yes, Phil Gramm helped write it, but it passed with a 90-something majority in a DEMOCRATIC congress and was signed into law by BILL CLINTON. Ahem. Yeah...that was certainly "worser."
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 Bill might want to check Urban Legend next time. Claim: Condoleezza Rice was upbraided by a shopper for buying expensive shoes just after Hurricane Katrina.
Example:[Collected via e-mail, 2005]
Is it true that shortly after Hurrican Katrina, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was seen buying thousands of dollars worth of shoes in an upscale Manhattan shoe store; and that the Secretary was accosted by an angry customer for doing so?
Origins: The rumor about Dr. Condoleeza Rice, the U.S. Secretary of State, going on a shoe-shopping spree while on vacation in New York immediately after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast has appeared on some gossip sites and was reported by the New York Daily News:
Yesterday, Rice went shopping at Ferragamo on Fifth Ave. According to the Web site www.Gawker.com, the 50-year-old bought several thousand dollars' worth of shoes at the pricey leather-goods boutique.
A fellow shopper shouted, How dare you shop for shoes while thousands are dying and homeless! — presumably referring to Louisiana and Mississippi.
The woman expressing her First Amendment rights was promptly removed from the store. A Ferragamo store manager confirmed to us that Rice did shop there yesterday, but refused to answer questions about whether the protester was removed, and whether by his own security or the Secret Service.
We don't know how much truth there is to this rumor, but it has undoubtedly spread because it expresses a fiddling while Rome burns frustration many Americans have felt at the federal government's slow response in providing aid to victims of the disastrous damage and flooding in New Orleans and other parts of the Gulf Coast caused by Hurricane Katrina.
As many other readers have pointed out, although one might direct criticism towards government officials such as the President of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Emergency Preparedness and Response for failing to coordinate adequate response to large-scale emergencies within the U.S., such efforts are largely outside the purview of the Secretary of State. Dr. Rice's primary duties are advising the President in the determination and execution of U.S. foreign policy, conducting negotiations with foreign representatives, and providing instructions to U.S. ministers and consuls abroad, little of which directly bears on coordinating disaster relief within the U.S.
The implication embedded with this rumor is that if Dr. Rice had only been shopping for sensible shoes (instead of expensive leather ones), that would have been acceptable — a point that indicates there's perhaps more political subtext to this piece, especially since the purported outraged comments came from a fellow shopper.
Last updated: 2 September 2005
The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/katrina/politics/rice.asp
Fact check....if you are talking about
Obama, he will cut your taxes if you make less than 250K a year....McCain will tax your healthcare benefits as income, then give you $5000 to try and find healthcare that on average costs 14K a year. If you would like more information on these two candidates' policies, visit their websites where policies are outlined. Just trying to help. If you are just listening to what you want you to hear, you may voting against your own best interests this election.
What bill was Obama talking about?
During the debate he stated the reason he did not vote for the bill presented in Illinois regarding babies that live through abortion is because there is a bill that already addresses this? Or did I miss something?
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight, political humorist Bill Maher (search), he has a new book out called "New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer." Of course, Mr. Maher is about as polite as I am and as timid as Dracula. He joins us now from Los Angeles.
You know, you've had some celebrities on your HBO show, "Real Time," which begins again on Friday, talking about policy and war on terror and stuff like that. I get the feeling they don't know very much, but you do. So I'd like to make Bill Maher, right now, the terror czar. Bill Maher, the terror czar. Could be a series.
How would you fight this War on Terror? How would you fight it?
BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I think the first and most important thing is to get the politics out of the War on Terror. You know, maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist, Bill, maybe I'm naive, but I thought that 9/11 was such a jarring event that nobody would dare return to business as usual on that one subject after that.
But of course, we found out that nothing could be further from the truth. And your president, my president too, but the one you voted for...
O'REILLY: You don't know that. Were you looking over my shoulder there? I could have voted for Nader. I could have voted for Kerry, but Kerry wouldn't come on the program, so I wouldn't vote. But I could have gone for Ralph. Ralph's a friend of mine.
MAHER: Yes. Anyway, I said the guy you voted for, President Bush, you know, how come this guy, who was supposed to be such a kick-and-take- names kind of guy, how come he has not been able to get the politics out of this?
