Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

And one more thing.........everybody read......sm

Posted By: m on 2008-11-22
In Reply to:

Thanks for "coming to my defense" on the board today. We might not always agree on everything, but that's the beauty of life. Y'all are the greatest! MMMMMMWWWWWWAAAAAA!!!!!


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

    If you read the whole thing....
    it is black liberation theology basically...and is segregationist. When whites preached segregation, it was called racist. That is exactly what Michelle Obama is doing. That blacks should separate themselves from whites so as not to be "assimilated." So much for no black america, no white america, just america....she does not believe that, and I don't believe he does either. All his career, his associations, etc., do not support that he does.

    After you read the thesis, you understand that she meant exactly what she said when she said for the first time in her adult life she was proud of her country.

    Obviously they share this separation view and that is why they gravitated to the people they gravitated to, and to Wright's church.

    And no, Obama's campaign did not release it. Princeton University did, because of the Freedom of Information Act, and she signed at the beginning of the thesis that Princeton could release it (back when she wrote it..of course, at that time had no idea she would be wife of man running for Pres of US).

    I was not going to vote for Obama anyway, and this certainly moved me more solidly toward McCain.
    You best read up on history a little more. GOT for one thing.

    This is the most nonsensical thing I have ever read. nm

    I read the whole thing, and I appreciate your opinion, and I know you believe it...
    now try to understand my belief. I feel that my God is a powerful and just God. I also believe that He gave His children free will, and I believe that all of us will answer to Him one day for all our choices, whatever they may be. Please understand...I do believe that those aborted babies are with God now. No doubt about it. Straight shot to his side, as they are the most innocent among us. But you cannot make me believe that a just and loving God would agree with this heinous, horrible procedure, to the tune of 1.2 million every year! I'm sorry...I just don't believe that.

    And I'm sorry...I don't think murder is between God and the person. An unborn child has a soul...just like a child who has been born. What about someone who murders a child outside the womb? Is that between the murderer and the creator? What about when a pedophile hurts and then murders a child? That is between the pedophile and his creator? I am not saying that to be mean or confrontational. I am trying to understand.

    My God, I believe, loves all children, and yes, children who die violently go right to His side, yes, I believe that. What I do not believe is that it was His will that they die violently. You have your belief, and I have mine. Can't be just allow each other to have our beliefs? Can't I be allowed to follow MY belief of MY God, which tells me that someone needs to speak for these children?

    As you said...that is just my opinion, my belief.
    I did read the whole thing, why do you assume that I
    didn't? Just because I didn't feel that it was racist, doesn't mean I didn't. We obviously have different takes on it.

    The release of it I was referring to was to the politico.com web site, which Obama did relase it to, not the thesis as a whole.
    I agree...have read the same thing. nm
    x
    That's the most stereotypical thing I"ve ever read
    New California seems like a racist state to me....
    Just ignore them, ms, obviously they refuse to read the whole thing....nm
    x
    That's the most sensible thing I've read on this board
    in a looooong time.  Why should somebody who works hard (or inherits) for their money have to pay more taxes than someone who makes (or inherits) less money.  Everybody paying the same - that is equality. 
    Thank you - the wisest thing I've read yet today
    I keep posting there are bad and good on both sides. Neither side is perfect. There are a lot of democrats I agree with and I think they are right on (Kucinich, Richardson, and others in the senate). Actually there are more democrats I agree with than I would rather admit to. HA HA, but there are some I absolutely do not agree with (Pelosi, Reid, Clinton and others). On the other side there are some republicans I agree with (Ron Paul and others, can't think of any others right now just cos I'm so tired) and those that I think really stink (Bush at the top of them), but unless we get on this board praising Obama and every single democrat and cut down and destroy every republican, we will get bashed over and over. I have said many times there are good and bad on both sides and if people are going to follow the group think and not think for themselves, well that's when they lose a part of their sense. My mom is a great one. I don't know how many arguments I will have with her. She hates Bush so much with such a vengence she has come right out and said what she want to happen. "He's a liar, he's this, I don't have any money because of Bush, etc, etc. But the minute I say to her If you want to talk about liars lets hit on Clinton, or lets talk about what Obama said. Ohhhh no, can't do that. I was also told by her "If you know what is good for you, you'll stop saying those bad things about him". I asked her what exactly does that mean and she said I just better watch it. Then I said to her, well how can you say what you say about Bush but I tell you I disagree about something Obama said and your ready to report me to the authorities. Funny how someone mysteriously happened to be knocking on her door at that moment and she had to leave (btw, I didn't hear anything in the background and her phone is in the halway near her front door). So unless people will admit when they are wrong there will always be arguments.
    It's obvious you didn't read a DARN thing.....
    First of all, real history is not taught in college either.... unless you are soooo lucky as to get a professor who actually LOVES history and really DID his/her homework.

