That "my friends" phrase, so oft-repeated, made him
Posted By: sound like a snake-oil salesman. - nm on 2008-10-08
In Reply to: McCain leaving the hall - gourdpainter
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
Okay "my friends"
Signed Joe the (not) Plumber.
he used a phrase - the same phrase that McCain used several times against Hillary - nm
x
another oft-repeated distortion
put to rest. Regarding the "liberal" media and its slant in favor of liberal thinking. Tonight on 20/20 (ABC - one of the big 3) had a story by that highly regarded, unbiased John Stossel. The subject was "scientists who disagree with the global warming theory and the threats on their lives!!" It was mentioned it twice -- they actually been threatened with DEATH for disagreeing. I watched. It was 6 assorted scientists who claimed that global warming might not be caused by mankind, and even if it were, it might not be all bad. The horrific death threats -- are you ready? An e-mail stating "you might not even be alive when the planet warms up." Sends a shiver up your spine, doesn't it? Bill O'Reilly himself couldn't have made a bigger mountain out of that molehill.
Should add there repeated references to
putting partisanship behind us now that the election is over.
But...how much are your taxes going up if the bush tax cuts are repeated....
that will be coming out of your huge difference there.
Repeated? Obama doesn't want to repeat tax cuts
for the rich -- and "rich," by the way, is anyone earning more than a quarter of a million dollars a year.
Obama wants to give tax CREDITS to businesses that keep jobs in the USA, instead of exporting them out of the country.
These huge greedy corporations may be creating jobs, but they're not creating American jobs. Obama wants to try to slow that down and wants to reward companies who don't turn their backs on Americans.
Bush worshippers don't want to hear the truth repeated
They just want us to forget what a mockery and mess that buffoon made of our country.
Oh, but watch out for Obama - that Democrat might just FIX everything and then the Pubs will have no one to point fingers at.
What a joke that anyone thinks they can defend that jerk!
You really don't know who "my campain" is
and you are only assuming from some of my posts that I am a Democrat. One would assume by your posts that you are a Republican but you have claimed ad nauseum that you are an independent. I'm not a dem actually, but a pub. But, I don't believe all the garbage the pubs are putting forth.
I also don't hear McCain say much about what the GOP is doing, or trying to do in Michigan and a few other states about voter suppression to people who are in or have undergone foreclosure. That is disgusting to me too.
I have looked at "my" guy
and I've looked at McCain. I wouldn't vote for McCain if you paid me. Did you not HEAR him say he's the biggest free trader ever?
<groan" only 1 more day.
He's not "my boy". I only catch him
a couple times a week early in the morning if I can't sleep.
I don't have stocks or bonds, so it's really a moot point. I just need some laughs once in a while over how upset he gets over some things.
Has nothing to do with "humoring you" or "my" definitions.
It's important for you to discover the complexities for yourself (Google is all you need), and "my" definitions don't matter unless I am the one doing the analysis.
But I'll start the ball rolling.
1. "Prenatal care" starting at what point in the gestation (1st trimester? 2nd? etc.)?
2. Involving what different features or services?
3. Does the study adequately filter out other coincidental factors that tend to characterize some populations that do not receive prenatal care, but which also might impact infant survival, such as poor nutrition, smoking, alcohol and drug use, squalid living conditions and even low educational levels?
4. What time period after delivery will be used to define a relevant "infant death"?
5. What causes of infant demise will be considered relevant to the question?
6. Will all "modes" of delivery be included?
7. Will "high-risk" pregnancies be included or excluded?
8. Will premature deliveries be included or excluded?
The list of problems that have been identified in the design of studies that look very scientific and conclusive, and have been published in respected journals, has proven to be considerable.
Some have tried to get around these problems using a technique called "meta-analysis", which tries to reconcile and synthesize the findings from multiple studies, but this hasn't been very successful either.
The problems worsen when you simply use empirical evidence - say, by comparing birth/mortality rates in different countries with different "levels" of prenatal care. One study "showed" that the mortality rate in the US was higher than that in one of the Baltic states (I've forgotten now which one), but failed to take into account that in the US we try to deliver and save infants who are much more premature than they try to salvage in the other country - so naturally, our "failure" rate would look worse.
