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

CIA Director Panetta: Records Show CIA Officers Briefed Lawmakers Truthfully

Posted By: sm on 2009-05-18
In Reply to:

WASHINGTON — Director Leon Panetta says agency records show CIA officers briefed lawmakers truthfully in 2002 on methods of interrogating terrorism suspects, but it is up to Congress to reach its own conclusions about what happened.


Panetta's message to agency employees came one day after Speaker Pelosi said bluntly the CIA had misled her and other lawmakers about the use of waterboarding and other harsh techniques seven years ago.


Panetta wrote that the political debates about interrogation "reached a new decibel level" with the charges.


He urged agency employees to "ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/15/cia-director-panetta-reco_n_204005.html


==============================================


Pelosi Accuses CIA of 'Misleading' Congress on Waterboarding


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the CIA of misleading Congress about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terror detainees.


"Yes I am saying the CIA was misleading the Congress, and at the same time the (Bush) administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, to which I said that this intelligence doesn't support the imminent threat," Pelosi said at her weekly news conference.


"Every step of the way the administration was misleading the Congress and that is the issue and that's why we need a truth commission," she said.


Under a barrage of questioning, Pelosi adamantly insisted that she was not aware that waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques were being used on terrorism suspects.


"I am telling you they told me they approved these and said they wanted to use them but said they were not using waterboarding," she said.


Growing increasingly frustrated throughout the briefing, Pelosi slowly started backing away from the podium as she tried to end the questioning.


As she backed out, she continued to accuse the CIA of not telling Congress that dissenting opinions had been filed within the administration suggesting the methods were not lawful.


The CIA immediately disputed Pelosi's accusation, saying the documents describing the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed are accurate. CIA spokesman George Little noted that CIA Director Leon Panetta made available to the House Intelligence Committee memos from individuals who led the briefings with House members.


"The language in the chart -- 'a description of the particular EITs that had been employed' -- is true to the language in the agency's records," Little said. "The chart I'm referring to is, of course, the list of member briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques."


Republicans also questioned Pelosi's charge.


"It's hard for me to imagine anyone in our intelligence area would ever mislead a member of Congress," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said at his weekly news conference. "They come to the Hill to brief us because they're required to under the law. I don't know what motivation they would have to mislead anyone."


The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., told FOX News that Pelosi's accusation against the CIA is "not credible."


"I am afraid she has disremembered what she went through," he said. "We have had not only the records from the CIA but the contemporaries who were there with her had other views on it, so I am afraid that this is not a credible explanation."


Pelosi said she was briefed only once on the interrogation methods in September 2002. She acknowledged that her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, informed her about another briefing five months later in which Bush officials said waterboarding was being used on CIA terror detainee Abu Zubaydah.


Pelosi said she supported a letter drafted by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who also attended the briefing in February 2003, and sent to the Bush administration, raising concerns over the technique.


Pelosi's account has changed several times in recent weeks as she has sought to clarify what she did or didn't know about the interrogation methods that she is pushing to investigate.


Pelosi said last month that she was never told that the controversial interrogation methods were being used. But a national intelligence report later showed that she was briefed seven years ago on the tactics while she was on the House Intelligence Committee.


Her spokesman then said the speaker thought the techniques were legal and that waterboarding was not used.


Democrats will hold a series of hearings on Justice Department memos released last month that justified rough tactics against detainees, including waterboarding and sleep deprivation.


While Democrats want the hearings to focus on what they call torture, Republicans have tried to turn the issue to their advantage by complaining that Pelosi and other Democrats knew of the tactics but didn't protest.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/14/pelosi-reiterates-didnt-know-waterboarding-use/




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

Leon Panetta - CIA Director
Thoughts?  Arguments for or against?  I thought this was a very interesting choice, providing he gets through, but I'd like to know what some of you think about this.
Lawmakers Question O's Missle Defense Cuts

Lawmakers are demanding to know why the president's proposed 2010 defense budget cuts missile defense by $1.2 billion and does not provide any funds for the European missile defense shield as Iran and North Korea defy the international community with missile testing.....


At Fort Greeley in Alaska, the missile defense silos can defend the U.S. from both North Korea and Iran, but the Obama budget would cuts the number of interceptor missiles based there from 44 to 30. And that has both Republicans and Democrats asking, why now?


