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

happy with the choice of

Posted By: warmallee on 2008-12-08
In Reply to:

Gregory for Meet the Press.  I think the team at NBC and MSNBC have put together in the last year is exceptional.  Its a good feeling to have faith in our new president, his cabinet appointees and even the media covering him.  I think maybe we had to hit Bush-rock bottom to be able to get our act together.  Did anyone hear that Rev Wright called Eliz Hasselback a dumb blonde or such other phrase.


 


 




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 don't feel the need to make the choice. It's a child, not a choice. n/t
.
Choice
The three posters chose not to post anymore.  No one ran them off.
Pro-Choice
I am pro-choice and here is why. My dad was a big city cop before Roe v. Wade. He told me true stories of woman dying from botched illegal abortions. Many times, they found women who had bled to death because they tried to abort the babies themselves with coat hangers. Other times, they found women dead from sepsis. This was in the days before ambulances when the cops answered all the medical calls.

He was anti-abortion but seeing all these dead young woman haunted him. He saw a lot of awful, gruesome stuff where he worked and eventually became somewhat hardened to it, but these cases he could never forget.

I am not pro-abortion but it is going to happen. It can either be legal and somewhat safe, or illegal and dangerous.
my choice

would be change with demonstrated ability to appreciate the complexity of situations and the willingness to listen to all views on the subject.  precisely why I am an ardent Obama supporter.


 


Again, for those of you who are pro-choice...
and against hunting, fishing, etc,  could you please explain the difference between killing something for food or because it is a menace to livestock as opposed to killing a child because it's not the right time for a baby, oops I got pregnant by "accident", oops I don't want children, etc. Again, it is rather ironic that one can be selective in their definition of killing.  
whose choice?
seriously, where do you draw the line? i mean a 2-year-old is not old enough to make a "choice" of life or death, so you think it's okay to rid of them too?
choice
I do not think there is a person on here who is in favor of 3rd trimester abortion, etc. The thing is folks, that if abortion is abolished, it not only effects those who haven't learned of birth control use (and I don't feel sorry for them) but those in real need such as rape victims, maternal distress, etc. That is the trouble here, you can't do away with abortions entirely, though a lot of people have abused it. We don't need women resorting to butchers as they did in the past. Look, if someone is wanting one, they are going to have it, legal or not. We have to make it the same as any other medical procedure in this country.. you see your doctor, you make arrangements for the procedure to be done in the hospital through a referral.
what choice
When Obama wins, the repubs will no choice but to accept that fact.  I cant wait to get out of the Bush admin and have a change.  The last eight years has sunk our country. 
There is another choice.....sm
for president. Check out Chuck Baldwin and the Constitutional Party. Warning: He is VERY conservative, so all you liberals need not look. ;o)

http://www.baldwin08.com/
Actually under O you will have no choice
The dems are talking about a draft. O has already starting talking about it being a requirment for college students. Yes REQUIRE, not option.

http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-new-youth-corp-requirement.html


Going to war is your choice...not ours.
Those who choose to elect war-mongers should be the ones sent to battle. Those who choose to elect peace-loving Presidents should not be forced to serve. That is why there are conscientious objectors.

I think you summed it up when you described the lack of intelligence involved in being the first to enlist.
I don't think we will have any choice. (sm)
As you said, people will do whatever they have to feed thier families.  I also think before it's over with, we'll have to get a board for gardening on this site...LOL.
Bad choice, but he had to do it (sm)
IMHO, Obama made a deal with the Clintons in order to get elected and now it's pay up time. Look at all the Clintonites he's got surrounding him - the positions have changed, but all the faces are the same. All we need is Madeline Albright in there somewhere.
It is my choice, and I don't believe it.
Scare tactics are a dime a dozen in religion.
No, I think the choice was hers...(sm)
but that's the point.  She had the choice of either having the baby or not, as opposed to being forced into having the baby, which is exactly what outlawing abortion would do.
What exactly do you think Pro Choice is?
Pro Choice means you believe a woman has the right to decide what to do with her body - exactly how do you figure Obama is not Pro Choice?

