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

Yeah, he turned....gone over to the dark side...nm

Posted By: . on 2008-10-19
In Reply to: Colin Powell....closet democrat...no surprise there...nm - 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

Tonight: Frontline -- The Dark Side

Click on the link check local listings to see when it is on where you live.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/


The Dark Side


coming Jun. 20, 2006 at 9pm (check local listings)


(60 minutes) On September 11, 2001, deep inside a White House bunker, Vice President Dick Cheney was ordering U.S. fighter planes to shoot down any commercial airliner still in the air above America. At that moment, CIA Director George Tenet was meeting with his counter-terrorism team in Langley, Virginia. Both leaders acted fast, to prepare their country for a new kind of war. But soon a debate would grow over the goals of the war on terror, and the decision to go to war in Iraq. Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and others saw Iraq as an important part of a broader plan to remake the Middle East and project American power worldwide. Meanwhile Tenet, facing division in his own organization, saw non-state actors such as Al Qaeda as the highest priority. FRONTLINE's investigation of the ensuing conflict includes more than forty interviews, thousands of pages of documentary evidence, and a substantial photographic archive. It is the third documentary about the war on terror from the team that produced Rumsfeld's War and The Torture Question. (read the press release)


 


The dark side of faith (title of article)




(Considering how much importance the *right* religion is going to play in our future Supreme Court, I thought it was ironic that I found this at the Professional Ethics site. http://ethics.tamucc.edu/article.pl?sid=05/10/01/1656216)


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-brooks1oct01,0,3034570.story?track=hpmostemailedlink


The dark side of faith

By ROSA BROOKS

October 1, 2005

IT'S OFFICIAL: Too much religion may be a dangerous thing.

This is the implication of a study reported in the current issue of the Journal of Religion and Society, a publication of Creighton University's Center for the Study of Religion. The study, by evolutionary scientist Gregory S. Paul, looks at the correlation between levels of popular religiosity and various quantifiable societal health indicators in 18 prosperous democracies, including the United States.

Paul ranked societies based on the percentage of their population expressing absolute belief in God, the frequency of prayer reported by their citizens and their frequency of attendance at religious services. He then correlated this with data on rates of homicide, sexually transmitted disease, teen pregnancy, abortion and child mortality.

He found that the most religious democracies exhibited substantially higher degrees of social dysfunction than societies with larger percentages of atheists and agnostics. Of the nations studied, the U.S. — which has by far the largest percentage of people who take the Bible literally and express absolute belief in God (and the lowest percentage of atheists and agnostics) — also has by far the highest levels of homicide, abortion, teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

This conclusion will come as no surprise to those who have long gnashed their teeth in frustration while listening to right-wing evangelical claims that secular liberals are weak on values. Paul's study confirms globally what is already evident in the U.S.: When it comes to values, if you look at facts rather than mere rhetoric, the substantially more secular blue states routinely leave the Bible Belt red states in the dust.

Murder rates? Six of the seven states with the highest 2003 homicide rates were red in the 2004 elections (Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, South Carolina), while the deep blue Northeastern states had murder rates well below the national average. Infant mortality rates? Highest in the South and Southwest; lowest in New England. Divorce rates? Marriages break up far more in red states than in blue. Teen pregnancy rates? The same.

Of course, the red/blue divide is only an imperfect proxy for levels of religiosity. And while Paul's study found that the correlation between high degrees of religiosity and high degrees of social dysfunction appears robust, it could be that high levels of social dysfunction fuel religiosity, rather than the other way around.

Although correlation is not causation, Paul's study offers much food for thought. At a minimum, his findings suggest that contrary to popular belief, lack of religiosity does societies no particular harm. This should offer ammunition to those who maintain that religious belief is a purely private matter and that government should remain neutral, not only among religions but also between religion and lack of religion. It should also give a boost to critics of faith-based social services and abstinence-only disease and pregnancy prevention programs.

We shouldn't shy away from the possibility that too much religiosity may be socially dangerous. Secular, rationalist approaches to problem-solving emphasize uncertainty, evidence and perpetual reevaluation. Religious faith is inherently nonrational.

This in itself does not make religion worthless or dangerous. All humans hold nonrational beliefs, and some of these may have both individual and societal value. But historically, societies run into trouble when powerful religions become imperial and absolutist.

The claim that religion can have a dark side should not be news. Does anyone doubt that Islamic extremism is linked to the recent rise in international terrorism? And since the history of Christianity is every bit as blood-drenched as the history of Islam, why should we doubt that extremist forms of modern American Christianity have their own pernicious and measurable effects on national health and well-being?

