Right bashing

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Jan 31 2007, 11:12 AM) [snapback]383282[/snapback]</div>

Slaughtered does not need to denote a specific number of people killed. Daniel Pearl was slaughtered, no? And he was the only killed in that instance.

Are you aware of the long term effects of alcohol use on a person?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Jan 31 2007, 11:27 AM) [snapback]383295[/snapback]</div>

What documents did sandy berger destroy. and if God forbid a nuke is set off here and the person who pulled the trigger is killed - is that enough for you - you would not do anything further except bury the dead and cordon off the area for the next 1,000 years or so.

Yea, clinton caught the guys - and let the masterminds and the machine operate business as usual - without the fear of reprisals or anything - another example of our great leader :blink: clinton was such a DISASTER in not protecting America or Americans.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Jan 31 2007, 11:27 AM) [snapback]383295[/snapback]</div>

I know, but I wouldn't have called that a "slaughter." Attempted slaughter, maybe. I guess it's a nebulous term.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 11:32 AM) [snapback]383296[/snapback]</div>

Yes, I am. Two years is not long term.

And I don't agree with you (big surprise there). More Americans have been killed by foreign aggression under W than Clinton...and not just by a few, but by THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS. And there is no way to controvert that FACT, again, but I'm sure you'll try. I know that facts are useless to you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Jan 31 2007, 08:31 AM) [snapback]383220[/snapback]</div>

WOW how old are you? Where you on vaction during the clinton years? Im speaking in reference to the statements that are bolded....

dbermanmd is right again regarding Mr. Clinton execept he left out sexual favors in the oval office. :lol:

Just think of it we wouldn't be in this mess now had he FOLLOWED through..All because of the out cry from the us citizens and how damaging it would be in the polls...

Remember the inspectors? It was during the Clinton administration that the inspectors had to leave Iraq. Talk is cheap. Clinton didn't DO anything. His lack of action was tantamount to appeasement.

Our current Presidents father should have pushed harder when fighting saddam but the country did not side with him after they reached a certain point. Then along came Clinton.

Funny how Bill clinton comes into office, AFTER saddam has gassed his own people, and he does nothing. Oh yes he gassed his own people before, but the former President Bush DID SOMETHING about it however when clinton came in he was just fine with whatever the heck Iraq did or wanted to do.

Under Clinton, the USA hit Iraq with massive air strikes multiple times when it failed to behave.
When Iraq began blocking UN inspectors, ~30,000 troops were deployed to the region as a threat.
But they did nothing as it was just a threat.

Clinton was bound by a policy of upholding the UN resolutions, not preemptive strikes and regime change.

Here are some links:

Hillary Clinton's views on going to war, Saddam, and WMD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20040623.htm

The Clinton Strategy:
Saddam Hussein v. Ken Starr
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/owens/98/iraq.html

Open Letter to the President

February 19, 1998
http://www.iraqwatch.org/perspectives/rums...-openletter.htm

I guess in the long run the liberals are WRONG and the rest of us are WRONG too so we will never come to a complete 100% agreement on this and other issues.

As Daniel has stated :" both parties are made up of corrupt, self-serving gangsters."

So no matter who comes into office in 08 we all will suffer...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Jan 31 2007, 08:05 AM) [snapback]383274[/snapback]</div>

There was a New Yorker comic years ago (back in 1993, I believe) that kind of became an Internet mantra. The comic shows two dogs, one of whom is in front of a computer with his paw on the keyboard. He turns to the other dog and says "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog." Here's a link.

I bring this up because, frankly, our dear Dr. Berman, M.D. could be anyone. He has presented no evidence that he has a medical degree, that he is educated, or any measure of his intelligence (other than what we see on these boards, which is somewhat dubious). His profile contains no identifying information about him (city, etc... he even leaves off the type of Prius he might or might not actually own). He chose his own screen name... who knows if he just added the DR and MD parts to get credibility. Of course, this could be extended to many of the participants on this forum... we don't really know anyone's qualifications... we just gather our opinions based on what we believe we know about them.

Don't let his actions diminish your respect for those in the medical profession, and those with advanced degrees.