And he is not saying that women are going to be required to abort their unborn - he is saying they are going to have the right!
That's your choice
and God gives you that right.

Christianity is very much based on fact just as it is on faith. The faith comes from having faith that Jesus' death was sufficient for all. The facts have been shown through archeology and even science.

If the Bible was scrutinized the way other ancient literature has been, it would be found to be true and consistent within itself, but because there is preconceived notions held by those who scrutinize, such as the "fact" that miracles cannot happen, it is believed to be incorrect, myth if you will.

I used to be just like you. I used to think that Christians were rude Bible-thumping bigots who tried to take the corner on Heaven. But when I finally dropped my bias and read the Bible as I would any other book and once I let people actually speak their peace to me, I came to the logical conclusion that Jesus was real, He was the Godman, and He was the Lord. Reading the Bible through you cannot help but notice the consistency and fluidness that runs through it. The OT is the story of the promise God made, and the NT is God fulfilling that promise.

I was not raised in a church, I was not taught about Jesus by my parents. I was not forced to go to Sunday School and I was not forced to be baptized. I made a decision. A decision has to be made with your mind, your emotion and your spirit. It's a three part deal. Many people make emotional decisions and once the emotion is gone, so is the decision. Many people make logical decisions, but the decision is never personal for them, so neither is the relationship with God. Many times the spirit tries to guide someone to the decision, but the person feels logically or emotionally that they cannot.

I may come off as brash because I don't take the "we are all on the same path route" as some do. I would be wrong in doing so, and I would be denying what my Lord explicitly said. To do so would have serious repercussions for me. Therefore, I choose to do what He says and have people not like me, rather than do what people would have me do and deny the One who died for me.


And that is your choice
You choose that belief; I don't. If you want to lead a life ruled entirely by Biblical law, maybe you could all band together and buy an island or something and call it Christganistan. This is a secular country, founded to get away from the idea that there is one true way to live one's life.

The more the so-called tolerant Christians write here, the less difference I see between Radical Islam and Fundamental Christian. It's two sides of the same coin, and it saddens me that this country, founded on principles of individual choice, has seemingly regressed in that regard.
It is NOT a choice.
You keep on with this ridiculous choice bit, but homosexuality is not a choice anymore than being blond or tall or having blue eyes is a choice. It is what the individual is born as.
Sure it's a choice.
God says it is. I believe Him not you. Sorry...
thank you and I like #2 choice. nm..
x
Happy 4th to you too MT -
...and to everyone! I feel it an appropriate time to remember...I LOVE AMERICA...sappy but true:)Not even THEY can spoil that, ya know.

Happy comet watching! Here's a link for anyone interested in seeing the collision:

http://www.space.com/deepimpact/


http://www.space.com/deepimpact/
So happy here
Bunch of corrupt individuals..Frist is waiting in the wings.
Oh Happy Day






Sunday, Oct. 02, 2005
Power Outage
House leader Tom DeLay's indictment upends the Republicans' to-do list and their outlook for next year's elections. Can they recover in time?

The news that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay had been dreading for months was brought by an aide, who interrupted DeLay's weekly lunch with Dennis Hastert in the House Speaker's office. DeLay absorbed it, and then the man widely called the Hammer on Capitol Hill (though rarely to his face) did what he does best: he hit back. All right, DeLay replied. Let's go. Let's go fight. Less than three hours later, before a roomful of reporters, DeLay addressed a Texas grand jury's charge that he and two political associates conspired to funnel $155,000 in illegal corporate campaign contributions into Texas legislative races. He called it one of the weakest, most baseless indictments in American history and the prosecutor who brought the case a partisan fanatic. That night, anxious to show he's not a recluse, he introduced Rudy Giuliani at a Friends of Israel banquet. DeLay even made an uncharacteristic round of the cable shows, hinting darkly on cnn that he would soon produce very good evidence that his nemesis, Travis County district attorney Ronnie Earle, had engaged in a conspiracy of his own--with the Democratic leadership here in Washington.