Arguably, Paul's study invites us to conclude that the most serious threat humanity faces today is religious extremism: nonrational, absolutist belief systems that refuse to tolerate difference and dissent.

My prediction is that right-wing evangelicals will do their best to discredit Paul's substantive findings. But when they fail, they'll just shrug: So what if highly religious societies have more murders and disease than less religious societies? Remember the trials of Job? God likes to test the faithful.

To the truly nonrational, even evidence that on its face undermines your beliefs can be twisted to support them. Absolutism means never having to say you're sorry.

And that, of course, is what makes it so very dangerous.

yeah, but i turned on the TV to watch Days of Our Lives
and everyone watching that channel was doing so to watch Days of Our Lives. If we wanted to watch news, we would turn to news channels.
You are in the dark......just the way O wants it
))
Dark Hole Sun
I hope some day, the medical community can figure out how to remove those sticks from up these self-righteous a$$es. Oh, I am so offended. Cover my eyes! You said the a-word!!!!  Oh, oh........don't read 'em - it's that simple.
Seems you are really into dark foreboding.
floats your boat, go fo it. I prefer to take my comfort in, "...to those who would tear the world down, we will defeat you."
I'm praying for you and your dark soul.

For those that want to continue to live in the dark
I do not care to do that. As a democrat, I have watched this man whom so many think will be their saving grace. This man was raised Muslim, is Muslim through and through, and only went Christian on us after he came here and started attending Rev Wright's church.

He is very careful about skirting around questions posed to him. He has never been able to prove US citizenship...refuses to put forth a legitimate birth certificate proving it, and is now facing a suit to hopefully force him to prove just that. I am not so easily led as some O lovers.

I have a close friend in Atlanta, GA, who is an aware winning journalist. This is where one of the most recent honor killings took place. As all campaigns are questioned when something important surfaces, they want to know how the candidate feels about certain things. Well, knowing Obama is Muslim by birth and upbringing, this question was posed out of Georgia to his camp, who would not give a straight answer. They refused to let Obama speak to this. They went round and round the question, but wouldn't even come out and say he would condemn such things. Not even a condemnation of these acts.

Just not easily led about this man.
"I am sorry your future is so dark and meaningless"
x
He has got to paint as dark a picture as
pretty good job of it, so when just a glimmer of light shines through, he can tell you, Yes, I Did!

But, I sure hate to bust your bubble, we are noncombustible, we are not going extinct, we ain't going anywhere! We just here praying for our country.
My dear....during some of this country's dark days....
whites with mental illness were also sterilized. How about slavery? How about thousands of white soldiers who died on battlefields to free them? How about the thousands of WHITES along the underground railroad who helped escaped slaves find homes?

YES, the preacher is hateful, the theology is racist.
well, i would call it dark but not necessarily meaningless
x
I watched it and I have no idea where this is coming from....dark orifices? nm
v
He's already turned it down once
He considered it in 1996 with Bob Dole, but turned it down. I doubt he would have done it now even if chosen. Not that he wouldn't have been great.
But this has turned into a different
conversation.
I already got pi$$ed and turned it off...nm
x
It's a dark day in America when voters dare to feel inspired and hopeful?
rasberries
The only blind eye here was turned toward
nm
turned down claim
My husband went through that too, what you need to get is an attorney who only gets paid, if he gets disability.  We did and finally thank God, we finally got it and boy did we ever need it.  You also get a retroactive amount from the first time you applied, so there was some money involved and now every month it goes into his account by direct deposit and each year it goes up a little more.
and turned a blind eye to all the rest
nm
She did cooperate. She turned over the tape of....
one of her office people calling the guy in question. Which he has already testified to was not at her request. She did not lie. Was Hollis French lying when he said that the governor's office was cooperating and no subpoenas would be necessary? Or is he lying now? When things changed is when she was named as the VP candidate. We should all be able to do the math on that one.
Turned a blind eye? Did you hear what
the "frightened senile old woman" had just called Louis Farrakhan's Messiah? Maybe next time Sen. McC will just let the crowd go, as O did this morning. After McC stood up like the man he is in front of his own, this morning when O was "acknowledging him," his someone from his own crown yelled "shoot him." I can assure you, you will not here a word of this on CNN or MSNBC and probably not anywhere else, but I heard it. O hesitated, smiled and kept kept on ranting. Now, when this happened at McC's rally, he was inciting riotous behavior and creating havoc, but O is calming his crowds. There is such a double standard in this election it is pathetic.
With the people who seemed turned off by Palin,
nm
GW Bush turned out to be socialist
He is the poster boy for how deregulation doesn't work.  Now we all get to pay for his mistakes.  The rich people are technically on welfare now thanks to the average person.
I turned the TV off - can't stand to hear him

