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

Keeping God out of it is your right

Posted By: gourdpainter on 2008-11-17
In Reply to: Let's keep God out of this. - sm

Me?  I prefer to be on the winning side.


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

Who was keeping us safe before
9/11? So tired of hearing this crap. This was the first time ever (not this present president on watch) that the US was attacked on its own land and yet you talk about since 9/11. Why not even before then?? I think the attitude of most on here sucks. All chicken littles, scared. booooooo. See, made you jump.
Thanks for keeping the facts straight - NM
//
Having a hard time keeping up.
The numbers of Iraqi deaths that is. Today, 93 Shi'ite pilgrims were killed and 147 injured in a suicide bombing in Hilla. Two bombings in Baghdad killing 18 to 20 and I don't know how many injured, 9 American soldiers killed on this one day. This is all just so wrong, all of it, and the numbers just keep on climbing.
anybody would be dog tired with the schedules they were keeping then! nm
x
actually he says he will tax credit them for keeping jobs here... nm
x
Thought you were keeping a tally... nm
xxx
He's keeping his campaign of "change" - that's for sure
Change? Yeah he keeps changing his mind. I've been saying it all along with others that there is no way he can do everything he wants to and spend, spend, spend without taxing us. This is coming right out of the democrats mouth, 250, 200, 150, and now 120. It keeps going lower and lower.

Sure he wants you to go out and vote early. He keeps pushing it as hard as he can because as each hour goes by we keep learning what more of a "sleeze-bag" he really is and the truth is coming out.

Why do people want someone with his character and already the blatant lies he puts out. Have people taken a break from reality? Do people want to live in socialism and fear?

You are definitely not offending us. These fears you express are so much like mine and many others while.

As far as I'm concerned he is NOT NOT NOT eligible to be president. He has not passed the #1 criteria. "American-born citizen". If he wins it will be a stolen election and illegal and lets just see how many people who believe in the constition will be happy about that.
So what! - How about keeping your mind on what is happening now
And if you want to start prosecuting Clinton better be right at the top.

That time has passed. Obama better not decide that there is a right time to prosecute anyone. If so Clinton and himself should go down the tubes along with the rest of them.

This is now old news. Lets stick to the problems we are facing currently. There is enough to keep our minds busy for the duration of the term (4 years - well actually 3 and 1/2 now).

We don't need this type of distraction. That is where there is American Idol an Survivor - keeps poeple dumbed down.
Keeping the glass half full SM

isn't about any of the things you name.  It comes from inside, a peace of spirit and soul. It needs no outside influence except, in my case, my love for God and his for me.  My glass has always been half full.  And it always will be because He is with me always.


Last minute house keeping by Bush & Co.

It’s something of a tradition– administrations using their final weeks in power to ram through a slew of federal regulations. With the election grabbing the headlines, outgoing federal bureaucrats quietly propose and finalize rules that can affect the health and safety of millions.


The Bush administration has followed this tradition and expanded it. Up to 90 proposed regulations could be finalized before President George W. Bush leaves office Jan. 20. If adopted, these rules could weaken workplace safety protections, allow local police to spy in the “war on terror” and make it easier for federal agencies to ignore the Endangered Species Act.


What’s more, the administration has accelerated the rule-making process to ensure that the changes it wants will be finalized by Nov. 22.


That’s a key date, Nov. 22. It is 60 days before the next administration takes control — and most federal rules go into effect 60 days after they have been finalized. It would be a major bureaucratic undertaking for the Obama administration to reverse federal rules already in effect.


“The Bush administration has thought through last-minute regulations much more than past administrations,” said Rick Melberth, director of OMB Watch, a nonprofit group that tracks federal regulations. “They’ve said, ‘Let’s not only get them finalized; let’s get them in effect.’”


So what are the new rules?


The Washington Independent has highlighted five regulations notable for their potential effect and the way they slipped through the regulatory process. Four could to be finalized by Nov. 22. One was already — on Election Day.


1) The Dept. of Labor proposed a regulation Aug. 30 that changes how workplace safety standards are met. Labor experts contend that the administration, which previously issued only one new workplace safety standard and that under court order, is trying to make it a bureaucratic nightmare for future administrations to make workplace safety rules.


Here’s what it would do:


Currently, if the Occupational Safety and Health Admin. or the Mine Health and Safety Admin. want to introduce a new safety standard on, say, the level of exposure to toxic chemicals, it issues what is called a notice of proposed rule-making. This notice is published in the Federal Register and then debated by labor, business and relevant federal agencies.


The new regulation would add an “advanced notice of proposed rule-making,” meaning OSHA and MSHA would have prove that, say, the said chemical was seriously harming workers.


This would open the door for industry to challenge the validity of the risk assessment and then, if necessary, the actual safety standard that may come from that risk assessment.


“The purpose of this sort of rule is to require agencies to spend more time on a regulation which gives them less of a chance to actually regulate,” said David Michaels, a professor of workplace safety at George Washington University, “You’re adding at least a year, maybe two years, to the process.”


The regulation has not been finalized.


2) The administration proposed a rule that changes the employer-employee relationship laid out in the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act.


Here’s what it would do:


The Family and Medical Leave Act says that employers must give their workers 12 weeks of unpaid leave if they are sick or need to take care of a family member or newborn. The employer’s health-care staff can check the legitimacy of the family or medical leave claim with the employee’s doctor or health-care provider.


The proposed regulation would allow the employer to directly speak with the employee’s doctor or health-care provider. The employer could also ask employees to provide more medical documentation of their conditions.


Why such a rule — which may threaten an employee’s privacy– is needed is unclear. The only study the Labor Dept. has done on the act was in 2000. The department collected comments from employers before issuing the proposed regulation, but a report analyzing the comments was never issued.


