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

She didn't have to be leading going into the final round to win, obviously!

Posted By: TechSupport on 2009-04-22
In Reply to: Actually.... - Trigger Happy

There wouldn't be much point in the final round otherwise, would there? All five contestants in the final round are there because they have high enough scores that any of them can win.


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

What is amazing to me is this garbage goes round an round...sm
in hopes that John McCain's poles will go up and Obama's down, yet just the opposite has happened, all the result of a dirty campaign, not so much by McCain, but by his supporters. It is too late to change directions now and we all have watched McCain's changes fly out the window.
I'm smart enough to know who is leading
smart enough to read an electoral map, smart enough to recognize the #1 campaign issue, smart enough to know that only losers will ignore the ecoomic meltdowm, and smart enough to give O my vote.
Yes, but Obama was leading more than the margin of error....
he has lost that, and McCain has been on top, with the margin of error...for several days now. Nice try, but no cigar. The polls have shifted. And Rasmussen is still creeping up. Obama had a pretty sizeable lead and that has been eaten up. He is not back to where he was, and McCain continues to inch up.

And I believe you said Obama was ahead in the polls. He isn't. Nice try.

And no I don't agree that the military poll is an accurate indicator of the military vote. I think it is indicative of a poll being pointed at deployed soldiers who are disenchanted with the current administration. It did not poll any veterans living here in the US and it did not poll Iraq veterans who have returned home. And with the huge amount of deployed soldiers is minute at best.

Nice try at the smoke screen, tho.

All that being said...polls are what they are, and can change daily. What is remarkable in this the big shift in Independents and unaffiliated voters moving toward McCain from Obama.

We will just have to see how it all pans out in coming days.
In your drams. That will be round 2
nm
Maybe we could just round up all the pubs
so we can actually get some work done this time around!
Conclusion to this mind merry-go-round

Yes, but just because Hitler made a case for exterminating the Jews by calling them socialists, and because Ford may have also hated them.....doesn't mean that in reality the Jews all really were socialists. 


As I said, they were propagandists, or at least Hitler was (and if Ford publicly wrote about or ridiculed the Jews then he would be included) and propagandists pass off LIES as the TRUTH.  So therefore we cannot draw a historically accurate conclusion that Jews are basically socialists.


final result

I think pretty much this debate was McCain's best hope.  His strength, according to most, is foreign policy.  I thought that all O really needed to do was avoid being seen as weak on foreign affairs. He more than lived up to that. The clear frontrunner is O.  This debate did not change that.  The next two pres debates will show O's strengths and Mc weaknesses.  The Sarah/Joe debate is going to be high theatre.  I am so looking forward to that one.


Another point.  I don't get all misty when Mc tells his bracelet/POW stories.  I think they are blatant attempts at pulling emotional strings and I cringe when anyone, anywhere tries to manipulate me.  I am saying he uses stories for his benefit instead of feeling them. So as far as I am concerned they backfire.


 


 


Yes, and regarding that final paragraph re: Iran
Seymour Hersh has yet to get it wrong, no matter how much the King George and his men attack.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact
Saddam's in his final hours....sm
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - The official witnesses to Saddam Hussein's impending execution gathered Friday in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone in final preparation for his hanging, as state television broadcast footage of his regime's atrocities.

With U.S. forces on high alert for a surge in violence, the Iraqi government readied all the necessary documents, including a red card - an execution order introduced during Saddam's dictatorship. As the hour of his death approached, Saddam received two of his half brothers in his cell on Thursday and was said to have given them his personal belongings and a copy of his will.

Najeeb al-Nueimi, a member of Saddam's legal team in Doha, Qatar, said he too requested a final meeting with the deposed Iraqi leader. His daughter in Amman was crying, she said 'Take me with you,' al-Nueimi said late Friday. But he said their request was rejected.

An adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saddam would be executed before 6 a.m. Saturday, or 10 p.m. Friday EST. Also to be hanged at that time were Saddam's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, the former chief justice of the Revolutionary Court, the adviser said.

The time was agreed upon during a meeting Friday between U.S. and Iraqi officials, said the adviser, who declined to be named because he is not authorized to speak to the media.

Saddam will be handed over shortly before the execution, the official said. The physical transfer of Saddam from U.S. to Iraqi authorities was believed to be one of the last steps before he was to be hanged. Saddam has been in U.S. custody since he was captured in December 2003.

