Didn't O want everybody to "do their part" ?
Posted By: They need to cut corners.... or cobs.....LOL n on 2009-03-12
In Reply to: Maybe they should use corn cobs for toilet paper to meet your fiscal requirements, eh? - Mrs. Bridger
xx
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
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
Didn't you read this part?
"The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States."
Their system costs less per capita than our system. You bring up a good point about the doctors making less money, but should our doctors' main objective be getting rich or providing excellent care to patients? I'm sure many doctors would be happy to be able to help patients without having to beg insurance companies to cover the only cholesterol medications to help someone with severe CAD or not having to write letters pleading with insurance to cover a much-needed MRI or surgery. I transcribe letters like this all the time. Doctors are constantly taking time out of their day (and money out of their pockets) to jump through insurance companies' hoops. They are also often frustrated by patients with no insurance who refuse to pay for a potentially life-saving echocardiogram or colonoscopy. They might be happy with lower paychecks if they knew they could just go to work and help patients without having to stress about whether or not their patients can afford the medical help they need. I know some doctors are probably in it mostly for the money, but that is not the kind of doctor I want to go to!
However, I want to find out more about how France transitioned into their current program, as I imagine here it would be quite difficult to make so many changes. I believe we can do it eventually though, and anything this important is worth the effort. I do think we can learn a lot from their system though, because they have not done away with private health insurance and choices, and I think that system would be much easier for Americans to swallow.
She knew; she didn't know which part he was talking about...
there are several parts of the Bush doctrine: The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate (used to justify the invasion of Iraq), a policy of supporting democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the spread of terrorism, and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way.[2][3][4] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[5]
He was trying to trap her and she didn't bite. Her first answer was a broad answer to a broad question. Then when he looked down his nose at her and specified the pre-emptive part of the doctrine, she have a great answer in my opinion.
The only thing I saw and was so amused by is that she was too smart to be baited. And it was frustrating the heck out of old Charlie. LOL.
Guess you didn't read this part . . .
From Wall Street Journal and other sites:
"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal," Mr. Burton said in an email to reporters. "At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details."
McCain released statement minutes after responding to Obama.
I didn't watch that part. I figured it would be ridiculous. What's the scoop?
x
Is God going to "do the right thing?"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/22/palin-god-will-do-the-right-thing-on-election-day/
Is this the woman you want to see anywhere near the White House? Sort of like Bush's "God told me to be president." LOL Delusional both of them.
No. They don't "do" links.
If you copy and paste the entire thing, you stand about a 12% chance of them actually reading it. So here is, ironically, what you get when you click on the word "REQUIRE."
It might be too many words for some, but the bottom line is that this is a choice, NOT a REQUIREMENT.
America Serves
"When you choose to serve -- whether it's your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood -- you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That's why it's called the American dream."
The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.
due respect, not "do" --- sigh, lol. (nm)
nm
Women who "do" ABs or adoptions do NOT
None of us need spend a single second defending ourselves against this santimonious slop. Take it back to the church where it belongs and remember the Sermon on the Mount while you are at it...judge not, lest ye be judged.
Diaper Dave in airport rage "Do You Know Who I Am?" umm...depends
Report Of Vitter In Airport Rage: Do You Know Who I Am?!!
Roll Call reports that Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), the staunch social conservative whose career became bogged down in the 2007 D.C. Madam prostitution scandal, was sighted this past Thursday night having an incident of airport rage at Dulles Airport.
Vitter arrived 20 minutes before the plane was scheduled to depart, and found the gate locked. He then opened the door, setting off the alarm and inviting the attention of an airline worker:
Vitter, our spy said, gave the airline worker an earful, employing the timeworn "do-you-know-who-I-am" tirade that apparently grew quite heated.
That led to some back and forth, and the worker announced to the irritable Vitter that he was going to summon security.
Vitter, according to the witness, remained defiant, yelling that the employee could call the police if he wanted to and their supervisors, who, presumably, might be more impressed with his Senator's pin.
