Looks like the "kill em" statement is untrue
Posted By: ermt on 2008-10-16
In Reply to:
I'll attach the link, but in summary the Secret Service said the "kill em" allegation is unfounded.
News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.
Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.
How much more is the Obama campaign going to invent. First they try to make it about race when its not. Now they try to say someone said "kill em" when Obama's name in mentioned yet nobody heard it.
It sure is getting nasty.
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
Very untrue colors
We don't "win elections"? Totally untrue. If that were true there would be no democrats currently or ever in office. Try lying about something that is harder to disprove. Bush is very good at it.
Oh, my dear, that is so untrue.
General Giap of the North Vietnamese army wrote his memoirs after the war. He posted that the antiwar movement in the United States gave the North Vietnamese hope after Tet, when they were decimated and ready to surrender. It gave them hope, prolonged the war, and eventually led to our precipitous departure. No, I am afraid you are wrong about your facts. Here's the post from the 1st Cav.
Tet Offensive -- Monica
what are the cause and effects of the TET offensive? and who won this campaign? I don't really get this event! can someone tell me the story in a easier version? I am in the 9th Grade. Monica,
Here is an answer to a very complex question. The Tet Offensive of 1968 was an initiative of the North Vietnam Army to have the civilian population of South Vietnam join them in their offensive and efforts to overthrow the South Vietnam Government, forcing the withdrawal of the United States Armed Forces.
The Tet Offensive of 1968 was conceived by General Giap, commander of the North Vietnam Army and his staff. General Giap earlier in his career planned and executed the battle at Dien Bien Phu which drove the French out of Vietnam in 1954. During the battle of Dien Bien Phu, General Giap stated he was willing to lose 10 men for every 1 enemy soldier killed, which indicated that a person's life in Vietnam was cheap.
By the end of 1966, North Vietnam had suffered large causalities in manpower and supplies through the bombing of the North and the fighting in the South. They consider the war was at a stalemate. North Vietnam would need a major victory if they would continue on with the war. Thus the planning for what is known as the Tet Offensive began with General Giap (Commanding General of the North Vietnam Army) and his staff.
The battle of Khe Sanh (Jan. 21, 1968) was the prelude to the Tet Offensive of January 31, 1968. The battle at Khe Sanh was similar to that of Dien Bien Phu in which the Vietnamese had surrounded their enemy and cut off all land routes for supplies and evacuation. Khe Sanh had two objectives besides the obvious objective in defeating the Marines.
1. Diversionary tactic to draw American attention away from the cities of South Vietnam and more towards Khe Sanh.
2. Remind the people of South Vietnam of another battle that took place 14 years earlier at Dien Bien Phu, which would encourage South Vietnamese to join the VC in throwing out the Americans as they did with the French.
The North Vietnamese Army fought the battle at Khe Sanh and the National Liberation Front (VC) fought the Tet Offensive, which attacked the cities and provinces throughout South Vietnam.
It should be noted that NVA units who were not participating in the Khe Sanh siege supported the VC in their attacks on the cities during the Tet Offensive.
National Liberation Front - (Also Known As) Viet Cong or VC were comprised of South Vietnamese civilians and North Vietnamese advisors who lived in the cities and villages throughout South Vietnam. They were part of the North Vietnamese forces in reuniting the two countries as one. |
A cease-fire began on January 30, 1968 for the Vietnamese new year of Tet, which falls on the first new moon of January. On January 31, 1968 the Viet Cong broke their cease-fire and attacked many cities and provinces throughout South Vietnam. In Saigon, a small number of VC (19) were able to reach the American Embassy grounds, but did not gain entry into the embassy itself.
In the Northern part of South Vietnam, the city of Hue was taken over by the V.C. and executions of city officials and their families took place. The initial reporting indicated the number of people executed was in the thousands (2,300 persons executed in and around Hue during Tet 68 - Time Magazine 31 Oct 69).
Saigon was the center for most if not all of the news agencies that were covering the war in South Vietnam. Tet offensive of 1968 was the first time, during the war, that actual street fighting took place in the major cities. Rear support personnel and MP’s did the initial fighting by American troops until support from infantry and armor could arrive. These men did an outstanding job in defending the cities, airfields and bases along with the embassy. The news media were able to capture this street fighting on tape in addition to the attack on the American Embassy. This new offensive was immediately brought into the homes of American families through reporting by television and the press. The sensationalism of this reporting brought forth a misrepresentation of the actual facts that took place during the Tet Offensive of 1968. The reports led the American people to think that we were losing the war in Vietnam and that the Tet Offensive was a major victory for North Vietnam. This was not the case. The VC suffered such high casualties that they were no longer considered a fighting force and their ranks would have to be replaced by North Vietnamese regulars. The civilian population of South Vietnam was indifferent to both the current regime in South Vietnam and the Viet Cong. The civilian population, for the most part, did not join with the VC during the Tet Offensive.
