And on the flip side...
Posted By: sm on 2009-05-19
In Reply to: One site to keep an eye on health care reform.... - Pugmom
http://www.pnhp.org
France, which comes in 1st in WHO health care rankings, has a better plan for the US to emulate than England's. It *can* be done right, if we try.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042070.htm
LINK/URL: http://www.pnhp.org
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
...and on the flip side...we will soon see...sm
what Obama will do with his regime.
I have a feeling it won't be pretty.
At least we'll have a reason to throw all the democrats out of all branches of offices when they fall flat on their you know whatsits, and find they can't do what they think they can.
The American people won't stand for what the country is about to become, you included, once you wise up and see what's about to come.
Re: Canadians...The flip side. s/m
There is a flip side to some Canadians coming into the US to get health care, jump the line, etc. For every Canadian that comes here for care there is an equal or larger number of Americans entering Canada to obtain more reasonable medication. Also, a small but growing situation are Americans traveling to India for surgical procedures that they otherwise could not afford in the US.
As I have said before, I certainly do not have the magic "fix" for the health care debacle, but there is a flip side regarding Canada, etc.
on the flip side .. those with $$ pay more in taxes ...
by virtue of the money they SPEND -- their property taxes are higher; all those clothes and cars and boats and fancy diners out are taxable items ....so they automatically are already paying more into the tax funds that those with lower incomes.
I am also one who thinks it should be a flat tax -- WITH NO LOOPHOLES ... keep it fair and keep it simple.
We don't make much ... but I don't think it's fair to take from the rich and give to the poor. Let the rich give of their own accord, if they so desire.
I could have worked harder, made better decisions/different choices ... but I didn't and those who did should not have to support me.
I agree with the other poster - I would give the shirt off my back to those who really deserve it but our social programs have propagated a whole generation that think they are owed something just for being here and being American.
oh well .. back to work .. LOL
The flip
MSNBC just showed that a little while ago....the whole clip. He scratched with one finger, then with the other. Not at all meant to be any kind of hand gesture.
Wow...flip flop, flip flop....
You yourself said social programs did not need more money thrown at them but managed better and priorities applied. Now you say there is no such thing as runaway social programs and they were not mismanaged. I guess you read a common dreams article and had to readjust your thinking, the article d'jour? lol. You should run for office. You got it down, girl.
Let's look at regime change in Iraq. That was not hatched by "neocons" (whatever the heck that means). It was hatched during the Clinton administration. He went on TV during his tenure and called for regime change, how Hussein had WMD, yada yada, for our own safety we should disarm him, look what he did to his own people, same thing intelligence said during Bush admin (no big surprise...Bush kept the intelligence structure intact from Clinton admin...boy what a colossal mistake THAT was). Clinton is liberal isn't he??
Open your mind and Google it. And figure out a way to spin it. If the attack on the WTC had happened during Clinton's watch, we would have invaded Iraq then, and you would have been on here defending it because a "liberal" Prez instituted it. We would not be hearing conspiracy theories from you, we would not be hearing bring the troops home from you. We would not be hearing you calling for HIS impeachment. No wonder we cannot get anything done in this country.
Moral relativism. In your mind, perjury is not wrong in all cases, it depends on what you are lying about. Go after Scooter Libby for perjury and obstruction (same thing Clinton did) because it is somehow worse when done by a Republican. Not be upset that the person who actually committed the crime (outing an agent) was Armitage, NOT Libby and NOT Rowe, was never charged. In fact was asked by Fitzgerald to keep quiet about it. But THAT does not matter to you.
The fact that you cannot see that yourself proves that you exist in the state of denial and your only "truth" has to come from a liberal page, a liberal article, a liberal TV station, yada yada. Anything printed in Common Dreams is gospel to you and you go no further. Anything printed on a page you don't approve of is a lie and you go no further. You don't even attempt to see if the FACTS are true (no matter where it is printed)..but, what am I thinking????? Why, heck, it CAN'T be the truth, if those evil lying conservatives printed it. LOL. Amazing!!