The other problem is really more or less endemic. "Prenatal care", however defined, will represent some set of services and characteristics. We may assume that all of them do not contribute equally (and some, perhaps not at all) to infant survival. This means that even if you can resolve all of the study design problems and show that prenatal care contributes to survival, you haven't said very much that's useful. It might be, for instance, that a simple regimen of multiple vitamins has as much impact on survival as all of the other factors combined. If so, have we presented a case for purchasing "prenatal care" as a constellation of services (from the standpoint of healthcare economics), or should we focus on finding ways to see that pregnant women get the multiple vitamins?
When we see "studies" of complex issues - especially those involving an interplay between myriad scientific and social or cultural factors - we should always put on the brakes and find out more about how the study was done, what assumptions it made, and keep a sharp eye out for flaws in the design of the study (which, I am sad to say, crop up more frequently than you might suspect), even or perhaps especially in the field of medicine. People who study things do have agendas, and sometimes the agenda amounts to grants of $millions in research funds, or sponsorship of the study by an organization that has a "mission", etc. A lot of what masquerades as "scientific proof" in the field of medicine, unfortunately, is nothing of the sort. Let's see now - are eggs good for us or bad for us?
Make that "my analogy refers to
nm
"my Muslim faith" -- oops meant Christian
nm
great quote "My personal opinion, we don't even have a candidate that I can support as the les
I agree with you 100%! Why doesn't a retired general run or someone who knows what he is doing. It's like all the real men have disappeared from politics.
key phrase
" as far as I am concerned. . . " Remember Britney Spears and Paris Hilton everybody!!!!
You like that phrase it seems. He WAS on vacation. sm
I don't know where you have been but he has been making speeches about the Hurricaine all weekend before it even hit and pledged support, etc. So obviously, he may have been officially on vacation, but he wasn't in any way. Do you watch TV. He's been all over it. Get over your own bad self.
I have never personally used that phrase myself. sm
But then, I am sure someone will expend a huge amount of energy to prove me wrong.
I'm thinking of a phrase...
oh yeah - "When pigs fly."
The second amendment phrase that
gun control supporters always fall back on is ''well regulated militia''. But the militia back then was considered to be all able-bodied males capable of fighting. Also, having had such recent experience with the tyranny of an out-of-control government, our founders wiisely built the right to possess and bear arms into our constitution to make sure our new government did not become too big for its britches.
I believe it was in Justice Scalia's opinion on the Heller case (or maybe in his questioning of the pro-gun-control attorney) that I read something to the effect that in revolutionary war times firearms were necessary to procure food and also to protect ourselves and families from hostile attacks, bears, wolves, and other predators. Nowadays most of us don't have to fight off wild animals anymore; the predators have become.....us.
One phrase cracked me up in your post - sm
"whether you believe in God or not as a liberal" - What? If someone is liberal, they don't believe in GOD?...
I may not believe in the same God as you (or the same concept of God is probably a better way to put it), but I don't believe liberals are any more "godless" than anyone else. I know this is off topic and I don't mean to create a stir by posting it, but it seems so "typically conservative" to make assumptions such as this.
Just google the phrase, JTBB.......sm
There's lots there.
Nothing personal, but I don't feel like being derided by anyone today for my opinions.
In fact, I'm thinking of taking a break from this board, as I doubt I would really be missed, anyway.
Salisbury is the one who first coined this phrase,.
So he probably knows what he is talking about, at least from that liberal viewpoint you are so quick to deride. Michael Savage has a different, more conservative interpretation. Good for him. Now that we have established the fact there are at least two opposing views on the same concept, the logical next step would be to respectfully discuss the pros and cons of each and get beyond the tacit dismissal.
Using the phrase "drinking Kool-Aid"
On November 18, 1978, 909 inhabitants of Jonestown, 276 of them children, died of apparent cyanide poisoning, mostly in and around a pavilion. This resulted in the greatest single loss of American civilian life in a non-natural disaster until the September 11, 2001 attacks. Jones and several members argued that the group should commit "revolutionary suicide" by drinking cyanide-laced grape flavored Flavor Aid (often misidentified as Kool-Aid) along with a sedative.
