month Mr Bush threatened to veto legislation aimed at blocking a sale of US port operations to a Dubai company. He was saved from a showdown after the company sold that part of its interests to a US entity.

Ronald Reagan vetoed 78 Bills, and Bill Clinton 36.


I will bet that he puts his pants on one
DH does! He really is JUST A MAN, his s**t stinks just like the homeless beggars hanging around DC. He really is JUST A MAN. This isn't even humorous any more, just beyond anything I have ever heard. He will never be "one of us", he has himself on too high a podium to drop to some peon's level.
That puts you in the 26% range...(sm)

according to a recent poll asking the question of whether or not Americans felt safe with Obama.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/13/cnn-poll-obama-not-making-us-less-safe/


Looks like you're still in the minority, a rather small one at that.


That puts you in the 26% range...(sm)

according to a recent poll asking the question of whether or not Americans felt safe with Obama.


[Exert] "Seventy-two percent of those questioned in the poll released Monday disagree with Cheney's view that some of Obama's actions have put the country at greater risk, with 26 percent agreeing with the former vice president."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/13/cnn-poll-obama-not-making-us-less-safe/


Looks like you're still in the minority, a rather small one at that.


I don't think that puts his reputation on the line
If Obama gets elected and he is truly as bad as we think, then we will know God has brought the judgment on us. Serves us right too.

God rarely answers when you try to bargain with him. Praying "prove to me by doing such and such" doesn't seem to bear much fruit from what I've seen. It should be "your will be done"

Flame away.... ;)
This how he puts his campaign coffers to their best use,
oh brother
It is words. When he puts that into action....
I will begin to trust him. His actions will dictate what he meant by that...and if it was just words or sincerity. Since almost everything he is for I am against, I don't see how he could hear my voice, with all due respect. But time will tell. His actions will determine what he meant.
As long as SP puts herself out there and threatens to
she will draw volleys from the firing squad. Truth is that this relentless criticism is the best thing that can happen for the GOP, who needs to turn their eyes in a MUCH different direction when it comes to the leadership void. If they cannot move themselves more toward the center, they are doomed to fail again.
Voucher Program Puts D.C.

Cant trust anything Moore puts out there
nm
And I hope God puts some love and
//
Prosecutor Puts Bush in Spotlight
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/washington/11leak.html?hp&ex=1144728000&en=cfd85f2bec48b42b&ei=5094&partner=homepage

April 11, 2006

White House Memo

 

With One Filing, Prosecutor Puts Bush in Spotlight



WASHINGTON, April 10 — From the early days of the C.I.A. leak investigation in 2003, the Bush White House has insisted there was no effort to discredit Joseph C. Wilson IV, the man who emerged as the most damaging critic of the administration's case that Saddam Hussein was seeking to build nuclear weapons.


But now White House officials, and specifically President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, have been pitched back into the center of the nearly three-year controversy, this time because of a prosecutor's court filing in the case that asserts there was a strong desire by many, including multiple people in the White House, to undermine Mr. Wilson.


The new assertions by the special prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, have put administration officials on the spot in a way they have not been for months, as attention in the leak case seems to be shifting away from the White House to the pretrial procedural skirmishing in the perjury and obstruction charges against Mr. Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr.


Mr. Fitzgerald's filing talks not of an effort to level with Americans but of a plan to discredit, punish or seek revenge against Mr. Wilson. It concludes, It is hard to conceive of what evidence there could be that would disprove the existence of White House efforts to 'punish Wilson.'


With more filings expected from Mr. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor's work has the potential to keep the focus on Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney at a time when the president is struggling with his lowest approval ratings since he took office.


Even on Monday, Mr. Bush found himself in an uncomfortable spot during an appearance at a Johns Hopkins University campus in Washington, when a student asked him to address Mr. Fitzgerald's assertion that the White House was seeking to retaliate against Mr. Wilson.


Mr. Bush stumbled as he began his response before settling on an answer that sidestepped the question. He said he had ordered the formal declassification of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq in July 2003 because it was important for people to get a better sense for why I was saying what I was saying in my speeches about Iraq's efforts to reconstitute its weapons program.


Mr. Bush said nothing about the earlier, informal authorization that Mr. Fitzgerald's court filing revealed. The prosecutor described testimony from Mr. Libby, who said Mr. Bush had told Mr. Cheney that it was permissible to reveal some information from the intelligence estimate, which described Mr. Hussein's efforts to acquire uranium.


