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

One nation, under Stalin....right....you keep pushing that unity thing and we'll be completely

Posted By: socialist...they're all laughing at us know, yo on 2009-01-10
In Reply to: And it couldn't possibly have anything to do...(sm) - Just the big bad

Keep trying to convince yourself.


It's Putin, and Chavez, and Castro that are so proud of us now.


That is, when they're not laughing at us behind our backs.


You are so naive.

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

So much for promoting unity in our nation........... sm
While there may have been an UNOFFICIAL white caucus all these years, I believe the key word is "unofficial." Were blacks denied membership into this caucus based solely on the color of their skin? I rather doubt it, but I am certain that the black population would probably say they were.

I am all for equal opportunities when it comes to education, housing, jobs, etc., for all people regardless of skin color. However, forming special interest groups does nothing to promote equality. Rather it only promotes the reverse racism and devisiveness we are seeing here and will continue to see in the future.
The only thing I'm pushing for
is the right to do with MY body what I see fit.  I don't care what your religion is, where you pray, etc.  I just simply don't think what I do with my body is YOUR decision. 
....along with a pic of Joseph Stalin...nm
xxx
Next thing you know, they'll
because his card isn't religious enough...good grief.


'Holiday' Cards Ring Hollow for Some on Bushes' List

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; A01

What's missing from the White House Christmas card? Christmas.

This month, as in every December since he took office, President Bush sent out cards with a generic end-of-the-year message, wishing 1.4 million of his close friends and supporters a happy holiday season.

Many people are thrilled to get a White House Christmas card, no matter what the greeting inside. But some conservative Christians are reacting as if Bush stuck coal in their stockings.

This clearly demonstrates that the Bush administration has suffered a loss of will and that they have capitulated to the worst elements in our culture, said William A. Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

Bush claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one, said Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com. I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it.

Religious conservatives are miffed because they have been pressuring stores to advertise Christmas sales rather than holiday specials and urging schools to let students out for Christmas vacation rather than for winter break. They celebrated when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) insisted that the sparkling spectacle on the Capitol lawn should be called the Capitol Christmas Tree, not a holiday spruce.

Then along comes a generic season's greeting from the White House, paid for by the Republican National Committee. The cover art is also secular, if not humanist: It shows the presidential pets -- two dogs and a cat -- frolicking on a snowy White House lawn.

Certainly President and Mrs. Bush, because of their faith, celebrate Christmas, said Susan Whitson, Laura Bush's press secretary. Their cards in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths.

That is the same rationale offered by major retailers for generic holiday catalogues, and it is accepted by groups such as the National Council of Churches. I think it's more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards, said the council's general secretary, the Rev. Bob Edgar, a former Democratic congressman.

But the White House's explanation does not satisfy the groups -- which have grown in number in recent years -- that believe there is, in the words of the Heritage Foundation, a war on Christmas involving an ever-stronger push toward a neutered 'holiday' season so that non-Christians won't be even the slightest bit offended.

One of the generals on the pro-Christmas side is Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association in Tupelo, Miss. Sometimes it's hard to tell whether this is sinister -- it's the purging of Christ from Christmas -- or whether it's just political correctness run amok, he said. I think in the case of the White House, it's just political correctness.

Wildmon does not give retailers the same benefit of the doubt. This year, he has called for a consumer boycott of Target stores because the chain issued a holiday advertising circular that did not mention Christmas. Last year, he aimed a similar boycott at Macy's Inc., which averted a repeat this December by proclaiming Merry Christmas in its advertising and in-store displays.

It bothers me that the White House card leaves off any reference to Jesus, while we've got Ramadan celebrations in the White House, Wildmon said. What's going on there?

At the Catholic League, Donohue had just announced a boycott of the Lands' End catalogue when he received his White House holiday card. True, he said, the Bushes included a verse from Psalm 28, but Psalms are in the Old Testament and do not mention Jesus' birth.

They'd better address this, because they're no better than the retailers who have lost the will to say 'Merry Christmas,' he said.

Donohue said that Wal-Mart, facing a threatened boycott, added a Christmas page to its Web site and fired a customer relations employee who wrote a letter linking Christmas to Siberian shamanism. He was not mollified by a letter from Lands' End saying it adopted the 'holiday' terminology as a way to comply with one of the basic freedoms granted to all Americans: freedom of religion.

Ninety-six percent of Americans celebrate Christmas, Donohue said. Spare me the diversity lecture.

Diversity has been a hallmark of White House greeting cards for some time, according to Mary Evans Seeley of Tampa, Fla., author of Season's Greetings From the White House. The last presidential Christmas card that mentioned Christmas was in 1992. It was sent by George H.W. and Barbara Bush, parents of the current president.

Seeley said the first president to send out true Christmas cards, as opposed to signed photographs or handwritten letters, was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Merry Christmas From the President and Mrs. Roosevelt, said his first annual card, in 1933.

