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

Why I am relevant...very simple!

Posted By: TLD on 2006-12-16
In Reply to:

This is the liberal board and I am a liberal.  You are not.  You and your playmates enjoy degrading the liberal posters on this board.  It gets really tiresome.  You and your bully friends need to find a different group to pick on, as it obviously brings you very much perverted pleasure as you CANNOT seem to stop and you REFUSE to quit bashing the posters on this board even when asked to by the moderator multiple times.


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

Closing Gitmo is not as simple as simple
nm
simple exercise or simple mind
ever heard of thyroid dysfunction, ever heard of drugs that cause weight gain (such as steroids) or any other cause for obesity? Don't be so self-righteous.
How is this relevant? sm
So everyone knows he is an alcoholic.  Yes, he is. And what is your point?  I swear I don't know.  Ted Kennedy is an alcoholic.  So what? 
How is this relevant?...nm
nm
I believe it is relevant....I don't want someone with zero...
integrity in the white house either. John McCain's temper or the lack thereof has never resulted in bad decisions. It is ridiculous to assume because he got angry and said the F word disqualifies him. YOu might as well disqualify the entire Armed Forces.

He is not as dangerous as Barack Obama who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy...who wants to sit down and chat with terrorist nations...and would be crippled without Joe Biden.

No thanks.
That's not even relevant...(nm)
x
I hardly think it's relevant to ...(sm)

go back 60 years in history.  Times were different then, the mind set was different, so it is not possible to have any kind of logical comparrison.  However, if he were still around now doing that, then yes, he would be a war criminal.


The amazing thing is that you guys sound just like the extreme jihadists to me.  All you want to do is destroy others and spread your religion.  And for what reasons?  Fear and revenge.  You like to talk about being religious, just like the jihadists, but when it comes to something like revenge or torture, you put that religion aside --that same religion you would have everyone else believe is your life -- and you take your revenge and put it in a box with a bright pink bow to sell it.  That is what I call a blight on humanity.


Who are you and do you have anything relevant to add to the posts?
If not, I suggest you HaHaHa yourself somewhere else.
the reason that I think it is relevant--
and I am sure that you will attack me for this--is that I seem to hear a lot of people saying that Obama is going to do this and that for them (money issues, etc.). So, I am afraid that if everyone puts their faith in him, our freedoms are going to slip away. More gun control, more government power over our money and our health care, etc. Eventually, we will become vulnerable. If you disagree, that is fine. It was just food for thought.
what is for you a relevant source?...nm
nm
The most relevant portion of the article was cut out. This is the
Attendees of Bilderberg include central bankers, defense experts, mass media press barons, government ministers, prime ministers, royalty, international financiers and political leaders from Europe and North America.

Some of the Western world's leading financiers and foreign policy strategists attend Bilderberg. Donald Rumsfeld is an active Bilderberger, as is Peter Sutherland from Ireland, a former European Union commissioner and chairman of Goldman Sachs and of British Petroleum. Rumsfeld and Sutherland served together in 2000 on the board of the Swedish/Swiss engineering company ABB. Former U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary and former World Bank head Paul Wolfowitz is also a member. The group's current chairman is Etienne Davignon, the Belgian businessman and politician.


[edit] Mainstream Criticism
Critics claim the Bilderberg Group promotes the careers of politicians whose views are representative of the interests of multinational corporations, at the expense of democracy.[8] Journalists who have been invited to attend the Bilderberg Conference as observers have discounted these claims, calling the conference "not much different from a seminar or a conference organized by an upscale NGO"[9] with "nothing different except for the influence of the participants."[10]


[edit] Conspiracy Theories
The group's secrecy and its connections to power elites encourages speculation and mistrust by such groups or individuals who believe that the group is part of a conspiracy to create a New World Order. This is further encouraged by the frequent use of the term 'New World Order' by its members when referring to their ultimate goal of world integration. The group is frequently accused of secretive and nefarious world plots by groups such as the John Birch Society.[11] This thinking has progressively found acceptance within both elements of the populist movement and fringe politics. [12] According to investigative journalist Chip Berlet, the prominent origins of Bilderberger conspiracy theories can be traced to activist Phyllis Schlafly. [13]

Radio host Alex Jones claims the group intends to dissolve the sovereignty of the United States and other countries into a supra-national structure similar to the European Union. This accusation is also linked with theories asking for a merger of Canada with United States, hoping Canadian influence will be calming to American society and foreign policy.