    My son is a history/political major and LOVES history... and I can assure you, he would put history teachers to shame in what they "think" they know.... the crap the government puts in their history books is all they are ALLOWED to teach in our public "government ran" schools!

    Our history IS politics....where have you been? Teaching our kids politics IS teaching them history.... WOW! Glad my son is teaching them and not you!

    This guy has been teaching for 19 years with NO complaints about his informative web site.... the parents have ALWAYS like it!

    Only ONE person complained......ONE!!! No doubt a liberal jackarse who has NO loyalty or love for this country whatsoever.... another lost soul.

    This guy had an introductory video where he says he truly wanted his kids to LOVE America.........what the heck is wrong with that?

    He was told to remove that video because everyone "did not love America"..... huh? Then I suppose they can sit on their sorry sad butts and hate everything....who cares? This guy did nothing wrong but encourage students to love their country but of course, you WOULD have something wrong with that! Geesh!
    Now THAT's the smartest thing I've read in a long time! nm

    East Ohio Gas has been using natural gas to fuel their utility trucks for years - why hasn't that caught on?  Makes ya wonder..............


    But valuing over the price of a dollar is a right thing wing thing, so you are on the wrong board. n
    x
    This looks interesting. A long read, so will read it when I get home from work. nm
    nm
    Obviously u didnt read, I said NONE of them are moral. Read the post before spouting off.

    I read on CNN (yes, I do read liberal stuff too..hehe)...sm
    ...that Karl Rove was actually very disappointed in the McCain campaign for airing negative type ads against Obama.

    So I would say that Rove is definitely not in the hip pocket of the McCain campaign.
    Good research sam - but a lot to read right now so gotta read it later
    I've been goofing off too much from work. I appreciate what you wrote and will read when I'm done with work here.
    I never said it's a bad thing, it is a good thing....nm
    nm
    sorry, should read I did not read post that way.
    ,
    All you have to do is read up on Marxism, read up on...
    black liberation theology, and look at what Obama is proposing. All of it a matter of public record, most of it from his own mouth. Your denial of it does not change the facts. If you support socialism, vote for him. Certainly your right. You are already wanting to squelch any kind of dissent...what's up with that? If you seriously consider calling someone a socialist a smear, you really need to read up on your candidate. I did not post a smear, I posted a fact. Redistribution of wealth is socialist and he already said he was going to do it...I heard him say it and it is now a campaign commercial. Sigh.
    Some on this board can only read what they want to read (nm)
    x
    READ THE ARTICLE-READ OTHER
    READERS COMMENTS!!!
    one other thing though....

    Agree with everything you stated, but I am profoundly disgusted also with Rove being able to expose a CIA agent, and nothing is going to be done about it in that I feel he committed treason, as Reagan did with Iran-Contra... Treasonous acts that are let to slide...no big deal huh?  Who knows if someone is getting hurt because of his mouth, and yet, nothing...  The silence is very annoying...as our country drops into a stinking sea of muck.