Oh yes, let's talk about unions. Why are Americans buying cheaper imports? Because union costs have made cars so expensive Americans can't afford them anymore. You don't think that has a direct effect on lots of jobs going overseas?? Of course it does! Unions as they were conceived were a needed thing. A wonderful thing. But many other things, money and power corrupted them. Where is the big money in unions? At the top, not with the union members. And both political parties suck up to them big time because of that power and money. Unions have contributed as much as anyone to sending jobs and manufacturing overseas.
Look at your history. Democrats (predominantly southern Democrats I grant you) DID keep the black population from voting. It was conservatives, largely for religious reasons, who opposed slavery and finally abolished it and were willing to fight a war over it. Even after the war and the emancipation proclamation, southern Democrats passed laws making it impossible for blacks to vote and managed to do so until the 60's. And when that point was made, you spun that by saying the Republicans of that time were more liberal. Spin, spin, spin. LOL.
It was Republicans (conservatives of that time) who started the sufferage movement for women, because conservatives believe that all men (and women) are created equal.
When did liberals get interested in what blacks wanted or needed? WHEN THEY GOT THE VOTE. Hence, the Lyndon Johnson war on poverty which came on the heels of blacks getting the vote. I don't know how much more transparent you can get. Same way with illegals. Oh NOOOO don't card them...they vote for US.
Lyndon Johnson was president when the decision was made to raid social security. And we know where that led, don't we? It was promised that would never happen. I would not call Lyndon Johnson a conservative.
The first pre-emptive war was started by a liberal President "to stop the spread of communism." That was not an idea spawned by "neocons" or the Bush administration. If you want to lay blame, at least lay it where it belongs. Liberals also forced the withdrawal when the war became increasingly unpopular, resulting in the killing fields of Cambodia, when the liberal Congress would not allow Nixon to keep his promises to the South. Now there is something for liberals to be proud of. Got the war stopped, yep...but at what cost?
You say you are not talking Democrats and Republicans, you are talking liberals and conservatives. I say tomato, you say tomato. Semantics. It is all the same. Most Democrats are liberal...in varying degrees. Your definition of "liberal" is not the same other persons who call themselves "liberal." When a Democrat does something you don't like, first thing heard is "he/she is not liberal." I guess you have to, in order make a vain attempt at a consistent message. So far it ain't happenin.
Media manipulation and lobbying were begun by the conservative party? First I would say prove it with something other than Common Dreams opinion pieces, but given the benefit of the doubt, let's just say they did. And here is the big BUT...it has certainly been perfected to a fine art by liberals. And what, pray tell, is the conservative "party?" Don't see that on any ticket. Just like I don't see "liberal" on any ticket. I thought you were not talking about democrats/republicans. Oops. That is what happens with cutting and pasting sometimes.
Your post looks like a left wing conspiracy theory ohhh myyy gooodnessss it is all THEIR fault, WE have NEVER EVER done ANYthing wrong, they are EVIL, EVIL, EVIL and EVERY bad thing that has EVER happened to this country was perpetrated by conservatives! Let's get the picks and shovels and torches and go to the castle and DESTROY them. LOL. Good grief.
And you wonder why people don't take the hard left seriously???
I tell you one thing....if BOTH sides don't quit playing the blame game and own up to the fact that no one party, no one ideal, no one ANYthing got us where we are, nothing will change. I cannot believe the colossal arrogance of anyone to state that it is all someone else's fault and accept no blame whatsoever.
Why can't we just drop all the labels, and when a good idea comes down the pike join in support of it instead of automatically rejecting it because...GASP...a "liberal" had it, or...GASP...a "conservative" had it. I am sure we do have some common goals in there somewhere, but they get lost in the power struggle.