From "The Hunt for Red Menace:" "The views on intractable godless communism expressed by [Fred] Schwarz were central themes in three other bestselling books which were used to mobilize support for the 1964 Goldwater campaign. The best known was Phyllis Schlafly's A Choice, Not an Echo which suggested a conspiracy theory in which the Republican Party was secretly controlled by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberger group, whose policies would pave the way for global communist conquest. Schlafly's husband Fred had been a lecturer at Schwartz's local Christian anti-communism Crusade conferences." [14]

Jonathan Duffy, writing in BBC News Online Magazine states "In the void created by such aloofness, an extraordinary conspiracy theory has grown up around the group that alleges the fate of the world is largely decided by Bilderberg."[15]

Denis Healey, a Bilderberg founder and former British Chancellor of the Exchequer, decries such theories. He was quoted by BBC News as saying "There's absolutely nothing in it. We never sought to reach a consensus on the big issues at Bilderberg. It's simply a place for discussion."[15]

Some popular media references to the group are in Fredrick Forsyth's novel "The Icon" where the group decides to undermine a nationalist Russian leader loosely modeled on Vladimir Putin (among others).In the movie Nixon by director Oliver Stone, Nixon, played by Anthony Hopkins blames "the cabal" for his defeat, Vietnam war and other things, as the edited portion of the Nixon tapes.

Bilderberg has been accused of having kingmaker power as prominent politicians are seen to attend the group before being elected while their political rivals do not attend. [16]


[edit] Meetings
1954 (May 29-31) at the Hotel DE Bilderberg in Oosterbeek, Netherlands
1955 (March 18-20) at the Hotellerie Du Bas-Breau in Barbizon, France
1955 (September 23-25) at the Grand Hotel Sonnenbichl in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, West Germany
1956 (May 11-13) at the Hotel Store Kro in Fredensborg, Denmark
1957 (February 15-17) at the King and Prince Hotel in St. Simons Island, Georgia, USA
1957 (October 4-6) at the Grand Hotel Palazzo della Fonte in Fiuggi, Italy
1958 (September 13-15) at the The Palace Hotel in Buxton, United Kingdom
1959 (September 18-20) at the Çinar Hotel in Yeþilköy, Istanbul, Turkey
1960 (May 28-29) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1961 (April 21-23) at the Manoir St. Castin in Lac-Beauport, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
1962 (May 18-20) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1963 (May 29-31) in Cannes, France
1964 (March 20-22) in Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
1965 (April 2-4) at the Villa d'Este in Cernobbio, Italy
1966 (March 25-27) at the Nassauer Hof Hotel Wiesbaden in Wiesbaden, West Germany
1967 (March 31-April 2) in Cambridge, United Kingdom
1968 (April 26-28) in Mont Tremblant, Quebec, Canada
1969 (May 9-11) at the Hotel Marienlyst in Helsingør, Denmark
1970 (April 17-19) at the Grand Hotel Quellenhof in Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
1971 (April 23-25) at the Woodstock Inn in Woodstock, Vermont, USA
1972 (April 21-23) at the LA Reserve di Knokke-Heist in Knokke, Belgium
1973 (May 11-13) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1974 (April 19-21) at the Hotel Mont d'Arbois in Megeve, France
1975 (April 22-24) at the Golden Dolphin Hotel in Çeþme, Ýzmir, Turkey
1976 no conference. The 1976 Bilderberg conference was planned for April at The Homestead in Hot Springs, Virginia, USA. Due to the ongoing Lockheed scandal involving Prince Bernhard at the time, it had to be cancelled.
1977 (April 22-24) at the Paramount Imperial Hotel in Torquay, United Kingdom
1978 (April 21-23) at the Chauncey Conference Center in Princeton, New Jersey, United States
1979 (April 27-29) at the Grand Hotel Sauerhof in Baden bei Wien, Austria
1980 (April 18-20) at the Dorint Sofitel Quellenhof Aachen in Aachen, West Germany
1981 (May 15-17) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1982 (May 14-16) at the Rica Park Hotel Sandefjord in Sandefjord, Norway
1983 (May 13-15) at the Château Montebello in Montebello, Quebec, Canada[17]
1984 (May 11-13) at the Grand Hotel Saltsjöbaden in Saltsjöbaden, Sweden
1985 (May 10-12) at the Doral Arrowwood Hotel in Rye Brook, New York, United States
1986 (April 25-27) at the Gleneagles Hotel in Gleneagles, Auchterarder, United Kingdom
1987 (April 24-26) at the Villa d'Este in Cernobbio, Italy
1988 (June 3-5) at the Interalpen-Hotel Tyrol in Telfs-Buchen, Austria
1989 (May 12-14) at the Gran Hotel de La Toja in Isla de La Toja, Spain
1990 (May 11-13) at the Harrison Conference Center in Glen Cove, New York, United States
1991 (June 6-9) at the Steigenberger Badischer Hof Hotel, Schlosshotel Bühlerhöhe in Bühl (Baden) in Baden-Baden, Germany
1992 (May 21-24) at the Royal Club Evian Hotel, Ermitage Hotel in Évian-les-Bains, France
1993 (April 22-25) at the Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel in Vouliagmeni, Greece
1994 (June 2-5) at the Kalastajatorppa Hotel in Helsinki, Finland
1995 (June 8-11) at the Palace Hotel in Bürgenstock, Nidwalden, Switzerland
1996 (May 30-June 2) at the CIBC Leadership Centre aka The Kingbridge Centre in King City, Canada
1997 (June 12-15) at the Pine Isle resort in Lake Lanier, Georgia, United States
1998 (May 14-17) at the Turnberry Hotel in Turnberry, United Kingdom
1999 (June 3-6) at the Caesar Park Hotel Penha Longa in Sintra, Portugal
2000 (June 1-4) at the Chateau Du Lac Hotel in Genval, Brussels, Belgium
2001 (May 24-27) at the Hotel Stenungsbaden in Stenungsund, Sweden
2002 (May 30-June 2) at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Virginia, United States
2003 (May 15-18) at the Trianon Palace Hotel in Versailles, France
2004 (June 3-6) at the Grand Hotel des Iles Borromees in Stresa, Italy
2005 (May 5-8) at the Dorint Sofitel Seehotel Überfahrt in Rottach-Egern, Germany[18]
2006 (June 8-11) at the Brookstreet Hotel in Kanata, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada[19] See picture of meeting location at time of meeting.
2007 (May 31 - June 3) at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel,[2] in Þiþli, Istanbul, Turkey.[20]
2008 (June 5-8) at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Virginia, United States[3]
[4]