Al-Nueimi said U.S. authorities were maintaining physical custody of Saddam to prevent him from being humiliated before his execution. He said the Americans also want to prevent the mutilation of his corpse, as has happened to other deposed Iraqi leaders.

The Americans want him to be hanged respectfully, al-Nueimi said. If Saddam is humiliated publicly or his corpse ill-treated that could cause an uprising and the Americans would be blamed, he said.

Munir Haddad, a judge on the appeals court that upheld Saddam's death sentence, said he was ready to attend the hanging and that all the paperwork was in order, including the red card.

All the measures have been done, Haddad said. There is no reason for delays.

As American and Iraqi officials met in Baghdad to set the hour of his death, Saddam's lawyers asked a U.S. judge for a stay of execution.

Saddam's lawyers issued a statement Friday calling on everybody to do everything to stop this unfair execution. The statement also said the former president had been transferred from U.S. custody, though American and Iraqi officials later denied that.

Al-Maliki said opposing Saddam's execution was an insult to his victims. His office said he made the remarks in a meeting with families of people who died during Saddam's rule.

Our respect for human rights requires us to execute him, and there will be no review or delay in carrying out the sentence, al-Maliki said.

State television ran footage of the Saddam era's atrocities, including images of uniformed men placing a bomb next to a youth's chest and blowing him up in what looked like a desert, and handcuffed men being thrown from a high building.

About 10 people registered to attend the hanging gathered in the Green Zone before they were to go to the execution site, the Iraqi official said.

Those cleared to attend the execution included a Muslim cleric, lawmakers, senior officials and relatives of victims of Saddam's brutal rule, the official said. He did not disclose the location of the gallows.

Raed Juhi, spokesman for the High Tribunal court that convicted Saddam, said documents related to the execution would be read to Saddam before the execution. The documents included the red card, al-Maliki's signed approval of the sentence and the appeal court's decision.

On Thursday, two half brothers visited Saddam in his cell, a member of the former dictator's defense team, Badee Izzat Aref, told The Associated Press by telephone from the United Arab Emirates. He said the former dictator handed them his personal belongings.

A senior official at the Iraqi defense ministry also confirmed the meeting and said Saddam gave his will to one of his half brothers. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

Saddam's lawyers later issued a statement saying the Americans gave permission for his belongings to be retrieved.

An Iraqi appeals court upheld Saddam's death sentence Tuesday for the killing of 148 people who were detained after an attempt to assassinate him in the northern Iraqi city of Dujail in 1982. The court said the hanging should take place within 30 days.

There had been disagreements among Iraqi officials in recent days as to whether Iraqi law dictates the execution must take place within 30 days and whether President Jalal Talabani and his two deputies had to approve it.

In his Friday sermon, a mosque preacher in the Shiite holy city of Najaf called Saddam's execution God's gift to Iraqis.

Oh, God, you know what Saddam has done! He killed millions of Iraqis in prisons, in wars with neighboring countries and he is responsible for mass graves, said Sheik Sadralddin al-Qubanji, a member of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as SCIRI, a dominant party in al-Maliki's coalition. Oh God, we ask you to take revenge on Saddam.
Final Palin segment

I was very impressed with Charlie Gibson.  I am not an ABC news watcher, so I did not know what to expect.  He brought up all the important issues involved in the contradictions between Maverick and Reformer claims including per diem, keeping the money from bridge to nowhere, lobbyists for Alaska, abuse of power in Troopergate, etc. I thought he allowed her to expose her lack of knowledge on foreign affairs.  I thought he, for the most part, keep questioning her on points when she tried to evade questions by throwing out the slogans and talking points. 


The one point that I had not heard before was the fact that the sendoff for the soldiers she staged in Alaska was timed to be on 9/11 for the publicity, and that the soldiers were not in fact going to leave for 2 to 3 more weeks. 


All in all, I thought it was a good introduction of the actual Sarah Palin. When you add the tape of McCain disparaging mayors and short-time governors, it was a definitive package for those who have not yet made up their minds in this election.


 


 


Head in the sand....final thoughts
You said: I am truly sorry that any of you on the right equate not wanting to fight, not wanting to kill, eshewing revenge shrouded as justice and preferring diplomacy to preemptive attacks with **lily-liveredness.**

My answer: First of all, to say that going into Iraq was revenge does a huge disservice to the people who died on 9-11 and to the soldiers who have died in Iraq since. I think a statement like that is unconsciable. It is your right to say it, my right to disagree strongly, which I do. I have a hard time understanding how any American could think that.

