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

Sheesh....Clinton didn't go to funerals either....

Posted By: Observer on 2007-04-26
In Reply to: w at VT - new guy

and yes, soldiers died on his watch too (Somalia, Bosnia,etc). I did not see CNN covering flag-draped coffins then. Yes, more have died in Iraq; however, a soldier killed is a soldier killed. Clinton did not go to the funeral of that US serviceman who was killed and then his body dragged behind a Jeep in Somalia. Was that because Clinton felt guilty? Come on!! It is impossible for a President (ANY President) to show up at a private funeral without causing a media circus, and frankly, I would not want Bush there because along with him would come Cindy Sheehan, the pink ladies, the nutso religious group, the ones who hold up signs saying your son died for nothing, yada yada. Maybe THAT is why Bush does not go to funerals. Ya think???

As to stopping the media...what planet to you live on? As if Bush could stop the liberal media from showing anything they want...ala CNN and their terrorist-made sniper video as the terrorists stalked our soldiers. Good grief, new guy!!! The liberal media doesn't give a rat's patootie about who they hurt as they strive to take Bush down....ya think???

And frankly, new guy, do you think the public need to see a flag-draped coffin to know about the death toll in Iraq? I am surprised CNN has not installed a ticker to count them. Get a grip, get a clue, buy a vowel. You and other Bush haters like you just need to admit it. You hate the man, anything connected with the man, to the point that you criticize him for doing a wonderful thing by showing up at Virginia Tech. I think that shows a remarkable lack of human compassion on your part. Yeah...I THINK.


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

How many funerals did Johnson and Clinton attend.
Answer me that.  It is inappropriate because it seems you will use any tragedy to further your sad and disturbing hate for this president. I get that by reading these boards. 
Clinton...talk about a rewrite on history...sheesh....
He was a waste of a good president. Ergo, he was an embarrassment, in more ways than one.


Where do you want your break, anyway?
OK then why didn't Clinton send Chelsea
to Mogadishu or Bosnia?   See what nonsense you're spouting.  You and Cindy Sheehan.  Maybe Cindy will take up a real cause and move a few hundred miles East and do something worthwhile and help the hurricane victims, but I doubt it.
It didn't happen on Clinton's watch
I know, the truth can be so annoying sometimes, can't it?
Why didn't Clinton kill bin Laden when he had the chance?

If it Clinton screwed something up - why didn't Bush fix it? He had 8 years!

As much as you want to blame Bill Clinton......don't forget who held the reins for the last 8 years......who let them run amuck? Why was nothing done?


Check out the mortgage failures.
Tell me which failed more, prime or subprime
Tell me what is the rate of failures under the CRA or even Bush's ADDI (which i attack alll the time)
Once again, REALITY AND THE DATA doesn't fit ya'lls claims.




Basically what happened was.. we reformed bankruptcy laws.. so that people who ran into dire straights could not restructure.





We packaged the loans into commodity derivatives. These are sorta mirror bets on the loans. Sorta..as the same loan will be sold many times in many derivative packages.. that's why the housing derivatives are worth more than all the real estate in the US. Derivatives are actually not that bad.. when a market is stable and only has to deal with natural forces. The housing market was bubbled.. partially due to low interest rates that encouraged everyone to buy, even the rich, and partially due to the CRA and the ADDI.. which did add customers to the market (helping form the bubble was the extent the CRA and the ADDI had in this mess)




All it took was a few failures to pop the bubble..and make real estate prices drop,. and mind you, it was mainly prime loans (READ not loans given to poor people and not loans under the CRA) that failed. The derivative market.,.which like I said, is really mirrors of the same loans.. cause the defaults to explode with ten times the ferocity, because one loan could effect the price of dozens of derivatives.




Really the poor and even irresponsible people .. simply did not have the economic ability to cause this mess. Pool all their money together and waste it on hookers.. it would have zero effect without help from the rich elites and their magnifying packaged derivatives.




