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

Thank you, also; I hate the polarization that continues between "right and left," Dem or Rep.,

Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-01-25
In Reply to: I asked a simple question, and you answered...nm - see inside

AMERICANS. Is that too simplistic, altruistic, unrealistic? When can we get beyond LABELS and fingerpointing, US VERSUS THEM mentality, and become AMERICANS united for our own country, our own people; the divisions in this country is what has helped to bring us down. I fully support President Obama and feel very humbled and privileged indeed to have been able to witness history happening before me, but if we had an "us" and "them" division back during the revolution, we would still be paying taxes to England and flying the Union Jack! I love this COUNTRY, and pray that we can help each other crawl out of the horrific mess this country is in.


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

It's true. The left hate anyone who disagrees with
nm
Thanks so much for proving my point about the angry, hate-filled left. sm
You did a perfect job of it.  You are incapable of thought other than that driven by hate. Your debates are screeds and your voice is strident and laced with the same adjectives...the word liar comes to mind. Which, of course, you are.
I gotta wonder how long that "right of conscience..."
thing would last if someone refused to prescribe Viagra or Cialis or refuse to treat a "victim" in the ER who's had a "problem" for more than four hours (as advertised/warned on TV).
And the pattern continues.

Another swiftboating of a hero.  Anyone who dares to disapprove of Bush's actions can expect to be dragged through the mud.


I wonder how many innocent  Americans who simply disagree with Bush have been spied upon and deemed terrorists for merely disagreeing with his flawed policies.  We'll never know because Bush refuses to obey the law and use warrants that would spell out probable cause for such surveillance.  :-(


Maybe that is why FOX continues to skyrocket.
nm
Already proven but the myth continues. nm
.
Bush Approval Continues to Fall

Could the rest of America be getting a clue?


August 17, 2005



Bush Approval Continues to Fall

President Bush’s job approval has dropped to 41% nationwide, according to the results of 50 separate but concurrent, statewide public opinion polls conducted by SurveyUSA. Bush’s aproval rating ranges from a high of 59% in Idaho to a low of 29% in Rhode Island.

  • Bush is above 50% in 7 states.
  • Bush is at 50% in 2 states.
  • Bush is below 50% in 41 states.
Compared to last month's poll, Bush's approval numbers dropped 5 or more points in 10 states. The single largest drop was in Minnesota, where it fell 10 points. Bush also fell 9 points in New Mexico.

Who is President NOW, as the economy continues to sink? Who got us here? nm
x
You will have to ask him not to call you; report to supervisors if he continues - nm
x
If Netanyahu continues to bomb Gaza,
then Obama has to do some action, words are not enough anymore regarding this conflict.
Most probably Obama, as he is a wise guy, he will curtail US' financial and weapon support to Israel.

Obama will not start the bombing and he will not torture.


And the Sudan genocide continues under Bush's watch.
We could bounce these back and forth all day.

I think he was a good president overall, but not intervening in Rawanda was Clinton's biggest failure in my book.

But if you are going to talk about blind eyes on the genocide in Africa I suggest you go back a little further through American history than Clinton and bring it on up to this current administration.
Swiftboating continues; you're in good company.


Walter Cronkite may be next...

Cronkite: Time for U.S. to Leave Iraq

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television WriterSun Jan 15, 6:47 PM ET

Former CBS anchor Walter Cronkite, whose 1968 conclusion that the Vietnam War was unwinnable keenly influenced public opinion then, said Sunday he'd say the same thing today about Iraq.

It's my belief that we should get out now, Cronkite said in a meeting with reporters.

Now 89, the television journalist once known as the most trusted man in America has been off the CBS Evening News for nearly a quarter-century. He's still a CBS News employee, although he does little for them.

Cronkite said one of his proudest moments came at the end of a 1968 documentary he made following a visit to Vietnam during the Tet offensive. Urged by his boss to briefly set aside his objectivity to give his view of the situation, Cronkite said the war was unwinnable and that the U.S. should exit.

Then-President Lyndon Johnson reportedly told a White House aide after that, If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost Middle America.

