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

Who's going to explain to your son that Bush couldn't care less

Posted By: Libby on 2005-09-25
In Reply to: Let me tell you something, gt. - Army Mom

what happens to him AFTER he gets home, God willing that he is fortunate enough to get home in one piece!











Full funding for veterans health care in the future – Senator Durbin supports permanent, mandatory funding for veterans health care. He believes that veterans health care is an earned benefit that shouldn’t be subject to political deal-making. To accomplish this, he has co-sponsored the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2005 which makes Veterans health a “must fund” item so that it not subject to the cuts and shortages of the annual discretionary budget process.


Responding to Administration Failure to Adequately Fund Veterans Health NowThe Bush Administration requested more than $80 Billion in supplemental funding for war related costs in 2005 but not one extra penny for veterans. Senator Durbin found this to be unacceptable and supported an amendment offered by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) to the 2005 Iraq supplemental spending bill to increase funding for veterans by $2 billion. The Murray amendment included a proposal by Senator Durbin to expand VA treatment capability for veterans suffering from Post-traumatic stress disorder. The amendment was defeated, with Republican leaders and the Bush Administration arguing that closing the VA funding gap was not an emergency. Just weeks later, the VA admitted that it was indeed more than $1 Billion short of needed funds in the current year and would be short for the next year as well. Durbin joined Murray and others in responding with renewed legislation for added funds for the VA and this time the measure was passed.


Helping veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder – Senator Durbin continues to push for additional VA funding and staff to help veterans suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) officials at six of the seven VA facilities visited by the GAO said they might not be able to meet the demands for PTSD treatment of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.


Welcome Home G.I. Bill, increased health care, education and financial support for veterans – Senator Durbin introduced the “Welcome Home GI Bill” which, like the original G.I. Bill offered at the end of World War II, will provide a package of benefits for returning veterans to ease their transition to civilian life. This bill would provide up to five years of health coverage for veterans who have no other insurance, as well as $5,000 tax-free for a home down payment. It also roughly doubles current levels of veterans’ educational benefits to $75,000 over four years.


Protecting veterans from harsh new bankruptcy rules – Senator Durbin sponsored a successful amendment to exempt from the harsh “means test” of the new federal bankruptcy law those disabled veterans whose debts are incurred primarily while they were serving on active duty. This successful addition to the new law provides protection


Concurrent Receipt of Both Retirement and Disability Payments – Senator Durbin feels strongly that military retired pay should not be reduced because a military retiree is also eligible for veterans' disability compensation awarded for a service-connected disability. Currently, a retiree can only receive both benefits in full if he or she is 50% or more disabled. To improve this situation, Senator Durbin has co-sponsored the Retired Pay Restoration Act (S. 558) which allows the receipt of both military retired pay and veterans' disability compensation with respect to any service-connected disability.


Senator Durbin Works to Help the Families of
Fallen Service Members


Increased support for surviving spouses and children of fallen service members – With Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH), Senator Durbin is pushing for substantial increases in health, education and financial benefits for surviving spouses and children of service members who die serving our nation. Their bill, S. 21, calls for increasing the “death gratuity” from $12,500 to $100,000; increasing the monthly compensation for surviving spouses to $1,500 per month plus an additional $750 per month for each surviving child. It provides surviving children with no-cost health care until they are turn 21 (23 if they are in school). And it increases education benefits for children and spouses to $80,000 each. Senator Durbin has been adamant that the increased death gratuity should be paid to the families who lose loved ones due to either combat or non-combat deaths.


Military Retiree Survivor Benefit Equity Act of 2005 – Senator Durbin is a co-sponsor of this bill which allows the spouse of a retired military member who dies from a service connected disability to receive benefits from both Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) paid by the Veteran's Administration and the military in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Currently the law forbids surviving families from receiving both benefits in full.

 
   




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

I couldn't care less what you think! (nm)
I will live a happy life no matter what you think of me. Frankly, I don't give you a second thought.
I couldn't care less whether he has
a party or not and who he has attend the party.  However, I do have a problem if it is taxpayer money being used.  If he is footing the bill himself, he could have disco fever every night at the WH for all I care.  I just cannot imagine him footing the bill though and I believe taxpayer money is being spent wastefully and that is what makes me mad.
Actually, I really couldn't care less. I'm
N-M
Care to explain?
x
I couldn't care less who he detains

on his land.  That is his private property and he has every right, IMO, to do what he has done.  There is no reason why illegals should have more civil rights than Americans do in our country.  That is just insanity.  This will do nothing but spring up more illegals trying to score easy money off of Americans who have land down there.  Seriously......we need to bring our troops home and keep these illegals out of our country.  I may cost money to keep troops down there but it sure as sh!t would save us money for paying for more illegals in our country.