You know, as a guy who's been accused of treason, I'll tell you what real treason is: Treason is when legislators vote against homeland security measures because it goes against the wishes of their political or financial backers. Treason is the fact that, as a terrorist, you could still buy a gun in this country because the NRA (search) lobby is so strong.
O'REILLY: OK. But you're getting into the political, and I agree with you. I think that the country should be united in trying to seek out and kill terrorists, who would kill us.
But I'd like to have some concrete things that you, Bill Maher, the terror czar — and take this seriously, this could be a series — what would you do?
All right, so you've got bin Laden. You've got Al Qaeda (search). You've got a bunch of other lower-level terrorist groups. What do you do to neutralize them?
MAHER: OK. Well, first of all, you discounted my answer, which is get the politics out, but OK.
O'REILLY: Well, assume you can do that. They're gone.
MAHER: We'll let that go. Keep going. I wouldn't worry that much about bin Laden. I mean, capturing bin Laden at this point, it doesn't really matter whether he's dead or alive. He's already Tupac to the people who care about him and work for him. Capturing bin Laden, killing him would be like when Ray Kroc died, how much that affected McDonald's.
O'REILLY: It would be a morale booster. But I understand. You're not going to send...
MAHER: A morale booster, right. Well, we've had plenty of morale boosting. We've had plenty of window dressing. What we need is concrete action.
In the book I wrote before this one about terrorism, I suggested that we have a Secret Service for the people. I said whenever the president goes anywhere, he has very high-level, intelligent detectives who look around at a crowd. They know what they're looking for. They're highly paid. They're highly trained.
We don't have that in this country. We should have that. We should have a cadre of 10,000 highly trained people who would guard all public events, bus stations, train stations, airports — and stop with this nonsense that this robotic sort of window dressing...
O'REILLY: OK, so you would create a homeland security office that was basically a security firm for major targets and things like that. It's not a bad idea. Costs a lot of money. Costs a lot of money. It's not a bad idea.
MAHER: Costs a lot of money compared to what? If you paid 10,000 people a salary of $100,000 a year, that would, I think, cost $10 billion or something. That's nothing. There's that much pork in the transportation bill before you get...
O'REILLY: Yes, 10,000 wouldn't do it, but I get your drift.
MAHER: Whatever it costs.
O’REILLY: You would create a super-security apparatus. OK, that's not bad. That's not bad. How about overseas now?
MAHER: What we need to do is what I call get Israeli about this. Because the Israelis are not afraid of profiling. The Israelis are not afraid to bury politics in the greater cause of protecting their nation. We don't act that way. You know, I'm afraid 9/11 really changed nothing.
O'REILLY: Boy, your ACLU (search) pals aren't going to like that. You're going to lose your membership card there.
MAHER: I'm not a member of the ACLU.
O'REILLY: Oh, sure you are, just like I voted for Bush. You're a member of the ACLU. I can see the card right in your pocket there.
MAHER: Bill, I'm not a joiner. I'm not a joiner. I don't like organizations.
O'REILLY: They won't have you, Maher, let's be honest about that. All right, now, in your book, which is very amusing, by the way — if you want a few laughs buy Maher's book.
MAHER: Thank you.
O'REILLY: You take some shots at FOX News, which is your wont, and I just want to know why you think we're so fabulously successful here.
MAHER: Well, I think that question has been answered many times. It's because the conservative viewer in this country, or on radio the conservative listener, is very predictable. They like to hear what they like to hear. They like to hear it over and over again.
O'REILLY: All the surveys show that the viewers are all over the map. They're not conservative in a big bloc. Some of them are moderate. Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are Moroccans. I mean, they're everywhere. That's your analysis? That just the conservatives watch us?
MAHER: Well, I think mostly the conservatives do watch you. That's not to take anything away from what you guys have achieved over there. It's a very well-produced broadcast, and they have excellent personalities like yourself, Bill. Who could resist watching you when you get home from work at night?
O'REILLY: Whoopi Goldberg, maybe? I don't know.
MAHER: Yes.
O'REILLY: Anyone who doesn't watch here is misguided. We identify them as such.
But look, I think there's more to it than — you're in TV. You know the ratings game. I mean, if you don't provide a product that is satisfying people, no matter what your ideology, they tell you to take a hike.
