has anyone changed Pres choice in
Posted By: last 2 wk? (nm) on 2008-11-01
In Reply to:
x
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
really wanna barf - guess who steps up as pres. if something awful happens to the pres and vp??? nm
....
I don't feel the need to make the choice. It's a child, not a choice. n/t
.
don't want either for pres.
Can we have her for pres instead of VP? LOL
.
Schwarzenneger for pres
x
First Pres younger than me
and though I love him (am definitely a kool aid drinker, I admit) he looks like he's in junior high and it will be sad to see him age. Maybe it won't be too bad. He seems to like stress.
Who was Pres on 09/11/2001?
Why would anyone give him credit for PROTECTING us?
Have they done that with previous pres?
If they have done this with previous presidents, I really couldn't care less. Anyone know the answer to this?
Pres just had a press conference..
listened very discernibly, heard nothing different from his other press conferences... Feel like I'm watching "Groundhog Day" starring Bill Murray, only Bill Murray is much more funny and quite a bit smarter! When will get some real leadership? We desparately need LEADERSHIP!!!
A little insight on Pres. Bush
I work in a very high profile media department, and part of my job is transcription of raw interviews. I have transcribed several transcripts of raw interview footage with Pres. Bush, and he is the most respectful, gracious, down-to-earth person behind the scenes you can imagine. It's not that fakey type of schmooze either. You can tell he's genuine. When there is a break in the interview process he's asking the crew about their families etc. He has a very kind heart.
Now, with that said I don't agree one hundred percent with all his policies. Some of the the things he has been for I have been totally against...amnesty for illegals is one of them.
I do not have one problem with people disagreeing with his policies but to personally say he's a bad person, compare him with Hitler and other evil people is not only beyond the pale it's just plain not true. I have also transcribed interviews of several members of the Bush family, and they are all warm loving people.
I could mention some people who are not gracious, but I'm not here to smear anyone's character on the basis of my professional knowledge, but I do feel I need to defend a person who is so unjustly character assassinated on a daily basis.
President Bush has very unfairly been painted to be evil by the media and the extreme left in this country. Again, nobody is forced to like him, but to say he's a bad evil person is just not right or factual, and I, for one will defend him on his character.
Discussion from Gab Board re Pres.
"First... I don't claim him. I think he's a tyrant to put it nicely and I think he is a warmonging hillbilly (and that's sad for the hillbillies because they are decent folk he gives a bad name). I told everyone not to vote for him last time... I tried to warn them. I didn't want him and he hasn't done anything to help me our my friends and family in the slightest, except make us look ridiculous on the international stage (which I can say because I live in Europe at the moment and I know how foolish they think us right now). Second, good for you. Maybe you should vote for McCain so that the pain (errr I mean pleasure) never ends. I bet the people that he's been against and not fought for (i.e., Katrina victims, Iowa flood victims, homosexuals, people with diseases that stem cell reasearch could help, innocent people in far off lands that lost family members and friends who were innocent victims) I bet they all share your same sentiments.. right? You can have him.. I bet right about now he's half price on the discount rack anyways! Third... you should be grateful she put "creatrue." Its probably how Bush spells and says it, so its a true representation. Fourth... I think the last time I checked it was a free country with free speech and allowed for people to have their own opinions. I have better names to call him than childish ones... but I won't use them since your so easily offended... are you his personal emotional filter? I doubt he cares what the American people call him... he's certainly proven he doesn't care what they think or how they feel... so why should we care about him? Thanks back atcha. I can have whatever opinion I want of the president and I can tell you, I am more the majority than you are."
Moving over here per Mod request.......
Of course you can have your opinion about President Bush. I was just saying that the names are uncalled for. Are you staying in Europe forever or are you planning on coming back to the U.S.? Just curious.
President Bush isn't perfect and there have been many mistakes, I do agree. I did vote for him and agree with the vast majority of his conservative views. I do plan on voting for John McCain in November. But, if Obama is our next president, as much as I disagree with his views, I wouldn't call him names; but that's just me I guess.