But on Monday, Mr. Bush was not talking about that. You're just going to have to let Mr. Fitzgerald complete his case, and I hope you understand that, Mr. Bush said. It's a serious legal matter that we've got to be careful in making public statements about it.


Every prosecutor strives not just to prove a case, but also to tell a compelling story. It is now clear that Mr. Fitzgerald's account of what was happening in the White House in the summer of 2003 is very different from the Bush administration's narrative, which suggested that Mr. Wilson was seen as a minor figure whose criticisms could be answered by disclosing the underlying intelligence upon which Mr. Bush relied.


It turned out that much of the information about Mr. Hussein's search for uranium was questionable at best, and that it became the subject of dispute almost as soon as it was included in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq.


The answer to the question of whose recounting of events is correct — Mr. Bush's or Mr. Fitzgerald's — may not be known for months or years, if ever. But it seems there will be more clues, including some about the conversations between Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney.


Mr. Fitzgerald said he was preparing to turn over to Mr. Libby 1,400 pages of handwritten notes — some presumably in Mr. Libby's own hand — that could shed light on two very different efforts at getting out the White House story.


One effort — the July 18 declassification of the major conclusions of the intelligence estimate — was taking place in public, while another, Mr. Fitzgerald argues, was happening in secret, with only Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Libby involved.


Last week's court filing has already led the White House to acknowledge, over the weekend, that Mr. Bush ordered the selective disclosure of parts of the intelligence estimate sometime in late June or early July. But administration officials insist that Mr. Bush played a somewhat passive role and did so without selecting Mr. Libby, or anyone else, to tell the story piecemeal to a small number of reporters.


But in one of those odd twists in the unpredictable world of news leaks, neither of the reporters Mr. Libby met, Bob Woodward of The Washington Post or Judith Miller, then of The New York Times, reported a word of it under their own bylines. In fact, other reporters working on the story were talking to senior officials who were warning that the uranium information in the intelligence estimate was dubious at best.


Mr. Fitzgerald did not identify who took part in the White House effort to argue otherwise, but the evidence he has cited so far shows that Mr. Cheney's office was the epicenter of concern about Mr. Wilson, the former ambassador sent to Niger by the C.I.A. to determine what deal, if any, Mr. Hussein had struck there.


Throughout the spring and early summer of 2003, Mr. Fitzgerald concluded, the former ambassador had become an irritant to the administration, raising doubts about the truthfulness of assertions — made publicly by Mr. Bush in his State of the Union address in January of that year — that Iraq might have sought uranium in Africa to further its nuclear ambitions.


Mr. Wilson's criticisms culminated in a July 6, 2003, Op-Ed article in The Times in which he voiced the same doubts for the first time on the record. He cited as his evidence his 2002 trip to Niger, instigated, he said, because of questions raised by Mr. Cheney's office.


Mr. Wilson's article, Mr. Fitzgerald said in the filing, was viewed in the Office of the Vice President as a direct attack on the credibility of the vice president (and the president) on a matter of signal importance: the rationale for the war in Iraq.


Mr. Fitzgerald suggested that the White House effort was a plan to undermine Mr. Wilson.


Disclosing the belief that Mr. Wilson's wife sent him on the Niger trip was one way for defendant to contradict the assertion that the vice president had done so, while at the same time undercutting Mr. Wilson's credibility if Mr. Wilson were perceived to have received the assignment on account of nepotism, Mr. Fitzgerald's filing said.




At least McCain's wife puts her money into

I haven't seen anything on that. I see where she helps her own race. I haven't heard anything about her helping children with health problems like Mrs. McC.


If anyone has any proof that Mrs. O does help others, I'd seriously like to know about it.


W puts money in blind trust It's been 8 yrs since
but claims he lost money in the meltdown.  Guess economics was/is not his strong suit.  This makes me wonder if his economic advisors were ever able to dumb down their reports enough for W to be able to understand them.  Just 6 more days, praise the Lord. 
Thanks for the article, puts O in a good light really.
Told me how he is trying to rein in the lobbyists and get spending under better control and not things as usual in DC. I am Obama girl, thanks for posting!
No. I love the country side in Alabama...I'm a country girl...nm

