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

wow.....the talking points are down cold....

Posted By: sam on 2008-08-14
In Reply to: Destroyer how?...sm - By waging peace?

what structure? The free enterprise system for one...through hard work able to move up in the world as far as your talent and ambition will take you. Obama wants to penalize those people by talking their money and redistributing it those who did not have the talent or ambition to EARN their way to the "top." Yes, socialism will destroy what makes America great...ingenuity, ambition, and working for what you want or need. And Barack Obama is more of socialist than Hillary Clinton ever thought about being. Yes, she is a socialist...Obama is to the LEFT of her on that issue.

The propaganda and war machine? Good grief!! We were ATTACKED on 9-11, which brought about this whole Iraq thing. And please, do your research...the Iraq Liberation Act was authored during the CLINTON administration, enthusiastically supported by both Clintons and the entire Democratic congress. So please...don't give me the old Bush lied chestnut. It is just not true. If he did, it was because he believed George tenet and Richard Clarke (Both of whom he kept over from the Clinton administration...his first mistake).

Decaying economy? It is not as bad as Carter's term. Our economy was MUCH worse then. Yes, gas prices are high. So for Pete's sake, can we finally drill here???

Shameful health care system? What a ridiculous statement. We have one of the best health care systems in the world. Why does everyone come HERE to be treated? Have you ever transcribed notes for the premier facilities in this country? How many patients come from other countries? How many doctors from other countries come here to train? That is PRECISELY because we don't have "universal" government run health care. If it is so great in Europe, why do those people bring their children to America to be treated for serious diseases? Can we please be serious about this? It is NOT the responsibility of government to insure us. Wait..let me rephrase that in a truthful manner. It is not the responsibility of our fellow citizens to insure us. All government-controlled universal health care will accomplish is a lower standard of care for everyone, premier teaching hospitals will cease to exist, and THEN you will have the shameful health care system you THINK you have now.

Well...while I would not use the words "My way or the highway," we have not been attacked on our oil soil against since 9-11, which is a direct result of our action in Iraq. There are those who will bury their heads in the sand and deny this, but it seems pretty obvious to me with all their actions everywhere else in the world (the terrorists).

As to Europe being our allies....I would again refer you to history. The only allies we have who are still grateful for us pulling their fat out of the fire in WWII is England. France...Italy...oh they wanted us there when we liberated them from Nazi Germany and facism...but have now conveniently forgotten it. Let them be attacked or feel threatened today and who do you think they are going to call? The EU? Yeah, right. Yo, America....helppppp.

As to a little input from them...did not work out very well last time, did it? Whose intelligence agencies agreed with the intelligence Bush was getting? Well....France...Germany...toname two. Yeah, input from Europe is JUST what we need.

As far as hatchet job we have done on ourselves...again, France and Germany have never cared a whit about the US...a lot of jealousy there in case you had not noticed. They will take, take, take...comes time to give, they run like scalded dogs. If that is what you consider an "ally," maybe so. Me, not so much. Compare what we have done in the world and what they have done...what we have contributed to poor and needy all over the world compared to what they have done...and there you will have your story. And again...first sign of trouble and you know who they will go running to? Not each other or the EU...Us. And because we are who we are...we will go and help. History has proven that time and time again. We give everything and get nothing and keep on giving. And these are the opinions you care about??

Wimpy regarding Russia? You have GOT to be kidding. You think Sarkozy of the EU was the least bit influential in getting Russia to dial it down? You SURELY are kidding. It is that hateful stupid "cowboy" Bush who got it done and don't think for a moment it isn't. If Obama was in the White House today he would be kissing the toukas of Russia and Georgia would be a smoking mess and dragged back into Russia under their rule. To quote Teddy Roosevelt you have to talk softly and carry a big stick...Russia knows as long a we have a Prez like Bush there is definitely a stick to contend with. With Obama, more like throwing a sack of daisies at them. There is no way he could ever put up a tough enough front. "Can't we all just get along?" Uh...no, we can't. Because to get along, all parties gotta want to. In what alternate universe does Russia WANT to? The only thing that keeps them from rolling over every country around them is the fear that the US would intervene. Once that is removed...Katy bar the door. And if you look at the history of how russia has behaved...and think anything else, then, I am sorry, you are naive. You have to look at countries and their histories...

Don't know about mtmt's vision of the future, but mine is with an Obama presidency we might just get what little old ugly bald-headed Kruschev told us years ago...we will be taken from inside without firing a shot. Food for thought.


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

Democratic talking points 101. nm

great talking points
1. I do believe there should be some sort of civil union, marriage, whatever you call it to allow homosexuals the same basic rights as married couples. As far as Christian marriage - it should be up to each individual denomination to decide. My own, PC USA is debating this issue every year. I am still on the fence about it.

