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

Seems like SP's speech energized O's base too.

Posted By: 10 million dollars in 48 hours. No too shabby. a on 2008-09-05
In Reply to:

su


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

Cindy re-energized the anti war movement
Well, guess we are looking at different news papers and news programs cause from what I have seen and read, most of the country is behind Cindy 100%.  In fact, it was her camping out in Tx that re-energized the anti war movement.  If she was a quack or clown which is what Rove called her (takes a clown to know a clown), she could not have possibly started the ending of the Iraq war..which is what she did, you know.  If you dont agree, I would suggest you study the ending of the Vietnam War.  Nixon refused at first but the roar of the majority got too loud.  As far as sacrificing a son.  She probably feels guilt cause she feels that way as any mother wants to protect her children and not send them into harms way.  So, if she had known he would die, she probably would have fought every which way to try to keep him out of the military.  In her mind the guilt trip is she sacrificed her son..she should have *protected* him.  I think that is what she feels.  Me?  I think when a child turns 18, they need to be on their own and make their own decisions..So, to me it would be the sons decision.
"kill him" speech is not acceptable free speech - it is against the law - nm
x
and I base mine on

available information .... don't just pull them out of my bellybutton.


 


I definitely don't base it JUST on morals
I guess I should have been more elaborate on that. And you are completely right, most presidents change their tune after they get into the white house. I feel like we are almost gambling when we vote, who will change less?

Honestly, if we could take the candidates and even the VPs and just mush them into one candidate, I think we would be flying pretty high.

I think my biggest fear right now is that myself and a lot of people I know are one step from losing our homes and standing in the breadline. I Get upset that my husband and I both work extremely hard to keep what we have (which isn't much) but that we can't seem to get any assistance whatsoever. Yet someone can have seven kids and never work a day in her life and be taken care of. Do I think this will change? No. I feel like the middle class in the economy is a lot like "the middle child" in a family - often forgotten about, but expected to behave anyways.

On religion, check out my reply to Kaydie. I've written a short summary of a part of the book I mentioned to her in response to you saying that Jesus was a highly evolved human being (I used to believe the same thing)

Josh Mcdowell puts it like this: either Jesus was a liar, a lunatic, or Lord.

If he spent his life telling everyone that he was the Son of God and getting people to believe and follow him and he knew that he wasn't, then he was a liar. But the question poses, can someone that evil hearted (remember a lot of his disciples left there homes, family, jobs, etc to follow Him and were even killed defending His name) never do wrong? See I believe that there were enough people that hated Jesus that after he died if someone tried to talk about how great he was they would have been writing about ANYTHING wrong he did if they knew that he did. We would have heard about it.

Lunatic - If he did all this not knowing that he was being deceptive, and he really believed that he was the Son of God, then he had to be crazy. But this is crazy to the tenth power. Most lunatics who believe they are something else believe they are something tangible, such as a dog or a butterfly or another human. To believe that your the Son of God (remember, there was no Son of God in history before him, so it's not like it was a term thrown around or an unoriginal idea) is very unlikely. Not to mention how eloquent of a speaker Jesus was and how he was so easily able to explain things.

Lord - If Jesus was neither a liar or a lunatic, then he must be who he says he is - Lord, the Son of God. And since the Son of God cannot sin, he cannot lie, which means when he says "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father EXCEPT by me" then he must not be lying.

Josh Mcdowell explains this a lot better than I can (that's why he's a PhD and I'm an MT! :-D ) but in case you never get to check out his book, I just wanted to give a recap. It helped me make my decision that he is Lord, because for a long time I wanted to believe that he was just "a great man" or "a great teacher" but I feel now that it was so rude of me to say that of someone who personally died for me.

Just my ideas! Thanks for giving me yours! It's nice to be able to talk back and forth about this without anyone getting upset! :-D
Deeni, please don't base all on one
I'm a Christian, but I see a lot of Christians who just are paranoid about anything and everything under the sun. They become paralyzed with "end times," the antichrist, etc. They become so entranced by this stuff that they lose their joy in their faith. I'm not like this. I feel Obama is there because he's supposed to be there, and I'm just working, paying bills, and enjoying my life and family. We're not all the "fire and brimstone" kind. :) I actually feel sorry for those Christians that feel this way because they're not acknowledging who is really in charge and these things are happening because they're supposed to. "Let it go!" I say to them. lol I'm sure you will agree. :)
I want to know what facts you base this on.

Unless, you know her personally, that is.


