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

THANK YOU!! Finally, a voice of reason!

Posted By: (sm) on 2008-11-16
In Reply to: Gross. - sm

My head has been spinning so much over the abc comment about not starting to live until after the fourth month, or whatever it was she said, that I was just too baffled to address this. And then going on in another post about a life is a life when talking about a frog and a ferret . . . apparently totally missing the point of that post.

I believe, however, that a lot of abortions occur because the male involved does not want a child. I am not sticking up, necessarily, for the females who still have this done, but, IMHO, we STILL live in a male-dominated world and that is a huge reason for why this has become legal. I think that oftentimes it is young, scared GIRLS who subject themselves and their fetuses to this, in order to please their "man". I think that in many cases, if the female in question felt that she would have support, either from the father or from her family, she might make a different choice. Not excusing it, just saying . . . IMHO. Heck, I've seen it, and more than once.


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

Thank you - the voice of reason (nm)
x
Piglet, thank you for your voice of reason
It's very refreshing. Thanks again...
A voice of reason and balance.
nm
Right on - another voice of reason and truth (no message)
x
the voice of reason! completely true. nm
x
Yeah, and you're ALWAYS the voice of reason
Oh brother!
Jon, our voice
Isn't it amazing the length that people that have such closed minds will go to, a matter of loss of control.
another voice from
the "you are on your own party" that the next prez, Barack, talked about in his wonderful acceptance speech. 
In the voice of........

Rodney King "why can't we all just get along." Name-calling serves no purpose. Can't we just refer to ourselves as Americans. Can we agree to disagree? I see a bright future. I am sorry your future is so dark and meaningless.


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.



 


So because you don't like her voice and demeanor? (sm)
You aren't voting for your high school class president, or best personality for your year book. You need to base your decision on facts.
that voice is like a needle in the eye!...

Aw, the voice of wisdom.
x
no, it's not about Voice recognition, it's about
using medical computerized charts and "check boxes" if you will... cutting out the work of the MT by using generic charts and filling in information... at least where i come from
I am all for EMR, just not voice recognition -
EMR is just a way of keeping up with your records and not having all the paper at a bunch of different doctor's office.

Voice recognition on the other hand is what is killing our profession. Of course, the hospital I just left implemented voice recognition the week I left and the feedback from my ex-coworkers so far is that the Transcriptionist hate the system, the doctors hate the system, and they are already thinking about having to change it --- and they actually only bought the initial license for 10 of the 200 doctors to use the voice (and they put the good American doctors in that 10, of course).

I don't think that transcription will totally be replaced by computers in my lifetime at least, but I do think as technology advances, transcription will face even more changes.

We all have to keep in mind that typing these reports is based on an antiquated concept and that as the doctors are getting younger and younger, it means they have grown up using all this new technology that our older doctors did not have and are resistant to.

Like it or not, Obama or not, times are achangin'!
Thanks Dem for the lone sane voice here
Thanks for affirming that the *genocide* comment was was WAYYY off base. There is a difference between you and the far leftists here, and the gap widens between the two on a daily basis.

Ann Coulter is a very vocal (sometimes over vocal) conservative. Many of us don't always agree with her approach or tactics. However, Ann says what she feels, and her free speech is as protected as anyone elses. Now, when Michael Moore says the same things in the same way and in the same style he's lauded here. So, to say that people like Ann are uniquely on the right is completely untruthful.

Ann is out to make money, of course! So is Michael Moore, and to a large extent so are the 9/11 widows. I don't minimize their loss, but I think exploiting their husband's memory for money politics, and 15 minutes of fame is pretty low.

Jewish Voice For Peace
It is Jewish Voice For Peace.Org, not Jewish Voices For Peace as I previously posted.  Sorry.
Another voice in Utah last week.

 This is quite long but if you just read the the last lines, the no mores, it will move you. While our **leaders** were out there borrowing rhetoric from WWII and not from the good guys either, the mayor of Salt Lake City had some words of his own to share.


I have not been on the boards much lately because I just don't know what to say. There is so much that is so wrong that I am completely overwhelmed, so much death, so much torture, so much pain, so much greed, so much **depraved indifference***, so much deceit and on and on and on.   I am grateful there are still those who can put words together and produce a piece of coherent outrage. The mayor of Salt Lake is one of them.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0902-03.htm


AAMT was supposed to be our voice
in Washington. I finally dropped my membership in disgust at their lack of action. All I saw them do was puff themselves up, making up all sorts of education and standards wish lists that have never been applied to the field which certainly would have helped keep work on shore and our wages more in line with our knowledge and services to the medical community.
More like a voice of scare tactics.
XX
Bravo. A voice of compassion and

wisdom.  Not often seen herewithin.