There's a guy over at MSNBC. He's a very conservative guy. He was hired and nobody's watching him. They hire liberals. Nobody watches them. Air America (search). Nobody's listening to it.
I mean, there's got to be a reason why we're No. 1, a punch line for you, and No. 2, you know, becoming the most powerful news network in the world.
MAHER: Well, I think, as I say, it's a well-produced product. You know, your program moves along, always at a clip that never seems to bore. You know, you move along to the next topic, the next guest. It never sort of drags. I don't think a lot of people know how to produce that stuff that way.
O'REILLY: All right. It's bells and whistles and my charming personality. That's what I thought it was.
Last thing: You know, one thing I like about Maher is he's not a hypocrite. He drives a little hybrid vehicle. Right? You putter around there. Does it have training wheels? What's it like?
MAHER: Actually, I had the Prius hybrid for three years. I was one of the first ones to get it right after 9/11. And I traded it in a few months ago for the Lexus hybrid.
O'REILLY: I think we should all cut back on our energy consumption, and I think we should all get these hybrids as fast as we can.
Hey, Bill, always nice to see you. Thanks very much. Good luck with the season on the TV show.
MAHER: Continued success there, Mr. No. 1.
O'REILLY: All right. Thank you.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"
Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.
Look, it is simple economics. The big bad corporations everyone hates...first of all, it is not 5 or 6 rich guys and that's it. They employee thousands of people just like us...and when the government puts those huge taxes on them, if they want to stay in business, they are forced to move offshore. Higher taxes are responsible for more jobs going overseas than "greed." The DNC has told its members for years that "corporations" and "the rich" are the cause of all their problems and they have bought that Marxist rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Corporations are not the cause of ill in this country. They are the backbone of the economy in this country. That is simple economics 101. And I am certainly not rich...and I certainly am not on the upper echelon of a corporation, but I do understand reality and I understand how the economy works. Yes, there is wrongdoing by some upper level folks in corporations. There is wrongdoing in the government. Where there is power, there will be wrongdoing. But for every Enron there are thousands of other good, solid companies that employ thousands of Americans, but the DNC does not share the success stories, because it does not promote their agenda. In order to control people they want them beholden to government and hating free enterprise. They want big government, total power, and control. And following Alinksy's program...you have to instill class warfare. You have to make corporations the enemy. You have to make classes envy the next rung up. Classic Marxist socialism. It is being played out in this country every day.
who provides campaign funds. Do you know why lobbyists are making the headlines? Because they are bribing the politicians of both parties - lobbyists work for private interests (AIPAC) along with the pharmaceutical company ($280.00 for a bottle of pills? Only in America, folks), oil industry (record profits at your expense) credit card companies and unethical banking procedures (Funny isn't it how Visa wrote the reformed BK bill, making virtually everyone end up in ch 13 (garnishing income, including SS) after raising credit limits and offering transfer balances at 0 percent to everyone with a last name and a roof over their head? Along with mtgs that were bound to turn into bad loans when house prices dropped which they always do after a bubble. God, I could go on and on here but I get tired. The nation is in such trouble. Serious serious trouble. There is a huge loan to an unfriendly country (did you watch the Olympics? did you ever see Bush look more uncomfortable other than during the Stephen Colbert roast during the national press conference. lol.
Well I want you to know what fascism. And I want you to know that those treasury notes are backed up by the taxpayers (you) and real estate including roads and govt buildings and parks. Have you noticed why Save-Mart Center is owned by savemart and not a community business or the community itself? There is somethign happening slowly and surely and it is NOT going to benefit middle class america one iota. You must know that as a poor person, you have no power, no voice. Elections are rigged and the politicans cease to care whether you like them or not - oh wait, that has already happened.
THINK ABOUT THIS!!!! Your 401Ks and investments/assets are what at are stake!
Fascist governments nationalized key industries and made massive state investments. They also introduced price controls, wage controls and other types of Soviet-style economic planning measures.[12] Property rights and private initiative were contingent upon service to the state.[13].[14] Fascists promoted their ideology as a "third way" between capitalism and Marxian socialism.[15] Fascists in Germany and Italy claimed that they opposed reactionaries, and that they were actually revolutionary political movements that fused with conservative social values.
It seems that you did not read the last sentence in my former post.