Like many modern touches, the generic New Year's card was introduced to the White House by John and Jacqueline Kennedy. In 1962, they had Hallmark print 2,000 cards, of which 1,800 cards said The President and Mrs. Kennedy Wish You a Blessed Christmas and 200 said With Best Wishes for a Happy New Year.

Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson continued that tradition for a couple of years, but it required keeping track of Christian and non-Christian recipients. Beginning in 1966, they wished everyone a Joyous Christmas, and no president has attempted the two-card trick since.

Seeley dates the politicization of the White House Christmas card to Richard M. Nixon, who increased the number of recipients tenfold, to 40,000, in his first year. The numbers since have snowballed, hitting 125,000 under Jimmy Carter, topping 400,000 under Bill Clinton and rising to more than a million under the current Bushes, with each president's political party paying the bill.

The wording, meanwhile, has often flip-flopped. Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter put Merry Christmas in their 1977 card and then switched to Holiday Season for the next three years. Ronald and Nancy Reagan, similarly, began with a Joyous Christmas in 1981 and 1982 but doled out generic holiday wishes from 1983 to 1988. The elder President Bush stayed in the Merry Christmas spirit all four years, and the Clintons opted for inclusive greetings for all of their eight years.

The current Bush has straddled the divide, offering generic greetings along with an Old Testament verse. To some religious conservatives, that makes all the difference.

There's a verse from Scripture in it. I don't mind that at all, as long as we don't try to pretend we're not a nation under God, said the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
I'll agree with you on one thing
the American people are, for the most part, ignorant sheep.
Most likely, the only thing you'll listen to are
X0X0
I'll agree with you - not on the crow thing
But the disturbing fact that he is surrounding himself with the Clintonites. I thought the O kept running on the platform of Change. This is not change. This is the same ol same ol. The Clinton presidency was so nauseating and so much damage was done. Even though I didn't want the O to win I at least had hopes he would bring in new people. Not the same bumbling bubble heads.

Good for Fox - I'm no Fox fan but I'll give them credit for doing the right thing
They say Fair and Balanced but they definitely are more conservative and Sean Hannity really gets on my nerves something awful. He's about as condescening as Rush and treats guests who are liberals as though they are less intelligent than he is.

When I am in favor of conservative viewpoint I will watch them, and when I am in favor of liberal viewpoints I will go to another channel. Never CNN because they praise the Clintons too much. Most of the time I watch MSNBC even though they are more liberal, but at least they are fair and civil to conservatives.

So I give Fox some credit.
You poor thing. I'll say an extra prayer for the demons to leave your heart.

Big hug.

Peace? And Unity?
If peace and unity is what obama supporters are touting, well then heaven forbid anyone disagree or have different opinions.  That has been shown on these very boards today.  Peace and unity indeed.
So much for unity and equality.
Obama adviser: White males need not apply

.Robert Reich tells House panel stimulus package should emphasize 'social return' over worker skill

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A top economic adviser to President Obama has told a
congressional panel the billions of dollars in the proposed economic
stimulus plan should be allocated with social issues in mind, to make
sure the money doesn't go to just "white male construction workers" or
the highly skilled.Robert Reich, who served as labor secretary
under President Clinton, was speaking to the House Steering and Policy
Committee Jan. 7 about funding infrastructure projects across the
nation."It seems to me that infrastructure
spending is a very important and good way of stimulating the economy.
The challenge will be to do it quickly, to find projects that can be
done that will have a high social return, that also can be done with
the greatest speed possible," Reich said.

"I am concerned, as I'm sure many of you are, that these jobs not
simply go to high skilled people who are already professionals or to
white male construction workers," he said.

Reich's statements were highlighted in a video by NakedEmporerNews, which is embedded here:

The hearing took place two weeks before Obama was inaugurated.

"I have nothing against white male construction workers," Reich
said. "I'm just saying there are a lot of other people who have needs
as well.
"There are ways in which the money can be, criteria can be set
so the money does go to others, the long term unemployed, minorities,
women," he said.
Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., appeared to agree, suggesting federal money be directed to specific groups of people.

The federal government, he said, must "remove the discretion"
about where the funds go, or what projects would be involved, even to
the point of eliminating any input from governors or state legislatures.Reich agreed: "Governors ought to be, should be given a choice of signing on the bottom line or not."

Then Rangel noted the "middle class" would be unlikely to create any opposition to funds directed to minorities.

"One thing that you can depend on, you don't have to be worried
about what the middle class is going to do. Things are so bad, they
have to put food on their tables, get clothes for their kids, get them in school," he said.

Who
is Barack Obama REALLY? Get the book that says his "change" is designed
to uproot American culture and replace it with the failed, secular,
socialist policies of the past.

