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

My husband and I were discussing is that the upside of Obama as pres it that we will probably

Posted By: qualify for foodstamps now. on 2008-11-06
In Reply to: Obama supporters.... - sm

x


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

I agree. My husband and I were discussing that.
nm
really wanna barf - guess who steps up as pres. if something awful happens to the pres and vp??? nm
....
My husband says this video/audio of Obama saying he will...sm
do away with the coal industry....has been scrubbed clean from the Internet, like so many other telling bits of the real Obama....

Yet another one.....gone, poof, nothing there.


This man will try to do away with capitalism as we know it.

YES we should be discussing this
We should discuss it until it is resolved. It has not been resolved yet as you can see. This is one of the major headlines in the U.S. Has the "possible" next President met the qualifications. There are lots of headlines going on around the world (India being the biggest right now), but here in this country American's are still waiting for answers. Yes we should be discussing and questioning until an answer has been given. Not by left-wing agencies like factcheck, MSNBC, CNN, etc but by the Supreme Court.

Next, if you don't know where my sources came from why are you calling them right-wing. One of them is NBC and that is "left-wing". Additionally I don't need to site sources because first, I'm not posting the articles. I'm posting headlines I read on the internet. This "post your sources" is getting way out of hand. In the past conservatives and independents have posted their opinions before and were told to give their sources. Tell me that makes sense?????? Do your own research. And second, if I did post sources, you have shown by your statement you are already going to say they are not credible. Anything that doesn't favor and drools over the O you and other dems will say it's not credible, so no need to site them. Look them up yourself. Might do some good to get a different opinion than the left-wing sites. If you think I made up these headlines, pulleese. If I could only write so well I'd be rich.

And what I don't find entertaining in this "left-wing" blog is the starry-eyed O followers cutting down every single thing out there. We on this page do not make this stuff up. This is coming from thousands and thousands of Americans all across the country (at least 100,000 for sure). The facts are that the supreme court will be deciding if he meets the qualifications. We will wait til then. So until then I don't find the lovefest for Obama amusing. And if you don't want to read people's differences of opinions I would suggest not coming here.

The people who are not interested in the truth are the ones who are afraid of the truth. The left-wing dems who try to cut down those with different opinions and call them all these names. Never once questioning anything. Just following the pack (I believe they are referred to as Sheople).

You said you "addressed this issue during the campaign.". My answer to that is "So what!" Does that mean because you have addressed that is the end to it and no longer to be talked about. This is one of the most important issues of our time right now (yes along with the other crisis' going on), but we're talking about a person who might possibly be the next president. If it was a republican getting ready to take office you'd be on this board every day wanting to discuss it. I think finding out whether this guy is qualified and if not, how in the world did he ever get this far (who covered up what) will be one of the biggest issues of time. And for someone who doesn't want to waste their time you sure wrote a long post.

This is not gossip. The supreme court does not involve themselves with cases of "gossip". There is validity to what is being brought forth to them. Otherwise they would not waste their time. They don't have time to hear every single case that is brought before them, but they know the importance of upholding the Constitution, and so do the electorals who will be voting. If he doesn't meet the qualifications he and the DNC have got some explaining to do.

Your comments about "right-wing rag sources" "so-called headlines" "ignorance in the fringe right's hate blogs" "Focks news". Goes to show how little you know about what is happening. And your statement that you "read and listen to numerous national and international sources on a daily basis" is laughable. Your comments show you clearly do not.

Your dose of reality is that this is bigger than you know, the Supreme Court will be hearing the case. There are at least 12 or more lawsuits going on. The O refuses to show the information and prove his eligibility (not sure how long he thinks he can get away with it - what's he going to do, defy the Supreme Court?). The cases are being presented by lawyers, judges, politicians, democrats, independents, republicans, whites, indians, chinese, and blacks. The people voting in December want the issue cleared up because if any of them have any doubt about this, they will not vote for him. That's the reality and that's what the dems (especially on this board) fear, and that is why the left-wing rags, TV stations, and radio stations won't talk about it.

As for the rest of your post I will not address because it is so long I didn't read the rest of it. The first two paragraphs and the first sentence of the third paragraph was enough for me to realize you clearly do not know what you are talking about.

