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

Stem cell research has started

Posted By: Full speed ahead on 2009-01-23
In Reply to:

I am so glad to see this has started. I know there must be loads of people who suffer maladies including strokes, spinal cord injuries and many, many more who have been waiting to start testing. I am very glad this has been overturned- now to get down to more business!


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

stem cell research
Well, God help you if any of your family gets struck down with a debilitating disease that could be helped with stem cell research
Here's my reasoning on stem cell research
It's not been made illegal, it's simply not funded with federal money, i.e. taxpayers money.  The pendulum has swung so far to the other side.  There are lots of people who have serious objections to abortions and also stem cell research, because of their objection to using live embryos.  People who want abortions have them paid for by people who don't believe in them.  That's unfair.  So, let the private market do the stem cell research and leave the taxpayers out of it.  If you feel very strongly about it, donate your own money to those doing it in the private market.
I don't support stem cell research.
It will never see a dime of my money if I can help it.
Stem Cell Research - First Veto...sm
Stem Cell Bill Gets Bush's First Veto

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 20, 2006; Page A04

President Bush issued the first veto of his five-year-old administration yesterday, rejecting Congress's bid to lift funding restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research and underscoring his party's split on an emotional issue in this fall's elections.

At a White House ceremony where he was joined by children produced from what he called adopted frozen embryos, Bush said taxpayers should not support research on surplus embryos at fertility clinics, even if they offer possible medical breakthroughs and are slated for disposal.



Stem cell research breakthrough

Just read this on Comcast.  Thought I would share.  Very intesting and exciting stuff!


http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/general/2007/11/20/Stem.Cells/?cvqh=itn_stemcell


 


I'm conflicted about stem cell research.
I'm for it as long as there are limitations with how they get the stem cells - do they come from aborted babies? That I would have a problem with.

I don't have cancer, but there is a genetic background in my family for several different types, as well as muscular dystrophy, so I'm all for stem cell research as long as there are guidelines that are followed and Obama or any other president needs to make those guidelines clear.
Govt backing of stem cell research

I want stem cell research to go forward to help those with devastating illnesses.  I do not want the embryos to be thrown away but rather put to good use.  I really do not care what people with the opposite position say.  This is my position and in my mind and heart and soul it is the right position.  I care more for those who are already alive.


In a democracy, the majority rules and the majority of Americans want stem cell research to move forward with government backing.  The debate, as far as I am concerned, is over.  I am for it, others are not.  Whether it is approved within the next two years or when finally a democratic president, who makes judgments and decisions fairly and based on what the people want and not what God has told him/her, it will be a reality within a few years.


Stem cell research has no proven cure rate.
I remember years and years ago when animal experimentation was being protested.  I saw this fellow who was a soap opera actor.  He was crying and crying because they wanted to stop torturing animals to find cures.  His son had diabetes and he said they were THIS CLOSE to finding a cure.  that had to be at least 25 years ago.  Millions of animals have died and there is no cure for diabetes.  So when does it end? 
Senator Frist Now Backs Funcing for Stem Cell Research

 Finally!  A neocon wants to save life AFTER it's born, too!


 July 29, 2005


Veering From Bush, Frist Backs Funding for Stem Cell Research


WASHINGTON, July 29 - In a break with President Bush, the Senate Republican leader, Bill Frist, has decided to support a bill to expand federal financing for embryonic stem cell research, a move that could push it closer to passage and force a confrontation with the White House, which is threatening to veto the measure.

Mr. Frist, a heart-lung transplant surgeon who said last month that he did not back expanding financing " P nonetheless.< bill the supports he work, for financing taxpayer on limits strict placed which policy, four-year-old Bush?s Mr. altering about reservations had while that said He speech. Senate lengthy a in morning this decision his announced juncture,? at>

"While human embryonic stem cell research is still at a very early stage, the limitations put in place in 2001 will, over time, slow our ability to bring potential new treatments for certain diseases," Mr. Frist said. "Therefore, I believe the president's policy should be modified."


His speech received the approval of Democrats as well as Republicans.


"I admire the majority leader for doing this," Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader and Democrat of Nevada, said immediately after the speech. He and Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said Mr. Frist's stance would give hope to people everywhere.


Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, contending they were discussing "the difference between life and death," said of Mr. Frist, "I believe the speech that he has just made on the Senate floor is the most important speech made this year, and perhaps the most important speech made in years."


He added: "This is a speech that will reverberate around the world, including at the White House."


Scott McClellan, Mr. Bush's chief spokesman, said Mr. Frist had told Mr. Bush in advance notice of his planned announcement. "The president said, "You've got to vote your conscience," Mr. McClellan said, according to The Associated Press.


"The president's made his position clear," Mr. McClellan said when asked if Mr. Bush would veto a pending bill that would liberalize federal support for stem cell research, The A.P. reported. "There is a principle involved here from the president's standpoint when it comes to issues of life."


Mr. Frist's move will undoubtedly change the political landscape in the debate over embryonic stem cell research, one of the thorniest moral issues to come before Congress. The chief House sponsor of the bill, Representative Michael N. Castle, Republican of Delaware, said, "His support is of huge significance."


The stem cell bill has passed the House but is stalled in the Senate, where competing measures are also under consideration. Because Mr. Frist's colleagues look to him for advice on medical matters, his support for the bill could break the Senate logjam. It could also give undecided Republicans political license to back the legislation, which is already close to having the votes it needs to pass the Senate.


The move could also have implications for Mr. Frist's political future. The senator is widely considered a potential candidate for the presidency in 2008, and supporting an expansion of the policy will put him at odds not only with the White House but also with Christian conservatives, whose support he will need in the race for the Republican nomination. But the decision could also help him win support among centrists.


"I am pro-life," Mr. Frist said in the speech, arguing that he could reconcile his support for the science with his own Christian faith. "I believe human life begins at conception."


But at the same time, he said, "I also believe that embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported."


Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group, said today in a statement that Senator Frist's decision was "very disappointing but not a surprise," given the senator's previous testimonies advocating stem cell research.


"As a heart surgeon who knows that adult stem cells are already making huge progress in treating heart disease in humans, it is unfortunate that Sen. Frist would capitulate to the biotech industry," Mr. Perkins said. "Thankfully, the White House has forcefully promised to hold the ethical line and veto any legislation that would expand the president's current policy."


Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, also objected to Mr. Frist's decision and alluded to its political impact. "Senator Frist cannot have it both ways," he said, according to The A.P. "He cannot be pro-life and pro-embryonic stem cell funding. Nor can he turn around and expect widespread endorsement from the pro-life community if he should decide to run for president in 2008."


Backers of the research were elated. "This is critically important," said Larry Soler, a lobbyist for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. "The Senate majority leader, who is also a physician, is confirming the real potential of embryonic stem cell research and the need to expand the policy."


Mr. Frist, who was instrumental in persuading President Bush to open the door to the research four years ago, has been under pressure from all sides of the stem cell debate. Some of his fellow Senate Republicans, including Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Mr. Specter, who is the lead Senate sponsor of the House bill, have been pressing him to bring up the measure for consideration.


"I know how he has wrestled with this issue and how conscientious he is in his judgment," Mr. Specter said today. "His comments will reverberate far and wide."


But with President Bush vowing to veto it - it would be his first veto - other Republicans have been pushing alternatives that could peel support away from the House bill.


Last week Mr. Castle accused the White House and Mr. Frist of "doing everything in their power to deflect votes away from" the bill. On Thursday night, Mr. Castle said he had written a letter to Mr. Frist just that morning urging him to support the measure. "His support of this makes it the dominant bill," he said.


Despite Mr. Frist's speech, a vote on the bill is not likely to occur before September because the Congress is scheduled to adjourn this weekend for the August recess.


With proponents of the various alternatives unable to agree on when and how to bring them up for consideration, Mr. Frist says he will continue to work to bring up all the bills, so that senators can have a "serious and thoughtful debate."


Human embryonic stem cells are considered by scientists to be the building blocks of a new field of regenerative medicine. The cells, extracted from human embryos, have the potential to grow into any type of tissue in the body, and advocates for patients believe they hold the potential for treatments and cures for a range of diseases, from juvenile diabetes to Alzheimer's disease.


"Embryonic stem cells uniquely hold some promise for specific cures that adult stem cells just cannot provide," Mr. Frist said.


