The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Chit Chat
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:12 PM
SaidSomething's Avatar
SaidSomething SaidSomething is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb West of Boston
Posts: 288
Heart I've debated some and said Iwoudn't post but I need to be heard...Hillary Clinton.

Hi you guys...

I know we argued/debated this in another section...if anyone was hurt I'm sorry. I am passionate about politics now...because myself and those I love are affected by the story below...

I hope you read with an open mind/heart...

Just please...as I said at the bottom...don't be hurtful...I expect a debate...

I'm just a guy...back at work for an airline that makes headlines everyday...with my co-workers and I suffering under "Corporate America..."

Nana...I hope you can see this...I miss you.




My story was entitled...

An Open Letter Of Love And Support For Hillary Clinton...













Dear Hillary...

That's a picture of my Grandmother and I on a day my Uncle had to go back to the war in Vietnam...after his generous 5 day leave.

I've posted on blogs...spoke loud and clear to all I can reach about how I passionately feel about you as a mother and a woman...and as an outspoken person, speaking for those that don't or can't have a voice. I love when you speak firmly and with conviction. I, as a lower middle class guy, from a lower middle class upbringing...have had my voice...and those similar to me...silenced. It's like I work 5,6,7 days a week to live in my apartment...pay bills and taxes...help out my family (because in the end...who else is there, really?) and manage to somehow look to the future with hope. I'm poor but I feel so rich because of the blessings I have...and have had...and will continue to have. Please help us be heard Hillary. I have so much to say but, it would be pages so I'll sum it up in little ellipses...My grandmother that raised me died about a month ago...she worked well into her 80s. She paid every last tax...and was rewarded with barely $400.00 a month in Social Security. She was the mother of 4 children...left alone with her kids in the 1940s when her wife beating husband left her. Who did she turn to? The church...and her inner self. She summoned all her courage to survive and move on. She didn't take handouts she didn't ask for food stamps and she didn't quit on her kids...or those she loved...she was on a mission...and didn't leave until the misson was complete. She didn't have a voice...who would listen? She worked as a maid, waitress, cafeteria "coffee lady" and then would go home and string beads all night to make an extra quarter or two to buy her kids their Easter shoes. She was yet another poor, Irish Catholic, uneducated statistic. Or so it seems. Her only son was on the front lines in Vietnam. She raised me when my father was simalar to her husband...a violent abusive guy. She took me in as an infant...protected me...and taught me about values, ethics...and what was important in life. She was always praying for somebody. She was a lot like you Hillary, actually. The differences are your worlds. My grandmother's world was very small...but those in her "small world" were affected by her very much. She fed the poor. Visited widows or mom's that lost their sons or daughers...or she would drop in on the lonely. She donated what she had to Big Brother Big Sister...and to the Home for the Little Wanders. She taught me about being happy...and working hard...and always, always remembering I was made the same as everybody...rich, poor, blind, black, white, tall ect... In her small world she reached out and protected, nurchured and guided those she loved to "always doing the right thing".
I'm a disabled guy. I work for a huge airline. I celebrated my 10 year anniversary this May. My BIG corporation...run by a BIG republican CEO and his cronies have robbed men and women like me that have made this airline what it is...or was. It's corrupt. I took 2 massive paycuts...was stripped of many benefits...and I look a 3 week leave for a re-occurring serious kidney condition requiring surgery. They have denied me FMLA from their Chicago headquartes 3 times in the last 2 months submitted by my 12 year physicain. I've had FMLA in place before by my company. They don't see my "serious health condition" serious enough to warrant a day or two off every once in a while to deal with the pain of trying to pass massive, multiple kidney stones, the size of my pinky nail...serious enough. They don't find that my pain and the toxic levels of my blood cause by backed up urine. They know of my disability (not my kidneys) and continue to tamper with me. I've had my doctors fax evidence of surgeries, the seriousness of my damaged kidneys that I have operated on about every two years! I'm scared. I've been out of work with no money now for TWO MONTHS!!! They are now deeming my return to work certificate that was very detailed "that I'm fit to work now" fax from my 12 year physician as...not enough evidence of my health being good enough to work. I'm living off of my 1,000 dollar "retirement savings" now. Waiting for my BIG AIRLINE COMPANY to make up their mind about me. I think Hillary would benefit all of us that are dammned by BIG CEOs. The way the administration is set up now is to outsource tons of jobs in American based companies to places like India and the Phillipines. I think people from all countries deserve to make a living...and do the best they can...BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF AN AMERICAN'S JOB!!! All our reservation centers have been sent overseas. You have NO IDEA the frustration from passengers and us employess have to deal with over their errors and the language barriers. NOW they want the saftey of all to be in jeapordy but outsourcing the jobs of Airplane maintenance to China and such...If I were you, and you fly...I'd be scared too. BIG ASS REPUBLICAN CEO'S FILLING THEIR POCKETS AND THE POCKETS OF THEIR CRONIES AT THE EXPENSE OF YOU, ME AND ALL OF US THAT CAN NOT MAKE ENDS MEET!!! It's a big CRIME...and a lot of LIES and COVERUPS.
I know HILLARY CLINTON WILL END THIS!!!!
I lost my sister about 2 years ago. She had so many difficult disabilities to care for. She lived in a state run place. My mom, grandmother, sister, myself...everyone would see/interact/love/visit/enjoy her everyday! They closed the place just after she passed because they deemed it too costly here in Massachusetts (a big THANK YOU TO MITT ROMNEY) to have a state run faciity for people and families to receive desperately needed health care and attention. The people from there are scattered everywhere...some were completly mainstreamed into society...no skills...no help...nothing. Many have passed. I'm sad.
Another BIG Republican Economy Reform Failure.
Men and women...Americans and other beautiful people are dying everyday for a "WAR ON TERROR"...That is comlete crap...it's a war for oil to suck more money from the voiceless, middle class to poor folk to pay for. It's "DADDY'S WAR" It's fruitless, dumb, wrong...and it was over before it started. Would anyone come here if there was a Civil War? Look at what George said at a HUGE celebration for Isreal! Doesn't that scare you?
My grandmother and my mom have been my warriors of love forever. Without them I'd be gone right now. I'm thinking of Nana, Ma and all the other "unsung heros" of the world. I'm thinking of all the women ignored for all these years. Behind every great, strong man...is a greater, stronger woman. A mom, a wife etc... Women are the real strength. They are the support behind their husbands, children and families from time immormoral. I'm thinking of you Hillary. I'm thinking about you helping out a guy like me...just making his way and still managing to smile...because I have love and family. It's not about money, gas, foreign policy...it's about what's right...who's the strongest for everyone...and giving back a voice to a "nobody" like me...