    One more thing, gt. sm
    Of all the people on these boards, YOUR opinion of me is the one I value the least. 
    Oh, and one more thing, gt. sm
    Clnton signed Kyoto in 1997, only because he knew that the Senate would not ratify it.  He was right.  They voted 95-0 AGAINST Kyoto.  Why?   Because it would have required signatory nations to significantly cut greenhouse gases resulting from the burning of fosil fuels.  Because ratifying the treaty would have required a large reduction in the use of fossil fuels that we use to our our economy.  Until there is an alternative fuel source that is better than gold old fashioned coal and oil, restricting our economy's ability to burn these fuels would CRIPPLE US AS A NATION.  You are not seeing the total picture here, you simply cannot be seeing it.  I know the left's hatred for capitalism has blinded them to the fact that without our economy, we collapse.  It really is that simple.  We would be reduced to a third world nation in a very short period of time and you and I would not be sitting here writing on our computers because our world as we know it would change.   Yes, it really is all about oil.   But not the way you think.
    and another thing
    we aren't controlling anybody.  There are several countries in this world where you are controlled, but this ain't one of them. 
    One more thing:

    I apologize for the length of my post, but so far, I still have freedom of speech.


    Guess I just feel the need to get it all out before that freedom suddenly disappears, as well.  The majority of Americans don't agree with Bush, and we all know how he/his thugs handle people who dare to disagree with him.  If you don't believe me, just ask John McCain and/or Valerie Plame.


    I'd like to add one more thing.

    If these alleged WMDs are so widespread and so easily accessible in Iraq, why aren't any of them being used on our soldiers?


    Honestly, that's one of the very first fears I had when I heard we were going to war with Iraq (when I still believed the reasons given by the president and supported the invasion based on those reasons).  I had visions of massive troop deaths at the hands of Iraqis and these WMDs.


    Did that happen?


    OK. Here's the thing...sm
    Because we've been through this before and I feel a repeat coming on. I'm respectful and nice to everyone on these boards 99% of the time. People come over to the liberal board and pretend they are moderates or just want to *debate.* When all the time they are anti-everything liberal and have no intention of seeing the liberal point of view. In the end, they end up *insulted* off of the board and run to the other board and have a sling fest. Yawn. They have revelations over there contrary to the beliefs they portrayed on this board. So really I'm skeptical about debating with the like. You may be 100% different worldfan, but from your posts on the Conservative and News boards it would appear you would be more at home on the conservative board giving them a high five about what's going on over here. Just my observation.

    I used to post on the conservative board but I left because they were getting too extreme for my liking. It's that simple. There are some topics over there that I would reply too, but I don't b/c of past comments made over there, which have made me stick to the liberal page. However, on quite a few issues I am far from liberal like abortion and fiscal spending.

    I hope you get my points. If not, we don't have anything more to discuss.
    Sorry. Here's the whole thing.

    I was trying to avoid this but the link is not working for some reason.








































     
    Common

     
         

     

    Tuesday, July 04, 2006  
     
       Headlines  
     
     
     
















    Published on Monday, July 3, 2006 by Agence France Presse

    Britons Tire of Cruel, Vulgar US: Poll

     
    People in Britain view the United States as a vulgar, crime-ridden society obsessed with money and led by an incompetent president whose Iraq policy is failing, according to a newspaper poll.

    The United States is no longer a symbol of hope to Britain and the British no longer have confidence in their transatlantic cousins to lead global affairs, according to the poll published in The Daily Telegraph.










    ...a majority of the Britons described Americans as uncaring, divided by class, awash in violent crime, vulgar, preoccupied with money, ignorant of the outside world, racially divided, uncultured and in the most overwhelming result (90 percent of respondents) dominated by big business.
    src=http://www.commondreams.org/images/endquote.gif
     
    The YouGov poll found that 77 percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that the US is a beacon of hope for the world.


    As Americans prepared to celebrate the 230th anniversary of their independence on Tuesday, the poll found that only 12 percent of Britons trust them to act wisely on the global stage. This is half the number who had faith in the Vietnam-scarred White House of 1975.


    A massive 83 percent of those questioned said that the United States doesn't care what the rest of the world thinks.


    With much of the worst criticism aimed at the US adminstration, the poll showed that 70 percent of Britons like Americans a lot or a little.


    US President George W. Bush fared significantly worse, with just one percent rating him a great leader against 77 percent who deemed him a pretty poor or terrible leader.


    More than two-thirds who offered an opinion said America is essentially an imperial power seeking world domination. And 81 per cent of those who took a view said President George W Bush hypocritically championed democracy as a cover for the pursuit of American self-interests.


