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

Your time out didn't make you

Posted By: any less clueless...sm on 2008-10-28
In Reply to: What pat of redistribution of wealth do you not understand? - sam

Tax cuts/credits, progressive tax system and social programs aimed at creating opportunities are as American as apple pie. Those policies and initiatives can be found punctuating the pages of our country's history since the time of its inception.

Tax schemes that move the wealth of the masses upward toward an exclusive, elite power class (as in the now defunct Soviet Union), government ownership/takeover of banking and lending institutions and massive buy-outs of privately held properties (homes) such as John McCain proposes to "fix" the mortgage crisis smack of communism and are not exactly what you would call traditional American values. Got it?


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

She didn't make it up. In fact, it's not the first time

these domestic terrorists bought an abortion clinic.  Now, they "need a bigger office."


Operation Rescue president Troy Newman said that his group has discussed the idea of buying the tan, windowless clinic in east Wichita. He made the comment after the Tiller family announced that the clinic would be closed permanently.

"I would love to make an offer on that abortion clinic, and that's some of the discussion that we're having," Newman said in a telephone interview Tuesday from his group's headquarters in Wichita.

Tiller was shot May 31 while serving as an usher at his church. Scott Roeder, a 51-year-old Kansas City, Mo., resident, has been charged with first-degree murder and aggravated assault.

Tiller attorney Dan Monnat declined to discuss Newman's suggestion.
"I'm just not going to respond to every irreverent publicity stunt or comment by these extremists," Monnat said.

Newman's group bought another former abortion clinic in Wichita in 2006 for its headquarters, but he said the group needs to expand. "We need a bigger office," he said.


 
Balance at:  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/10/national/main5079658.shtml?source=RSSattr=U.S._5079658


I didn't make fun of anyone.

This issue is not funny.  It could be deadly for us all.  There are certain Christians who will defend Israel no matter what Israel does.  I think a legitimate question is why.  Jewish people obviously do not accept Jesus Christ as their savior.  So why do some Christians have such undying loyalty to these people?  Is it because they truly put them on a pedestal (again, if so, why?), or is it because of the real estate inhabited by Israel, which just happens to contain the holiest of cities?  Or is it because the Bible says they must not turn their back on Israel or they won't get into heaven?  Some of them are very excited about the prospect of the Rapture.  Coincidentally, these people also represent Bush's base.  Do they believe the Jews are worthy of heaven only if they convert to a certain form of Christianity?  And what happened to Pat Robertson's theme park plans in Israel, and why did it happen?  How does Jerry Fallwell feel about Jews' entrance into heaven?  And can't anyone else see how this could be interpreted as the Jewish religion being inferior to the views of certain Christians?


I personally feel the Jews are entitled to gain entrance to heaven as much as anyone else of any other religion is.  Why don't you?


These people don't represent all Christians, as Starcat pointed out in this thread.  I can't help but find it fascinating that when either Israel or the concept of loyalty to Israel is brought up, a nerve is struck, and attacks against posters asking the questions ensue, without any answers ever being provided to the questions that were asked.


This is not a religious forum, and religious comments really shouldn't be posted here.  Unfortunately, we have a President who has mixed religion and politics so intrinsically during his administration that they can't be separated now.


I have full respect for anyone's religious beliefs, and what they believe is none of my business, but if the entire world is about to end because its end was assisted by those of a certain religion to self-fulfill a prophecy they and the American President believe, then it becomes my business, as well as the business of every person in the world who may be harmed as a result of the religious beliefs of some - not all or even the majority in the world.


I apologize if you feel I made fun of anyone's religion.  That was not my goal.  I admit that sometimes my words don't come out right and what are questions may seem like confrontations.  I apologize for that.


teenager didn't make it.....you need to
xx
well duh - he didn't make a donation.
x
I didn't make the way of salvation sm
but God through Jesus Christ his son did and that is what he says not what I say. That truly is a great God who has made a way for ALL, from the least to the vilest of sinners.

If you spend eternity with Ghandi who has not accepted Jesus, you will regret those words because you will spend an eternity in he**.
Two things I just heard that make her look better all the time!

#1:  Democrat Senority Minority Leader Harry Reid actually suggested to Bush that he nominate Harriet Miers.