The Wall Street Journal published an interview with Bui Tin who served on the General Staff of the North Vietnam Army and received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. During the interview Mr. Tin was asked if the American antiwar movement was important to Hanoi's victory. Mr. Tin responded It was essential to our strategy, referring to the war being fought on two fronts, the Vietnam battlefield and back home in America through the antiwar movement on college campuses and in the city streets. He further stated the North Vietnamese leadership listened to the American evening news broadcasts to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi made by persons such as Jane Fonda, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and various church ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. Mr. Tin surmised, America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win. Mr. Tin further advised that General Vo Nguyen Giap (Commanding General of the North Vietnam Army) had advised him the 1968 Tet Offensive had been a defeat.
The military defeat of North Vietnam after the Tet Offensive of 1968 became a political victory for North Vietnam because of anti-war demonstrations and the sensationalism of the news media. The North Vietnamese interpreted the U.S. reaction to these events as the weakening of America's resolve to win the war. The North Vietnamese believed that victory could be theirs, if they stayed their course.
From 1969 until the end of the war, over 20,000 American soldiers lost their lives in a war that the United States did not have the resolve to win. The sensationalism by the American news media and the anti-war protests following the 1968 Tet Offensive gave hope to Communist North Vietnam, strengthening their belief that their will to succeed was greater than ours. Instead of seeking a successful resolution at the Paris Peace Conference following the disastrous defeat of the 1968 Tet Offensive, they employed delay tactics as another tool to inflame U.S. politics. This delaying tactic spurned further anti-war demonstrations. Those who sensationalized their reporting of the war and those who supported anti-war demonstrations are guilty of giving our enemy hope. Because of their actions, they must share partial responsibility for those 20,000 + Americans deaths.
We won the war on the battlefield but lost it back home on the college campuses and in the city streets.
I seriously doubt it is untrue.
Emotions are running way too high, especially in the Republican rallies, and I DO watch them. If ever there was a plant in the audience it was the black man that stood up and said, "please, sir, I'm begging you....." Notice Mc went up and hugged him and then addressed the poor woman who was "scared" of Obama because he was a terrorist. Anyone remember Mccain saying, "no, no maam, he's not." Do any of you republicans ever pay attention? 
This is so totally untrue. How can you just make things up like that? NM
So untrue and so unfair. Disagree with his policies,
nm
Immediate White House statement on Dr. Tiller - still no statement on
Having had at least three relevant opportunities to make a statement about the killing of an Army recruiter and wounding of another since this occurred on Monday, Obama has not said a single word about it - but a statement was forthcoming from him immediately concerning the killing of Dr. Tiller.
The media coverage of the two events has also been strikingly different. Please note that the sympathies of the liberal cause provide a complete explanation of both of these phenomena.
More than passingly strange that they think we don't notice stuff like this, n'est-ce pas? Well, they'll discover their mistake soon enough. The election cycle of 2010 is already starting up - and it isn't going to look anything like the cycle of 2008.
Spew venom? Because I post rebuttals to untrue...
information or present the other side? Don't think I have called anyone trailer trash or wished anyone dead lately, which Dems have done toward me on this board. Being Independent means exactly that...not affiliated with any party. It does not remove the right to have opinions. This is a democracy, no matter how much the democrats would like to change that.
Which information that I have posted is false?
If you are truly an Independent, you would know that Fox News is the only place a conservative has to go to get anything of the conservative viewpoint in cable or broadcast news. THe others are in the pockets of liberals/Democrats and have been for years. Got a news flash for you...just because it appears on Fox does not make it untrue and just because it appears on MSNBC does not make it true.
What do the Dems post here that they have verified as 100% true? But I don't see you taking them to task.
Yes, I am truly an independent. I have been both. I have voted Democrat, but not in many years. When they took the hard left, they left me. Then I voted and was a member of Republican party. When they started leaving their conservative roots, they left me. So yes, I am an Independent. Independent of ANY party. No RNC or DNC tells me what to do or what to think.