    US policy in Iraq was similarly derided, with only 24 percent saying they felt that the US military action there was helping to bring democracy to the country.


    A spokesman for the American embassy said that the poll's findings were contradicted by its own surveys.


    We question the judgment of anyone who asserts the world would be a better place with Saddam still terrorizing his own nation and threatening people well beyond Iraq's borders, the paper quoted the unnamed spokesman as saying.


    With respect to the poll's assertions about American society, we bear some of the blame for not successfully communicating America's extraordinary dynamism.


    But frankly, so do you (the British press).


    In answer to other questions, a majority of the Britons questions described Americans as uncaring, divided by class, awash in violent crime, vulgar, preoccupied with money, ignorant of the outside world, racially divided, uncultured and in the most overwhelming result (90 percent of respondents) dominated by big business.


    Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse


    ###

    Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

     
       FAIR USE NOTICE  
      This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
     
     

     




    Common Dreams NewsCenter
    A non-profit news service providing breaking news & views for the progressive community.
    Home | Newswire | Contacting Us | About Us | Donate | Sign-Up | Archives

    © Copyrighted 1997-2006
    www.commondreams.org


    I would like to know the same thing.nm
    12
    The thing that got me was this...sm
    This totally counts out everyday Joes. And those with a couple million to run. A half a billion dollars is a lot of money.
    One last thing.....
    Your argument might hold more water if I thought for one minute liberals understood that it was Michael Moore's OPINION and not the truth (but why should they, because he frames as the truth). I think, if you truly understand that, you are in the minority.
    One more thing...
    I asked the last poster to bring me one example of a Democrat who, when caught in wrongdoing, has resigned. Just one. She has not come back with one, even though I named several who should have. As I stated, the only Democrat I know of who resigned from anything resigned because he was coming out of the closet, and I find that ludicrous. The man should not have resigned because he was gay. For felony perjury, yes. For obstruction of justice, yes. Remember please the congressman who actually had a homosexual affair with an underage page (male). No Democratic outrage. He stood right up and said he was an adult and it was consensual and that had nothing to do with his job as a Congressman. No Democratic outrage. In fact, he was re-elected. Yes, that was several years ago, but all that proves is that the Democratic moral compass went wonky several years ago. It is not a recent thing, it is just getting worse and worse and worse. Stop please dancing around the subject, and please to bring forth one or two Democrats who have actually resigned and admitted wrongdoing? And while you are at it, Republicans who were caught and still hold office? I would be very willing to read and re-assess. Try for one minute to take off the liberal hat and look at it objectively. It is case after case after case...Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Alcee Hastings, William Jefferson, and on and on the list goes....in fact, Alcee Hastings was removed as a Federal Judge for bribery and perjury..see below.

    In 1988, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives took up the case, and Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413-3. Voters to impeach included Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, John Conyers and Charles Rangel. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming only the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate. The Senate had the option to forbid Hastings from ever seeking federal office again, but did not do so. Alleged co-conspirator William Borders went to jail again for refusing to testify in the impeachment proceedings, but was later given a full pardon by Bill Clinton on his last day in office.

    Ain't that special?? And just proves the point.
    How did I get into this thing..

    I have not said anything about regime change for months, years. I said Iraq was on the table before 9/11 solely to illuminate the fact that 9/11 set the stage for what some had been wanting to do for a long time. My intent was to emphasize that this administration used 9/11 as a way to garner support from Congress and the American people for the switch from Afghanistan to Iraq. If 9/11 had not happened, there would never have been support for a preemptive war in Iraq nor do I believe we would have supported going after bin Laden. It took something monumental for the American people to be willing to go to war.


    How do you know Clinton is my favorite president?? I think he was a good president and I was doing a lot better when he was in office but you assume much here. In my lifetime I think maybe JFK was my favorite president (I was about 10 years old and I remember him as bigger than life) and one of the reasons for that was that he inspired us. I don't think anyone has really done that since, made us think and feel like we could do anything. It really has been downhill since Watergate.


    I will cease and desist from regime change rhetoric if I never have to hear the words spew or ooze again.


    How did I get in this thing....