So, when you're reading his posts, keep in mind that he might be a doctor, he may be a construction worker, or he might be a thirteen year old snot-nosed kid on his parent's computer. He might even be a dog, because as everyone has heard... "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog"!

Dan

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 31 2007, 12:08 PM) [snapback]383327[/snapback]</div>

Dan~

I do not feel dbermanmd needs anyone to stick up for him, as he has proved he can stick up for himself. dbermanmd, has nothing to prove to you or anyone else if you dont like what he has to say ignor him..

But I sure wouldn't post my credentials over the internet, muchless on a message board filled with vengful posters.. <_<

That would be like you Dan visiting a hacker web-site and giving them your personal social security number..

Your quote holds true for 100% of the people here on PC as you have stated on this thread, but we can include the entire internet also..

"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog"! this is a funny but true statement. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 31 2007, 12:08 PM) [snapback]383327[/snapback]</div>

I love that cartoon, thanks. There's always the ignore button too, regardless of whether he's a real doctor or some orderly who uses the computer when the nurse is away. His diatribes are boring, uninspired and entirely predictable. He also won't listen so there's no need to read them for the most part. Sometimes, I'll scan a post from someone on my ignore(ance) list but if it's another example of their backyard dog yappings, I don't get too much of their filth on me

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Jan 31 2007, 11:56 AM) [snapback]383314[/snapback]</div>

More Americans have been killed by "illegal immigrants" than by "foreign aggression" - not even close. Your point is tangential at best and self-serving at the worst. Facts are usefull if you are doing appropriate comparisons.

More innocent American civilians were killed under clinton than W - not even close. I worry about my own people and my own society first and foremost. Tell me, the first sentance in the Presidents swearing in oath says what????????? Do you think clinton honored that oath - ? do you think any oath or promise he made he kept?

I still ask you - what did clinton do after the first WTC attack in 1993? The FACT is he is the first sitting president to do NOTHING to protect us - he SAT on his hands and did NOTHING. What message did that send obama and his brothers in arms???? When clinton ran from somalia what did that say to them too? And when the USS Cole was attacked and 17 Americans were SLAUGHTERED what did he do and do you think that ENCOURAGED our enemies to plot and plan??? clinton was a coward - spineless - testosteroneless - self centered poll driven politician who did NOT protect America. What did he do to the military and intelligence assets of this country during his reign??? Did he not construct the "wall" between the CIA and FBI - the Toricelli Rule? What documents did sandy berger destroy and what did they pertain too???

I lost too many friends and neighbors and patients on 9/11 - SLAUGHTERED - in part and I say in part because of clintons INACTION and abrogation of his duties that he swore an oath too. And now we have a bunch of enablers of evil who think we are bad and wrong and we are evil for bringing the fight to our enemies?? Our society and culture are in trouble only because of the rot from within. I am tired of watching Americas on HOME soil be slaughtered.

If we RETREAT from Iraq NOW - do you think our enemies will follow us home eventually?? Honestly tell me - we leave with our tail between our legs - they leave us alone like the vietcong did? And if your answer is that they will follow us home - what are you going to recommend we do NOW in real life.

Me personally - I do not want to die yet. And if I am going to die at least I want to see the SOB who is going to try to take me out in front of my face so I can defend myself.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 31 2007, 12:08 PM) [snapback]383327[/snapback]</div>

You are like Kerry too - you think the opinion of a construction worker is not worthwhile - you show your true colors here - how condescending you are - i guess you must be a MENSA member???

This is what people do when they realize how void their opinions and thoughts are when tested. Hey if I am a 13 year old "snot-nosed kid" I am sure making you look bad -- how does that make you feel?? Being taken by a 13 year old?

Hey its ok being a dog - at least I still can learn new tricks - better than having a closed mind that operates based on conceit and condescension.

 

Please reply to all of the factual content that he posted in the thread concerning your position on our economy, more specifically unemployment, and the masses will be the judge as to whether or not you've "taken him".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 09:27 AM) [snapback]383336[/snapback]</div>

Wow... are you foaming at the mouth?