Combativeness has seen Tom DeLay through near-death experiences before, but on the Hill late last week, it was hard to miss the signs that his foot soldiers and allies had begun positioning themselves in anticipation of his demise. G.O.P. rules require that DeLay, 58, majority leader since 2003, relinquish his post while he fights the conspiracy charge, and speculation is rife that even if he is acquitted his days as one of the most powerful men in the House could be over. You leave a job like this, there is no coming back, says a top Republican official who likes DeLay and thinks he will be cleared. Politics abhors a vacuum more than anything else, and it's going to move past him too quickly.

Almost immediately, it did. A plan engineered by DeLay and Hastert to install complaisant Rules Committee chairman David Dreier as temporary majority leader was nixed by conservatives who dislike Dreier's moderate positions on stem-cell research and gay marriage. Instead the brain trust installed ambitious whip Roy Blunt, who will share some of the majority leader's duties with Dreier. The setup is so shaky that some House Republicans are pressing for the election of a new leadership team as early as January.

Meanwhile, lobbying shops that had traded on the access to DeLay were desperately dialing House aides to forge new relationships. Those not tied to DeLay were calling the same staff members to gloat. There's millions of dollars on the table, said an aide who had heard from both camps. These guys are going to slaughter each other. What's left of the G.O.P. leadership, already beset by a raft of other political problems, was trying to figure out how to salvage the ambitious legislative agenda of more tax cuts, hurricane help and gas-price relief that they want to carry them to next year's midterm elections--a more difficult challenge with the sidelining of the man who had so determinedly pulled off many of their close victories.

DeLay may not have seen the worst of it yet. Sources tell TIME that while Earle was closing in on DeLay from Austin, Texas, a federal investigation into the spreading scandal around disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, accused with Michael Scanlon (a former press secretary of DeLay's) of bilking their Indian-tribe clients out of $66 million, has begun lapping at the edges of the former majority leader's operation. A former Abramoff associate who was questioned by the FBI in August says, They had a lot of e-mails, a lot of traffic between our office and DeLay's office. Many of those exchanges involved lavish travel by DeLay arranged by the lobbyist but requested, the e-mails suggest, by aides in DeLay's office. (House members are allowed to accept gifts under limited circumstances but not to solicit them.) Says the source: There was nothing I saw that hit DeLay personally, but there was a lot of questionable stuff that was going on with his staff. 'Tom wants this. Tom wants that.' Was it really him or just the staff that was being aggressive? DeLay's office wouldn't comment on the Justice Department investigation, and neither would the FBI.

Republicans had plenty of problems even before the latest blow to DeLay. Voters are angry about gas prices, the war in Iraq and the botched response to Hurricane Katrina. Polls show President George W. Bush at or near the lowest public-approval ratings of his presidency. On the other side of the Capitol, Senate majority leader Bill Frist faces an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission into the circumstances surrounding his decision to sell all of his stock in the hospital chain founded by his family, Hospital Corporation of America, in June, just before the share price dropped following a bad earnings report.

So dispirited are Republicans that some worry about losing control of the House--a danger that once seemed remote. We're looking in the crystal ball. We're moving into an area where we don't know what will happen, says deputy whip Tom Cole, a conservative from Oklahoma. With a switch of only 15 seats required to end their majority, Cole is anxious that the party may have to contest as many as 100 tight races if the winds arraying against it turn into a national backlash like the one that ended the Democrats' 40-year reign in 1994. Having seen how the Democrats failed to galvanize their voters in that campaign, Republicans say the chief goal in rewriting their strategy for the fall will be to re-energize their base. The plan taking shape calls for a robust conservative agenda through next spring, including a tax-reform package. That move would allow Republicans to pivot back to issues like education tax credits that would appeal more to moderates as the elections approach.