Excuse me while I cry foul over "kill him" and
lynch mob mentality IS alive and well in the McC camp. For those of us who are old enough to remember the 60s, John Lewis is right on with his reminder of what this sort of "enthusiasm" can lead to...and so is this poster.
NO "Kill Him" or "Off with his Head"...
"A couple of days ago, David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune reported that somebody shouted 'kill him' about Barack Obama at a McCain-Palin rally in Scranton, Pennsylvania, while Republican congressional candidate Chris Hackett spoke. But today Andrew Cedar of the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader reports that not a single person interviewed by the Secret Service heard this outburst."
"Secret Service Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment. 'I was baffled,' he said after reading the report in Wednesday's Times-Tribune of Scranton. He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than the reporter," David Singleton of the Scranton Times-Tribune. Slavoski said that more than 20 nonsecurity agents were interviewed Wednesday from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally he said Singleton was the only one to say he heard somebody yell kill him. 'We've yet to find anybody to back up the story,' Slavoski said. 'We had people all over. We have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.'"
I, too, heard someone yell "kill him" . . .
it was very clear on the news clip. I agree with gourdpainter -- I am afraid of all the loonies that have been specifically targeted by the McCain camp for the sole purpose of inciting these blood-thirsty crazies, and hope to God there are none of you supporting this kind of despicable behavior.
Does John McCain "kill you," too?
I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time. (John McCain, October 21, 2007, describing how he's ready to lead on day one, before selecting his running mate who was a mayor for a short period of time and a governor for a short period of time).
McCain supporters shouting "Kill him" at his
rallies. What is that about??? That scares me.
One of the earlier "kill him" incidents happened
nm
OK. In he midst of "kill him" and "off with his head"
we have an antecdotal incident where, in the absence of taped evidence, it is essentially one person's word against another. Here's a woman who has obviously bought into some of this hate rhetoric by responding to the question by calling Obama a socialist and baby killer.
Without a tape, there is no way to know presisely what this woman may or may not have said to the campaign worker. However, I am not surprised that in the current volatile environment, whipped up by an "energized" Christian right-wing McCain/Palin base, campaign workers are instructed to report any PERCEIVED death threats that in turn get passed on to the Secret Service for disposition.
If this woman makes statements to a newspaper reporter during a routine interview such as "panties in a bundle," when describing an Obama supporter, there is no telling what she is capable of saying when her own drawers are in an uproar.
I for one am grateful that the SS is airing on the side of caution...after all, it is their job. I am old enough to remember the non-stop democratic leadership assassignations of the 60s and the hate speech that prevailed during those times. BTW, we live in a post 911 Patriot Act world here where the shrub and his cronies would have us believe we are surrounded by home grown terrorists.
Like your no-class group that shouted "Kill Him" regarding O at a GOP rally? With Palin? or
don't you remember that? Bunch of hypocrites - you guys dish it but you sure don't like to take it.
"kill him" speech is not acceptable free speech - it is against the law - nm
x
Sorry. That last statement should have been
x
RIGHT, but it was actually a statement that was
nm
What an odd statement
"God's will has been done"???
Whenever somebody gets what they want they always say it's "Gods will" or what "God wants". As though they know. Then as if to try to convince us it's true they will throw in a "I prayed and was shown a sign". Well I know a lot of people who are priests, biships, and very spiritual and religious people and they were praying for a different outcome. They were praying for McCain to win. So are you saying 50% of Americans praying for a different outcome all have a different God than yours who "answered your prayers"? Also I have found that when things don't work out they way they want they'll have a different answer (but usually the same canned answer).
There is good and evil in this world. I'm not saying Obama is either. Only he and his family know his religious viewpoints. This is the kind of conversation that is 1/2 religious 1/2 political. If your talking about our government (DC people) I would say that is the least likely place to find "God". Then if your going to go there you should say say "Allah" has spoken and wants him in the office, after all that is who the muslims pray to.
Yes things happen in the world. I think that's were that phrase "$hit happens" comes in.
You said all things happen in this world for the good of those that love the Lord. Does this include the parents who murder their children because God has told them to do so, or even just murder their children for no reason (like that lady in Florida). How about the senseless shootings, robberies, gang rapes, do you think all that happens for those becuase I'm sure those victims loved the Lord too. Oh what about 9-11 all those victims who died. I'm sure there were a lot who loved the Lord. Like I say I don't want to make this a religious message because that is for the faith board but you are mixing the two together and they are very different things.
