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

Yes, there WERE WMD. The intel was correct....SH got rid of 'em...

Posted By: . on 2008-12-21
In Reply to: Not to hijack your rant, but there - no WMDs in the context that

.


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

Good for INTEL! sm
Hopefully other companies will follow their example.  I bet India's not to happy about this!  LOL
WOW! Proud of Intel and hope other
Just watched Lou Dobbs. Intel CEO is closing down manufacturing jobs overseas and bringing all the manufacturing jobs back to the United States and CEO is "pressuring" other companies to do the same. This was just announced today.


http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTRE51942N20090210

Intel to invest $7 billion in U.S. plants
Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:39am EST


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Intel Corp (INTC.O) plans to invest $7 billion over the next two years to build advanced manufacturing facilities in the United States that make faster, smaller chips that consume less energy.

The announcement comes less than a month after the world's largest maker of microprocessors used in personal computers said it would close plants in Southeast Asia and scale back U.S. operations under a restructuring that affects as many as 6,000 employees.

The investment funds deployment of Intel's 32 nanometer manufacturing technology, the company said.

Intel's investment will be made at existing manufacturing sites in Oregon, Arizona and New Mexico and will support some 7,000 jobs at those locations. The company said its total workforce in the U.S. is about 45,000.

In a speech before the Economic Club of Washington, D.C., Otellini also underscored the need for tech companies to invest in the United States. He quoted former Intel CEO Andy Grove who said, "bad companies are destroyed by crisis. Good companies survive them. Great companies are improved by them."

Otellini called the current crisis the worst he has seen since he began at Intel about 35 years ago, adding, "For nations like the U.S., absolutely nothing about the future is inevitable or guaranteed -- not jobs, not leadership, not our standard of living."

Piccioni said the Intel announcement also boosts its public image as a major U.S. corporation, especially at a time of massive job cuts.
Don't forget, and this was all on top of unsourced intel. from CurveBall.nm
x
But in Pennsylvania, the Intel Design lost out
November 9, 2005
School Board
Evolution Slate Outpolls Rivals
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

All eight members up for re-election to the Pennsylvania school board that had been sued for introducing the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in biology class were swept out of office yesterday by a slate of challengers who campaigned against the intelligent design policy.

Among the losing incumbents on the Dover, Pa., board were two members who testified in favor of the intelligent design policy at a recently concluded federal trial on the Dover policy: the chairwoman, Sheila Harkins, and Alan Bonsell.

The election results were a repudiation of the first school district in the nation to order the introduction of intelligent design in a science class curriculum. The policy was the subject of a trial in Federal District Court that ended last Friday. A verdict by Judge John E. Jones III is expected by early January.

I think voters were tired of the trial, they were tired of intelligent design, they were tired of everything that this school board brought about, said Bernadette Reinking, who was among the winners.

The election will not alter the facts on which the judge must decide the case. But if the intelligent design policy is defeated in court, the new school board could refuse to pursue an appeal. It could also withdraw the policy, a step that many challengers said they intended to take.

We are all for it being discussed, but we do not want to see it in biology class, said Judy McIlvaine, a member of the winning slate. It is not a science.

The vote counts were close, but of the 16 candidates the one with the fewest votes was Mr. Bonsell, the driving force behind the intelligent design policy. Testimony at the trial revealed that Mr. Bonsell had initially insisted that creationism get equal time in the classroom with evolution.

One incumbent, James Cashman, said he would contest the vote because a voting machine in one precinct recorded no votes for him, while others recorded hundreds.

He said that school spending and a new teacher contract, not intelligent design, were the determining issues. We ran a very conservative school board, and obviously there are people who want to see more money spent, he said.

One board member, Heather Geesey, was not up for re-election.

The school board voted in October 2004 to require ninth grade biology students to hear a brief statement at the start of the semester saying that there were gaps in the theory of evolution, that intelligent design was an alternative and that students could learn more about it by reading a textbook Of Pandas and People, available in the high school library.