But that's my point, the military HAS turned into a kid club...
For the most part.  The recruiters prey on high school kids.  Let's take a poll out there of how many of you were capable of making truly wise life-impacting decisions at age 17 and 18?  I sure wasn't and my kids certainly weren't able to.  Deciding on college, maybe.  Deciding to party, most certainly.  And the problem with the military is that it is advertised as a ticket to education and world-travel, the recruiters don't advertise it as a one-way ticket to an immoral war.  And as you know, it is extremely hard to "quit" the military if there is a change of heart...... 
Uh, no, you and people like you turned the C board into a sewer. SM
Other than a few drive-bys, it's been great since then.  Thanks! 
turned down for disability - notified the day of the funeral!
My sister-in-law was diagnosed with a heart condition and told she only had a matter of months to live. She applied for disability and her husband received the notice that her benefits were denied on the day of her funeral because they said she was not disabled. Now how much more disabled can you get?
Well, it has turned into a multimillion dollar business...
I just find it appalling that they made a $68 million profit and most of that came from aborting babies. It is the only service they render where they require cash up front. No wonder they don't want the laws repealed. They don't give a DANG about womens' reproductive choice. They care about a $68 million profit. I hope if McCain is elected the FIRST thing he does is work on removing federal funding from abortion. There is no way the american public en masse should have to pay for this stuff. Let the posters here keep sending their checks and all the pro-choicers, let THEM pay for it. Seems only fair to me.
Bush turned out to be a socialist and you were fooled by him
Our banks are under socialism now.
Nope, PA turned Democrat last year.

Spector has had a few bouts with cancer and now this is his way to get out without retiring. That's what that is all about. He wll blame it on not being re-elected, but I doubt he wants to be re-elected. He did state he only got re-elected this term by 1%. So, if he didn't want out, why would he buck the pubs that were left in PA.


He's switching parties to be sure, and he hasn't done anything for PA lately due to his cancers. While I don't blame him for not being able to keep up, it's no reason for him to be a turncoat. In fact, he was a closet dem for years. So, come to think of it, he may win re-election because of it, but I will not vote for him.


I am lucky. I was invested very modestly and just turned 65 in August. sm
I pulled everything out of the market 2 months ago and put it into CDs. Pure luck on my part.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You've said before that you're leaving, but you and your goons can't sta

I think Gore has turned off enough people recently that most Dems don't even support him.
Thank God he was not elected. 
Your precious Bush turned Wall St socialist and the banks TRUE
you voted for him and look what happened SOCIALISM by BUSH
yeah, yeah, yeah.....what he failed to mention...
is that the Dems are responsible for the mortgage meltdown which is responsible for the wall street meltdown. Chris Dodd, Barney Frank...totally to blame. Blocked every attemmpt by Bush Admin and yes, McCain, to regulate fannie/freddie. Dems certainly have selective memories...convenient bouts of amnesia. lol.
I was never on SP's side.... s/m
but I think that it was extremely tasteless of this Canadian comedian to post as
French President Sarkozy and interview her for 5 minutes and making fun of her.
Extremely tasteless.
After all she was the running mate of McCain.
I am a democrat.
I don't think that either side... sm

has much room to talk. 

I have seen articles, opinions and links posted, apparently by Republicans, about the issues facing Obama, and the first replies are the childish Dems who come on and say "well, it's Bush's fault that he has this or that to deal with" or some other childish remark. 

By the same token, I have seen what I believe to be Democrats posting nasty articles and opinions about Sarah Palin and how she is giving interviews, how she obviously doesn't have the sense to be a major political player or whether she gave the clothes back to the party before going back to Alaska. 

I'm with BWT.  I think the childishness and catiness that I have seen on this board for the last week or so need to end and let's get to discussing the issues at hand.  We won't be able to solve a danged one of them, but we can have a civilized adult discussion and we might even learn a thing or two from each other. 

Reach across the aisle, folks. 


We are on the same side
I wanted to post and did not want to respond to an Ann fan, so I posted under your reasonable statement. 
no just one side
This problem is not just a dem/repub problem.  It is a greedy CEO/Wallstreet problem as well.  It is a mass amounts of people went out and bought things they couldnt afford and houses they didnt need and couldnt afford problem.  Did the gov make them go out and do that?  Who made all these people sign their names on these subprime short arm loans that collapsed?  It is their fault too.  It is also a welfare problem.  You know, those people who would rather pop out kids for a job than work for real. 
...and just you on the other side.
...but not LAST night.