My aunt does the same thing though. She will talk of something and then add in "I prayed about it and the lord told me this or that" I guess she's trying to put validity behind her statement but it has the opposite effect.
We all hope Obama becomes a great president and does good things for the country. That is the hope of any president elected. Nobody is saying he's going to do a bad job. We're all saying we hope he will do good, but we know about his history/background, associations, voting records, and inexperience, and there is a lot that is not sitting well with us. I believe we all hope to be pleasantly surprised but only time will tell and we will be keeping our eyes open just like we would do with any person elected.
I'm just trying to figure out the logic of this post and it makes no sense and is an insult to those of us who feel differently and "prayed" for a different outcome.
I have to wonder at your statement... sm
""Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country" used to hold a positive meaning in this country."
How does this apply when people like Peggy Johnson (or whatever her name was) proclaim on national tv that they are so glad they don't have to worry about paying their mortgage or putting gas in their cars? I wonder how people who are getting ready to quit their jobs and live off the government will react if they find out that the gravy train is being pulled by the engine of "serve your country?"
I would agree with you. America has gotten greedy and spiteful. I also feel they have gotten lazy, apathetic and complacent and depend on the government now more than ever to meet their needs instead of the other way around.
Your statement a few posts above that (SM)
liberalism is the problem with this country is BASHING.
If you want to bash Liberals - go do it on your Conservatives board.
I see you haven't changed. BTW, Nan, who in the world supposedly "invited you back" as you state below? Perhaps you were invited back to the Conservative board? LOL
A statement from Shrub!
Actually, I didn't think it was funny either when he made that statement as our troops were and are being maimed and dying for him, and he thought it was funny that "whoops, no WMDs!" Rude indeed!!!!!
dumb statement
she gets what she deserves? All the woman wants is to meet with the person who is supposed to be our servant, the person WE put into office. That is not asking too much, in my opinion. It is not like he is a king or dictator. He is supposed to be working for US. If he had met with her, she would have went home and none of this shooting guns, crashing into crosses, etc., would have happened. He is the reason she is getting all this press coverage. Gets what she deserves? What a dumb statement. He should get what HE deserves, impeachment, a criminal trial and imprisonment for this illegal immoral war of his.
broad statement
And have you taken a poll of every democrat in the country as to whether they love or hate Phil? These broad statements are not helping your credibility.
Not a broad statement at all.
And since you make broad statements all the time, that's a little disingenuous, don't you think? I asked a question. You didn't answer it. How many politicians have you seen embrace Phil? As far as credibilty, let's be perfectly frank. I don't care if you find me credible and I am sure the same can be said for your feelings about me. We are worlds apart in our thinking. Thank God.
broad statement
I make broad statements all the time? When, where? LOL. That in itself is a broad statement from you. I make statements with facts to back them up, I post articles. As far as how many politicals back Phil, who knows, who cares. Is he running for office? I must have missed it if he is. He is a tax paying, charity giving, hard working adult who has opinions and ideas and beliefs on how our country should go and I applaud him for speaking out, with his own independent ideas. As far as your and mine ideas? Sure they are different. I dont thank god for that..Frankly, I dont think god has anything to do with that. We are free thinking human beings (at least I am..are you?) and it is great that you have your ideas and I have mine. That is what this country was built on..differing opinions. Heaven help us all if this country ever becomes one thought and one opinion..that is called a dictatorship. I dont know about you but I could never live under that situation..So, long live your opinion and long live mine and never the two shall meet.
true statement
This statement shows that architects of war and politicians, they know just how to manipulate the nonpolitical masses and do it well.
If that's not the most pompus statement ever
I don't know what is...it's a wonder you can breath with your nose so high in the air
That is just as much a racist statement as the one above. sm
Racism goes both ways. How about let's not labeling people at all.
I borrowed that statement from you by the way.
I'm not sure where you get your history or how it go so skewed; Johnson didn't run from war in the Vietnam, he started it, and you consider the way John Kennedy handled the Cuban missile crisis as running from war? As opposed to the alternative? Nuclear war.
What you fail to understand is that the conservative party is not running on the political theory that it was intended to.
Emancipation proclamation is a LIBERAL idea. Voting for women and African American is a LIBERAL idea, not a conservative one.
You have absolutely succeeded in proving that you are not only uneducated but incredibly misguided. You are a political conservative's wet dream.
This is not an accurate statement
Please provide non-partisan sources that state that the majority of scientists state that global warming is bunk.
Your statement, and I quote....(sm)
"A half a Xanax works just as well as a full one."