The board was sued by 11 Dover parents who contended that intelligent design was religious creationism in new packaging, and that the board was trying to impose its religion on students. The parents were represented by lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and a private law firm, Pepper Hamilton LLP.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
* Home
* Privacy Policy
* Search
* Corrections
* XML
* Help
* Contact U
I just hope Intel hires Americans to do those jobs
of what Bill Gates did when he lobbied for more foreign visas to import more foreign workers into America to work for Microsoft.
You want 'em, you can have 'em,
nm
name 'em
x
Set 'em up, Joe....
...and it's about time.  Joe the Plumber has filed a federal lawsuit against the (now former) head of OJFS (Ohio Job and Family Services) and two assistants.  They illegally investigated him after he offended dems and the liberal media by asking Obama a question, then *somehow* the information was leaked to the press.  Gonna love following this one. 
Keep 'em coming.
I’m going to take a page out of your book again and simply jump over this latest denial/dodge of yours...just like you did with the context post. Blame game bluster scores no points here. The ignorance seems to be unending, but at least you could try to know your own party platform. Think you can handle that?

Bottom line. This is so simple, even you can get it. Dems would impose the R-words (regulatiions and restrictions) on the transnationals....back in the day, we called it monopoly busting. Pubs give them the keys to the candy store, the greed of the wealthy being what it is and all. Gotta keep those CEOs perks coming.

We can all see how well that has worked for us. One does not have to look too far to see just how inept the party has been over the past 8 years in all things economic. Huge surplus transformed to deepest deficit of all times, virtually overnight, gas/food, bank foreclosures, housing crisis, rising unemployment, wage stagnation, inflation/recession. Bush’s latest brilliant explanation for all this is that “Wall Street got drunk. It has a hangover. Don’t know how long it will take them to sober up.” This would be the extent of his experience? Scarey. Maybe he has been reading McCain's joke book. The candidate tells us that the economy “is not his strong suit.” Disarmingly honest, but none to comforting. Speaks for itself.

Touched on this in the economics paragraph in the context post, but you chose to ignore that...or, in your own words, maybe that was the one you were not paying attention to, I forget. In fact, no response from you, Sam, speaks volumes and sheds a whole lot more light on the subject than anything you might actually come out and try to say. Go figure.

If ya can't feed 'em
don't breed 'em
That's the problem with 'em all - they just CAN'T
They're bullies. Both in and out of office.
Ya calls 'em the same way I do.

Most of 'em believe in heaven and he!!, too.
n/msg
McCain sure knows how to vet 'em.
nm
you tell 'em martha
x
Let 'em marry if they want to
then they can have the same privilege straight couples have of paying thousands to divorce lawyers to get rid of what they were so sure was gonna last a lifetime.  Straight or gay, that marriage license changes people.  I seriously doubt that "gay" marriages are going to last any better than straight marriages.  Yeah and they want to adopt kids.  What are the 2 biggest problem areas in straight marriages?  You got it.  Money and kids.  So let 'em have at it.  Make the divorce lawyers richer.  As It happens I don't believe in marriage between 2 people of the same sex and I believe homosexuality is a choice but then I'll leave the sorting out to God.  Same as being an alcoholic is a choice.  One can choose to fight the temptation or they can embrace it.  JMO.
New York is welcome to 'em!! n/m
x
Nothing racist about 'em -
I do not find anything racist about your posts; but I do find the aspirin post racist.
So where d'ya plan to put 'em all?

10%. No deductions. Wouldn't need 'em if
.
Tell 'em what they wanna hear.
they are transporting children to vote.... not quite old enough to realize fairy tales are just that....
ride 'em cowboy!
xx
'outlaw' something that so many of 'em got rich
sheesh
There are different flavors - Fox "news" is one of 'em.
nm
They're ALL innocent...ask 'em!
x
Looks more like Germany wouldn't give 'em up to the US. nm

If it bothers you, don't read'em....I have a job AND a life...
thank you very much. I also have things that are important to me, and the next President of the US and abortion are two of them.
just plain rude - keep 'em coming
xx
Rush Limbaugh taught 'em how!
  Desperate to say something bad, even if they have to fake the film to do it!  Because they know their loyal viewers are such sheep they'll believe anything they see on their show as gospel - even if it is debunked later!
Unfortunately the good weather attracts 'em.