BTW, anyone nuts enough to vacation in Mexico is just that......nuts.  I absolutely refuse to ever go to that country with all the kidnapping, etc.  No reason for my vacation money go to support that country since a lot of our American jobs have gone there.  They will get no money from me if I can help it.


Ahem....I couldn't care less how many times Clinton...
"had a cigar" with Lewinsky. As a "values" voter, my problem was that he lied before the grand jury (and what he lied ABOUT has nothing to do with it) and that is a felony. He is an attorney, for pete's sake, he fully KNEW he was committing perjury. If he had an ethical bone in his body he would have resigned. Not sure who you are referring to with the other issue...Rudy Guiliani maybe? So far as I know he has not committed any felonies. He is not my guy at this point and probably will not be, but it would not be because he had a mistress...it would be because he is not pro life.
Who are "you guys">>>>I couldn't care less about Ewards
00
Pardon me, but I couldn't care less if you approve of my opinion or my humor

This is the liberal board.  It's very interesting that when one of you supposedly disappears, another shows up instantly to take the first one's place. 


If you are truly interested in discussing this issue, then please tell me the points with which you disagree rather than rant and rave with personal attacks on my opinion and/or sense of humor.


Bush couldn't orchestrate a trip to
the bathroom.
Bush doesn't care anything

about terrorists.  If he did, he'd START by securing our borders to help keep them out.  Instead, governors are forced to declare states of emergencies because BUSH DOESN'T CARE.


Instead, we are now dealing with terrorists who are much better at their "trade" now, gratis Bush, who has enabled them to hone their skills in Iraq.  I personally think Bin Laden should send Bush a thank you note.  Iraq was NOT a terrorist's haven before it was invaded by America.  Bush did that.


We are DEFINITELY less safe, and we're losing the respect of the entire world a little more every day, especially with the likes of Pat Robertson and those of his ilk publicly advocating the assassination of a president of another country.


I want our borders sealed so these animals can't get in here.  And when they do get in because our president couldn't care less if Americans die, I want them KILLED.  I have no sympathy for terrorists, and the fact that some people on this board think if someone is liberal and against this unethical war, they love terrorists.  That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, and these people apparently believe it.  Nobody can debate or reason with skewed thinking like that.


The best we can do on this board is to continue to politely, intelligently debate with and inform each other of issues, ignore the ones who want to do nothing but start trouble, and maybe the respect and intelligence and civility will bore them to tears and they'll go back to ripping wings off of baby birds or whatever fun stuff they do to pass the time.


 


too late, Bush has already taken care of that
xx
You mean a watery grave like those that Bush took care of?

Just when I think you can't be any more stupid, you outdo yourself.


This thread is about a Republicant who posted a total LIE about Ted Kennedy and how many Katrina survivors are moving to Massachusetts.


If you don't like it here and you are so fed up, why don't you spare yourself the discomfort and go back to your stinky, stenchy Conservative board and take a swim in THAT murky water?


If I had any I would, Bush took care of that, but I don't expect you to get the facts.
NM
So now the health care is Bush's fault? Hummmmmm....sm
I seem to recall that someone named Clinton ran largely on a platform to redo the health care plan, but of course, no one on the left ever remembers that.   Bush is suddenly responsible for every sin including original sin. 
Then explain his church and minister. Explain that to me. nm
x
who could possibly care? War, financial ruin, health care needs.

nm


 


Well, I care. I also care about the constitution.nm
nm
name you couldn't think of....

John Evander Couey


I read in August 2007 that he is *fit to die* - *applauds.....


http://www.jessicamarielunsford.com/


Couldn't have said it better
Nobody is questioning his patriotrism, but that's as far as it goes for me. I need someone who has a plan for the country. Who has the insight to see how far our country can go, the great things we can do as a nation.

While people may not know much about Barack one thing I do know is he has a plan and one that can be reached.

John McCain? He has no plan. Your absolutely correct. John McCain's platform is all about him and the time he spent as POW. At least Barack is making the election about us.

A lot of people may not know what Barack will bring (I do - a better future for us). Can you imagine what life would be like if we didn't do things because we didn't know what the outcome would be. A lot of our finest things have come because we took a chance on the unknown. We now have computers and other things, and we went to the moon and are exploring mars - all which was unknown years ago.