"Is this being budget-driven?" Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., asked.


"The numbers don't add up to me," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., "I think it's just a question of somewhere somebody has decided to cut missile defense substantially, and you're doing the best you can under a difficult circumstance."


Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska said: "With North Korea, it seems since we've made this announcement, as I've said, 40 percent of their testing has occurred, plus an underground nuclear test. I mean, I don't know. That seems risky to me."......


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/16/lawmakers-question-obamas-missile-defense-cuts/


Poster who implies anyone wanted officers shot was certainly slamming.
And if they did not mean to do it - which I doubt - they need to rethink their delivery if they don't want to be continually misunderstood (though I also doubt they were).
Soldiers and peace officers pledging to refuse to obey sm
An invitation to soldiers and peace officers across the United States to pledge to refuse illegal orders – including "state of emergency" orders that could include disarming or detaining American citizens – has struck a chord, collecting more than 100,000 website visitors in a little over a week and hundreds of e-mails daily.

Link to article: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91530

Oath Keepers website: http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html
Doesn't the director or CEO of the
Red Cross earn almost as much, maybe not. Anyway,I bet Pelosi is glad now she wasn't allowed to get the private jet she wanted not so long ago.!
Emanuel Was Director of Freddie Mac During Scandal...

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6201900&page=1



Emanuel Was Director Of Freddie Mac During Scandal



New Obama Chief of Staff, Others on Board, Missed "Red Flags" of Alleged Fraud Scheme




November 7, 2008






President-elect Barack Obama's newly appointed chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, served on the board of directors of the federal mortgage firm Freddie Mac at a time when scandal was brewing at the troubled agency and the board failed to spot "red flags," according to government reports reviewed by ABCNews.com.


According to a complaint later filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Freddie Mac, known formally as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, misreported profits by billions of dollars in order to deceive investors between the years 2000 and 2002.


Emanuel was not named in the SEC complaint (click here to read) but the entire board was later accused by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) (click here to read) of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention."


In a statement to ABCNews.com, a spokesperson said Emanuel served on the board for "13 months-a relatively short period of time."


The spokesperson said that while on the board, Emanuel "believed that Freddie Mac needed to address concerns raised by Congressional critics."


Freddie Mac agreed to pay a $50 million penalty in 2007 to settle the SEC complaint and four top executives of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation were charged with negligent conduct and, like the company, agreed to settle the case without admitting or denying the allegations.


The actions by Freddie Mac are cited by some economists as the beginning of the country's economic meltdown.


The federal government this year was forced to take over Freddie Mac and a sister federal mortgage agency, Fannie Mae, pledging at least $200 billion in public funds.


Freddie Mac records have been subpoenaed by the Justice Department as part of its investigation of the suspect accounting procedures.


Emanuel was named to the Freddie Mac board by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and resigned his position when he ran for Congress in May, 2001.




Freddie Mac Misrepresented Income, Says SEC


During the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to the SEC, Freddie Mac substantially misrepresented its income to "present investors with the image of a company that would continue to generate predictable and growing earnings."


The role of the 18-member board of directors, including Emanuel, was not addressed in the SEC's public action but was heavily criticized by the oversight group (OFHEO) in 2003.


The oversight report said the board had been apprised of the suspect accounting tactics but "failed to make reasonable inquiries of management."


The report also said board members appointed by the President, such as Emanuel, serve terms that are far too short "for them to play a meaningful role on the Board."


As a Congressman, Emanuel recused himself from any votes dealing with Freddie Mac until just this year.


In dealing with the nation's economic crisis, the new White House chief of staff will almost certainly be involved in discussions about the house and mortgage markets.


Emanuel's spokesperson said, "As White House chief of staff he will work with President-elect Obama and his economic advisers to help ensure we protect taxpayers and homeowners."


Director's blog at the CBO link inside

 


http://cboblog.cbo.gov/


 


Steven Camarota....director of research for Immigration
................
Send a letter to the director of the school system and include that message. sm
This has absolutely nothing to do with being instructed in English.