I'm a pagan - I guess that'll really freak 'em out, huh?
Talking with the people you describe is like going back to the Dark Ages.
I would think if they bring them here, when they "let them loose", they would send 'em home
x
You are correct
the thing is we can find common ground with people who we don't always agree with 100%.  Blair tends to be more socialistic, but he is unified in the fact that terrorism is the worst threat to our world right now, and we have to stop it at all costs.  Social agendas come second to him.  Safety is 1st.  
You are correct
I'm sure there are some wonderful people in Iran!! You included. It's good that you can the government is scary though. Here are some words from Iranian president AhMADinejad from just yesterday...

Ahmadinejad warned the West that trying to force it to abandon uranium enrichment would cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians.

From your comments it sounds as if this a false statement since you love America. You of all people I'm sure appreciates America!!


Yes, of course you are correct

However, my post topic was literally just a couple posts below yours and it seemed unlikely that you would have not noticed the duplication in monikers.  This board may indeed be available world-wide, however, there is a fairly small group of folks who routinely post.


My point was simply that your posting may have erroneously led folks to believe that I was posting both pro and anti-liberal messages within a few posts of each other.  That would be rather confusing to say the least and it would be thoughtless to confuse and/or mislead anyone who might be using this board, whether in the U.S. or outside of the U.S. 


You are correct about the $40K....
that is the SCHIP program as it has been over the past 10 years (although income levels have gone up some from the start of it). The expansion of the program was to include the $80K families. This bill was about expansion of the program. Letting the program continue as it was was not the issue. The expansion was the issue. Bush would not have vetoed it if they had not sought to expand it that much. They knew he would veto it if they left that in, and they wanted him to veto it to score political points. That I do not understand. Yes, some Republicans voted for it too, also for political reasons, so if the fallout was really bad they could come back and say "Oh i voted FOR it." Kinda like the Iraq war resolution...lots of Dems voted for it...yada yada.
I want to correct myself on the above...
I was wrong about the poverty level. The figure quoted for a family of four at 300% of the poverty line is $62,000 so he was close on that. However, the bill does not state those people over that level will not get on it. It says the matching rate from the feds might not be available. Then we have the EXCEPTION...the waiver. That opens the door for New York and every other state who wishes to, to expand the program as high as they want to go. That is what Bush was talking about. The waiver makes it possible, and not only possible, probable.

Just wanted to be sure my facts were correct.

Thanks.
Yes you are 100% correct!!!

By george you are right!!!  EVERY SINGLE POSTER ON THIS BOARD IS ME!!!!!!  Except for Observer, of course, and a few old American Girl postings!  I admit it, I am guilty, you have caught me.  I have authored every single post you read on here.  It keeps me very very busy but it's worth it!!!


There I have "fessed up and I feel sooooooooo much better.  Whew!  Thank you Observer for helping me to do the right thing.


You are correct - however, you were the one...
Yes, you are correct, a lot of people don't give middle names second thoughts, and certainly there is nothing to worry about when mentioning his name in full, but when you smear it like its a dirty word, I call that a dirty shame. I was simply stating why don't you say Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton or John Sydney McCain, no you don't, therefore it seems when people don't treat one candidate equal to the other they are up to something. I have no problem with his middle name. I think its a beautiful name. I also think Sydney is a beautiful name.. Second just because someone posts a long post does not mean they copy from other articles. I happened to write the post myself, however, if you would like a much longer one there are plenty that I can copy and paste from - just let me know....happy to oblige. :-)
Correct!
Strange how it's permissible to spread all kinds of rumors about McCain but off limits to mention the facts about Obama's past and present associates, such as the Reverend whose sermons he claimed he never heard.
Sam would be correct
nm
You are correct and I think you are going to see it...
more and more as this campaign goes on. I think it has finally happened. The slumbering lion is waking up. :)
I am sure you are correct, but please,
be specific as me was.
Well.....if you are correct in

assuming that she and her husband aren't working their butts off....at least she isn't living beyond her means regardless of how many hours she works.  At least she doesn't want a handout from the government and money given to her that she hasn't earned.  There are people making as much as she does a year and are well beyond their means with toys, cars, homes, etc.  Crying that they are victims and requesting a handout. 