2. As to welfare, I don't think the current program works. Some welfare-to-work, or something similar would be better. I have a friend who gets a child-care subsidy to help pay with that. If she gets a job making just 25 cents more an hour, she completly looses that, so there is no incentive to get a better job. Same with welfare, food stamps, etc. Maybe phase them out as income increases, to encourage better jobs, growth, etc.

3. As for abortion, I agree with pxmt. Don't like it, don't have one. No matter how I personally feel about it, it is not my place (or anyone elses) to tell a woman what to do with her body, or make someone carry a child to term. As far as I am concerned, it is a medical procedure and should be between the woman and her doctor.
talk about republican talking points
Can't you people say one thing that isnt a direct quote from fox news? Im beginning to see why people have T-shirts that say vote rpublican its easier than thinking. Yes and your right, due to the lies of this administration, we have on big mess on our hands. and you wonder why people are ticked off. But ill be sure to tell my daughter how the terrorists love her because she wanted her husband out of iraq before he was killed for a lie. Unfortunately, that did not happen. But hey Ill just tll her how he was spreading democracy, im sure tha will make her feel bettr. Its only the what..27th rationalization this administration gave for this war?
Biden did nothing but regurgitate talking points....
nothing original in what he said. Same old, same old...just like what he said: "I will not change. I have been in the senate for 30 years. I will not change." and then a breath later, said "Barack and I will bring change." Hmmm....I won't change. I have been in the senate 30 years and I won't change. BUT Barack and I will bring change. puleezzeee.
The staple far-left talking points. Do you have a
brain to think for yourself?
The talking points must have mentioned using the word *impeach* as often as possible, too. NM

Lots of confirmation of the talking points you mention.

Especially the inevitability of New Orleans. You can research the local papers and find articles that go back years. The funding to research and fix this has been the last 3 years W. has been in office. That is a fact. The Army Corps of Engineers chief quit in disgust over this issue some time ago and the former FEMA chairman was fired; the one who got things done, by the Bush administration..I don't know why.  Our leadership is lacking. We need a leader. We need someone to step up to the plate and start the ball rolling; to date, doctors, nurses, entertainers, basketball players and ordinary everyday people with some necessary skills have been on the ground working in a haphazard manner because there is no leadership. Bush 41 and Clinton have started their tsunami crusade a la New Orleans and I have to tell you, the both of them sitting on my TV screen asking for money, were more believable, more compassionate than anything we have seen from the WH. A lot of defensive people up there. Why doesn't someone lead. As the mayor of New Orleans said, Washington sent one John Wayne guy down there and he is evidently kicking butt, getting things done. Where are the leaders???


 


He has precisely identified the viable talking points.
nm
Nope. I don't just post talking points. I back it up.
see above.
Note that the democratic talking points memo of the week must contain sm
stuff about utilities, cuz I sure see it on here a lot.  I guess it was okay when Saddam was in power cuz people could flush their toilets and drown out the screams of those being tortured and raped.
Don't you think that is a little cold...
to say *When I said the protests will not stop, I was stating the obvious. They will have to serve and ignore or serve and pay attention and let it bring their morale down* to people in a war zone? I guess not...

Called on the carpet? Oh, please. And what was the answer...oh, they lied to us. Oh, I voted for it before I voted against it. I was for it then but not now. I only voted to give him the power to go...never thought he would. Oh...excuses, excuses, excuses and no accountability. Par for the course.

Not catching a break? When was the last time you saw a liberal carrying a sign castigating a liberal for voting for the war? Umm...that would be...umm....never.
Now that's cold. nm
nm
Hey....I think I got that cold

you thought you were getting.  I sound like an old woman who has smoked for 60 years or so.  LOL!  I'm sucking down Halls faster than you could believe.  This sucks!  My 4 y/o is sick too. 


So here is to scratchy throats, runny noses, and dragging major butt!  I think I'm going to go lie down now.


Ice cold (see link)

NOT DEAD, NOT COLD JUST
tired of watching you run around making up jobs for yourself and causes that you can't do anything about in a way that will cause change. Why are you so certain that our soldiers are bad? What makes you so sure those children will be victims of "war crimes?" Think about that for a moment. You must have a really low opinion of most American soldiers.

I have children and let me assure you that even were I dead or my husband dead and they were 12 and tried to kill others I would feel like they would have to be accountable for what they had done. That is because I brought them up to be accountable. They were when they were 12 and they are today.

My words may be unacceptable to you, but are acceptable to many others. I have to tell you that I am related to some of those people by marriage and they have no love for us, no appreciation of who we are, what we want, what we give, or anything about us. They want to control us and take what we have. The males OWN the children and OWN their wives and those children and wives better do what they are told and nothing you can do personally can change their viewpoint in a timely enough manner to make a difference.