U.S. air base closing which is a key to
This is not good. Just heard on the news that we need McCain, Romney, and Obama to talk to Russia about this special base closing. But of course, the senate and congress are too busy with this stimulus, stated the ex-FBI agent to fight terrorism.

Supposedly Russia prime minister stated he was FOR (not against) helping fight terrorists, but instead, Russia is actually working with Taliban. Basically, "Russia is bullying Obama." This needs to be worked out soon or terrorists are going to get stronger and attack when we are at our weakest, which I say is about now. We have already lost 150 vehicles for fighting because of base closing and do we seriously have 15,000 troops? Or are some of our young ones in high school and college going to be drafted soon.


MOSCOW — Kyrgyzstan's president said Tuesday his country is ending U.S. use of an air base key to military operations in Afghanistan_ a decision with potentially grave consequences for U.S. efforts to put down surging Taliban and al-Qaida violence.

A U.S. military official in Afghanistan called President Kurmanbek Bakiyev's statement "political positioning" and denied the U.S. presence at the Manas air base would end anytime soon.

The United States is preparing to deploy an additional 15,000 troops in Afghanistan and Manas is an important stopover for U.S. materiel and personnel.

Ending U.S. access would be a significant victory for Moscow in its efforts to squeeze the United States out of Central Asia, home to substantial oil and gas reserves and seen by Russia as part of its strategic sphere of influence.

Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev spoke on a visit to Moscow minutes after Russia announced it was providing the poor Central Asian nation with billions of dollars in aid.

Bakiyev said when the U.S. forces began using Manas after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the expectation was that they would stay for two years at most.

"It should be said that during this time... we discussed not just once with our American partners the subject of economic compensation for the stationing (of US forces at the base)," he said on Russian state-run TV. "But unfortunately we have not found any understanding on the part of the United States.

"So literally just days ago, the Kyrgyz government made the decision on ending the term for the American base on the territory of Kyrgyzstan," he said.

Col. Greg Julian, the U.S. spokesman in Afghanistan, denied there was any change in U.S. use of the base and he noted that Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, just recently traveled there.

"I think it's political positioning. Gen. Petraeus was just there and he talked with them. We have a standing contract and they're making millions off our presence there. There are no plans to shut down access to it anytime soon," he told The Associated Press.

As recently as Jan. 19, Petraeus said he had received Kyrgyz assurances that Russia was not pushing for the base to close.

In Washington, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said: "I have seen nothing to suggest, other than press reports, that the Russians are attempting to undermine our use of that facility."

The United States set up Manas and a base in neighboring Uzbekistan after the September 2001 attacks to back operations in Afghanistan. Uzbekistan expelled U.S. troops from the base on its territory in 2005 in a dispute over human rights issues, leaving Manas as the only U.S. military facility in the immediate region.

Moscow, which fought a 10-year war in Afghanistan during the Soviet era, was initially supportive of U.S. efforts to keep Afghanistan from collapsing into new anarchy and stem the spread of militancy northward through ex-Soviet Central Asia.

But as Kremlin suspicions about U.S. foreign policy have grown, so has Russian wariness about the U.S. presence in Central Asia. Russia also uses a military air base in the ex-Soviet nation.

During his visit last month, Petraeus said that Manas would be key to plans to boost the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan. He also said the United States currently pumps a total of $150 million into Kyrgyzstan's economy annually, including $63 million in rent for Manas.

About 1,200 U.S. troops are based at Manas.

Russia, however, agreed Tuesday to provide Kyrgyzstan with $2 billion in loans plus another $150 million in financial aid.

Kyrgyzstan is one of Central Asia's poorest countries and has been buffeted by political turmoil for years. Its economy has been strained to the limit this winter after neighboring Uzbekistan significantly raised prices for natural gas.

Most Kyrgyz have been supportive, or at least accepting, of the U.S. presence, though in 2007, widespread anger erupted after a U.S. serviceman at Manas shot and killed a Kyrgyz man during a security check. Kyrgyz investigators had asked the serviceman face criminal prosecution in their country.

Petraeus said during a trip to the region last month that the investigation will be reopened.

Central Asia is key to U.S. efforts to secure an alternative supply line to forces in Afghanistan. The main route, through the Khyber Pass in Pakistan's northwest, has occasionally been closed in recent months due to rising attacks by bandits and Islamist militants, including one on Tuesday that destroyed a bridge.