[edit] See also
Trilateral Commission

So there has to be a discussion of posts for it to be relevant?
what a stupid, anonymous comment
Would these amendments be relevant for states that - for example - sm
have passed laws allowing medical marijuana use, but the Federal laws are still being used to prosecute patients?
What you say is true, but if relevant evidence is denied sm
or falsified, an objective approach is impossible. This is what the family members faced. They had to force Bush to form that commission to investigate. Coulter is now attacking them for that. They had a list of 400 questions, and got no answers. I agree with you on the wacky theories. I became interested in doing some research on the issue after hearing things around the area I live - Colorado Springs. This is the neocon capital of the United States, and home to Norad and Space Command, Ft. Carson, USAFA, Peterson AFB, Falcon AFB. They live and breathe Bush & military. At first, I thought they were only rumors. Norman Mineta's testimony to the 911 Commission confirmed them to be true. The second question I had was about WTC building 7. This building only had small fires and was not hit by an airplane. It came straight down like the other 2 into a nice neat pile. The owner of the building Silverstein said they made a decision to pull it. This is a demolition term for demolishing the building. Well, this is something that takes careful planning weeks in advance, not several hours. I am also hearing bizarre stories from troops returning from Irag and their family members. Mineta's testimony was shown on C-Span and here is the link. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y&search=mineta

I never saw the movie The Siege. Not a Bruce Willis fan. Anything with Matt McConaughey in it, I have seen.

Here, here!!! It sure isn't that simple.

I remember when I used to be 18 and the world was black and white, and I thought I knew everything.


The older I got, the more gray I saw, and the less I knew.


I figure at this rate, in a few years, I'm not gonna know nuttin!!!  LOL


I know exactly what you mean about screaming out at the TV, too!!! LOL.  (I wonder, if I turned down the sound on the TV and opened the windows, whether I'd hear a bunch of other people screaming, too.)


I still don't know if I can bring myself to watch him.  I just hope that every single soldier, whether seeing him personally at Fort Bragg or watching him on television somewhere, is able to return to their families safely and without injuries.  I have a feeling it's going to be the soldiers who really attract my attention, and I always cry when I see them, knowing how they've been betrayed by their "commander in chief."  Our military deserves much better than "chimpboy."  (Laughing at and agreeing with that term.)