Comparing our culture with theirs and what we would do and want is futile. You cannot even imagine the true depths of their hatred of us unless you are close to them, are related to them, or live with them. We have chosen not to associate with or speak with any of them because after 20 years of beating your head on a wall you tend to tire out and move along to something you can do that will work. I personally try to focus on things closer to home that I can and do work on, causes for which I can make a difference and which will not wear me out in the process. Sometimes after you have exhausted yourself, your ideas, and every avenue you can think of to effect change it is best to walk away if you want to have anything left of yourself.


You are cold, blind to yourself and obviously
My question for you would be the same as the question the OP asked Sam. Who do you hate more? Blacks, the poor or Dems? Unless you are truly interested in knowing exactly what happened there and why people could not get out, I will not dignify your post with my time, much less my comments, other than to say that people there did not refuse to leave....they could not get out. 1863 people died in that city behind broken levies.

Here's one issue you might consider. Funding for the levies/US Corps of Engineers who are responsible for their maintenance…repeatedly cut to fund Iraq and tax cuts for the rich, despite repeated warnings of the need to shore up, maintain and/or replace them. The literature is out there for those who are interested. Let me say this much loud and clear. By no means is this the only factor. It is one of many. You show no real interest in understanding this and therefore, I have no real interest in debating with this kind of uninformed rhetoric.

I have lived on the Gulf Coast all my life. When Katrina happened, I was paying close attention. To blame the victims of this horror IS cold-blooded. You want to be that way, fine. No problem. But I will not stand by and be silent when I see this kind of stupidity. Whether you care or not, besides the 1863 who died there, there are refugees from Katrina in the 10s of thousands from the incompetence and failures of FEMA, withholding of federal emergency funds to the most heavily stricken areas, either deliberate or as a result a president who does not know how to read a map. Declaring emergencies is his job. At the very least, take a look at this map and tell me there isn't something wrong with this picture.

And by the way, this is not just about what happened during the storm or its immediate aftermath. This is also about failures that were NOT local leadership that occurred over and over and over again over months and years in the aftermath.
http://www.bobharris.com/content/view/637/1/
map
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/01/AR2005090102261.html
Bush Undercut New Orleans Flood Control
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/blumenthal/2005/08/31/disaster_preparation/
No one can say they didn't see it coming

Cold comfort

But I believe we will be proven right before too long. And when that happens the failure will still be laid at the feet of Bush and the republicans.  The country was just too far gone.  Obama did his best against all odds, but victory was snatched away by those evil conservatives. 


I don't want our country to fail, but I do want Obama's ill-advised policies to fail because anything else will change this country into something I can no longer recognize.  Probably I will never earn 250K, but I like to think that if I ever do I might get to keep some of it without hundreds of sticky fingers trying to pry it from my grasp and give it to slackers who did not work for it.


you are right it is cold, selfish and sm
downright cruel! She will have to be retired one of these days and at worse disabled then she will get it. Very very sad!
I think they are already stone cold enough. Maybe a
//
Now that gave me cold chills. SM
Mostly because I feel this very sentiment oozing from this board.  Man, I hope none of the terrorists read here.
Talk about the cold shoulder
This person said they used to be a liberal and you show them the door.  I mean, there was a chance for you to try and win a former liberal back, and you just justified the reason they left the liberal ideology.  Wow, talk about writing someone off....
It's too cold for flip flops where I am, but here are a few...sm
1. Social Security Surplus

BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus. [President Bush, 3/3/01]

...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes. [The New York Times, 2/6/02]

2. Patient's Right to Sue

GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects. [Salon, 2/7/01]

...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas. [Governor Bush, 10/17/00]

...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits ‘would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states. [Washington Post, 4/5/04]

3. Tobacco Buyout

BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed. [President Bush, 5/04]

...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS The administration is open to a buyout. [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04]

4. North Korea

BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach. [President's Statement, 11/15/02]

...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARMWell, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature. [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 6/23/04]

5. Abortion

BUSH SUPPORTS A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE... Bush said he...favors leaving up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question. [The Nation, 6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, 5/78]

...BUSH OPPOSES A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE I am pro-life. [Governor Bush, 10/3/00]

6. OPEC

BUSH PROMISES TO FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES... What I think the president ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots...And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price. [President Bush, 1/26/00]

...BUSH REFUSES TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS With gas prices soaring in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the Miami Herald reported the president refused to personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds. [Miami Herald, 4/1/04]

7. Iraq Funding

BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004... We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04 [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04]

...BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops. [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]

8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony

BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'... Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference. [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]

...BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony. [President Bush, 3/30/04]

9. Science

BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE...I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good. [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]

...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE 60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels. [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]