Commentator Michelle Malkin said Reich's statements expose "the
lie that the Obama administration is actually interested in
revitalizing basic infrastructure for the good of the economy."
"No, what Team Obama really wants is to ensure that the least
skilled, least qualified workers get jobs based on their chromosomes
and pigment," she said.
Malkin cited Reich's own blog,
where the Obama adviser wrote of the economic stimulus plan: "I'd
suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors

to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed and
to people with incomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty
level."
This, Malkin wrote, is "spoken like a true-blue wealth
redistributor. The 'needs' (read: demands) of politically protected
minorities trump the need for competently build roads and bridges."

..


..

Reich's blog headline


On his blog, Reich makes his case for, "The Stimulus: How to
Create Jobs Without Them All Going to Skilled Professionals and White
Male Construction Workers."
"At least 2 percent of project funds should be allocated to such training.
In addition, advantage should be taken of buildings trades
apprenticeships -- which must be fully available to women and
minorities," he wrote.
Race already has become an issue several times in the Obama administration.

As WND reported, Democratic Party strategist Donna Brazile admitted she swiped Obama's complimentary blanket
from his inauguration ceremony and then joked it was not a criminal
offense because, "We have a black president ... this was free."
Outrage also erupted over the inauguration
benediction by Rev. Joseph Lowery, the 87-year-old civil rights pioneer, for
asking God to help mankind work for a day when "white would embrace what is
right."

Obama reacted to the benediction with a smile.
Unity!...not! They are also preparing to beat the
nm
But......he's not trying to promite equality and unity
@@
Trinity Unity Church ministries list inside

Michelle and Barack Obama's association with Trinity Unity church dates back to around 1988 (Obama, age 27) when they were civil right attorneys in Chicago and engaged in voter registration drives in South Chicago.  Being young, biracial and a recent graduate from Harvard Law School with international heritage and early life experiences, he was searching for the meaning of black identity in America.  It seems like a black church would be a reasonable place for a Christian to take that search.  Trinity Unity Church in South Chicago engages in the following ministry programs of common interest to both himself and his wife, who were active in that community at that time.     


1.    Seniors activities.


2.    Adopt-a-student. 


3.    Economic development and health education in Africa.


4.    Sports, career development.


5.    Caribbean cultural education. 


6.    Social justice advocacy. 


7.    Bible study. 


8.    Individual, family, group and grief crisis counseling. 


9.    Children, youth, men and women modern dance, ballet and interpretive dance, including African roots of dance in worship. 


10.   Domestic violence support services. 


11.   Drama.


12.   Drill teams. 


13.   Drug and alcohol recovery. 


14.   Fine arts and literary guild. 


15.   Food share. 


16.   Girl Scouts.


17.   Health advisory for the prevention of physical and mental illnesses. 


18.   High school counseling. 


19.   HIV/AIDs education. 


20.   Housing seminars, including tax sales, avoiding foreclosure, purchase of HUD homes, finance mortgages. 


21.   Christian, cultural and social focus groups on "coming into womanhood."


22.   Information technology, self determination for the physically, mentally and/or emotionally handicapped. 


23.   Legal counseling. 


24.   Marriage counseling. 


25.   Math tutoring. 


26.   Instruction in audio, visual, print, photography and telecommunications. 


27.   Men's groups and fellowship. 


28.   Development of spiritual, economic, social and political viability of the African American community.


29.   Partnership programs across ministries.


30.   Messengers of Faith high school choir.


31.   Little Warriors for Christ choir for ages 6 years to 8th grade.


32.   Men's Chorus.


33.   Sanctuary choir for adult men and women.


34.   Women's Chorus.


35.    Walaika Choir for 3 to 5 year olds.


36.    Newness of Life guidance for life's spiritual journey.


37.   Prison ministry weekly visits to prisons to provide support for prison families and engage inmates in rap sessions and training programs. 


38.   Christian role models and mentors for boys and girls of elementary school age. 


39.   Reading/literacy program.


40.   Sign language- Bible studies and other programs for the hearing impaired.


41.   Singles groups for never married, divorced, widowed, single parents and same gender.


42.   Women's groups.


43.   New member orientation and financial aid for members enrolled in seminaries.


44.   Tangeni adult dance rehearsals, seminars and retreats.


45.   Taped worship services/visitation for members and extended family, who are hospitalized, shut-ins or in extended care facilities.


46.   Computer classes.


47.   Church usher program, all ages.


48.   Women's guild volunteers for nursing home resident visitation.


49.   Yoga physical, mental and spiritual fitness.


50.   Young adults/teenage groups.


51.   Christian character development of cultural and spiritual awareness.


52.   Youth Christian education, music, prayers and crafts activities groups.

With all this going on, and with the focus the Obamas had on community involvement and civil rights as attorneys, a 20-year membership makes perfect sense.  Anyone who would attribute their "association" with this church, its members or its pastor to subversive, militant, Marxist/Socialist over-throw of the government apparently has their own subversive agenda to serve.  The good deeds and actions that are manifested in these ministries far overshadow any hateful political smear campaigns, no matter how organized they are or how much hot air they expel.
Production of a Certificate of Live Birth is a very small price to pay for unity...