Second, I have never referred to anyone as lily-livered. No one WANTS to kill. You and the left keep saying that like Republicans or anyone NOT liberal (sound familiar?) WANTS to kill. That is just nuts. However, some people do believe that our way of life, our country, are worth dying for or killing for if necessary. That being said, for diplomacy to work, both sides have to be interested in a peaceful outcome. In what alternate reality do you imagine that Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, Al-Zawahiri, the Taliban, or ANY terrorist would be interested in a peaceful outcome, when their stated purpose is the destruction of the United States and Israel, and eventually anything not Muslim? Where in there do you see ANY room for diplomacy? THAT is what I mean when I (not others who post, I cannot speak for them) say *head in the sand.* Do you actually believe that diplomacy will work with these people? I do not for the life of me understand how you can look at the history of terrorist attacks, their escalation, and say that somehow talking with these people will make a difference. Perhaps you can clue me in on the possibility that you see in diplomatically stopping the terrorist threat? How that could possibly happen? I would be willing to listen.


You said: I see those as strength of character, the courage of conviction and fairhandness.

I say: Strength of character is also standing tall and saying *your plan of terrorizing and separating this country and her people will not work. If you plan to attack us, know that we will fight back.* Strength of character is also not kowtowing to bullies. Common sense tells you bullies do not respond to diplomacy. Bullies win by intimidation, sneak attacks, and fear. It is impossible to negotiate with these people, because you cannot give them what they want. Saddam violated how many UN resolutions before 9-11? His word was worthless, absolutely worthless. Simply because YOU desire that kind of diplomacy and YOU have those kinds of values, if they are absent on the other side, you might as well chop your own head off and save them the trouble. Yes, I remember how you said you did not fear having your head chopped off. The trouble is, it is not just YOU they are after, and your seeming lack of caring for what happens to your country and other Americans is pretty darn scary. THAT is what I mean when I say the left has become about me, me, me and the heck with the rest of you. And look at Kim Jong Il and Admadinejad...diplomacy is really working with them, isn't it? When are you and the left going to learn, for it to work both sides have to WANT it to work.

Please demonstrate to me how terrorists will respond to courage of conviction or fair-handedness. When did they ever show fair-handedness? They make cowardly craven attacks designed to murder as many as possible in one strike. There is no courage or fair-handedness in 9-11, in the Achille Lauro, in Beirut marine bombing, in the Cole, and the gazillion suicide bombings over the years, the embassy bombings...where in ANY of that do you think diplomacy would work? They are not of a country with whom you CAN negotiate. And you are willing to just keep the courage of your convictions, even knowing there is no possibility that will work, and allow yourself AND your fellow Americans who might not be like-minded to be murdered? And that is okay with you? No, sorry, I will NEVER understand that.

You said: No need for you to comment on this because I already know **I have my head in the sand** and do not need to hear you tell me again what a naive person I am, but they are my beliefs and I honor them and are proud of them because, no matter what happens, they are good and decent values and Iraq will not change my mind or my values.

I say: I do not believe you are naive. I believe you just choose to ignore and or rationalize what does not fit with your stated ideals, and I believe you have some noble ideas, and perhaps with a strong charactered, fair-handed enemy those ideals would be fruitful. They are not. They are the antithesis of strong character and fair-handedness.

But, I am sure you will be relieved to hear, I get it. I will not be foisting my opinion on you any longer, because as you say, there is no changing your mind, which is EXACTLY the point I am trying to make. As married as you are to your ideals, multiply that by about a gazillion and you know how the terrorists are married to their ideals. THEY are not going to change THEIR minds either, and we are NOT going to change THEIR minds by talking to them about strength of character and fair-mindedness.

And the rest of the story is that as long as there are still some Americans like us remaining, who are willing to go to the mat for America and ALL Americans, perhaps you will not ever have to give up the country and the way of life that let you form and hold those ideals.

You're welcome.

God bless.
never say cinch till the final tally is in!
x
About the same damage Clinton did in his final months after the election (NM)
x
Final roll call House on bailout bill. sm
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

Please print it and remember those who voted to pick your pocket. They are clearly operating outside the consent of the people.