Maybe you should get a grip and read and listen to other stuff besides what the left wingers keep dishing out.
As I said below, he had been discussing Freakanomics, Democrat.

And as I said below, need he have interjected that in every sentence in the conversation?  The discussion was actually about abortion.  The entire TEXT of the conversation is posted here.  Also, this has been discussed on several talk shows and Freakanomics has been mentioned often and appropriately, but as I also said, there is no use discussing it further.  There is no arguing with most on here about it, athough there was a glimmer of hope.  Understand me, I am not dismissing his comments out of hand. I think he made a poor decision when he was making a point.  However, do I think he did it deliberately and with malice and do I think he is a racist?  Absolutely not.  THIS is racism:








What, white isn’t a color?
Posted by: McQ on Saturday, October 01, 2005
 
Things like this amuse me as they show the absolute lunacy which now exists in some areas of our society. From Northeastern University:
After originally advertising for women of color only, the Women's Studies and Graduate Consortium's first Breaking Bread: Women of Color Dialogue was forced to open the doors of the Raytheon Amphitheater to all races last Saturday.

The event was meant to include only women of color during its first session from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., with the second session from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. open to the public. However, after protest from the Student Government Association (SGA), orders came from Provost Ahmed Abdelal that the event must remain open to all who wished to attend.

They were in violation of the nondiscrimination policy, said Michael DeRamo, SGA vice president for academic affairs. We're glad that everything turned out well and the people who wanted to go were allowed to attend.

He said although SGA appreciated what the program was trying to accomplish, SGA could not stand dormant while one of their senators was denied admission based on her race.
OK, you say. Good deal. Now, check out the reaction:
I think it's a shame that one or two white students based on white privilege, a lack of awareness of racial issues and a lack of generosity of spirit complained to the office of the provost and were able, because they were white, to gain admission to the morning session that I was forced to open up, Chandler said. Only one white female student showed up and I welcomed her anyway, in addition to telling the audience to conduct themselves with integrity even though the presence of a white woman was unwelcome.
Is your irony meter pegging out yet? Talk about Newspeak. Protesting discrimination is now lack of awareness of racial issues and a lack of generosity of spirit.

Protesting discrimination now apparently only belongs to 'people of color'.

Just as interesting is this group seems to believe it can solve racial issues without involving all the races.

Oh and the condescension was almost dripping when this person said I welcomed her ... even though the presence of a white woman was unwelcome.

Sounds like a stereotypical southerner in the immediate post-civil rights south, doesn't it?


Personal note: You won't see this in the MSM.


THIS is racist:


In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and [there] were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master ... exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him. Colin Powell's committed to come into the house of the master. When Colin Powell dares to suggest something other than what the master wants to hear, he will be turned back out to pasture. -- Harry Belafonte


THIS is racist:


He's married to a white woman. He wants to be white. He wants a colorless society. He has no ethnic pride. He doesn't want to be black. -- California State Senator Diane Watson's on Ward Connerly's interracial marriage


THIS is racist:


I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state .... The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia .... It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union. Will you please inform me as to the possibilities of rebuilding the Klan in the Realm of W. Va .... I hope that you will find it convenient to answer my letter in regards to future possibilities. -- Former Klansman and current US Senator Robert Byrd, a man who is referred to by many Democrats as the conscience of the Senate, in a letter written in 1946, after he quit the KKK.


THIS is racist:


I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years. -- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, Inside The White House


THIS is egregiously racist:


I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's not a n*gger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a White man from dust, a n*gger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, Yellow men in Asia and White men in Europe and America. Harry Truman (1911) in a letter to his future wife Bess


And THIS is racist:


There’s some people who’ve gone over the state and said, ‘Well, George Wallace has talked too strong about segregation.’ Now let me ask you this: how in the name of common sense can you be too strong about it? You’re either for it or you’re against it. There’s not any middle ground as I know of. -- Democratic Alabama Governor George Wallace (1959)