Is Barack Obama a U.S. citizen?"

Of course he is, dummy..

"But how do you know?"

Well for starters, he posted his birth certificate on his website. Not to mention, the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii released a statement saying he was born in Hawaii . Also, factcheck.org (a non-partisan and highly credible political fact checking website) investigated it heavily and validated, beyond doubt, that the birth certificate he posted was real. Did I mention that if there were an actual conspiracy surrounding this...it would have to be 47 years in the making? That's right, read it and weep: his birth announcement was posted in a Hawaii newspaper way back in 1961! But if you're really not sure, just remember there have been court cases challenging his citizenship, and every one of them was laughed off the docket.

"That's all pretty compelling. But I got this email that said...."

The email you got is just a crazy, internet-born rumor. It's nothing but a desperate attempt to discredit him. Trust me.

"Yeah, I'm sure you're right...."


Sound familiar? I've personally had a similar conversation several times, but mine ends differently.


"Well for starters, he posted his birth certificate on his website."

Really? Well humor me, because I think this is important enough for us to get our facts straight. So let's explore that. Hawaii doesn't issue "birth certificates". The state offers "Certificates of Live Birth" and "Certifications of Live Birth." What Barack Obama has posted on his website is a "Certification of Live Birth." So let's talk about the difference between the two documents. As you probably know, the document we commonly refer to as a "birth certificate" (more formally called a Certificate of Live Birth) is packed with detail. Detail like the hospital you were born in, the doctor who delivered you along with his/her signature, etc. It looks like a tax form with all the boxes and everything. The Certification of Live Birth is really just a snapshot of that. So which one is more credible? Which one does the state of Hawaii give the "last word" to? Based on information that existed long before this issue came up, let's take a look at one example of what the state of Hawaii has to say on it:

"In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL." ( http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl ).

So if the state of Hawaii itself doesn't accept "Certifications of Live Birth" as a last leg of verification, it's safe to say there's a pretty solid distinction we too can make when comparing a Certificate to a Certification. What Barack Obama posted, was a Certification. What people want to see, is the Certificate. When you say he "posted his birth certificate" on his website, the truth (painful as it may be to hear) is that he posted a much different document that if accurately described, would be a "birth certification" - which is far less credible and far easier to alter.

"That's pretty lean. It's not really a big deal to me because I know it's just a rumor. But still, if you're going to insist there's a question here, I have to tell you....the state of Hawaii released a statement saying he was born in Hawaii . They have the 'Certificate' you're talking about, and they proved it was authentic. Are you saying they're in on this crazy conspiracy?"

I'm not saying they're involved in a conspiracy, or even that one exists. But I'm not sure you can honestly say you actually read that statement. Here, take a look:

Director of Health for the State of Hawaii , Chiyome Fukino: "There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama's official birth certificate. State law (Hawai'i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai'i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama's original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai'i."

Now you tell me, where in that statement does it say anything about where he was born? Public officials are very careful when they release these statements. They carve their words out precisely and check and double check to make sure what they release is accurate and viable. I have to be honest, it wasn't until this statement came out that I became more concerned by the citizenship question. If you actually read it, it's plain to see that as it relates to his birth, the statement really only "proves" 3 things: 1) Barack Obama was born, 2) proof of that birth exists on paper, and 3) their office is in receipt of that paper. An official statement with a lot of affirmatives about requirements and procedures means nothing if they can't find the words, "originating from Hawaii " or "was born in Honolulu " or "as documented in the Certification he has already released". Now maybe it was an accident that Dr. Fukino was able to authenticate virtually every scrap of it's existence - except the part everyone is asking about. However, pressed on this, there has been ample opportunity for her to revise or expand her statement, and she still to this day has not done so.

"Wait a minute, Hank. Didn't factcheck.org already investigate this whole thing. You're just grasping at straws. What do you know, that they don't?!"

I guess the first thing I'd tell you is that, on this particular subject, factcheck has already missed a lot of "facts", and even created a few of their own. You know that statement we just read from Hawaii 's Director of Health? Well this is what factcheck had to say about it: "Department of Health confirmed Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu " ( http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html ). Did you see that in the statement? I didn't. If this site's only claim is to report facts in a non-partisan manner, how much credibility can we really give them when they start making up their own, very partisan and very inaccurate facts? They also failed to make the distinction between the Certificate and the Certification. And to be fair, factcheck.org is a product of the Annenberg Foundation. You may remember, Barack Obama worked for Annenberg as a spoke in their umbrella. If you look at the actual facts, this is a slight conflict of interest on factcheck.org's part - which might help to explain their not having met their own obligation of getting the facts right. An accident on their part? Maybe. But they too have had plenty of time to correct it, but chose instead to close the book on this one...fabricated facts and all.