The best time to have made a similar statement about Iraq came after Hurricane Katrina, he said.

We had an opportunity to say to the world and Iraqis after the hurricane disaster that Mother Nature has not treated us well and we find ourselves missing the amount of money it takes to help these poor people out of their homeless situation and rebuild some of our most important cities in the United States, he said. Therefore, we are going to have to bring our troops home.

Iraqis should have been told that our hearts are with you and that the United States would do all it could to rebuild their country, he said.

I think we could have been able to retire with honor, he said. In fact, I think we can retire with honor anyway.

Cronkite has spoken out against the Iraq war in the past, saying in 2004 that Americans weren't any safer because of the invasion.

Cronkite, who is hard of hearing and walks haltingly, jokingly said that I'm standing by if they want me to anchor the CBS Evening News. CBS is still searching for a permanent successor to Dan Rather, who replaced Cronkite in March 1981.

Twenty-four hours after I told CBS News that I was stepping down at my 65th birthday I was already regretting it and I've regretted it every day since, he said. It's too good a job for me to have given it up the way that I did.

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
*****************************
AND MURTHA:

Web Site Attacks Critic of War
Opponents Question Murtha's Medals

By Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 14, 2006; A05

Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), the former Marine who is an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, has become the latest Democrat to have his Vietnam War decorations questioned.

In a tactic reminiscent of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth assault on Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during the 2004 presidential campaign, a conservative Web site yesterday quoted Murtha opponents as questioning the circumstances surrounding the awarding of his two Purple Hearts.

David Thibault, editor in chief of the Cybercast News Service, said the issue of Murtha's medals from 1967 is relevant now because the congressman has really put himself in the forefront of the antiwar movement. Thibault said: He has been placed by the Democratic Party and antiwar activists as a spokesman against the war above reproach.

Cindy Abram, a spokeswoman for Murtha, said, We certainly believe that the questions being raised are an attempt to distract attention from what's happening in Iraq. As for how Murtha won the Purple Hearts, she said: We think the congressman's record is clear. We have the documentation, the paperwork that proves that he earned them, and that he is entitled to wear them proudly.

Cybercast is part of the conservative Media Research Center, run by L. Brent Bozell III, who accused some in the media of ignoring the Swift Boat charges, but Thibault said it operates independently. He said the unit, formerly called the Conservative News Service, averages 110,000 readers, mainly conservative, and provides material for other Web sites such as GOPUSA. We won't run anything against anybody if we don't have the goods, he said.

Former representative Don Bailey (D-Pa.), who was quoted in the article, confirmed his account to The Washington Post yesterday.

In a conversation on the House floor in the early 1980s, said Bailey, who won a Silver Star and three Bronze Stars in Vietnam, Murtha told him he did not deserve his Purple Hearts. He recalled Murtha saying: Hey, I didn't do anything like you did. I got a little scratch on the cheek. Murtha's spokeswoman would not address that account.

Bailey, who lost a House race to Murtha after a 1982 redistricting, said Jack's a coward, and he's a liar for subsequently denying the conversation. That just really burned me, he said.

While saying he has only responded to reporters' questions and is not bitter toward Murtha, Bailey said the congressman's approach to Iraq is not responsible and that it just turned my stomach to see Murtha acting as a spokesman for veterans.

He said he shared the information with Republican William Choby, who ran against Murtha four times beginning in 1990 and made the Vietnam decorations an issue. Choby raised the issue again during Murtha's 2002 reelection campaign.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, citing Marine records, reported that year that Murtha was wounded during hostile actions near Da Nang, Vietnam: In the first incident, his right cheek was lacerated, and in the second, he was lacerated above his left eye. Neither injury required evacuation. The Cybercast article cites a 1994 interview in which Murtha described injuries to his arm and knee.

The article included a 1996 quote from Harry Fox, who worked for former representative John Saylor (R-Pa.), telling a local newspaper that Murtha was pretending to be a big war hero. Fox, who lost a 1974 election to Murtha, said the 38-year Marine veteran had asked Saylor for assistance in obtaining the Purple Hearts but was turned down because the office believed he lacked adequate evidence of his wounds.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, The Swift Boat-like attacks on an American hero, Congressman Jack Murtha, are despicable and have no place in politics.