McCain - he will bring us war, no improvement in the economy, war, jobs continuing to go overseas, war, tax breaks for big companies and his wealthiest friends, war, continuing to rise food and gas prices, war, a rapidly rising deficit while we continue to send 1.8 billion dollars to Iraq (while they have a surplus), war, war, war, and more war. For those with children I think that would throw a huge red flag up. (and I don't mean the red, white and blue flag).
Couldn't have said it better.
nm
Couldn't have said it better.
nm
Couldn't have said it better....sm
McCain had the right idea - he just picked the wrong token female to do it....bad judgement all the way around. There is just no justifying Palin for VP of an entire country let alone to an elderly man with cancer in his medical history.
Couldn't have said it better
Now we have her Hollywood smile that is as irritating as G. W.'s infamous constant smirk.  Not to mention "soccer mom" to go along with "when I was in prison."  and PULEZ!!!  spare me that "folksy stuff."  How intelligent people can say she won the debate is far beyond me. I would like to know on exactly which points she won. I didn't hear her give one single intelligent answer to a single intelligent question.  Heaven help us if she is one heart beat away from the presidency.  We think this country is in trouble now...........
You got that right. Couldn't say it better myself.
x
I couldn't have said it better myself
thanks!
Thank you - couldn't have said it better
I get quite irate when I am told what I should or should not watch/read. I have a mind and I know what I feel is right from wrong. Let me think for myself. That's why I don't like a lot of the mainstream TV shows because they sit and give their opinions and then try and tell everyone that is the way they should think. The minute you try and stop certain groups from talking you take away their freedom of speech. Makes me want to shout out to them, how come you get to speak and I can't. They'll scream and shout if their viewpoint is held back but they'll hold back our viewpoints in a nannosecond.

I say let people use their own minds. Let them read and listen to everything. Then let them make up their own minds.

Knowledge is freedom!
Couldn't have said it any better myself! - sm
'I guess if churches don't want government running them, then maybe they should stop trying to run government with their religion.'

Maybe if the churches didn't keep trying to 'dish it out', they wouldn't be in danger of having to 'take it'.
You mean you couldn't tell by looking at him
  Why can't she listen to him anymore??????  His sexual preference doesn't affect his singing voice does it? 
Please explain to me what we are not
doing to protect ourselves here?  You just assume there's nothing in place here to protect us because you believe all the unsubstantiated liberal talking points that come out ever day.   Believe it or not part of protecting us here at home is making the world a more stable place.  We can't just hope they won't make the long journey over here like they did in the 1700 and 1800s.  Today, in just a few short hours they can walk off of any commercial airline or private plane.  We are in Iraq for a myriad of reasons including protecting our own boarders.  Why does this have to be explained over and over again to you?  A lot of liberals call conservatives narrow minded, but many of you have tunnel vision to a degree I've never seen before.
Let me explain how I can say that.

I agree with you that there were inciting posts from both political viewpoints on the conservative board, myself included.  However, I think what is being pointed out was a general trend of "anything goes" for the conservative posters and high deletion/banning rates for the liberals.  This has been apparent for a long time and complained about many, many times (usually complaints are deleted so they are virtually impossible to document at this point).  I personally was warned once for "picking on" Nan, when objectively, it really was more the other way around.  There is a sickness of spirit on the conservative board at times.  I was drawn into this and became "ill" also at times.  I am not proud of this.


As far as the moderator or administrator, she did post in the Christian board some time ago regarding her beliefs.  They were evangelical Christian, kind of extreme.  That, coupled with occasional comments on the political board in addition to deleting LOTS of liberal posts and actively supporting and not reigning in the Conservatives is, well, just common sense as to her political leanings. 


Explain please
I don't have ESP...
So please explain this:
If marriage is for procreation, and Mary and Joseph were married, why and how was Mary still supposedly a VIRGIN when Jesus was born?
Well, then perhaps you could explain to me
why Saddam's atrocities didn't seem to bother us in the 80s when we wanted his help against Iran?
This might help explain why.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1309924800&en=1be0e7d4e2aac8d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss


7, 2006



Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts




A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.


The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.


We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad, the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. That's a problem.


A Defense Department spokeswoman said officials there could not comment on the report because they had not yet seen it.


The center called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to appoint a task force to study the problem, declare a new zero tolerance policy and strictly enforce it.


The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote The Turner Diaries, the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.


The groups are being abetted, the report said, by pressure on recruiters, particularly for the Army, to meet quotas that are more difficult to reach because of the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.


The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members.