During his visit, which included a stop in Kyrgyzstan, Petraeus said Washington had struck deals with Russia and several Central Asian states to allow the transhipment of supplies heading to Afghanistan.

NATO spokesman Eric Povel said the alliance could not comment because use of the base was an issue for the U.S. and Kyrgyzstan.

"It's not a NATO base," he said.
your way off base and don't know what your talking about
In my relationship with my partner we don't do sm, bondage, strange fetishes, and we certainly don't abuse each other. We don't do 3-ways or wife/husband swapping. We also don't do polygamy and certainly no domestic violence.

We have a normal sexual relationship and show tender loving care to each other. We respect each other, give each other privacy and never force the other into anything. We love each other unconditionally and when we're together we feel the love each of us shows the other. I trust my life with my partner. We have a totally natural and normal relationship with each other.

There are many couples (heterosexual) who do sm, bondage, strange fetishes, 3-ways, wife-swapping and polygamy and most domestic violence is commited by a heterosexual couple.

So I would say if anything heterosexual couples are not normal.
LOL, oh give it up, you are so off base it isn't funny! sm
You mean gt/Libby/deedee/DixieDew???  LOL!!!
Once again, gt, you are not thinking from a base of fairness.
But I didn't expect you to. And when another poster actually did, you responded with HOW COULD YOU.  I expected that, as well.  So much for philosophical conversation, exploring intent, and misspeaking.  I notice you never mentioned Maher, which, again, is typical. I drew a cogent correlation and you dismissed it completely.  Again, expected.  Thank you, Gadfly, for the conversation.
Permanent military base. sm
This has nothing to do with anything.  We have permanent military bases in many European countries.  That does not mean we are involved in the politics in those countries.  It means, and I have said this three times but I will try again, that when the Iraqi Democratic government is finally in place, they will decide what happens with prisoners of war.  Right now, we are involved in that.  In the future, we won't be.  I am not sure how much clearer I can make it.  Very much to the contrary of what the poster Democrat has posted above, this is not a partisan brouhaha that the media has somehow missed.  They miss very little.  It is something you are misunderstanding.  There is plenty out there on the internet that explains it.  That might be your first step, or, if you are determined to be upset about it, then there is little anyone can do.  Now, having said that, I am off to other boards.  Have a nice day.
Please don't base your decision on who you vote...sm
for on this or any other board. Look at the issues and make your decisions based on them, not personalities or rhetoric.
If you base your perceptions of the entire
populace of our country from the postings on this forum, you need to get out more.

I'm sorry they said bad things about your candidate. It obviously hurt you deeply.
If they were born on a military base, they
are considered U.S. citizens. Military bases anywhere in the world are considered U.S. soil.
they were not born on a military base either
they have dual citizenship.
You base your impression of all liberals
He is a television personality. That would be like basing an impression of all conservatives on Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. None of them are there to provide objective opinion, and in a lot of ways they are caricatures for infotainment.

I consider myself a liberal, but I would not base my impression of all conservatives on any one individual of that political persuasion.

I do think that Obama will listen to knowledgeable people no matter what their political affiliation is. No one person (or political party) has all the answers and it is going to take a cooperative effort to get us started on the road out of this mess. Good ideas are good ideas no matter what the source is.

P.S. I don't think much of Olbermann really. He doesn't even vote. He strikes me as a blowhard critic. It will be interesting to see how/if his program changes in the next few months. She is way more liberal, but I prefer Rachel Maddow's show. She seems much more genuine and personable.
The Commander in Chimp's base is hopeless...sm
I saw one post on Alternet earlier today which stated that if 911 were an inside job, that Bush probably had to sacrifice for the greater good.

Has anyone seen this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whhbPVrb5KM

CG, me, Hillary's angered base, feminists,
We'll all be pushing long and hard against having what's-her-name represent us and squash the Bimbos Unite! movement before it even takes off.
You are so off base. BE PATRIOTIC, s tand behind the NEW PRESIDENT OF THE USA !!!!
nm
the speech

I heard, I am very old and I suffered greatly at the hands of the enemy.  Did I ever tell you I was a POW?  I suffered greatly.  Please feel sorry for me and vote for me.  I deserve it.  I suffered greatly.  No economic plan, no health insurance plan, just  I suffered greatly.  Sarah's speech was John suffered greatly.  No one else has suffered as much as he.  Joe Biden's loss of family members and Obama's struggle with identity because of being mixed race do not qualify.  This is an election about the issues of the american people not a Queen for A Day episode where the person with the saddest story gets a new washing machine.


