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

They can't see past anything..... easily led!

Posted By: nm on 2009-06-26
In Reply to: Do you even see how ridiculous you look? - Why so angry if you "won"? ..maturity please

nm


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

    They can very easily in this computerized age. nm
    .
    Still a big concern for those not so easily
    Palin's clothes, her trips, family trips. Who cares!!

    If you don't want to hear about it, too bad! I can see where you wouldn't; doesn't look good for him.


    we could easily do what the liberals
    constantly do and spin that out and say that was a set up by the Obama campaign to make McCain supporters look bad. 
    No, I can EASILY understand it. YOU have a
    nm
    You are easily entertained...n/m
    n/m
    YOU are easily aggravated
    LOL!
    And he could easily do that simply by....(sm)
    upholding G. W. Bush's patriot act.  Go figure.
    If Democrats startled more easily ...
    we might not be in the financial situation we find ourselves in today. Just sayin.
    Lucky for me, I am easily entertained . . .
    Chuck is a great new TV show. I still watch Survivor. Big fan of Nip/Tuck. Dr. Who, although that is a British show. I like foreign films, so that isn't the Hollywood crowd either.

    I know this isn't political but I can only take so much endless arguing with the same points being made over and over and over. It's like watching a train wreck. Which reminds me, I like watching Katie Couric on the Evening News, because that is sort of a train wreck too.
    you're easily led... no that should be misled
    -
    You're too easily sidetracked....
    //
    no, you are so easily entertaining us. Thanks a lot. It really nice of you
    to bring some comic relief to this board! 
    Tiny minds = easily boggled...nm
    nm
    I'm a tough cookie and don't get offended easily
    Well I guess you could call it a conflict with myself. On one hand I'd like to believe what they say (that they want a better America and to do good things for Americans and that their plans would be good for the country), but Bill's whole presidency really put a bad taste in my mouth and I was so relieved to have him out of the office. Mind you I'm no fan of Bush, but I was terrified to get Gore in there to continue on with more of the same. Anyway....Gore is a whole nother issue I won't go into.

    I was against Hillary's campaign from the beginning. I never have liked her. I did like her while he was campaigning and for about the first two years of him being president, then started reading and learning things about her (her position at Rose Law firm, what she did to get where she's at, her literally having to be pulled off of Bill by the secret service, the foul language she used towards people, the way she would talk to the secret service, the mysterious deaths, her trying to socialize the health care system, the way she represented the US when she would go over to another country and was presented with a gift and she would turn to Chelsea and make a comment that she thought nobody heard but was picked up on the cameras as her telling Chelsea it was a piece of s@@t and she was not going to wear it, etc, etc. She also said another time to Chelsea that she was tired of doing stuff and having to talk to people (other leaders wives) her were below her "class". This was caught on camera so it's not made up.

    I was turned off by her campaign tactics from the beginning. The lies, her little crying episode when she felt it served it's purpose. The "shame on you Barack" speech she gave all the while she had been putting out lies about him and his plans. It was the kettle calling the otherside black (or whatever that saying is). The real cincher was when she said she was staying in because we have to remember that "Kennedy was assissinated in June, right?" She never once apologized for anything and she blamed it all on the other side. She doesn't and has never taken responsibility for anything she says. She will say something and blame the other side. But it doesn't surprise me because Bill is the same exact way. A lot of what she did I believe was probably at the direction of the campaign advisers (Terry McAuliffe and others), but she is a grown woman and knows better and she could have said no. She inflated herself like when talking about how she is experienced in dangerous situations because she flew into Bosnia when it was under fire and she has answered the "red phone". Those were outright lies and she knew it. Then everyone says, oh she just couldn't remember. Well I was in the Army - believe me you know when your being fired at. Also claiming what Bill accomplished in the white house as if they were her accomplishments. When caught in her lies she laughs it off and says it was a "minor" mistake.

    I do think she could unite the party, but she is choosing to divide it. She says in public she wants a party that is united, but yet she's not telling her supporters that they need to back the nominee. She's telling them that if they march to the convention they have another chance that she could be put on the ticket. She should be telling them that she is not the candidate and she is proud of how far she got but she'll just have to try another time. She is the person who could calm them but she is deciding not too.

    I think I do have a lot of fear with McCain. I do not see much of a difference between Hillary and McCain. They have voted the same way in the senate. So the thought of those two are quite frightening for me. I just hope Obama picks the right VP choice. I do hope Clintons supporters do not march to the convention like they say they are going to. I need to read up on history but believe the last time that happened it was horrible and the party lost. Which brings me to the next point which is I have heard that that is Hillary's plan. She wants McCain to win so that way in four years she can run again and therefore she will do everything she can to make sure Obama loses.

