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

personal attacks are

Posted By: MissiLink on 2008-10-01
In Reply to: If you injected a little truth and integrity... - sam

not allowed on this board.  Stop attacking me personally with your imagining what I have or don't have in my work area.  Stick to the issues.


 




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

we don;t need personal attacks.

nm


 


personal attacks are

not allowed on this board. Stop immediately.


 


Why the personal attacks?

This has nothing to do with this conversation.  What this person makes and why they make that is none of our business.  The point was that she didn't live beyond her means and doesn't want a handout and that right there makes her a heck of a lot better than a lot of people. 


and the personal attacks continue

And now we revert to personal attacks
on posters when you can't them to agree with you.  What a waste.
Stop the personal attacks. SM

Stop with personal attacks, the vile name-calling, grammar policing and foul language.


Debate the issues.  Respect opinions. 


I'm not moderating for niceness but there is some troll behavior going on and it has to go. 


Moderator


 


can we just debate and stop with the personal attacks?
I know, Democrat, I know, and if I come across as harsh sometimes, that is just me..however, the post below that I condone terrorism really cut me..I have never condoned terrorism..to protest, of course, that is part of America, long live protests, but to say I condone terrorism..OMG..I have tried to debate logically, of course, not what conservatives believe but that is what debating is all about..two different ideas..I have not attacked personally  yet these neocons continue to post on the liberal board and attack the liberals for what they have posted and they have attacked me non stop..I thought a few weeks ago we made a deal that we would post respectfully  but the minute I started posting once again, there has been nothing but attacks, not logical insightful debate..If a neocon does not agree with me that Chavez is a good man or that I agree with protesting in Argentina (not breaking the law, just protesting), well then lets debate it..dont attack me and call me a terrorist..which I take very seriously and it is an affront to me, it is like cursing at me..Oh geez..I do have to say, Democrat, you have always posted above and beyond board..I have always enjoyed reading your posts..
Reminder: Watch the personal attacks. sm

Debate opinions, argue conflicting viewpoints.  Steer clear of personal attacks.


Thanks,


Moderator


 


Shocking personal attacks after you just called people empty headed?
the hypocrisy is mind boggling and humorous at the same time.
need more attacks
More liberals need to start attacking back at the neocons.  For too long we have remained quiet while the republicans have been in full attack mode, especially during last year's election, smearing a true Vietnam hero, Kerry, whereas Bush never even finished his National Guard duty and Cheney and Rumsfield never went into the military but they find it is quite alright to send our sons and daughters to war for nothing.  We need more liberals to start screaming out about the terrible people in the WH. 
No Attacks?
Anthrax.
No need for attacks
he got what he wanted which was the Iraq War and taking out Sudam.  Show me bin Laden and maybe I'll be willing to give Bush some credit.  Something mighty strange that we with the mightiest miliary in the world can't get him.  But I guess Cheney would say, "SO??????"  What a couple of crooks!
How many terrorists attacks have we had since 911
nm
Thx - the attacks are really getting out of hand
Reminds me of that line in the movie where the guy says "I'm mad as he!! and I'm not going to take it anymore". Really though, I've read back through all the posts and not one post about something positive about Obama's plans. Just attacks to the other side and other posters. I feel if I'm going to get this I might as well just turn on MSNBC, and now I get my MIL who has such hatred for Bush is coming out saying that today market failure (whatever you call it- that 300 or so point drop) she's saying that is McCain and Palin' fault. I don't even get into political arguments with her anymore. It's just mind numbing how closed their minds are. Glad you liked my post.
Let's talk about attacks....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeVBaM2lQsg

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28656#continueA

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/09/12/conn-paper-tired-attacking-palin-attacks-angry-town-wasilla-inst

http://fredshelm.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/debunking-the-moonbat-attacks-against-palin-part-1/

There are plenty more, those are just a few.
It is called more attacks like the one we went through
Do you actually believe the govt is telling us about each and every plot they help dismantle to make the country safer. Oooh- can I be in your fantasy movie.

People may hate GW - You know our "President of the United States", but Americans (the patriotic ones that is) are grateful for the policies that have been put in place that enable them to find out when things are happening so we will not endure another 911. Sorry you don't like the fact, but that's what they are.

I for one am very grateful we have not been attacked again.