As for DeLay, his struggles appear likely to consume him for many months. He has launched what amounts to a major political campaign to convince supporters that the indictment is flimsy and he is a victim of a political smear. DeLay pointed to Democrats' vow to use G.O.P. ethics as a campaign issue, and supporters noted criticism of Earle in Texas for speaking in May to a $100,000 fund raiser for a Democratic political action committee (PAC). But DeLay has produced no evidence Earle conspired with Democrats in Washington.

While it's true that Earle and DeLay have been locked in a complicated war of Texas-size egos for years, the charges against DeLay are fairly simple. During the 2002 elections, a committee DeLay founded to support conservative politicians--Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC--allegedly accepted $155,000 in corporate donations and then included that in a check for $190,000 to the Republican National Committee, which then routed a similar amount to seven Texas legislative candidates. DeLay's lawyers say the transactions were separate and that the PAC accepted money from both individuals and corporations. The contribution helped produce six wins that were crucial to DeLay's political ambitions in Washington because they resulted in a Republican majority in the state legislature, which redrew congressional district lines and helped add five more Republicans to the state's congressional delegation. If convicted, DeLay faces up to two years in prison and a maximum fine of $100,000.

DeLay has done his best to paint the D.A. as a Democratic loose cannon. But Earle, 63, points out that of the 15 public officials he has prosecuted, 12 have been fellow Democrats. Texas law makes it a felony for corporations and labor unions to contribute money to political campaigns, Earle tells TIME. My job is to prosecute felonies. I'm doing my job. The grand jury foreman, William Gibson, 76, insists that this was not one of those rubber-stamp deals. Ronnie Earle did not indict Mr. DeLay. Twelve people on that grand jury voted to indict.

If DeLay has cause for hope, it may be that Earle has been more successful convicting minor figures than major ones. The majority leader has put together a legal team headed by Dick DeGuerin, who handed Earle the most spectacular failure of his career: a 1994 misconduct case against former state treasurer Kay Bailey Hutchison that Earle was forced to drop on the first day of trial. Hutchison is now the state's senior Senator.

There are those who predict that DeLay will be able to balance mounting a defense with pulling strings behind the scenes in the House. But whereas he had been accustomed to just stepping downstairs to the majority leader's spacious suite of Capitol offices after a House vote, dusk last Thursday afternoon found DeLay outside on the Capitol Plaza, waiting at a traffic light to return to his office in the Cannon House Office Building across the street. Just like any other Congressman.


Happy day
I have been a vegetarian for more than 30 years and am also pro Native American.  I have not celebrated Thanksgiving for many years.  However, I do celebrate a day of getting together with family and friends and a day of appreciation..So, to all my liberal friends/co-posters..**Happy Day**..There are truly better days coming..
Happy 4th to Everyone!

I hope we never forget that brave American soldiers fought and died for our freedom to post on this very board!  Here's hoping that we all still have the same freedoms in the USA next year this time as we have today. 


My flag is hanging proudly.  I hope you all have a wonderful day.


Happy 4th to you and everyone!

She sure does not seem happy about it.sm
JMHO but to me it is hands off unless invited.
I'm happy s/m

To see that a couple of people will stand up with me.  This nation was founded on the principals of Christianity.  We kicked God out of our schools, courthouses and everywhere else a few thought He should go and look where we are now.  Kids killing each other in the schools, etc. etc. Now I hear they want to take "In God We trust" off of our money.  And my further opinion.........these radical evangelicals who think that anyone who says, "Lord, Lord" must be a Bible thumping Christian, have done more to turn people away from God than the other way around.   No wonder we're in such a mess. 


For anyone who wants to jump on this as "religion"....well don't.  I don't propose that anyone who doesn't want to turn to God be forced to do so but I do believe that it is high time that Christians.....or those who follow Christ (or try to)... stand up and be heard.  AND I believe when enough of us do that, God will lead us.  Again....this is my opinion and I'm not talking about "religion," I'm talking about those of us who have accepted Jesus Christ as our Savoir.  He gave us a choice to accept Him or reject Him and I don't believe he would want us to cram him down anyone's throat who does not want to be a believer.