But after talking a huffy big game, Vitter apparently thought better of pushing the confrontation any further. When the gate attendant left to find a security guard, Vitter turned tail and simply fled the scene.
Late Update: Vitter is now responding to the story, after a spokesman declined to comment in the initial reports:
"After being delayed on the Senate floor ensuring a vote on my anti-pay-raise amendment and in a rush to make my flight home for town hall meetings the next day, I accidentally went through a wrong door at the gate," Vitter said in a statement. "I did have a conversation with an airline employee, but it was certainly not like this silly gossip column made it out to be."
the link did not work. It gave me a "do you want to try snopes search engine" msg. nm
nm
only part saved was the ignorant part
You can read the whole article. This quote was saved to show what she said that was so stupid.
This is the reason we are in Iraq and it's the same reason I didn't vote for him in 2000: Didn't
his own personal reasons.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050620/why_george_went_to_war.php
The Downing Street memos have brought into focus an essential question: on what basis did President George W. Bush decide to invade Iraq? The memos are a government-level confirmation of what has been long believed by so many: that the administration was hell-bent on invading Iraq and was simply looking for justification, valid or not.
Despite such mounting evidence, Bush resolutely maintains total denial. In fact, when a British reporter asked the president recently about the Downing Street documents, Bush painted himself as a reluctant warrior. "Both of us didn't want to use our military," he said, answering for himself and British Prime Minister Blair. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."
Yet there's evidence that Bush not only deliberately relied on false intelligence to justify an attack, but that he would have willingly used any excuse at all to invade Iraq. And that he was obsessed with the notion well before 9/11—indeed, even before he became president in early 2001.
In interviews I conducted last fall, a well-known journalist, biographer and Bush family friend who worked for a time with Bush on a ghostwritten memoir said that an Iraq war was always on Bush's brain.
"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999," said author and Houston Chronicle journalist Mickey Herskowitz. "It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"
Bush apparently accepted a view that Herskowitz, with his long experience of writing books with top Republicans, says was a common sentiment: that no president could be considered truly successful without one military "win" under his belt. Leading Republicans had long been enthralled by the effect of the minuscule Falklands War on British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's popularity, and ridiculed Democrats such as Jimmy Carter who were reluctant to use American force. Indeed, both Reagan and Bush's father successfully prosecuted limited invasions (Grenada, Panama and the Gulf War) without miring the United States in endless conflicts.
Herskowitz's revelations illuminate Bush's personal motivation for invading Iraq and, more importantly, his general inclination to use war to advance his domestic political ends. Furthermore, they establish that this thinking predated 9/11, predated his election to the presidency and predated his appointment of leading neoconservatives who had their own, separate, more complex geopolitical rationale for supporting an invasion.
Conversations With Bush The Candidate
Herskowitz—a longtime Houston newspaper columnist—has ghostwritten or co-authored autobiographies of a broad spectrum of famous people, including Reagan adviser Michael Deaver, Mickey Mantle, Dan Rather and Nixon cabinet secretary John B. Connally. Bush's 1999 comments to Herskowitz were made over the course of as many as 20 sessions together. Eventually, campaign staffers—expressing concern about things Bush had told the author that were included in the manuscript—pulled the project, and Bush campaign officials came to Herskowitz's house and took his original tapes and notes. Bush communications director Karen Hughes then assumed responsibility for the project, which was published in highly sanitized form as A Charge to Keep.
The revelations about Bush's attitude toward Iraq emerged during two taped sessions I held with Herskowitz. These conversations covered a variety of matters, including the journalist's continued closeness with the Bush family and fondness for Bush Senior—who clearly trusted Herskowitz enough to arrange for him to pen a subsequent authorized biography of Bush's grandfather, written and published in 2003.
I conducted those interviews last fall and published an article based on them during the final heated days of the 2004 campaign. Herskowitz's taped insights were verified to the satisfaction of editors at the Houston Chronicle, yet the story failed to gain broad mainstream coverage, primarily because news organization executives expressed concern about introducing such potent news so close to the election. Editors told me they worried about a huge backlash from the White House and charges of an "October Surprise."
