If you are talking about President Obama's stance, action, statements concerning offshoring - it is political. It goes on the Politics board.
If you are talking about healthcare industries and what Congress, the Senate, the GOP or other leaders are doing or not doing about - it is political. It goes on the Politics board.
Please dispute this. I welcome it. It seems like Bush's "lies" had lots of company, although those quoted below have washed their hands of their own comments. How convenient.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John McCain (Rino-AZ) and others, Dec. 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I b elieve that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.
"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his contin ued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
There was a lot of that before I became an MT. Maybe I was just lucky, after I went into MT we were on a great incentive plan and were highly competitive, I don't think we had time to gossip and backstab. I know what you mean though, I have had those jobs.
I feel bad that you lost your account, but you don't need to be taking your anger out on other people and start calling them Republicans and blaming her for your belief of the mistreatment of MTs. This was a simple challenge on how to make more money and spend your time wisely.
That would be true most especially here .. this is not a place for that sort of heavy discussion. I prefer face to face. And, just to be clear, I too am of the mind that we certainly need to be vigilant, and I was merely responding to the fact that I found it ironic that this particular day was chosen .. I will be watching the Boston Pops in 10 minutes and thanking God for having the freedoms I enjoy. I did not need to be chided as we all have opinions.
I need opinions please...I work on a very small account with just a handful of ladies. Because of the nature of the software (trying not to get too specific here) we can see who is working online and what reports they are working on in real-time...
We have one cherrypicker on the account. Instead of using FIFO method, she retrieves the reports by author ID - usually picking the better dictators of course. She knows I busted her and she did admit to it in on our work e-mail (not too bright) which I am saving just in case she gets out of hand - so far I'm still able to make money since really most of the dictators aren't bad.
But every night it's starting to wear on me since she's screwing up turnaround time. I don't really want to cause a big uproar being that it is such a small account and I need to work with her almost every night usually one on one.
What would you all do? I want to handle this as delicate and professional as possible because we can't really afford to lose anyone on this account. In other words, I refuse to stoop to her level by cherrypicking right back.
My boss has asked me several times why so-and-so does so much more than I do...I just bite my lip at that point but one of these days I think I might explode and just open up a can of worms....
One of the girls, a person who at one time folded towels but who was hired as a clerk, was just discovered to ahve not mailed out reports for 30 days. These include both in house reports and outpatient reports. They have been sitting on her desk because she "has not had time to do them."
What do you make of this? The lead MT is close to this girl (hence her being moved from housekeeper to clerk) and is trying to minimize the impact that not having the reports mailed to referring physicians' offices, as if it is a minor problem (how they found out about it is a doc's office called the MT's supervisor and asked why 30 days worth of reports were mailed to their office yesterday.
They were keeping it from the director of radiology. I think this is BIG and that heads should roll for negligence.
marks the location of current message within thread