Sounds like the teacher is foisting her principles and ideas on youngsters, which she has no right to do. It's none of her business who and who was not born out of wedlock. She has no right to tell youngsters to get married and stay married, that's none of her business either. She has no right to tell a youngster to take a job and keep it, no matter what the pay. I'm wondering how old this teacher is.

Write a letter of complaint to the Board of Education, stating the above and ask them what this has to do with English instruction.

She's not a morals counselor, she's supposed to be a teacher of English.

Maybe the ACLU would be interested. You never know. Can't hurt to ask.

It that was my kid, I'd be in the teacher's face big time.
Just goes to show the j@ckas@es/crooks running the show!
nm
We have records of it. NM

EHR records
EHR is not just about voice recognition. It is about getting hospitals to have their records computerized instead of paper charts so that they are easily accessible.

Medicare and Medicaid already have a program in place that will subsidize a hospital's cost to change to EHR so that it makes it easier for them to process claims.
I did look at the records

of McCain and Obama.  I always research who I'm voting for before I vote.  I don't want to be one of those uninformed voters like the ones that were interviewed and said they had no problem with Sarah Palin being Obama's VP.  I mean....come on.  If you are that misinformed that you don't even know the candidates VP choice....you shouldn't be voting.


My problem was that I didn't have faith in either McCain or Obama.  I voted for McCain because I felt he was the lesser of two evils and I didn't want to throw my vote away by voting for an independent.  I'm not doing that any more.  If I think an independent is better, I'm bucking both parties.  Maybe if both parties lose, they may open their eyes and see that both parties have screwed up and both parties have p!ssed us off.


voting records...yes, let's go there...
Obama -- most liberal senator in the senate based on his votes. Biden -- 3rd most liberal. That means more government, more spending, more programs...no thanks. As for "voting with Bush..." Anything that passed was also voted for by the majority of Democrats. As President Obama can't vote for anything, as Bush can't, so I don't see how Obama is going to change anything. That's how it works. Nice try, no cigar (no pun intended).

JM did not adopt Obama's exit strategy. If anyone did, Bush did...he's the President now and the strategy is being applied now. Obama admitted on O'Reilly that the surge succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams. That one he voted against too. Biggest national security/foreign policy decision during the war and he voted against it. Enough said.

If you had watched his speech, he outlined it. He said his administration would be completely transparent. I believe him. Obama says he is going to change things. He doesn't say how. You believe him.

Oh good grief. You don't even know what pork barrel spending is, and it is the same on both sides. It is attaching things to bills to help your financial supporters back at home and selling your vote to get the earmark. Has nothing to do with social programs. Both sides do it, and it needs to stop. Politicians should be there to take care of ALL of us...not their fatcat supporters, and yes...Obama has fat cat supporters...Moveon.org to name one.

Boy, you have that class warefare mantra down. Trouble is, you buy it, I don't. I know better. Name one evil corporation who does not employ tens of thousands of Americans, who will loose their jobs if Obama taxes them into oblivion. Name just ONE.

American imperial delusions of grandeur. What does that even mean?? Look at T. Boone Pickens again. He said: "Yes, drill EVERYWHERE, drill NOW. But that is not enough." John McCain says the same thing.
Some of us actually READ RECORDS.
nm
Beck says - almost every show - that he is NOT doing a news show.
He does an opinion show - meaning HIS opinion. As such, he's entitled to stick pins in little Obama dolls for all I care.

I can hear Chris Wallace laughing at you folks from here because it's pretty obvious whoever wrote that knows zip about Beck, or Wallace for that matter. In fact, I can't think what Wallace has to do with Beck anyway. Everyone of INTELLIGENCE who watches Beck and Wallace is perfectly aware that one does one type of show and the other does another.

But what do you expect from one of George Soros' puppet sites like Media Matters and Move Bowels.org?

You really should delete your Favorites list and start over.
Checking adoption records

I agree.  I think the media is way out of line with that.  Judge Roberts and his wife should be commended and respected for having the love and compassion in their hearts to adopt these children.


The more I see of him, the more respect I have for him and the more I like him.