Debating The Timeline For War
But today, as public doubts over the Iraq invasion grow, and with the Downing Street papers adding substance to those doubts, the Herskowitz interviews assume singular importance by providing profound insight into what motivated Bush—personally—in the days and weeks following 9/11. Those interviews introduce us to a George W. Bush, who, until 9/11, had no means for becoming "a great president"—because he had no easy path to war. Once handed the national tragedy of 9/11, Bush realized that the Afghanistan campaign and the covert war against terrorist organizations would not satisfy his ambitions for greatness. Thus, Bush shifted focus from Al Qaeda, perpetrator of the attacks on New York and Washington. Instead, he concentrated on ensuring his place in American history by going after a globally reviled and easily targeted state run by a ruthless dictator.
The Herskowitz interviews add an important dimension to our understanding of this presidency, especially in combination with further evidence that Bush's focus on Iraq was motivated by something other than credible intelligence. In their published accounts of the period between 9/11 and the March 2003 invasion, former White House Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke and journalist Bob Woodward both describe a president single-mindedly obsessed with Iraq. The first anecdote takes place the day after the World Trade Center collapsed, in the Situation Room of the White House. The witness is Richard Clarke, and the situation is captured in his book, Against All Enemies.
On September 12th, I left the Video Conferencing Center and there, wandering alone around the Situation Room, was the President. He looked like he wanted something to do. He grabbed a few of us and closed the door to the conference room. "Look," he told us, "I know you have a lot to do and all…but I want you, as soon as you can, to go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this. See if he's linked in any way…"
I was once again taken aback, incredulous, and it showed. "But, Mr. President, Al Qaeda did this."
"I know, I know, but…see if Saddam was involved. Just look. I want to know any shred…" …
"Look into Iraq, Saddam," the President said testily and left us. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty stared after him with her mouth hanging open.
Similarly, Bob Woodward, in a CBS News 60 Minutes interview about his book, Bush At War, captures a moment, on November 21, 2001, where the president expresses an acute sense of urgency that it is time to secretly plan the war with Iraq. Again, we know there was nothing in the way of credible intelligence to precipitate the president's actions.
Woodward: "President Bush, after a National Security Council meeting, takes Don Rumsfeld aside, collars him physically and takes him into a little cubbyhole room and closes the door and says, 'What have you got in terms of plans for Iraq? What is the status of the war plan? I want you to get on it. I want you to keep it secret.'"
Wallace (voiceover): Woodward says immediately after that, Rumsfeld told Gen. Tommy Franks to develop a war plan to invade Iraq and remove Saddam—and that Rumsfeld gave Franks a blank check.
Woodward: "Rumsfeld and Franks work out a deal essentially where Franks can spend any money he needs. And so he starts building runways and pipelines and doing all the necessary preparations in Kuwait specifically to make war possible."
Bush wanted a war so that he could build the political capital necessary to achieve his domestic agenda and become, in his mind, "a great president." Blair and the members of his cabinet, unaware of the Herskowitz conversations, placed Bush's decision to mount an invasion in or about July of 2002. But for Bush, the question that summer was not whether, it was only how and when. The most important question, why, was left for later.
Eventually, there would be a succession of answers to that question: weapons of mass destruction, links to Al Qaeda, the promotion of democracy, the domino theory of the Middle East. But none of them have been as convincing as the reason George W. Bush gave way back in the summer of 1999.
I think you are right, but only in part...sm
The bigotry is the other part. What escapes you was the FACT pointed out in this article that blanks are disproportionately denied parole when their white counter parts are allowed parole time for their crimes. No bigotry there...maybe not???
Another sad part...s/m
Yes, due in part to a "surge" there is less violence in Iraq at this time. How long will this last? I certainly do not know. What will the situation be in Iraq in 2 to 5 years? I certainly don't know, but my gut tells me that you cannot go into another region of the world, bomb it extensively, ruin the lives of so many people, impose your will in trying to "plant the flag of democracy" in a region that does not want that, and have a good outcome. It was a terrible mistake in invading Iraq, and I don't see a good or happy outcome long term. That's my opinion.