I think HIllary could put a stop to the crimes happening in our own country...all the way from the people we elected (or bought their way into office) to the criminal CEOs of companies...to the crime ridden hate filled streets...
I'm ending with this...I have no benefits...nothing to fall back on. I have no more pension...I have no more voice...it has been robbed by the likes of George, Mitt and the others that do their best to benefit people like them...and screw people like us. Look really hard at Hillary's website and maybe you too will find a way for the world to heal...as you know someone really, really great said..."we're crying out for love..." and "...you'd like to save me..."
God Bless...
J

PS...God's demands on us are small. He wants us to honor him...love one another...do your best...and enjoy the blessings from him...our planet, nation etc...and...to ALWAYS DO WHAT'S RIGHT. Hillary's right...the other's are yet another BUSH crime.

Link to one of the places that took my story...CNN!

http://www.ireport.net/docs/DOC-2354...2FB1B7B2B0B800

You guys...I don't know what your stance is...maybe this is in the wrong section...I want it "OUT THERE"...for all of us that have been silenced...or have had their opinions and hopes dashed.

Love,
Jim

PS...IF YOU WONDERED WHERE I'VE BEEN...I WAS LURKING FOR 2 MONTHS BUT WRITING A LOT OF POLITICAL STORIES SUCH AS THIS...AND SCREAMING ON LINE AND ON THE PHONE AND REACHING OUT TO EVERYONE WITH THE MESSAGE..."WE NEED HELP!"

Republicans...don't take offence...please...let's hear some positive or negative post from you too...don't bash people's ideas...let's debate.

...and those who don't like this...

BRING IT ON!!!

Just thinking of those in support for Clinton, Obama and McCain...
Are you voting Democrat or Republican just because that's the way you were raised? Are you voting for Hillary because she is a woman? Are you voting for Obama because he's black and trendy? Are you voting for McCain because he's a war hero...a POW...a Republican...that knows all about war?

I'm looking forward to you responses.

I love you all....

Last edited by SaidSomething; 06-08-2008 at 01:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
.
  #2  
Old 06-08-2008, 03:41 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 14,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaidSomething View Post
I think HIllary could put a stop to the crimes happening in our own country...all the way from the people we elected (or bought their way into office) to the criminal CEOs of companies...to the crime ridden hate filled streets...
Ridding the streets of violent crime & thuggery (my single biggest social concern) would be great. How can Clinton do that?
__________________

moviekinks.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-08-2008, 06:13 PM
SaidSomething's Avatar
SaidSomething SaidSomething is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb West of Boston
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Ridding the streets of violent crime & thuggery (my single biggest social concern) would be great. How can Clinton do that?
Good question...
For example...from CNN profile.