And as to socialized medicine leading to a socialized country....
it has to start somewhere, piglet. It has already started in this country with all the entitlements. Adding health care is one more nail in the proverbial coffin. And as you seek to move entitlements further and further up the income ladder, you create a wider disparity and destroy the middle class. That is how it starts. That is how it started everywhere. A good idea gone bad, just like so many others. The more power you place in one area, and the more choice you take away from the "people" the closer you get. It looks good to start. Then pretty soon the government starts to control businesses, so that eventually everyone "works for the government." When people begin to wake up and realize what is going on...and start to protest it or try to bring it into the light...then the government starts to control media (aka Chavez shutting down a TV station). It is not a leap. It is a slow, malicious process. Socialist Germany started out that way. Germans thought it was great, and it was, until Hitler rose to power. Then it was too late. When you concentrate too much power over the everyday lives of the people and make them dependent upon the state for the necessities...we are already headed that way with people dependent for income, and now you want them to be depenent for health care as well. What's next, Piglet? You tell me.

I have lived to see enough "that would never happens" that DID happen to know. And if you will read history, you will see that what I have said is borne out. In a person's desire to have everything provided for them, every time that happens, control is relinquished to the government. That is where it starts.
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't

his own personal reasons.


http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php


The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.


Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."


Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.


In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.


"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"


Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.


Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.


Conversations With Bush The Candidate


Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.


The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.


I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."


Debating The Timeline For War


But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.


The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.



On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"


I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."


"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …


"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.


Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.



Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"


Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.


Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."


Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.


Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.



 


I didn't know that.
Thanks, Democrat.  I wasn't aware of that point at all, and to me, that makes a huge difference.  I will visit the site and check it out.  Thanks again.
I though you said you didn't

Sorry, but I didn't see anywhere

in AR's post that she was against it.  Instead, she acted as if the topic has no place on this board and shouldn't be discussed... like some kind of dirty little secret.


The *attack the messenger* technique has been used constantly in the last 5 years by the current administration (and his followers) when someone gets too close to the truth.  Don't believe me?  Ask Valerie Plame.


I didn't say that.nm

It is me, but I didn't get it...sm
I think there is a problem wiht the email on forumatrix because I tried to send an email to the poster ????? who posted on the conservative board today and got an error message as well.

Nevermind it though. Have a good day! I have to get ready for my mini vacation later this week, so I will be working mucho hours til Wednesday.
I didn't know it was q/yours/q.
I just made a fast post.  I don't know what the rest of the stuff is you are talking about.  ForuMatrix is a worldwide board.  Some of us don't even live in the United States.  People here might want to realise that when making responses.  It is of no consequence to me one way or the other.  Just asking a question. 
I didn't think so.

Same old.  Same old. 


No way. He didn't say that, did he??? nm
.
I didn't think of it this way.
I really didn't think of that, but you are right. My brother-in-law made over $20K in a few months. My sister has paid off just about everything, including the mortgage.

But, that is a heck of a risk to take for a little cash.
Didn't know about that one.
nm
You'd be #$%*@ing if they didn't do anything -

But, it IS the RNC, so they are damned either way with socialists oops I mean democRATS like yourself. 


Please tell me he didn't say that

I received a call from an friend who was so upset and said Obama called Palin a pig in lipstick.  I responded, surely no, you must be mistaken.  Obama is running for office of the President of the United States.  Why would he ruin his chances of winning by calling this lady a pig.  That doesn't sound like rational behavior for a presidential candidate.  However, to my surprise I opened several different news sources (both liberal and conservative) and sure enough he did.  I'm thinking why, why in the world would you fall down that path of being so low that you would call Palin a pig saying "you can put lipstick on a pig and it will still be a pig".  If he was trying to make a joke in reference to her joke about the difference between a soccer mom and a pit bull is lipstick, this joke could not have come at a worse time for him.  How in the world is he going to explain that one.


Shame shame Barack Obama.  This has to be one of the lowest comments anyone can make about another candidate. - Not funny!  Why would you go and ruin any chance you had that people may have thought you had a little bit of "class" to you.


I haven't watched MSNBC but am curious as to how they are going to respond.  How can they support someone when this is his opinion of other people.


Talk about low class.  One more reason I will not be voting democrat this election. 


I didn't know this either, but....sm
I was a little disappointed in McCain yesterday, blaming Bush for the current crisis, just like Obama.