    I have not said anything about regime change for months, years. I said Iraq was on the table before 9/11 solely to illuminate the fact that 9/11 set the stage for what some had been wanting to do for a long time.


    My point was that it is not only *this* administration.  Clinton felt strongly enough about Iraq and regime change, as did the Congress at that time, to enact a LAW calling for regime change.  So Iraq was on the table then.  The articles posted would lead you to believe that liberals/Democrats never called for regime change.  They are the instigating part of the *some* you speak of.  And if you will read Clinton's speech at the time, if you did not know he gave it, you would think Bush might have, because the content is eerily similar.  It is just odd to me that liberals were on board for WMD, on board for regime change, on board for force, on board for ALL of it when Clinton was calling for it.  How do liberals manage that massive flip flop?  I remember Clinton's speech well.  It was one of the few times that I agreed with what he was doing and saying.


    My intent was to emphasize that this administration used 9/11 as a way to garner support from Congress and the American people for the switch from Afghanistan to Iraq. If 9/11 had not happened, there would never have been support for a preemptive war in Iraq nor do I believe we would have supported going after bin Laden. It took something monumental for the American people to be willing to go to war.  Okay.  I get it.  3000 people dying here was not enough to make liberals willing to go to war.  What, in the name of the Almighty, is, I am wondering.


    How do you know Clinton is my favorite president?? I think he was a good president and I was doing a lot better when he was in office but you assume much here. I was being facetious...he seems to be the posterboy for liberals.  I apologize.  I will not refer to him as YOUR favorite President anymore.  Glad though that you validated what I have said on numerous occasions, that liberals are about what is good for them individually...I am glad you personally were doing better when he was President. 


    In my lifetime I think maybe JFK was my favorite president (I was about 10 years old and I remember him as bigger than life) and one of the reasons for that was that he inspired us. I don't think anyone has really done that since, made us think and feel like we could do anything. It really has been downhill since Watergate. Maybe it has gone downhill for you since watergate.  Personally I think it started downhill then, and made a huge massive slide with Monicagate and a sitting President committing felony perjury.  However, I do not hold the country responsible for that as you seem to.  I hold the individuals...Nixon and Clinton...responsible.  At least Nixon had a modicum of grace to say he was wrong and resign when caught.  Clinton has done neither and his party has not expected him to and has in fact defended him.  You will never hear me defend either of them.



    I will cease and desist from regime change rhetoric if I never have to hear the words spew or ooze again.  I believe it was one on the liberal board who started the *spew* and *ooze* and the only time I have used those words was again, being facetious, in reply to the ones who used them.  I personally did not start the use of those.   In fact, I think her words were *spew venom* (ick).  As to cease and desist, go ahead with the regime change rhetoric if you like.  We know it did not originate with Bush, not opinion, matter of law.  No spin, hard fact.


    Have a good day.


    The right thing to do is...
    allow everyone to vote.  No one needs to step down.  And I do not support either of them.  I supported Ron Paul when he was in the race.
    One more thing
    He keeps flashing a pic of himself when he was a young guy in the military. Almost every commercial of him shows him when he was younger, and in fact one of his ads on this website shows him a young guy in the military. He's now old and he should have a current picture. What's next, Barack putting up adds with his high school senior pic? How about Hillary running with a picture of her in grade school. The guy is old and if he's so confident in himself he should have a current pic of him. He's no longer younger and he doesn't have the mind of someone younger.
    You did no such thing since he never said that.
    I did do my research and so did the author of "comparative drug use." above. FYI: Crack/free-base cocaine and cocaine hydrochloride are not the same. One is pure, the other a compound. The addition of hydrochloride gives the intranasal compound a completely different chemical make-up that does not have the same effect. It is slower on the uptake and clears the system much faster than the cocaine base (giving it less of an addictive potential) . The pure free base/crack cocaine DOES NOT WORK when it is snorted, since the absorption is obstructed when it is attacked by enzymes via the nasal route. Method of delivery does matter, in terms of drug effect, absorption, drug life and addiction potential. If you are an MT, you know where to go to verify this information.