"Voted for a 10-year extension of the assault weapons ban. Voted for requiring extensive background checks at gun shows. Supports licensing and registration of handguns, mandatory trigger locks for handguns, holding adults responsible for their children's use of guns, raising the youth handgun ban from age 18 to 21, limiting gun sales to one per month and allowing the Consumer Products Safety Commission regulate guns. "


hillaryclinton.com

"Our immigration system is in crisis. The laws we currently have on the books are inadequate and no longer serve our best interests. As a nation, we place a premium on compassion, respect, and policies that help families, but our immigration laws don't reflect that.

Hillary has consistently called for comprehensive immigration reform that respects our immigrant heritage and honors the rule of law. She believes comprehensive reform must have as essential ingredients a strengthening of our borders, greater cross-cooperation with our neighbors, strict but fair enforcement of our laws, federal assistance to our state and local governments, strict penalties for those who exploit undocumented workers, and a path to earned legal status for those who are here, working hard, paying taxes, respecting the law, and willing to meet a high bar.

Hillary strongly believes we need to do more to know who is in our country by securing our borders and ensuring that employers comply with the law against hiring and exploiting undocumented workers. She supports deploying new technology that can help stop the flow of undocumented immigrants into the country and an employer verification system that is universal, accurate, timely, and does not lead to discrimination and abuse by employers.

Along with these changes, Hillary believes we need to repair those broken portions of our immigration system that irrevocably damage families and force citizens and lawful immigrants to choose between their newly adopted country and living with their spouse or children. We have a national interest in fostering strong families. This is why she introduced an amendment during consideration of the immigration reform bill that would have taken steps to protect the sanctity of families. Our American values demand no less.

And Hillary understands that our immigration policies have a direct impact on American workers. She opposes a guest worker program that exploits workers and creates a supply of cheap labor that undermines the wages of U.S. workers. Hillary believes all workers deserve safe conditions and decent wages. She supports an Ag Jobs program, which will keep our agricultural industry vibrant while enabling agricultural workers to receive the fair wages and labor protections they ought to receive.

When Hillary is president, comprehensive immigration reform will be a top priority.



Hillary has advocated for policies to help smooth the transition of legal immigrants once they arrive in the U.S. so that they can add to our economy and culture.

She championed the Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act, which would give states the option to provide federally funded Medicaid and SCHIP benefits to low-income legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
She wrote the Access to Employment and English Acquisition Act to meet the growing demand for English language courses and other job skills.
She strongly supports the DREAM Act, which provides a path to citizenship through military service or higher education for children who were brought to the U.S. by their parents.
She offered an amendment to make family reunification the guiding principle of our immigration system. "

More from Hillary...

From her days as a staff attorney for the Children's Defense Fund (CDF) working as an advocate for children with special needs to her leadership of the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee, Hillary has been a passionate advocate for providing greater educational opportunities to all children. Her work for CDF helped pave the way for the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, the first time children with special needs were guaranteed the right to a free, appropriate public education. Her work in Arkansas led to tangible results: teacher salaries doubled, class size fell significantly, learning standards and assessments were implemented, and students were given much greater access to higher-level science and foreign-language courses. Hillary also brought Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters, a model parent education program, to the state in order to better prepare all children to start school.

As the nation's First Lady, Hillary promoted the Prescription for Reading program, encouraging pediatricians to "prescribe" that new parents read to their children. She helped create Early Head Start in order to prepare students from low income backgrounds for school. She also spearheaded the administration's efforts to grow an after-school program from a pilot program of $1 million to a $1 billion program, serving children in all 50 states. As a senator, Hillary worked to reform and fully fund No Child Left Behind. She helped enact legislation to recruit and retain teachers and principals to high-need areas. She has been committed to strengthen and fully fund our special education system. She also helped fight off efforts by the Bush administration to slash afterschool funding by 40 percent. As president, Hillary will fight for each and every child in America to have access to the highest quality schools so that they can fulfill their potential and reach their dreams.



Early Childhood Education

Hillary knows that parents are our children's first teachers, and the early years have a tremendous impact on their lives. That is why she will invest heavily in proven strategies to get all children ready for school, including:

Nurse home visitation programs to help new parents develop parenting skills.
Quality child care and Head Start.
Pre-kindergarten for all four-year olds.


K-12

Hillary also knows that we have to improve our K-12 system in order to ensure that every child is prepared to compete in an increasingly global economy. As president, she will:

End the unfunded mandate known as No Child Left Behind.
Meet the funding promises of IDEA to ensure that children with special needs get the attention and support they deserve.
Recruit and retain thousands more outstanding teachers and principals, especially in urban and rural areas.
Cut the minority dropout rate in half.
Create "Green Schools" in order to reduce energy costs and eliminate environmental hazards that can hinder children's development.
Expand early-intervention mentoring programs to help one million at-risk youth aspire for college and job success.
Identify at-risk youth early on and provide $1 billion in intensive interventions, such as early college high schools and multiple pathways to graduation, to get them back on track.
Double the after school program to ensure that 2 million young people have a safe and stimulating place to go between 3 and 6 p.m.
Invest $100 million in a new public/private summer internship program.
Provide opportunity for 1.5 million disconnected youth in job programs linked to high-growth economic sectors.