Out of respect for the nearly 1000 innocent Christians who tragically died in Jonestown, I would like to ask the posters of this forum to find another phrase to use other than "drinking Kool-Aid" to describe a person's political beliefs. It is insulting and disrespectful to the memory of those that died in Jonestown to use this expression so flippantly.
JMHO
Well, at least you have a new catch phrase. Don't wear it out now, ya hear? nm
McCain did say this in the primaries several times - same phrase exactly - nm
x
Okie dokie. I am just reminded of the old phrase...
be careful what you ask for. But I do have a question...Obama has said forcefully that if he ends Iraq the war will go on in Afghanistan...so you are still going to have a war. Where the war is makes the difference? We are still going to be spending billions. The fact that it will be in Afghanistan and not Iraq makes the difference?
We are getting ready to spend billions bailing out the mess that Democrats created. No, Republicans have actually been bringing this mess up, screaming warnings about it, and the only thing this Democratic congress has done was pass a housing bill this time that further encouraged giving out those bad loans. Republicans were against it, but the Dems have the majority. Soooo...here we are. I do blame one Republican, George Bush, for signing it. He should have vetoed it.
How you can ignore something that huge and trust the fox to run the chicken house...I will be the first to say...I certainly do not understand it. But your vote is YOURS, and you should use it however you wish to.
A phrase rings in my ears too...Can't see the forest...
for the trees. And they can't.
The operative phrase "due to no fault of their own"
and then there's the millions of others that are just LAZY
I have no problem helping the disabled or even someone that lost their job and has some hard times...
My problem is those that choose not to better themselves BECAUSE of these handouts.
Dont tell me I deserve to work my ASS OFF to pay for these people to live.
I have a huge heart, and I don't make much money even after working hard, and I choose to give it to the charities of my choice, which is the way it should be, not TAKEN from me to give to people that DONT want to better themselves.
You lost me at Dems coined the phrase
If you didn't realize that the expression voodoo economics wasn't coined by Dems, then it makes me wonder how many other things you just don't realize this administration, the previous administration, or politics in general.
The phrase voodoo economics was coined by George H.W. Bush in a debate with Ronald Reagan. The phrase trickle-down economics is not a good thing, as you might have it sound. It's a derogatory phrase that was first used by Republicans as a criticism regarding a dam project John F. Kennedy had planned. He actually was the one who initiated this theory that when the GDP grows, the incomes of all American's will grow. He coined the phrase "a rising tide lifts all boats" when referring to this economic theory, and it was the GOP that countered saying it was trickle-down economics.
If you can't get that right, it makes me wonder how you can judge what is right or wrong with what this administration or the last administration does or has done.
You always forget the phrase *under oath*, which is what lost him his law license sm
and the respect of the Supreme Court Justices who for the first time in history, did not attend the State of the Union address of a sitting president. But I guess all that is okay, too.
We were, you changed it to Bush hatred, another bin Coulter phrase.nm
zz
Nobody called SP a pig. Phrase means JM can call change "change,"
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. JM can call change "change," but he is still 4 more years of W. SP is the one who is running on the lipstick platform. That's why her supporters are trying to accuse O of calling her a pig.
I am an independent....neither party is "my" party.
THis election cycle I believe the best man is a Republican. Do your research. John McCain warned about this in 2005, named Fannie and freddie by name, co-sponsored legislation to control them. Blocked by Democrats, led by Chris Dodd..same guy now trying to fix what he and the Dems broke. Chris Dodd, #1 on contributions list from fannie/freddie, followed closely by #2, your shining knight Mr. Obama. The chickens have come home to roost all right...or should I say the donkeys. :)
At least I have some friends
and they are not hypocritical they are what keep this country safe from wackos like you. Buh-bye, have a nice life if you can keep your bitterness fro ruining it.
My Friends
That is too funny, because as I read your words, I heard his voice in my head, saying it ... and you are so right -- he says it constantly ... between those words and that grin & pause that he does (I guess that's a signal for applause).