    I am aware of what he said and did not say in his book. I have nothing to add to the "comparative drug use" post in that regard. Furthermore, there is nothing inaccurate in my original post. There is a pervert on a right-wing fringe blog who made these unsubstantiated claims about his witnessed account of "sharing" cocaine with Obama and having homosexual sex with him. He has also been discredited and has a wrap sheet a mile long. Does not seem like a credible observation from a credible source. That's all I said. I did not deny, nor did I acknowledge whether or not Obama used cocaine. My comments referred to how information is extracted from legitimate sources (in this case, straight from the horse's mouth), twisted and manipulated by perverts and right-wing blogsters in desperate efforts to smear somebody's character when they are unable to engage themselves directly in legitimate policy issues. The "character" card, whether played by one party or the other, is really a lame strategy that prevents productive, progressive approaches to issues and solutions to problems of dire importance to us AS A NATION, not as party affiliates.
    That is the best thing you

    can come up with?  Let us forget Obama's association with Ayers or his 20-year membership to a church that preached hate messages......let's just focus on McCain calling his wife a C unt shall we.  Sheesh......If he thought so little of women, he would never have chose one to run as his VP.


    In all seriousness though, why is c unt such an offensive word?  Who dictates words and which ones are bad?  Who decided that the F bomb was bad?  Who determined what words were considered swear words?  If I called someone a poop head and then called someone a c unt, they are both supposed to insult...are they not.....so why is one worse than the other and who determined that?


    At least she is doing the right thing
    She is going to have the baby and not kill it
    well, the one thing that the VP has is...
    the deciding vote if there is a tie in Congress, and with a majority dem congress that is not a bad thing.. :)

    Yep, I agree with the "gimme" attitude. I call it being all about me, me, me. Don't get me wrong, I believe some social programs are necessary because there are people who, through no fault of their own whether mental disability or physical disability, cannot work. And I think we should take care of our fellow man to that extent. However, those who are fully capable of working and choose not to, and we have to subsidize their housing, their groceries, and give them a check every month...that needs to stop.

    Have a wonderful day!
    yes, SP did the right thing!!
    x
    One more thing....sm
    McCain isn't "my hero" per se.... -- my first choice was Romney, and we all know where that went....lol....

    But John McCain is this country's hero, whether you agree or admit it. He simply is, and was. Period. You can't take that away from him.

    And I'll tell you who "sat around and watch a city drown." I think that pretty much covers what the entire nation did, as the nonstop coverage of that event was depicted...actually, I think the whole world watched, not just us. One of our tragedies, but you can't lay that completely at McCain or Bush's feet. It's been covered before her ad nauseum, and I think most agree, if the dem gov and dem mayor would have acted preemptively, as happened this weekend in both LA and TX, a lot of that would have been averted. No need to cover this ground again, really. I get your point of view though, so no need to expound.



    Bummer....now I betcha won't answer my other question on SNL....rats, I really wanted to know too....lol....I used to love SNL with the first crew was on there with Chevy, Belushi, Gilda Radner, and all those first not ready for prime time players.

    LOL! I can add one more thing to that -
    To paraphrase the Beach Boys:

    'and she had fun, fun, fun,
    'til her mommy took her condom a-wayyyyyy!!!'


    Is that a bad thing?
    Should he have just attacked, attacked, attacked? Doesn't matter what he does, it is wrong, I guess. I would rather have somebody who can say Yeah, we disagree on some things, but here is where we agree. Isn't that what bipartisanship is about?
    Whatever they do there is one thing for sure
    It will not benefit "we the people."  This bail-out is absurd.  Our local bank president is a personal friend.  Talking to her the other day she said there are no problems there and it's business as usual, loans being made just the same.  Now that doesn't add up to the scare tactics we hear from the jerk-off politicians.  JMO but I think this is G.W.'s last great assist to his Wall Street buddies.  One party is as bad as the other and they all benefit from what goes on on Wall Street.  They'll pass some kind of bail-out and this country will be bankrupted.  No money, no jobs.  Their bail-out is not going to help the situation any more than the rebates did.  Just borrow more money and throw it away.  I hope eventually enough people will get totally disgusted and then maybe we can take back our government.  Everyone wants "help."  Well, those who bit off mortgages they couldn't afford, tough toenails, suffer the consequences.  We may as well start learning to spell GREATER DEPRESSION, worse than the 30s because,  folks, that is what is coming.  The Republicans will keep on blaming the Democrats and the Democrats will keep on blaming the Republicans.  ALL of our elected politicians ought to be tried and hung for treason!!  The best I know to do is vote against EVERY incumbent.  I am far from excited about Obama but I will vote for  him because he is not a Republican.  Any Democrat running for anything I will vote for the Republican.  That's the best I can think of at the moment to try to change.  We all need to quit bickering about "Republican" and "Democrat" and start thinking as AMERICANS!  If someone can build a better mousetrap than what I plan to do I'll be first in line to buy it.  Something HAS to be done and we don't need to start in arguing about who should get a free  handout.  The truth is NO ONE should get a free handout, other than the aged and infirm!
    One other thing to think about . . .