No one should have to release their medical records...
to run for office. If one has to release them they all should. What is Obama's family history? Is he on antihypertensives? Is he on any kind of mood altering meds? Does he have high cholesterol? lol. That is none of my business, and neither is McCain's medical record.
First of all, Obama did not seal his records....sm
Only the person named on the birth certificate has access to a copy of it. He got a copy and presented it, period.

Secondly, he did not seal his college records. The colleges did this. Apparently it is common practice with presidential candidates as they are flooded with requests during the campaign.
looked at her financial records lately?
she is definitely not a poor girl in my opinion. I think she could afford to buy her own clothes...
"People have to start looking at records

when they are voting" so what in McCain's record was so appealing?  Firstly, he cheated on his wife who was in a horrible car wreck, and then eventually married for money.  Not much appealing going on there.  Secondly, his record of Keating-5 not very appealing. Thirdly, he doesn't know anything about the economy, handled himself erradically; that's not appealing to me, for sure.  So as far as the choice, Americans have chosen the right person for prez in these dire times. 


"A prez/rep has of the people has to hold the constituents thoughts in mind when they are voting."  If I understand this, I think you mean the prez/rep has to remember why they were voted into office.  What has Obama done in one week that has not shown that he is doing just that? He most certainly has done, in one week, a lot that the American people who voted for him want done.  So far, so good. 


"People have to get involved by writing to their reps."  Did you write to Bush when he invaded a country without reason, when he was killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people?  Did you write to your rep when he and his cronies sanctioned torture? Did you write to your rep when they put in jail PFCs for the Abu Ghraibe deal, which goes much higher than Private First Class!!  Did you write to your rep when Katrina hit and thousands of people were stranded, and some even killed by police officers who are sworn to help people, when they had nothing to drink for 5 days?  Did you write to your rep when Halliburton stole Billions of bucks?  Did you?  No? didn't think so.  So much for your involvement.  


computerized medical records
Probably a dumb question, but what does Pres. Obama mean by computerizing medical records, and how does that hurt/help us?
Article on offshoring of records
http://www.latimes.com:80/features/health/medicine/la-fg-philippines-transcribe19-2009apr19,0,902588.story
Yes, and check the voting records for how many times...
he voted "present." He has never made an executive decision in his life. He has not managed a government of ANY size. In Congress you have committees and panels and discussion and debate and it takes weeks to get anything done. That does not work in the white house...you can't get a committe or a panel or vote present. She has more executive experience than he has. Fact. And she is the #2 on the Republican ticket. He is the #1 on his ticket. I agree with Joe Biden's initial assessment.
When will McCain release his medical records? sm

(And his tax returns and military records?)  I came across this link while surfing around:  Shouldn’t John McCain Release His Medical Records? 


http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/09/14/shouldnt-john-mccain-release-his-medical-records/


>> John McCain has not yet released his medical records to the public. McCain is 72 years old, and has been diagnosed with invasive melanoma. In May of this year, a small group of selected reporters were allowed to review 1,173 pages of McCain’s medical records that covered only the last eight years, and were allowed only three hours to do so. John McCain’s health is an issue of profound importance. We call on John McCain to issue a full, public disclosure of all of his medical records, available for the media and members of the general public to review. >>


1) Jobs (and our medical records) brought back from
3) The rich & big corporations pay their fair share.
4) Bring more honesty into the healthcare/HMO industry.
5) Address ILLEGAL immigration... it's out of hand.
6) Incentives for those who come up with clean & viable alternatives to oil & gasoline.
Phone-Jamming Records Point to White House

More Bush dirty tricks. 


Phone-Jamming Records Point to White House





By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press WriterMon Apr 10, 4:55 PM ET



Key figures in a phone-jamming scheme designed to keep New Hampshire Democrats from voting in 2002 had regular contact with the White House and Republican Party as the plan was unfolding, phone records introduced in criminal court show.


The records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin, who recently was convicted in the case, made two dozen calls to the White House within a three-day period around Election Day 2002 — as the phone jamming operation was finalized, carried out and then abruptly shut down.


The national Republican Party, which paid millions in legal bills to defend Tobin, says the contacts involved routine election business and that it was preposterous to suggest the calls involved phone jamming.