But the cells cannot be obtained without destroying human embryos, which opponents of the research say is tantamount to murder. "An embryo is nascent human life," Mr. Frist said in his speech, adding: "This position is consistent with my faith. But, to me, it isn't just a matter of faith. It's a fact of science."


On Aug. 9, 2001, in the first prime-time speech of his presidency, Mr. Bush struck a compromise: he said the government would pay only for research on stem cell colonies, or lines, created by that date, so that the work would involve only those embryos "where the life or death decision has already been made."


The House-passed bill would expand that policy by allowing research on stem cell lines extracted from frozen embryos, left over from fertility treatments, that would otherwise be discarded. Mr. Castle has said he believes the bill meets the president's guidelines because the couples creating the embryos have made the decision to destroy them.


In his speech, Mr. Frist seemed to adopt that line of reasoning, harking back to a set of principles he articulated in July 2001, before the president made his announcement, in which he proposed restricting the number of stem cell lines without a specific cutoff date. At the time, he said the government should pay for research only on those embryos "that would otherwise be discarded" and today he similarly supported studying only those "destined, with 100 percent certainty, to be destroyed."


Moreover, he said, "Such funding should be provided only within a comprehensive system of federal oversight."


After Mr. Bush made his 2001 announcement, it was believed that as many as 78 lines would be eligible for federal money. "That has proven not to be the case," Mr. Frist said. "Today, only 22 lines are eligible."


But, Mr. Frist says the Castle bill has shortcomings. He says it "lacks a strong ethical and scientific oversight mechanism," does not prohibit financial incentives between fertility clinics and patients, and does not specify whether the patients or the clinic staff have a say over whether embryos are discarded. He also says the bill "would constrain the ability of policy makers to make adjustments in the future."


Mr. Frist also says he supports some of the alternative measures, including bills that would promote research on so-called adult stem cells and research into unproven methods of extracting stem cells without destroying human embryos.


"Cure today may be just a theory, a hope, a dream," he said in conclusion today. "But the promise is powerful enough that I believe this research deserves our increased energy and focus. Embryonic stem cell research must be supported. It's time for a modified policy - the right policy for this moment in time."


Jennifer Bayot and Shadi Rahimi contributed reporting for this article from New York.





Michael J Fox admits he did not read the Missouri stem cell initiate. sm
This is exactly what I am talking about.  He has no idea what the stem cell initiative says about cloning.  But he is *quite sure* he would support it anyway.  Frightening.
Is the new legislature talking about stem cells of aborted fetuses?...sm
Because I am a pro-life liberal. I don't rattle any cages about what other people chose to do with their bodies because I believe 90% of the time a person who choses to abort will not be a good parent anyway and will probably do worse to the child once outside the womb. Yes, I do believe a horid life can be worse than death before full development. The child will more than likely be in abject poverty, social and mental deprivation, and on and on. But more importantly, I think people should be more responsible to not get pregnant in the first place when they don't want kids.

Having said all that we do live in an age where abortion is legal, and like I said if they are going to dispose of the fetus anyway, why not use the stem cells to give hope to a Christopher Reeves of the world.

Now, when you talk about cloning and reproducing parts and such I'm not agreeing with that. That's taking it too far IMHO.
Stem Cells - I can't think of one reason why they should throw the extra cells away, rather than sav
x
This all started because you said
*founded on Christian principles*....now I see you've moderated it to *God* Yes, they were *Deists* not Christians as you said in your first post...big difference....not that you will even admit there is a difference.


First of all, GP started this particular

thread, so she is not responding to anybody's attacks in this case.  Second, I think it is very mean to attack someone's religious beliefs.  Third, GP indicated that George Bush said that God told him to be president.  If I remember correctly, George Bush said that God told him to RUN for president.  So he did.  SP did not say that God doing the right thing would put McCain in the White House, nor did she imply it.  She said that she has faith that God will do the right thing and that his will for the country will be done.  Imagine, two Christian practicing their faith and treating God as if he actually exists.


Guess what?  God told me to call my sister last weekend.  Am I delusional too?  Or is it only delusional to think God speaks and leads if you are national figure?  