I'm off my stump now.


Am I happy?

I must admit that I am not happy about Barrack Obama winning.  I do still have some fear because it seems like there is so much about him that we do not know.  I still worry about his inexperience as well.


However, I hope he is successful as president.  I don't wish him to fail because if he fails.....we all fail.  I hope he is a wonderful president who can bring us out of our crisis.  We will just have to wait and see. 


Just because I'm worried and scared of what is to come....doesn't mean I won't give him a chance.  I will give him a chance and hope and pray that I was wrong about him all along, but until he proves to me that I am wrong....I'm still naturally going to be worried, nervous, scared, etc.  That doesn't make me unpatriotic or a radical republican.  It makes me human.


I'm not happy
I'm not happy about any assassination talk about anyone. I would be MORE upset if McCain/Palin had been LYING about Obama, but they were not.

The original article talks about there always being a surge in this type of activity after every election. There is more of a surge this time because Obama is African-American. I'm pretty sure they saw that coming. I'm also pretty sure the Secret Service can deal with it.

End of discussion.


Hey, I'm happy to have someone
else munching on crow alongside me.  LOL  Have a Happy Crow Eating Day!
Why are you happy about this? Why would be want
nm
What I'm happy about is
not to be living in such a black and white world. This is not a question of whether or not you respect Obama. This is about the knee-jerk hatred expressed by sore losers. Just because W has earned such deep and broad disapproval (the kindest word I can think of) and has taught us all that we cannot trust government, does not mean that we have the right to assume that Obama cannot and will not take us to a higher level and get us back in touch with who we really are.

He may not have earned your respect, but he DOES deserve to have his chance. You don't want to come out of the darkness and into the light? Fine. Hunker on down in that dark damp dungeonof yours, but please stop trying to drag te rest of us down there with you.
Not happy, but if I were, I would not act like a
nm
Don't be so happy.

"To be sure, Obama and his staff have long insisted that they are not measuring their progress on the whims of the markets. One day's gains can be tomorrow's losses. But for those in the commentariat who are down on what has happened under the current president's watch, it's worthwhile putting recent developments in historical context." Your input, not mine.


At lunch time, it was down, but by the end of the day, it was up. The market is not "ready" to rebound yet. Too much still up in the air. I don't get where you think 1 or 2 days gain is the greatest thing that happend since apple pie.  If I had a bunch of money to throw away, I might be throwing some into the stock market now and taking it out tomorrow, but I don't, so I won't. Those that do have the money are doing just that, putting in and taking out the same day. That's not a very reliable way to judge the stock market.


Granted, if it would keep going up, I might move my 401K into a more aggressive portfolio, but after losing more than $7K, I'd rather wait. I only had triple that in a pension plan, so I would rather be safe than sorry.


This does not mean the plan is working yet and I'd rather be safe with what's left of my piddling 401K than sorry.


Don't jump on the bandwagon  yet. There's still a lot left to be desired in the plans and/or laws that they are trying to put in place.


How can anyone be happy with

a president who spends more in a few months than Bush did in 8 years?  How can you be happy with a man who said he would sign no bill with pork in it and then turn around and not even read a bill and sign it loaded with pork?  How can a man who campaigns on pulling troops out of Iraq be praised for what he is doing when he has extended the time line to keep troops in Iraq and is sending more to Afgan?  How can you praise a man for giving rights to people who wish to have an abortion but at the same time take away the rights of those who might refuse to perform it because they don't believe in it?  How about the fact that he would appoint no lobbyists and turned around and did just that?  A man who obviously bows to the Saudi King and then lies about it when it is on video tape!! 


This isn't prejudging someone.  It is seeing a politician for what he is.....a liar. 


