when they are voting" so what in McCain's record was so appealing? Firstly, he cheated on his wife who was in a horrible car wreck, and then eventually married for money. Not much appealing going on there. Secondly, his record of Keating-5 not very appealing. Thirdly, he doesn't know anything about the economy, handled himself erradically; that's not appealing to me, for sure. So as far as the choice, Americans have chosen the right person for prez in these dire times.
"A prez/rep has of the people has to hold the constituents thoughts in mind when they are voting." If I understand this, I think you mean the prez/rep has to remember why they were voted into office. What has Obama done in one week that has not shown that he is doing just that? He most certainly has done, in one week, a lot that the American people who voted for him want done. So far, so good.
"People have to get involved by writing to their reps." Did you write to Bush when he invaded a country without reason, when he was killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people? Did you write to your rep when he and his cronies sanctioned torture? Did you write to your rep when they put in jail PFCs for the Abu Ghraibe deal, which goes much higher than Private First Class!! Did you write to your rep when Katrina hit and thousands of people were stranded, and some even killed by police officers who are sworn to help people, when they had nothing to drink for 5 days? Did you write to your rep when Halliburton stole Billions of bucks? Did you? No? didn't think so. So much for your involvement.
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 the only thing "people"
like you prove is that in 2000 years, some people have still learned nothing. You act just like those "people" who got all shook up and demanded action when another good man appeared to simply help people.
"People don't die from second-hand........ sm
alcohol whatever?" What do you call drunk driving then? The victims die or are seriously injured as a result of someone else's intoxicated state. I would call that second-hand "whatever."
Before you jump right in the middle of my back, let me state that I don't drink, but I used to in the past. I also smoke, and I hate it but have not managed to quit for any length of time in the past 25 years. I have known people who have tried tobacco but have not become addicted to it, just as I know people who have tasted alcohol and decided it was not for them.
I agree that stronger laws need to be in place for both alcohol and tobacco as well as illicit drugs. I think that cleaning up cigarettes to remove tar and nicotine might be a good first step. Unfortunately, I don't see much way to clean up alcohol outside of prohibition, but we know how well that worked in the 1920s.
We have records of it. NM EHR records
EHR is not just about voice recognition. It is about getting hospitals to have their records computerized instead of paper charts so that they are easily accessible.
Medicare and Medicaid already have a program in place that will subsidize a hospital's cost to change to EHR so that it makes it easier for them to process claims.
I did look at the records
of McCain and Obama. I always research who I'm voting for before I vote. I don't want to be one of those uninformed voters like the ones that were interviewed and said they had no problem with Sarah Palin being Obama's VP. I mean....come on. If you are that misinformed that you don't even know the candidates VP choice....you shouldn't be voting.
My problem was that I didn't have faith in either McCain or Obama. I voted for McCain because I felt he was the lesser of two evils and I didn't want to throw my vote away by voting for an independent. I'm not doing that any more. If I think an independent is better, I'm bucking both parties. Maybe if both parties lose, they may open their eyes and see that both parties have screwed up and both parties have p!ssed us off.
voting records...yes, let's go there...
Obama -- most liberal senator in the senate based on his votes. Biden -- 3rd most liberal. That means more government, more spending, more programs...no thanks. As for "voting with Bush..." Anything that passed was also voted for by the majority of Democrats. As President Obama can't vote for anything, as Bush can't, so I don't see how Obama is going to change anything. That's how it works. Nice try, no cigar (no pun intended).
JM did not adopt Obama's exit strategy. If anyone did, Bush did...he's the President now and the strategy is being applied now. Obama admitted on O'Reilly that the surge succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams. That one he voted against too. Biggest national security/foreign policy decision during the war and he voted against it. Enough said.
If you had watched his speech, he outlined it. He said his administration would be completely transparent. I believe him. Obama says he is going to change things. He doesn't say how. You believe him.
Oh good grief. You don't even know what pork barrel spending is, and it is the same on both sides. It is attaching things to bills to help your financial supporters back at home and selling your vote to get the earmark. Has nothing to do with social programs. Both sides do it, and it needs to stop. Politicians should be there to take care of ALL of us...not their fatcat supporters, and yes...Obama has fat cat supporters...Moveon.org to name one.
Boy, you have that class warefare mantra down. Trouble is, you buy it, I don't. I know better. Name one evil corporation who does not employ tens of thousands of Americans, who will loose their jobs if Obama taxes them into oblivion. Name just ONE.
American imperial delusions of grandeur. What does that even mean?? Look at T. Boone Pickens again. He said: "Yes, drill EVERYWHERE, drill NOW. But that is not enough." John McCain says the same thing.