I try to look at all the candidates, hear what they have to say and make an informed decision. I try not to fall prey to gossip, personal comments/videos on Youtube, etc. Initially I really did like John McCain -- felt a sincerity from him, but as time went on and he started running this "desperate times call for desperate measures" campaign that like I felt for him disappeared. I feel like all politicians lie, but when the lies are in the same sentence, phrase or paragraph -- that's bad.
Then your friends should have kept their
xx
Friends? I don't think so, sm
.
I have gay friends and I'm
against gay union. They know this too and we have learned to agree to disagree on that one. They are good people and I like them very much, but I cannot condone something that I feel is wrong. That doesn't mean I can't be friends with them. What they do in their life is their business but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it and it also doesn't mean I have to stop being friends with them.
Best friends?
Don't you mean appointees? At least he has the decency to get rid of them for failure to disclose. If you think the last administration was squeaky clean - you have problems.
yup I have purple friends
LOL, yup, my best friends are black, hun?? Had to make sure you made a point of that.how pathetic..For your information, my father's side of the family live and own a lot of land in Va..that is why I keep my ties to the south..I also have friends who are of various colors but I dont make it a point to state I have black friends, brown friends, yellow friends, white friends..friends to me are just that friends..no matter their color or belief..
All the President's Friends
September 12, 2005
All the President's Friends
By PAUL KRUGMAN
The lethally inept response to Hurricane Katrina revealed to everyone that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which earned universal praise during the Clinton years, is a shell of its former self. The hapless Michael Brown - who is no longer overseeing relief efforts but still heads the agency - has become a symbol of cronyism.
But what we really should be asking is whether FEMA's decline and fall is unique, or part of a larger pattern. What other government functions have been crippled by politicization, cronyism and/or the departure of experienced professionals? How many FEMA's are there?
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.
The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
Yesterday The Independent, the British newspaper, published an interview about the environmental aftermath of Katrina with Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst in the agency's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, whom one suspects is planning to join the exodus. The budget has been cut, he said, and inept political hacks have been put in key positions. That sounds familiar, and given what we've learned over the last two weeks there's no reason to doubt that characterization - or to disregard his warning of an environmental cover-up in progress.
What about the Food and Drug Administration? Serious questions have been raised about the agency's coziness with drug companies, and the agency's top official in charge of women's health issues resigned over the delay in approving Plan B, the morning-after pill, accusing the agency's head of overruling the professional staff on political grounds.
Then there's the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, whose Republican chairman hired a consultant to identify liberal bias in its programs. The consultant apparently considered any criticism of the administration a sign of liberalism, even if it came from conservatives.
You could say that these are all cases in which the Bush administration hasn't worried about degrading the quality of a government agency because it doesn't really believe in the agency's mission. But you can't say that about my other two examples.
Even a conservative government needs an effective Treasury Department. Yet Treasury, which had high prestige and morale during the Clinton years, has fallen from grace.
The public symbol of that fall is the fact that John Snow, who was obviously picked for his loyalty rather than his qualifications, is still Treasury secretary. Less obvious to the public is the hollowing out of the department's expertise. Many experienced staff members have left since 2000, and a number of key positions are either empty or filled only on an acting basis. There is no policy, an economist who was leaving the department after 22 years told The Washington Post, back in 2002. If there are no pipes, why do you need a plumber? So the best and brightest have been leaving.
And finally, what about the department of Homeland Security itself? FEMA was neglected, some people say, because it was folded into a large agency that was focused on terrorist threats, not natural disasters. But what, exactly, is the department doing to protect us from terrorists?
In 2004 Reuters reported a steady exodus of counterterrorism officials, who believed that the war in Iraq had taken precedence over the real terrorist threat. Why, then, should we believe that Homeland Security is being well run?
Let's not forget that the administration's first choice to head the department was Bernard Kerik, a crony of Rudy Giuliani. And Mr. Kerik's nomination would have gone through if enterprising reporters hadn't turned up problems in his background that the F.B.I. somehow missed, just as it somehow didn't turn up the little problems in Michael Brown's résumé. How many lesser Keriks made it into other positions?
The point is that Katrina should serve as a wakeup call, not just about FEMA, but about the executive branch as a whole. Everything I know suggests that it's in a sorry state - that an administration which doesn't treat governing seriously has created two, three, many FEMA's.