In November, when Murtha called for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the congressman was endorsing Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party and called his stance a surrender to the terrorists. Days later, President Bush called Murtha a fine man and said they simply disagreed about Iraq.

The Cybercast article appeared shortly before a segment scheduled for CBS's 60 Minutes tomorrow in which Murtha predicts that the vast majority of U.S. troops will be out of Iraq by year's end.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

FOR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES WHO OPPOSE THE WAR:

Bush to use speech in Kentucky to promote Republicans

January 11, 2006

LOUISVILLE (AP) -- President Bush will have an eye on the fall elections Wednesday when he heads to Louisville, Kentucky, to give a speech on Iraq.
Tuesday, the president told a veterans group that voters should punish any Democrat whose Iraq War rhetoric gives comfort to our adversaries. He said loyal opposition is one thing, but defeatism is another.


Abortion Rate Continues to Drop, at Lowest Level Since 1976

Abortion: Just the Data
With High-Court Debate Brewing, New Report Shows Procedure's Numbers Down


By Naseem Sowti
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 19, 2005; HE01


A new analysis of the most recent abortion data shows that the number of U.S. women having the procedure is continuing its decade-long drop and stands at its lowest level since 1976.


In the year 2002, about 1.29 million women in the U.S. had abortions. In 1990, that number was 1.61 million.


The data, collected by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit group that collects information from abortion providers and public sources, show that for every 1,000 pregnancies that did not result in miscarriage in 2002, there were 242 abortions. This figure was 245 in 2000 and 280 in 1990. The institute's mission is to protect reproductive choice, but its reports are considered accurate across the political spectrum.


With President Bush preparing to nominate at least one new Supreme Court justice whose presence on the high court could produce new rulings on abortion, the data are already being interpreted differently by abortion rights advocates and antiabortion activists. But scientists say it is difficult to determine why the number of abortions has been dropping.


"There are so many things feeding into" the decline, said Lawrence Finer, associate director of domestic research at Guttmacher. Possible factors, he said, include changes in contraceptive technologies and use, changing ideas about family size and abortion, and reduced access to abortion services. Pregnancy clinics and abstinence programs may also have contributed to the declines, he said.


Who Gets Abortions?


Women with unintended pregnancies are those most likely to get abortions. According to the Guttmacher report, 47 percent of unintended pregnancies are aborted. Teenagers, unmarried women, black and Hispanic women, and those with low incomes are more likely than the population as a whole to have unintended pregnancies.


The report shows that non-Hispanic white women get about 40 percent of all U.S. abortions, black women 32 percent and Hispanic women, who can be of any race, 20 percent. Women of other races account for the other 8 percent. Black and Hispanic women have higher rates of abortion than non-Hispanic whites, the report states.


Other facts about U.S. abortions from the Guttmacher report:


· Six in 10 women who had abortions in 2002 were mothers. "Despite the common belief, women who have abortions and those who have children are not two separate groups," said Finer.


· A quarter of abortions occur among unmarried women who live with a male partner, putting this group at elevated risk of unintended pregnancy and abortion.


· The majority -- 56 percent -- of women who terminate their pregnancies are in their twenties. Teenagers between 15 and 19 make up 19 percent of abortions, although this percentage has dropped substantially in recent years.


This drop may be due to use of longer-acting hormonal contraceptives and lower rates of sexual activity, said Joyce Abma, a social scientist at the National Center for Health Statistics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).


She added that there has been a decline in sexual activity reported by teenage males, which could be a contributing factor to lower pregnancy and abortion rates among teens.


· The incidence of abortion spans the economic spectrum, but low-income women are overrepresented among those having the procedure. Sixty percent of women who had abortions in 2000 had incomes of less than twice the poverty level --below $28,000 per year for a family of three, for example. This is in part because "low-income women have lower access to family planning services" such as contraception and counseling provided by health departments, independent clinics or Planned Parenthood, Finer said.