It isn't that simple. sm
When Chavez held Chomsky's book up at the UN, the headlines the next day said his book was selling out.  Exactly who has the power here? 
Yes, very simple.
Plainly speaking, why do you post in a political forum if your posts are not politically motivated?
Look, it is very simple....
Bush has not broken the law. Clinton did. He committed felony perjury. I don't care that he jumped Monica Lewinsky. Ihate it for her and I hate it for Hillary but that is nothing to impeach a man for. What he was impeached for is obstruction of justice and felony perjury. If Bush had done that you would be calling for his head on a pike. So let's not pretend you wouldn't...waste of time. That is the difference between you and me. Nixon, a Republican, broke the law. But he had at least one iota of integrity left and resigned. Clinton lied through is teeth, broke the law. If he had just said, yeah, I jumped Monica, sorry, no harm no foul, it would have gone away. But he chose not to. And even after the impeachment hearings proved him guilty, they all ADMITTED he was guilty, they did not (Congress) have the guts NOR the integrity to convict him, and I mean Dems AND Republicans. That is the difference, again, between you and me. If it is wrong, it is wrong, and the political party of the person makes no difference to me. If George Bush committed perjury on national TV I would be calling for his resignation as well. One would hope he would have the integrity to resign BEFORE he was impeached if he did so.

Bashing Clinton? Did I lie? I stated the truth, in response to someone posting, for no apparent reason, that Bush was a dumba$$ and an embarrassment. I countered and said that I felt like a morally bankrupt lying perjurer was just as embarrasing.

Why aren't you getting on the other poster for bashing Bush? Ohhhhhh I understand...okay to bash Bush, NOT okay to bash Clinton. What is that again about liberal tolerance, no bigotry, freedom of speech, we love everybody doctrine? How does that go?
Simple as that.
It's very simple

Obama is the #1 most liberal Senator, which you can check.  He leaves Ted Kennedy and the rest in the dust by comparison.  Many Democrats fear him.  John McCain is pro-life, regardless what you think of him.  I'm no cheerleader for McCain, but holy hanna would freeze over before I either voted for or sat idly by over something this serious, and I don't even have kids.


If you want to try to spin it so someone you think maybe, kinda could sorda be for this barbaric procedure, so ahead and either not vote or keep your head in the sand.


My guess is that you could track down this nurse if you really wanted.  It's possible that she could no longer take it and then said "enough."


Like the old saying goes, if you don't vote, then don't complain. 


When is enough enough?


Simple
Check his voting record. He voted with Bush 90% of the time on important issues that he VOTED on.
Simple...

He isn't a white flag waving wimp, he doesn't want to censor the media, he has experience, he can speak without needing a script, though he probably has some questionable associates, none are like the Obama associates, most military people respect him, and most importantly, he is not a Marxist or Socialist hiding in sheeps clothing in order to get everyone to follow him.


But still not simple enough
Many people refer to the SS system as a pyramid/Ponzi scheme for the very reason that the money paid to retirees now is not from the money they paid in, but rather the money current workers are paying in. In addition, your benefit payment is determined by what you earned, not what you paid into it. Wikepedia, while I'm not a big fan, does a good job of explaining this is in fairly simplistic terms. Theoretically at least, SS moneys cannot be used for anything but SS and even investment of it is limited to government-secured bonds.

And just to be clear, I don't want to take anyone's benefits or even end Social Security as we know it now. All I'm saying is that there is no money to fund an increase at this time and that at this moment in time, I would rather see each recipient's $30 SS increase go toward putting people to work so that next year, the increase can be funded without bankrupting the system further.
simple minded? Nah.
Nah, the simple minded and hateful are on the conservative board..you got the wrong board..sorry, sweet cakes..
Just that simple. No problemo, yea right!
Unfortunately, some of us do care that the prez would appoint a person to a position of that magnitude with a whopping NO EXPERIENCE. The leader of this organization has the ability and is required to make decisions that can save American lives, and many, and NO EXPERIENCE is just a no biggie to ya! Oh, OK.