10. Ahmed Chalabi

BUSH INVITES CHALABI TO STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS...President Bush also met with Chalabi during his brief trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving [White House Documents 1/20/04, 11/27/03]

...BUSH MILITARY ASSISTS IN RAID OF CHALABI'S HOUSE U.S. soldiers raided the home of America's one-time ally Ahmad Chalabi on Thursday and seized documents and computers. [Washington Post, 5/20/04]

11. Department of Homeland Security

BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY...So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything. [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people. [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]

12. Weapons of Mass Destruction

BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION...We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]

...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons.And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out. [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]

13. Free Trade

BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue. [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection. [Washington Post, 9/19/03]

14. Osama Bin Laden

BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.' [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]

...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him.[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]

15. The Environment

BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... [If elected], Governor Bush will work to...establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide. [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]

...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act. [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]

16. WMD Commission

BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency. [NY Times, 1/29/04]

...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction. [President Bush, 2/6/04]

17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11. [CBS News, 5/23/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. [ABC News, 09/20/02]

18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. [Washington Post, 1/19/04]

...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work. [CNN, 2/4/04]

19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony

BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday. [NY Times, 2/26/04]

...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock. [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]

20. Gay Marriage

BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into. [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]

...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife. [President Bush, 2/24/04]

21. Nation Building

BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]

...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people. [President Bush, 3/6/03]

22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link

BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror. [President Bush, 9/25/02]

...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11. [President Bush, 9/17/03]

23. U.N. Resolution

BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam. [President Bush 3/6/03]

...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written. [Washington Post, 3/18/03]

24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict

BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area. [President Bush, 04/05/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East. [President Bush, 5/23/03]

25. Campaign Finance

BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression. [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]

...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW [T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law. [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]

26. 527s

Bush opposes restrictions on 527s: I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising [in McCain Feingold], which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import. [President Bush, 3/27/02]

…Bush says 527s bad for system: I don't think we ought to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it…I think they're bad for the system. That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold. [President Bush, 8/23/04]

27. Medical Records

Bush says medical records must remain private: I believe that we must protect…the right of every American to have confidence that his or her personal medical records will remain private. [President Bush, 4/12/01]

…Bush says patients' histories are not confidntial: The Justice Department…asserts that patients no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential. [BusinessWeek, 4/30/04]

28. Timelines For Dictators

Bush sets timeline for Saddam: If Iraq does not accept the terms within a week of passage or fails to disclose required information within 30 days, the resolution authorizes 'all necessary means' to force compliance--in other words, a military attack. [LA Times, 10/3/02]

…Bush says he's against timelines: I don't think you give timelines to dictators. [President Bush, 8/27/04]

29. The Great Lakes

Bush wants to divert great lakes: Even though experts say 'diverting any water from the Great Lakes region sets a bad precedent' Bush 'said he wants to talk to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien about piping water to parched states in the west and southwest.'– [AP, 7/19/01]

Bush says he'll never divert Great Lakes: We've got to use our resources wisely, like water. It starts with keeping the Great Lakes water in the Great Lakes Basin...My position is clear: We're never going to allow diversion of Great Lakes water. [President Bush, 8/16/04]

30. Winning The War On Terror

Bush claims he can win the war on terror: One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can. [President Bush, 4/13/04]

…Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: I don't think you can win [the war on terror]. [President Bush, 8/30/04]

…Bush says he will win the war on terror: Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]. [President Bush, 8/31/04]
If your party is this cold-blooded
nm
No blame game here. Hello. It's the cold
nm
cold-hearted, aggressive, and
wouldn't give a hoot for your well-being any more than the wolves she's shooting just for the fun of it. She surely can't give the old cop out of hunting for food. she just wants to kill for the sake of killing.
Too danged cold in DC in the winter.
lol
And he** will freeze over. Notice it's cold in DC? nm

Duh, its cold in DC this time of year!
nm
At the risk of sounding cold
I agree that it is a terrible thing that there has been no social security increase for 2 years. However, I must point out that I have actually seen a decrease in my income in the last 2 years. While I don't believe that they should be punished in their golden years, point of fact is that most of them do have their houses paid off. Their families are grown and gone. They are eligible for Medicare.