That is not how it started...
This has been going on for quite a while on the Politics forum. The rabid right-wing Christians have been forcing their beliefs on all of us for months and months and months. They have quoted scripture and told us that anyone who does not believe as they do is destined to burn in eternal fire. They have no respect for people of other religions. I was born into a Jewish family, and I have never felt animosity towards any Christian until recently. These posters have forever changed my opinion of Christianity and not for the better!
For nm-So have I. Plus 2 others started lately.
Does that give you a hint?
Don't get that started here......... sm
That is rude and totally uncalled for.
Looks like you started it
When you tried to accuse W of having a double digit and O of triple.

The fact of the matter is you don't know what GW's score is or O's for that matter. I've been on several sites pro and con for both sides. I've read that people were trying to pass a lie that GWs was 99 (looks like you want to believe the lie too). However there are many sites that say he scored around 129. They also said that some people want to believe O's is higher, but according to his SAT/LSAT is ranges in the 115-120. However, it also says that he won't release his SAT score. Imagine that....Obama not releasing information? Say it ain't so Joe.

The fact is before you start accusing someone of a low or high IQ score maybe you should research a little more. We get it, by your posts you don't like GW. Don't know many who do (including myself), but I don't lie to make one look bad.
Don't even get me started.
Double standards, contradicting, arrogance, etc. How much money does that jet cost for promotional tours? I thought stimulus passed.
You don't even know who I am, I only started coming here.
x
No, it started with a real
when they couldn't find anything, they dug up the sex scandal. Clinton was investigated for 7 years; can you name a high-level Clinton administartion official indicted? I know Clinton can't practice law; he was also impeached...what's your point?


So if WWWIII is to be started to
we're just supposed to sit down and shut up? Excuse me, but I was raised Catholic and I do not support this at ALL. Bush does NOT have a direct line to God Almighty.
No, not at all...it started on the far left rag...
the dailykos. That is where it broke. And then the rest of the far left picked it up and ran with it.

I was the first to congratulate Obama on his renouncing of the behavior. But even with him saying that, his supporters continue the salvos at Palin's family. Big time Dem pundits on TV still taking shots at her. Blogs still taking shots at her. Posters on this board still taking shots at her. Now you take people who are not committed yet, they see this happening, and you are left with only two conclusions...either Barack was very serious and meant what he said (which I believe) and his followers and pundits and the media are still going to attack regardless; or that he just made that statement to take the political high road while all the time in the background he is saying "sic her." It has to be one of the two...but either way, if his supporters and big Dem pundits continue the attack it reflects badly on his candidacy. I realize that he cannot control what people do...but one would think they would heed what he says (they claim to believe everything he says) and just lay off...but, to each his own.
Let's just get some more rumors started.
x
you are wishing him out before he has even started?
I understand being cautious, but can't you give the guy a chance? I gave Bush a chance even though I didn't vote for him. I'm not happy with how it turned out, but I wasn't wishing him out of office before he even started.
If your son joined after the war started...
I would be interested to know what HE thinks. There is no draft. No need to send your son to die. Again, you and I disagree on whether or not we should be there. I think that it is silly to think that Hussein was not a threat, or at the very least, a future serious threat. I think our biggest mistake was not taking him out and getting this all done the first time.
Judy started it.......
then I just got sucked in. It was like watching the toilet overflow. What can you do?
I know the Californias started
For awhile, I thought I was in California with all the license plates and Hawaiian shirts everywhere.  Got tired of all the traffic too.
they became Medquist! I started sm
wit the Detroit office of TL in 1981 and worked for the company until February of 2006. Like you I made big bucks but after the change to the name Medquist and subsequent yearly changes like everyone else I left. At one time I workekd directly for John Donoho out of the Feasterville office and couldn't have been happier. My whole career with them was spent working at home but hiring MTs and supervising in the area that I live in. I miss the way it use to be. I was 50 years old when I left them and I truly remember a time when they valued their employees, gave bonuses, raises and great Christmas gifts. Its too bad MTs starting out now don't have that type of experience. Yes you could write your own ticket even with TL. They would gladly give out a good raise to a person who had great quality and production and was loyal to the company. Very sad to see what they hve done.
Wrong. It may have started that way...
But once again has degenerated to immature name calling and personal attacks.
5 years old? well when do you think the war started?
who hid a fact there were no WMDs? and there WERE you just dont find the mass media reporting on them. ill find that link to if you would like me to if you want to deny there were ever any weapons found, and let me remind you how long did they have before we invaded to move the weapons?

No iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that was not why we went in now is it? was that said? We are attacking Iraq because they attacked us? NO, because they WOULD HAVE ATTACKED US as soon as they could.

as most everyone in that link agreed...
5 years old? well when do you think the war started?
who hid a fact there were no WMDs? and there WERE you just dont find the mass media reporting on them. ill find that link to if you would like me to if you want to deny there were ever any weapons found, and let me remind you how long did they have before we invaded to move the weapons?

No iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that was not why we went in now is it? was that said? We are attacking Iraq because they attacked us? NO, because they WOULD HAVE ATTACKED US as soon as they could.

as most everyone in that link agreed...
Just remember that you started this one...LOL..(sm)

First of all, I am a firm believer in evolution.  From what we know from archeologists, man started in small groups and gradually formed larger and larger groups, forming communities.  We do know that they worked collectively for the benefit of the community, some hunting, some preparing meals, etc.  So, I think there is a large element in society that says we choose what is "right" for the sake of the good/success/survival of the community. 


I know that most will say the Bible, and I think the Bible did play a role, but not the only role.  This is evidenced by the fact that all cultures have gone through this evolution of determining what is right and wrong.  Consider the tribe in the middle of nowhere (and yeah there are still a few) that has had no contact with ANY religion.  Scientists have studied cases like this before and have found that even they have a set of "rules" that they go by, and these rules were based on what would or would not benefit their community. 


I think the most important thing though is that the rules of right and wrong are constantly changing as we evolve.  If you asked your standard white christian lady in the 1800s if it was okay to beat the slave out back, the answer would have most likely been yes.  Ask the same question today of anyone and the answer should be no. 


So, I think evolution and probably instinct for self preservation are the key factors.


This probably all started with a 7-yo misunderstanding his teacher.nm

The flames have begun. They were started by you.

All you've done since you've come here is flame and insult.  If you'd treat people with some respect and dignity, you'd be surprised at how quickly it would come back at you.  Instead, you're treated the way you treat others.  How does it feel?


I cited examples of true things that happened.  Unlike you, I didn't bash or negatively judge one single poster on this board. 


Yes, I call them CONS, as in NEOCONS.  I don't know how anyone who believes they are a Republican can worship someone as they do Bush who is the complete antithesis of anything REPUBLICAN.


Since you continue to show your contempt for the monitor and the monitor's rules, how about you leave me alone on this board, and I'll return the favor?


Nah, you aren't capable of doing that, are you?  Well, keep flaming away.  I'll take the higher road which you've never traveled and ignore you.


One more thing:  Every single thing I posted is the truth.  Your claim that it's hysteria without any facts to back it up merely proves the negative value you contribute to this board.


If you're referring to my health situation as hysteria, then until you've walked in my shoes and know what I've been through in the last month healthwise, you have no basis or right to claim that anything I said is hysteria.  Having no compassion for someone who's very ill is clearly a CON point of view, so dressing yourself up in a costume representing another political party isn't fooling anyone.  You may be a little higher up on the food chain than I am, maybe insulated with a husband who provides you with health insurance and additional income, but America has become a hungry shark where only the strongest survive, the weakest are disposable, and the same thing could happen to you. 


Maybe not but our future could have started 5-1/2 years ago.

Bush's policies in all areas are making it look pretty bleak.


You started the condescending, Teddy...
read your post again. It was very condescending. You talked down to me, and I thought it might be fun to respond from down there where you put me. You talked down to me and you were rude. You know it and I know it. I was just giving it back to you. Now that we are past the kid stuff, could you please answer my question, and enlighten me as to what the *big picture* was that I missed and leave the condescending attitude out of it. As to being a dumb condescending Polack...your words, and not mine...it is so hilarious to me the parallels. My guy is of Polack/German ancestry and he is standing behind me as I type, and we are enjoying a good laugh, so thank you from this Choctaw/Cherokee/Irish gal and her dumb Polack guy. LOL. We are looking forward to the *big picture* point, though.
Not to get a fight started...just an observation...
that little twinge is probably be the Holy Spirit and you would be well served to maybe listen to it....? Or perhaps you think not listening to the twinge in favor of listening to John Edwards is the better path.