I do not envy anyone who is willing to take on the gigantic role of running the country. I would not want the job in a million years. I have respect for ANYONE, republican or democrat, who is ready and willing to take on this great responsibility.
I still would like to know what a creatrue is and President Bush is NOT retarded.
You mean "proud of your pres-elect" (nm)
Just watched him with Pres Bush and
Obama in the White House, definitely no droop, no change at all in his appearance.
for new pres foremost, to keep us safe.
x
Name a pres that kept all his campaign promises?
I don't expect him to keep all his promises. In actuality, he really can't. None of the other presidents in my memory have been able to either. That is an unrealistic expectation. They say what they need to say to get elected.
too bad i'm not the pres - i'm control freakish enough 4 it
:)
Oh, pul-EEEZE. Any pres., Pub or Dem, deserves a
night out on the town once in a while. And of COURSE it cost $20,000! It's not like they can just hop on public transit with no Secret Service, and cruise on down to the local burger shop.
His memory is no more 'selective' than the current Pres..
and his cronies...
I like your line of thinking. LOL. You should run for pres. You'd have my vote. nm
nm
When GW Bush became pres, I did give him a chance even though
amazin
Of course, this was all before 9/11, which, of course, changed everything. nm
He must have really changed
since the last time I watched his show then. Hmmm.
What has changed? sm
Obama stated after a landslide victory in 2004 in his bid for Illinois senator that he didn't feel he had the experience to run on a national ticket in 2008.
What has changed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gexyfVpFMU
I see you changed your name.
Stop the dang bashing. This is not a board for spelling police.
Transcript: Democratic response to Pres. Bush's
Good morning. This is Congressman Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the House Majority Leader.
Over the past several months, Democrats and Republicans in Congress have negotiated a bipartisan extension of the highly successful childrens health insurance program known as CHIP - a program enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress in 1997, with strong Democratic support, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
CHIP provides health insurance coverage for over six and one-half million American children in families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance.
However, millions of other children who are currently eligible for this health insurance are not enrolled due to the programs limited resources.
To address this, our bipartisan legislation provides funding for approximately four million more children - ensuring that at least 10 million low-income children in our nation receive the health care coverage they need and deserve. Thats good for them and for our country.
This legislation does not change current eligibility guidelines. It simply strengthens CHIPs financing, covers more low-income children, and improves the quality of care they receive.
Sadly, on Wednesday, President Bush - in the face of bipartisan majorities in Congress, and contrary to the will of the American people - vetoed our bipartisan bill.
The President claims - wrongly - that this bill is fiscally irresponsible.
The truth is, this legislation is fully paid for. It does not add one nickel to the deficit or to the debt.
Furthermore, under the Presidents proposal more than 800,000 children who now receive coverage under CHIP would lose that coverage.
The President claims that this legislation would lead to a government takeover of health insurance. He is wrong.
The truth is, Americas largest private insurance lobbying group supports this bill - as do Americas doctors, nurses, childrens advocates, 43 governors, and, most importantly, 72 percent of Americans.
The claims made against this bill are simply wrong.
As Senator Pat Roberts, a senior Republican from Kansas, recently said: I am not for excessive spending and strongly oppose the federalization of health care. And if the Administrations concerns with this bill were accurate, I would support a veto. But, Senator Roberts added: Bluntly put, they are not.
Most puzzling of all, perhaps, is the fact that the Presidents veto violates his own campaign promise.
In 2004, at the Republican National Convention, the President promised (and I quote): In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of children who are eligible but not signed up for government health insurance programs. We will not allow, he said, a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need.
But he has done just that.
But the Congress has done exactly what the President said he was going to do, if re-elected.
Yet today, the only thing standing between millions of American children and the health insurance they need and deserve is one person. The President is saying no to these children he promised to help.
This is a defining moment for this Congress.
In the words of Senator Charles Grassley, a Republican of Iowa, weve got to do what we can to try to override the Presidents veto.
In the days ahead, we will work to persuade many of our Republican colleagues, who insist on standing with the President, to instead join the bipartisan majorities in Congress - and Americas children - in overriding this veto.