What he needs to do, is link Obama and Biden to this, as they both took bribes from the lobbyists, from these corporations, that went under.

Where's the outrage against the dems and the democratic congress, that knew these things were going on, and refused to step in and stop these from happening?

Once again, it's blame George Bush, and McCain has to remember he's running against Obama, not George Bush.




I don't think he didn't know where
Spain was. I think he is just old, tired from the campaign and wasn't thinking very clearly at that moment. But that is not any more comforting than not knowing where Spain is. Geography he can learn; energy, youth and vitality he cannot get back. My mom is a pretty spry 75YO, but would I want her as President at that age, no way.
I didn't go after anything she said . . .
I posed a question, which is worse?. You read far more into it than was intended. Lady R. brought up Obama's bitterly clingly to guns and religion insult and added an additional insult of referring to those people as rednecks. Thus, my question, which is worse? She was just as clueless that it was offensive.

And as far as going after what my opponent says, I am not running for anything, I have no opponent. I voted for McCain in the primary of 2000 and was very disappointed when he wasn't the nominee then. I am an independent that has actually voted both parties.
You didn't see this on NBC, etc.









Subject: Bet Ya didn't hear about this on NBC

Family with Down Syndrome Child Meets John McCain and Sarah Palin

September 9, 2008



((( BEGIN PHONE TRANSCRIPT WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH )))



RUSH:  Kurt in Pittsburgh, hello, sir.  Nice to have you on the EIB Network, and how about the Steelers defense?

CALLER:  How about those Steelers, huh?

RUSH:  How about that?

CALLER:  Hey, listen, Rush, longtime listener, first-time caller, one of those Bible, family, gun clingers from western Pennsylvania.

RUSH:  Thank you.

CALLER:  And I wanted to share a story with you.  A week ago last Saturday we went to the Palin-McCain rally in Washington, Pennsylvania, was the day after he announced her, and we have a five-year-old daughter with Down syndrome, and we made a sign that said: "We Love Kids with Down Syndrome."  So when they pulled in their bus, the sign did catch their eye (McCain and Palin and the rest of their family) it caught their eye, we could tell, they gave us a thumbs-up from the bus, so we were all excited just by that --



RUSH:  Wait, wait, wait.  Who gave you the thumbs up, McCain and Palin?

CALLER:  McCain, Palin, Cindy McCain, we could see them from the bus. We were in a position where we had eye contact with them --

RUSH:  Oh, cool!

CALLER:  My wife was holding our daughter.

RUSH:  Very, very, very cool.

CALLER:  It was really cool, Rush. I was like, "Wow, that's awesome," because I love Governor Palin and so I thought that's really neat.  So then we moved around as the bus was getting ready to pull out, we kind of positioned ourselves so we could just wave them on and a Secret Service agent came up to us and said, "Hey, can you come with us?"  I was like, "Do we have a choice?"

RUSH: (laughing) You shouldn't have worried.  It's not the Clinton administration.

CALLER: Right. So we accompanied them up the hill, we went right to the bus, where it was, and Governor Palin, Senator McCain, Cindy, Todd Palin, they're all standing there. We're in this inner circle with just us and them, and the Secret Service agent, and they came right up to us and thanked us for coming out, said they loved our sign, and Governor Palin immediately said, "May I hold your daughter?" and our daughter Chloe, who's five, went right to her, and I have some pictures I'd love to send you maybe when I'm done here, but Governor Palin was hugging Chloe, and then her little daughter brought their baby Trig who has Down syndrome from the bus, he was napping, and Chloe went right over and kissed him on the cheek, and my son Nolan who's nine, he thanked her.



RUSH: This is amazing.

CALLER: I will send you all the stuff, Senator McCain was talking to my son, and we thanked him for his service, and he asked my son if he wanted to see the bus, and we were hanging out and it was very surreal. I felt like we could have had a pizza and a beer with them, they were so warm.

RUSH: You know what? I want to put you on hold. I want Snerdley to give you our super-secret, known-only-to-three-people here, e-mail address.

CALLER: I will send you everything, Rush.

RUSH: And then could you send us these pictures? Would you mind if we put them on the website?

CALLER: I would be honored, and my main thing is they are warm, kind, genuine people, and they represent the best of this country.

RUSH:  That's right.  And when you send these pictures, make sure you identify them.  I mean, we'll know Palin and McCain, of course.  Identify yourselves.