"Look....if there was any truth to this, it would have meant that Barack's parents and a Hawaiian newspaper were in on it too. And they were in on it 47 years ago! There's a birth announcement in a Hawaiian newspaper for crying out loud."

Okay now this is one of my favorites. So now rather than authenticating citizenship by way of formal, long-form, vault copies of actual Certificates of Live Birth - we are relying on birth announcements in newspapers? Let me ask you something: If you and your wife live in Ohio , but you gave birth while visiting Florida , is there a legal or logical premise that says you're bound to put that birth announcement in a Floridian newspaper? Or, would you likely send news of the birth back home, to your town-of-residence, where more friends and family would see the good news? If Barack Obama was born outside of the U.S. , there doesn't have to be a "conspiracy" for his family to have sent word of that birth back to their hometown newspaper.

"Hmm. Okay. Well newsflash Hank. This has already been challenged in court and the judges dismissed it as frivolous and ridiculous."

Actually, this has been heard in a handful of courts. The judges by-in-large dismissed the cases, you're right. But the majorative reason was not merit, but rather standing. "Standing", as an act of dismissal in the courts, is a technicality. The judges said that individual citizens did not have standing to ask that the Constitution be upheld. This raises a pretty clear question: If "We The People" don't have standing to ask that the contract we hold with our government be upheld (ie the Constitution), who does? There are several other cases still pending; at least 12 confirmed. One of those is actually active on the Supreme Court's docket, as we speak. Another has been brought in California by 2008 candidate for the Presidency, Alan Keyes...and several of California 's electors (members of the electoral college who will officially vote our President in on December 15, 2008).

I don't think too many grounded people could say, "I know the answer." For instance, I am not saying Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen. I'm not saying he was born in Kenya . I'm not saying he renounced his U.S. citizenship when he moved to Indonesia and attended school there (a right reserved only to Indonesian citizens - in a country that didn't recognize any dual citizenship.) I'm not saying that due to his father's citizenship at a time when Kenya was still part of the British empire , Barack, as a son, was automatically and exclusively afforded British citizenship. I'm not saying the video footage of his Kenyan grandmother claiming to have been in the delivery room, in Kenya , when he was born, is necessarily "evidence." I'm also not saying he was born in Hawaii . What I'm saying is, none of us have these answers. I'm saying, there is an outstanding question here - that only Barack Obama can answer. And rather than answer it, having promised a new sense of transparency throughout his campaign, his course of action has been to spend time, money and the resources of at least 3 separate law firms....fighting to keep any and all documentation off the discovery table and out of the courtroom. It is a well known legal fact that if you have documentation/evidence that will help you - you are quick to produce it. If that documentation will hurt you, however, you fight to keep it out of court. Let's be fair. He was quick and happy to give documentation he claimed validated and authenticated his citizenship to a website - but is fighting to keep that same documentation out of the courts. If that document really does authenticate and validate everything, why not just hand it over? Why fight?

"Alright Hank. Well MY question is, if there was any validity to this, why isn't the media covering it?"

I have no idea.


As an Independent and initial Barack Obama supporter, I can safely say that contrary to what many think, asking these questions is not an attempt by Republicans to win a technicality-laden seat in the White House. Republicans lost. They were due the loss. Most know that. The seat will ultimately go to a Democrat. But if there is truth to Barack Obama not being able to formally prove his a) natural born, and/or b) properly maintained citizenship statuses - we as Americans must not gloss past it. If there is truth to it, this will represent the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people and our most coveted process of democracy. If there is truth to it, this will demonstrate a wanton and relentless pursuit for power which left President-Elect Obama trapsing all over our Constitution - in pursuit of a position that ironically and foremost swears him to uphold and protect that same document.

There is much unanswered here. I know it is very embarassing for the Democratic party to have allowed what might be such an incredibly elementary oversight to occur - but nothing good that Barack Obama might do in the next 4-8 years, will be able to repair the damage done by setting a precedent that affords anyone in our Country the room and right to trample the contract "We The People" hold with our government, let alone a person who is asking to be our next President.

"Everyone will riot if they kick him out." We can't be intimidated by that. The people of our country elected a black man for the Presidency. Nothing can change that. If it turns out his entire campaign and effort were based on fraud, that reality is still 100% independent of the color-blind lenses our nation took to the polls. So if we bow down to the potential for race riots - recognizing that we did in fact (perhaps ignorantly relating to his eligibility) initially vote for him, we are only fostering a new evolution of racism that is nurtured by intimidation and complicit with failing to incite accountability over a man, people and process - simply based on color.

Very few people know any of this is even occurring. Those who do are greatly divided. Some are sure Barack Obama has acted fraudulently, some are sure he hasn't. Neither group can be sure of anything though, until Barack Obama himself answers the question for us. We all show our "birth certificates" (Certificates of Live Birth) several times over the course of our lives. Why should someone running for the Presidency be an exeption to that expectation, or even a more fiercely vetted recipient of it? More questionably, how can we as a government, media and nation - allow someone running for the Presidency to be an exception to that expectation?