 


The MSM has been a liberal political voice for years
what's the beef about. What does freedom of the press have to do with foreign countries? That argument withstanding the military has published articles for years in foreign newspapers. It happened after WWII and wars previous and subsequent to that, but just because this administration is doing it it's all of the sudden a problem.
Thank you...nice to have a second voice crying out in the wilderness...
just put on your kevlar and come right on in. :)
Do not patronize. Bristol has no real voice here.
She, her baby and her husband be living their private lives out on the alter of sacrifice for the sake of SP, regardless of how the news got out there. It's out now and mom's ambitions played just as much role in this tragedy as any rumor factory you will repeatedly try to use as a scapegoat. No need to beat this dead horse and repeat youself a thousand times tonight. The media will not show restraint and the internet, even less. We will all have our bellies full of this as the convention grinds on. One thing is certain, Palin just rained on her own parade.
I cannot STAND to listen to that woman's voice!
Any one else feel this way about Palin?  She irks me.
"Our opposition.." You are the voice of the liberal board?
Guffaw.
Obama's voice "irks" me. Every time I hear him, I
nm
voice mail doesn't cost anything - but I hate it
I cannot stand having to pick up my phone, hear a beep, beep, beep, then dial into the phone company, then dial my telephone number, then dial my password. Too much of a hassle for me. So it was free but what a waste of my time.
Voice mail doesn't cost anything? Crapola. My
phone company must be run by dems! I pay to have my phone company's voice mail, line item every month of my bundled services.

I'm not so lazy it bothers me to dial in and get my messages. Public mindset says, "give it to me without any effort, any cost to me, and let others pay for it." Private sector mindset says, "let me dial in, I'll pay for it, and when I can't, I'll discontinue the service."

No hassle to me says I can delete what I don't want to hear. Picking up a handset is better than picking up a welfare check.


Couple of months back, I was the lone voice on this issue.
nm
Did anyone notice the voice doesn't match the video? How does that make her (sm)
a witch hunter? So ridiculous. The voice didn't even match the minister who was praying with her.
Finally

More and more are finally *getting it*.


The Governing Board of the
National Council of Churches
USA (
http://tinyurl.com/7ptbk)
invites you to join them in
this call to pursue peace and
justice in Iraq. You can sign
the statement at:
http://tinyurl.com/77lz7 .


 


Okay, I finally get it...
you don't want to pay a high insurance premium. You could find better uses for that money. But is it fair to tax everyone, including all those people who will use the entitlement because they apparently cannot or will not insure their own children, people like me who do struggle to pay health insurance premiums but manage to do so, is it fair to cut into our incomes even more so that it is more comfortable for you to not have to worry about a $1000 premium? You see where I am going with this? Because we, the taxpayers, including you, at all levels, are going to pay for this. Not a cigarette tax because it won't come close to covering the expansion. How is that fair? It is never going to be completely fair to all of us...and you say I keep saying $80K...you keep saying $1000 a month. There are policies that are more affordable than that. Might not be the cadillac of policies, but it would be coverage. It is about choices. Let's drop all social programs EXCEPT free health care for ALL American children (and apparently illegals as it does not seem to bother you they are included). Fund that first, DO NOT raise taxes, ANY taxes. After childrens health care is covered, whatever is left give to other entitlements. Again, what is wrong with tax cuts for those who pay their insurance premiums? Oh wait, I'm sorry. You don't want a tax cut and still pay the premium. You want it free. But again...it is not FREE. Every taxpayer in America will have to pay for it. Frankly, I think it is just as important to fix social security so that the next bunch of elderly won't be destitute...but hey, at least some of you can go on a vacation. SIGH.
Finally, but she has.....
no dignity, or honor, or shame, or anything. I think she finally listened to the people and did the math (the real math that is, not her "fuzzy" figures counting certain states votes (the ones that voted for her) but not others (the ones who voted for Obama). How does she think I feel knowing that she is out there saying my vote doesn't count because my state was for Obama. How does she think the people who voted for her in those states feel when she says their vote is not important enough because they are in Caucus' so their vote should not count. I was never in support of her as I'm sure if you've read previous posts of mine. I think there are so many many other qualified women I would have loved to see run for the white house and I think they would have done a much better job than her. She's just a really nasty person in both her political and personal life. I for one like living in America. I do not want the whole world to be one nation, one country which is what she is pushing for. I want to live in America and keep my job here. She is for sending jobs overseas. Whatever the other candidates are about, she is by far the worst of them. Well actually her and McCain are equal in "evil-ity". That's why I will write in Ron Pauls name at election time (if I can).
Finally...........
I knew there had to be someone out there who actually does their homework. He definitely has associations with some very worrisome and dangerous bed fellows but hey, some are just so anti-Republican they will vote for anything the democrats throw out there. I'm not a McCain supporter either, but Obama's past voting and lack thereof speaks for itself. He avoids invitations to speak wherever he thinks he may be called out on the carpet so to speak and can't wiggle and squirm his way through the answers and all that calm appearance will be put to test. He'll fold like a cheap tent.
ahh . . . someone finally got it.