I believe it is endemic of the economy as a whole...obviously, if there's nobody working, there's nobody paying into social security. However, things are just as bleak out here for those of who who constitute the younger working poor, with mortgage/rent payments, medical insurance (if we can even get it), families to feed and dress, etc.
It doesn't just sound cold
It is cold and selfish. This is a generation who worked very hard and paid in to SS all their lives and they deserve better. Grow a heart, for crying out loud.
A kleenex for you, Sunday...nasty sounding cold there....
x
Honey, the world IS a cold, heartless place...
you need to develop bit of a thick skin to get by.
I'm not cold. It's not the government's fault if people ignore warnings.
I have no idea what McCain is doing in the Gulf today. That shows he is well meaning but probably has not lived after a hurricane. Everything to be done is done by now for someone who will be there for the storm. The real work will really start in about 4 days. Unless he is just there to give moral support to the national guard and dmat teams.
I wish he had not changed the convention schedule.
Nazi Germany was created during a long cold winter
when unemployment was high. People was literally starving and freezing. Leadership had failed to keep the citizens fed and sheltered. Rogue leadership, Hitler, arrives announcing he will bring an end to the suffering. War employs. When there are no jobs, war is the alternative for a country. And pillaging, which is what basically happened, and the attempt at extinctousing an undesirable (to Hitler) nationality. Desperation in a country is a ticket to the empowerment of leadership which could potentially change the course of history. Or maybe we know that as it has just happened to us.
When McBush is talking, he isn't talking to you unless you are wealthy or CEO

 


who provides campaign funds.  Do you know why lobbyists are making the headlines?  Because they are bribing the politicians of both parties - lobbyists work for private interests (AIPAC) along with the pharmaceutical company ($280.00 for a bottle of pills?  Only in America, folks), oil industry (record profits at your expense) credit card companies and unethical banking procedures (Funny isn't it how Visa wrote the reformed BK bill, making virtually everyone end up in ch 13 (garnishing income, including SS) after raising credit limits and offering transfer balances at 0 percent to everyone with a last name and a roof over their head?  Along with mtgs that were bound to turn into bad loans when house prices dropped which they always do after a bubble.  God, I could go on and on here but I get tired.  The nation is in such trouble.  Serious serious trouble.  There is a huge loan to an unfriendly country (did you watch the Olympics?  did you ever see Bush look more uncomfortable other than during the Stephen Colbert roast during the national press conference.  lol.  


Well I want you to know what fascism.  And I want you to know that those treasury notes are backed up by the taxpayers (you) and real estate including roads and govt buildings and parks.  Have you noticed why Save-Mart Center is owned by savemart and not a community business or the community itself?  There is somethign happening slowly and surely and it is NOT going to benefit middle class america one iota.  You must know that as a poor person, you have no power, no voice.  Elections are rigged and the politicans cease to care whether you like them or not - oh wait, that has already happened. 


THINK ABOUT THIS!!!!  Your 401Ks and investments/assets are what at are stake! 


Fascist governments nationalized key industries and made massive state investments. They also introduced price controls, wage controls and other types of Soviet-style economic planning measures.[12] Property rights and private initiative were contingent upon service to the state.[13].[14] Fascists promoted their ideology as a "third way" between capitalism and Marxian socialism.[15] Fascists in Germany and Italy claimed that they opposed reactionaries, and that they were actually revolutionary political movements that fused with conservative social values.


Talking to them is talking to a brick wall.
nm
a few points

I couldn't find the Russert quote because you misquoted.  I believe both Cheney and Russert changed their positions since this interview.....


As far as the "747" you mention -- I couldn't find it because it was actually a "707" and here is another opinion on its significance:


"a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britain’s MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. “We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison,” the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplane—which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training—when they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. “That’s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff,” the former agent said. “They train in basements. You don’t need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing.”


Salman Pak was overrun by American troops on April 6th. Apparently, neither the camp nor the former biological facility has yielded evidence to substantiate the claims made before the war."


two points

Here we go with the celebrity subject again.  Also I don't want the Spears family used as a standard against which to select our national leaders. 


No points for you or
And you know this how? Gibson was repeating his questions because he was expecting to hear a little more than what she gave. He did not ask her about the general function of NATO. The NATO question was within the context of Georgia. As I explained in the last post, any US foreign policy toward Georgia is an extremely tricky proposition, whether it is a member of NATO (not any time soon) or not, given global relationships between the US and Russia, US and Eastern European nations and the dynamics between Europe and it's relation to former Eastern bloc countries in terms of their recognition by NATO, which historically is a precursor to inclusion within the European Union.

Georgia's entry into NATO is not a foregone conclusion, especially in view of its recent aggression in South Ossetia. This was no trick question for Palin. The South Ossetia episode is quite recent and the answer to this question should have reflected some sort of awareness of that conflict, the nature of which remains in question in terms of who started the aggression. That episode has complicated Georgia's NATO aspirations. An informed candidate would have naturally expressed that within the context of the question.

In addition, the US has pipeline stuff happening there and there is a direct conflict of interests between the US and Russia in terms of the oil reserves and who is going to exploit them. Why do you think Russia has such interest in Georgia? Another talking point is the fact that US troops are already spread so thin between Iraq and Afganistan. Can we really afford to open a third front? NOT. If Palin really knew anything about any of this, she missed a great opportunity Gibson gave her to "show her stuff." He even gave her the opportunity not once, not twice, but three times…thus the repeated questions. She did not recognize the opportunity and was unable to respond because of her fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject. No point for Palin.