· Almost 90 percent of abortions are performed in the first trimester -- during the first 12 weeks after the first day of the woman's last menstrual period -- with most performed before nine weeks. Because of newer surgical and medical techniques, the proportion of abortions performed at six weeks or earlier has almost doubled in the past decade.


Less than 1 percent of abortions are done after 24 weeks.


· The number of abortion providers declined by 11 percent between 1996 and 2000, to 1,800. In 2000, one-third of women aged 15 to 44 lived in a county that lacked an abortion provider.


About the Data


There are two main sources of national data on abortion: the Guttmacher Institute and the CDC. While both are regarded as dependable by major groups on both sides of the abortion issue, their numbers are different, and less precise than some other health statistics.


Not all states require reporting of abortions. The District, Maryland, New Hampshire and New Jersey do not mandate abortion reporting. California does not collect abortion data at all. Alaska and New Hampshire have not released statistics since 1998. This affects CDC's data, which is assembled every year from reports received from state health departments.


Due to differing reporting requirements and data-gathering procedures, abortion information for the District, Maryland and Virginia does not permit meaningful comparisons.


Guttmacher produces its reports by contacting abortion providers nationwide; its reports are considered more comprehensive than the CDC's. But the institute publishes the data only every four or five years. Neither group has published data for years beyond 2002.


Despite the inconsistencies of methods, the trends reported by CDC and Guttmacher correspond closely to each other. ·


Resources


For the complete Guttmacher report, visit http://www.agi-usa.org/sections/abortion.html , click on "An Overview of Abortions in the U.S."


For the CDC's complete report, visit http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/indss_2004.html , and click on "Abortion Surveillance -- United States 2001.


Or visit http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_23.pdf to download "Estimated Pregnancy Rates for the United States -- 1990-2000: An Update").


© 2005 The Washington Post Company


English not so good. Sad for you. So much hate. Life too short hate.
x
Oh I see....you hate small town folks, you hate Christians...
and you hate the military...you are also coming into real clear view.
Sheesh, you not only hate Bush, you hate PEOPLE!
x
you mean left wing....it's a left wing ding website on the messiah....the right wouldn't bothe

They don't hate us because we are free, they hate us because...
We need to stop imposing the way we live on them. They don't hate us because of our freedom. That is absurd. When have you ever heard them say we hate you because you are free? Never. What they have been saying is "Don't tell us how we should live". "Don't tell us we need to have the same type of government that America has", and they also say "We don't need the Americans designing our own countries flag" and that is why they hate us. They are their own country. It is not right for us to go in and say you need to live the way we do, your government needs to be run the way ours is. How would we like it if they came and said "Were invading America and your going to conform to the way we live because "its' the right way" or "god has told me this is the way it's suppose to be". No, we wouldn't like it one bit. Every country lives differently. We need to stop dictating how other countries should live.
Hate mongers hate everything.
x
So you not only hate gays, you also hate
.
No need. I can't think of who else left besides Nan before. sm
That's why I didn't name their name. Either way, my point was they'll be back.
Actually what the left
expects and the right should too is not to be lied to on a continual basis, to have our constitution upheld. We didnt go into this war to spread democracy we went because this administration lied. WMD remember? THATS why we went into Iraq, that and the fact that due to republican spin fully half of Americans believed Saddam did 09/11. and meanwhile the real perp of 09/11 runs free. If Iraq had no oil, we never would have gone in there. Sadly, Mr bush has made one huge mess that is costing us billions and killing our soldiers. Yeah a whole lot of America is furious and upset and we have good reason to be.
Look what the left does..

maybe this was posted before but it just goes to show how biased the media is and what liars they really are. the quote in red was the actual quote. Look how the media decided to butcher it.


The media is trying REALLY hard to paint Sarah Palin into an evil religious zealot. The AP is willing to break the typically utilized laws of printing the English language to do it.


According to the AP, Sarah Palin said this about the troops while at church:


“Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,"


According to real life, Sarah Palin said this about the troops while at church (with the AP’s selective quoting underlined):


“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God,”


The AP quote means “Iraq is a mission from God.”