Discussing ideas is antagonistic?
I, personally, have been very respectful. If discussing ideas and having a dialogue with someone is antagonistic to you then I'm afraid you're in for a very difficult road in life.
today on radio, they were discussing
his own party is in controversy over flip-flops. disgusted almost with the whole lot of them. someone said government growth has been 60% in the last few years. Don't know about that, but upsetting story on medicare losing millions by having doctor's available info on line which, of course, has been abused. Some of these guys have been dead for years and so people have been using their id's and #'s to scam/order wheelchairs. oh well, we'll always have more taxpayers, right? The name of the game is money, and they are all to blame for this energy problem, alternative methods have been squelched for almost 80 years. We could very quickly find ourselves in a fine pickle if they shut off the tap over there and I don't put it past them. After all, we have already made them filthy rich, they won't need us anymore, especially with our losing economy. Indonesia and Viet Nam won't even accept american money. or so I heard a couple of weeks ago, not like I tried to spend any money anywhere! I strongly feel the need to become self-sufficient and I mean that on an individual level as well, think 1800's. our people are much too busy fingerpointing to get anything accomplished and I am sick of all the bickering and wastefulness. I really feel for the ones to come after us.
I thought they were discussing sending them to Australia.
Did that change? I don't watch political channels, it just makes me mad.
don't want either for pres.

Can we have her for pres instead of VP? LOL
.
Schwarzenneger for pres
x
First Pres younger than me
and though I love him (am definitely a kool aid drinker, I admit) he looks like he's in junior high and it will be sad to see him age. Maybe it won't be too bad. He seems to like stress.
Who was Pres on 09/11/2001?
Why would anyone give him credit for PROTECTING us?
Have they done that with previous pres?
If they have done this with previous presidents, I really couldn't care less.  Anyone know the answer to this?
Pres just had a press conference..
listened very discernibly, heard nothing different from his other press conferences...  Feel like I'm watching "Groundhog Day" starring Bill Murray, only Bill Murray is much more funny and quite a bit smarter!  When will get some real leadership?  We desparately need LEADERSHIP!!!
A little insight on Pres. Bush
I work in a very high profile media department, and part of my job is transcription of raw interviews. I have transcribed several transcripts of raw interview footage with Pres. Bush, and he is the most respectful, gracious, down-to-earth person behind the scenes you can imagine. It's not that fakey type of schmooze either. You can tell he's genuine. When there is a break in the interview process he's asking the crew about their families etc. He has a very kind heart.

Now, with that said I don't agree one hundred percent with all his policies. Some of the the things he has been for I have been totally against...amnesty for illegals is one of them.

I do not have one problem with people disagreeing with his policies but to personally say he's a bad person, compare him with Hitler and other evil people is not only beyond the pale it's just plain not true. I have also transcribed interviews of several members of the Bush family, and they are all warm loving people.

I could mention some people who are not gracious, but I'm not here to smear anyone's character on the basis of my professional knowledge, but I do feel I need to defend a person who is so unjustly character assassinated on a daily basis.

President Bush has very unfairly been painted to be evil by the media and the extreme left in this country. Again, nobody is forced to like him, but to say he's a bad evil person is just not right or factual, and I, for one will defend him on his character.
Discussion from Gab Board re Pres.

"First... I don't claim him. I think he's a tyrant to put it nicely and I think he is a warmonging hillbilly (and that's sad for the hillbillies because they are decent folk he gives a bad name). I told everyone not to vote for him last time... I tried to warn them. I didn't want him and he hasn't done anything to help me our my friends and family in the slightest, except make us look ridiculous on the international stage (which I can say because I live in Europe at the moment and I know how foolish they think us right now). Second, good for you. Maybe you should vote for McCain so that the pain (errr I mean pleasure) never ends. I bet the people that he's been against and not fought for (i.e., Katrina victims, Iowa flood victims, homosexuals, people with diseases that stem cell reasearch could help, innocent people in far off lands that lost family members and friends who were innocent victims) I bet they all share your same sentiments.. right? You can have him.. I bet right about now he's half price on the discount rack anyways! Third... you should be grateful she put "creatrue." Its probably how Bush spells and says it, so its a true representation. Fourth... I think the last time I checked it was a free country with free speech and allowed for people to have their own opinions. I have better names to call him than childish ones... but I won't use them since your so easily offended... are you his personal emotional filter? I doubt he cares what the American people call him... he's certainly proven he doesn't care what they think or how they feel... so why should we care about him? Thanks back atcha. I can have whatever opinion I want of the president and I can tell you, I am more the majority than you are."


Moving over here per Mod request.......


Of course you can have your opinion about President Bush.  I was just saying that the names are uncalled for.  Are you staying in Europe forever or are you planning on coming back to the U.S.?  Just curious. 