Some of us actually READ RECORDS.
nm
Checking adoption records
I agree. I think the media is way out of line with that. Judge Roberts and his wife should be commended and respected for having the love and compassion in their hearts to adopt these children.
The more I see of him, the more respect I have for him and the more I like him.
No one should have to release their medical records...
to run for office. If one has to release them they all should. What is Obama's family history? Is he on antihypertensives? Is he on any kind of mood altering meds? Does he have high cholesterol? lol. That is none of my business, and neither is McCain's medical record.
First of all, Obama did not seal his records....sm
Only the person named on the birth certificate has access to a copy of it. He got a copy and presented it, period.
Secondly, he did not seal his college records. The colleges did this. Apparently it is common practice with presidential candidates as they are flooded with requests during the campaign.
looked at her financial records lately?
she is definitely not a poor girl in my opinion. I think she could afford to buy her own clothes...
computerized medical records
Probably a dumb question, but what does Pres. Obama mean by computerizing medical records, and how does that hurt/help us?Article on offshoring of records
http://www.latimes.com:80/features/health/medicine/la-fg-philippines-transcribe19-2009apr19,0,902588.story
Yes, and check the voting records for how many times...
he voted "present." He has never made an executive decision in his life. He has not managed a government of ANY size. In Congress you have committees and panels and discussion and debate and it takes weeks to get anything done. That does not work in the white house...you can't get a committe or a panel or vote present. She has more executive experience than he has. Fact. And she is the #2 on the Republican ticket. He is the #1 on his ticket. I agree with Joe Biden's initial assessment.
When will McCain release his medical records? sm
>> John McCain has not yet released his medical records to the public. McCain is 72 years old, and has been diagnosed with invasive melanoma. In May of this year, a small group of selected reporters were allowed to review 1,173 pages of McCain’s medical records that covered only the last eight years, and were allowed only three hours to do so. John McCain’s health is an issue of profound importance. We call on John McCain to issue a full, public disclosure of all of his medical records, available for the media and members of the general public to review. >>
By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press WriterMon Apr 10, 4:55 PM ET
Key figures in a phone-jamming scheme designed to keep New Hampshire Democrats from voting in 2002 had regular contact with the White House and Republican Party as the plan was unfolding, phone records introduced in criminal court show.
The records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 — as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down.
The national Republican Party, which paid millions in legal bills to defend Tobin, says the contacts involved routine election business and that it was preposterous to suggest the calls involved phone jamming.
The Justice Department has secured three convictions in the case but hasn't accused any White House or national Republican officials of wrongdoing, nor made any allegations suggesting party officials outside New Hampshire were involved. The phone records of calls to the White House were exhibits in Tobin's trial but prosecutors did not make them part of their case.
Democrats plan to ask a federal judge Tuesday to order GOP and White House officials to answer questions about the phone jamming in a civil lawsuit alleging voter fraud.
Repeated hang-up calls that jammed telephone lines at a Democratic get-out-the-vote center occurred in a Senate race in which Republican John Sununu defeated Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, 51 percent to 46 percent, on Nov. 5, 2002.
Besides the conviction of Tobin, the Republicans' New England regional director, prosecutors negotiated two plea bargains: one with a New Hampshire Republican Party official and another with the owner of a telemarketing firm involved in the scheme. The owner of the subcontractor firm whose employees made the hang-up calls is under indictment.
The phone records show that most calls to the White House were from Tobin, who became President Bush's presidential campaign chairman for the New England region in 2004. Other calls from New Hampshire senatorial campaign offices to the White House could have been made by a number of people.
A GOP campaign consultant in 2002, Jayne Millerick, made a 17-minute call to the White House on Election Day, but said in an interview she did not recall the subject. Millerick, who later became the New Hampshire GOP chairwoman, said in an interview she did not learn of the jamming until after the election.
A Democratic analysis of phone records introduced at Tobin's criminal trial show he made 115 outgoing calls — mostly to the same number in the White House political affairs office — between Sept. 17 and Nov. 22, 2002. Two dozen of the calls were made from 9:28 a.m. the day before the election through 2:17 a.m. the night after the voting.
There also were other calls between Republican officials during the period that the scheme was hatched and canceled.
Prosecutors did not need the White House calls to convict Tobin and negotiate the two guilty pleas.
Whatever the reason for not using the White House records, prosecutors tried a very narrow case, said Paul Twomey, who represented the Democratic Party in the criminal and civil cases. The Justice Department did not say why the White House records were not used.
The Democrats said in their civil case motion that they were entitled to know the purpose of the calls to government offices at the time of the planning and implementation of the phone-jamming conspiracy ... and the timing of the phone calls made by Mr. Tobin on Election Day.