Mr. Barfield said Army recruiters struggled last year to meet goals. They don't want to make a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military, he said, because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists.


The 1996 crackdown on extremists came after revelations that Mr. McVeigh had espoused far-right ideas when he was in the Army and recruited two fellow soldiers to aid his bomb plot. Those revelations were followed by a furor that developed when three white paratroopers were convicted of the random slaying of a black couple in order to win tattoos and 19 others were discharged for participating in neo-Nazi activities.


The defense secretary at the time, William Perry, said the rules were meant to leave no room for racist and extremist activities within the military. But the report said Mr. Barfield, who is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., had said that he had provided evidence on 320 extremists there in the past year, but that only two had been discharged. He also said there was an online network of neo-Nazis.


They're communicating with each other about weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within the military, he said. Several of these individuals have since been deployed to combat missions in Iraq.


The report cited accounts by neo-Nazis of their infiltration of the military, including a discussion on the white supremacist Web site Stormfront. There are others among you in the forces, one participant wrote. You are never alone.


An article in the National Alliance magazine Resistance urged skinheads to join the Army and insist on being assigned to light infantry units.


The Southern Poverty Law Center identified the author as Steven Barry, who it said was a former Special Forces officer who was the alliance's military unit coordinator.


Light infantry is your branch of choice because the coming race war and the ethnic cleansing to follow will be very much an infantryman's war, he wrote. It will be house-to-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood until your town or city is cleared and the alien races are driven into the countryside where they can be hunted down and 'cleansed.'


He concluded: As a professional soldier, my goal is to fill the ranks of the United States Army with skinheads. As street brawlers, you will be useless in the coming race war. As trained infantrymen, you will join the ranks of the Aryan warrior brotherhood.


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company


Like I said....we all only have to explain our
own decisions to God. Remember your argument here to me. It may come in handy.

God bless.
Someone explain this to me...

If you are a suspected terrorist or suspected terrorist sympathizer you can go to Gitmo or sent out of the country to a place where torture is A-OK for the rest of your life w/o being given a reason for the incarceration or access to our legal system, even if you are an American citizen but....if you are on a list of terror suspects, you can buy a gun just like everyone else.

Published on Saturday, May 5, 2007 by Associated Press
NRA: Don’t Ban Gun Sales to Suspected Terrorists
by Sam Hananel

WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.

In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., “would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere ’suspicions’ of a terrorist threat.” 0506 07

“As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word ’suspect’ has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties,” Cox wrote.

In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.

Hertling also notes there is a process to challenge denial of a sale.

Current law requires gun dealers to conduct a criminal background check and deny sales if a gun purchaser falls under a specified prohibition, including a felony conviction, domestic abuse conviction or illegal immigration. There is no legal basis to deny a sale if a purchaser is on a terror watch list.

“When I tell people that you can be on a terrorist watch list and still be allowed to buy as many guns as you want, they are shocked,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports Lautenberg’s bill.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, lawmakers are considering a number of measures to strengthen gun sale laws. The NRA, which usually opposes increased restrictions on firearms, is taking different positions depending on the proposal.

“Right now law enforcement carefully monitors all firearms sales to those on the terror watch list,” said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. “Injecting the attorney general into the process just politicizes it.”

A 2005 study by the Government Accountability Office found that 35 of 44 firearm purchase attempts over a five-month period made by known or suspected terrorists were approved by the federal law enforcement officials.

© 2007 The Associated Press.


Will someone please explain to me -
Why do you keep saying our vote does not count and that the next President has already been chosen? 
I for one, have too much to do, to try to explain it....sm
to you, because frankly, I'm getting so I don't care.

There's nothing to find out, and they're making stuff up, so until you have something substantial, I have work to do.


However, if you would have posted about the screaming witch woman from up north and her rag on her, I would have really busted a gut being upset.

As it is, I'm just letting it all go, because Gov. Palin is better than you, better than me, and better than the media.

She will rise above it all, and come out on top. Of this, I have no doubts whatsoever.


That's all I have to say on the matter, cuz I have too much to type for more here....


Look at who you are trying to explain this to
xx
Please explain...
Please explain exactly how Democratic voters are misled.  How are they being misled???  What, can they not read the English on the voter card?  All I know is Ohio had 200,000 dead and nonexistant voters voting for Obama.  I don't think it's the Democratic voters who are being misled, I think it's the American people, who don't realize what a complete scam is going on with this ACORN group. 
Would someone please explain
How McCain  can "guarantee" he's going to win as he said on Meet The Press yesterday?
Perhaps this will help explain....
Remember him talking about the tax "credits?" That is his way of floating giving tax rebates to people who pay no taxes. This is the opinion from someone on the other side of the pond...and explains it pretty well.