THE CRA and ADDI both had stricter requirements than loans you got from normal banks.. both required income data.. where many prime loans did not.. they also greatly limited you on how much home you could purchase..whereas private banks did not care if you tried to buy something you could not afford.
Don't believe me?.. Look in the phone book.. call your own housing authority - you can get a loan for 106% the purchase price of a home even today.. if you're poor enough.
 



Ask to hear the red tape and hoops you must go through.. Heck, it is probably easier to just get a real job and earn real money than go through the FHA.


Funerals
Not everyone gets a funeral. Homeless people who die on the street don't get a funeral. People who die with no loved ones don't get a funeral. If you have an abortion, more than likely you didn't want the child, so why would you have an abortion for someone you didn't want or love?


Why no funerals for aborted fetuses?
answer that one Foxy
Again I say, he probably stays away from funerals out of respect for the family...
so that along with him does not show up Cindy Sheehan, the pink ladies and who knows who else. Clinton came to OKC after the bombing there but I do not recall seeing him at any soldier funerals, and yes, soldiers died in Somalia and other places under his administration. As I have stated, the President has met with numerous families of fallen soldiers and to me that shows his respect as much as showing up at the funeral. I don't know why you are so upset he showed up at VA Tech. I think it is a wonderful thing that he did. Good grief. Not sure where all this animosity is coming from. He wasn't attending a funeral, he was attending a memorial service. I doubt if he will personally attend any of the victims' funerals. What he did at VA Tech is similar to what I have seen at countless visits to military bases across the country where he personally met with families. Just because you don't see it on mainstream liberal media does not mean it is not happening. As I said, they would rather eat dirt than telecast something like that. I for the life of me cannot figure out why someone would have a problem with the President being there or somehow think it is an affront to fallen soldiers that he did. Shaking my head....
That is simply not true. No funerals for fetuses ever.
THINK about it. Foolish to argue this point.
Um...well Bi(n La)den..sheesh,
just making an observation as many others will, I am sure.
Sheesh!

I can almost feel palpable hatred that Palin is so fond of inciting at her rallies.


I guess time is getting short, everyone keeps saying Obama will win, they're becoming very angry and the venom is spewing.  Too bad they just can't stick to the issues and must resort to attacking posters instead of issues.  I guess that just shows the extent of their desperation. 


Now, I don't know for sure if Obama will win.  I'm very hesitant about feeling too secure about that.  As long as there are the Karl Roves of the world and Diebold machines, anything can happen.


Sheesh....is there
anyone in D.C who pays taxes? 
Again with the liar. Sheesh is right. NM

You are kidding, right? Sheesh. NM

Sheesh.....you are delusional.
Pay attention here...Bill Clinton...liberal to the core...regime change in Iraq was hatched during HIS presidency. You can't deny that. Well, you can, but anyone who cares to check will see the truth of it. So...your last paragraph should be aimed at liberals. Apparently, regime change is a LIBERAL idea.

John F. Kennedy...another liberal and incidentally as I have said on many occasions a man I admire...started getting involved in Viet Nam to "stop the spread of communism." FORCING western ideas on those folks. So I guess invading other countries to start democracies must be a LIBERAL idea.

Your rationalizing aka just because they were enacted during a conservative government doesn't mean it was a conservative idea. That is a ridiculous statement. What it DOES mean is that conservatives cared enough about the idea, WHATEVER it was, to actually DO something about it other than TALK about it. Ideas are fine, ACTION is what counts.

Look, for whatever reason and Lord only knows why, I am going to try this one more time. I consider myself an American. Not a conservative, not a liberal, not a libertarian, a Ron Paul supporter, polka-dotted or criss-crossed. I don't have any group, person, club, party who tells me what to believe. You can call me whatever you want to, pigeon hole me however you like, to suit your agenda. It is what you are good at. It makes absolutely no difference to me what you think of me or what group you want to put me in.

As to justifying my beliefs? My dear, you are the one who keeps justifying, and I can show that every major change in this country from the start was enacted under what you call conservative, what I call deeply morally convicted people...and then YOU justify by saying doesn't matter if "conservatives" actually DID it, it was a LIBERAL idea.