I urge all of you: Contact your Member of Congress.
Ask them to support our children.
Ask them to do what the President promised to do when he sought re-election.
Ask them to vote to override the Presidents veto and ensure health care for our kids and for their future.
Thank you for listening. This is House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
Lets put this nonsense to bed. Pres candidates born outside US
Here's the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Here's the text. See. Isn't this EASY?
US presidential candidates born outside the US
"The constitutional wording has left doubts about whether those born on foreign soil are on an equal footing with those whose birth occurred inside the country's borders, and whether they have the same rights."[2] Though every president and vice president to date (as of 2008) has either been a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, or else born in a U.S. state or Washington D.C.,[3] a number of presidential candidates have been born elsewhere.[4]
Barry Goldwater, who ran as the Republican party nominee in 1964, was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory. Although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully organized and incorporated territory of the United States.[5]
George Romney, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States in 1912. Romney was 32 years old when he arrived in Michigan.
Lowell Weicker, the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France and acquired his citizenship at birth through his parents. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.[6]
John McCain, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and is the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Although the Panama Canal Zone was not considered to be part of the United States,[7] federal law states: "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States."[8] The law that conferred this status took effect on August 4, 1937, one year after John McCain was born — albeit with retroactive effect, resulting in McCain being declared a U.S. citizen.[9]
The mere fact of Constitutional ineligibility has not deterred some minor parties from nominating candidates for President who could not possibly serve in the office. For example, although some states have blocked ballot access for such candidates, the Socialist Workers Party nonetheless successfully placed its candidate, Róger Calero, on the ballot in Mississippi in 2004. [10]
My husband and I were discussing is that the upside of Obama as pres it that we will probably
x
Isn't it wonderful to have a pres WHO DIDN'T STEAL THE ELECTION? AND WHO sm
won by such a large margin???? Poor Gore had to sit through Bush's inauguration knowing he had 500,000 more votes. This is WONDERFUL!
yes, he changed the story
"just a bit" to better prove his point that she was a reformer. Like his cross in the dirt story as a POW. When he first told it, it happened to someone else. It went over better when he changed it to first person. That is dangerous behavior. We have been through 8 years of information manipulation. Please no more.
He's changed his plan but yet again..
The McCain-Palin campaign has critized his tax plans as welfare, so Barack’s campaign has come back and tweaked it to add a work requirement. (They will materialize things out of thin air as needed to get elected.) This comes from the New Hampshire Union Leader in reply.
Glad to see not much has changed :)
politics as usual! :)
they have not changed the rules yet
Hedge funds are still doing sneak attacks on companies, driving them into the dirt.
Citigroup got hit today, down 23%. It is worth 6 bucks and one year ago was 40. They need to change the rules on these hedge funds. They can pick on any company and kill it in a day.
The constitution will most likely be changed for him.
nm
I never changed my moniker and always
posted inside my messages so my thoughts would not get lost. I take full credit for what I post and usually try to post anything of interest to others, so I don't care who knows my moniker. They can read or discard, but I will get my reasoning and/or thoughs/suggestions out there.
I've been bashed plenty of times prior to the election but I don't care. I still don't care who likes me or not. I get my thoughts out there and that's all that matters. I don't hide like some people on this board do, or change names. Running a post through the name part does no one any good except to tell everyone they don't want to use the comment part of the board. I usually bypass those.
I also suggest if anyone posts that they use (nm) or NM in their subject if they have nothing else to say. I spend a lot of time opening a message to find nothing underneath that post. To me that is waste of time.
I thought they changed it to anyone
making over 235,000 now. I will have to look that up.
because the situation OVER THERE CHANGED,
Taliban in Pakistan is getting stronger!
Think and get more flexible.
they changed that $250K...
Now they're saying more like $200K and going lower. And let's just face it. 20 bucks or $200K, everybody is gonna pay more taxes.
First thing is a Biography of Pres. Bush, then Welcome to Michael Moore...nm
x
Personally, I am disappointed in Pres Bush, but namecalling is really infantile.