Are you saying that crimes from the near past should all be forgotten?
LOL, yes, be sure to check with gt before you believe anything. She knows it all.
x
I will check
I honestly dont remember..I will check the history in my computer and see if I can find it..It could have been on Huffington or Crooks and Liars, one of the news sites I frequent..but it was from a newspaper, an article they had posted on their site..I will look this weekend. Dont jump at me..I do not want the president of the USA to be drinking again..I think if it is true it is sad and tragic for him both personally and professionally.
check this out
Check out http://groups.msn/home. They have lots of political groups, without censorship!
Check this out PK.sm
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/PressRelease_2Jul2006.html
Thank you VERY much! I shall check it out.
I commend you for the volunteer work also. It might drive me nuts to know more about the dirt in politics than what is already obvious...
thanks again :-)
check out wnd.com
xxx
check your
facts instead of making things up. I do not mean the National Enquirer or Faux News. Karl Rove's people are advising McCain. That is why you see the silliness of celebrity ads and ads about people when Obama was 8 years old. At first, he tried to run on his own charisma and could get no attention -- all was focused on the charismatic young man from Chicago. Rove's people came in and started the negative ads. And McCain went right along with them. . ..
Thanks. I will check it out :) nm
nm
would you check it for me --
You can see plenty on michaesavage.com. I tried to copy/paste it, but this is all that transferred.
Piggy pols in hog heaven with pork-packed pact (New York Post) Congressional deal-brokers slopped a mess of pork into the $700 billion rescue bill passed by the Senate last night - including a tax break for makers of kids' wooden arrows ... Top 10 tax sweeteners in the bailout bill (Taxpayers for Common Sense) The "Transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters" allows employers to provide a benefit for costs associated with bicycle commuting ...
Check this out
Awhile back my husband and I were picking up rocks off our property. I said, "I'm so bone tired I can't hit another dick!" Of course I meant to say that "I can't hit another lick." My husband is still laughing. So..........was I bone tired or not? Certainly I knew what I meant to say but it didn't just come out just right.
You check it out..............sm
This same blog post can be found all over the internet, so it is not from just "some obscure web page." Look for yourself.
This is a video of T. Boone Pickens on the daily show. If you don't like Jon Stewart, don't let that discourage you from checking this out. Pickens is talking about the energy plan he has been promoting.
go to: http://www.thedailyshow.com/
In the middle of the page is the video section. Go under that to the "coming up next" box and pick T. Boone Pickens.
Sorry about the round about directions, but I couldn't find the interview anywhere else.
Maybe you should check yours.
November 5, Israeal kills 6 in raid. Israel has continued its crippling blockade and never complied with the original condition of the truce that the blockade be lifted.
What I want to know is, how is this check
is supposed to be the tax cut he promised to 95% of the taxpayers. Now, that does not mean you have to pay INCOME taxes to get an income tax break, that would be if you pay any kind of taxes, sales tax, property tax, etc. If the government just sends me a check for $1000, this is my tax CUT, right? Now, I am supposed to take this money and spend it to stimulate the economy, right? Well, the check everyone got last year, mine and DHs went straight to the IRS, we never saw it. I expect the same thing to happen with this new one and I will still be paying the same tax rate as ever, until it is increased again. Where is my tax CUT? How many other *middle-income* folks do you think had this same situation?
BUT you won't get it in a check.
It's a payroll tax cut. It will show up in your pay. How much more can you do with $13 a week. That's what it comes out to for this year.
Check this out....(sm)
It's an older article, but the facts remain the same.
France's model healthcare system
By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007
MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.
Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.
The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.
An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States.
That's because the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, Sécurité Sociale.
Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.
Nor do France's doctors face the high nonmedical personnel payroll expenses that burden American physicians. Sécurité Sociale has created a standardized and speedy system for physician billing and patient reimbursement using electronic funds.
It's not uncommon to visit a French medical office and see no nonmedical personnel. What a concept. No back office army of billing specialists who do daily battle with insurers' arcane and constantly changing rules of payment.
Moreover, in contrast to Canada and Britain, there are no waiting lists for elective procedures and patients need not seek pre-authorizations. In other words, like in the United States, "rationing" is not a word that leaves the lips of hopeful politicians. How might the French case inform the US debate over healthcare reform?