President Bush isn't perfect and there have been many mistakes, I do agree.  I did vote for him and agree with the vast majority of his conservative views.  I do plan on voting for John McCain in November.  But, if Obama is our next president, as much as I disagree with his views, I wouldn't call him names; but that's just me I guess. 


I do not envy anyone who is willing to take on the gigantic role of running the country.  I would not want the job in a million years.  I have respect for ANYONE, republican or democrat, who is ready and willing to take on this great responsibility. 


I still would like to know what a creatrue is and President Bush is NOT retarded.


You mean "proud of your pres-elect" (nm)

Just watched him with Pres Bush and
Obama in the White House, definitely no droop, no change at all in his appearance.
has anyone changed Pres choice in
x
for new pres foremost, to keep us safe.
x
Name a pres that kept all his campaign promises?
I don't expect him to keep all his promises. In actuality, he really can't. None of the other presidents in my memory have been able to either. That is an unrealistic expectation. They say what they need to say to get elected.
too bad i'm not the pres - i'm control freakish enough 4 it
:)
Oh, pul-EEEZE. Any pres., Pub or Dem, deserves a
night out on the town once in a while. And of COURSE it cost $20,000! It's not like they can just hop on public transit with no Secret Service, and cruise on down to the local burger shop.
His memory is no more 'selective' than the current Pres..
and his cronies...
I like your line of thinking. LOL. You should run for pres. You'd have my vote. nm
nm
When GW Bush became pres, I did give him a chance even though
amazin
Transcript: Democratic response to Pres. Bush's

Good morning. This is Congressman Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the House Majority Leader.


Over the past several months, Democrats and Republicans in Congress have negotiated a bipartisan extension of the highly successful childrens health insurance program known as CHIP - a program enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress in 1997, with strong Democratic support, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.


CHIP provides health insurance coverage for over six and one-half million American children in families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance.


However, millions of other children who are currently eligible for this health insurance are not enrolled due to the programs limited resources.


To address this, our bipartisan legislation provides funding for approximately four million more children - ensuring that at least 10 million low-income children in our nation receive the health care coverage they need and deserve. Thats good for them and for our country.


This legislation does not change current eligibility guidelines. It simply strengthens CHIPs financing, covers more low-income children, and improves the quality of care they receive.


Sadly, on Wednesday, President Bush - in the face of bipartisan majorities in Congress, and contrary to the will of the American people - vetoed our bipartisan bill.

The President claims - wrongly - that this bill is fiscally irresponsible.


The truth is, this legislation is fully paid for. It does not add one nickel to the deficit or to the debt.


Furthermore, under the Presidents proposal more than 800,000 children who now receive coverage under CHIP would lose that coverage.


The President claims that this legislation would lead to a government takeover of health insurance. He is wrong.


The truth is, Americas largest private insurance lobbying group supports this bill - as do Americas doctors, nurses, childrens advocates, 43 governors, and, most importantly, 72 percent of Americans.


The claims made against this bill are simply wrong.


As Senator Pat Roberts, a senior Republican from Kansas, recently said: I am not for excessive spending and strongly oppose the federalization of health care. And if the Administrations concerns with this bill were accurate, I would support a veto. But, Senator Roberts added: Bluntly put, they are not.


Most puzzling of all, perhaps, is the fact that the Presidents veto violates his own campaign promise.


In 2004, at the Republican National Convention, the President promised (and I quote): In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of children who are eligible but not signed up for government health insurance programs. We will not allow, he said, a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need.


But he has done just that.


But the Congress has done exactly what the President said he was going to do, if re-elected.


Yet today, the only thing standing between millions of American children and the health insurance they need and deserve is one person. The President is saying no to these children he promised to help.


This is a defining moment for this Congress.


In the words of Senator Charles Grassley, a Republican of Iowa, weve got to do what we can to try to override the Presidents veto.


In the days ahead, we will work to persuade many of our Republican colleagues, who insist on standing with the President, to instead join the bipartisan majorities in Congress - and Americas children - in overriding this veto.


I urge all of you: Contact your Member of Congress.


Ask them to support our children.


Ask them to do what the President promised to do when he sought re-election.


Ask them to vote to override the Presidents veto and ensure health care for our kids and for their future.