Your contention about the so-called "liberal media" not interviewing Obama about foreign policy is a crock. Maybe in Fox Land. Do you not recall the little overseas trip he made earlier in the summer? There was a whole blitz of interviews, both televised and in print media, in the days leading up to that trip. Fareed Zakaria had a one-hour interview Obama on July 13 on CNN during the GPS program he hosts every Sunday. This link will take you there where you can see the photo and content of the interview.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/13/zakaria.obama/
He was interviewed on Face the Nation. Here's the link.
http://bourbonroom.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/07/20/obama-never-has-doubts-about-foreign-policy-experience/
Here's a link to the CSPAN interview:
http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2007/12/interview-with-obama-foreign-policy.html
Here's a link to the NY Times interview:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/us/politics/02obama-transcript.html
Here's a more recent one:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26612909/
O'reilly questioned him on foreign policy:
http://utube.smashits.com/video/HuXKyXKu0dM/O-Reilly-questions-Obama-on-foreign-policy.html
I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

Obama has foreign policy experience. He is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In this capacity, he has made numerous trips to many countries. Read about this here under the 109th and 110th Congress sections.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama#Initial_work
He has been asked about his experience as you can see in the transcripts from the links provided above. Furthermore, he has a number of ideas and strategies that were also discussed. These types of interviews will be the ones that the pub party will shield Palin from, but that will not save her from the foreign policy segments that lay ahead of her against Joe Biden (can't WAIT for that one!) in the VP debates. Your comment about video, as usual, is taken out of context and your contention is debunked by the content of the above links. No point for you either. Palin is a pipsqueak on foreign policy and no amount of spin from you or from her party is going to be able to save her from herself.
Your points are all well taken.......sm
I don't really know that there is a "bigger picture," however, in terms of one situation being worse than the other. If we proceed with the bailout, will that be the end of it? Who will be at Capitol Hill next holding out their hat? The construction companies? The grocery store chains? The shipping industry? The logging industry? Where is the money going to come from? China is pretty much tired of our useless dollar. Maybe Russia or North Korea will come to our aid. Or perhaps, those of us who are working will be taxed to the point of not being able to feed and provide for our families and decide "what's the point in working?" and just get in line with everyone else and then the government can bail us out, too.

My point is that, either way, this is going to hurt our economy....not hurt, probably crucify. If government would stay out of the free enterprise system, it would eventually right itself. If we bail out the big 3 this time, how long before they will crash and burn for good? And then what? Just go to the Xerox and print up some dollars, because that's about what our dollar is worth these days?

America has fallen down, and there is no one to help her get back up again.
Three Points:
First:  "In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack,'" he said. "In other words, I didn't anticipate war. Presidents -- one of the things about the modern presidency is that the unexpected will happen."

Bush "anticipated" this war as far back as 1999 when he said if he ever had the chance to invade Iraq, he would, so he could be seen as a war-time President and thus have a successful presidency.  This was two years BEFORE 9/11 happened and one year before he was President.


So this nonsense of "not anticipating war" is just another Bush lie, and I would encourage anyone who is truly interested in the "integrity" of George W. Bush to read the link I provided below in its entirety because it is quite revealing.  It not only includes this tidbit about his wanting to invade Iraq but also shows, once again, how an innocent man who was his ghost writer on a book (and also a family friend of the Bushes) had his character attacked after the Karen Hughes and others came in, realized that Bush said too much, and the author (Mr. Herskowitz) was fired, citing personal habits that interfered with his writing -- totally false and another example of how Bushies will destroy anyone -- even friends of the family.  It shows just how despicable they all are.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1028-01.htm


 


Second:  His comment regarding the economic crisis:  "You know, I'm the president during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in president," Bush said.


He threw his own father under the bus on this one because the administration in control "over a decade or so" before Bush's installment as President was Bush 41.


Third:  Bush said that he regrets that he was unable to change the partisan tone in Washington -- one that permeated his presidency.




"I didn't go into this naively; I knew it would be tough," he said. "But I also knew that the president has the responsibility to try to elevate the tone.


And, frankly, it just didn't work, much as I'd like to have it work."


"9/11 unified the country, and that was a moment where Washington decided to work together," he said. "I think one of the big disappointments of the presidency has been the fact that the tone in Washington got worse, not better."