While national Republican officials have said they deplore such operations, the Republican National Committee said it paid for Tobin's defense because he is a longtime supporter and told officials he had committed no crime.
By Nov. 4, 2002, the Monday before the election, an Idaho firm was hired to make the hang-up calls. The Republican state chairman at the time, John Dowd, said in an interview he learned of the scheme that day and tried to stop it.
Dowd, who blamed an aide for devising the scheme without his knowledge, contended that the jamming began on Election Day despite his efforts. A police report confirmed the Manchester Professional Fire Fighters Association reported the hang-up calls began about 7:15 a.m. and continued for about two hours. The association was offering rides to the polls.
Virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number, which currently rings inside the political affairs office. In 2002, White House political affairs was led by now-RNC chairman Ken Mehlman. The White House declined to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002.
As policy, we don't discuss ongoing legal proceedings within the courts, White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said.
Robert Kelner, a Washington lawyer representing the Republican National Committee in the civil litigation, said there was no connection between the phone jamming operation and the calls to the White House and party officials.
On Election Day, as anybody involved in politics knows, there's a tremendous volume of calls between political operatives in the field and political operatives in Washington, Kelner said.
If all you're pointing out is calls between Republican National Committee regional political officials and the White House political office on Election Day, you're pointing out nothing that hasn't been true on every Election Day, he said.
WASHINGTON — Director Leon Panetta says agency records show CIA officers briefed lawmakers truthfully in 2002 on methods of interrogating terrorism suspects, but it is up to Congress to reach its own conclusions about what happened.
Panetta's message to agency employees came one day after Speaker Pelosi said bluntly the CIA had misled her and other lawmakers about the use of waterboarding and other harsh techniques seven years ago.
Panetta wrote that the political debates about interrogation "reached a new decibel level" with the charges.
He urged agency employees to "ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission."
Pelosi Accuses CIA of 'Misleading' Congress on Waterboarding
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the CIA of misleading Congress about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terror detainees.
"Yes I am saying the CIA was misleading the Congress, and at the same time the (Bush) administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, to which I said that this intelligence doesn't support the imminent threat," Pelosi said at her weekly news conference.
"Every step of the way the administration was misleading the Congress and that is the issue and that's why we need a truth commission," she said.
Under a barrage of questioning, Pelosi adamantly insisted that she was not aware that waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques were being used on terrorism suspects.
"I am telling you they told me they approved these and said they wanted to use them but said they were not using waterboarding," she said.
Growing increasingly frustrated throughout the briefing, Pelosi slowly started backing away from the podium as she tried to end the questioning.
As she backed out, she continued to accuse the CIA of not telling Congress that dissenting opinions had been filed within the administration suggesting the methods were not lawful.
The CIA immediately disputed Pelosi's accusation, saying the documents describing the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed are accurate. CIA spokesman George Little noted that CIA Director Leon Panetta made available to the House Intelligence Committee memos from individuals who led the briefings with House members.
"The language in the chart -- 'a description of the particular EITs that had been employed' -- is true to the language in the agency's records," Little said. "The chart I'm referring to is, of course, the list of member briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques."
Republicans also questioned Pelosi's charge.
"It's hard for me to imagine anyone in our intelligence area would ever mislead a member of Congress," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said at his weekly news conference. "They come to the Hill to brief us because they're required to under the law. I don't know what motivation they would have to mislead anyone."
The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., told FOX News that Pelosi's accusation against the CIA is "not credible."
"I am afraid she has disremembered what she went through," he said. "We have had not only the records from the CIA but the contemporaries who were there with her had other views on it, so I am afraid that this is not a credible explanation."
Pelosi said she was briefed only once on the interrogation methods in September 2002. She acknowledged that her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, informed her about another briefing five months later in which Bush officials said waterboarding was being used on CIA terror detainee Abu Zubaydah.
Pelosi said she supported a letter drafted by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who also attended the briefing in February 2003, and sent to the Bush administration, raising concerns over the technique.
Pelosi's account has changed several times in recent weeks as she has sought to clarify what she did or didn't know about the interrogation methods that she is pushing to investigate.
Pelosi said last month that she was never told that the controversial interrogation methods were being used. But a national intelligence report later showed that she was briefed seven years ago on the tactics while she was on the House Intelligence Committee.
Her spokesman then said the speaker thought the techniques were legal and that waterboarding was not used.
Democrats will hold a series of hearings on Justice Department memos released last month that justified rough tactics against detainees, including waterboarding and sleep deprivation.