National health insurance in France stands upon two grand historical bargains -- the first with doctors and a second with insurers.
Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.
French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by Sécurité Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.
The French system strongly discourages the kind of experience rating that occurs in the United States, making it more difficult for insurers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions or to those who are not in good health. In fact, in France, the sicker you are, the more coverage, care, and treatment you get. Would American insurance companies cut a comparable deal?
Like all healthcare systems, the French confront ongoing problems. Today French reformers' number one priority is to move health insurance financing away from payroll and wage levies because they hamper employers' willingness to hire. Instead, France is turning toward broad taxes on earned and unearned income alike to pay for healthcare.
American advocates of mandates on employers to provide health insurance should take note. The link between employment and health security is a historical artifact whose disadvantages now far outweigh its advantages. Economists estimate that between 25 and 45 percent of the US labor force is now job-locked. That is, employees make career decisions based on their need to maintain affordable health coverage or avoid exclusion based on a preexisting condition.
Perhaps it's time for us to take a closer look at French ideas about healthcare reform. They could become an import far less "foreign" and "unfriendly" than many here might initially imagine.
Paul V. Dutton is associate professor of history at Northern Arizona University and author of "Differential Diagnoses: A Comparative History of Health Care Problems and Solutions in the United States and France," which will be published in September.
It's an older article, but the facts remain the same.
France's model healthcare system
By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007
MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.
Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.
The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.
An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States.
That's because the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, Sécurité Sociale.
Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.
Nor do France's doctors face the high nonmedical personnel payroll expenses that burden American physicians. Sécurité Sociale has created a standardized and speedy system for physician billing and patient reimbursement using electronic funds.
It's not uncommon to visit a French medical office and see no nonmedical personnel. What a concept. No back office army of billing specialists who do daily battle with insurers' arcane and constantly changing rules of payment.
Moreover, in contrast to Canada and Britain, there are no waiting lists for elective procedures and patients need not seek pre-authorizations. In other words, like in the United States, "rationing" is not a word that leaves the lips of hopeful politicians. How might the French case inform the US debate over healthcare reform?
National health insurance in France stands upon two grand historical bargains -- the first with doctors and a second with insurers.
Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.
French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by Sécurité Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.
The French system strongly discourages the kind of experience rating that occurs in the United States, making it more difficult for insurers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions or to those who are not in good health. In fact, in France, the sicker you are, the more coverage, care, and treatment you get. Would American insurance companies cut a comparable deal?
Like all healthcare systems, the French confront ongoing problems. Today French reformers' number one priority is to move health insurance financing away from payroll and wage levies because they hamper employers' willingness to hire. Instead, France is turning toward broad taxes on earned and unearned income alike to pay for healthcare.
American advocates of mandates on employers to provide health insurance should take note. The link between employment and health security is a historical artifact whose disadvantages now far outweigh its advantages. Economists estimate that between 25 and 45 percent of the US labor force is now job-locked. That is, employees make career decisions based on their need to maintain affordable health coverage or avoid exclusion based on a preexisting condition.
Perhaps it's time for us to take a closer look at French ideas about healthcare reform. They could become an import far less "foreign" and "unfriendly" than many here might initially imagine.
Paul V. Dutton is associate professor of history at Northern Arizona University and author of "Differential Diagnoses: A Comparative History of Health Care Problems and Solutions in the United States and France," which will be published in September.
You might want to check again.
It might have been JTBB and me that you saw. tnx will have to check those out.
Pretty hooked right now on 590klbj.com out of austin 5:30 a.m. to 10, one man always the voice of reason standing between the retired ex-cop and the I would swear has a gray ponytail liberal, but I notice even in the last couple of years he coming over to the dark side more and more. Ed and Sgt. Sam can flat get into it sometimes. I am actually listening to radio much more than TV, like hearing what the guy on the street has to say and you just don't get much of that on TV.
oh no Mr Bill
The communists are coming!!!!!!
Can you say BILL C-L-I-N-T-O-N???? He
xx
I will try this once more....this is a bill
put forth by a VERY unpopular REPUBLICAN president. All we hear ad nauseam from the Obama campaign is McCain is another Bush, we can't afford more Bush, heck, Pelosi said the same darned thing in her little speech before the vote blew up. The Democrats do NOT want to be identified as voting in the majority, against the Republicans, WITH Bush, to pass the bill because if they did, and it does not work, they will be forever identified with voting WITH Bush. Political suicide. Surely you can see that.