 


 


The Speech to Nowhere
http://www.truthout.org/article/palins-speech-nowhere
Anybody see O's speech about

10:30 this morning? If he can accomplish half of what he talked about, I'll have a little more faith in him.


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/03/president-to-ta.html


So much for your pre-speech intelligence

He did talk about the war.... Hey, wait a minute, your intelligence was bad....You lied to us!!!   You twisted the information to fit your post...Don't you want to apologize and tell us all what a terrible mistake you made!!!!       How does it feel to be called a liar without justification?


Freedom of speech, LOL
Freedom of speech?  To get up there and state you believe A WHOLE SOCIETY OF PEOPLE, A WHOLE ETHNICITY OF PEOPLE OUGHT TO BE ABORTED?  Yet, you people jump all over Cindy Sheehan when she rags on Bush, LOL..You jump all over anti war people when we scream..STOP THIS WAR..But NOW you are stating freedom of speech..LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL..Better to shut up now about Bennett, cause you sure are looking silly..
and this wise speech comes from a man

who admitted he's had too many wives, done too many drugs....and was happy to admit he inhaled.


Ahhh the credibility....


That's the only line you took from the speech...sm
But you think Bush who admits that he did drugs - obviously inhaled or sniffed, and was an alcoholic is a living testimony of credibility. Is there a double standard here?
Ah, yes. Freedom of speech.

I remember it well. 


It was a cute joke.  In case any of you missed it before it was removed from the board, one of the many places it can be found is http://www.justpetehere.com/2004/11/george_bush_pas.html.


Better do it quickly, though, because this post is sure to be removed as soon as the Cons start whining again.


freedom of speech

 Check out the St. Pete Times, Sunday, 11/13/05, The Perspective, article by Robin Blummer. Sorry I don't have the link but it is easy to find. Talk about scary. By the way, I see that there are a number of comments to posts listed on the board but they are not available to see. Is this a new policy...we know people read or responded but we can't see what the response is?


the speech, annotated...
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0111-25.htm

Long but worth the read.
do you or do you not believe in freedom of speech....
and do you or do you not believe in the right of people to have opinions different from those and voice them? Is someone holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read my posts? You might be more comfortable in Russia where it is the policy of the counry to control thought that does not agree with the party line.
Do you believe in free speech?
If so, please allow me mine.
If you believe Obama's SPEECH,
nm
her speech, and debate later. I think
nm
Freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech is freedom to all.

When watching TV if there is something I don't like I change the channel. I would suggest you do the same on this board instead of trying to silence those you don't agree with.

Keep on postin sam - you must be hitting home if there are those who want to silence you.
acceptance speech

was written by Bush speech writer.  But there is not connection between the McCains and the Bushs.  Mere coincidence.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.


 


FYI, the prompter went out during her speech
at the convention -- but you didn't know it by watching her! I have every confidence she can handle whatever comes her way. she is a quick study, with common sense and intelligence.
Hate speech
You are a racist a__hole.  Who cares what you think? 
So is freedom of speech.
If the lady wants to talk about religion, so what? It's not like she's gonna get into office and make us all abide by her religion - Pa-leeeze!!!
Freedom of Speech? Think Again.

See 2nd link. 


  • Hyscience
  • Missouri Law Enforcement Targeting Anyone Who Unfairly Attacks Obama | THE HOT JOINTS
  • Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
  • Werner Patels - A Dose of Common Sense
  • A Small Corner of Sanity - An Online Oasis for Conservative Thought
  • Liberal Fascism Obama Truth Squad Style | Bitter Knitter



    ShareThis


  • No, more like all the hate speech
    "energizes" fanatic fervor and mobilizes race-baiting hoaxters, cyberspace skinhead assassination plots and the other more than 500 threats to Obama. See link.
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6123157&page=1
    What a great speech........
    so handsome, with his captivating smile, terrific speaker, cool under pressure, so humble, refined and much more...CHANGE IS HERE, CONGRATULATIONS to the American people and the world.
    I didn't see his speech
    But I did read an article in the news.  I  notice that Bush's "help" is going to require union workers to get in line with non-union workers by the end of next year (can you say PAY CUT).  I do agree with doing away with the job bank.  Not one word did I read about his demanding deep cuts for the EXECS!!!!  Of course they are his buds and they need those private jets and billions in bonuses.  Makes me sick.
    Bush's Speech
    Bush was surprisingly coherent and articulate in explaining the bailout and its reasoning. His plan, by the way, is virtually identical to the one that the White House and Senate Democrats hammered out and Senate Republicans stonewalled a couple weeks ago.