Nice post Katie. It's the electorial vote that puts
the R or D candidate in the Big House, not "We The People" as stated in the Constitution.
Regarding your comment on "armed guards," it got me thinking.....maybe the men and women in the US military should be the deciding or only voters. After all, it is they who protect and defend us from harms way. I have nothing but the highest admiration for them for risking their lives each and every day...and who for? US-the people. That's a he11 of alot more than Congress or the entire presidential staff do, IMO.
Well...if it puts Obama in a good light, it is probably owned by George Soros. nm
nm
Yes killing this country - have you been out of the country the last 3 months or so
Don't you have a clue as to what is happening in America? Where have you been? Don't you listen to what is happening or are you still drinking the kool-aid. That time is over. Put the aid down and wake up. The country is being destroyed. These have been the worst 4 months in the history of bad presidents. Foreclosures are on the rise, unemployment is on the rise, 3+ trillion more in deficit and on the rise, companies shutting down, Clinton for SoS. Napolitano - one of the biggest tragedies to happen to America. The list goes on and on and on and on.

Dubya is not in office anymore. You think dubya "pulled the trigger", well the O keeps reloading it and continues to pull the trigger.
this country

Please remember this country and its founding Christian principles were legislated by slave-owners, a practice that was condoned for another 100 years in this country, along with the near-annihilation of this country's indigenous peoples.


The past may not be as rosy as you might paint it to be.


Well, I don't think this country had anything to do with it....
and I don't think Musharraf himself had anything to do with it. That is not to say that radicals within the intelligence services of Pakistan did not have a hand in it. The way it was done, they probably did. With the goal in mind of stopping the elections and causing destabilization...and perhaps a chance to get their hands on nukes, that we all know Pakistan has. Nukes ready to use.

This is a very scary event, folks. Not just for Pakistan...for the world.
Just as an aside....if you really look at what is going on in this country....
Ron Paul is more of a threat than you think. Evangelical Christians want someone pro-life and they are not going to get it with Guiliani...and whether you believe it or not, there are a LOT of them out there. And a lot of young people are looking at Paul, and that is young people on BOTH sides of the political spectrum. And in most all issues, Ron Paul is a strict conservative. And a lot of people out there are VERY sick of tax and spend...even a lot of Democrats...hence the Congress approval rating LESS than Bush's. There is a ground swell going on out there that could very well take over and tsunami the Dem candidate...and if the candidate is Hillary I would be willing to BET it will happen. Your worst nightmare realized. A true conservative in the White House and a Congress to help him turn things around. The purse strings are sure to really tighten (which is what I meant by gravy train about to end...by that I meant the endless tax and spend tax and spend).

Almost makes one giddy thinking about it.

I myself have a couple of real problems with Ron Paul...however...I could get behind him easier than I could Guiliani and so could a LOT of conservatives out there. So....I wouldn't be trashing Ron Paul and hawking that split the vote thing too loud...it could come back to bite you.

Have a good day!
country first

Theme of RNC.  Sarah Palin was member of a group who advocated Alaska seceding from United States.  Who first?  Wno on second?


 


How are you get along with a country...
run by a man who calls for the annihilation of another country? As Ahmadinejad has said ad nauseam. Sure Mahmoud, let's sit down and talk about obliterating Israel. And that pesky little Death To America slogan...we need to talk about that. Have some tea.
Probably do everything they can to keep this country
from going to h*ll in a hand basket!!!!!
but it's okay with me if the country
x
If we had done to their country
We would have been in jail. Can you imagine going to a foreign country, standing on a corner until you got a job, sending your kids to school even though they did not speak the language and expecting to be accommodated, buying a house, car, getting a foreign credit card, not paying taxes, sending the money out of the country, and then trying to say you had rights to citizenship? It really boggles my mind when I think about it. And in my neighborhood we just loved and accepted everyone who came and were gracious and generous. I even took Spanish classes so I could speak to my neighbors. Then they left. They lost their jobs and they lost their homes and they left. The whole neighborhood is devastated, the school closed down and the houses are all empty. The really funny thing is to even get a job for awhile in my area, you had to be able to speak Spanish! What can you say, but that is absolutely insane!
What are you saying here? It's their country
Heads down? What does that mean? This transition is inevitable and I do not see anything wrong with the Iraqis expecting troops to live by the rule of law...their law. Iraqi is a sovereign nation, not an occupied territory (illegal by international standards).
I think everyone in THIS country should take off their
Just saw the video. Cracked me up.
You mean OUR country, don't you?
You may not be ashamed of America, but your love-it-or-leave-it attitude brings shame down on you. Country of diversity. Deal with it.