Geezzzz....whatever, piglet. If that is the case, thank you for the idea, and YOU'RE WELCOME for ACTUALLY ENACTING THEM.

Sheesh. LOL. THE END.


And you are in theposition to know all before it happens...sheesh...

and the pubs KNEW EVERYTHING for these last eight years and did what was supposedly good for this country?.  One of many horrible things they did was push the average American worker out of the middle class while the fat cats got fatter, all the while thumbing their noses at us, not to mention the 'war' that never should have happened.   


Sheesh - this is what your happy about?
You love to see people in misery? You like to see people unhappy? And why because they are connected to a republican which many hold so much disdain for. You know if John Kerry, AL Gore, Bill Clinton were going through terrible times with their children no matter how much I dislike them I certainly wouldn't be so gleeful that their kids are going through this. And please spare me the "they were pawns or objects" because of so, so was Bidens kids, and you wouldn't be so gleeful about that.

As for this guy going around to the TV shows, who doesn't now adays...especially when your offered a million dollars for your story or to appear on the air.

There are more important things going on now - unemployment, housing crisis, financial crisis, war, and your gleeful that relatives of Sarah Palin are having personal difficulties.

Shameful is what I call it.
sheesh is right, sam, GIVE IT A REST!!!
if we talked about the weather, you would turn it into an abortion topic.  If we talked about fashion, you would turn it into an abortion topic.  If we talked about sports, well, you get it.  And WE GET IT.  Give it a blanking rest.
Sheesh. Well I am so glad you are happy....
come to pick the bones with the rest of the crew? Well, bon appetit. LOL. geez.
Of course you will. It's called spin. lol...sheesh.
nm
Sheesh! You have way too much time on your hands!

Not failures...favors. Sheesh. lol nm
nm
Sheesh louise people.
For the love of pete.....the fact that Obama wants to raise taxes on businesses and the fact that it won't keep jobs in American because it will be cheaper to take their business to other countries.....that isn't fox news tabloid.....that is common sense. 
Whattabuncha nay-sayers. Sheesh.
.
Sheesh. Just asked a question.

You said:


"like a very bad itchy rash, or the smell of cow manure, he is EVERYWHERE, even to ignorant dems/independents who (OH MY GOD) get all the nes channels, C-SPAN, that the special Republicans can."


You're all hyped up today. Calm down.  I wasn't sure what you were saying and took it to mean C-Span was a garbage channel..


They are not murdering children - sheesh!!!!
Whether you want to call it murder that is your opinion. Embryos are not children. This is not a living breathing human being that has a mind, nerves, emotions or anything. That's like saying to eat eggs your are murdering baby chickens. When a child is born and is a breathing living fully developed human child and it is born and after it breaths air, and is killed then yes that is murder. Disposing of an egg is not murder, and it is probably the best thing that could happen to someone who is forced into a world of hate, unlove, and unwantedness. I guess it doesn't bother you one bit to see these children suffer because they have been born into a life of despair. Do you get a warm fuzzy feeling to know that a child will be miserable and may even want to commit suicide because they were born into a world where they are unloved and unwanted.

You really need to stop twisting reality into what you want to believe it is. Not every child is born into a loving family and people need to keep their nose out of where it doesn't belong.
Sheesh! I messed up my own joke!

I wrote:  I said, "Well, let's see:  "Algia" means pain.  "Ceph" means pain, so pain in the head -- HEADACHE!"


Obviously, "ceph" means HEAD!


I just got out of the hospital (again for pancreatitis), and I believe MY "ceph" was left behind when I was typing my post.


Good thing I don't own a gun or I'd probably shoot myself in the foot.  LOL.


NOT the same thing - sheesh! - see message
How can you compare the two. I pay taxes as do the companies we work for.

Tupperware reps pay taxes.

Churches do not pay taxes.

Unless churches plan to pay taxes they should not be holding business meetings in their homes.
I stand corrected - sheesh! who can you believe anymore
I'm totally confused with everything going on now adays. I don't know truth from smears. You would think if someone is actually putting their name to something they would be telling the truth due to serious outcomes of false accusations.

