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

Where is it documented that the man in charge of the bailout...

Posted By: sam on 2008-10-23
In Reply to: by the way - shelly

is Muslim? He's Indian-American by all I can find out. Would not matter if he was Muslim; however, I can't find anything credible saying that he is.


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

Religious "voodoo?" Science has documented and shown that....sm
life begins at conception, those cells are living, have their code, and I have seen my own children on ultrasound as early as 8 weeks (with high risk pregnancies) fully formed, moving all extremities, trying to suck their thumbs, kicking, tiny heart beating away, with everything that you or I have, only inside the womb. Now if you wish to believe that a woman can do with THAT as she wants, so be it, I still have to stand with the pro-choice crowd not because I believe in abortion or that it is okay and not murdering a human being, but because I can see the instances where a woman would be justified in her actions, and let her make her own peach and atonement with God, as we all will. Science more and more is proving out what has been in the Bible all along. I do not think that was a fair or rational characterization of "religion," and it was hurtful and inflammatory. Choose to be atheist or agnostic, Christianity is not "voodoo."
Who put you in charge?
Just because you decided to commemorate 9/11 by not posting on the forum today does not mean that we all have to follow your orders. Maybe some of us have more pertinent ways to commemorate this day. We are all free to choose whether we want to post on the forum today or not. Apparently, you felt free to post a message chastising others.
he is not in charge right now ....looks like it is up to us to help each other
And I am sure that those people will be counting on the charities that are already in place to get through the winter and holidays.
Exactly! O wants to be in charge, yet be
nm
Is Ted Kennedy in charge..
of how many evacuees his state takes in?  I guess I didn't realize that!  Could you explain that further?
Ted Kenney in charge

we'd all end up dead in a watery grave!  


What I want to know is who left you in charge?
nm
Who put you in charge of sway?
nm
We are not in charge of the world, sam.
nm
Has Obama ever been in charge of anything that
nm
Who has been in charge of the economy for the

Democrats own congress....... they are the ones responsible for the complete mess of this economy.   But because there is a republican president, the republicans get the blame. 


Republican president really can't get anything done with an all democrat congress. 


Who put you in charge of focus, Sam?
x
I am glad you are not in charge of that
right where it should. You are admitting to being a smoker now. You really should look back over your posts for the past few months and see what a profile you have painted of yourself!
Looks like Rush is still in charge...LOL

Rush Limbaugh critic Kevin Stevenson ousted as Marathon County Republican Party spokesman



By Robert Mentzer • Wausau Daily Herald • June 2, 2009


The Republican Party of Marathon County has stripped its spokesman of his title less than three months after he wrote a column critical of conservative talk radio star Rush Limbaugh.





Kevin Stevenson said he believes his March guest column in the Wausau Daily Herald criticizing Limbaugh turned local party members against him.

"They felt I was too moderate in what I was speaking and printing," he said.


Stevenson, who characterizes himself as a "John McCain-type of Republican," said the conflict was a microcosm of a national debate about what political message to put forward. A debate at a local Republican meeting on Thursday "got hostile and it got personal," he said.


When Stevenson criticized Limbaugh for saying he wanted President Barack Obama to fail, other local Republicans wrote to the newspaper, arguing that conservatives ought to want Obama's policies to fail.


"This is just part of what you're seeing nationwide," he said. "(Party members) know that I don't agree with Rush Limbaugh. Rush Limbaugh is hurting us more than helping us."


Kevin Hermening, the local Republican Party treasurer and a past president, said although Stevenson's columns were circulated among the party's executive committee, they did not always represent the views of most members.


“He was sharing a moderate view in his columns, which I think is terrific,” Hermening said. "If the leadership had wanted a more moderate position, we would have let him (continue)."


Stevenson, who lives in Lincoln County, was removed when the party adopted a new interpretation of residency -- but he said he considered that an excuse. Stevenson had previously been included because he owns land in neighboring Marathon County.


Party Chairman Joe Wachtel said he disagreed with the decision to remove Stevenson as spokesman, but that he also disagreed with a moderate position.


"I don't think the Republican Party and the conservative movement is going to be served by being Democrat-lite," Wachtel said.


___________________________


Side note:  I wonder if Rush is going to kick Nancy Reagan out of the party since she said nice things about Pelosi......ROFL.


Pretty weak charge if you ask me.

It'll probably be dropped in a few days but not until the media is allowed to have their way with them, and the liberal bloggers tar and feather him.  Does anyone remember travelgate and the Clinton land deal scandals.  I'm sure you dems/liberals don't recall that at all....


Before you start condemning one Republican politician to hell you better take a look into your own party's closet.


JM is totally innocent of this same charge?
publically stepped up and appealed to his supporters to rein it in. O at least tries to do this when he sees tings getting out of hand.
False charge exposed
RE: Obama filed lawsuit that "bullied" banks into giving risky loans.