What I am saying is, Obama is a far left socialist and the party has become the majority far left socialist. So they will SUPPORT his agenda, and they have the majority in congress to back it up. Surely you can see that they will vote FOR Obama's agenda. You cannot honestly sit there and tell me that you think enough Democrats would vote against him to stop something he wants? You really think that??
I second that bill! There was a bill that they both
worked on together. John McCain's people called Obama's people. It was not the other way around.
But you know something, Bill still came out
smelling like a rose, after all that, didn’t he? A much admired man, makes $$$$ for speeches, welcomed here at home and around the world. Oh, the 2nd Mr. Bush could only wish for so much.
This bill
is a slippery slope and doesn't deserve the slightest considersation. All people should be protected from criminal or harmful behavior. If a homosexual or pedophile deserves protection from someone, doesn't the child or even an adult who may be raped because of a deviants "sexual orientation" deserve the same protection? Having a so-called "sexual orientation" does not give you the right to act on that "orientation" simply because you can't control your "urges." This bill gives deviants free range to imbibe in their "deviant urges" without consequences. Why any president would consider such an atrocity is beyond me. If Obama signs this bill, the damage done will be on his loony head.
check article above
Well, we might just get an investigation into the Downing Street Memos after all and then when it is proven that Bush contrived this war and lied for this war, you can post here that yes Bush is a liar. I refer you to the above post about the Downing Street Memos above. Interesting article. States finally a republican is wanting an investigation into the Downing Street Memos, as so far it has only been democrats asking for an investigation.
You may want to check your sources.
“Massachusetts will take in about 2,500 Hurricane Katrina refugees in coming days, sheltering them on Cape Cod for up to two months and likely resettling some permanently in the Bay State, Gov. Mitt Romney said Sunday.
Romney said federal emergency officials told him Sunday to prepare for the evacuees, who will arrive in two to three days, and will be temporarily housed at Camp Edwards on Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod.
Otis has many amenities to accommodate the large numbers, including beds, a school, medical facilities, a gymnasium and a movie theater, he said.”
Check out this site http://www.filmstripinternational.com/index.php?asshole
Reality check
You just cannot stay off this board can you? Don't you get it? We don't want to debate with you. We are just as set in our beliefs as you are in yours. No one here is interested in anything you have to say, so please, get a life or at least stay on your own board.
For Reality Check. sm
I think my post did sound a little hateful. I am sure you are a very nice person. You see, this is a country divided, and I am certain I am not the only one on this board, to feel that GWB has had a lot to do with that. Like I said, I am sure you are a nice person. However, this is a country divided, nothing will make me change my mind about this administration. I fear for either party that gets in next time, if it is a democrat, they cannot hardly get ahead because of the blunders made by the current administration. In a nutshell, I sincerely feel like this country has never been more divided, and perhaps that is why the moderators decided to split the two boards to begin with. Post all you want, you will get no more nasty responses for me. I however will feel at liberty to post jokes when I feel like it. I lurk on the conservative board, but do not post. There are many right-winged jokes and cartoons over there and I do not post my opinion - because that is their board.
Good one! Check this out
http://mkanejeeves.com/?p=213
A cell of miscreants in Frostbite Falls, Minnesota at the college Whattsamatta U., led by two shadowy figures nicknamed *Moose and Squirrel.* LOL
Anything to get those poll numbers out of the toilet...oh, right,I forgot, they don't pay attention to those.
They don't have a blank check
They are a U.S. ally and we support them. Lebanon is not an ally and a blatantly terrorist state. Of course we're going to side with Israel, but no we are not giving them a blank check thus the push of a cease fire.
You've got to check this out
if you haven't already. Go, Paul! http://-paulhipp-.cf.hufingtonpost.com/SUBIRAQIAN%30HOMESICK%20BLUES%204.htm or http://www.myspace.com/paulhipp for other great videos.
Check my posts
I am a pro-choicer and I believe I am allowed to post where ever I please, as long as I am respectful.
marks the location of current message within thread!["](http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/File-Based_Image_Resource/dingbat_story_end_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
http://www.filmstripinternational.com/index.php?asshole