God bless!
WHy don't we check and see which administration started...
borrowing money from China. The Clinton administration took huge amounts of money from Chinese...remember the scandal? Ahem.
I did NOT imply that his camp started it....
in fact, I said the dailykos started it, and unless his camp blogs there and I don't know it, that is exactly what I meant. What I said is that when he asks his supporters not to continue and they persist, it reflects negatively on his candidacy in some people's minds...and that is all I said. I also said that I believe him and that he was sincere...and that his supporters are ignoring him. However, I have heard others suggest that he is saying that publically but behind the scenes his camp is fanning it. I did not say it, and I do not personally think it, and would not unless it was proven. All I am saying is that some perceive it that way.
Thanks for the links. I started reading through them. sm
I started with the first link and only got partially through Palin's. Hope to go back later to finish it and read the other candidates too.

One of the things I read it said where her husband worked for BP. They had said that he would quit if she were elected gov. but after she was they backed out of that and stated that since he was not management it wouldn't matter or wouldn't be a conflict. But wouldn't it be? He works for an oil company, she is for the drilling of oil, etc. To me that is still a big conflict.

Also, why is one thing saying he quit and another thing saying he still works there part-time. This link from above was a direct quote from them I believe.

Anyway, again, thanks for the links. Hope to read up some more tonight.
LOL!. That is where the problem started. Mexicans
nm
All you have to do is look at the figures and when they started declining....
and 20 months is about right. This democratically controlled congress sat on their hands even when Greenspan was telling them they needed to tighten up on Freddie and fannie. Instead they made their hold on the housing market even bigger.
They failed to act to do anything about rising cost of fuel, went on freaking vacation rather than vote on energy bill. Not only do we need to vote in McCain/Palin, we need to clean up that viper pit that is Congress and finally start acting like adults and work together to clean up that viper pit. Only one candidate is talking about that, and it isn't yours.
Now that you mention it....here are links to get you started.
Ignore it if you like...but you know, the duck thing...if it quacks like a duck.

All of these things can be independently verified. The policies that he is proposing are socialism 101...redistribution of wealth. The "people" of Cuba has not done so well after the Castro/Che Guevara revolution, now have they?

http://politicalcenter.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/04/1466498-obamas-marxist-revolution-must-be-rejected-

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/07/what_barack_obama_learned_from.html

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-international-socialist-connections

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/08/31/america/France-Socialists-Obama.php

http://www.acton.org/commentary/443_marxist_roots_of_black_liberation_theology.php

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2008/08/michelle_obama_4.php

http://www.tysknews.com/Articles/dnc_corruption.htm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75101


I wouldn't even get started in that direction
Don't even get into donning church talk or we can bring up a whole lot of information about Obama and his ties to the Muslim church and then Rev. Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, Larry Sinclair, and the multitude of other liasions and then right before him getting into politics he just happens to swtich. If you open up a can of worms be prepared to have the mud slung back at ya.
The "revolution" started as socialism....
and as socialism generally does, rolls into communism and dictatorship. Che Guevara introduced communism to Castro. Che Guevara...far left Marxist. The one whose pic is in an Obama campaign office. Obama studied and taught Alinsky method of organizing...Alinsky = communist. See a common socialist/communist thread here?

Who is the REAL Barack Obama? Does anyone really know?
He quit after he started his campaign
has fallen off the wagon several times during the campaign, just FYI.
That is when this started, back during the primaries

The first lawsuit that is still ongoing was filed by a lifelong democrat attorney in Pennsylvania.


But yes, I agree with you on that last point. 


Not so fast Mrs. M.....Democrats started
nm
Unfortunately changed started 8 years ago. n/m
x
my job has already been affected since this stuff started -
I am already down about $1500 a month in the last 3 months. I know what is going to happen - but I don't think I should have to keep helping bail other people out!

Is anybody helping bail me out because I cannot pay my mortgage this month? No - because I was responsible... is anybody helping me out because I can't put gas in my car this week? No, they are not. Is anybody helping me out with the power bill, the water bill - are they going to pay my cable so that it is not turned off this week? No they are not.

It is time to stop bailing these companies out and let them figure out how to straighten their messes out on their own.

We are just giving these companies more money for more of the same and I for one am tired of doing it.