The regulation also would gives employees the right to waive their rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, making it the first national labor law to be optional. A worker, for instance, cannot waive his right to earn a minimum wage or get paid more for overtime.


The regulation was finalized on Election Day.


3) The Dept. of Health and Human Services proposed a rule Sept. 26 that would expand the reasons that physicians or health care entities could decline to provide any procedure to include moral and religious grounds. The language of the regulation says the department hopes to correct “an attitude toward the health-care profession that health-care professionals and institutions should be required to provide or assist in the provision of medicine or procedures to which they object, or else risk being subjected to discrimination.”


Here’s what it would do:


The rule change seems to apply to abortion. But they are already several rules that say physicians or health-care entities can deny an abortion request. Some women’s health advocates contend that the proposed regulation’s broad language is meant to increase the number of physicians who not only don’t provide abortions but don’t provide contraception.


“Contraception is certainly the target of this rule,” contends Marylin Keefe, director for Reproductive Health at the National Partnership for Women and Families. “The moral and religious objections of health-care workers are now starting to take precedence over patients.”


The regulation is notable for another reason. A rule involving an employee’s religious rights must be referred to the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission, yet the commission was never told of this proposed regulation.


A bureaucratic battled erupted when EEOC’s legal counsel, Reed Russell, wrote a regulation comment (pdf) blasting both the substance of the proposed rule and its disregard for the rule-making process.


The regulation has not been finalized.


4) On July 31, the Justice Dept. proposed a regulation that would allow state and local law enforcement agencies to collect “intelligence” information on individuals and organizations even if the information is unrelated to a criminal matter.


“This is a continuum that started back on 9/11 to reform law enforcement and the intelligence community to focus on the terrorism threat,” said Bush homeland security adviser Kenneth L. Wainstein in a statement.


Critics say it could infringe on civil liberties.


Here’s what it would do:


“It expands local law enforcement’s ability to investigate criminal activity that it deems suspicious,” said Melberth of OMB Watch. “But what’s suspicious to you may not be suspicious to me. They could be investigating community organizations they think are two or three steps away from a terrorist group.”


The regulation has not been finalized.


5) Before a federal agency approves any construction project– anything from building a dam to a post office — government officials must consult the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. These two agencies enforce the Endangered Species Act, and they can veto any project that adversely affects an animal on the endangered species list.


Here’s what it would do:


A regulation proposed by the Interior Dept. Aug. 12 would end this approval process. “It destroys a system of checks and balances that have been in place for two decades,” claimed Bob Davison, senior scientist at Defenders of the Wildlife. “[A federal agency] wants to go forward with a project that [it wants] to do. So you need an independent agency to look at the decision.”


Davison is not the only conservation advocate up in arms. The Interior Dept. has received 200,000 public comments, which may affect the final rule.


Or not — the department shortened the comment period from 60 to 30 days in its effort to get the regulation finalized.


In May, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten vowed that the administration would propose no regulations after June 1. He and White House spokesman Tony Fratto have repeatedly stated their contempt for what they call “midnight regulations.”


Yet with the exception of the Family and Medical Leave changes, each of these regulations were proposed after June 1. And if finalized, they will effect worker’s safety, women’s health-care choices, local police powers and endangered species.


“It was a pretty resounding election,” said Keefe of the National Partnership for Women and Families. “But this administration acts like it still has a mandate.”


Obama is calling for keeping troops in Iraq....
for how long he does not say, but that we need MORE in Afghanistan. He does not differ from McCain on that stance. Diplomacy does not work with terrorists (the Taliban were in charge there when bid Laden was parading around in the open after 9-11). Taliban = terrorists. With all due respect...you cannot negotiate with terrorists. Do you remember the horrific images of 9-11? I do. Of the Khobar Towers bombing? I do. The first World Trade Center bombing? I do... the bombing of the marine barracks in beirut? I sure remember those images.
My goodness. O witch hunt sure is keeping you busy.
It is in its 3rd day. No comments on the discussions regarding party revamp? How about today's agenda? Keep your eye on Jindel. He did a great job in Louisiana with disaster mgmt...and GOP will be neding plenty of that in the 2008 election aftermath. Seriously, as a left-wing commie Marxist terrorist unAmerican anti-patriot, he has GOP leadership written all over him. Mayb you should take a hate break and take a look at him.
Keeping information quiet because we worry about the pirates??????
That never stopped the MSM from giving out troop movements, information etc during the height of the Iraqi war did it? What about the "embedded" journalists over there. And I use the word journalist loosely.
So how did the Cheney comment fit in except to say that Obama was not keeping us safe from this flu?
x
Thank you, President Bush, for your service and especially for keeping us safe at home. nm

It's just too easy -- the idea that keeping American jobs in America actually helping the economy

Nope, let's spend a few million and buy new furniture for homeland security and a few million more to buy hybrids for congress. 


Can they not deduce that keeping corporate America from offshoring jobs will actually create more jobs, thereby lower the unemployment rate, and put more money in American's pocket for them to spend?  Cut all tax cuts given to companies for offshoring and give the tax cuts to companies to strive to keep jobs in America?


And here's another V8 moment -- how about we buy American?  Maybe increase tariffs on imported goods to discourage American companies from importing so much crapy and thereby necessitating said crap be sold at higher prices in an effort to discourage Americans from buying imports? 


The ONLY way to help the American economy is to employ Americans and buy American!  It's that simple!


Original pledge by forefathers didn't include God. I agree with keeping the original.

http://www.usflag.org/history/pledgeofallegiance.html


The original Pledge of Allegiance


I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands- one nation indivisible-with liberty and justice for all.


On September 8,1892, the Boston based The Youth's Companion magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy,the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual.


At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words the Flag of the United States replaced my flag. In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted.


It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact,today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom!


In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words under God. Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.