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

Wait. I'm confused. I thought the Maverick and Rogue

Posted By: were teh change candidates...sm on 2008-10-29
In Reply to: Change....I'm so sick and tired of that mantra. - sm

It's not so much change "into" something else...more like change "away from" where we've been. Chicken Little prognostications are prejudicial and unfounded. Judging the last 8 years and 90%...not so much.


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

Oh really? So the Maverick and the Rogue
When their poster boy cannot stand up to the glare of scruitiny, he is suddenly off limits? O camp is simply following the red camp lead, who insist that character counts....and crediblity, for that matter. You pick your issue, and I'll pick mine. He is a sham, a huckster turned hustler, self-serving, unable to stay on task, lurching around from one plan to another and a cheap opportunist...in many ways, much like the candidates who planted him in front of Obama in the first place. Socialist arguments are not at all viable when launched by witch hunting mobs who consistently demonstrate no understanding of the term and double standards when faced by academic challenges that apply the same socialist standards to their own candidates...standards that they themselves have defined repeatedly. Hypocrisy can be a strong turn-off for undecided voters trying to make up their minds. If you get to point that out every time you turn around, then hey, I'll take my turn every now and again. It's a free country, after all, isn't it?
Wait. I'm confused. Just yesterday we saw
NOTHING is more important from a president than - Natl Security. THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH. This appeared just three threads below this one.

So which is it, GOP? Natl security or the economy? Both? Neither? I am anxiously awaiting my next directive from on high.
O was wise ... wait... wait... I'm rolling in the aisle.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Osamabama 'distances' himself from every lame association he ever had with his rat pack of radical nut job friends.

And if he's lucky enough to get elected, he's going to distance himself from his fawning flock as soon as his advisors tell him there's no way in hades to pay for his free po'folk tax cuts he promised without throwing the economy into the tank.
min-Maverick

applied for and accepted per diem travel money from Alaskan tax payers while staying in her own home.  Over $16,000.  Reformer . . .  against wasteful govt spending . . . honest?  you decide.  oink.


 


Sp, the min-maverick

sought federal earmarks to study halibut and baby seals.  (Maybe to determine best size of club to use?)


 


Oh she's a Maverick that's for sure. sm
She'll install a tanning bed in the gov. mans. at the expense of the people, but as mayor she was charging rape victims for their exams.  Now there is a woman we should all look up to.
Maverick
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain
Maverick squared

John McCain is indeed adventurous; his selection of an untested running mate whom he had met only once attests to his willingness to take a gamble. Even at the cost of popularity in his party, McCain has often been a politician of stern principle. These are engaging qualities; and ones shared to some degree by Sarah Palin, the vice-presidential nominee. The pair were presented this week by some supporters as "maverick squared."


But these are the attributes not of an American president but of a defiant prisoner in a Hanoi prison camp; an unbowed dissident in the Soviet Union; or head of state in one of those countries with a presidency sufficiently powerless that it can be given as a lifetime achievement award to the keeper of a nation's conscience.


PictureBy contrast, the American presidency is an executive role. Decisions require deliberation; principle must be put to one side in the interest of a messy compromise; pride must be swallowed. My personal test is a hypothetical reenactment of the Cuban Missile Crisis. If McCain were president, could he really ignore the more belligerent rantings of America's enemies? Would he, like Jack Kennedy, have made the face-saving concession that helped the Soviet Union withdraw missiles from Cuba? If the phone rings at 3am in the White House, it's McCain the proud martyr I worry about rather than careful Barack Obama.


Watching the Maverick's

campaign fall down around his knees this week has been amusing.  His VP selection has been judged as a political choice only by 79% of the nation. Her poll numbers have dropped 10 points.  He thinks Spain is in this hemisphere.  He was against the bailout of AIG and then 24 hours later for it.  He now claims, after 24 years, that he is FOR regulation after innumerable remarks about being against it.  The great joy that his supporters professed at Lady deRothchild's defection was erased when she made that redneck remark. It's over.  He just looks like a desperate fool now.


 


mrs. maverick does not like mcain
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/weekinreview/05schwartz.html?_r=1&no_interstitial&oref=slogin
THE TRUE MAVERICK (MC CAIN)

He may consider himself a "Maverick" and he may have "Love for Country" -- but his love is for men (military) and he has a disrespect for women as you will see in the following video clip -- but he will take votes from women (anything to win).


As you see John McCain allow someone to say this about Hillary (I not a fan) and not correct it or call the person on it -- and even laughs at it -- shows his true colors. 


He called his wife a C___ in public, I hate to think what he calls her at home.  His poor daughters are probably referred to "female dogs" on a daily basis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLQGWpRVA7o


(WHERE IS THE RESPECT FOR WOMEN?)