While Democrats want the hearings to focus on what they call torture, Republicans have tried to turn the issue to their advantage by complaining that Pelosi and other Democrats knew of the tactics but didn't protest.
You are definitely the chosen people: Chosen to be banned from heaven. This is what the people who pretend to support you really believe. And it must be true, because according to them, you and I will be spending eternity together, and no doubt that will be hell for us both.
Jerry Falwell: Jews and Muslims Can't Go to Heaven
While I am a strong supporter of the State of Israel and dearly love the Jewish people and believe them to be the chosen people of God, I continue to stand on the foundational biblical principle that all people -- Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Jews, Muslims, etc. -- must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to enter heaven. -Jerry Falwell
March 14, 2006
Wow...where to start....
Yes, I do agree about those entering our country to a point. I believe that they need to have respect for our laws or not be here. Yes, we are a government of the people BY the people. There is no clause that says "unless we don't find that convenient right now."
Respect for those in office...not so much unless it is earned. Respect for their office itself, yes.
Now, I'm not so sure about the rest of your post or where that came from about me believing I have a final word on everything and my way is the only way and that I am a one person catalyst to change. That was really out there, especially for the very little I have posted. I don't care for the daily Kos. I have never said where I get my news. I do not believe everything everyone tells me...actually very little that anyone tells me. My research is very accurate, however. Though I have never posted any of it on this board and have never needed to as I tend to stay out of these little spats because of the level to which they quickly degenerate. I don't mix emotion with politics. That's the wrong road for me and it is my belief that it's a big problem with politics today. People take hot button emotional issues and try to legislate with them and politicize them. BS as far as I'm concerned, and I don't really care what anyone else's opinion is of that.
So! If you want me to answer to all that, you'll have to actually explain what planet or universe it's coming from first because I am at a loss.
Why don't you start? How much do YOU think?
0%, 10%, 20%? Flat tax? Only some types of income? No taxes at all, and we pay as we go for everything, like school, toll roads, police, fire, federal sales tax?
here's a start
Eliminating Wasteful Spending
Stop Earmarks, Pork-Barrel Spending, And Waste: John McCain will veto every pork-laden spending bill and make their authors famous. As President, he will seek the line-item veto to reduce waste and eliminate earmarks that have led to corruption. Earmarks restrict America's ability to address genuine national priorities and interfere with fair, competitive markets.
Leadership, Courage And Choices: Reducing spending means making choices. John McCain will provide the courageous leadership necessary to control spending, including:
Eliminate broken government programs. The federal government itself admits that one in five programs do not perform.
Reform our civil service system to promote accountability and good performance in our federal workforce.
Reform procurement programs and cut wasteful spending in defense and non-defense programs. Gee....where to start??....
I would close the borders. Nobody in unless comes through the LEGAL channels.
Then I would get rid of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Jack Murtha, and others who ride their coat tails.
And then I would give myself the power of line item veto.
I could probably list more, but you only wanted 3. LOL.
i should start using a name on here
i was the one who asked about the father's rights and i agreed to your comment.
It may be a start.......... sm
but like I said, I think energy costs and environmental conservation will be the last thing on folks minds in a few short years.
Then I would start with....
taking away the right for christians to assemble. What you guys don't seem to realize is that when you start taking away rights, it sets a precedence for others to follow.
LOL....that's a start...(sm)
I would mess with you about the foot channel, but since you took the time to agree with me, I'll let it go this time.
to speak to an American when we get phone calls or call a place and get an ESL on the line. Maybe if we refuse to speak to them....they might realize they need to hire some Americans.
Are we really going to start this again?
Let it go, already.
Me too! They always start my day off
And we keep some of her posts behind the desk in the Emergency Room, too. They've proven to be reliable emetics in poisoning cases.
I don't know where to start...
Lead him down the right path? and you do that by calling people dysfunctional, disgusting, etc, and all the other things I have seen you post. Patty, I won't argue this with you as I am afraid I may say something pretty unChristian. I am out of here.
That's start of the war in *2003* nm Again, what if? That was my question to start with.
I'm not accusing anyone, I merely asked *what if*? I can't say with complete certainty that this happened anymore than you can say with complete certainty that it didn't. Minority status is fine with me, given the evidence and pervasive secrecy and lying of this administration. Have a nice day.
Very good start...sm
Thanks for the info LVMT.