It would be wonderful if it was that simple....
so let's just make it REAL simple. If you want on SCHIP, you have to pay an additional 3% off the top in your income taxes. Democrats in Congress want to expand it, 3% off the top of all their salaries from now on to fund it. That would probably take care of it for years to come. If not, then start down the registered Democrats' tax rolls and if they favor the program, 3% off the top of their salaries to pay for it. Don't force it on people who are not going to use it, who pay their own premiums, to pay for it. Let those who want to expand it fund it. Simple as that. Sounds fair to me.
yes, you sound simple.
nm
simple remedy

like someone posted earlier.  Open. Close. Open. Close.  Then you can read what other posters have to say because new posts are in blue.


 


 


Simple ? What does it say about a man's character when he

1.       Dumps his crippled wife and mother of his children to have affair with wealthy heiress, then turns around to apply for marriage license before his divorce is final. 



2.       Calls his wife C-word.



3.       While speaking at a biker's rally, volunteers his wife as a contestant in the "Miss Buffalo Chips" topless modeling contest, including it's legendary banana competition.



4.       Tries to blame his wife for the Keating 5 scandal when it becomes public.



5.       Screams at and thoroughly humiliates a young pub volunteer who set up his podium at a rally.



6.       Jokes about ape rape and killing off Iranians with cigarettes and "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb."



7.       Describes Arizona's elderly as "seizure world."



8.       Throws temper tantrums, punctuated with the casual use of the F-word. 



9.       Calls fellow senators Aholes and sh-heads. 



10.    Ignites a culture war to get elected. 



11.    Questions the patriotism of his opponent and fails to renounce his supporters who question his faith, endlessly insinuate he lies about it and portray his wife as a militant with hidden agendas to stage a socialist/Black Power takeover of the country.



12.    Embraces endorsement from a pastor who disparages Catholics, women, African Americans, Muslims and LGBT Americans, believes that Hurricane Katrina was punishment from God because "New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God," announced a "slave sale" at the church to raise funds and believes that "the coming nuclear showdown with Iran is a certainty,"



13.    Overlooks the Bush-Rove campaign strategy of unleashing a landslide of racist attacks on him, including calling his own daughter an illegitimate half-black love child, turns around in 2004 to campaign for W's second term, throughout it all supported 9 out of 10 of his disastrous policies that has brought the nation to it knees and then embraces Rove as senior campaign adviser in 2008. 



14.    Stood silently by while fellow war hero/veteran John Kerry was swift-boated without mercy. 



 



Before any rebuttal ensues that would seek to deny, dodge and deflect, keep in mind that character assassination has been a benchmark of JM's campaign and of his supporters, so no whining allowed.  Finally, this is legitimate inquiry, given that 90% is striving so diligently not to be 90% and has hawked character as his main qualification for presidential leadership. 


Simple answer...
#1. Anything that passed Congress required votes from both sides to carry. So both parties did.

#2. Obama voted against. Biden voted for.

#3. Obama, according to his website it was January. Trouble is, Gen. Petraeus said to commit to some kind of a line in the sand date was the wrong thing to do. I vote with Gen. Petraeus.

#4. I imagine several Republicans lobbied against it...I think David Petraeus knows more about whether a timetable will work than Barack Obama does.

#5. Gen. David Petraeus said: WASHINGTON: General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, has said that US forces could hand over control of the entire country to the Iraqi military by the end of next year.

That could coincide with Obama's withdrawal timetable. If you are saying General Petraeus is trying to highjack Obama's timetable...I don't think so. It is his recommendation that drives what the administration says. Since he is the architect of the surge, which has worked "beyond anyone's wildest dreams" (Obama quote), he is in the best position to know what is feasible. But even he does not call it a timetable. COnditions on the ground dictate how something plays out. Or it SHOULD.

And that is the rest of the story.


A simple poll, sm
Who Would You Hire

You are The Boss... which team would you hire?





With America facing historic debt, multiple war fronts, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, skyrocketing Federal spending, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc. etc., this is an ***unusually critical*** election year.





Let's look at the educational background of your two options:




McCain:


United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899





& Palin:



Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester



North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study



University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism



Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester



University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism 



(verified through Anchorage Daily News adn.com  1981-1987.  5 schools in 6 years! 



 vs.


Obama:



Occidental College - Two years.



Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.



Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude



 & Biden:



University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.



Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)



Now, which team are you going to "hire" ? 


for simple god-fearin'

salt-of the-earth christian folk, you and your alter egos certainly disdain and/or hate many people.


 


Let's keep this simple this time around.
Here's a staight answer: Go here first and read the extensive fact check information and view detailed copies of the HAWAIIAN birth certificate which you can blow up and inspect if you like.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Naysayers will decry the source as biased. You can make up your own mind.