It never ceases to amaze me that just because someone doesn't agree with Obama that they are instantly categorized as racist or prejudice.  Doesn't it occur to you people that maybe I don't like Obama because he is a liar and it has nothing to do with his race.  A liar is a liar no matter what race or sex a person is.


I'm so sick and tired of the race card.  Obama is the president and each president deals with criticism.  It isn't like this is a new fad of criticizing the president just because he is of mixed race.  If McCain had won, he would have been criticized for every little thing he did too.  Deal with it!


Very happy for you.
nm
I am not happy about that at all.
But he isn't the only one abusing tax payer dollars and that crap continues to happen in both parties.  I personally feel that we should go after all the jackarses who misuse taxpayer money......but if we did that.....we wouldn't have anyone left.  LOL!
I don't know where they want to go with it, but abortion is a choice..sm
and last time I checked it was not limited to one race. Can that same one prove that more blacks abort than whites? There goes that theory.
A word about choice
I think we have probably said all that we can say on that matter, and we won't agree, but I enjoyed speaking with you.

I just want to add a word about women who support choice. It seems that many people are quick to judge a woman that supports choice, stating that she must have had an abortion or would be willing to have one. I can only speak for myself, a few friends, and family members, but I can tell you that in our case, this it entirely not true. My sister always states that she is, Personally conservative, but politically liberal. I do have a few friends who had had abortions, but I do not believe that I could ever have one myself, and though I would stand by my daughter if that was a choice she made, I would be devastated inside. So, while this is not a choice I would make, I will still support the right to choose for other women. In an ideal world, there would be no unwanted pregnancies, but until there is, I will always stand for choice.

Peace.
A word about choice...
And I enjoy talking with you. It is good to discuss opposing viewpoints without anger and condescencion. We will have to agree to disagree. There is so much more to this than just abortion. As I have said, and as I will continue to say, when we as a nation begin to devalue life at any stage, we are on a slippery slope headed downward. And to start that devaluation with the most innocent and helpless among us...is horrifying to me. The idea of murdering captive child in utero is absolutely horrifying to me. As I said, I will follow the law of the land, and just because some wingnuts have blown up clinics and shot doctors does not mean that all people of faith believe that. I believe it is wrong to do that and I would have no part of that. However, I will continue to call it what I believe it is, and that is murder. And in the end, the women who choose abortion and the doctors who perform them will have to answer for that one day, not to you or me, but to God.