The behavior, mostly (to my personal dismay) for his part, has only fueled speculation. Why factcheck.org? Why not a governing body like the Federal Election Commission, Board of Elections or even the DNC? When a governing body did finally inject itself in to this matter, why were they only able to do so vaguely...leaving the real question entirely untouched and unanswered? Why spend more than $800K fighting this in court, at a time when our nation is in economic crisis and that money could be better spent in far more charitable ways; when it could ultimately and universally be resolved for the small $12.00 fee required by Hawaii for a copy of the actual Certificate of Live Birth? In the spirit of transparency, why refuse to release this basic document for inspection? In the spirit of unity, why leave so many Americans alienated and debating the matter - when all most of them want is affirmation so that people on both sides of the debate can move to more healthy and productive lines of communication?

It was opinionated that he had left this door open prior to the election, so that those who opposed him would be led down a blind and pointless alley. The general election is over though. And still, he offers nothing to end the speculation.

By the time I am done with the conversation I outlined above, those I am speaking with inevitably return to what I have typically found to be their first and last refutation....

"He must have been properly vetted. Right....?"

I don't know. And without support for that contention coming directly from the Federal Election Commission, the Board of Elections or (ideally) Barack Obama himself, neither does anyone else.

"This is ridiculous" doesn't count as a refutation. Simply, answer the question with the simple documentation that is being asked of you in double digit numbers of court rooms across the country, including the Supreme Court. It may go away. It may be dismissed again based on standing. But President-Elect Obama's refusal to quell what have become very real questions about this, will only serve to leave many good Americans who hope to vigorously support their President...with far too much doubt to be able to do so. Production of a Certificate of Live Birth is a very small price to pay for unity.


http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-156768

sorry: ....a-r-e pushing....n/m
nm
Wow, my post was totally and completely respectful and yours is totally and completely not. sm
what a surprise.  Can't stand to be corrected or proven wrong, can you.  Have to call everyone a liar, don't you.  Got to tell people to stick things somewhere, don't you.   TSK TSK TSK  Anger management might be helpful.
I am not pushing my beliefs on you...
I am merely standing for what I believe in, just as you do. You seem defensive, and when people are defensive, that generally means they feel guilty. If you believe in a woman's right to choose to abort a child, that is your right, and you do not need me to endorse that. Just as I do not need you to endorse my feeling that life does begin at conception, I believe the soul begins at the same time. I do not believe a child growing in the womb is soul-less. We agree to disagree.
you are pushing secularism on me
every time I hear that there is no God and that abortion is not murder or should be legal or that we cannot pray in public or that the 10 commandants should be taken out of the government buildings, or God off of the money, I am getting secularism pushed onto me.  So how is that different?  Is that supposed to be okay to???? Where are my rights?
At least now we know why he has been pushing so hard
Vote early and vote often.

JBB won't read anything.....too busy pushing
--
sooo Hillary is pushing for this electronic

not sure exactly what she means by that but that sounds scary for our profession.  Anybody got the 411 on this?

At first I thought these people pushing the b/c issue
were just plain ole MTs with inquiring minds, however, wrong they might be.  The poster above who said "put your money where your mouth is"  finally got a light bulb to come on in my brain.  These people have an agenda, whatevier it may be, but it is NOT the Constitution or they would have trampled Bush a long time ago.  I doubt they are MTs.  I believe they have an agenda that is way darker than the birth certificate issue and I am going to keep posting to their posts so that hopefully unsuspecting, well-meaning  MTs might THINK and see them for what they are.
Public schools are NO place for pushing the
--
They aren't pushing a "gay agenda"...(sm)
They're pushing TOLERANCE.....something you could obviously use a lessen in.
I agree. No one should be pushing their ideals in public schools.SM
Just the regular math, science, drama, choir, social studies works for me.

Parents are responsible for educating on religion, sex (though a little sex ed is not a bad thing), politics, etc.
Exactly...but Obama is still pushing his Global Poverty Bill.....
It is designed to send BILLIONS of our hard earned dollars to Africa and other 3rd world countries to cut poverty there by half.

How can he cut their poverty by half?? He should be worrying about OUR poverty. Which is a telling point in my mind. Why is Obama so bent on giving OUR money away? I don't know about you, but I don't need the govt' telling what to do or not do with my money. I earned it, I have the final decision.
What I find wrong is that he's pushing his own ego-driven agenda
regardless of what anyone thinks. I think this is called FALSE reassurance.
Well, quit pushing the liberal religion down our throat in government...
schools, and universities and we'll be happy to call a truce until then...we'll fight you on ideals.  
I guess it is the idea that in the spirit of Christmas the NRA is pushing their agenda...sm
Is nothing sacred? And that goes beyond politics.

Santa with a gun. Right over baby Jesus. Insinuating that Muslims want to blow up Christianity. All in the name of being able to bear arms.