"And I'm proud to be an American where at least I know I'm free. And I won't forget the men who died who gave that right to me. And I'll gladly stand up next to you and defend her still today. Cos there ain't no doubt I love this land. God bless the USA!"
The attacks didn't happen here

they happened in London, England and you don't see people London whining and acting like the world is coming to the end.  They got up and got on those darned buses and trains.  These terrorists made very little headway at all yesterday. 


You all don't get the point do you?   You really don't.  No matter where we are in the world you're going to find fault with it as long as it is done under conservative leadership.


I think I understood every word you said loud and clear. 


Occurs to me there's no basis in any of your attacks.
Name one thing I made up and we'll see what the truth is. Go ahead, poser - explain what you mean.
Foiled Terror Attacks...sm
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/britain-thwarts-plot-to-bomb-us-bound/20060810015209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Fox Attacks Barack Obama..sm
(see link)
We were told by moderator -no more attacks on
nm
Of course it's the fault of the terrorists for carrying out attacks.

And it's the fault of this president for obsessing about Saddam Hussein (since he's been doing since the early 1990s) and not doing enough to protect his own people from future attacks.


The terrorists have all the power here.  They're holding all the cards.  They once again managed to scare a large part of the world.  They also know something that American soldiers DON'T know.  The know what the outcome of their plan is going to be.  They use the element of surprise, and when they wake up in the morning, they don't wonder if they're still going to be alive the next day.  They already KNOW they won't be because they've planned it that way.  They control their own fate, as well as the fate of everyone who gets in their way.


Our soldiers have to deal with that every single day.  A car bomb here.  A suicide bomber there.  Every single day is 9/11 for them.  It sounds real nice to pretend to respect and honor them when participating in a photo op on an aircraft carrier.  Why doesn't he care enough about their lives to provide adequate body armor and Humvees for them?  He has no problem giving big tax breaks to his rich base (and YES, they are his REAL base, not the Christian right; just wait till he betrays you all with his moderate Supreme Court nominees). He has no problem giving free healthcare to all Iraqis. Forget about the American people for a minute. Why can't he care about our troops -- our CHILDREN -- enough to supply them with adequate equipment?  Of course, he personally would not know what constitutes adequate equipment because HE WAS TOO MUCH OF A COWARD TO EVER SERVE IN COMBAT.


As far as giving this President too much credit, you obviously didn't comprehend one word of my post.


HELLO!


It may be hard to credit Bush with no attacks when there is...sm
nothing tangible to show for it, right?


But then, that's the whole point.


No attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11.


There's the proof.


I'll be a believer and give President Bush the credit for this one.
Draft Dodger Cheney attacks War Hero
The words President Murtha are sounding pretty good!

 

DERRICK Z. JACKSON

White House plays chicken with a war hero



THE WHITE House is so deluded, it actually believes it can turn a soaring hawk into a scrounging chicken. Stung by the call by US Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania to pull out of Iraq, Scott McClellan, President Bush's press secretary, said this week, ''It is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party.


Talk about playing the chicken-hawk card. A White House where most of the architects of war avoided combat in their own lives dared to associate two people who are worlds apart in world views. Moore made the anti-Bush ''Fahrenheit 9/11, which infuriated the right wing by breaking box office records for a documentary film. Moore was booed at the 2004 Republican National Convention.


Murtha is the 73-year-old recipient of two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star for combat duty in Vietnam. He is a Democrat whose three decades in office are marked by support of President Reagan's policies in Nicaragua and El Salvador. Murtha was a top Democratic supporter of the 1991 Gulf War. He wants a constitutional ban on burning the American flag.


In a 2002 press briefing, former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz termed the support of politicians like Murtha for the Pentagon as ''wonderful. In the 2004 vice presidential debate, incumbent Dick Cheney said, ''One of my strongest allies in Congress when I was secretary of defense was Jack Murtha.


For all those shows of patriotism, Murtha was skeptical about the rush to invade Iraq in 2003 of Iraq even though he voted to give President Bush the authorization to go to war. He publicly said Bush beat the war drums before building an international coalition. Murtha said he had not seen anything in intelligence reports that indicated an imminent threat. Murtha said Bush ''has put the country in such a box. He can say, 'You'll undercut me if you don't vote for this resolution.'


One month after the invasion, when no weapons of mass destruction had yet been found, Murtha warned that American credibility was at risk. By the September, the absence of weapons of mass destruction made him join the much more liberal House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, in calling for Bush to fire the planners of the invasion. Despite the proclamation that ''we achieved a marvelous military victory, Murtha became increasingly frustrated with the chaos of the occupation. This summer, Murtha said administration officials were ''not honest in their assessment that they were winning the ongoing battle.