I think it detracts from logical debate. Pointing out people's personal flaws is another really bad debate tactic. Need to rise above that high school behavior and stick to the opinons and there are plenty of bad things to say right now. Don't make it personal.
Do you think men don't come back from all wars changed? SM
What war is worth fighting for? Explain that to me. During World War II, ten times the men that have died in Iraq in two years died in one day. How many is too many? What is worth fighting for?
So you think the genocidal Saddam changed
That's the real question here. Have you listened to his tirades during his circus of a trial? Anyone who believed Saddam changed from being mentally unstable genocidal megalomanic while still the dictator of Iraq has to be the most naive person on Earth. Because he is demonstrating in court that he's still a megalomanic. The U.N. gave them adequate time to straighten up and fly right, and as you know the U.N. is having major corruption problems, so any agreements we have with them are shaky at best. You are right on one statement. The war in Iraq was wayyyy overdue.
Maybe he changed his mind like Palin sm
changed her mind on the whole Bridge to Nowhere fiasco. She makes a bid to-do about it in her speech, about how she shot it down or opposed it, but in the beginning she was all for it. I guess she changed her mind like Biden changed his mind about McCain. Or how the McCain's changed their mind on what was behind the adoption of their daughter.
Okay....then let's just say neither of them are liars. They just changed their minds.
I'll go with that. My entire point is that you can't really call one of them a liar and say the other just "changed his/her mind."
Looks like McCain changed his mind again. sm
In October 2007 McCain had the following to say, referring to Romney and Giuliani I believe, when they were all starting out in the Rep. nomination process. I bolded the part he seemed to have changed his mind on. I am sure if SP wasn't his running mate now he might feel the same way he did back them.
"I have had a strong and a long relationship on national security, I've been involved in every national crisis that this nation has faced since Beirut, I understand the issues, I understand and appreciate the enormity of the challenge we face from radical Islamic extremism. I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."
Nope, I haven't changed. s/m
I will be voting AGAINST McCain or for Obama whichever way you want to look at it. As I have listened carefully to Obama, particularly on his infomercial, I find that I like him more and believe in him more. I still have a problem with his church but then I guess there is still Congress and there is STILL the people who can put pressure on Congress if need be.
What I said was that I COULD change my mind, let's say if Obama pulled a really big boner (doubtful) between now or Tuesday or McCain said something that convinced me he was the better of the candidates. I don't expect either to happen. I don't know if the people voting for McCain have heard different speaches by him and Palin and I've been out in lala land or what but all I have heard them do is talk about what Obama is going to do and not do, scare tactics, nothing about their plans. In other words the whole McCain campaign has been about trashing Obama. I think that Obama has handled all the trashing very professionally and has looked quite presidential.
Okay - I agree that the site has been changed; however -
I think the first time it was posted, someone just did not put all the information there by mistake. You can see by the links I posted below that it was never the intent to make it mandatory for everyone, but mandatory in order to receive the college credit of $4000.
We are all transcriptionists and we all know how easy it is to make mistakes while typing - somebody just left out part of what they were supposed to type there.
Unfortunately changed started 8 years ago. n/m
x
Yes.....changed the subject from Obama.......sm
to anchor babies growing up to be president. And didn't I say that I would help you rant and rail over it when the time comes?
If a person is born on US soil, they are considered a US natural born citizen unless they choose to denounce it. They are therefore "endowned with certain inalienable rights" one of them being citizenship.
That is correct.... it can be edited and changed by
--
Pres. Bush holds completely stated "teleconference" with troops
Gads, I think he's a slow learner. This sort of stuff doesn't go over well, IMHO. Might make people think he is a big phony.
AP - 42 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - It was billed as a conversation with U.S. troops, but the questions President Bush asked on a teleconference call Thursday were choreographed to match his goals for the war in Iraq and Saturday's vote on a new Iraqi constitution. This is an important time, Allison Barber, deputy assistant defense secretary, said, coaching the soldiers before Bush arrived. The president is looking forward to having just a conversation with you..
We haven't changed the rules at all. To what are you referring?
/
|