OBAMA TAX PLAN – 95% BULL?

Obama’s tax plan is receiving much praise from some elements of the Tory blogosphere. Promising tax cuts for everything and everyone is certainly a very attractive position, and I can see why so many ObamaCons are attracted to it; but does the claim really stand up to scrutiny?

Firstly, if you look at Obama’s promise of tax cuts for 95% of Americans and then look at the billions of dollars needed for the government programs that he has pledged to implement or expand, and common sense should tell you that thing simply do not add up.

Secondly, the 95% of all Americans figure is suspect. Since more than 30% of working Americans don't pay any income taxes now - many in fact get a welfare check - how can they get a "tax cut?" So how does Obama back up this 95% claim? Well those of you with long memories may remember Bill Clinton’s battle to change the definition of what “is” is? What we are witnessing here is an attempt to change the definition of tax cut. To me, and I am guessing to most people, a tax cut means you get to keep more of what you earn. But for the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts disguised by the infamous "tax credit." All but one of these tax credits would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for an income transfer -- a government check -- from taxpayers to non taxpayers. In other words, increased welfare, a Demogrant if you will. Obama's marketing genius is to call this increase in welfare a tax cut; and given how UK conservatives have watched the collapse into failure of Gordon Browns tax credit system, I am mystified why they would support Obama’s.

That being said...he says it expands welfare. I say it is socialist. Same end result. Marxist redistribution of wealth. But it is working...LOL. He is sure hiding it from YOU.
Let's see if I can explain this to you..
most blacks voted for Obama; most are against gay marriage, as their vote points out. How hard is that for you to comprehend? The black vote FOR Obama hurt the gay marriage vote. Is that simpler for you to understand?
I really tried to explain to you......... sm
in my other response to you above that I don't hate you and that I don't hate gay people or teach my sons to hate them. I don't know in exactly what way you think I should reach out to gay people. I do know some gay people, and as much as I may like them as a person, I would have to tell them if they presented the subject my feelings on it and why.
Please explain....(sm)
why you think it would be *trickle-up poverty* and how that works.  I can't wait to hear this one...LOL.
explain to me
all their "tax breaks" then
because maybe im missing the bigger picture.
the middle class... (ME included) got a tax break... my first one EVER... so until I see a better one under Obama's administration, I'll stick with what I believe is a tax break for everyone that pays taxes...
and how is it a fact that the "rich" pays what, like 80% of the taxes?
That would explain why
why a clear 7.2% margin of victory mandate was handed over on Nov 4, why seas of humanity were jumping for joy that night, why DC is filling up to the rafters as Jan 20 approaches and why the rest of the world is joining in our single-digit T-minus-9 countdown. The transition is coming off without a hitch despite your best efforts to protest otherwise, the guy has assembled a blue-ribbon team, has plans in place and is ready to roll. Like I said, you are not handling defeat very well and cannot stand to see REAL leadership emerge after W's scorched earth administration.
Please explain this one........ sm
"*..., even a black man.....*



That's right....even a black man. Is it so hard for you to fathom the idea that someone of a different skin color would be of equal standing to you? Do you just completely reject the ideas of civility and equality? Has it ever occurred to you that this *black man* has every intention of trying to help YOU keep your job and help you keep food on your table?"

Why is it that this inauguration is being tauted, especially by the Democrats, as "an historical event" in which the first African-American man will become POTUS and that is supposedly politically correct, but when a Republican or non-Obama supporter dares utter that he is a black man, they are jumped on like white on rice for being racist and bigoted?
Please explain.....nm
x
Please explain something to me.
It this is taxpayer money were are fronting and president and Congress are our electd representatives, why SHOULDN'T they regulate the use of that money to safeguard against excess, mismanagement and misuse of the funds?
Please explain to me how this is

all W's fault?  Creating a breeding ground?  What....do you want us to kick out all arab looking people and their arab children so we don't have homegrown terrorists?  We can't do that. 


As for terrorists threats....don't we generally get a lot of those?  How do we know which ones are real and which ones are pure BS? 


W is out of office.  Now it is Obamarama's turn.  What will you do if we are attacked and Obama fails to listen to warnings?  Are you going to rake him across the coals too or are you still going to blame W? 


Why does this guy know all this stuff about terrorists and attacks?  Who are his sources?