Get a job.
No one took Eric's side. sm
But then, you know that.  The rest I won't argue with you about.  If you use science against God's Word, what more can I say.
The Other Side of Mel Gibson...sm

Disney Cancels Mel Gibson Holocaust Series


The ABC television network has pulled a miniseries about the Holocaust it was developing with Mel Gibson 's production company, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, quoting an unidentified representative for the network.

Gibson was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving early on Friday and was reported to have launched into a tirade against Jews, asking the arresting officer if he was a Jew and blaming the Jews for starting all wars.

The actor, who holds strong conservative Catholic religious and political views and whose father is a Holocaust denier, apologized on Saturday.

The incident has raised questions about the future of projects Gibson and his Icon Productions company are working on, like the ABC television miniseries based on a memoir about a Dutch Jew during World War II, the newspaper said An ABC representative told the paper, without elaborating, it has been two years and the network still has not seen a script, so the project is being pulled.

A spokesperson for ABC, which is owned by Walt Disney Co. , could not be reached for comment.

Disney's movie studio arm still plans to release Gibson 's self-financed Mayan-language movie Apocalypto on Dec. 8, Hollywood's trade papers reported. The Web site Slate.com quoted Walt Disney Studios president Oren Aviv as saying he accepted Gibson 's apology.

Copyright Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
We're on the same side
I am trying to understand where all this animosity is coming from. Why does it bother you so much that the last democratic president and former first lady/candidate/senator are going to be at the convention? How would it look if they weren’t there? Hillary and Obama are basically on the same page when it comes to policy, so I am guessing this is a personality issue for you? During the primaries, her tactics and strategies left a lot to be desired, to be sure, which may have been a mitigating factor as to why Obama was ultimately able to come out on top but, let’s face it, not by much. It will be extremely important that the party get past its in-fighting and focus on the task at hand of winning the election in November.

Bill and Hillary Clinton are and will remain influential party leaders for a some time to come. It appears that it is her die-hard base supporters that are acting like children. They are the ones who prolonging the division and ill-will which you are expressing here. Both the Clintons have been selected by the Democratic National Convention Committee to speak in Denver for good reason. The DNC recognizes just how pivotal their roles will be in bringing the party back together. This group of HRC’s supporters who are planning to disrupt the convention and demand a roll-call are not very likely to succeed in this effort. This serves no useful purpose whatsoever and is in nobody’s best interests.

Hillary will eventually “crawl back into her hole,” as you so eloquently put it, and return to her position as a junior senator, but not until she has done her job of trying to encourage party unity. I suspect that she still has much to contribute in that capacity and in roles yet undefined in terms of advancing party policies. Try not to take what the newscasters say as gospel. They relish in scandal and controversy. Do not give them the satisfaction. It should come as no surprise that the Clintons are disappointed in the primary results, but that does not mean that they are supposed to fade on off into the sunset. It is not their time to pass...not just yet.

Bill Clinton, a racist? Where is this coming from? Fox News? He does not hide behind mansion walls in the ghetto. His foundation continues to advance the cause of civil and human rights, both here and abroad. It is unfair to write HRC off as a disgrace to women who needs to “just go away,” based on this one less than stellar chapter in her political career. She is much more than that, just as Bill Clinton is much than the "impeached president" you so casually dismiss. I am wondering if you hated him this much while he was in office, or did this arise out of the recent primary process?

In any case, if Obama is defeated, HRC will not be responsible. It will be this divisive in-fighting within the party members that will be the reason. We are between the primaries and the convention. The entire campaign still lies ahead of us. Just give it a little more time. You will see Hillary and Bill come around as party loyalists who will play perhaps the most key roles of all in party unification. This is not just their job. It is up to all democrats to come together this fall and keep their eyes on the prize. Perpetuating this kind of division does nothing to advance that cause. Is this hatred really worth harboring to the extent that, in the end, we will be facing 4 or 8 more years of a republican regime? Try to keep that in mind the next time you find yourself this riled up, and ask yourself what I ask you now….where is this really coming from? I think I know the answer, but I am more interested in hearing yours at the moment.

Disrespect is nothing new on your side...
and it is not just directed at me, and to suggest so is being dishonest at best. You tolerate no opinion other than your own, want to discuss only issues that you are pro and do not tolerate discussion of any other viewpoint, and for people who call themselves Democrats that is a very undemocratic attitude. You hate an entire group of people (all Republicans...well I should say anyone who is not Democrat) for no reason other than that. Two sides? That's rich! There have never been 2 sides.