NOT TRUE. A half a Xanax will take the edge off. An entire Xanax will afford you the opportunity to take a 2-hour nap.
McCain had a statement...
"Phil Gramm does not speak for me. I speak for me. So, I strongly disagree," McCain responded. "America's in great difficulty, and we are experiencing enormous economic challenges."
I agree somewhat with what Gramm said tho...things have gone really well for a long time...gas was low, home values were high, joblessness was at all-time low (yes, during the dreaded Bush administration), and now we are entering some tougher times...and instead of hitching up their bootstraps and moving on through the tough time, a lot of Americans are just whining...well, more than whining, screaming at the top of their lungs for the government to bail them out. Well, again...overtaxation is the prime reason we are in the fix we are in. Democrats and their never-ending social programs, throw more money at problems approach, and to fund all that...higher taxes. Higher taxes for ALL of us, including the so-called "rich" (who employ 75% of the people in the US and pay 85-90% of the taxes already). I would like to know how many people in the good old US are on some kind of government assistance. I think the numbers would astound most. And what are the Democrats doing this election season...hawking yet MORE taxes. Obama wants higher payroll taxes. He wants to tax small businesses even more. Well, something has to pay for the largest entitlement EVER...government-run health care. What a debacle THAT will be if it ever happens. Better be careful what you ask for...
What we need to do is cut all programs except those absolutely needed, that being people who because of health or injury absolutely cannot work. Stop keeping families on welfare generation after generation. Stop making it more profitable to sit at home and draw a check than it is to get out and work. And, in my humble opinion, I don't mind an interim check if someone finds themselves out of work, or while they are in job training. But it should NOT be open-ended. Criminal laws should be tougher and anyone in prison should have to work. Period. It should not be 3 squares and a roof without work. There is plenty they could do.
I believe we need to move back to what made America great..the chance to, through education and/or hard work to better yourself, and family responsibility to one another (meaning moms and dads need to work to feed their own families)...back when welfare should be the LAST resort and effort was made to get off as soon as possible.
Okay, off my soapbox now. I do not mean to offend anyone...just giving my opinion.
hello? the statement that the woman
loves to fire people? pretty simple what i was responding to.
LOL - It was a blanket statement
I said my pet peeve is when people make fun of other people for the way they talk. But now that I think of it, it's not a pet peeve, its more of an irritant. Now I know why my parents taught me not to make fun of other people for the way they talk or look.
Can you back that statement up?
This is like the statement that one poster said- nm
.
There is a substantive statement. nm
nm
Now that's a right bright statement!
I don't think this statement was racist.
I'm sure that there are some white people who are so nuts in their racism that they could potentially assassinate Obama or at least attempt to. That doesn't insinuate all white people. As for riots....I'm sure there are some black people who are so racist that they could potentially riot if Obama loses. That isn't saying that all of them will. You need to pull back the race card you just threw out there and perhaps lay off of the caffeine as well. Making these statements doesn't make someone racist.....it just points out that there is racism out there in the world and it comes from all sides.
This is a hurtful statement
Guess I was stunned when someone calls you a name because the can't see you face to face. I don't need to explain my nationality to you. Do you know how many black people there are who are not supporting Obama. Are you gonna call all of us racists.
What do you define as a racist? Just becuase people don't vote for Obama doesn't make them racist. Not once in my post did I mention his race. It's the facts and his policies I am against.
I like the idea at the end of your statement
I like your statement "I also believe a system such as this, in place for a number of years, would tremendously cut the waste in America drastically by causing the American people, especially those in the middle class and lower class to consider their purchases more carefully. However, I doubt it would have as much of an affect on the higher income class in terms of wastefulness"and agree with it. We used this principle while trying to teach our kids some financial responsibility. We used to buy their school clothes, etc. When they got to the ages where shoes were $100 a pair for tennis shoes and jeans were outrageously priced as was everything else in a teenager's wardrobe, and they were old enough to babysit or whatever to earn a little money, we told them they could pick what they wanted and we would buy it but they would have to pay the tax portion of those purchases. They learned a lot about responsible spending at that time and cut back a lot on their wants. Small scale, but I believe your idea sentiment is correct.
Yes that's me - and I still stand by my statement.
I just agreed that the site has been changed; however, if you compare the 2 sites they are virtually word for word until you have to add the part about the college credit (which I posted 4 links below that show that that has been part of the "requirement" all along and not a new idea). That is why I say that it was a mistake on somebody's part that was doing the typing.