So how can we tell if something we hear on TV, radio or internet is true or not?

Makes me just not want to vote anymore and turn off the TV and put my head in the sand and ignore all going on. I just don't know what to believe anymore.
Drink another cup full of Kool-aid...sheesh. nm
.
Ever hear of TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT? sheesh you are limited
nm
This is the site you fraudulently tried to pass off as the *truth* about Donahue. Sheesh!










About

All About Philosophy - The Big Questions




















ABOUT US
Our Mission

Our mission is to lead people to Jesus and help them grow in their relationship with Him. We strive to deliver compelling evidence for the Christian faith to seekers, believers, and a skeptical world. We seek to be non-threatening, practical and informative, using the technology of the Internet to answer tough questions about God, Jesus Christ, the Bible and Christianity.

Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Matthew 28:19-20 KJV

Our Faith Statement

Although our ministry style often caters to wary skeptics, our group's foundation is based on solid, fundamental Christian doctrine.

Therefore, We Believe


  • The Bible is the only inspired Word of God – a supernaturally integrated set of 66 books, written by 40 authors, over nearly 2,000 years.
  • God created all things – from the massive cosmos to the microscopic cell.
  • We were created in God’s image, yet we were all corrupted and estranged from God after Adam fell into sin. The sin of Adam was the entry point of all sin, as well as physical and spiritual death on Earth.
  • God exists as three distinct personalities, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
  • Jesus Christ is the Son of God who fulfilled over 300 Old Testament prophecies when he took on human flesh, through the miracle of the virgin birth, and came to Earth as the promised Messiah.
  • Jesus died a physical death on the cross as the ultimate love sacrifice and act of grace, which allows all who believe in Him to be cleansed of sin by His blood and have a renewed, eternal relationship with God.
  • Jesus rose from the dead as the ultimate sign of his deity. He ascended to heaven, with the ultimate promise of his return to Earth as our just and mighty Lord. We constantly strive to be a Spirit-filled ministry, regularly praying and seeking God's guidance for our activities. We remind each other daily that this is God's work, not ours.

    But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. Hebrews 11:6 KJV

    Contact Information:
    All About GOD Ministries, Inc.
    7150 Campus Drive, Suite 320
    Colorado Springs, Colorado 80920
    719-884-2246
    719-884-2247 fax
    Email: Questions1.1@AllAboutGOD.com
    Website: AllAboutGOD.com












  • Philosophy Home | About Us | Support Us | FAQ | Sitemap
    Copyright © 2002 - 2005 AllAboutPhilosophy.org, All Rights Reserved.


    Now that makes all kinds of sense. Sheesh. I am sure murders occur...
    where you live too. Are you a murderer? What a goofy post. I just happen to be one of those people who knew of Bill before he came to national fame. And I did not say he murdered anyone. All I said is that there are unexplained deaths. All you have to do is google. People should not post rumor and innuendo if they do not want it turned around and applied to their side.
    MSNBC doesn't encourage these witch hunts at all. Sheesh
    Convention III of the Geneva Convention has to do with treatment of Prisoners of War.

    Identifying who is to be classified as a POW is specifically called out in detail in Art 4 of Convention III.

    The AL Queda and Taliban rogues, and other ''terrorists'' DO NOT fall under the protections of Convention III, commonly referred to as Common Article III.
    Not upset that he was in VA; upset that he has not attended funerals..
    since individual people don't usually have convocations, a funeral would have to do. I am glad he was at VA. I heard first it was just Laura going, then the both of them.
    Sheesh, you not only hate Bush, you hate PEOPLE!
    x
    not avoid their rehab, afford their rehab....sheesh lol
    I will correct myself before someone else does...lol
    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.