The actual quote means “We pray Iraq is a mission from God.”


The headline is even more misleading.


Palin: Iraq war 'a task that is from God'


The AP not only doesn't mention the previous sentence, or the first part of the sentence they quote, they also essentially ignore the meaning of the very next sentence as well. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."


This is a statement of humble reflection from Palin. To translate into terms the media might understand, its "I hope we're doing the right thing."


This story is bad enough that the AP really should issue a correction on it, if not a full retraction. There's no story unless you butcher the quote. It's based on half (or a quarter) of a quote, mentally ignoring the previous and following sentences, and even presenting the trimmed quote as the start of a sentence --forcing them to capitalize a word that actually appeared in the middle of the sentence.


Really bad.


you left off

spinning his wedding ring.  And everyone knows what a married man is thinking when he does that . . .


 


If you have next to no $ left now
you must be one of the ones that the rest of us will be supporting with our tax money. 
I will if you put the left one in.

nm


 


Left behind
I am just wondering if either of you read Tim LeHaye's "Left Behind" series. It is fictional but deals with the rapture and those left behind. I had read it many years ago but was just thinking the other day how scary it is that I find so many similarities between the books and our current situation and my feelings about what we as a country may be facing after this election. Part of it also deals with a "one-world" religion, another thought I find scary. Have you read it?
She is the only one left on there with
decency and common sense! She is definitely no twit and there is nothing to hate about her. Just my opinion of course, and I feel like all the others are twits.
Does anyone have anything left in their

those to the far left seem to think
we are to be all-tolerant of them and their lunatic ideas, but the tolerance doesn't work the other direction. Don't worry, those who counted on Obama for the gay/lesbian legislation -- i'm sure he'll come through for you before its all over.
Yes, I know someone who left the
country because Bush was reelected.  So, in answer to your obnoxious question, YES!
I'm about as far left as you can get ....
and Dubya didn't have anything to do with prompting the 9/11 attacks.  He just had the bad fortune to be the sitting president at the time.  Those attacks were years in the making.  Years.  It's foolish to blame any one president or any one administration for it. 
Is this what the left always does when they have no
nm
Oh, come on! Both can be mean, but the left can
nm
What will they do when there's no one left to pay
This, of course, is the major flaw in all socialist dreams and schemes. Sooner or later, the camel collapses under the weight of hauling everyone else's load. And my hump is already getting rubbed raw.
Here is one, but it's partisan left! sm

Neighbors for Peace to "Raise the Bar" for Democratic Candidates


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


St. Paul, MN – June 17, 2003 – When national Democratic leaders visit St. Paul next week, Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace and other Minnesota organizations will be on the scene to question presidential candidates, raising the electoral bar for peace, justice, and environmental issues.


The Association of State Democratic Chairs and the Democratic National Committee will convene this weekend at the Radisson Riverfront Hotel at 11 East Kellogg Boulevard in St. Paul. Gearing up for the 2004 presidential elections, Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace will be outside the hotel on Friday, June 20, from 2:30 to 5:30 p.m. to invite the candidates to join concerned Minnesota Democrats in dialogue about critical issues.


"People are leaving the Democratic party in droves, because in recent elections the candidates have become so centrist that they are almost indistinguishable from the Republicans," comments Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace co-founder, Anne Benson. "We want to see the Democratic party return to its progressive roots—to stand up for working people and poor people, and to fight against the regressive domestic and foreign policies of the Bush administration."


The neighbors from the Merriam Park area of St. Paul hold that in recent elections, Democratic candidates have lost their chance to take office because they've neglected the concerns of their own voters.


"It has always been said, 'There are more Democrats than Republicans; we just need to get out the vote,'" states member, Steve Schwarz. "We, however, need a reason to get out the vote. Many Democrats have felt alienated and misrepresented by the party and have looked instead to other alternatives. We believe in the principles that made the Democratic party what it was and still can be today. Remember, we in Minnesota have supported a long line of Democratic politicians who voted on principle and not on predictions of popularity. We expect our candidates to make peace and justice issues a priority."