I am telling you, when I am wrong, I am admitting I am wrong, and I will continue to admit I am wrong.
If Obama does something that is wrong, then in the next election, I will most definitely not support him again. I am, however, giving him the benefit of the doubt until he is actually in office and doing the job of the POTUS, and not condemning him on typos, rumors, innuendos, outright lies, hypothetical situations, fear and hatred...
I base my decisions on that person's actions, not the public's opinion.
What a stupid statement by........sm
Randall Terry: "It's not a frog or a ferret that's being killed. It's a baby."
Life is life, why is it right to kill a frog or a ferret?????
I think that's a really unfair statement.
To say that we are afraid of him because he's black? I personally don't care what color he is as long as he does his job for the good of America instead of the good of himself, like too many other "leaders" in Washington.
I'm afraid because I don't think his bailout plan is going to work. I'm afriad that instead of surrounding himself with intelligent people, he's surrounding himself with crooks (Geithner). And I'm afrid that there are too many people up on the hill that are going to make life impossible for him when he actually has a plan that will work (and I'm not just talking about republicans - there are now fellow democrats that are voicing concern). THAT'S what I'm afriad of.
I agree that there's a lot of hate on this board, but that's indicative of America - there are some very narrow-minded people in this country and many that just aren't happy unless their side wins. But to say that we're afraid of him because he's black is just utter nonsense, at least for the majority, so please don't lump us all into the same category.
I don't think this is a true statement........ sm
"I support him now, as do all of the people who voted for him."
It has been reported that the mother of one of the men killed on the USS Cole regrets that she voted for Obama, so there is at least 1 person who does not support him.
I didn't vote for Obama and am not too crazy about his plans for America, but I hope like heck that his stimulus package will help (not holding my breath, though) because it would mean our economy would rebound and Americans can dig themselves out of the hole we are in.
Mission Statement
The GOP Mission Statement!
GOP Rep: "Our Goal Is To Bring Down Approval Numbers" For Democrats
'GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry, a key player in helping craft the Republican message, has offered an unusually blunt description of the Republican strategy right now.
"We will lose on legislation. But we will win the message war every day, and every week, until November 2010," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., an outspoken conservative who has participated on the GOP message teams. "Our goal is to bring down approval numbers for [Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and for House Democrats. That will take repetition. This is a marathon, not a sprint." ' -Huffington Post
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/house-republicans/gop-rep-our-goal-is-to-bring-down-approval-numbers-for-dems/
You see the Republicans are always up to something. Too bad it is usually no good for the American people.
You made the statement:
'It's just downright immoral (again, my opinion) to profit from someone's health (be it good health or bad health) because sooner or later, we're all going to get sick, especially the older we get. '
(You were the one who drew the inference that insurance companies had something to do with transcripts. I did not imply that. However, now that you mention it, insurance companies one of the main reasons we transcribe reports.......)
I replied that all who work in healthcare-related fields (including MTs) profit from people's health.
We make a living from the transcriptions of doctors who are charging money to treat people who are staying in hospitals that charge patients to stay there. Nurses are also paid to take care of the patients, and insurance companies make money as well, all from people's illness. Unconscionable! We all should just donate our services!
The deal is, we all try to charge more money than it actually takes us to perform the job, so that we can earn a living.
Might as well say that home repairmen are immoral for charging for a new roof, because everybody needs a place to live. Are grocers immoral for charging for the food we all need? Should they just give it to you if you can't pay? Should our electricity be free because everyone needs light and heat? How much of a nanny state do you want to live in?
That would be a feasible statement...(sm)
if we actually had gotten any useful information from it, but reports thus far have shown the exact opposite.
I think it's more making a statement
I don't think they're necessarily making the interstate trip for the sake of getting married per se; I believe they're doing it because they can do that thing that they felt it has long been denied to them. Many have had their own private/personal commitment ceremonies. As an example, I started going out to clubs when I was 17 (back in the days, 18 was the drinking age). However, it was still an "occasion" when I turned 18 and went out. I went to the same club I had been going to for the last year, drank no more than I ever had, and danced the same way I had for the last year. But that didn't make it any less special. I'm guessing it's the same kind of thing.
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT!
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON H.R. 1913, THE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT HATE
CRIMES PREVENTION ACT OF 2009
"This week, the House of Representatives is expected to consider H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance - legislation that will enhance civil rights protections, while also protecting our freedom of speech and association. I also urge the Senate to work with my Administration to finalize this bill and to take swift action."
|