     


    clinton
    You mean wonderful super intelligent President Bill Clinton and his lovely super intelligent lawyer wife, Hiliary?  So much better than the dufus warmonger and Stepford wife in the WH right now..Jerks, both of them, backward thinking monsters, Bush and Stepford.
    clinton
    I think Clinton should have been impeached. He is to be a role model? Please, what kind of a role model is that cheating on his wife.
    No on Clinton as VP

    No way can Obama offer VP to Queen Hillary.  He should remember what happened to JFK (with Johnson being involved).  What a better way for the Queen to annoint herself to the presidency by getting rid of him.  Don't put it past her either - just remember Ron Brown, Vince Foster, Eric Fox, Sandy Hume, Danny Casolaro, Ronald Rogers, John Wilson, Gandy Baugh, Mary Mahoney, Suzanne Coleman, Judy Gibbs, Gary Johnson, Kathy Ferguson, Bell Shelton, Sally Perdue (didn't mysteriously die but was told if she didn't keep her mouth shut they would break her legs), Jon Walker, Johnny Franklin, Ed Willey, Barbara Alice Wise, Jerry Parks, C. Victor Raiser, L.J. Davis, Herschel Friday, Ron Brown, and the list goes on and on an on....


    So no, I would not put it past either of them that something would happen and she would swear herself in as the anointed queen.  Lets just hope Obama has more sense - which I believe he does.


    Clinton

    Where do I start?  I love Bill Clinton.  Hs is very intelligent, he can talk about anything and knows what he is talking about.  He did what the first person posted.  He was impeached but he could not be removed from office because he was impeached for was not govenment and it has to pertain to the government to be removed from office.  He was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth and he earned everything he got.  He has worked very hard.  Funny, but I get the same sick feeling in my stomach whenever I see George Bush's face on TV and the man cannot even speak so how he can do anything else.   The trillion dollar debt, people with no jobs, and the list goes on and on.  Put us in a war we had no business being in.  He has never done anything on his own that turned out good.  Whatever he did was with the help of his father or someone else doing it for him.   He will not return to Crawford, they are going to build a house, but I forgot the location, and he will not be traveling around the world working to get meds for  AIDS patients, starving  children, etc.  Maybe he can help bring back other countries to like us again like they used to until Bush told just about everyone of them he did not need their help and made them angry with us.  I could go on and on but I am tired and going to bed. 


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


     


    This has been going on even when Clinton
    was in office.  This has been going on for years.  Shoot, I lived in Arizona for 25 years and illegals were everywhere.  Finally, Arizona will NOT hire anyone that is illegal.  The companies have to hire people who show BC and if the employees do not, they are not hired.  So most illegals moved to other states.  Also the companies are audited and have to show proof that each employee is legal or the company will be fined.  Arizona has border patrol that runs along Mexico and Arizona and that should have been up years ago.  Even tried putting up border control when Clinton was in office, but everyone ignored her plea until a few years ago.  Also work for a company that outsources to India.  This has been going on for years and years.  When the O takes over, he will probably sell our country out and will be worse.  He says he will help the the middle class yet cause electricity rates to skyrocket and so on.  I do not trust O with ANYTHING.  He is a smooth talker, the ones I do not trust.  If McCain wins, at least I know he will try to make our country safe from nukes of Iran.    
    Again I will say it. Clinton and his
    cronies cooked the books. There was no surplus. It came out after an audit after Bush got in office.
    I really do wonder how Clinton will
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480126,00.html

    U.S. Obtains New Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Intrigue

    Friday, January 16, 2009


    Iran Presidency Office

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inspects the Natanz nuclear plant in central Iran.

    WASHINGTON — U.S. security and law-enforcement officials say they have fresh evidence of recent efforts by Iran to evade sanctions and acquire metals from China used in high-tech weaponry, including long-range nuclear missiles, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

    Iran's efforts are detailed in a series of recent emails and letters between Iranian companies and foreign suppliers seen by The Wall Street Journal. Business records show one Iranian company, ABAN Commercial & Industrial Ltd., has contracted through an intermediary for more than 30,000 kilograms (about 66,000 pounds) of tungsten copper — which can be used in missile guidance systems — from Advanced Technology & Materials Co. Ltd. of Beijing. One March 2008 email between the firms mentions shipping 215 ingots, with more planned.