As to domination of the board....there are about 6 or 8 of you guys to 1 of mine. lol. Talk about blinders.
All voters should consider this regardless of which side

It should be very troubling that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since day one.  Ask Hillary Clinton or anyone else who ran (again, R, D, or I).


With that in mind, who gave them the right to choose our next President? 


Incidentally, the media (left-wing, of course) actually selected McCain, too.  They were absolutely certain that he would be the weakest candidate.  Mitt scared the holy hanna out of them.  I personally hoped for a Rudy-Fred ticket, in no particular order.


It should be interesting as to how many honest people there are reading this stuff to see how they'll react.  Based on what I've read since Palin's speech, she's certainly changed quite a few minds.


The thing that surprises me the most is that the bulk of people on this board is women, yet so many of them put party above the person.  I personally don't vote by genitalia.  I think it's foolish.


"Woe to the other side who does not
recognize it."  What I saw was very scary, an individual who has not clue one about what is going on in this country or out of it.  Very scared, indeed.  Woe, indeed.  You make this election sound like a football game.  This is our country, our children's future that is at stake.  And no, I didn't find her very knowledgeable in the least, just mouthing words and throwing something someone told her to say.  We will see, but I pray to God these two do not get elected.
The other side of the story....
http://www.newsmax.com/smith/barack_obama_tony_rezko/2008/09/02/126890.html
Another side of the coin.....

I respect your beliefs and am very happy you found your niche in life and saved your marriage. Kudos to you! I myself do not question Obama's morals - and I can't say that I question McCain's either. But, Bush got into the white house based on deceptive strategies aimed at leading the populace to believe he was on the moral high ground. (I see the same strategy being used in McCain's campaign). In view of what has transpired over the last 8 years, my faith in the pubs moral high ground has been trampled beyond repair. I believe torture of other human beings to be reprehensible and not advocated by any religion, but it continues and McCain supported it - even though he himself was tortured as a POW. The sex scandals - Larry Craig (airport bathrooms - it was illegal - otherwise, I don't care who he has sex with), Mark Foley (Repub House Representative - Once known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, Foley resigned from Congress on September 29, 2006 after allegations surfaced that he had sent suggestive emails and sexually explicit instant messages to teenaged males who had formerly served and were at that time serving as Congressional pages) and now the scandal surrounding the Department of the Interior on charges of getting into bed with big oil (literally and figuratively) drug abuse, etc. I find the whole thing ridiculous to base your campaign on "personality" and moral high ground. I am not saying that Dems did not have their issues with sex scandals - as we all know.


I believe Jesus Christ was once a very highly evolved human being and no longer has to incarnate as a human as he has reached perfection. I believe Buddha was a very highly evolved human being who no longer has to incarnate for the same reason. I believe that Ghandi and Mother Theresa were highly evolved. I believe that energy never disappears, it only changes form. I believe in life after death. I believe that love is the most important thing in life. Humans are not perfect. I do not believe that sex is sin. Dolphins have sex for pleasure and I am not equating humans to aquatic life - but Dolphins are highly intelligent. Do you think God judges them for indulging in pleasure? I believe that exploiting the vulnerable for sex is morally wrong (children, women....that's as far as I'll go on that). Sex between 2 consenting adults is not wrong.


I believe that every religion has it's place on earth and I am in no way authorized or vetted to judge which one is right and which one is wrong. They are all right. Paganism, Wiccan, the Jewish faith, Catholic, Muslim, etc., etc. We, as humans, have the right to decide what is right for us in that regard.


I think all religions know the difference between right and wrong and stealing from others, torturing others, even JUDGING others is morally wrong. You can boil it down to not having ANYTHING to do with religion.


And to believe that whoever is in the white house holds your moral values as a primary reason for decisions that are made is naive. I think the last 8 years proves that and for that reason, I fear more of the same. I am willing to cross party lines just to see if this disaster of a country can be repaired.


The other side of the coin....
Karl Rove would be working to get any Republican elected. That is what he does. He is not a member of the campaign and it is a free country...he can advocate anyone he wants.

If Obama was serious about change he would not have picked a senator who has been in the senate over 30 years. That is not change. That is also more of the same.

James Johnson, of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fame, who used to be an economic advisor to Obama...after he came under scrutiny for possible fraud, he left the OBama campaign with his tail between his legs. Don't see much difference in the two.
Other side of the story...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/09/16/2008-09-16_john_mccain_campaign_releases_troopergat.html