Did I say that being a construction worker wasn't a worthwhile pursuit? No. Did I say that a construction worker couldn't have a valid and well-thought opinion? No. Was I being condescending to construction workers? No. I was stating that we shouldn't base our opinion of doctors on our interaction with you, as we don't have any idea whether or not you actually are a doctor. As usual, you're stating things that aren't the truth. This shouldn't be a surprise to any of us here. You have less credibility than President Bush.

I was, however, being condescending to thirteen year old snot-nosed kids... having been one many years ago, they probably deserve it.

As for making me look bad - what color is the sky in your little world anyway? How about an admission that your information in the "Budget Deficit in Free-Fall" thread wasn't correct. You ran away from that one claiming that you didn't have time to respond... seems you have time today. I'm still waiting for a retraction and an apology. Or would you rather just "cut and run" when things get tough?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 31 2007, 12:52 PM) [snapback]383348[/snapback]</div>

You obviously do not have a very good public school system where you live. There are a number of very gifted 13 year olds in my neighborhood - and trust me - they could give you a run for your money - and thats a fact.

You should re-examine how you worded your prior post - what do you have against construction workers? Do you think that because they perform physical labor that makes their opinion less valid. Tell me, what would you do with the opinions of our troops in Iraq if they were behind this President and this conflict - would they be wrong or would you be more qualified to make that call than they would be??

And I see again another issue here - do you base all your opinions and thoughts based on first person experience?? Where you President too? If not, how can you differentiate fact from fiction? I mean not having been President, how could you know what Bush is doing is really right or wrong?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 10:10 AM) [snapback]383357[/snapback]</div>

And most of the gifted 13 year olds tend not to be snot nosed. At least, that's been my experience.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 10:10 AM) [snapback]383357[/snapback]</div>

Let's take a look at the post in question.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 31 2007, 09:08 AM) [snapback]383327[/snapback]</div>

I see absolutely nothing disparaging construction workers in any way whatsoever. Care to specify where he says he's got anything against construction workers? I certainly don't see it. Granted, I speak English, and he may be speaking in another language that looks identical to English but has different meanings than I know. But you could be doing the same thing.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jtullos @ Jan 31 2007, 01:21 PM) [snapback]383361[/snapback]</div>

Do you think it is ok to disparage any human being - of course now that he has/needs some assistance? And i think your statement is one based on opinion - yours.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 10:24 AM) [snapback]383366[/snapback]</div>

I could ask the same of you, as you have disparaged quite a few people yourself. No, it's not ok, but it will happen, as it's human nature.

Now, back to my question. Where did he say anything bad about construction workers, and what was it he said?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan, 08:32 AM) [snapback]383296[/snapback]</div>

Errr, actually, the mastermind of the '93 WTC bombing was arrested in 1995, and is currently held in a high security prison in Colorado.

'On November 12, 1997 [Ramzi] Yousef was found guilty of masterminding the 1993 bombing and in 1998 he was convicted of "seditious conspiracy" to bomb the towers.'

His co-conspirators, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, El Sayyid Nosair, Mahmud Abouhalima, and Mohammad Salameh are all in prison. Another co-conspirator, Abdul Rahman Yasin was being held in an Iriqi prison by Saddam, but was released sometime after 2002.

So yes, it's true, Clinton was a great leader. He captured the terrorists who attacked us under his watch.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 10:10 AM) [snapback]383357[/snapback]</div>

The school system in my area is excellent, thank you... one of the best in the state. I'm chairman of a non-profit organization that works with gifted science students at the K-12 level. Some of them could probably give me a run for my money, but they tend to be the exception, not the rule. I'm reminded of a quote that is usually attributed to Mark Twain... goes something like this:

<blockquote>"When I was thirteen, I was amazed at how stupid my parents were. When I was 20, I was amazed at how intelligent they were. To think that they'd learned all of that in just seven short years."

</blockquote>Many thirteen year olds can tend to fall into this category.

As I stated already, my statement does not disparage construction workers, and to imply that it does is misleading and insulting. You know that, of course, and your attempts to twist my words aren't going to work... we're all too smart to fall for it.

Yes, I base many of my thoughts on first person experience, but I also do research. For example, when I saw your post the other day stating that unemployment was at all time lows and wages were up, I decided to research the statistics myself. Lucky I did this, because I found that you were incorrect in both statements. This is how I differentiate fact from fiction. Seeing as I seem to state facts, and you have a history of stating fiction, how do you differentiate?