    I read that she is co-chair of the Senate India Caucus and that she and Bill accepted over 360K (she 60K from them and B 300K) and this is a group that is responsible for taking jobs away from Americans and giving them to other countries (India for one) - this means jobs like yours and mine.

    B&H are pushing for a one-world government. They have been trying to get Canada, America & Mexico to become one country with one currency (similar to the Euro), and Hillary wants to be the world leader over it all. This is nothing I heard from any right-wing conspiracy group. This is some document I read somewhere but I can't quote it at this time (would take some research).

    What I don't like about B&H ... Vince Foster (suicide?) and removal of documents from his office, Gennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinski (lies and cover ups), Travelgate, Castle Grande (sham transactions), Cattle futures, Waco, Elian Gonzales, mysterious deaths of James McDougal, Mary Mahoney, Ron Brown, Ed & Kathleen Willey, Jerry Parks, James Bunch, James Wilson, Kathy Ferguson. There at least 35 others but won't list them all. Them accepting illegal funds, destroying the white house before they left and air force one, Hillary saying that she was going to think of the cleaning lady in her office building as a human being. I did get sick of when there was a tragedy and he would be there in front of the camera he had his "sad pouty face" on, but as soon as he thought the camera was off of him he'd go into a laughing state and be quite jovial, then he'd see a camera and back was that sad face again. His lies that he belonged to all these black churches throughout his life. There are other things I can't remember right now.

    When Bill was campaigning for president I heard about all the promises he made, lower the budget, cut in taxes, beter health care for Americans, this, that, and other promises. He never once held good on his promises (but in all fairness the same has happened with other politicians). During Clinton presidency jobs were lost to overseas, and about 3 weeks after he became president our military was cut back so much that America was not safe from it's enemies. Mind you at this time I still thought he was okay, but little by little that was being eroded away.

    One thing about your statement that got me thinking about my opinions about his policies. I may be in the wrong about some of my feelings and its' been so long that I really need to read up about what he did in there. I just disliked him so much that I usually turned him off. I'd hear things here and there (and now I do have to admit I listened to Rush Limbaugh and Fox News a lot at that time) and I do realize that its not fair to judge them on things I heard from them.

    Anyway...you have some very good issues you brought up and to tell the truth I do have to do a bit more research. I think overall is my basic disgust of the lies they have told throughout their careers. The way their "fan base" will not listen to truth and claim that Bill and Hillary are so innocent and never did anything wrong, it was all a conspiracy against them.

    I never did have anything against Bill's affairs. It is not my busness whether he sleeps with other people and I don't find that as disgusting as a lot of people do. Nobody knows what was going on in their lives that brought him to that position and if I had a wife like Hillary I'd probably sleep with someone else too, but all I say is tell the truth. It was the lies and coverup that I had a problem with. I didn't care that he couldn't keep his boys behind closed doors, but be a man and admit it.

    So to sum it up my biggest problem with them is they lie, they manipulate, when caught they say they never said it and when told its on film he comes out and says I'm not going to play that game instead of something like well if its on tape I must have said that and lets talk about that further at another time. I just really lost respect with them. In all fairness for them though I do have to say they are not the only politicians like that.

    One more note is I liked your post. It was long but had some very good points and really is making me think twice about some things. I don't think I've answered all your questions, but you have given me a lot to think about. It hasn't changed my opinion since I first posted but is getting me to think and do some research. Tx.
    Obama followers are so easily fooled....nm

    Good, there's no hatred on the right. Glad to hear, BUT how easily
    you guys forget, selective memory I mean. No one was born yesterday on here. Bill Clinton caught more flack about any and everything than Bush could imagine in his time in the White House. Some on the right would stop at nothing to have the man relieved of his job. So, if you were one to sit tight and not say a word against Clinton while he was a sitting president good for you, but you most definitely were sitting alone.

    Now, don't get me wrong I do not feel the same way about Pres Bush as gt does. I believe God works all things out in the end and he will have his judgement day. Whether he, or anyone else for that matter, rots in hell will be for them and God to decide.
    Conservatives Scare More Easily Than Liberals, Say Scientists

    http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/09/fearmongering-h.html


    A quick look at some of the posts on this board would seem to corroborate the above.