I can't name ONE act of terrorism in American history in the last 100 years that a citizen bearing arms would have saved ONE person from a terrorist.

A gun wouldn't have helped anyone in the trade center, can't take them on a plane so wouldn't have saved any of the passengers, Oklahoma bombing, nope a gunn wouldn't have helped those victims. Just another scare tactic, exploiting 9/11 to push their agenda that was here before waaaayyy before the fact.

I had a friend on Right Nation who went down there. SM
He lives about an hour away.  He did not gestimate anywhere even close to that. 
A great nation. sm

As an outsider, I could give you another perspective and one not nearly so dire as yours.  However, I also realise that my view is slanted as I simply adore this country and Americans in general.  In short, given the information at his disposal, George Bush’s decision to oust Saddam looks altogether reasonable--though, again, not necessarily right. To argue otherwise demonstrates both ignorance and bad faith. So what are we to make of the downward spiral of sectarian mayhem that is currently drawing Iraq into the abyss? The violence seems senseless to us . . . but perhaps that’s the point. Perhaps our enemies recognize that the great exploitable weakness of the American military is that, in the wake of Vietnam, the American public’s grasp of geo-politics runs only as deep as the lyrics to Bob Dylan’s “Blowing in the Wind.” This is a weakness every bit as real, and every bit as deadly, as a missile with a faulty guidance system or a tank that stalls in its tracks--and it will remain a real weakness until the American public is knocked upside the head a sufficient number of times to outgrow it. What the degeneration of the mission in Iraq indicates most profoundly is that one 9/11 was not enough to crack through the platitudes of the late 1960s--which are deeply embedded in the universities, television networks and editorial pages of major newspapers. There remains, in such circles, the delusion that the jihadists are ultimately live and let live types, that totalitarian Islam will eventually just peter out, that the principles of the European Enlightenment will simply dawn on a billion Muslims without us cramming them down their throats.This may in the end prove the deadliest error in geo-political judgment Americans have ever made. Members of the genocidally well-meaning baby-boom generation will likely go to their graves believing they “gave peace a chance,” having spared themselves the anguish of killing hundreds of thousand Muslims . . .  and likely bequeathed to their children and grandchildren the anguish of killing scores of millions. 

the nation really isn't interested

It's just a device used by the neocons to keep the attention of the stifled.  They know that the repressed loonies in the county slobber over anything pertaining to sex.  Just look at O'Reilly.  Nearly every night he has some story about prostitutes, strip clubs, girls gone wild -- he is complaining how horrible it is, yet they always have tapes behind him of half-naked coeds grinding away.  If it is so horrible, must we see the tapes over and over?


 

We are not a nation of businesses.
nm
I am with you, Shelly. Also, it seems our nation is
nm
I think it's a symbol of what our nation has become
Greed...from the top to the bottom.  You couldn't pay me enough to get me to go out on Black Friday. 
Obviously we are a divided nation.
Do not see how any of this will work. With no republican vote, that speaks volumes to me. Obviously cannot work together or see eye to eye with the future.
I'll double that 'amen', and I'll raise you one!
amen
#1, The Nation is extremely partisan. #2.

Tillman didn't talk about why he went into the service to anyone.  We will have to assume that what his mother is saying is true.  Has the wife spoken out?  I would think if he told his deepest heart's secrets, it would be to her.  She was his high school sweetheart.  Here's a snippet from a Newsweek article. 


He joined the service just after a honeymoon to Bora Bora with his high-school sweetheart, Marie. He and a younger brother, Kevin, slipped off to enlist in Denver, where they could avoid publicity. Kevin, who gave up a budding minor-league baseball career, remains in the Army. Pat Tillman wanted no attention, no glory, for joining the rank and file. He didn't want to be singled out from his brothers and sisters in the military, says former Cardinals coach Dave McGinnis. Tillman apparently had made a pact with his family to stay silent about his service, a promise they have kept. They have gathered to grieve inside the comfortable family home in a leafy enclave of San Jose.


His was no simple case of patriotism; Tillman was never known as a flag-waver. His agent, Frank Bauer, told reporters he had suspected that Tillman might quit to teach or to practice law like his father, Patrick Sr., but not to join the military. Snyder, his college coach, said Tillman never used the word patriotism when he explained his plans to enlist. He just seemed to think something had to be done. When players asked why he enlisted, he didn't want to talk about it. McGinnis says there were reasons Pat said he had that he didn't want to divulge, and the coach respected his view and his right to make his own path. Tillman had always been different. When he joined the pros, he rode a bicycle to practice because he didn't own a car. He refused to buy a cell phone. A sports publicist at Arizona State once described him as a surfer dude.


It seems his mother decided the pact no longer had any merit.  Personally, I see another Cindy Sheehan, disobeying her son's wishes. 

Prayer vigil for our nation
I posted this on the Faith board but I also wanted to post it here just in case...