CALLER:  I will, I will identify everybody in the picture, Rush, and God bless you for being a beacon of hope and truth in this country.

RUSH:  Oh, no, no.  It's nothing, it's nothing.  You're doing the Lord's work.

CALLER:  Well, we're very blessed and I want people to know what a blessing it is to have a child with Down syndrome. These kids, they're angels.

RUSH:  That's the thing.  There's always good to be found in everything that happens.  It may be a while before it reveals itself.



CALLER:  Absolutely.

RUSH:  Right, and when she hugged my daughter I said, here's the difference, this candidate embraces life and all its limitless possibilities.

RUSH:  All right.

CALLER:  That's what she is.

RUSH:  Terrific, okay, I gotta run here, but I'm going to put you on hold.

CALLER:  Thank you, Rush.

RUSH:  Thank you, Kurt.  I really appreciate it.

((( END TRANSCRIPT )))











 

Well, you didn't say that s/m

you didn't agree with everything in that propaganda.  Therein lies the problem.  Don't put stuff out there as fact if you don't agree with it.


Sorry the Dems didn't have enough votes to pass the bail-out without their Pub counterparts.  They are all a greedy bunch of vipers and I intend to vote AGAINST my Senator (Democrat) and Represent (Republican) when they come up for re-election and I have told them so!  Both have voted to support big business in their district and gone against the will of there constituents on every issue.


Sorry, I didn't see
your post before I posted mine.  I said apology accepted.  I forgot about "that dog won't hunt."  LOL
I didn't know he had said this....

Obama told an evangelical church in South Carolina: "I am confident we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth."


hmmm.


I didn't say it was okay - sm
But they both aspire to be dictators. Obama just hides it.

No not all democrats are socialists. Obama IS. So is Hillary. Although now in all fairness to her, knowing what I know about what type of person Obama is, I should have voted for her.
Please tell me he didn't say this....

"My job this morning is to be so persuasive....that a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Barack."


- Barack Obama, January 8, 2008, speaking at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire


What in the heck?  He really does think he is the messiah!  Anyone else ever see or hear of this? I came across it somewhere, googled it and it's out there...


 


no didn't see it
I don't turn the TV during the day, otherwise, I get nothing done. The internet is bad enough, lol.
ACTUALLY I DIDN'T
swampmamma
She didn't put you down.

You are the one getting defensive because we don't see your point of view.  She asked for facts to back up your statement when it was just your opinion and not a fact at all. 


If that was your opinion...fine.  I do not agree but that is my opinion.  However, when people ask for facts...don't get all bent out of shape when you can't give them any.


I didn't, but I think I'm going to.


I didn't want to be the first
to say anything, but to uses a child to bash the oponent you don't like.

Please be fair in your assessments.
actually I didn't need to look it up
I read a lot and know how to spell lots of words. I think I learned how to spell that one in 8th grade. Too bad you can't see the irony.
I didn't get to see it
I'll have to find it online. I thought that speech he gave awhile back at the dinner (I can't remember the name of it right now) was hilarious. Wonder if this turned out like that?

I watched a rerun of O on Jon Stewart last night. I'll admit he is witty too.
Didn't I now?
I'd love to keep on chatting but gotta get about some constructive efforts now.
she didn't say that
at all. But of course, being christian, you have to see the worst in absolutely everything.
Thx - I didn't know
Didn't know if he could just put in whoever he wanted to or if they have to meet qualifications and be approved by others.
Really...that's odd, I didn't see any of them
dem and republican party candidates and going toward the Independent party, which is against big government, the IRS, open borders, illegals, government mandates, etc. Where were all those folks at the voting booth? You back those that want bigger government, you are for bigger government and government control of your lives.

I sat on this board and read one criticism after another about Ron Paul. They were so small as to criticize the way he looked, talked, his age, and his beliefs about government interference in their lives, so when you say MOST on this board do not want government in their lives, that's really hard to believe. The fact that they supported Obama certainly doesn't tell me they wanted less government control. The very word taxes should have been a clue.

If the media would get out of the way, as well as deep pockets, and stop orchestrating the candidates and ignoring the Independent candidates, you might actually see this country be what it was intended to be........free!
I also didn't say anything about...(sm)
*Bible-Thumpers* or religion.  If you are referring to the use of the term *special interest groups,* there are more of those than just religion.
Looks like someone didn't
take her anti-literalism pill this morning.