    The pay cut for auto workers is nonbinding, and there are limits on executive pay.
    Maybe he should have made his speech in the 50s then.
    His hate speech is not in line with today's reality. In most major cities, and for most young people, the black culture is the dominant culture. Fashion, music, media, sports - look at today's icons.

    His speech was racist and makes me sick, because it is only going to spawn - guess what - MORE racism. If this is how the Obama presidency is going to be run, I predict the ranks of the KKK will be full to bursting by the time his first term is over.
    freedom of speech
    Hillary said that Bill always was a hard dog to keep on the porch. So what. At least we weren't embroiled in an unjustified war, we had a SURPLUS in the treasury and the whole country wasn't going to the dogs. I believe in the 1st amendment - she can say whatever she wants. Take some cojones to talk about propriety................look at dubya and turd blossom.
    This man has NEVER believe in free speech
    He has made no secret of his belief that our constitution is NOT a static document, which it is. He believes it should be a "living" document, so he can make up things as he goes along.

    This guy is so uptight and immature that he continually makes comments about Hannity and O'Reilly and Limbaugh. What rock did he crawl out from under? Too bad when he decided to come back to this country he didn't learn that FREE SPEECH mean just that, FREE SPEECH!!

    Of course, he doesn't believe in our constitution anyway, so it shouldn't be a surprise.

    Anyone in his position who obsesses over a few conservative talk heads isn't mature at all but this guy is so messed up, he actually believes he has the right to censor talk show hosts just 'cause he doesn't like them...... now that is a dangerous dictator!!!
    Well, in his speech last night, he sure

    seemed to be trying to put fear at the retreat. He started out calm enough but before it was over, he was livid, blaming the pubs for everything. He WAS trying to put fear in the dems to the words that they HAVE to pass this bill. No way was he going to let it fail.  He wants the package the way it is. He doesn't want to compromise on this package no matter what he says to the media with his smiling face.


    What did you think of PM Brown's speech
    Don't get me wrong. I love England a lot (many of my family came from that country, have visited it and the people of England are wonderful people), but I caught PM Brown's speech the other day and I though it was... well "lame" for lack of a better term. He was kissing the behinds of the people to get funding from America his nose was covered in feces. I see he has also been studying President Obama's speeches and it was so blatantly obvious. President Obama is probably one of the greatest in giving speeches. No doubt about that, but this was clearly an imitation of Obama's past speeches. (We are not blue states and we are not red states, we are the United States). Here Mr. Brown says "There is no old Europe, there is no new Europe, there is only your friend Europe". The way he presented his speech all I could think of was that Obama's speech writers wrote it for him. All I thought of was how lame.

    Just curious what your opinions are. Mine is that America does not have the funds to be sending money over to England. Unemployment is rising, home loss is on the rise and they are trying to have us send money to them??? Maybe I'm wrong about this but I just think it's very arrogant, as was his speech to congress.

    I also heard that I guess it didn't go as well as England had planned because now The Queen is having a private meeting with Mr. Obama.

    Just wondered what others opinions are.
    Each to his own....... that's why we have "free speech"
    xx
    Deplorable speech!
    What was breathtakingly shocking about Obama's speech is that he proposes "oversight" of executive decisions by the other branches of government under the guise of the principle of "checks-and-balances". As a former Constitutional lawyer, even he has to know that this was never what was meant by that principle for the simple reason that it abrogates executive responsibilities to the other branches.

    Never mind that he failed to say what would happen if one of these other branches says "No you can't do that". Would the third branch then resolve the question?

    Never mind that such a process would mean that the executive - which must often make critical defense decisions in minutes - couldn't act for days or months.

    Never mind that he fails to mention that such a misapplication of "checks-and-balances" would set a precedent so that the next President could insist on exercising "oversight" over the Congress and the courts.

    We shouldn't be surprised by this, though. This administration has demonstrated a shocking disregard for Constitutional principles from the very moment it took office and continues to do so to this very day.

    Anyone who understands the principles of this country will have been very, very disturbed by Obama's speech today. And the country is getting sick of the blame game, too, Mr. President. At some point you should go into the Oval Office and see if you can find out who's President now. That's where the buck stops.
    I think you have the wrong speech...(sm)

    the discussion is about when he was talking in Turkey.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIVd7YT0oWA&feature=related