The Justice Department has secured three convictions in the case but hasn't accused any White House or national Republican officials of wrongdoing, nor made any allegations suggesting party officials outside New Hampshire were involved. The phone records of calls to the White House were exhibits in Tobin's trial but prosecutors did not make them part of their case.


Democrats plan to ask a federal judge Tuesday to order GOP and White House officials to answer questions about the phone jamming in a civil lawsuit alleging voter fraud.


Repeated hang-up calls that jammed telephone lines at a Democratic get-out-the-vote center occurred in a Senate race in which Republican John Sununu defeated Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, 51 percent to 46 percent, on Nov. 5, 2002.


Besides the conviction of Tobin, the Republicans' New England regional director, prosecutors negotiated two plea bargains: one with a New Hampshire Republican Party official and another with the owner of a telemarketing firm involved in the scheme. The owner of the subcontractor firm whose employees made the hang-up calls is under indictment.


The phone records show that most calls to the White House were from Tobin, who became President Bush's presidential campaign chairman for the New England region in 2004. Other calls from New Hampshire senatorial campaign offices to the White House could have been made by a number of people.


A GOP campaign consultant in 2002, Jayne Millerick, made a 17-minute call to the White House on Election Day, but said in an interview she did not recall the subject. Millerick, who later became the New Hampshire GOP chairwoman, said in an interview she did not learn of the jamming until after the election.


A Democratic analysis of phone records introduced at Tobin's criminal trial show he made 115 outgoing calls — mostly to the same number in the White House political affairs office — between Sept. 17 and Nov. 22, 2002. Two dozen of the calls were made from 9:28 a.m. the day before the election through 2:17 a.m. the night after the voting.


There also were other calls between Republican officials during the period that the scheme was hatched and canceled.


Prosecutors did not need the White House calls to convict Tobin and negotiate the two guilty pleas.


Whatever the reason for not using the White House records, prosecutors tried a very narrow case, said Paul Twomey, who represented the Democratic Party in the criminal and civil cases. The Justice Department did not say why the White House records were not used.


The Democrats said in their civil case motion that they were entitled to know the purpose of the calls to government offices at the time of the planning and implementation of the phone-jamming conspiracy ... and the timing of the phone calls made by Mr. Tobin on Election Day.


While national Republican officials have said they deplore such operations, the Republican National Committee said it paid for Tobin's defense because he is a longtime supporter and told officials he had committed no crime.


By Nov. 4, 2002, the Monday before the election, an Idaho firm was hired to make the hang-up calls. The Republican state chairman at the time, John Dowd, said in an interview he learned of the scheme that day and tried to stop it.


Dowd, who blamed an aide for devising the scheme without his knowledge, contended that the jamming began on Election Day despite his efforts. A police report confirmed the Manchester Professional Fire Fighters Association reported the hang-up calls began about 7:15 a.m. and continued for about two hours. The association was offering rides to the polls.


Virtually all the calls to the White House went to the same number, which currently rings inside the political affairs office. In 2002, White House political affairs was led by now-RNC chairman Ken Mehlman. The White House declined to say which staffer was assigned that phone number in 2002.

As policy, we don't discuss ongoing legal proceedings within the courts, White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said.

Robert Kelner, a Washington lawyer representing the Republican National Committee in the civil litigation, said there was no connection between the phone jamming operation and the calls to the White House and party officials.

On Election Day, as anybody involved in politics knows, there's a tremendous volume of calls between political operatives in the field and political operatives in Washington, Kelner said.

If all you're pointing out is calls between Republican National Committee regional political officials and the White House political office on Election Day, you're pointing out nothing that hasn't been true on every Election Day, he said.











Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback















oh yea - good point - bringing our medical records back from overseas
Never thought of that one.
If checking the adoption records is part of the normal background check, then the only reason this i
x
Saw the show. It was a guest on the show....
not a commentator. Why don't you post the link to the clip so everyone can decide?
Show me who your friends are and I’ll show you who you are.’
This subject is not old, and is very, very relevant.



Obama's friends/associates (supposedly former friends and associates, only since this campaign):

Ayers

Wright

Dorhn

Michelle

Khalidi


The company he keeps:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YThjYTU1ZDBjNmQ2YzcwNzU1MmYwN2JiMWY0ZGI0NDA=



I find it very, very troubling, that this man has no visible friends, other than the ones above (not Michelle, although she has been kept under lock and key out of public sight for some time now, so as to keep her from embarrassing herself again).