Adds Benson, "We're encouraging candidates to ask themselves the hard questions: Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Was I misled by the administration when I voted for the War Powers Resolution? How do we get out of this quagmire in Iraq? Does the PATRIOT Act infringe on too many civil liberties?"


Merriam Park Neighbors for Peace has invited all Democratic candidates to meet with them after their sessions conclude on Friday to answer a series of fourteen questions regarding issues of pre-emptive war, international relations, arms development, military spending, V.A. benefits, U.S. economy, social programs, employment, globalization, education, health care, civil liberties, terrorism, and environmental policy. They invite all Minnesotans with these concerns to join them in St. Paul on Friday in addressing the candidates.


"We're not endorsing a particular candidate," group member, Jeanne Schnitzen, notes. "We're giving them all a chance to look us in the eye and answer to the issues we vote for. If they're really in this race to turn the tides, we'll make sure they get that chance. I want to believe there is a Democratic candidate who is capable of sowing the seeds of change."


So much for the tolerance of the left. nm

Looks like you left your *objectivity*

on the Conservative Board.   Might be time for you to return.


Left leaning.

I am well aware that I am on a *left leaning* board; however, how can you ever possibly gain a true picture of real facts if you only visit left leaning sites?  It isn't possible. I don't do it. In fact, on the other political boards I post on, some left and some right, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, News Max, Fox, are not used as sources. 


You misunderstand me about the Constitution and Iraq. 


The left really hates this guy
This is so laughable that with all that's going on the world the left stoops to National Enquirer style reporting. Get a life and a clue.
Why do you think everyone not for Bush is left?sm
I guess compared to those over on the conservative board, I am a little left. I was a registered Republican up until 4 years ago. Because their policies and actions conflict with my beliefs, I can no longer support the party. There are many many more just like me.
I think there is still dispute over even when they left sm
and why planes were allowed to come into US airspace to pick them up when all other aircraft were grounded. Also, why they were not questioned by FBI, etc.

Also, researchers requesting information from the FBI about their disposition with Osama, and were told that Osama is wanted by the FBI, but not for 911. So my question would be, well then who is?
Too bad folks, it's not just the left...sm
Like Lurker said, the gig is up! People are pushing for change in Iraq. Personally, I would have rather seen us release the full fury on terrorist who are invading that country and clean it up before leaving. However, if our strategy is to keep peddling around like street police then something has to give. We have our own country to fix and too much attention has been given to Iraq in the past 3 years.

On to the economy for a sec. Republicans have been boasting on how good the economy is doing, but guess which group is reaping the benefits. You guessed it - the rich. So sorry if the working man, you know those of us who punch the clock, are not feeling so thankful for the Dow and Nasdaq earnings. What's funny is that the *beltway boys* as AG calls them can not seem to figure out why 50% of Americans tend to feel the economy is not so hot.
What is typical of the left?
It kind of got lost in the point you were trying to make, something about Lurker not answering your question the way you wanted her to...or somethin' like that.
What I want to know is who left you in charge?
nm
Posters like this need to be left alone
nm here
Would that be left or right bias?
nm
The left does it all the time.
nm
No, not at all...it started on the far left rag...
the dailykos. That is where it broke. And then the rest of the far left picked it up and ran with it.

I was the first to congratulate Obama on his renouncing of the behavior. But even with him saying that, his supporters continue the salvos at Palin's family. Big time Dem pundits on TV still taking shots at her. Blogs still taking shots at her. Posters on this board still taking shots at her. Now you take people who are not committed yet, they see this happening, and you are left with only two conclusions...either Barack was very serious and meant what he said (which I believe) and his followers and pundits and the media are still going to attack regardless; or that he just made that statement to take the political high road while all the time in the background he is saying "sic her." It has to be one of the two...but either way, if his supporters and big Dem pundits continue the attack it reflects badly on his candidacy. I realize that he cannot control what people do...but one would think they would heed what he says (they claim to believe everything he says) and just lay off...but, to each his own.
Has the left ever put "country first"?
nm
Left field is right!
nm