My friends on the west
coast are still paying $4 a gallon for gas, as of Thursday, anyway.
I cannot plug in my television with antenna and get anything. If I do not have a cable connection I cannot get anything. The analog thing I just read in a publication Lockheed Martin provides to its employees. I have a friend who is an engineer there in Atlanta and he is always sending volumes and volumes of Lockheed stuff; so that is where my information came from.
I'm not sure where it is, but one of your friends from yesterday
kept bugging Debbie about it. Maybe she knows where the rule is.
I think it used to be that we were asked to post links, so as to save disk space for the MTStars website, something like that.
That way, we can click over to read what is posted. Also, it gives you backup to your posts for verfication. Much better to see who's point of view it is, and from what website in your link.
Does anybody know if this rule still exists under the new management??
yep, and you SHOULD be judged by the friends that
nm
Okay, worked together. He was friends with Rev.
nm
Apparently your friends must be among the better off...
Q: What are the current concerns among healthcare workers in the country?
A: The Canadian Healthcare Association, and other concerned bodies, such as the Canadian Nurses Association, have put forward a Common Vision for the Canadian Health System document. It argues that four key areas need improvement in the country's healthcare system: patient waiting times; overall healthcare funding; shortages in personnel and improvement of medical technology; and the expansion of the healthcare system to include home, pharmaceutical, and long-term care.
Moreover, Canadian nurses have expressed particular dissatisfactions with the healthcare system in recent years. In 2002, the Canadian Nursing Advisory Committee delivered a report which recommended increasing the number of nurses, improvements in education, and maximizing the scope of practice of nurses.
The lure of more lucrative salaries has also led to a "brain drain" of professionals to the United States in recent years. Although overall emigration has been relatively small, healthcare professionals constitute a significant proportion of the public sector workers who have chosen to leave Canada for employment in the United States.
Q: What are the current concerns among patients?
A: Waiting times to see specialists and for diagnostic tests have become a point of issue for Canadians. According to a study by the Fraser Institute, a conservative think tank, such waiting times have increased from 13.1 weeks in 1999, to 17.7 weeks in 2003, to 17.9 in 2004. Long waits to undergo elective surgery have also become an issue in recent years, as have crowded emergency rooms in the country's largest cities.
One response to these concerns on the part of patients has been to seek treatment in the United States or overseas. While "medical tourism" is derided by some in Canada as queue-jumping, others see it as a legitimate means of dealing with the healthcare system's shortcomings. The province of Alberta currently reimburses patients who have sought medically necessary physician, oral surgery, and hospital services not immediately available in Canada.
The frequency of adverse events, or errors in treatment that might harm the patient or the outcome of their treatment while hospitalized, has also raised concerns in regards to the country's healthcare system, both among healthcare workers and patients.
Q: What are the current challenges in providing healthcare?
A: In 2004, the federal government and the provinces struck a C$41-billion (US$34.2-billion), 10-year agreement to improve Canada's healthcare system.
At the center of this agreement is an attempt to reduce waiting times. A Wait Times Reduction Fund has been instituted to help the provinces accomplish this. The fund allows the provinces to increase the hiring of healthcare professionals, clear backlogs, increase capacity, and expand ambulatory and community care programs. The provinces have themselves agreed to set targets for acceptable wait times, and have also agreed to cooperate in establishing a common set of criteria to measure wait times across the country.
Tell me, when the long waits to see a specialist, elective surgeries, etc., happen here...where will the canadians go? Where will WE go?
Just asking.
Oh, what a tragedy. But, being friends with a
nm
Pub lesson on how to win friends and
This must be some sort of new maverick style of reaching across the aisle and getting that bipartisan cooperation Americans are so anxious to see again...he just left out the part about looking at his opponents down two barrels of a shotgun.
O has some bad friends. Not accusations,
nm
You have friends in Wasilla?
nm
Tell us who a few of his close friends
shadowy backgrounds. If he and all his followers insist that all his questionable past associations mean nothing, then where are the ones that do mean something to him? Someone had to influence his life.
|