    They certainly have in the past. sm
    but their headline didn't intentionally mislead like the one posted above. Oh, let's face it, the media is just not what it used to be.  I don't trust them at all.
    from the past
    I am so-o-o sick of the party bickering, finger pointing and verbal barbs blaming the other guy, I am remembering a line from my past "Alfred E. Newman for president." Back then it was a joke but it is starting to sound good again!
    That's because most do not look at his past tax
    //
    You mean once we look past the
    seas of humanity jumping for joy on November 4th, the rafters-busting crowds that are descending on DC for the inauguration and the hordes in the global bleachers cheering him on? Four years is sufficient time to build a slam dunk of a track record but in the absence of worthy GOP opponents, all he has to do is stay alive between now and then to get re-elected. Personally, I hope that they put SP, Hasselbach and/or Coulter up there, the dream team of certain defeat. Sure doesn't look like they have much more than that to offer at the moment.
    Yes, definitely ignore the past if it does not...
    fit your agenda. It clouds nothing. Somehow I cannot see you blasting JFK for Viet Nam. Just cannot see that happening...though you swear you would. You just can't bring yourself to be disguated about something that is not happening NOW? Wanna talk about Carter and Iran? Oh no, we can't do that, that was in the PAST.

    Well hang in there piglet...as soon as Congress pulls funding, the troops are brought home because of it, Viet Nam revisited, the horror that will become Iraq when that happens making NOW look like a walk in the park...you will be able to ignore THAT as the past also.

    Must be nice.
    There is nothing in McCain's past...
    of radical leftwing socialist politics. Nor does he think there should be absolutely no restrictions on abortion, up to and including allowing babies who survive abortion to be left to die. Tell me...how do you reconcile your Christian principles with that? Do you think the Jesus you know would condone that? For ANY reason?
    we have now gone way past rude..
    to downright disgusting. It probably also take a MENSA brain to call someone else pathetic, little, loser because they don't think the same as you. Give it a rest already people.
    No, I was responding to the past above yours, sorry,
    did I get it wrong? yikes - I meant that for the 'first of all' post...
    I have felt in the past...
    that I was being attacked for saying something that was never really meant to be offensive. I feel that we should all be able to act like adults and refrain from personally attacking anyone. I just thought that the response was unnecessarily nasty. I hope you have a great evening! I hope the other person does, as well.
    I think JM was up past his bedtime.

    Past and future
    Stop dwelling in the PAST.
    Look into the FUTURE.
    The last past 8 years did not work for anybody.
    What we need is change. REAL change.
    Summon it up, we do not need
    your pagelong lectures. Who has time for this?
    The election is tomorrow, thanks God.
    Go, Obama!
    Can't live in the past - have to look to

    The PAST says a lot about what you are today.
    nm
    past that point
    http://www.youtube.com/user/visionvictory



    It's not the past administration?
    What color are your eyes? Brown? Thought so.
    But you don't do that. You only discuss the democratic past.

    In order to smear it.


    No talk about the 12 prior years of Reagan and Bush.


    U.S. and past civilian deaths

    U.S. and British forces bombed Dresden, Germany with the death of approximately 225,000 civilians, and it was intended as a purely civilian bombing. 


    From a history publication (with references to LeMay also made by Robert McNamara in The Fog of War):


    When news concerning the bombing of Dresden got out, it led to an uproar that had to be quieted by cynical denials that this was U.S. or British policy. But it was, and it continued, now against Japan. In March 1945, more than 100,000 Japanese were killed in a firebombing raid on Tokyo as “canals boiled, metal melted, and buildings and human beings burst spontaneously into flames” (John Dower, War Without Mercy: Race & Power in the Pacific War [Pantheon Books, 1986]). By August 1945, 58 Japanese cities had been firebombed and the bomber commander, General Curtis LeMay, had to curtail his raids because he had run out of incendiary bombs. After the war, Le May remarked “I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.” Instead he was promoted, eventually heading the Strategic Air Command, where he advocated a pre-emptive nuclear “first strike” against the Soviets. During the Vietnam War, Le May notoriously called to “bomb them [the North Vietnamese] back into the Stone Age.”


    It is nice to look to the future and not the past.
    You are quite wrong about my stance on Vietnam. Don't make the presumption that you know me at all.

    One thing that I do know is that you cannot change the past. You want to bog yourself down with useless information knock yourself out. Our government tends to not pay attention to those details of the past in the way they operate today. If they did, Bush would have never invaded Iraq. Perhaps you are making your speeches to the wrong audience? You will never convince a liberal that war is just.

    As I have stated before, I am strictly anti-war, no matter who, what, where, and why. War does nothing but fund hate and line pockets of men who profit from them and kills the innocent as an after thought, and it's excused because, hey, that's war isn't it?

    The longer our troops stay in Iraq, the more hate it is going to foster. This military pseudo occupation has to stop and the humanitarian effort needs to start, period.

    Or better yet, why don't you go there and explain to the Iraqi people and our military men and women who are doing their fourth or fifth tour and tell them why they are still there. There's your audience, try and convince them.