Does this man not have any other friends/associates, other than the ones above?
I know most of it's for show
But how does she get on TV saying things like she did about Jewish people? How does she sleep at night after saying something like that? She just gets more and more outrageous just to get a reaction - and yeah sometimes it works because what she says is hateful. I have no problem with anyone giving their views, but she's hateful about it and that is what I have a problem with (and no, as I've said before I don't condone hateful things on either board)
goes to show

even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


 


Just goes to show you that you need to ...sm
have an inquiring mind and not take as gospel what is spoon fed to you by either party. I particularly like the "fact checks" on both party's candidates. The perception is that we American voters are fools and will believe anything we are told.
Show me a pic
I can't find a pic with a lump on his jaw.
show me
show me refusal to acknowedge - I haven't seen it.
Goes to show you - sm
McCain is concerned about the people. Obama is concerned about himself.

McCain was absolutely right on the spot when he said there needs to be an investigation, just as there was when 9-11 happened, we need one now for this crisis.

One more plus to show McCain is interested and will work for us, while Obama....well Obama is for Obama.
Once again....goes to show

how people who get their tail feathers all ruffled after someone personally attacks an Obama supporter on the board, but they have no problem calling McCain supporters names and personally attacking them by stating they lack intelligence.


Look in the mirror....your hypocracy is showing.


Don't believe it. Show me. nm
.
You show me anywhere where he said...
95% of American workers WHO PAY TAXES. SHOW me where it says that. But, supposing that is what he means...there are still that 30-40%. Those people pay taxes. Then they get deductions and credits. They get back every dime they paid in and THEN some. They are part of that 95% who "pay taxes." Got it? And about 30-40% of the working public fall into that category. so it is back to square one. Yes, they "pay taxes." Taxes are deducted. Then they file. They get the deductions and the credits and whatever (I am talking about NOW). They get back every dime they paid in. These people technically "pay taxes." If you work one day a year and have deductions, you "pay taxes" and will be included.

I understand that you don't see it. I understand that you are filling in the blanks that he left open. I don't see it the way you see it. He is counting on people seeing it the way you see it. So be it.

YOu can yell BOGUS until you are blue in the face. I will yell NAIVE just as loud.



"He is assuming it is understood." Well, he is hoping that everyone will understand it the way YOU understand it. I am not so enamored of him that I cannot read between the lines. And frankly, as BOGUS as my line of thinking appears to me, YOURS is naive at best. So we will agree to disagree. If he went on television and told you tomorrow that he was going to cut checks to people who don't pay taxes because it is the right thing to do, you would be on this board defending the decision tomorrow night.






You show me where he says it is not.
You assume it is not. I assume that it will be. Based on everything his history is, based on everything he has said, including starting at the BOTTOM. Just where do you think Mr Obama perceives the bottom to be? What is your assumption on that?
Please show me where....(sm)
Obama has said that he will "give to those who would not [work]."  And by the way, does that include Social Security? 
OK show me
Where does it say the Secret Service blames McCain/Palin?

There were people who spoke about potential threats to Obama before he even became the Democratic candidate. To act now like it's all because of McCain and Palin stirring them up is ludicrous.

Bigotry is out there. Or do you honestly believe no one would have noticed that Obama is an African-American?



I don't like her either, but she has every right to be on the show
I don't like Ann Coulter at all. I think she's obnoxious and arrogant. But then again I don't like the View. I think it's filled with old "has been" housewives and mothers who just sit and gab and give their opinion and put down anyone who doesn't agree with them (i.e. anyone who is not a liberal). I watched the View a couple times and there was nothing interesting or entertaining about it. If they don't like a guest they won't even look at them (Joy Bear (or however you spell her last name) is such a pig! - I can explain and prove that in another post if anyone is interested). Anyway...for anyone to come out and say there is no reason to have someone (no matter who it is) on their show is a bit Nazi-ism. Who are you to say who they should have on and who they shouldn't. Her opinion of Barbara Walters is just that, her opinion. I didn't see the show, but when she said that I'm sure she was jumped on by the others. None of them can stand any person who is not a liberal and they try (and I use the word loosely), try to ridicule them. Luckily it doesn't work. From my understanding of what I've read on this board and elsewhere is that Ann Coulter says things to inflame others. She says things for what they call "shock value". I'm sure Barbara Walters is a big girl (I like Barbara Walters - just can't stand the others on the show), but Barbara is a big girl and can stand up for herself. She's smart and a quick thinker so I'm sure she had an intelligent comeback. But as for Ann Coulter saying things, that's just the way she is and they all know that and knew well before hand that she would most likely do that. Besides they do have a script they follow to some degree with questions prepared ahead of time and what they say and how they plan to cut down a non-liberal.