It's like high school. Just bigger cliques. Superficial, judging someone by a label and engaging in group ridicule and dislike and not seeing individuals and not behaving as individuals but rather in packs. It was ridiculous then when we were teenagers. It is even more ridiculous now that we are adults.
SIGH. When we will we put away childish things??
hey, take off your flip flops
and we can wrastle....
No one gives a flip about retreat.
that perpetuates division and hatred....quite another story. No only do you have the reading comprehension of a 2nd grader, you can't seem to count past 3 and are obviously outnumbered by folks who have zero tolerance when it comes to bigots. Such a bore.
Now Bush has flip-flopped...sm
The UN is a viable and necessary institution now. This is his latest on the UN.
When he was making the case for the war it was screw the UN.
In the wake of the mess in Iraq he has changed his tone, done a 360.
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]
She definitely calls them out on their flip flops
xx
Is tht so? So I assume that you are a flip-flop,
WHAT exactly made you change your mind?
Biggest FLIP FLOP of all time...sm
So does Bush think there should be an exit strategy or not?
He's a joke!
Conservative Santorum - a flip flopper?
Group accuses Santorum of switch
Conservative association says senator made '180-degree turn' on intelligent design
By Lauri Lebo
Daily Record/Sunday News |
|
Dec 25, 2005 — A conservative organization that touts itself as a supporter of traditional values blasted Sen. Rick Santorum for his withdrawal of support for the Dover Area School District's unconstitutional intelligent design policy.
Senator Rick Santorum's agreement with Judge John Jones' decision ... is yet another example of why conservatives can no longer trust the senator, the American Family Association of Pennsylvania said in a news release Friday.
The association's president, Diane Gramley, said Santorum - who is expected to face a tough re-election challenge next year from state Treasurer Robert P. Casey Jr. - should heed her organization's remarks.
It's a warning that he needs to be careful, Gramley said. That he's beginning to lose his conservative base.
A year ago today, an editorial by Santorum praising Dover's intelligent design policy appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. I commend the Dover Area School District for taking a stand and refusing to ignore the controversy, he wrote.
Dover school officials were so pleased that they printed the piece in a newsletter sent out to district residents.
But last week, one day after Judge John E. Jones III sharply criticized former Dover board members and ruled that intelligent design could not be included in the science curriculum as unconstitutional, Santorum said he was troubled by former board member's actions.
Jones, in a strongly worded decision, left no doubt that he believed board members lied under oath in order to cover up their motivations - getting religion into science class.
Gramley criticized Santorum for changing his position.
He's almost made a 180-degree turn on this issue, she said.
In August, after President Bush said he supported teaching intelligent design in science class, Santorum said he didn't agree.
Rather, he said he supports teaching the controversy over evolutionary theory.
As far as intelligent design is concerned, I really don't believe it has risen to the level of a scientific theory at this point that we would want to teach it alongside of evolution, the Pennsylvania senator said during an NPR interview in August.
But in a 2002 Washington Times op-ed article, Santorum wrote that intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.
Gramley said Santorum's change of view is an indication that he may be diverting from his conservative positions, in order to court more moderate voters.
Santorum also said he intends to withdraw his affiliation with the Thomas More Law Center, which defended the Dover policy in the lawsuit.
Santorum could not be reached for comment Friday.
http://www.ydr.com/doverbiology/ci_3342145 |
|
|
|
Seems like Harry Reid has done some flip flopping of his own
FLASHBACK: Dem Senate Leader Harry Reid: 'Our Federal Wallet Stretched To Limit By Illegal Aliens Getting Welfare'
'Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally'
August 5, 1993
The Office of Sen. Harry Reid issued the following:
In response to increased terrorism and abuse of social programs by aliens, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) today introduced the first and only comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress.
Currently, an alien living illegally in the United States often pays no taxes but receives unemployment, welfare, free medical care and other federal benefits. Recent terrorist acts, including the World Trade Center bombing, have underscored the need to keep violent criminals out of the country.