    The United Arab Emirates has informed the U.S. that in September it intercepted a Chinese shipment headed to Iran of specialized aluminum sheets that can be used to make ballistic missiles. A month earlier, UAE officials also intercepted an Iran-bound shipment of titanium sheets that can be used in long-range missiles, according to a recent letter to the U.S. Commerce Department from the UAE's Washington ambassador.

    Evidence of Iran's efforts to acquire sensitive materials also is emerging from investigations by state and federal prosecutors in New York into whether a number of major Western banks illegally handled funds for Iran and deliberately hid Iranian transactions routed through the U.S. One focus of the inquiries is the role of Italy, including the Rome branch of Iran's Bank Sepah and Italy's Banca Intesa Sanpaolo Spa. Banca Intesa said it is cooperating in the inquiries.

    Iran Produces Enough Uranium to Build Nuclear Weapon

    The developments could present President-elect Barack Obama with an early test in responding to what many Washington security officials now say is a rapidly growing threat to the region, including U.S. allies Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    All of the high-performance metals Iran has been acquiring also have industrial uses such as commercial aviation and manufacturing, making it difficult for intelligence agencies to be absolutely certain how the materials are being used.

    "We can't say we know it would, or would not, be used for military purposes," said proliferation expert Gary Milholland of the nonprofit Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, noting that broad economic sanctions on Tehran led by the U.S. mean Iran has to go to unusual lengths to find high-grade materials for industrial use as well as weapons.

    Still, he added, "There doesn't seem to be any real doubt or debate whether Iran is going for the bomb or whether Iran is using front companies to import things. Everyone agrees on that around the world."

    Officials at the International Atomic Energy Agency said they believe Iran could have enough fissile material for an atomic weapon sometime this year, though it would need to be further processed into weapons-grade uranium. That assessment was echoed Thursday by Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael V. Hayden. U.S. and European governments have grown increasingly alarmed in recent months at the speed they believe Iran is developing ballistic-missile and nuclear capabilities. Last year the United Nations Security Council, which includes China, formally imposed sanctions on Iran's military and most of its banks for nuclear proliferation activities.

    A spokesman for Iran at its U.N. mission in New York declined to comment. China "has been strictly implementing" U.N. proliferation sanctions on Iran, said a spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing. The export of restricted items such as high-grade metals, which include specialized aluminum and titanium, is prohibited, he added.
    Wow, Clinton
    Probably had Monica hiding under the desk. LOL. Sorry, could not resist.
    No, Clinton just used

    the Oval Office (that I pay for) and ''company time'' to get Lewinskyed on a regular basis.  He may even have gotten a Lewinsky on Fathers Day, who knows?


    I believe it is called Fathers Day for a reason.  Obama went golfing on the sacred day, and I don't think Michelle and the kids were with him.   On Fathers Day, it's Daddy that gets the gifts, otherwise it would be called Family Day or Wife and Children's Day or something else. 


    Some men give their wives a day at a spa for Mothers Day...should she be required to spend all day with Hubby and kids instead?  Technically, I think the honoree gets to spend their time the way s/he chooses on that day.


    Sanford having his trist in Argentina was quite bad enough, do you really have to pile on with Fathers Day as well? 


    Well, how did you feel about Clinton
    get a B.J. just outside the Oval Office and then lying under oath about it?   Oh, but that was his personal life though...
    Yes, Clinton lied, and I

    thought it was terrible when he did.


    But Clinton's lies didn't result in a war.  Clinton created a surplus.  Bush squandered it all and created a huge deficit with his war. I'm amazed that you can't see the huge difference between the two lies.  Bush's lies are placing every single American in danger of a terror attack because he refuses to do anything about the borders.  This is here.  This is now.  Why don't you care about TODAY and the futures of your children and their children?  We're living in the most dangerous era that America has known, yet you're more concerned about the sexual practices of a former President?  I truly don't understand your way of thinking.