LETS FACE IT:   John McCain has "war on the brain" and you can tell by his actions that he truly feels that women have no place in the military.  Sometimes I wonder if he is running for "President of the United States" or "President of the Military of the United States." 


And yes, he is too old to lead -- just as someone would be too young to lead with the constitutional age qualification being 35.  I guess when they wrote the constitution they didn't imagine that they would have to cap it at the top, that anyone past retirement age in their Mid 70's would think they were caple of running the country.  Retirement age is 65 -- go enjoy your grandkids or something.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWX5u69hmzY&feature=user


(SENIOR MOMENTS)


 


mini-Maverick instructed by

judge prior to her election to quit harassing her sister's ex-husband and trying to get him fired by filing endless complaints against him with his boss.  After she elected, and trooper had already been disciplined by his superiors, she insisted on going after him anyway.  Rule of law . . . anybody?


 


mini-Maverick sought

federal earmarks to fund research on halibut and baby seals.  (Maybe to determine correct size of club?)


 


But he's the MAVERICK that stands up to his own party - nm
x
My opinion only. If John McCain was truly a maverick...sm
and wanted to have a fool-proof ticket, he would have nominated Michael  Bloomberg the mayor of New York City for VP, but that would not have cut it with the religious right,  I think he would have brought the most votes switching from Democrat Independent and ensure him the presidency. 
Plus - does the Republican party understand the meaning of MAVERICK?
Agree with you - what did they expect with her zero experience (in foreign policy) AND the fact that she's under investigation?

Re: maverick. There are subtle variations of this word like "eccentric" that could apply to just about anyone, but the central meaning is 'nonconformist'

When you look at someone who has VOTED WITH GEORGE BUSH 90% OF THE time, where do you see 'nonconformist'?

And this from a man who was hammered by Bush when they went toe to toe. Please sir can I have another?

I see REPACKAGED MATERIAL, not 'maverick.'

That said, I have TONS of respect for his POW experience - all the MORE reason for him to NEVER ALLOW AMERICA TO ENGAGE IN WARS BASED ON LIES!!!

What's nonconformist about his support for our current fake war?

He should under the banner of HYPOCRITE, not maverick.
Wait, wait - see message
I see the cloud opening and a light coming through... maybe I'm going to have an epiphany and realized I should have voted for him all along. HA HA HA
Ok - still confused
I'm reading all these posts to the original poster and I am just lost. I have no idea what all this means and don't know what it has to do with politics. Guess I am just dense tonight.
You got me confused with sam. I really
nm
I'm a little confused.
I watched Bush's blurb last night. Can someone clearly explain to me how what he is proposing will get us out of trouble? I'm being sincere, I just don't get it.
I'm a little confused...
what happened? I'm sorry I haven't been watching the news lately... :(


I'm confused . . .
You respond to one divisive post with your own divisive post, but you agree with me? I am an independent who has actually voted for Republican, Democrat and third-party candidates, so I am certainly not closed minded. I am just bored reading the same arguments over and over and over.
ok, am way too confused
too many posts, too late in the day, not enough caffeine, think I better take a break from this. My apologies if I offended you. I just have very strong beliefs and I get defensive when people bash me and I defend myself and they turn around and say its all my fault.

Anyway...again apologies if I offended you and many apologies if I've been replying to the wrong person.
I'm Confused SM



I'm a little  confused.  Let me see if I have this straight . .  . 

* If  you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your grandparents,  you're
 'exotic,  different.'
*  Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers,  a  quintessential American
story.

* If  your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic  Muslim.
*  Name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a  maverick.



*  Graduate from Harvard law School and you are  unstable.
*  Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're  well grounded.


       * If  you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer,  become

the  first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a  voter
registration drive that registers  150,000 new voters, spend 12
years as a Constitutional Law  professor,  spend 8 years as a  State
Senator representing a district with  over 750,000 people, become
chairman of the state Senate's  Health and Human Services  committee,
spend 4 years in the   United  States Senate representing  a
state of  13 million people  while sponsoring 131 bills and  serving
on  the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and  Veteran's
Affairs committees, you don't have  any real leadership experience.


      

* If  your total resume is: local weather girl,  4 years on the  city
council and 6 years as the mayor of  a town with less than 7,000
people, 20 months as the governor of  a state with only 650,000
people, then you're qualified to  become the country's second
highest ranking  executive.
  

*  If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years  while
raising 2 beautiful daughters, all  within Protestant churches,
you're not a real  Christian.


     


























* If  you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and  left
your  disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month,  you're
a  Christian.