Reid's bill, the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993, overhauls the nation's immigration laws and calls for a massive scale-down of immigrants allowed into the country from approximately 800,000 to 300,000.
The bill also changes asylum laws to prevent phony asylum seekers. Reid said the U.S. open door policy is being abused at the expense of honest, working citizens.
We are a country founded upon fairness and justice, Reid said. An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum. But this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America's inherent generosity and legal system.
Reid's bill also cracks down on illegal immigration. The 1990 census reported 3.3 million illegal aliens in America. Recent estimates indicate about 2.5 million immigrants illegally entered the United States last year.
Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs, Reid said. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement.
Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes.
Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally, Reid said.
Specific provisions of Reid's Immigration Stabilization Act include the following:
-- Reduces annual legal immigration levels from approximately 800,000 admissions per year to about 300,000. Relatives other than spouse or minor children will be admitted only if already on immigration waiting lists and their admission does not raise annual immigration levels above 300,000.
-- Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony asylum claims.
-- Expands list of felonies considered aggravated felonies requiring exclusion and deportation of criminal aliens. Allows courts to order deportation at time of sentencing.
-- Increases penalties for failing to depart or re-entering the United States after a final order of deportation order. Increases maximum penalties for visa fraud from five years to 10 years.
-- Curtails alien smuggling by authorizing interdiction and repatriation of aliens seeking to enter the United States unlawfully by sea. Increases penalties for alien smuggling.
-- Adds alien smuggling to the list of crimes subject to sanctions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Expands the categories of property that are forfeited when used to facilitate the smuggling or harboring of illegal aliens.
-- Clarifies that a person born in the United States to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen. This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the United States illegally, often at risk to mother and child, for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.
-- Mandates that aliens who cannot demonstrably support themselves without public or private assistance are excludable. This will prevent admission of aliens likely to be dependent on public financial support. This requirement extends to the sponsor of any family sponsored immigrant.
-- Increases border security and patrol officers to 9,900 full-time positions.
END
Don't forget that he flip flops at every turn....sm
of the wind, saying stuff INFORMED voters well know is just a ruse to get votes. Most of the stuff he is so-called "promising" will never get out of Congress - he knows that and is banking on uninformed Americans who think highly of his rock-star status. Personally I always thought the lying was supposed to start AFTER they got into office, but it's obvious that Obama sees things WAY differently than most folks who pay attention to his rhetoric instead of being "sheeple. "
maybe he's just a flip flopper - like 100 years in Iraq
He should have just said "I don't remember" like the pubs have over and over and over.
Mmmm, no I think the mother of all flip-flops...sm
Goes to McCain for "Experience, experience, experience, I have the experience!" McCain: What, that's not working? Okay, I mean "Change, change, change!" ("Do you think anyone will notice that I just adopted what my opponent's platform because mine wasn't working, and that I've gone from being a so-called 'Maverick' to a populist in a matter of weeks?")
Bush Flip Flops on Immigration Bill...sm
Sensenbrenner: Bush Turned Back on Bill
Key House Republican Jim Sensenbrenner says Bush turned his back on immigration bill
WASHINGTON, May. 17, 2006
By FREDERIC J. FROMMER Associated Press Writer
 (AP) |
|
(AP) Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, who has pushed a tough border security bill through the House, accused President Bush on Wednesday of abandoning the legislation after asking for many of its provisions.
He basically turned his back on provisions of the House-passed bill, a lot of which we were requested to put in the bill by the White House, Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., angrily told reporters in a conference call. That was last fall when we were drafting the bill, and now the president appears not to be interested in it at all.
Sensenbrenner chairs the House Judiciary Committee and would be the House's chief negotiator on any final immigration package for Bush's signature. He said it was the White House that had requested two controversial felony provisions in the bill the House passed last winter.
We worked very closely with White House in the fall in putting together the border security bill that the House passed, he said. ... What we heard in November and December, he seems to be going in the opposite direction in May. That is really at the crux of this irritation, he said of Bush.