Buycks-Roberson vs CitiBank Federal Savings Bank 1994. This was a class action lawuit which sought to challenge the practice of redlining, based on the 14th Amendment requirement of "fair and equal treatment for all citizens." The lawsuit charged that CitiBank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. This was settled out of court. Some class members received cash payments and CitiBank revised its discriminatory lending practice policies.

The action was brought against a single bank…CitiBank, though redlining was a widespread practice at the time. Obama DID NOT FILE this lawsuit. He was a junior member of an 8-member team that worked on the case. The lead attorney for CitiBank does not recall ever seeing Obama in the court during the proceedings. Obama charged a total of 2 hours and 50 minutes for his work on the case for reviewing some documents before a deposition and appeared ONCE before the judge to request an extension of time for filing a response to a motion in the case.

This decision did not "force banks" to do anything except to process minority loan applications the same as they were processing loans to white applicants. If this outcome in any way contributed to the mortgage crisis some 14 years later, it would be based on the fact that the banks were already handing out those "bad loans" hand-over-fist to the white applicants…a practice they agreed to extend to ALL applicants as "fair and equal treatment" under the 14th Amendment.

Once the facts get a thorough look-see, it becomes evident that the charges the McCain camp are trying to lay on Obama are (surprise, surprise) patently false.

Who do you propose should be in charge of deciding
You are not in charge of punishing Dr. Ayers...it is a legal matter that evidently was resolved 4 decades ago. Since that time he has become a contributing member of society and it would be a waste of talent to shun him and brand him with a scarlet letter.
Palin is very intelligent and actually been in charge
nm
Whose in charge of this anti-IQ crusade?
An ineffective tactic to use to try to excuse a sitting president's white matter deficit.
Really? Then why are they all still in charge of the purse strings?
They are set to dig us into a bigger, bottomless pit of liberal pet programs and bailouts and stimulus.
It will only get much worse with Obama in charge
He promotes that divide.....he just has a sneaky way of doing it. He lets others do their talking up there, while he says nothing against their racist remarks. The NAACP for instance was formed way back when but really has no place in our society today. Now think about this......if there were a group for ONLY whites (and I don't mean the KKK) which is no doubt where many minds will go, wouldn't there be an uproar about that. They would be called racists....how dare they promote WHITE opportunities, jobs, educations, etc. You're right, forming special interest groups does nothing to promite equality, but I can guarantee you will see more and more racists things coming down the pike; just hide and watch.

So far, they have singled out white males to not give jobs to.....now if a leader sat up there and said those same words about blacks, it would hit the fan and you know it.....

Funny how the liberals just sit up and there and keep their mouths shut, most of them all the way to being without a job, as they are white males as well.
Once again, class, WHO is in charge of the military?
.
Matters not one whit....he is now in charge of
.
Just wondrin' Patty: Who put you in charge . . .
of deciding what is a "sound" law or not?  LOL
As long as Obama is in charge, you better believe it
nm
Agreed 100%. If McCain can't take charge of his own campaign
!
Bush is NOT in charge of the stock market

Wall Street,. Nancy Pelosi, Barney Fife, and the others are making it worse with all their stupid ideas.


They WANT this to happen and give more stimulus checks to people so the people will think they are the greatest since apple pie. 


I don't see any of them trying to figure out what to do that will help us except throw money away to the groups that are keeping the money to pay their bonuses and take trips.


I read your post and thank goodness you are not in charge sm
Do you not understand that it is not okay to imprison people who are innocent? Do you not understand that his is a human rights issue that affects each and every one of us on this planet? Do you think beyond your own fears?
Answer me!

Who put the libs on this board in charge of free speech?
Joe has the right of free speech too. He asked a simple question, which Obama freely answered outlining socialism 101, and what did Joe get for that? A background check! And you can hail free speech and be okay with that in the same breath? Your hypocrisy is showing...and showing...and showing.

And you keep trying, and unsucessfully, to deflect from the true point. Understandably, because your focus is the big "O", the truthgiver, the one who will save the world. LOL. Free speech indeed. You don't believe in free speech unless it benefits you and the big "O."

Nothing in my post said anything about free speech. It just tried (and in vain I understand)...to stay on point...Obama's ANSWER.
guess that's not as bad as 'VP is in charge of the Senate' ...Palin NM
x
my paper said highest number in 14 years - who was in charge then?
x
Really? Pubs in charge of the purse strings? What planet
...no wonder we're in this mess, and it will only get worse.
Bailout

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of our money, frist by inflation and then by deflation; the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks) will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered"


-President Thomas Jefferson


here's your bailout
I think that all the CEOs of the big three along with all their members of the board and whatnot, all the big wigs, that have made millions screwing people over for years and years should dip into their OWN pockets and sell a few houses, cancel a few vacations, cash in a few money markets and get their own companies out of debt.  Then, when the books are balanced, the people who have been making 80,000 a year to push a button should take a pay cut and NOT go on strike and live like the rest of real America.  Then they should be fine.
Bailout
if they fail, do you realize it would affect everyone. Millions of jobs in the auto industry alone. If people don't have jobs, they can't spend money anywhere. Stores will start to close, etc. It will affect everyone.
Bailout
I totally agree 1000% with your analysis - the only time these greedy CEO's give a hoot about us is when they see their profits increase.  You can bet your last five cents that if one of us went to them asking for money - they would call the police!!  It would be interesting to see  the salaries of CEO's in Europe as opposed to what these guys continually fleece us for...
About That First Bailout
Do you remember who told us "we had to act now or we might face dooms day (sic)" with all that bailout money? It was Hank Paulsen and George Bush. We may as well have flushed that first TARP payment down the toilet. There was no accountability, and no one knows where all that money went.