Finally, this week, Murtha unleased a scathing attack on Bush's Iraq policy. He called it ''a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. He said he believed military officials when he visited Kuwait just before the war and they showed him where American forces would be attacked by weapons of mass destruction when they approach Baghdad. But now, with no end to the killing in sight, he said, ''The US cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It's time to bring the troops home. . .They have become the enemy.


Murtha talked about soldier after soldier he has visited in hospitals, wounded and maimed by the invasion. Yet, there's more terrorism now than there ever was and it's because of what? Is it because of our policy? I would say it's a big part.


In perhaps the most humble admission of his press conference, Murtha said, ''The American public is way ahead of the members of Congress.


This came the day after Cheney threw mud in the direction of critics who gave Bush his war authorization. Cheney accused them of making ''irresponsible comments. He accused them issuing ''cynical and pernicious falsehoods to make ''a play for political advantage.


He said, ''The President and I cannot prevent certain politicians from losing their memory -- or their backbone.


This was the same Cheney who gave us some of the greatest falsehoods of this generation with ''There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction . . . We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons, and that we would be ''welcomed as liberators.


Murtha clobbered Cheney's words the next day, saying, ''I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done.


This hawk still soars, above the scrounging chicken hawks.


Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.  src=http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/File-Based_Image_Resource/dingbat_story_end_icon.gif



src=http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/File-Based_Image_Resource/spacer.gif
© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
 












No, I didn't....it was in response to all the attacks about unwed mothers..
but i guess you feel that is okay, right?
Senior moments on the trail: Mc attacks O ties to

For the slur that was dead on arrival, go here:


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/the-khalidi-gam.html


 


Missile attacks targeted Al Qaeda strongholds.
President Obama is targeting the terrorists who are responsible for 9/11 and who may be planning future terrorist attacks against the United States. That is what he said he would do before he was elected, and that is exactly what he has done during his first week in office. President Obama has already done more to keep our country safe in the past 4 days than Georgie Porgie did in the past 8 years.
Evil constant attacks on Palin are about to bring the biggest backlash
I believe you may have cost yourselves the election with the horrendous extent this was taken to.
Don't take it so personal...sm
This is a debate. We will not always agree. It is perfectly normal for you to agree on one thing and be opposed on something else, especially talking with people on the opposite of your political spectrum.

Ward Churchill - see below

Would I care of someone judged me for posting an F-word, no because I apologized and it truly was a mistake, believe it or not. I'm sure no such apology will come from Ann to these widows.

What question is it that I didn't answer?

You are right, it is personal. sm
And it has consequences and I am not talking about physical ones.
cant we do without the personal

attacks?  Hippocrite.  (A hippo crossed with a hypocrite). 


 


SOY was the one who made it personal anyway.
**This fits many on THIS board...To fear the LORD is to hate evil; I hate pride and arrogance, evil behavior and perverse speech.**

Maybe you missed that because you've stereotyped, judged and sentenced the liberals already.


POLITICS NOT PERSONAL
I believe you are mistaken. It is almost impossible to carry on a political discussion without getting personal. Political alignments are based on personal beliefs. And as for you trials and tribulations, she said nothing about what you've gone through in your life with the exception of, you know nothing of persecution.
stooping to personal

insults, are we now?  Did you read Wally Lamb's book "She's Come Unhinged?""  A good read.


 


Right back at you...without the personal hit of course..
it is obvious whose value system is skewed. You resort to name calling and personal attacks...judging one's mental health...and sorry, when you let Clinton slide on perjury you lose all credibility of if Clinton had done this you would be disgusted...while that might be personally true, you would not be on this board crucifying him. And please, don't even try to say you would not.
I have never said anything personal about Obama.
I have nothing against him. He has a beautiful family. I am sure he is sincere...the point is, I don't agree with him. I think he is the wrong man for the job. I feel strongly about that. That is why I reply.

I have never attacked him personally, made jokes nasty jokes about him, and certainly not his family. Yet i see that constantly from the other side. The extent of the hatred and nastiness on this site might not bother anyone else...but as an Independent, it puts me off the Dem party...big time, and any positives are pretty much buried in tons of mud. That seems to be the way they do politics...see it in the mainstream media, on the dailykos (referred to one poster as a place where liberals go to post opinion...have you ever read anything there??)...if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

If there are any positives, please point them out to me. I would like to see them.

I suspect what the answer would be if they answered honestly. Of course they would support him. Because he is Obama. Because he is a Democrat. The rules are different for him.