The North American Mission Board has started a prayer vigil for our nation before the election. If you want to participate there is a sign up and prayer guide at

http://ilivevalues.com/prayer

It's 40 days of prayer and then 40 hours of prayer at the end. Check it out! I think it will really do some good and if God's people work together and call out to Him together to heal our nation, He said He would hear us and do so!

Have a great day!

God Bless!

p.s. this wasn't meant to start a riot or to have a bunch of people who don't believe in prayer or God to get up in arms, it's just for those who would like to participate, so please don't go there. Thanks!
most pedophiles are found in the nation's
(nm)
How many pubs on this forum and in this nation
being a qualified candidate for VP and ready to step into the highest office in the land? This is not just about Palin. This is about a party who expects to be taken seriously in the Congresss, Senate, 2010 and again in 2012. So far, all we have seen these past 2 days is a GOP collective who cannot abandon the witch hunt and mob stalking of Obama long enough to address their own shortcomings.

The presumption on the part of these folks that they should be taken seriously by anyone except themselves in view of the fact that they can turn a blind eye to this kind of basic deficit in their party and the judgment of their leaders is LUDICROUS.

Palin may not be a front burner issue for much longer, but the shambles that is the republican party will be there for a long time....a very long time, if their own members cannot get off their high horses long enough to take a long, hard look at themselves.
If we claim to be a nation of laws, then
we need to BE a nation of laws. JTBB has said it all and said it well.
With our nation in dire straights
knowing that 79% of my compatriots are feeling optimistic about our future with only 14% expressing pessimism. What's up with that?

For me, its about FINALLY having our long-awaited closure and moving forward instead of backward. I'm sure some will say "it's just a poll" but when I see that sea of humanity gathering with excitement, enthusiasm and joy, with smiles all over their faces, DESPITE the precarious state of our nation, I know in my heart it is much, much more.

Those numbers help me keep things in perspective (especially when reading the posts of this forum) and focused on what's really important. I will take great pride in doing my part, to whatever extent possible, in becoming part of the solution, and not the problem.
Obama and the State of our Nation

Obama was VOTED in, not 'given' the job as President...You know, I cannot believe some of the things tht come from the brains and out of the miouths oif some indivuduals.  This is indeed a historic moment; that I am in agreement with, and I also agree that 170M for the Inaguration was excessive but I will tell you what I find even more excessive - the lying, stealing criminal former administration who ripped of the American people (regardless of political affilation) and basically thummed their noses at us because they felt and still feel they are above the law.  The former president  and his administration didn't give a durn about the economy and reputation of this country  do you truly believe that they cared whether you, your  husbands, sons and other relatives lost their jobs and homes?  Do you really think they were concerned about whether YOU have enough to retire on after dutifully putting away funds in your 401k?  I don't think so.  They gutted us and left us twisting in the wind; and while we worry about how we are going to pay the light bill and have enough to buy grioceries let alone our mortgage - they dine well and live like kings, their families and frineds in their inner circles do not have to concern themselves with such mundane issues...why would they?  Their gods are Franklin, Harrison, Grant, et al.WE PAID FOR IT and will be for years to come.

Godless nation....hmmm...(sm)

Now that would be an improvement.  This country was not founded on christianity or any other relgion.  I agree that Obama was downplaying religion, but I also believe that that is exactly what he needed to do.  Bush turned this whole mess into a big "us against them" mentality...."us" meaning christians.  I believe Obama had to negate this idea by downplaying religion, thus deflating the whole notion that we are in a religious war (which is exactly what Bush wanted and subsequently turned it into.)


What I find really interesting is the idea that you insinuate that we MUST be identified as a nation by a specific religion.  Since we are talking about this in the context of politics, exactly why is it you feel we MUST be seen by the world as a "god-fearing" nation?  What would be the benefits of that?

If you are talking about the Obama Nation post...
it was written by a black pastor and it is his opinion. He was not hired by nor affiliated with the McCain campaign. There are several black preachers who do not agree with black liberation theology. There was nothing in his post about hatred. He said homosexuality was a sin..it is. He didn't say he hated gays...just that the Bible says the ACT is a sin..and it is. Just like lying, adultery, murder, etc. It does have the distinction of being the one sin that God classified as an "abomination." All the preacher was pointing out was that when Obama said there was nothing specific in the Bible regarding homosexuality...he was wrong. Again...there is no hatred in that post. He just doesn't agree with Obama's philosophy. Where you get hate from that I don't know....did you even read the post?

And by the way....sniping and cattiness must be your strong suit? You seem to excel in that area. Can you just drop the cattiness and sniping (as you asked that I do) and go figure, as you told me to do? Thank you so very much.
Our party's not the 1 who brought nation to its knees.
nm
haha - like half the nation is planning on doing!
;)
Don't you wish that me and half the nation which shares this view
x
American undeveloped nation by 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqW1-aA5aMg
© Copyright 2001-09 MTStars.com All Rights Reserved