I think the flip flop prize still belongs to Joe Biden...
from "He is not ready to lead; the job does not lend itself to on-the-job experience" to "He is ready to lead." Talking about the #1 on his ticket. Think that one still takes the prize. :)
I was never on SP's side.... s/m
but I think that it was extremely tasteless of this Canadian comedian to post as
French President Sarkozy and interview her for 5 minutes and making fun of her.
Extremely tasteless.
After all she was the running mate of McCain.
I am a democrat.
I don't think that either side... sm
has much room to talk.
I have seen articles, opinions and links posted, apparently by Republicans, about the issues facing Obama, and the first replies are the childish Dems who come on and say "well, it's Bush's fault that he has this or that to deal with" or some other childish remark.
By the same token, I have seen what I believe to be Democrats posting nasty articles and opinions about Sarah Palin and how she is giving interviews, how she obviously doesn't have the sense to be a major political player or whether she gave the clothes back to the party before going back to Alaska.
I'm with BWT. I think the childishness and catiness that I have seen on this board for the last week or so need to end and let's get to discussing the issues at hand. We won't be able to solve a danged one of them, but we can have a civilized adult discussion and we might even learn a thing or two from each other.
Reach across the aisle, folks. 
We are on the same side
I wanted to post and did not want to respond to an Ann fan, so I posted under your reasonable statement.
no just one side
This problem is not just a dem/repub problem. It is a greedy CEO/Wallstreet problem as well. It is a mass amounts of people went out and bought things they couldnt afford and houses they didnt need and couldnt afford problem. Did the gov make them go out and do that? Who made all these people sign their names on these subprime short arm loans that collapsed? It is their fault too. It is also a welfare problem. You know, those people who would rather pop out kids for a job than work for real.
...and just you on the other side.
...but not LAST night.
Get a job.
No one took Eric's side. sm
But then, you know that. The rest I won't argue with you about. If you use science against God's Word, what more can I say.
The Other Side of Mel Gibson...sm
Disney Cancels Mel Gibson Holocaust Series
The ABC television network has pulled a miniseries about the Holocaust it was developing with Mel Gibson 's production company, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, quoting an unidentified representative for the network.
Gibson was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving early on Friday and was reported to have launched into a tirade against Jews, asking the arresting officer if he was a Jew and blaming the Jews for starting all wars.
The actor, who holds strong conservative Catholic religious and political views and whose father is a Holocaust denier, apologized on Saturday.
The incident has raised questions about the future of projects Gibson and his Icon Productions company are working on, like the ABC television miniseries based on a memoir about a Dutch Jew during World War II, the newspaper said An ABC representative told the paper, without elaborating, it has been two years and the network still has not seen a script, so the project is being pulled.
A spokesperson for ABC, which is owned by Walt Disney Co. , could not be reached for comment.
Disney's movie studio arm still plans to release Gibson 's self-financed Mayan-language movie Apocalypto on Dec. 8, Hollywood's trade papers reported. The Web site Slate.com quoted Walt Disney Studios president Oren Aviv as saying he accepted Gibson 's apology.
Copyright Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.
We're on the same side
I am trying to understand where all this animosity is coming from. Why does it bother you so much that the last democratic president and former first lady/candidate/senator are going to be at the convention? How would it look if they weren’t there? Hillary and Obama are basically on the same page when it comes to policy, so I am guessing this is a personality issue for you? During the primaries, her tactics and strategies left a lot to be desired, to be sure, which may have been a mitigating factor as to why Obama was ultimately able to come out on top but, let’s face it, not by much. It will be extremely important that the party get past its in-fighting and focus on the task at hand of winning the election in November.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are and will remain influential party leaders for a some time to come. It appears that it is her die-hard base supporters that are acting like children. They are the ones who prolonging the division and ill-will which you are expressing here. Both the Clintons have been selected by the Democratic National Convention Committee to speak in Denver for good reason. The DNC recognizes just how pivotal their roles will be in bringing the party back together. This group of HRC’s supporters who are planning to disrupt the convention and demand a roll-call are not very likely to succeed in this effort. This serves no useful purpose whatsoever and is in nobody’s best interests.