I got to this part
A reduction in the violence does not mean that things are “going well,” only that they are going “less badly.”
-And I loved it! Exactly.
Here's the sad part...
You came across this article. You read it. You believed it and posted it because:
a) it said what you believe and
b) we (liberals) must believe it too because it is from a Democrat who is against the war.
Did you not question the validity of the statement? It came from an opposer, so it must be true? Do you believe everything you read simply because it says what you want to hear?
If the article had stated his specific reasons for believing so, I would have been more inclined to believe to be true. But again, it was a blanket article that says very little except his opinion. I think the article is short sighted and your posting it most refutable.
All that it did was convince me further that all your postings do is to try and take the very complex issue of Iraq and over simplify it to justify your war position. Not unlike what the Bush administration has done from day one in regards to dealing with it.
No one with half a brain believes that the progresses being made in Iraq is soley due to the troop surge, and there is plenty of documentation out there to disprove this theory.
Wasn't that the intent of your posting? Try to convince others that the surge is working? It didn't work. We are not that gullible.
I am most happy and pleased about the small gains that are being made, and I recognize them for what they are. But I am also realistic enough to know that those gains can disappear tomorrow regardless of the increased forces because there is no real stability established in the country. Our military is not the one who is going to create that stability. It is just a superficial band-aid at best. It is going to remain a hostile territory until the Iraqi people decide for it not to be and that has to come from reconciliation on the three parties involved. It won't make any difference how many troops we have there.
No I'm sure that part won't be on there. sm
I like to go to Huff and read the stuff, most it makes me laugh, the blogs; but ya gotta take it all with a grain of salt. Thanks for geting my point about the whole post, it being about Fox news and not about McCain or Obama.
I feel that with all of the side stuff, both sides are like little kids bickering, we are forgetting about everything that is important. I am so tired of both sides bashing the other, it is a waste of time and money.
I think it is all part of the......... sm
"American Dream" picture and White House tradition as well. Remember Molly, Barbara Bush's dog? I think Molly got more attention than George did at times.
Part 2
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill
The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the
taxidermist leaves the skin.
Mark Twain
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill
the world with fools.
Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)
There is no distinctly Native American criminal class...save Congress.
Mark Twain
What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.
Edward Langley, Artist (1928 - 1995)
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong
enough to take everything you have.
Thomas Jefferson
but part of what got us here
is many, many people abusing the system and getting free handouts when they should have been working.
The problem with our nation is the mentality that everyone is owed something. There is no pride in hard work anymore! And yes the rich thing they are owed loop holes, and the poor think they are owed handouts, and well the middle class is just p.o.'d at both of them!
Unfortunately if we start taxing the heck out of the rich they will just cut jobs from the middle class who pays taxes and then the poor who receive handouts won't be taken care of because we won't have any tax money left!
Before anyone gets mad, I understand completely that their are poor people who need help, and that doesn't bother me. The welfare system was originally created for single mothers though, not single mothers and their babies daddy and for the mothers to have 14 babies so the community to take care of them!
Here's a good idea for creating jobs: hire more caseworkers to investigate everyone on welfare and the ones that are abusing it lose it, which puts money back into the system for those that need it! The ones that abuse it should have to do community service to make up for it!
The sad part about this....(sm)
is that it's gonna get a lot worse than this before it gets better. As far as staying in their homes until they get arrested, some of them may not have any other choice if they don't have anywhere to go. If they go to jail, at least they have a roof over their heads. I don't think Obama's housing plan covers those who have already been evicted, but they need some kind of relief. At least ACORN is trying to help them, regardless of how they're going about it. What a mess.
You mean the part about
many officials who fear that the government will squander its takings, and so propose returning the money to citizens in the form of tax rebates or cuts, an idea known as "cap-and-dividend".