    Also need to think about the what if . . .?  What happens if Obama is elected and all these crazy radicals/extremists/racists in this country take him out, or GOD FORBID, if McCain is elected, (and I don't think an 80-year-old man is going to make it through 4 years), then that thing he picked as runny mate would step in as president?  Let's see, Palin or Biden?  There's a no brainer!!!  Mark my words, Palin beliefs would regress his country 30-50 years.  We don't need a self-righteous religious fanatic in the White House.  What ever happened to separation of church and state??


    they run the whole thing

    It's the old line "you get what you pay for" here.  Imagine it changes to SM tomorrow.  You wouldn't have the option to stay with the physicians you now have (unless a pure accident or coincidence).  Gone would be the choices you now have, which are pitiful as the system is now.  I still long for the days when we purchased our ins. the same as we do our car ins., cable co., etc.  In the ྌs and beyond I had BCBS.  I selected the doctors I wanted, and didn't worry about looking for who was on my (my list?  ha!) list closest to my home, etc. 


    A friend of mine lived in Canada for awhile and while there her daughter got DXd with cancer and ended up with an amputated leg.  She said it was a horrible system, and would never again do it...and she didn't.  She had no control over her choices up there.  No doubt you've heard of the many people who come here for surgery, etc. for the same reasons.  Again, everyone's trying to get IN to the US, not out...


    Does that help?  Please don't be swayed by the spin.  Anytime the gov't controls something, whether it be your healthcare to your home, you're no longer in control of it.


    My thing is
    that God gives life, not us. We are merely the vessels. Therefore what he gives we cannot take away. Well, excuse me, should not.

    I think that if someone doesn't believe in God they are still very much bound by his laws, they just break them left and right.

    I have quite a few reasons for not voting for Obama, but on the instance of abortion, I don't believe it is our right to put away what God has brought into being.

    What really bothers me though is that Obama supports the "just born abortions" (I can't remember what they are called). To me, if your going to carry the child for 9 months, why kill it at the end? If you've gone through all that, at least give it up for adoption and give it a chance!

    I completely agree, Mccain is not much better. I'm sure for the most part it will end up being politics as usual. I think he would like to make changes, but to me the President has become nothing more than a mouthpiece. He will fall in line with the majority. Obama, on the other hand, bothers me because for one, he rose to the top way to quickly. Two, he is not very patriotic and neither is his wife. Three, I think in his pursuit of getting "the people" to cheer him on he is going to do some very stupid things (like sitting down with terrorists. So what, then they can kidnap him and hold him ransom?) Four, there is no way he got to the top that quickly on his own. Therefore, he owes people. It bothers me to think of which ones he owes.

    There are others but I'll stop there since a lot of them have already been beaten to death on this board.

    To bad we as Americans couldn't all band together and put "one of our own" in there. Write in a middle aged lower-middle class construction worker from Tennessee, or an old cowboy from Texas (not related to Bush of course!) Someone without money, or a background in politics, or a personal agenda. Then we would really see change!
    And another thing
    What is he going to do about exporting jobs out of our country?  Have you checked the job seekers board lately?  Over 2000 hits on some of the ads.  Read the company board?  Seems no one has any work.  And McCain promises to be the biggest free trader of all times.  Yup, that's very good for the economy.