What I wanted to know to start with...
is how can I know that Democrats/liberals/the left, WHOEVER, will keep this country safe, when half of them deny there is a threat and the other half have no idea how to deal with it? What I said it was not political, I meant it. Both sides should be trying to protect this country, but frankly I only see one who seems to understand the threat. As I have said numerous times, I am not a registered Repbulican. I am not thrilled with any party in this country right now, but I have to register as SOMETHING to vote, so I am registered independent. Yes, I am conservative, I have conservative moral values and I believe if we had stuck closer to moral values we would have a lot fewer issues these days, but I digress. My concern is, Dem, that I don't think your party and many of its members grasp what a real threat radical Muslims are, and if you don't perceive the threat you don't take steps to fight it, and that is the reason I referred to Clinton, because in all honesty I do not think he perceived the threat. I do not want to think that he did and ignored it. And my point is, I don't think your party to this day perceives the enormity of the threat, and yes, that scares me. This is not rhetoric. This is the way I, me, personally, feel and has nothing to do with left or right Dems or Republicans, other than the Republicans do seem to have a better grasp on the threat than the Dems do. What I would like to see is America united against the threat, with politics out of it. That is what I would REALLY like to see.
Here's why SP need to start vetting
OK. I'll take a crack at breaking this down for you. While SP was building her candidate resume back at the hut in Wasilla, her predecessor in the governor's office teed her off after he SELECTED her (not an elected position) as Chairman of the Ethics Committee. When she started whistle-blowing on those entrenched Juneau cronies, he tended not to take her housekeeping recommendations to heart. Being such a strong and powerful woman, she launched a campaign of her own to take his seat away from him based on her ethics platform. Once in that chair, she spent a great deal of time and taxpayer's money scrapping more than 300 of his development plans in the name of fiscal responsibility and kicked out 30-some-odd of his other appointees, being the woman scorned and all.
FF back to the future. Once JM has ridden to victory on her coattails and puts her back in that token female corner where she belongs, McWayne proceeds to run the same style of corrupt, unethical administration of his mentor, the W. She takes the backseat VP position and waits for him to become incapacitated and gets bored waiting around to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate. She falls back on the only experience she has…ethics butt-kicking.
She's not afraid to bulldoze her own party members, as her record so clearly indicates, so kick butt she does. If she can't successfully take aim at her boss man, like she did before, maybe JM will simply expire and thrust her up into the Prez chair. Failing that, riding on the crest of the hypnotic spell she has cast over the pub party and taking advantage of the leftover collective amnesia the nation finds itself suspended in the aftermath of the 2008 pub campaign, she mounts a successful pub candidacy for Prez, in which case she will need to choose a running mate. Got the picture? Oh, REALLY? Like you guys don't start to -sm
soil your panties everytime you come across another person who doesn't think exactly like you in every way?
I know -- but everytime you start to
feel a scintilla of sympathy for them, they lunge at ya with the retracted lips and missing, yellowed teeth.
People can raise this question over and over again but what I would like to know is this: Has anyone ever raised the same questions regarding white candidates in this and/or past elections and why people voted for them? Of course not...I wouldn't care if Obama were multicolored - people are going to vote for whomever they choose and I for one am weary of the constant references to race...
Do you just try to start fights?
I asked you a simple question. You got out of whack about it. Yes, I know caps is yelling. I wasn't yelling at you I was yelling because you are making me crazy with your freak out of "stop picking on me!!" Please, grow up. It is unfair for you to make statements without backup. If you can't take someone asking you questions, don't post slander on this board. End of story.
Start at the top and work you way down.
then why not remove yourself from the dialog?
Oh brother - where to start is right.
His father left his mother when he was a baby? Yet Obama was able to write a whole book based on him? He has some communication with Kenyan relatives but not all? Where did you hear this? Wait...from him? Is that his explanation? So where did you study African Tribal Family Structures and the American family strucures? I think maybe people should take a break from the Survivor TV show. If the sheeple want to be led around blindly and actually buy into the same ol retoric of oh poor Obama, he didn't know he had an aunt or a cousin or an uncle because that's the way the "tribes in Africa" are, but he knows about all these others relative (Cheney & Irish ones). Glad I'm awake through all of this. Staying away from Survivor and doing some research does the mind some good.
You could start by considering Lincoln's
and take it from there. Keep in mind, Lincoln was republican. IMHO, Obama could do worse when it comes to mentors.
That was not necessary. Let's not start bashing again
Had enough of that before the election. She voiced an opinion. Let it rest.
And to think, the head of the KKK at the start
nm
I DID NOT START THIS, THE LYING 'M' DID..n/m
n/m
start a phoney war
Even mr. So? cheney admitted they were going to do it whatever the results of inspections were, let people drown in Katrina, let the terrorists kill 2000 people -- but dodge that shoe, and my, my what a great leader you are. Groan. I am so glad the majority of citizens woke up.
marks the location of current message within thread