#2: Some of most radical conservatives are beginning to whine about it.


Could it be that Bush, reminiscent of Rumsfeld's assertion that You go to war with the Army you have, realizes that he came into office with the Supreme Court HE had and is trying to maintain the structure of the court, and, in doing so, is actually doing something FOR Democrats??


I wonder how much his approval ratings will increase if Harriet Miers indeed turns out to be someone who is REASONABLE.


It will take some time to make this kind of change...... sm
but with the advance of technology, it might not be as long as we think. I would think within the next 10 years, this will be a reality. Obama seems to like to move pretty quickly. By that time, I will be too old to be considered for employment in other fields and too young for retirement (if there is such a thing by the time I get there). Those of us who have dedicated 20 to 30 years or more to this profession will be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if we don't find something else now while we are still employable.

As to who's job it will "save", probably that of software writers and software companies and computer companies....in other words, the technology fields. Interesting no mention was made of the number of jobs that may be lost by MTs, editors, etc. Wonder what those numbers would be?
Hey, don't blame Libby, she didn't make it up.
That information is all over the blogs and they took it from the National Enquirer which, as you should know if you are paying attention, has long been thought to be a toy of the CIA.

AND, Laura Bush slipped up herself thinking she was off camera and made a comment about some event they were talking about, and said oh yes, that was the night we were ALL drinking! So it seems there may actually be some germ of truth in the story taken right from the horse's mouth.

But just shoot the messenger, eh!
Next time, make the effort to remove the pictures. SM

They don't come out.  Also, the colors obscure the names of the people who made the quotes making them worthless.  How is one to argue about who said the quote if you can't read it.  


Yes, Lurker, it's time to make more phone calls and get these

Proby around the time they make GWBush's... smarty... nm
.
I think you picked the wrong time to make such a suggestion...nm
nm
No, your post didn't make it sound like you thought
he was responsible, I'm only imaging how it is going to somehow get back on him. It is a terrible thing to happen to anybody. Some people just need to step back and get a life. :)
You obviously didn't take time to...(sm)
actually look at the links (evidenced by the fact that one is a 9-min video and you replied within 2 min), so do you have any idea what you are even replying to?  All you have provided is yet another baseless knee-jerk reaction.
Yeah, next time we're just going to make our candidate a pop star.
Since it worked out so well for y'all.

Why don't you just let go of the bitterness already? It's petty.
That's the second time you addressed something I didn't post. sm
I thought the Chickenhawk article was brilliant though.  I wish I had posted it.
If he didn't believe in God he wouldn't devote so much time
trying to disprove Him.

It's typical of self-professed athiests. Sad. But typical.
So if McCain didn't vote 64% of the time
how can he vote with Bush 90% of the time?  LOL! 
It's really too bad you didn't take the time to read the entire transcript
of what William Bennett said, Democrat.  But I am not surprised.
What if Obama didn't hang around with terrorists? What if he was not a long-time follower of a r
Then I would be voting for him.
Conservatives believe Bush didn’t act in time because God told him to get rid of poor black people

on welfare and old people on Social Security because they cost taxpayers too much money.


A radio talk show host just said that…and I agree. They can’t admit that Bush has shown us all how he will refuse to protect Americans in a national emergency, even though he used that as a campaign promise, and that Bush doesn’t even have to care any more since he can’t be President again. I hope they can live with their collective conscience. That is if they have one. I’m starting to believe they don’t.


NOBODY can make Saddam look good. But Bush seems to be the ONLY one who can make him look less

If you can't make abortion illegal, just make it impossible (sm)

That's right, Bush is still alive and well.  Check this out.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28024676


Yeah, I know it's MSNBC, but how many other people are doing a lame duck watch?


Just because you make a statement does not make it true...
.
Yep, but it was straight time. No time and a half
DHL is GERMAN OWNED.  And, company was located on Snotsdale, I mean Scottsdale, AZ which means.  Labor laws in Arizona suck.  Right to work state.  Basically a company can do whatever they want to do with you and if you do not like it, then quit and find another job.
Those who make you believe absurdities can make

I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't

his own personal reasons.


http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php


The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.


Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."


Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.


In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.


"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"


Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.


Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.


Conversations With Bush The Candidate


Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.


The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.


I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."


Debating The Timeline For War


But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.


The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.



On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"


I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."


"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …


"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.


Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.



Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"


Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.


Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."


Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.


Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.



 


Perhaps we can make a
between lying because he was a husband caught with a bimbo and lying to even the score with Wilson who knew of the intelligence manipulation for going to war and jeopardizing national security issues. You really don't see the difference here? If Hillary can stand her husband for being a cad, that's hers and Bill's business, not mine. Whereas this administration has lied about Iraq. Clinton lied--nobody died. Bush lied--2000+ died, not to mention the *collateral damage* of innocent Iraqis as pointed out by Democrat above. And you don't see the difference?!
This is what I make of it...sm
Supposedly if the insurgents lay down their arms and come over to the good side they will be allowed amnesty. Info leaked from Iraqi prime minister, al-Maliki, office that he was considering giving amnesty to insurgents and terrorist who have not killed Iraqi citizens. His office later added US soldiers into the equation.

Supporters of said amnesty believe it will lead to further isolating the *bad* terrorist and be inclusive of the *good* terrorist, allowing them become a functioning part of the new Iraq. Bring them over to the good side so to speak.





We can't make it here.
http://sheergoldenhooks.blogspot.com/2006/05/james-mcmurtry-we-cant-make-it-here.htm
don't mean to make any

one more nervous, but visualize this scenario, McCain falls down and breaks a hip. The vice president who has stated "I have not thought much about foreign policy" (despite having HER OWN SON going to Iraq soon)  has to make a crucial decision that does not involve a rogue moose, her brother-in-law's behavior, or what to wear at a beauty pageant.  Scary.  Since she has not thought much about foreign policy, what group of Washington people are going to be instructing her on foreign policy soon?  The Karl Rove group who is advising them on all issues. If you have enjoyed the last 8 years, you're gonna l-o-v-e the next 4 if McCain wins.


 


Exactly. And the DNC will make him pay for it, too.
Sadly.
You have to make up your own

mind.  If you are curous as to what he studied, you can look that up.  Why ask some stranger to get that info for you?  He was a constitutional law professor, but as for specific classes, I don't know. I like him for his ideas, his honesty, his humor, his obvious love for his family, his unique time spent in both the black and white communities. His past has been thoroughly reviewed and shows only integrity.  The fact that he is attacked only for people he has known actually shows me that he has an immaculate record.  I don't know many who could stand up to that kind of scrutiny.  I think he is a once-in-a-lifetime leader - he has the ability to inspire and the humbleness to listen to different views about issues along with a brillant intellect.  His life shows his principals and I can find not one false note.  That is my opinion of him.  I am sure to be attacked over silly stuff for this post, but I can give it right back, so that's okay.


 


Make that 15
15. GLOBAL WARMING: Biden said that he knows what is causing global warming when in fact, even the best scientists in the country can't agree on what is causing global warming.
Does that make 2 now?
.
Now, whatever would make YOU
that???
I want him to make sure that the
US is the leader in development of alternative energy sources.  This would solve so many problems in one fell swoop:  Creating new industries thereby creating thousands of new jobs, address the global warming issue, helping us move away from our addiction to fossil fuels and foreign oil.  If the US would come out as a leader in this, then many other nations would follow.  He also stated that our infrastructure was in sore need of updating, that our power grid in this country is one of our major weaknesses making us more vulnerable to terrorist attacks.  I have never heard anyone else address this issue.  Makes so much sense!
Huh. That does make me wonder.
I know that if I was making it big my parents wouldn't be living in a double wide and my dad's house would have the improvements that it needs. I mean I wouldn't pay there way for everything but I'd make sure they had a decent place to live and weren't struggling. That's just what families do.
And what does that make you?

Rah, Rah, Rah, Yes we can, Change, Change, Change, Blah, Blah, Blah


Then that would make him.........sm
half American. And disqualified from serving for POTUS!

What is ridiculous is that you (collectively speaking to all libs) cannot understand that he is a FRAUD! He does not meet the qualifications, plain and simple. It would be the same thing if he were 38 years old....he would be disqualified on age.