Thank you for listening. This is House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.


Lets put this nonsense to bed. Pres candidates born outside US
Here's the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen

Here's the text. See. Isn't this EASY?

US presidential candidates born outside the US
"The constitutional wording has left doubts about whether those born on foreign soil are on an equal footing with those whose birth occurred inside the country's borders, and whether they have the same rights."[2] Though every president and vice president to date (as of 2008) has either been a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, or else born in a U.S. state or Washington D.C.,[3] a number of presidential candidates have been born elsewhere.[4]

Barry Goldwater, who ran as the Republican party nominee in 1964, was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory. Although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully organized and incorporated territory of the United States.[5]

George Romney, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States in 1912. Romney was 32 years old when he arrived in Michigan.

Lowell Weicker, the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France and acquired his citizenship at birth through his parents. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.[6]

John McCain, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and is the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Although the Panama Canal Zone was not considered to be part of the United States,[7] federal law states: "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States."[8] The law that conferred this status took effect on August 4, 1937, one year after John McCain was born — albeit with retroactive effect, resulting in McCain being declared a U.S. citizen.[9]

The mere fact of Constitutional ineligibility has not deterred some minor parties from nominating candidates for President who could not possibly serve in the office. For example, although some states have blocked ballot access for such candidates, the Socialist Workers Party nonetheless successfully placed its candidate, Róger Calero, on the ballot in Mississippi in 2004. [10]

Isn't it wonderful to have a pres WHO DIDN'T STEAL THE ELECTION? AND WHO sm
won by such a large margin???? Poor Gore had to sit through Bush's inauguration knowing he had 500,000 more votes. This is WONDERFUL!

First thing is a Biography of Pres. Bush, then Welcome to Michael Moore...nm
x
Personally, I am disappointed in Pres Bush, but namecalling is really infantile.
I think it detracts from logical debate.  Pointing out people's personal flaws is another really bad debate tactic.  Need to rise above that high school behavior and stick to the opinons and there are plenty of bad things to say right now.  Don't make it personal.
Pres. Bush holds completely stated "teleconference" with troops

Gads, I think he's a slow learner.  This sort of stuff doesn't go over well, IMHO.  Might make people think he is a big phony.


Bush Teleconference With Soldiers Staged


AP - 42 minutes ago


WASHINGTON - It was billed as a conversation with U.S. troops, but the questions President Bush asked on a teleconference call Thursday were choreographed to match his goals for the war in Iraq and Saturday's vote on a new Iraqi constitution. This is an important time, Allison Barber, deputy assistant defense secretary, said, coaching the soldiers before Bush arrived. The president is looking forward to having just a conversation with you..


 


My husband too in VN....
we were married after he came home, but he could not adjust.  He slipped into alcoholism, and died in a one car crash with a blood alcohol of 0.28 at age 31.   (thank God he did not kill someone else too.)  But he never talked about Vietnam, don't think he could....just never was really happy and drank, drank, drank. He told me one time that in Viet Nam you either smoked dope or drank, and he drank.  I would bet that a lot of Viet Nam vets turned to alcohol afterwards. 
If my husband
called me a c unt....I'd reply by calling him a d1ckhead.  That is just another word to me and I don't take a huge offense by it whether or not my mother does.  So like I said before, who makes the rules about words and which ones are offensive.  For all you know, his wife could be like me and not be hugely offended by that at all.  He11, he could have just meant she was a nice piece of @ss.....but think what you will and spat whatever you want.
Her husband is not just anybody. nm
nm
her husband

works for BP. Oil, you know.


 


My husband and I both
think that Michelle Obama is arrogant.
My husband and I went to go see this
just tonight. It was absolutely hilarious! I hadn't laughed that hard in a long time!!!
So what? My husband does very well
Because he has WORKED HIS BUTT OFF!! Now, there's a concept you would do well to remember. No one has given him anything, which is a great motivation to work hard, get up every day and not be lazy, and work to better your life.

I don't hear Obama saying anything encouraging to young people except let the government pay your way, pay your education, and do what the government says you should do and we'll give you a tiny tiny fraction of your college tuition. You might be able to buy toilet paper with it. Big whoop! Just let "me" take care of you...you dumb easily led sheep to the slaughter. I'll give you money.....you don't have to do a darn thing.