Yep, I am "enlightened" alright!!
Got it now. Had to use only the .com part
.
now I don't get the part where I
tried to change the subject as usual. I don't believe I am familiar with you at all as I don't remember ever chatting with you before, an endeavor which I am starting to think is not worthwhile anyway. I left this board a long time ago because of the constant bickering and mudslinging. Perhaps I have made an error trying it again. You consequently have not answered a question I had. In a nutshell, would you have objected a few years ago had he directed these kids to a liberal webside? If you are objecting on this behalf you would be just as wrong.
AW, you are part of a team.
People get mad at me sometimes because they think I am too harsh with conservatives - and I'm talking about liberals and progressives. You know though what we're up against. You can't be too harsh with them. Look at what they do. They've been getting away with it for a long time and enough is enough. They refuse to act like normal human beings and they shouldn't be treated like normal human beings. You could run away from a swarm of angry bees or vacate a house that was overrun with cockroaches and you'd be right to do so - but please even if you leave here, don't stop pegging these people. These kind of cockroaches are trying to overrun the world. I know you know who they are and I hope you won't be able to stay silent when they come scurrying around! I really hope you will stay here and keep adding your voice. In no way on no day should these people be allowed to remain unchallenged.
I think we agree for the most part
however, from what I heard of the tapes I don't think this teacher was just throwing his opinions out there. He was teaching them as fact. I think even if he was transferred to a political science class then he would still need to tone down his rhetoric several notches. You can teach any class from an objective point of view with very little effort. Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however, I think teachers need to be very careful about much of their own opinion they teach to students.
This is the part of a sermon that I can do without...sm
But this lady takes it to a whole new level. Passing out!? That's a class act.
Yep, I read that part...
and probably the difference in the cost is split between the difference in what the doctors make in both places, and if there is some sort of a cap on services...meaning, the insurance plan tells the doctor that is what you get for that particular service. No negotiation, no nothing. That is the only way I can think of that the streamlined disbursement system would work. If they do not have clerical personnel handling it, that tells me they have specific charges for specific services, regardless. That would be another sticky wicket on this side of the pond with the medical profession.
Another thing mentioned, and why the French physicians are okay to charge less...medical school in France is tuition-free. There will be another huge hit on the American taxpayer....can you even imagine the cost of that on the front end?
Like I said, it looks good on the face...one would be interested in knowing how long it took from inception to where it was "working well" and the dollar cost involved in the conversion and the ongoing maintenance.
I wonder, when they apply the "broad tax on earned and unearned income" if the French people will love it as much as they do now. It is a consideration...
Not meaning to be a fly in the ointment, kam...just looking at in stark reality.
Have a good day!
What part of this are you not understanding
I just read a bunch of posts below and am not disturbed, but maybe dismayed is a better word. Whether you trust Obama or not because of his policies, voting record, political life, or whatever is your perogative (sp?), but to incorrectly be making statements not based on anything but milicious rumors spread around leads readers to believe the writer is a biggot and just does not want a black man (which I should state once more 1/2 black, 1/2 white) in the white house. I have no doubt if more of the white race came out and he looked more white than black a lot of this would not be surfacing.
First - Obama is NOT muslim. You can think all you want and hope it to be true but what part of the facts don't you understand. How many times does he have to repeat he is a Christian. Always has been. Raised in a Christian home, white grandparents, white mother, went to catholic school, attended a Baptist church, married in a church (not Moslim), children baptised in a church. To say he is a muslim is like saying McCain belongs to KKK after all he's a white dude. Pullease. Sure, his father was a muslim when he married Obama's mother but that's where it stops. Obama never studied the muslim religon or went to muslim services. My parents are catholics but I was not raised catholic and am not catholic. His mother later remarried someone from Indonesia and Obama attended a catholic school. Get your facts straight. He never went to a muslim school or studied muslim studies and he is not muslim. So what if the muslims like him, so do the Christians, Jews, Mormoms, Baptists, and many other religions!