There are indeed two Americas, and that is the way they want it. THeir way or the highway. Choice for them but not for anyone else. Freedom of religion as long as you never mention it. Does that sound like America to you?
No need for personal potshots....
that actually reflect worse on you than the people you ridicule.
you have a personal vendetta against her and...
You continue to post time and time again saying sam this or sam that. We all enjoy hearing sams opinions and viewpoints. She is not the bully on this site (it seems you are). She has done nothing wrong to deserve being kicked off. Maybe the moderator ought to kick you off. How would you like it.

Moderate please do NOT kick sam off this board because others don't like what she has to say. I've never found her to be insulting towards others and from my understanding this is a board where we can all share things we have heard and our opinions. We all (well most of us) love sam and the due diligence she uses to research articles and she has never been rude to others and has done nothing to deserve being denied access. I have learned a lot from her posts.

Thank you moderator if you are reading this.
it is a personal choice
If you make it a religious choice, it is a toss up. Most Jews believe life begins at first breath, just like when God breathed into Adam's nostril. Protestants are divided on the issue. Many mainline/reform churches take the choice stance, including PC-USA and others.

I believe it is a tough decision, but I sure as heck don't see it as murder. Since you do, you probably should not have an abortion. Since my DH had a vasectomy, I probably won't need one. But if am raped, or the vas were to fail, you can be darn sure I want to be able to make that choice.
nothing personal - it's just politics!!! nm
x
Does personal responsibility mean
get off your lazy a$$, find a job, don't expect a handout, free healthcare, free college, maybe work for a living instead of expecting those of us who have been responsible to foot your bill??
What I have is personal bitterness...(sm)

for an organization operating under the pretense of religion molesting children.  Not only did they do it, they obviously condoned it by hiding the fact.  I must be nice to be a religious -- it's such a blinding experience.  You don't have to see the world as it really is.  You can just make assumptions based on your religion. 


I actually commend you on adopting children.  I do, however, wish more people would adopt children in this country.  I think it's a little bit of a double standard when one would go overseas to find a child to suit their desires and at the same time condemn this country over social issues.


And since you're waiting.....


http://www.adoptuskids.org/Child/ChildSearch.aspx


When you go to this page, don't change the criteria under *child profile* to look for the perfect child, just go to the bottom of the page and hit *search.*  I came up with 3466 children waiting for a home -- and that's just out of one agency.


how was that a personal attack?
telling you you aren't better than everyone? At least I'm not callng people mentally challenged. yes i know that wasn't you, you are the friend that just laughs along with the bully...

and if you wanna point fingers about me not responding the way you think I should have, i dont see you responding to the person giving their opinion on what trickle up means...

give it a rest it's freaking Christmas time
you obviously HAVE to have the last word so i'll let you have it. pretty pathetic that you spend your time trying to cut other people down... is that also a personal attack?
Right on! Why take personal responsibility for
nm
If you are answering to me, my personal
beliefs are strongly Christian, but I am a Christian who also believes wholeheartedly in the separation between church and state, FYI.  I was answering the person who is scared.  Christians should not be afraid of anything, if they truly believe that God is in control.  Just my opinion.
My personal feelings aside,,,
the three branches of government were meant to be equal. It was never intended for the judicial branch to be able to "overrule" the legislative branch or the voters whenever they felt that it was appropriate. It is abuse of what was meant to be a check and balance, but who checks the courts. It would appear that they have worked themselves into the final say and that is really unfortunate.
My personal opinion
FWIW, by definition civil is: "of or relating to or befitting citizens as individuals" and "of or occurring within the state or between or among citizens of the state" (per wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn), which to me is the one the government should sanction, be it gay or straight, and thereby entitle one to the legal and financial 'benefits'. Marriage, on the other hand, in my opinion could/should then be viewed as more a religious construct.
I too think it was a PERSONAL matter. It's unfortunate that the
republicans would stop at NOTHING to drag Bill Clinton through any kind of mud at any cost to the country down to whos blowing him.
You must not have read the personal comment at the end then.

Sounds like you have a personal problem....
And no, I don't have to deal with it. I don't take orders from folks with psychological problems on a forum. Do you?

I don't even know what I'd be lying about anyway. My guess is that you don't know either and that you are obviously just trolling.
and let's NOT forget personal slander
You all have directly slandered MT, and it shouldn't be tolerated in any form.

I'll hand your bog back to you and step aside.