Hillary will eventually “crawl back into her hole,” as you so eloquently put it, and return to her position as a junior senator, but not until she has done her job of trying to encourage party unity. I suspect that she still has much to contribute in that capacity and in roles yet undefined in terms of advancing party policies. Try not to take what the newscasters say as gospel. They relish in scandal and controversy. Do not give them the satisfaction. It should come as no surprise that the Clintons are disappointed in the primary results, but that does not mean that they are supposed to fade on off into the sunset. It is not their time to pass...not just yet.
Bill Clinton, a racist? Where is this coming from? Fox News? He does not hide behind mansion walls in the ghetto. His foundation continues to advance the cause of civil and human rights, both here and abroad. It is unfair to write HRC off as a disgrace to women who needs to “just go away,” based on this one less than stellar chapter in her political career. She is much more than that, just as Bill Clinton is much than the "impeached president" you so casually dismiss. I am wondering if you hated him this much while he was in office, or did this arise out of the recent primary process?
In any case, if Obama is defeated, HRC will not be responsible. It will be this divisive in-fighting within the party members that will be the reason. We are between the primaries and the convention. The entire campaign still lies ahead of us. Just give it a little more time. You will see Hillary and Bill come around as party loyalists who will play perhaps the most key roles of all in party unification. This is not just their job. It is up to all democrats to come together this fall and keep their eyes on the prize. Perpetuating this kind of division does nothing to advance that cause. Is this hatred really worth harboring to the extent that, in the end, we will be facing 4 or 8 more years of a republican regime? Try to keep that in mind the next time you find yourself this riled up, and ask yourself what I ask you now….where is this really coming from? I think I know the answer, but I am more interested in hearing yours at the moment.
Disrespect is nothing new on your side...
and it is not just directed at me, and to suggest so is being dishonest at best. You tolerate no opinion other than your own, want to discuss only issues that you are pro and do not tolerate discussion of any other viewpoint, and for people who call themselves Democrats that is a very undemocratic attitude. You hate an entire group of people (all Republicans...well I should say anyone who is not Democrat) for no reason other than that. Two sides? That's rich! There have never been 2 sides.
As to domination of the board....there are about 6 or 8 of you guys to 1 of mine. lol. Talk about blinders.
All voters should consider this regardless of which side
It should be very troubling that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since day one. Ask Hillary Clinton or anyone else who ran (again, R, D, or I).
With that in mind, who gave them the right to choose our next President?
Incidentally, the media (left-wing, of course) actually selected McCain, too. They were absolutely certain that he would be the weakest candidate. Mitt scared the holy hanna out of them. I personally hoped for a Rudy-Fred ticket, in no particular order.
It should be interesting as to how many honest people there are reading this stuff to see how they'll react. Based on what I've read since Palin's speech, she's certainly changed quite a few minds.
The thing that surprises me the most is that the bulk of people on this board is women, yet so many of them put party above the person. I personally don't vote by genitalia. I think it's foolish.
"Woe to the other side who does not
recognize it." What I saw was very scary, an individual who has not clue one about what is going on in this country or out of it. Very scared, indeed. Woe, indeed. You make this election sound like a football game. This is our country, our children's future that is at stake. And no, I didn't find her very knowledgeable in the least, just mouthing words and throwing something someone told her to say. We will see, but I pray to God these two do not get elected.
The other side of the story....
http://www.newsmax.com/smith/barack_obama_tony_rezko/2008/09/02/126890.html
Another side of the coin.....