The most disgusting thing that I have ever seen was during Christmas.  Every year my church does an angel tree.  Every year I would take names of children and their ages and their interest and go out and buy them gifts so they would have something for Christmas.  I wanted to help.  What kid doesn't deserve a nice Christmas....ya know.  So I went out and spent a lot of money on these kids.  Come to find out....these kids weren't poor.  Their parents drove newer and more expensive cars than I drove.  The parents were only out for a free handout....and that sickens me.  I felt used.  I so wanted to help people who really needed help.  Not people who were just looking for a free handout come Christmas time. 


Unfortunately you are correct. s/m

Unions don't have any clout anymore thanks to the Reagan years.  Without the ability to strike, what can they do?  While my husband, as a retiree, has excellent benefits, it is something that is not available to workers retiring now and in the future.  Fact is, we are worried that his benefits may be cut.  They have raised the retirement age and will have to pay more for their medical insurance.  Why?  Because they have lost members.  People who worked at CF with my husband and weren't of retirement age for the most part had to take non-union jobs which paid far less causing many of them to lose their homes and file bankruptcy.  Did anyone hear about them?  I guess not.  That was in 2001 and truckers are worse off today than they were then as are most American workers.


People have let the unions that people fought for go down the tubes.  American workers bought into the "unions have outlived their usefulness, aren't needed any more" from the Reagan years.  Unhuh and we see how much the employers care about their employees now.  Unions are no different than politics.  They are no better or worse than the people who support them.  Basically the clout of the unions came from people that had the fortitude to stand up for their rights and stand together.  Unfortunately we don't have that any more, it's more like, "I've got mine, sorry about you."


Unfortunately, since McCain says Reagan is his hero, I expect if he is elected the American workers can expect to be further shafted.  JMO of course.


You are correct on that one.
Consider that the tax issue will have to pass Congress unless my memory fails me.  I would say middle-class is more like $80,000 to $150,000, depending on whether you fall at the lower or upper end.  As I understand it what Obama is seeking to do is do away with Bush's tax cuts, which WILL affect just about everyone.  The tax cuts, as many of Bush's policies, was a bad idea in the beginning.  Now because of his poor management of the economy EVERYONE is going to pay more taxes and many of those free loaders we talk about may get told to get to work as they should be.  Obama's plan appears to be to be nothing more than rolling back Bush's ill advised tax cuts in the first place.
You are correct..........sm
Arnold can run for Senate (provided he has his citizenship papers in order, and I believe he probably does. Not sure what the laws are in Kollyfawnya.) but he could never run for the POTUS or VPOTUS.
you are correct..it's still that way,
born and raised there, it doesn't change.
You are 100% correct. n/m
x
I would say you are correct
Is anyone really so ignorant that they think that if there was anything illegal about Obama's run for the presidency, that HILLARY first would not have exposed it?  Certainly if she didn't McCain would have.  Why do you suppose THEY let it go?  Because it wasn't going to bear any fruit for them, that's why.
M is correct below - no, they did not
Bush gave his acceptance speech (like everyone does) then had respect for Clinton to finish out his term. Even though Clinton was a disaster too, Bush had the decency to wait until he was sworn in. I do remember hearing about who he was picking for cabinet members but he never held the press conferences that OMessiah is. Also, Clinton did not either. He too had respect for Bush Sr. This is just something you don't do. It is very disrespectful no matter how much you don't like or disagree with the outgoing president. You DON'T do it. They are not president yet and as far as I know the electorates have not even voted yet. So it is still not "cinched" that he is going to get in there. I do believe however he is giving so many press conferences (as many as he can get his face on the camera for) because can you imagine the outcry if the electorates do not vote him in. He's already preparing people to riot if he does not get elected. My take is that the more he gets his face on the camera, the more the idi@ts will believe he is already president. Then it puts pressure on the electorates and others that still have not voted him in yet that if they do anything to disrupt this there will be he!! for them to pay. O'Messiah knows what he's doing alright, but it doesn't make it right.