My husband and I give in our community and that way we know where the money is going, who is administering it, and it is going to the very people who need it most......NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

Maybe you would like to explain to me why YOU think your government is better qualified than you to know what is best for your hard earned money? You need the government to do your thinking for you? That's not the American way but unfortunately so many have forgotten where they live.


Your husband...
Could he possibly be "Joe the Plumber?" HaHaHaHa
Your husband should tell Dad . .
to give him a raise. Minimum wage is $8 an hour in my state. Teenagers make that flipping burgers.
My husband and I were both
cracking up.  Especially when he told her that she should be joyful since her name is Joy.  LMAO! 
My husband and I have been saying
for a long time that we were heading for a recession long before the media even hinted at there being a problem.  I have no doubt in my mind that we are currently in one right now whether or not the government admits to it or not.  So don't use the petty spout about republicans not admitting to a recession because that just isn't so....at least it isn't for this republican. At least I'm not naive enough to believe a man who is lying and has no experience.  At least McCain has experience.
BTW.....and if any of my husband's

employees would have said what was said to you, he would have fired them.....period. 


Especially with times right now, these salesmen need to wise up.  It isn't like it used to be.  Salesmen used to be able to sit at their desk and wait for the customers to come to them.  Now they actually have to work hard to get people in, get them interested in a vehicle, etc.  This economy is definitely going to weed out the bad salesmen because they won't be able to survive.


My husband saw one too.
I would definitely call payroll and see what the deal is. Maybe you make too much money to get the tax "cut".
There might not have been 9/11 widows if her husband was doing his job. NM

Don't you mean Laura's husband
should have been doing his job?? Lots of intel on the attacks, but nothing was done.

My husband is a vet so has VA coverage....
but he also works for the government and is a federal employee. I don't claim to know all there is to know either, but I believe the federal employee insurance depends on the best deal the government can get with a private insurance company. His happens to be Blue Cross/Blue Shield of the state we reside in. Maybe it is BC/BS across the board. But, at any rate, it is a private insurance company, not an entity for all federal employees in the United States administered from a central location. As to whether or not a person working at a VA hospital is a federal employee, my first inclination would be yes, because the government administers the VA hospitals. But, I do not know that to be a fact. The supplemental programs you talk about are state administered and vary state to state. Even Medicaid is to some degree controlled by individual states. What people are talking about when they talk about socialized medicine is like in Canada, in France, in Cuba...and other countries, where it is all centralized in the federal government. The federal government decides on the coverage, it administers the whole thing, from one place. Everyone gets the same plan, regardless. To some people, it looks good that the "rich" and the "poor" have the same plan and even if you have money you cannot jump "the line." "The line" being the waiting list for anything nonemergent. That is why Canadians come across the border in droves for procedures, etc. Recently two high risk pregnancies had to come to Seattle because there was no room for them in Canadian hospitals. I saw France's President on TV talking about how their health care plan is becoming nonsustainable and talking about having to cut benefits, raise taxes, or something soon. He talked about free market health care...so while some people might view socialized medicine as a cure-all, it isn't, and it is not sustainable, because it doesn't attack the core issue, and that is finding a way to bring costs DOWN. Historically, the free market system where there is competition brings costs down. The great minds of this country need to sit down and talk about that, reason it out, and not trot out the mother of all entitlement programs. People complain about HMOs making their health care decisions, yet are thrilled to let the government make their health care decisions for them in return for not having to pay a premium. That just makes no sense to me.

Insurance companies, health care providers, and a set of arbitrators need to sit down and work something out that will truly make health care more affordable for everyone in the country without handing it over to the government hook line and sinker. They should be able to do that. It would not happen overnight, but it could happen. I would like to see any candidate talk about that.
This is a nonissue. Whether it was she or her husband or both...
it was several years ago. Obama has been consorting with known anarchists (people who espouse the violent overthrow of the government and have bombed government buildings) still today and took money from them to run for office.

PALES in comparison. If you condemn one, you must condemn the other.
My husband is union....
He works for a trucking firm and told me this morning the union was talking about them taking a 10% cut in pay. The difference between him (or maybe his company?) is that he thinks no problem- his pay is good as it is and if it keeps the company going, why not? I think the car industry might think the same. Did they not say no cuts in pay??