Mr Phillip Berg does not accept the authenticity of this valid birth certificate. We can go around and around about dual citizenship, age of mother, etc. Irrevalent. Certificate has been submitted and disputed. Bottom line. As in all legal actions heard in US courts, the BURDEN OF PROOF is on the prosecution, not the defense. Berg now needs to prove not only that the BC is a forgery, but that Obama was born in Kenya. Good luck with that.

BTW, my husband is a foreign national. I was automatically given naturalized status from his country of origin by virtue of my marriage to him...did not even have to apply. Does not make me any less of a US citizen. Just got back from early voting. In terms of qualification to run for office, the dual citizenship arguments center on the Indonesian side of the assertions...another irrevalent point. What matters is whether or not the US recognizes dual citizenship. I am living proof that that argument is false. In fact, if you examine how many inconsistencies and irrevalant points have been raised during the course of this legal action and the contoversy that surrounds it, you may draw your own conclusions about the pattern that will emerge. Frivolous lawsuit.
See how simple the truth is. :-) nm
nm
Here is a simple equation
Sex = babies. Birth control = 99.9% chance of no babies. Don't want babies? Get on birth control. Don't want to take a chance of having a baby even on birth control? Don't have sex.


It's pretty simple
x
It isnt that simple. What you do is the same as
nm
It's simple. Because they're not.
x
I don't get how anyone can't get this simple point
More social programs don't work. MORE government does not work. Government interference in our lives DOES NOT AND HAS NEVER WORKED!
Explain to me how funding more crap programs with my money is going to MAKE someone lose weight, MAKE someone stop smoking.
You can't MAKE either happen!
Sorry, it wasn't quite that simple..........
My uncle lives in the NO area and years ago was telling us the fed govt DID give billions to the cithy of NO (the mayor was to work with the COE) for the levy project; however, that money disappeared like most free handout money, blown on heaven only knows what, and the COE was going after the mayor to get the whereabouts of the money answered for for YEARS. They never understood why the govt NEVER forced Negan or whatever his name is to cough up the money and give an explanation for the whereabouts of that money, which was to be utilized for the levy. Of course, it was the govt's place to demand answers but like so much crap that goes on, they never did. The Corp of Enginneers were to be issued their money by Mayor Negan but he never did and even the governor at the time had inquisitions as to the use of this money but still no answers. Too bad the NO residents were too busy doing nothing all day because as residents of this soup bowl, it would have behooved them to get off their butts and demand an answer......
One simple reason......... sm
the government lies. Always has, always will. I don't know for a fact (dare I even mention since I have no web site to copy and paste to support my claim, lol), but I would be willing to bet if you followed the trail long enough, it would trace back to someone or several someones in a high position of authority that has an interest in foreign oil. I have heard it saas (again, no proof on my own) that there is enough gas and oil held in reserves in this country to last us for several decades.
Here's the simple solution:

an email I received yesterday....


 


This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday.  The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?"  I thought this was the BEST idea....I think this guy nailed it!

Dear Mr. President,
 
Patriotic retirement:
 
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force - pay them $1 million apiece severance - no tax - with the following stipulations that they must do:
 
1) They must leave their jobs...... Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
 
2) They must buy NEW American cars....... Forty million cars ordered -Auto Industry fixed.

3) They must either buy a house/pay off their mortgage ..... - Housing Crisis fixed.
 
Can't get any easier than that!  Way cheaper than the cost of what's going on now!


Simple answer

The diet industry rakes in the big bucks because it is human nature to look for a shortcut.  A segment of the American public is like this.


Tell somebody they can lose an entire person's worth of weight by drinking some glop for six months and they will buy it.  Tell them that they can learn a foreign language in six weeks by listening to tapes while they sleep, they will buy it.  Tell them they don't need verifiable income or means to repay to buy a house, they will sign anything. 


Tell us we have to actually WORK at something - losing weight, building our credit to get a mortage, whatever, we will just look for the guy who says we don't have to. 


How about the simple fact that

if this had been Bush instead of Obama.....you would be saying that Bush made it worse instead of giving him praise for a job well done.


I admit that I'm glad Obama gave the order to do what was done whether or not it was actually him or others who came up with the plan.  So congrats on that part but to totally praise Obama and no one else is ridiculous.  The brave Navy Seals deserve the majority of the credit for actually doing what was done and risking their lives in the process.