I respect your beliefs and am very happy you found your niche in life and saved your marriage. Kudos to you! I myself do not question Obama's morals - and I can't say that I question McCain's either. But, Bush got into the white house based on deceptive strategies aimed at leading the populace to believe he was on the moral high ground. (I see the same strategy being used in McCain's campaign). In view of what has transpired over the last 8 years, my faith in the pubs moral high ground has been trampled beyond repair. I believe torture of other human beings to be reprehensible and not advocated by any religion, but it continues and McCain supported it - even though he himself was tortured as a POW. The sex scandals - Larry Craig (airport bathrooms - it was illegal - otherwise, I don't care who he has sex with), Mark Foley (Repub House Representative - Once known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, Foley resigned from Congress on September 29, 2006 after allegations surfaced that he had sent suggestive emails and sexually explicit instant messages to teenaged males who had formerly served and were at that time serving as Congressional pages) and now the scandal surrounding the Department of the Interior on charges of getting into bed with big oil (literally and figuratively) drug abuse, etc. I find the whole thing ridiculous to base your campaign on "personality" and moral high ground. I am not saying that Dems did not have their issues with sex scandals - as we all know.
I believe Jesus Christ was once a very highly evolved human being and no longer has to incarnate as a human as he has reached perfection. I believe Buddha was a very highly evolved human being who no longer has to incarnate for the same reason. I believe that Ghandi and Mother Theresa were highly evolved. I believe that energy never disappears, it only changes form. I believe in life after death. I believe that love is the most important thing in life. Humans are not perfect. I do not believe that sex is sin. Dolphins have sex for pleasure and I am not equating humans to aquatic life - but Dolphins are highly intelligent. Do you think God judges them for indulging in pleasure? I believe that exploiting the vulnerable for sex is morally wrong (children, women....that's as far as I'll go on that). Sex between 2 consenting adults is not wrong.
I believe that every religion has it's place on earth and I am in no way authorized or vetted to judge which one is right and which one is wrong. They are all right. Paganism, Wiccan, the Jewish faith, Catholic, Muslim, etc., etc. We, as humans, have the right to decide what is right for us in that regard.
I think all religions know the difference between right and wrong and stealing from others, torturing others, even JUDGING others is morally wrong. You can boil it down to not having ANYTHING to do with religion.
And to believe that whoever is in the white house holds your moral values as a primary reason for decisions that are made is naive. I think the last 8 years proves that and for that reason, I fear more of the same. I am willing to cross party lines just to see if this disaster of a country can be repaired.
The other side of the coin....
Karl Rove would be working to get any Republican elected. That is what he does. He is not a member of the campaign and it is a free country...he can advocate anyone he wants.
If Obama was serious about change he would not have picked a senator who has been in the senate over 30 years. That is not change. That is also more of the same.
James Johnson, of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac fame, who used to be an economic advisor to Obama...after he came under scrutiny for possible fraud, he left the OBama campaign with his tail between his legs. Don't see much difference in the two.
Other side of the story...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/09/16/2008-09-16_john_mccain_campaign_releases_troopergat.html
I'm just going to explain our side...
please don't start a war about this.
We are taught in the Bible that homosexuality is wrong and that marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman. We believe in the holy sanctity of marriage. Therefore it is violating the laws of God when homosexuals marry.
Again, it is not the homosexuals that we "hate" or "despise". It is the sin of homosexuality.
I do believe homosexuals are born that way. We are all born into sinful natures. Remember, in God's eyes, all sins are equal. We all have natural tendencies, and that includes homosexuality. I was born a compulsive liar. Since as far back as I can remember I have lied about anything and everything. Now that I am a Christian, that doesn't change. But with the help of Christ I am changing that and I have put away my sinful nature of lying. In the same sense, when a homosexual comes to know the true Christ, He will give them new desires and help them to withstand the temptation to go back to their old ways.
I know most of you won't understand this, but I just wanted to give you our viewpoint. True Christians do not hate homosexuals, or blacks, or immigrants, or abortionists, or anyone else. We just hate the sin, because sin separates us from God.
We want a president who is going to keep the sanctity of marriage, meaning one man and one woman. Marriage came from God, and it is a holy matrimony.