*  If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex  education,
including the proper use of birth  control, you are eroding the
fiber of  society.


   * If  , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only,  with


no  other option in sex education in your state's school  system
while your unwed teen daughter ends  up pregnant , you're very
responsible.

 
*  If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a  position
in a  prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her  inner
city  community, then gave that up to raise a family, your  family's
values don't represent   America 's.


    

      * If  you're husband is nicknamed 'First Dude',  with at least  one


DWI  conviction and no college education, who didn't register  to
vote  until age 25 and once was a member of a group that  advocated
the  secession of Alaska from the   USA , your family is  extremely
admirable.

OK,  much clearer now.

I think you are a little confused sm
It's not about giving part of my money to you, it's about fairness in taxes. Right now, GW Bush gives a great deep tax cut to people making over $250K and he is just going to take that tax break and apply it to those making less and who are now struggling with their salaries trying to pay for gas etc. A lot of the time, the rich aren't even asking for the greater tax break... GW just applied it across the board. They will still be rich but the middle class needs a break. This isn't about welfare. It's about working families like you and your husband. You will not get a handout. You will still pay taxes but you will not pay a inordinate amount that is out of proportion to your income. That's all it is.
I'm confused...
in your original post you were talking about minimum wage earners and then you say you paid them very well - which is it? Not trying to argue, just trying to understand who thinks minimum wage is paying very well?
I'm confused. Her? Him? Who?
nm
I think you are confused.
You contradict yourself in your own post.

you must be confused
My previous post said PEOPLE were to blame for not living within their means. Nobody forced them to take out loans they knew darn good and well they would never be able to pay back.

It really burns me that I am going to pay for THEIR stupidity. I live within my means. Everyone else should too.

I seriously don't think you mean to say that they were forced into taking these loans out. If that's what you meant, you must be delusional.
I am NOT confused.
I did not say they were forced to take them out--I said that lenders were forced to give them out. Had that not happened, this mess would not have happened. It does NOT just affect the people who live outside their means, it affects the whole economy; therefore, I hold those responsible for forcing the loans to be given more responsible than those greedy enough to take them! If you see it differently, perhaps you are delusional.
you are confused
America is very unusual in that if you are born here you are a citizen. Most other countries are NOT like that! You are a citizen of the country of your parents! Please look this UP!
Oh, I am NOT confused, but I would be if I
nm
I think you have me confused

with another poster.  I have 3 kids, all teens.  My husband and I both work 2 jobs.  The last vacation we had that was more than a day's drive from our home ---- oh yeah, never.  We live in the midwest and have never even seen the ocean. 


I disagree about the minimum wage hike being the answer.  The problem is the huge percentage of the population that has zero work ethic.  Even if you raised the minimum wage, those with the entitlement personality would still only work to get enough for their immediate gratification.  They won't do the math and see that if they stayed in this higher-minimum-wage job for an entire year they would finally get ahead of the game.  They only want to get ahead of the game on somebody else's blood, sweat and tears.  I don't feel sorry for them if they are not willing to work. 


It's not fair for the young teen who is busting his butt at McDonald's or some other minimum wage job to sock it away for college or his first car to get let go because the minimum wage was raised.   


I'm glad you want to help people - I do too. It's just not the right solution to the problem.  Dear.


I don't think they are the ones who are confused, here.

You must have me confused with
someone else.  I have never quoted the bible. 
You must have me confused with
someone else.  I have never quoted the bible.    135?  Really? I would think that'd help you keep posters and their messages straight. 
You must have me confused with
someone else.  I have never quoted the bible.    135?  Really? I would think that'd help you keep other posters and their messages straight. 
I'm doing okay, just a little confused (LOL

I'm starting to get some rather worrisome, more classic symptoms of my cystic fibrosis, so I might not be around as much for a while again.)


As far as JTBB, I hope she's okay, but I doubt that anything could hold her back.  Same with "m".  And I'm glad.  You and those two are my favorites on this board, and if there weren't polite, decent, "follow the Golden Rule" type on this board, I'd have no reason at all to visit here.


Don't know if you'll be seeing me in the next few days.  If not, I hope you have a great week.  You're definitely a class act. 


By the way, you're welcome, but the way I see it, it wasn't even a compliment, it was merely the truth!


I just thought it might be nice to hear an original thought. sm
I guess I was reaching.
Poor kid, he is confused, isn't he?

This is exactly what I mean when I say America is very confused.nm
z
These people are obviously confused

The U.S. is not Israel.  Shouldn't they should be demonstrating in Jerusalem.  