God bless!
It is not our choice who becomes president
Whether we like or dislike someone, vote or not vote for them, they are not elected by the people. I totally understand when people say "so'n'so is not my President. I felt that way when Bill Clinton was in. He campaigned as one person and once he got in the office all the promises he made, all the "changes" he said he'd bring never happened. He was a totally different person than what he campaigned as and therefore he was "not my president". The same was with Hillary. All I kept thinking was great, here we go again...this country is going to be without another president for 4 years. I was hoping for the best and luckily it worked out for the country's best to not have her in there. In actuality the people who have the money control who is put in there. We saw that with the Bush/Gore campaign (even though I'm thankful Gore didn't get in). I highly doubt all of Obama's donations are from people who send in $5 and $10. Although I leaning more towards him over McCain. To call someone names (retarded, hillbilly, etc) is childish and an insult to the people who are actually "special" and hillbillies. Also calling them the antichrist is also another stupid remark put out by people who don't understand. Sure Bush is not among the brightest who have held the office. He should have been impeached a long time ago (but we have the dems Pelosi and others) who stopped that (why I don't know). So, no Bush is not the brightest, he has committed war crimes (IMO). But Clinton was no better. If there was a contest in the worst President I would not be able to decide between the two. Neither of them know or care what the regular person (me and my family and friends) are going through. They don't know we're struggling with paying bills, grocery shopping, paying for gas, etc. Hillary Clinton fortunately is out of the race. I sweated that one. We won't even begin to go into all the lies and crooked campaigning she did. Why people don't remember what it was like when she and Billy were in there I can't understand. Clinton's presidency was the worst ever. Each time a President gets in their the economy gets worse. We end up more in debt as time goes on. So to say its worse with Bush than Clinton, you also have to say it was worse with Clinton than Bush Sr, worse with Bush Sr than Regan, etc, etc. We just go further and further into debt and each campaign are promised that they have a solution to get the debt down. I'm no Bush fan, but one thing that is a fact is that people have been paying lower taxes with Bush than Clinton. I found a fact sheet that showed what people paid for taxes under Bush and what they paid under Clinton. Clinton was awful. It was a dark time for our country. He misrepresented our country and made us look like fools. I counted every day until he left office and then in those last few hours was rewarded with learning how much more crooked he was by giving out pardons like it was candy at a halloween party. I also think Bush is awful, but the country would have been worse off with Gore (the Bore), and Kerry (Mr. Lerch). John McCain would be the worse thing that happened to this country, but I always have to remember...my vote doesn't count. Whoever "big brothers" want in there they will put in there.
I approve of his choice. I also was...sm
impressed by Obama's statement that he did not want to choose a yes man.
I think that was a good choice also.
Biden has over 30+ years experience and isn't afraid to voice his opinion if he disagrees with an issue.  Great choice and can't wait for them to WIN!!  Be real people - can you see Cindy McCain (druggie) as a first lady?  She's afraid of her own shadow and it's like watching paint dry when she talks!  Okay, Michele needs to spruce up that wardrobe but she's got more brains then McCain and Cindy put together.  
it was an insane choice
I certainly do not want to wake up every morning in a country where such mind-boggling choices are foisted on us by the president out of the blue. 
not even john's first choice

ABC's Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: It wasn't until Sunday night that John McCain, after meeting with his four top advisers, finally decided he could not tap independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to be his running mate. One adviser, tasked with taking the temperature of the conservative base, had strongly made the case to McCain that it would be a disaster for the party and that the base would revolt. McCain concluded he could not go that route.

So the man McSame thought would make the best vice president was vetoed by his fundie base. And he caved.

But he's very Mavericky!




That's her business and choice if she does, not yours.
Just because YOU wouldn't be able to handle children plus a job doesn't mean another woman wouldn't. Perhaps your energy or patience level isn't up to it, but I know plenty of women that have high-profile careers and young children and handle both beautifully. It's all about balance. Again, just because you might not be able to find that balance doesn't mean others can't.
Nothing wrong with his choice....and so far...
no Marxists have given her a rousing endorsement either. Another point in her favor.
Definition of choice

Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action. Some simple examples include deciding whether to get up in the morning or go back to sleep, or selecting a given route for a journey. More complex examples (often decisions that affect what a person thinks or their core beliefs) include choosing a lifestyle, religious affiliation, or political position.


You choose your path, I'll choose mine.


In the United States, the Bill of Rights is the name by which the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are known.[1] They were introduced by James Madison to the First United States Congress in 1789 as a series of constitutional amendments, and came into effect on December 15, 1791, when they had been ratified by three-fourths of the States. The Bill of Rights limits the powers of the federal government of the United States, protecting the rights of all citizens, residents and visitors on United States territory.


The Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom to petition. It also prohibits unreasonable search and seizure, cruel and unusual punishment, and compelled self-incrimination. The Bill of Rights also prohibits Congress from making any law respecting establishment of religion and prohibits the federal government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. In federal criminal cases, it requires indictment by grand jury for any capital or "infamous crime", guarantees a speedy public trial with an impartial jury composed of members of the state or judicial district in which the crime occurred, and prohibits double jeopardy. In addition, the Bill of Rights states that "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,"[2] and reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the citizenry or States. Most of these restrictions were later applied to the states by a series of decisions applying the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868, after the American Civil War.


 


Are you pro-choice? Just askin', cause...
I always find it ironic that people against hunting, etc, don't mind abortion at all....killing is killing.