Second of all on the flag thing. Obama's plane has the American flag on it, are you upset because the flag is not so huge it covers the plane from one end to the next? There's a flag there! Also, just because he doesn't have an american flag plastered all over the place on everything does not mean he is not "American". Have you seen him pledge to a flag of another country? No, he pledges to the American flag! As for the picture that he is standing not with his hand over his heart. I can't tell you how many times I've said the pledge of allegience and I didn't have my hand over my heart every time. Doesn't mean I'm not American. He's not trying to get rid of the American flag, but for pete's sake it doesn't need to be plastered in every square inch of empty space.
The poster who is not well informed about Obama's religion and trying to scare people into believing he's muslim when he's not is just plain wrong. It doesn't "ruffle any feathers" because you are just wrong. You may not want to "sugar coat any facts" but first you need to get the facts straight. People don't "hate" republicans, and certainly not enough that they would want "anything" in there. You could always put that statement on the other foot "People just hate the democrats so much they'll elect an old senile person to fill the position just as long as a democrat doesn't get in there". That excuse just doesn't sit well.
I'm no "Obama-lover" and I won't be voting for him but not because of malicious rumors on the internet or false statements made by the republican side. I'm basing my decision on his voting records and other issues that I don't agree with him on, certainly not from anything I get off the internet. You know there are people on both sides who hate the other candidate so much they are posting fall information, but for anyone to spread this...all I can say is "shame on you".
What part of we got other issues do you
nm
actually, in answer to the last part,
I do believe I heard him say he was going to consult with his wife and grandmother! McCain was going to consult with the generals. Agree with the rest of your post.
PS. Forgot the part about "I don't think
nm
Yes....I was only replying to the part about using her name....
I think that is why people use her name. As to what she thinks, of course no one knows what she thinks...can guess, I suppose, but no one really knows.
I think the statement Obama made was great. He was forceful, no beating around the bush, I didn't think he did it because of politics, I think he meant it. I am not an Obama supporter, but the man was a class act when he made that statement. Hats off to him.
Wow. Looks like I missed that part.
One blurb just said Bush will speak via satellite and RG was "bumped." Still curious about why. Please post if you hear anything.
Medical was part of it......... sm
The foreign car workers have, I believe, national insurance coverage so that does not figure into the workers' benefits from the company. The figure being negotiated with the UAW was the amount that the foreign companies pay their workers. I don't believe health care would be a part of the package for the UAW.
If you don't vote, you are part of the
problem....It saddens me that you take your freedom, or what's left of it, so lightly. If you allow others to vote for you, you are giving your rights away. Politics is always a dirty business, but it's not politics you are voting for. Hoping you reconsider.
The Sickest Part.........
Is the fact that most pubs probably did the same name-calling and pandering in the last election as they are doing right now. Look what it got you. George Bush. Are you proud of him? Has he been a success? Would you even ADMIT that you voted for him? McCain isn't proud of him. The whole party is trying to pretend he doesn't even exist. He didn't even speak at the convention - he was "wired" in because he INSISTED. How sad. He was used like TP and now he is being flushed. Now you want to put another puppet in the whitehouse. Some shuffling, suffering, old man who looks like he can barely move - I am sure he is in pain. And you have his running mate one HEARTBEAT AWAY........who has governed a state with a population the size of Memphis, TN. THAT'S executive experience!!!!!! NO, it is absolutely TERRIFYING! If you keep expounding the same lies over and over - the simple ones start to believe them. If those bozos win - I hope I can afford to leave this country (you can keep your comments about "no one will miss you" as your hate is not welcome or necessary). I'll move to Mexico and tell the Mexicans they are more than welcome to overrun this country because that is what it will become, a third world country. The rich and the poor and nothing in between.
The sickest part
I totally agree..besides, I certainly would not want a VP whose former brother-in-law Tasered his own stepson (now THAT's sick)!!
(See story in today's Yahoo! site
Now did I say the "pubs" had no part in it?
This article says an untruth when it says: Mr. McCain was never a leading critic or defender of the mortgage giants.