 


9/11 DID bring the people of this country together until BUSH, through his actions, brought about the divisions and the low morale that exists today and might never disappear.  The tone in Washington got worse because Bush continually thumbed his nose at the Constitution and at the Congress with all his "signing statements," "executive orders," playing deadly politics with outting a CIA agent, etc., etc., etc.  He laughed and joking about WMDs, pretending to look for them under his desk, and quipping, "Nope.  They're not there."  He showed his contempt for our brave soldiers during a ceremony where he was distributing medals to the survivors of soldiers who had been killed and told a griefstricken mother, "Now, don't go selling this on eBay."  (heh heh, smirk smirk)  He has used every conceivable opportunity to "raise the terror level" whenever it was politically convenient in order to keep this country in a constant state of fear and submission.


 


He has only ever cared about the richest top 1%-ers in this country.  The current (and never-ending) "bailout" will continue to make his rich criminal cronies even richer, and that's fine because we always have enough money to do THAT.  We just never have enough money to help the citizens of the USA.  Indeed, to suggest that we might even need help results in accusations of us being lazy or living beyond our means, etc.  There is no doubt about it.  All these "bailouts" are Bush's babies (complete with same secrecy and lack of transparency which has become his trademark), and buying up banks is fascism, plain and simple.  He can't blame Clinton, can't blame his father, and he can't blame Obama. 


 


We still have way too much time (in my opinion) left with him as the Commander-in-Chief, and he can do a lot more damage (besides all the safety regulations he is in a frenzy to dismantle, each of which that will make Americans UNSAFE).


 


With all the things he has done and is continuing to do, the only worry on this board is whether or not the Supreme Court will overthrow the will of the people (which could be very convenient for Bush in instituting martial law and promoting himself to "Dictator-in-Chief," the prospect about which he's "joked" on three separate occasions.  I wonder when the last time was that Scalia went hunting with Cheney and what their plans for this whole birth certificate non-issue are.


 


I suppose if the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case, then everyone on this board will say the Supreme Court is hiding something and go on an anti-Supreme Court tirade for a few months.


 


Or they might just let it go and return to questioning the "true motive" behind Obama getting his daughters a puppy (the "timing" of which has already been questioned on this board, which is even more bizarre).


 


All these terrible things that Bush has done over the last eight years -- and is still doing -- including stating that the Constitution is just a (insert Rev. Wright's "God" phrase here) piece of paper.  (How telling that I can't even properly quote the President of the United States because his language is too vulgar.)  I'm ashamed that Bush has not only talked that Constitutional talk but has consistently walked that Constitutional walk, as well.


 


His "divide and conquer" technique has certainly worked, as is evidenced by a quick look at this board and the negative judgment of the President-Elect before he has even taken the oath of office.


 


I've stated before that I will support Obama, as I supported Bush (before Bush gave me a TON of reasons not to).  However, it's clear to me that no matter how much Obama proves he loves this country, no matter how hard he works to unite us once again, no matter how devoted he is to bringing back the "American Dream," and no matter how hard he works to fix all the damage done by Bush, there are certain people on this board that will still invent reasons to condemn him, and they'll continue to jump from one non-issue to another non-issue.


 


I wonder where they all were during eight years of Bush's contempt for the Constitution and how loud their voices were in disapproval of his actions.


 


Bush can try to rewrite history all he wants, but I will remember what he did and what he's still doing.


THESE are exactly the points where
you are wrong. Obama is not kissing anyone's backside, the contrary. He tries to implementreal democracy, by actions, not only by words.

He is encouraging real democracy (see Iran) and justice (in Palestine).

He is sincere, but not all people can see this. I read yesterday on the Faith Board and there were implication by some people that OObama might be the Antichrist?

OMG, I cannot believe this! JTBB nipped this allegation right in the bud!
I agree with many of their points.
I feel that where they went astray, as often seems to happen on these political boards, was in making this a political issue.  I have nothing but the greatest sympathy for these women, for all those who were affected by 9/11.  I think Ann was not wise in the way she worded her statements, but there is a grain of truth, however small, in what she says. I am not a big fan of hers, but there are many many more victims out there who have chosen not to take the political path.  Still, as I said, I agree with their points, especially the porous borders. 
Good points.

I keep hoping that Krazy Katherine (Harris) will begin to spill her guts about it all since the Bushes have turned their backs on her, after she saw to it that he took Florida.  She's probably waiting for her payback and isn't getting it from them.


I agree with you on many points.

Living a responsible life with care and reverence for life seems to have been pushed to the side in these times, though.  I do believe that in many  instances, not all but many, abortion is being used as a means of birth control. In fact, I am absolutely positive about that because I transcribe many reports where women have had multiple abortions on a continuing basis.  And to think that anyone would vote that a teenager has a right to an abortion without parental involvement is chilling. 