I will say this, and you can call me a tin-hatter if you want, but IF the SC upholds the lower courts' decisions and allows Obama be POTUS, then we might as well chunk the whole Constitution out the window because the rest of it will be meaningless. If those judges let this go through, it will only further demonstrate how this election was orchestrated from the beginning....or even before the beginning.
Make that 6.8%.
x
It does make you wonder whose
butt the big liberal news is trying to kiss today. Those numbers are continually tossed around and no one bothers to check the facts. A neighbor who worked for GM for 40 years does get pension and healthcare benefits, etc., but the average worker now is making roughly $40/hour, which would include their benefits package as well. Of course, that is still great pay and is what many do not realize is actually what keeps the middle class in this country going.

I too was surprised they are going on and on about what the 3 big auto execs are using for transportation to get to the hearings considering you didn't hear a bunch of hooplah about what the AIG execs were skirting around the countryside in. Strange no liberal media went on and on and on about what they drove, what style they traveled in, etc., so it becomes very clear to me who the brown nosers are.
Really make you wonder
I haven't read the article but will. My take on the global warming conspiracy....someone sure is profiting from it. I won't say his name but his initials begin with AG (if you couldn't guess already).

All I know is I'm not about to have some energy hog riding around in a motorcade of SUV's (with one whole SUV just for his luggage), using however much energy, fuel, etc he wants and polluting the planet big time to tell me how I need to live.

There is a natural warming of the planet. It's happening with other planets too. Don't tell me people actually believe it's the earthlings fault for the warming of other planets too.

Lots of money to be had in this subject, but nothing has been proven yet. Especially since we all know the charts that AG uses to try to prove a point are not correct. Sorry but I'll listen to the scientists with years of knowledge and studying on the subject, not someone who is blowing off hot steam to get rich off of this scheme of his.
Oh yes! Make sure your have on your top hot, too!
;-) LOL!!
make too much?? I'm an MT!
Not likely I make too much as I am an MT!! Don't know any MTs in the $250K bracket, do you? If you do, I want to work where they do!!
So that would make
baby killers extremists. Glad you cleared that up. ;-)
This make me so angry!

As Karl Rove himself said, Wilson's wife was "fair game."


I've said before that it's not only Valerie Plame who he endangered, but everyone who has worked with her during her work with WMDs.  We're in the middle of a WAR, but this "good ol' boy" administration doesn't care what they do or don't do in that respect.  They don't care whose lives they endanger.  They don't THANK these people for their service and for putting their lives in danger to try to make this country a better place. No, instead they see a man who has dared to disagree with King George, and they target his wife for potential danger, to get even with her husband for disagreeing with Almighty George Dumbya Bush.  They act like a redneck version of the Mafia. The CIA deserve more respect than this administration gives it, but this administration doesn't think much of respect.  Bush blatantly doesn't care who in the world respects us, and he offers no respect to anyone else in this world.  He is perfect, and he makes no mistakes, and if you don't believe me, just ask him or one of his aids or one of his flunkies on this board.  They'll all tell you how perfect he is.


I've seen Larry Johnson on different programs, and the views he expressed in this letter absolutely reflect what he said on TV.  How in the world could any CIA source trust the CIA to protect his or her identity when the president of this country makes it clear that everything is "fair" in this good ol' boy Mafia-type game played in Washington.


Rove definitely should have his security clearance yanked.  He clearly doesn't deserve it.  Neither does Bush.


They don't make threats. SM
What's wrong with having guns?  They aren't wave them around.  They are proudly displaying them.  I guess it's more of a man thing. We have lots of guns but I am not really into them.  I don't care if someone else is though.  And that has nothing to do with war.  This is a typical liberal response to someone upholding their rights under the Constitution.  Silence the dissenters, take away the guns, remove all Christian religion from sight.  It's pretty obvious by your post that is what is going on with you.  It's called ignorance. 
Yes, anything to make an argument...sm
No pun intended to reality check, but yes anything can turn into an argument. Yep.
There is NO CONTEXT that can make it better.
You all keep saying taken out of context but you don't offer one iota of evidence to show this makes a bit a difference, or say why. Anytime someone is quoted the words are taken out of context.

Why don't you put your point on the line and explain why it makes a difference in this case?