Please don't flame, I'm just trying to explain in a way that maybe you can understand. I see it from your side too. Before I became a Christian I didn't understand the big deal either. But now I do and I see the big picture. If God had meant for man and man or woman and woman to be together, he would have given us the "parts" to be able to do so.
On the lighter side (maybe)
This was sent to me from a friend. Don't know where the info came from.
Guess who I am?
I am 42 years old
I love the outdoors,
I hunt,
I am a Republican reformer,
I have taken on the Republican Party establishment,
I have five children,
I have a spot on the national ticket as vice-president
with less than two years in the governor's office.
Who am I?
|
|
|
|
|
V
I am Teddy Roosevelt in 1900
How can anyone say that Sarah Palin is not qualified?
|
And I'll be right there on the side with you.
I gotta take a break, this board is making me crazy.
On a side note..
Where in the Mojave desert did you live? I grew up in a tiny town called Inyokern and went to high school in Lone Pine.
On the up side of things.........sm
Since I've been such a downer, gloom and doom "prophet" in my last posts , here is an article that recommends buying now, if you have the cash and the stomach for it, and reap the rewards 10 or 20 years down the road. Might be our solution to no Social Security when that time comes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27829555/
I think I have the other side of the story.
I've been watching all those other stations for years. I just started watching Fox lately. How much more "open-minded" do you want me to be???
What other side this weekend???
I've been on all weekend and it is more drone of the libs praising their god and arguing with anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Who's side you on, Willis?
Bush is the one who refused to do anything about the illegals (cheap help for the rich). Oh, that's right, It's O's job to clean up Bush's mess and he just isn't doing it fast enough to please you. Darn. Heck, Bush would sign anything with a great flourish of the pen and an idiotic grin! He sho did love them cameras!
Why so bitter? Because your side
Typical sore-loser attitude.
I agree. But, you see, when the other side has no
nm
Yes! But the other side of that coin
is that the federal government would have to stop sucking away all that money in the first place, only to dole it back to the states on condition of good behavior. (What many do not acknowledge is that the federal government has no money that it has not first extracted from us. When the federal government 'gives' a state money for any purpose, they are merely giving it back, with strings attached. )
The feds would stop dictating to states based on highway funding, education funding, medical funding, funding for 'the arts,' etc. We would have far fewer federal intrusions into our lives, and if we objected to the way our state governs, we truly could move to an other state more in line with our personal philosophy. As it stands now, if we object to federal regulations, where are we going to move? France?
that's because you are on the other side of the fence..nm
nm
The other side of the story.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Qassam_rocket_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rocket_and_mortar_attacks_in_Israel_in_2008
where is the OTHER side of the story?
Netanyahu agreed to the 2-state solution which was only a pretense under HIS ridiculous conditions for the Palestinians:
Total disarmament for the Palestinian state
The whole of Jerusalem for Israel
No return for the Palestinian refugess
BUT
Illegal settlement in the Westbank should remain.
This is ALL to the gross disdvantage for the Palestinians, therefore Abbas rejected the deal and now Netanyahu started again a massacre in Gaza.
Where is justice? It is Israel who wants the WHOLE of the Westbank, the whole of Jerusalem all for itself.
What else do you expect??? For sure there will be a pro-Israel demonstration in Union Square.
Sorry, I never say anyone on either side say things like this. You are sick. NM
So lying is okay when it benefits your side
Okay. I see the picture developing. It was okay that Clinton lied, but just because you think Bush lied he should be impeached post haste. Just want to be sure I'm reading you right here.
As will the stuff that piles up on the other side....
when the debates start. We'll see how it all plays out, and how all of America perceives it, not just we on this board. That will tell the tale. Yes, she did say he was the man she admires most in the world. If I recall, as a young man, Obama snorted cocaine and drank heavily, by his own admission. Michelle still loves him. In my mind, both of these things are in the past, in their youth, and nonissues.
|