This is what McCain said in 2005 with his proposed legislation:
Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.
The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.
The Democrats killed that bill.
Barney Frank, Democrat, pushed fannie/freddie to extend those subprime loans to minorities/lower income people who did not have a hope in heck of paying them back.
Top CEOs at fannie...Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson, and timothy Howard...two of who were Obama advisors until recently....all left Fannie with millions and we are left holding the bag. Chris Dodd, democratic head of banking and commerce committee...looked the other way. He is top recipient of donations from Fannie. Guess who is #2?
Pubs may have had a finger in it...Democrats had both hands up to the elbows in it. Just plain old fact.
Exactly what part of the video do you....
consider a conspiracy? The Chris Dodd part? The Barney Frank part? The Franklin Raines part? All denying that there was a problem with fannie/freddie? Which part of that is the conspiracy? SOme nasty Republican holding a gun to their heads to make them say it?
Perhaps the disclosure of which politicians were most in the fannie pocket? That part?
Or maybe the part where the bills introduced by the Republicans (named and numbered and easily verified) trying to regulate fannie/freddie only to be shot down by the Dems? That part? The part where McCain said on the senate floor we better wake up? That part?
Which part was it?
And what part of two-faced do you use to
xx
What part of he has already been investigated don't
.
What part of the evident below do you not
xx
I know, I don't think religion should be part of it either (sm)
But if McCain had been attending a white supremist church that hated African-Americans and had a minister who spewed hatred, and he had attended that church for 20 years and called the minister one of his mentors.....who would vote for him?? No black person, no non-caucasian person, and at least 90% of whites would not vote for him either!
This is the part where I realize just how little
going on besides the "economy" thing that everyone has their minds wrapped around so much it doesn't allow them to see anything else and every time Obama is questioned about something he wants to sidestep, he shoots back to that horrible economy that he knows so many can't think past.
You'll just have to pay attention, dive in, and connect the dots. I'm tired of doing it for you.
what part of reading don't you get?
xx
this is part of the problem
God forbid somebody mention God. They are talking about God in this election. Don't read those posts if it offends you. To some people God is relevant in this election
I assume you mean the sad part
is all of our brothers and sisters who refuse believe because they can't "prove" God's existence. I don't feel sad that the end times are near (I believe) for myself but I do believe the Bible tells us that in the end EVERY knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. It also tells us not to be afraid, something I struggle with, yet I know that in my rather looooong life, He has provided that which I needed, sometimes things I didn't even know I needed. He has also allowed me to suffer the consequences when I went against His will. Whatever part of the tribulation we have to endure, I am sure He will make a way for us. And I do believe we are entering into the tribulation.
did you miss the part where
this lady had a B for Obama carved in her head by a black man (not that his race really matters, so lets not start calling me a racist). I doubt that it was Republical propaganda about Obama being a Muslim that caused such a thing and I find it offensive that everyone keeps talking about Palin's looks. Honestly, it's not as if she is really all that good looking, just better looking than Hillary. Might not be racism, but it is a bit of sexism. If this had been a black woman attacked by a McCain supporter, I still would not understand you stance, but at least it wouldn't be from out of nowhere.
For the most part I agree with you.
But I admit I am a hard-liner so this is my opinion and my opinion only before anyone pounces on me.
I believe life begins at conception and I believe abortion at any point is murder. In this modern age, I see no reason, other than perhaps the mother's life being at stake, where an abortion might be acceptable and that decision, I believe is for the mother and the mother only to make. I will not speak to the issue of rape or incest, I cannot imagine what a horrible experience that might be. I have never been in the position, thank God, to have to make that decision. Anyone who has sex should, and likely does, know that pregnancy is a possibility whether or not they use birth control so if they aren't willing to accept that responsibility, maybe they should not have sex. I know somewhat of what I speak. I had 3 unwanted pregnancies in my early years. All 3 are living and I love them dearly and cannot imagine what life would be like without them. I am thankful I didn't murder them although at the time it was beyond me how I was going to care for them.
|
