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

Okay. Then let's have David Freddoso...

Posted By: sam on 2008-10-01
In Reply to: It wouldn't matter to me who mod'ed - I don't get it

moderate it.


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

David Freddos once said - s/m
<< All things in Moderation.>> So maybe he would be the best choice as a moderator. All things do come down to how they are moderated, especially in an election debate.
No...I like David Ogden.
This is old news that has been hashed out on the Politics forum and the Faith forum ad nauseum. I support President Obama's choice of David Ogden and will not be calling or writing anyone about it.
I stand by David Ogden.....
It is his legal ethical duty to represent his clients, not his beliefs. My parents decided I was too young to raise a child at 15 and forced me to have an abortion. Yes, the relief was enormous.....as well as the guilt. I got over it and am glad they made that decision for me.
David Brooks - New York Times - sm

David Brooks is an objective analyst and I believe his column in today's NYT is very interesting. I see him on PBS along with Mark Shields and always find him fair and nonpartisan.


Google David Brooks or New York Times and take a look at his article today.


 


Beautiful psalm, written by David
This is a beautiful psalm, written by David, not by G-d, and therefore, is not part of Jewish law.
David Rees is a satirist. This is supposed to
??


Maybe we can get David Ogden to defend him? LOLOLOL!
Nothing like a hypocrite take a fall to make MY day!
Interesting Bhutto interview with David Frost.sm
She is talking about the man who murdered Osama bin Laden. She did not stutter, she did not retract it, and no one corrected her. I guess this is why they can't find him - he's dead. Go to the 6:00 minute mark on the clip and listen for 30 seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ


David Horowitz on "Obama Derangement Syndrome"

I don't think they make 'em much more conservative than Mr. Horowitz.  I've never agreed with anything he's had to say, and I disagree with a few statements in this piece, but I totally agree with its premise.







December 08, 2008, 4:00 a.m.

Obama Derangement Syndrome
Shut up about the birth certificate.

By David Horowitz


The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive. The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, a demagogue who lost a Senate election to the then-unknown Obama by 42 points, should be a warning in itself.

This tempest over whether Obama, the child of an American citizen, was born on American soil is tantamount to the Democrats’’ seditious claim that Bush ""stole"" the election in Florida and hence was not the legitimate president. This delusion helped to create the Democrats’’ Bush derangement syndrome and encouraged Democratic leaders to lie about the origins of the Iraq war, and regard it as illegitimate as Bush himself. It became ""Bush’’s War"" rather than an American War —— with destructive consequences for our troops and our cause.

The birth-certificate zealots are essentially arguing that 64 million voters should be disenfranchised because of a contested technicality as to whether Obama was born on U.S. soil. (McCain narrowly escaped the problem by being born in the Panama Canal zone, which is no longer American.)

What difference does it make to the future of this country whether Obama was born on U.S. soil? Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for president trumps all others. But how viable will our Constitution be if five Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots?

Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies. Ours has been riven by profound disagreements that have been deepening over many years. We are divided not only about political facts and social values, but also about what the Constitution itself means. The crusaders on this issue choose to ignore these problems and are proposing to deny the will of 64 million voters by appealing to five Supreme Court Justices (since no one is delusional enough to think that the four liberal justices are going to take the presidency away from Obama). What kind of conservatism is this?

It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country’’s economy and defending its citizens, and —— by the way —— its Constitution.



—— David Horowitz is the author of Party of Defeat.




David Ogden - please write or call your reps
Obama has picked a man called David Ogden to be deputy Attorney-General. Ogden has made his legal career from representing pornographers, trying to defeat child protection legislation and undermining family values.  As reported this week, he once represented a group of library directors arguing against the Children's Internet Protection Act, which ordered libraries and schools receiving funding for the Internet to restrict access to obscene sites. And on behalf of several media groups, he successfully argued against a child pornography law that required publishers to verify and document the age of their models, which would have ensured these models were at least 18. 

The Family Research Council has more examples of his contribution to upholding American and western values. In one such case, he expressed the view that abortion was less damaging to a woman than having children:



In sum, it is grossly misleading to tell a woman that abortion imposes possible detrimental psychological effects when the risks are negligible in most cases, when the evidence shows that she is more likely to experience feelings of relief and happiness, and when child-birth and child-rearing or adoption may pose concomitant (if not greater) risks or adverse psychological effects ...


In another, co-authored brief, he argued that it was an unconstitutional burden on 14-year old girls seeking an abortion for their parents to be notified -- because there was no difference between adults and mid-teens in their ability to grasp all the implications of such a decision:



There is no question that the right to secure an abortion is fundamental. By any objective standard, therefore, the decision to abort is one that a reasonable person, including a reasonable adolescent, could make. [E]mpirical studies have found few differences between minors aged 14-18 and adults in their understanding of information and their ability to think of options and consequences when asked to consider treatment-related decisions. These unvarying and highly significant findings indicate that with respect to the capacity to understand and reason logically, there is no qualitative or quantitative difference between minors in mid-adolescence, i.e., about 14-15 years of age, and adults.


Newsletter: MADONNA SAYS SHE OFFERED DAVID'S FATHER MONEY..sm
Madonna appeared on NBC's Today show yesterday (Wednesday, November 1st) to talk about her plans to adopt 13-month-old David Banda of Malawi. She told host Meredith Viera that the boy's father, Yohane Banda, refused her financial offer to help raise his son. Madge said, When I met (Yohane), I said I would be happy to bring (David) back to your village and help you financially raise him. And he said no. She added, I think he truly felt in his heart of hearts that -- and who knows if he was telling me the truth -- that he would have a better life with me. So, when he said no, that was my sign that it was my responsibility to look after him.

Madonna also said that she was saddened by all of the criticism surrounding her decision to adopt David, adding that a week ago she was in the depths of my depression about the negativity and the state of the world. She thinks that racism has something to do with the reaction as well, saying, I think a lot of people have a problem with the fact that I've adopted an African child, a child who has a different color skin than I do...I think it's still considered taboo. You know, I have people say to me on the streets, 'Why did you adopt a black child?'

As for David, Madonna said he's doing well, describing him as very flirtatious and hysterically funny. He also has a temper.

More of Madonna's interview will air today (Thursday, November 2nd).

Meanwhile, David's father said in a recent interview, Madonna was like a bulldozer who has cleared the way for a better life for my son, according to the Associated Press.

Madonna's new children's book, The English Roses, Too Good To Be True, came out last week.
Tucker Carlson interviews David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor sm

He is a theology professor and member of Scholars for 911 Truth (one of those on the fringe loonies they keep telling you about - you will see he is not).


Check out Tucker's new look (I am LMAO).  He is not wearing his trademark bow tie, and looks like he set his hair with curlers. 


http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=2a3290a0-4b79-4bf5-8119-b91b7dede110&p=News_Comment%20-%20Analysis&t=m5&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8063292/&fg=