At least the present stimulus package has accountability built into it and some limits as to what can and can't be done with the money.
the bailout IS making

the US a socialist country - compliments of your beloved GWB and McPalin. congratulations you got your wish.


 


No Bailout for the rich
Say no to the bailout.  The FBI is investigating all of these companies for criminal mortgage fraud.
Why the rush for the bailout

There Is No Crisis--Summary by: Chris BowersTue Sep 23, 2008 at 16:22


Things are getting a little suspicious about this crisis.


1) Why did the Bush administration suddenly declare a crisis during the final two weeks when Congress would be in session during his presidency? Is it maybe because, after the election, Congress would know it wasn't dealing with Bush anymore?


2) If this is such a sudden crisis, why is it that the Bush administration was drawing up the plan for this bill for months beforehand?


3) Why is it that Congress is supposed to bail out many banks and firms that are actually quite successful and profitable right now, and not just those that are failing?


4) Why is Paulson blatantly lying to Congress about oversight?


5) Where did the $700 billion figure come from?


6) Why is Paulson urging that debate on the matter be held after the legislation is passed?The burden of proof should always be placed on those who are demanding a huge government bailout, not upon those who are skeptical that one is needed. And yet the questions keep mounting, with no answers in sight.


I am not saying that there is no need for government intervention. I am saying that the case for a $700 billion bailout is far from having been made. Until the case is made, there is no need to go forward. We will elect a new President in 42 days. We swear in a new Congress in 103 days. What is the rush? Why does this all of a sudden need to be done while the Bush administration is still in charge? The case hasn't been made, and answers are slow in coming, if they come at all. Chris Bowers :: There Is No Crisis--Summary


I don't agree with the bailout

We have some savings, but we still live paycheck-to-paycheck, not wanting to touch the savings.  I really don't agree that we taxpayers should have to fund this.  I think that the higher ups that walked away with 100s of thousands or even millions should have to pay for this.  Charge them with fraud and make them give it back.  I certainly don't feel I've put anyone in this situation and therefore don't feel I should have to pay for it. 


only 24% of us support the bailout
Yesterday it was reported only 24% of Americans support the bailout, 56% are opposed so 20% have no opinion. Senators' and reps' offices were flooded with calls and emails all day asking that the bailout be opposed. And I was one of those. Everyone should be contacting their own reps to express their opinions. That's they only way they will know what the people want.
Yes, and how about the bailout, ACORN, and
nm
Well.....look at it this way....if they don't push this bailout...
there are folks who know "where the bodies are buried." There is probably so much we DON'T know about all this...and yes, it is disgusting. Dodd and Frank, if they had an ounce of integrity, would apologize to the American people and resign. Pelosi, if SHE had an ounce of integrity, would demand it. So far John McCain is the ONLY one who has said someone should resign, and that was Christopher Cox, the Republican head of the SEC. He SHOULD resign. So should the treasury secretary, Paulson. Every member of that committee that voted back in 2006 to kill the bill McCain co-sponsored should resign. They should all be investigated criminally as well as far as I am concerned. I know the FBI is looking at Fannie/Freddie but talk about a day late and dollar short after Raines, Johnson, Howard, and Gorelick raped the American public for millions.

You're right. They should ALL have to go and start over.
SNL skit on the bailout. sm
Funny but sad because it is true.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/37758/saturday-night-live-c-span-bailout#s-p1-st-i1
TheSmokingGun/bailout
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1007083aig1.html
AIG spa trip, right after gov. bailout approved. This is disgusting.
Not a bailout, entirely voluntary (nm

x


I think we MT's need a bonus and a bailout!
nm
Again, I don't think the problem is the bailout itself, (sm)
but rather the way it's used, which right now leaves a lot to be desired.  As far as the rest of the country being screwed, well that's coming either way.  We have 2 choices--we can either do nothing, lose millions of jobs and go into a full-blown depression; or we can take a chance with bailing them out (preferably with stipulations) and owe a lot of money.  I think my preference would be to pay more taxes if need be, but still have a job so I could feed my family instead of not being able to do either of the above.
But, the first bailout passed because
the dems had the majority of votes. Am I right or did I lose my mind? DON"T ANSWER THAT QUESTION, PLEASE. LOL