I'm confused. Who do you hate more...
nm
I'm confused - can somebody explain

Okay, I don't have a fancy law degree.  Did sit on jury duty for a week some years ago, but this I don't understand.  I thought there was something about rumors and gossip was not a legal basis in a case, but today I heard this (on a more liberal station), that there is an investigation into what Governor Sarah Palin did to her ex-brother-in-law, and the lawyers on Obama's side are having people testify under oath to what they've heard as rumor and gossip and it will be included in the investigation.


Can they do that?  Like I say I'm not a lawyer, but I always thought rumors and gossip were not allowed in testimonies.


Hey, i think you have me confused with that other poster!
I was being sarcastic about conforming. I see what Bush has gotten us. I'm on your side!
sorry, my little brain got confused by all the
If my grandma, mother, etc died today, I wouldn't say any of those things because I would be with my family grieving the loss.  Obviously, Obama doesn't care that much or he'd be there with his family. 
You are a bit confused, dear.
I also bike, so spare me your suggestions, especially since it is quite evident that it has not really done a whole lot in the way of relieving your frustrations. You might want to bump it up. Perhaps you could try doubling your current schedule. It might start to make a dent in all that resentment you exude.

I'm not the sm who posted the article or ditzil (both of whose posts contained nothing but upbeat sentiment) which YOU decided to take issue with (and in your next breath are now trying to promote "positivity.") When you got all snippy, ditzil called you on it in no uncertain terms, with which I agree with because she described the tone of your post most accurately as sounding profoundly miserable and alienated. I simply chimed in to lend her my support and did not start anything here. In fact, you might want to look at the thread and notice it did not turn south until you showed up.

Your third paragraph has confirmed what I originally suspected. You sounded rather disingenuous in your other post when trying to claim to be supportive of Obama "for all the right reasons." My post to you has nothing to do with "whirling," little to do with your opinion and everything to do with your stinky attitude, so your attempts to belittle "crats" is a nonsequiter.

Your fixation on the chili dogs and cheesey fries perhaps can be explained by some unrequited calorie envy you harbor as you maintain that svelte 118-pound perfect bod. It certainly would explain why you are in such a bad mood. In any case, the point of the OP, ditzil and some of the posts that appear below was to talk about the difference between O and W, i.e., getting down with the public versus keeping above the fray of the hoi-polloi and the relief they feel to have a Prez who is more down-to-earth.

Guess you are just one of those folks who would rather gnash your teeth and regurgitate a whole bunch of ugly than to try to follow a thread and understand what the posters are really trying to say.
You are a bit confused, dear.
I also bike, so spare me your suggestions, especially since it is quite evident that it has not really done a whole lot in the way of relieving your frustrations. You might want to bump it up. Perhaps you could try doubling your current schedule. It might start to make a dent in all that resentment you exude.

I'm not the sm who posted the article or ditzil (both of whose posts contained nothing but upbeat sentiment) which YOU decided to take issue with (and in your next breath are now trying to promote "positivity.") When you got all snippy, ditzil called you on it in no uncertain terms, with which I agree with because she described the tone of your post most accurately as sounding profoundly miserable and alienated. I simply chimed in to lend her my support and did not start anything here. In fact, you might want to look at the thread and notice it did not turn south until you showed up.

Your third paragraph has confirmed what I originally suspected. You sounded rather disingenuous in your other post when trying to claim to be supportive of Obama "for all the right reasons." My post to you has nothing to do with "whirling," little to do with your opinion and everything to do with your stinky attitude, so your attempts to belittle "crats" is a nonsequiter.

Your fixation on the chili dogs and cheesey fries perhaps can be explained by some unrequited calorie envy you harbor as you maintain that svelte 118-pound perfect bod. It certainly would explain why you are in such a bad mood. In any case, the point of the OP, ditzil and some of the posts that appear below was to talk about the difference between O and W, i.e., getting down with the public versus keeping above the fray of the hoi-polloi and the relief they feel to have a Prez who is more down-to-earth.

Guess you are just one of those folks who would rather gnash your teeth and regurgitate a whole bunch of ugly than to try to follow a thread and understand what the posters are really trying to say.
sorry, I'm confused. Are you referring to GW
regarding historic precident?

Funny you should quote BJ. That was my argument against the Patriot Act.
No she is not confused, Beck has taken up
btw, I don't mean to offend you with the Colbert clip. It just came to mind as an example when I read the thread.
Yes, you are a bit confused. I answered
your posts - this is a free forum, isn't it? - and you referred to me as JTBB.

Do not try to justify your insensitivity with 'I was just joking', this is lame. Because you were NOT joking. You find all the torture and cruelty done to prisoners amusing and entertaining, as you decorate your comments with .. 'LOL, ROFL, Geez etc....'