You all cry and whine about us not giving Obama any credit and yet you did not give Bush credit on anything either.  Just goes to show the double standards that goes along with politics. 


Not a simple solution...
There's literally no simple action that can be taken with respect to offshoring - that train has left the station and it isn't coming back.

This is a global economy and we not only buy goods and services from other countries, we sell ours to them as well. Any adverse action will have an opposite adverse consequence of some kind - either direct or indirect.

Directly, a foreign government can restrict your exports to them, or impose excise taxes. They can restrict American companies from doing business altogether.

And there are indirect consequences. If the people in another country lose income as a result of some action we take, we restrict the market in that country for our goods and services. What that means is a powerful argument against restricting trade. The best we can hope for is to try to ensure that the playing field is as level as possible - and even achieving that has been extremely difficult.

When we imagine that there are simple solutions to complex problems, and then blame the government for not applying these imaginary solutions, we're living in a fanasy world and foreclosing the demand for whatever realistic actions we might actually be able to take - because they're never simple, and they're not going to be as satisfactory as we always imagine our simple solutions would be.
Plain and simple............
If you're black or minority in this country, you can run your mouth all you want and make racial jokes and say nasty things and we are all supposed to look the other way but if you make a joke or say anything that is remotely considered racial (which is anything when speaking of someone black), then AL Sharpton and every other nutjob comes out of the wood work to run their huge mouths. No one is going to probably do anything about Letterman, because he is a loud mouth liberal piece of crap and Palin seems to be an obsession with him. Why doesn't he make nasty jokes about the Obama girls and see where that gets him. For that matter, why is everyone in such an uproar over the gorilla remark if blacks and liberal whites are allowed to get by with their nasty racial and biased remarks?

Always a double standard! They want their cake and eat it too!
It is just the simple fact that
when McCann mentioned this during the campaign Obama did nothing but ridicule it and tell the American people how crazy an idea that was.  If a pub would have flip flopped like that, JTBB, you would have smelled blood in the water and would have been all over them.  As for him not liking it but going along with it and wait and see what is actually in the bill before I get my feathers all ruffled......we won't know what is in that bill.  Look at how many things have been passed when the very people who voted on it had no clue what all was in it.  They didn't read it all and, even though Obama talks about transparency all the time......the public wasn't given time to read it either before it was voted on.  Obama is trying to rush this through just like everything else and we will all be taxed one way or another.  Which is another thing I don't get about some of you people.  Obama said no taxes of any kind for 95% of American people and that was such a blatant lie and yet you refuse to acknowledge that lie.  Just like Bush Senior and his "red my lips....no new taxes."  Well....we all know what happened to him when he lied about that.  He didn't get elected a second term.  So why aren't you holding the president accountable for his lies?  Why?
Simple question....(sm)

Have your taxes gone up since Obama has been in office?  With the exception of cigarettes (which is not an across the board tax), mine have gone down.  In fact, my daughter is getting a huge break now.  She works a full-time job, but because she is also a full-time student she pays absolutely NO fed income taxes.


Taxes are definitely going to go up on the wealthy, in fact, that's what Obama said he would do.  However, as far as those who are not wealthy all I have come across is speculation of what might happen, when in reality the only thing that has happened is that those people have seen a tax reduction.


It's called fearmongering from the right, not based in reality, only based in speculation....which is the case with saying he will tax healthcare.


Simple question....
how is he going to pay for all this if he doesn't raise taxes? He has tripled the debt. He will have to pay for the health care plan somehow. He acknowledges that. What income does the government take in OTHER THAN taxes?
It's quite simple and doesn't need an explanation...sm
Get your hands (control) in areas that product oil, i.e., Iraq.
You are a liar, pure and simple

While parts of this may be from a court brief, they are taken wholly out of context and your entire posting is a cut and paste from a neocon website article.  Time to 'fess up!


Your source of "facts" will always be totally different from the liberal board's source of facts so we are never going to agree on much of anything in general.  SO therefore we cannot debate. 


Simple answer. Because there is no money in...
providing contraception. There is money in abortions. With 200 mill from the feds (your tax dollars and mine) and all the abortions they perform (it was 200,000 a year in 2005, no telling how many now)...that is where the money is. It is the only thing in Planned Parenthood they won't take a check for...cash or insurance up front. No checks for abortions. That is their cash cow. People complain abot high oil company profits but profiting from killing babies is okey dokey in their books. Good grief.