But for you to come out and say there is no reason to have such a person featured on TV? That is a bit too Nazi-ism for me. Everybody deserves to go on whatever show they want to. Her views have no value? According to you and other liberals they may not, but there are others who like her and would like to hear her interviewed. And certainly the View wanted her on the show otherwise she would have not been there.

I'm just glad your not in charge of who is allowed to go on what shows, or what books we can read (burn all those you don't agree with) - sound familiar?
Just goes to show ya
Fringers can't recognize a clean election when they see one and don't have a clue what the word "mandate" means. Uninformed? You seem to have cornered the market on that one.
same old show

Don't fret.


We get the same old show no matter what party is in office. It is a continual ball game with Republocrats versus the Democans. It keeps the American sheeple amused, cheering and fighting for its favorite team while the big boys play games with the global elite, keeping the spectators slaves to their greedy ideas. Been watching this show too long.......


But it would at least show that he

was attempting to keep his promise whether he was overrun by congress or not.  If that is the case, then let congress take the fall for it and we can vote those fools out as soon as we can.  But for him to just go along with it after he made promises to us.  The only reason Obama turned his back and broke his promises to the American people is so that he kept the support of the dems in congress. 


For once, I want a president who will stand up to his party and the other party and say....you know what....I promised the American people and they come first because WE work for them.  Instead we continue to get liar after liar in office with a government system that is more interested in how much money they can spend with our tax dollars. 


All this does is show him, as you said...for what he is.
a corrupt power-hungry politician, just like the rest of them. "Yes we can.." uh, no, "Yes I can." And he certainly is...lol, priceless. As they have sown....so shall they reap. Problem is, we are going to have to reap right along with them. Thank all of you who so ill-advisedly cast your vote for this charlatan...(tongue firmly in cheek). Next thing you know he will be asking us all to work for nothing like British Airways did...LOL.
The show and Powell

I thought the show was wonderful and illustrated very clearly how bits and pieces of intelligence were selected and manipulated and turned into something they weren't.  (They referred to it as a "Chinese menu" that the administration used to pick and choose from.)


I taped this show and watched it a couple times.  As far as Powell is concerned, it did show how Powell's relationship with George Tenet began to disintegrate.


It further showed how Tenet was, at Bush's father's urging, kept as CIA director when Dubya took office, and all the events leading to his resignation.  He was one of Dubya's sacrifical lambs.  I guess Bush thought giving him the Medal of Freedom made up for that.


Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff, said that Powell told him, "I wonder how we'll all feel if we put half a million troops into Iraq and march from one corner of the country to the other and find nothing."


Powell said, "I will forever be known as the one who made the case. I have to live with that."  (That made me feel really bad for Powell, who I have always trusted and considered to be an honest, ethical man.  His association with Bush really dragged him down, and his statement about having to live with that just tells me that he's still an honest, ethical man, the kind of man who had a spectacular military career, actually had the guts to go fight in wars himself, someone who truly IS Presidential material, someone who doesn't belong in an underhanded, lying, foolish administration like Bush's.)


The show also pointed out how if you are someone who works for this president and you discover something not right or in alignment with his "plans," if you tell him, you'd better be prepared to resign or be fired. 


This show clearly illustrated how Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq, and all he needed was a reason, even if he had to invent a fictional one.


Again, I thought it was an excellent show, and if you ever have the opportunity to watch it or obtain a transcript of it, I would highly recommend it.


Where did gt do that? Show me please because I can't find it.


It's COMEDY show
and the last I watched he was an equal opportunity offender....