Still waiting for your retraction and apology in this post, by the way: Budget Deficit in Free-Fall

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Jan 31 2007, 01:36 PM) [snapback]383373[/snapback]</div>

And would catching the guy who detonates a nuke in manhattan be enough for you?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jan 31 2007, 01:43 PM) [snapback]383377[/snapback]</div>

Looks like I stirred the hornets nest - what's up - no local protests going on? No active flag burning? Jane's sleeping?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan, 10:48 AM) [snapback]383379[/snapback]</div>

Huh? Who did that?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(danoday @ Jan 27 2007, 08:52 AM) [snapback]381677[/snapback]</div>

Hmm... usually don't reply to myself, but in this case a bit of clarification is on order. The clarification relates to whether or not the state or current federal wage takes precedence in those states with a lower than federal minimum wage. Initial reports said that states like Kansas would have the state minimum wage rolled back to $2.65 per hour, but my interpretation of the actual amendment doesn't seem to support that. Instead, it would seem that the amendment sets the minimum at whatever the prevailing minimum wage was on January 1st of this year. This is still up to interpretation, by the way... the amendment isn't completely clear on the matter.

Wayne Allard's amendment wouldn't have eliminated the federal minimum wage, but it would serve to negate any increases in the minimum wage contained in the overall bill. Here's the amendment:

<blockquote>"Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, an employer shall not be required to pay an employee a wage that is greater than the minimum wage provided for by the law of the State in which the employee is employed and not less than the minimum wage in effect in that State on January 1, 2007.''.

</blockquote>So, essentially this states that the federal standard would remain in effect (and could even be raised), but if the state legislated wage was lower, the employer only has to pay what the state amount is. As well, it seems to set the low point for the minimum at whatever the prevailing minimum wage was at the beginning of this year.

Many states set their minimum wage to match the Federal government's minimum, while 28 states have higher standards (only eight of those states exceed the new proposed federal standard). Colorado (the amendment author's home state) has a minimum wage of $6.85 per hour, and this was in effect on January 1st of this year. So, according to the amendment, the federal minimum wage would be raised to $7.25 per hour, but no employer would be required to pay any more that the individual state requires, but not lower than the prevailing standard (state or federal) required on January 1st, 2007. For Colorado, this means that employers could continue on with the status quo of $6.85 per hour unless the Colorado legislature raises it. Employers in states with a mandated minimum wage less than the federal standard (like Kansas at $2.65 per hour), or with no set standard would likely still be required to pay the prevailing federal minimum as of January 1st, 2007, or $5.15 per hour.

It is interesting, though, that while this amendment wouldn't have eliminated or lowered the minimum wage, this amendment would have had the effect of completely negating the Democrat's proposal to increase the minimum wage. Doesn't really matter, at this point... the amendment failed.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jan 31 2007, 01:48 PM) [snapback]383379[/snapback]</div>

Seriously, doc, Wth?

Bottom line, and thanks for trying to get out of the point AGAIN, is that YOUR MAN was the one ON WATCH when the WTC was attacked. We have lost many more folks due to foreign aggression under YOUR MAN than under Clinton. And, btw, you have no FACTS (again) to back up your statement that illegal immigrants have killed more people under Clinton than Bush. In fact, I would say the opposite is true.

I'm sorry you lost friends there. I'm glad we took action to take out Afghanistan--however, do you UNDERSTAND that we still have NOT CAUGHT the man that was responsible for the WTC collapse? Do you get that? Does it resonate with you AT ALL? We've had over FIVE years, and YOUR MAN managed to direct your understandable vengeance to a country that DIDN'T WARRANT IT!!!!!! (Smiling inside, knowing that he duped the same people who voted for him.)

And your REPUBLICAN congress was in office at the same time as Clinton, wasn't it? The Congress can declare war on their own...since you think that all dems have no spine, how 'bout the pubs? I guess they don't either! For more fact on this, since you are confused, Congress has these powers:
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions


You're wrong, you know you're wrong, and you don't have the testosterone to admit it. Little girlie man. And I'm done when I get so infuriated that I stoop to namecalling.