Imagine you were living in America in 1956 and someone would predict that, in the span of half a century, the culture in America would be so transformed that homosexuality would be an acceptable and even celebrated lifestyle choice, Christianity would be relegated to a private matter not to be considered in questions of public conduct, the culture that had dominated America and was an integral part of its success would be condemned as the cause of most evil in the world, the family would be on the verge of collapse as an institution, children would be listening to music that spewed obscenities and celebrated random sexual encounters and violence, teens would be having sex so commonly that some sexually transmitted diseases would become epidemic in that age group, and abortion would be the law of the land with a million and a half such procedures performed annually. Predictions of such a complete collapse of basic morality would have been considered so ridiculous that it would have been deemed possible only by the complete capitualtion of our nation's leadership to pure evil. 

The collapse of morality in this nation was not organic nor imposed by force but orchestrated as part of many interlocking marketing campaigns that had as their goal the repackaging of evil in a seductive wrapping and selling it to the American public. In some cases, the motivation was socio-political while in other cases the motivation was purely financial. Yet in each case the underlying techniques of manipulaiting the public are essentially the same. 

The only way to combat the manipulation around us to become aware of its existence. Manipulation is rarely as effective once the manipulated are cognizent of their fate. 

Ther is an entire laundry list of movements in contemporary American culture. Although many conservatives are in some sense aware of the problem of manipulation of the public sentiment, it is still quite jarring to see all the dots connected.

The problem we face is not just with leftists but also with corporate executives who see nothing questionable in artificially generating a desire for products through deceit. The forces of the left merely picked up on these techniques and applied them to sell their product. That corporations manipulated the public to sell soap, automobiles, and cigarettes instead of political views, sexual practices, and anti-Christian bigotry does not make such manipulation a morally acceptable practice. A wonderful example of this is the legislation just voted on in Missouri for embryonic stem cell research. The largest contributor to this (quote) cause (unquote) was the company who stood to benefit the most from the research.  


I say we need a call for our culture to return to principles rooted in the Christian faith. The problem is that much of the Church in America has already succumbed to the very illness that needs combatting. It is an easy target to aim at liberal churches who have surrendered on traditional morality. Much of the shallowness of contemporary Evangelical Christianity is a direct result of their adopting modern marketing techniques (as seen in the megachurches) as a means for advancing the Gospel. Such techniques may produce numbers but not necessarily disciples. Look at what has happened to the Episcopal church as a good example of having lost one's way.  They are losing members by the thousands.

The American public has for a generation been sold evil as good and it has taken this long for a crack in the facade to appear. For anyone interested in the future of this country, I think it is time to realize that abortion is not a right. It never was and it never will be.  For every woman who cries KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY BODY, there is a child, call it what you will if that will assauge your conscience, who has no voice at all.  And when you are sitting with your family at Christmas or Thanksgiving and watching the children play, try and justify to yourself the ones who never had a chance to be there.   


Agree with some points

I myself abused the welfare program for one year as a 19-year-old unwed mother.  Well, kind of.  It was not an experience I ever wanted to repeat.  However, my feeling is that the difficulty lies in determining who is truly deserving and needy of welfare and who is just taking advantage of the free ride.  And at what point do we also punish the children of ne'er-do-wells by denying benefits.  I guess that's my concern.


OK, now I've got to get some typing done or I'll end up on welfare from losing my job!!


Good points. nm
nm
Very good points! nm

.


Here here - very good points.
I didn't catch the whole interview (just a question here and there) but I did hear him ask her about the Bush doctrine. I looked at DH and asked him "what part of it is he asking about". She had the perfect right to ask him to clarify. It was definitely a set up (or tried to be a set up). Overall I think she gave a good interview given they were trying to bait and trap her. Luckily it didn't work and she came out looking better. Maybe what they should do is get some people from other countries who have no vested interest in who gets picked to interview and be the moderators during debates because it's obvious that it doesn't matter what network you work for, if you want one candidate to win over the other your going to be condescending to the other. Boy do I miss Tim Russert.

BTW - With all that has been thrown at her from the media and the liberal sacs she sure can take care of herself. Makes me realized what a strong VP she will make.
Good points! nm
x
Interesting points

I voted by mail for McCain/Palin.  Here's why.


Obama has a new ad out talking about taking the day off of work to vote.  Let's face it, everyone taking the day off will NOT help the economy.


Obama keeps pointing out he will go through the budget line by line.  last I knew the President does not have the ability to line item veto.


He speaks of redistributing the wealth and that it starts from the bottom up.  Who defines what bottom is? And why should someone take my money or even my father's money since he makes over 250, 000 and give it to someone else?


And let's not forget the act of treason that was swept under the rug when he spoke to the Iraqi leader basically stating the current President is not capable?  I can post links if needed.


McCain has his bad points as well but honestly, I would sleep better at night knowing him and Sarah are at the helm.