    Umm...2003...isn't that the PAST, piglet....
    I thought you were interested in NOW. :-)
    No need to go past the Malkin byline.
    su
    Look at his past political career....
    while he was an organizer in Chicago he pushed through legislation with earmarks beneficial for his benefactors...Tony Rezko and the Daley political machine, because that is what it takes to get ahead in Chicago politics. He made a somewhat meteoric rise...and that only happens when you have the right kind of political support and you repay that support.

    One of the first things he did as senator was steer over a million dollars in earmarks to his wife's employer...who had just previous to that DOUBLED her salary.

    He has a long-standing relationship with William Ayers...a man who hates this country. Among his advisors are people on record as saying Hugo Chavez is a great champion of Democracy.

    That is what I am talking about regarding his history. He is not going to change anything. He is a consummate politician, the most liberal senator in the senate, to the left of Ted Kennedy even. It will be politics as usual. He personifies Washington politics as usual, and so does his running mate...been there 30 years.

    Sorry...I see past the bio the media has created and look at his political career. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak.

    I invite you to get and read the book "The Case Against Barack Obama." It lays it all out there for you with verifiable facts about the earmarks, the Daley machine, William Ayers, the whole thing.

    But only if you are interested in both sides. I am not trying to fight with you. Just offering a source.

    Have a good night!
    There has been a big swing in past few days of
    nm
    I would not put it past an extremist republican to put something...sm
    like that out there and make it look like the democrats had something to do with it. Anyone who truly had the democratic party at heart would never think of lowering themselves to these kinds of tactics.
    The truth about his past associations....
    would be a good start.
    sam's right on this one. Mainly the dems in power through the past several...sm
    years have abused their power and positions, and taken advantage of the situation.

    While I believe a few of the republicans stood by and let it happen, they are not the majority in this.

    Rich liberal democrats on Wall street and in Congress/Senate, not to mention Bill Clinton and his cronies, are the ones that bear the most blame.


    And some of them are crying the loudest blaming George Bush, when it's their own fault.




    Sam has posted the names and dates and all. It is the truth. Research it yourselves. Just because you don't like what she has to say, means that it's wrong.







    Ran this past my brother who is a lawyer and...sm
    a republican I might add (much to my chagrin) and he said it is a frivolous lawsuit. He added, which I already knew, it does not matter where he was born, who his father was, who he was adopted by, or where he went to school. His mother is an American citizen and he is therefore an American citizen, period. This is all just smoke and mirrors, lies, diversions from the real issues.
    the Right-to-lifers cant see past their own noses.
    They oughta consider pulling them out of the bible every now and then and take a breath of fresh air. They sound like their brains are dying a 'slow and agonizing death' by asphyxiation. that's what happens to people when they choose to live and breathe that fairytale, with all of its voodoo. They all live in the Dark Ages.
    Can't ge past the ignorance of the first sentence here.
    the constitution is not a static document and is, in fact, a living, dynamic, changing, vital document. To wrap you brain around this concept, consider this. The orignal Constitution contained 10 amendments. Amendments 11 through 27 commenced over time as such: 1795, 1804, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1913x2, 1919, 1920, 1933x2, 1951, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971 and 1992.

    There. You see? The (progressive) authors of the constitution in their wisdom provided the mechanism of amendement, that would allow for change and growth. That makes it a living, breathing, dynamic document. Got it?

    Next time you try to interpret Obama's book, watch your step.
    my post was not talking about the past
    My post was in direct reference to the OP "blaming" Bush for something that isn't his fault. DHL is looking to the future and that is why they are laying off people. Not because of anything that's happened in the past.
    JTBB, you know where I have stood in the past.....sm
    but don't you see, WE have to try to change this around, calling names and playing the blame game, inflammatory insults, may all look cool on a board, but we have to find a way to get beyond this putrid miasma that the political system has become and start over, banking overhaul, immigration overhaul, new corporate business overhaul, social overhaul, and if these people we voted into office would do WHAT THEY WERE SWORN INTO OFFICE TO DO, we could all steer this sinking ship in the right direction. I am not about to start singing KUMBAYA in a loud voice, just sick of insulting rhetoric that gets us NOWHERE!
    You're just whistling past the
    In order to secure these pathetic "signs" of improvement, Obama is taking us down the road of ruination. And, like the rats who followed the Pied Piper, it's very clear you don't have the faintest idea what's coming.
    You will win nothing by continuing to obsess about the past. Move on. nm


    I appreciate the deletion from this board in the past few days...sm
    Especially when they come here just to bash.


    When you can't defend the present why do you always bring up the past?