xx


 


By Joe somebody's finally got it.
X
Finally

 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYdk26ezVio


 


 


You know he has finally come to his
the most watched news cable channel and the only fair and balanced, he is moving to FOX!
finally got it...somehow. n/m
x
W finally impeachable?
Hopefully this will lead to the impeachment of W
Below 40%, OMG, America is finally *getting it*

September 10th, 2005 11:57 am
President's Approval Rating Dips Below 40



By Will Lester / Associated Press


President Bush's job approval has dipped below 40 percent for the first time in the AP-Ipsos poll, reflecting widespread doubts about his handling of gasoline prices and the response to Hurricane Katrina.


Nearly four years after Bush's job approval soared into the 80s after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Bush was at 39 percent job approval in an AP-Ipsos poll taken this week. That's the lowest since the the poll was started in December 2003.


The public's view of the nation's direction has grown increasingly negative as well, with nearly two-thirds now saying the country is heading down the wrong track.


Finally - someone who agrees with me
I have read about her & Bill since before they ever got into the white house the first time. Their lives before they met each other, her career in the Rose Law Firm, all the "mysterious circumstances" that happened to people who disagreed with them, etc. They are both a disgrace to the Democratic party and they are tearing it apart for their own personal gain. Sure Barack is not perfect, sure he's going to push unneeded programs that will cost us money, sure I expect our taxes to be higher with him, however, she will do the same thing and worse. She wants a one-world government and she wants to be in charge of it all. I've read that she is pushing for Canada, US & Mexico to be one country and change our currency, among other things. As you said she is an evil self serving person. She cares nothing about people like me. The thing I like about Obama is his public service has shown he cares about people like me. He wants the US to be a great country and he is going to help people like me, and getting the economy back on track and our troops home. I don't trust Clinton because her voting record and the work she has done in her political career has served herself alone. Not the american people. I'm not voting for Clinton because I don't want 4 years of the same thing we had when B Clinton was in. It was a very dark time for our country and all you have to do is read to know that our taxes were the highest EVER when they were in. I don't want to go back to that and our country will be torn apart if she gets in. It just makes me very nervous to know that she is going to try something to just "place" herself in the position because she believes it is hers and nobody elses. She feels she should just be "anointed" into the position, like the Queen of England. On one other note...I could care less about J. Wright and that other minister (luckily a lot of other people feel the same). The minister of a church that he used to go to is not going to affect his position as president, however, the way Hillary has voted in the past, and the dirty money she has received, and the lobbyists who support her will affect her position if she was to be president. Just is a very scary time right now until the convention is finally done with. I'm also very interested to hear some debates between Obama and McCain. What's really getting to her that I laugh at is that it is going to be very very easy to win over McCain and she sees her chance slipping through her fingers. What she isn't realizing though is that if she was the nominee McCain would crush her because of her positions and background. Even the polls have come out and said that Obama is clearly winning over McCain but McCain is winning (or at least neck-n-neck) with Hillary.
Finally!! Someone with brains!!

Sambo's ranting and raving backed up with her "so called" facts are actually quite laughable. And then......to top it off - we have the whiners who proclaim "she backs it up with facts." HA!! Sofa King Wee Todd id!!!! Baaa, baaaa - the sheep must follow. Amazing, absolutely amazing. Watching that mass - pizza the hut Sambo - go gurgling out into space in a blaze of fire just made my day. To you, my most sincerest respect.


HOORAY!!!! Someone finally got it.
x
Well, thanks for finally understanding what I was saying.
Hitler maybe, but I'd have to think about that one for a while.
Oh, did you finally get out of bed this morning? nm
x
OH NO! I think we finally agree on something!


RNC is finally saying something about the bailouts. sm
RNC Draft Rips Bush's Bailouts.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/30/rnc-pushes-unprecedented-criticism-of-bailouts/
Well, you finally got one point right......... sm
God will judge you and your worthiness for admission to heaven..... And unless you are standing before Him clothed in the righteousness of Jesus, then you will be found sorely lacking.
My apologies..... you DO get it..... finally, someone
99