College Access

In the 21st century, a college education is more important than ever. Hillary believes it's time for a new bargain with the American people -- a bargain that gives all Americans willing to work hard the tools they need to get ahead. Her plan will make college more affordable and accessible so that every American who has earned it and wants to go has the chance to get a college degree. As president, she will:

Create a new $3,500 college tax credit.
Increase the maximum Pell Grant.
Strengthen community colleges through a $500 million investment.
Create a graduation fund to increase college graduation rates.
Increase to $10,000 the college scholarship for those who participate in AmeriCorps full-time for one year.
Get rid of the red tape in financial aid.
Hold college costs down and hold colleges accountable for results though an online college cost calculator, a college graduation and employment rate index, and truth in tuition disclosure.
Challenge selective colleges to expand access for students from low-income communities.
Hillary's PlansUniversal Pre-K
Youth Opportunity Agenda
Plan to Address the Drop-Out Crisis
Making College Affordable for More Families
Protecting Families From Predatory College Loans
A Champion for Educators and Children
Hillary's Plan to Strengthen the Arts
Giving Every Child a Chance
Scientific Integrity and Innovation
Innovation Agenda
Hillary’s Statement on the Bush Administration’s Announcement of More Flexibility Within No Child Left Behind
Plan to Address the Student Loan Crisis
Worker Retraining Initiative


Strengthening the Middle Class Providing Affordable and Accessible Health Care Ending the War in Iraq Promoting Energy Independence and Fighting Global Warming Improving Our Schools Fulfilling Our Promises to Veterans Supporting Parents and Caring for Children Restoring America's Standing in the World A Champion for Women Comprehensive Government Reform Strengthening Our Democracy Reforming our Immigration System Creating Opportunity in Rural America."

Maybe take a look at what she "has" done as a Senator...you can find many of these answers on the internet.

Thank you for your question.
Jim:wavey


By the way this is the unedited portion from my story...

"I think HIllary could put a stop to the crimes happening in our own country...all the way from the people we elected (or bought their way into office) to the criminal CEOs of companies...to the crime ridden hate filled streets...
I'm ending with this...I have no benefits...nothing to fall back on. I have no more pension...I have no more voice...it has been robbed by the likes of George, Mitt and the others that do their best to benefit people like them...and screw people like us. Look really hard at Hillary's website and maybe you too will find a way for the world to heal...as you know someone really, really great said..."we're crying out for love..." and "...you'd like to save me..."

Last edited by SaidSomething; 06-08-2008 at 06:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-09-2008, 01:48 AM
BombaySapphire3 BombaySapphire3 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Francisco Bay area
Posts: 4,499
Default

Hillary is a very intelligent and determined woman and I have no doubt she will work with our next President Barack Obama who shares many of her goals in whatever capacity she is in.
__________________
Children of the world the forgotten chimpanzee..in the eyes of the world you have done so much for me. ..SLN.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-09-2008, 03:26 AM
iamnotafraid iamnotafraid is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,850
Default

I wonder what she thinks about all the pardons her husband gave as he was leaving office?

I wonder why they bombed the "aspirin factory" during the Clinton administration?

Why did she vote for the war in Iraq, since she saw the very same intelligence reports President Bush had (and the rest of our allies for that matter)?

Why can't she just admit she lied about the "coming in under sniper fire" incident?

And sadly, that's just the beginning.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-09-2008, 05:51 AM
SaidSomething's Avatar
SaidSomething SaidSomething is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb West of Boston
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotafraid View Post
I wonder what she thinks about all the pardons her husband gave as he was leaving office?

I wonder why they bombed the "aspirin factory" during the Clinton administration?

Why did she vote for the war in Iraq, since she saw the very same intelligence reports President Bush had (and the rest of our allies for that matter)?

Why can't she just admit she lied about the "coming in under sniper fire" incident?

And sadly, that's just the beginning.
I'm glad you asked those questions. I'm not sure of her seeing the "same" intelligence reports. Her vote was NOT for the war in Iraq. If you check facts on your statements...and do some research NOT based on rumor...or 1/2 facts...you'll find your answers.

Thank you so much again, for your input.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-09-2008, 05:52 AM
SaidSomething's Avatar
SaidSomething SaidSomething is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb West of Boston
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3 View Post
Hillary is a very intelligent and determined woman and I have no doubt she will work with our next President Barack Obama who shares many of her goals in whatever capacity she is in.
Wow! I hope that's the case. If not, "I" feel...that we're screwed.

Thank you for not coming in as a line of attack.

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-09-2008, 09:00 AM
Stew_Matthews's Avatar
Stew_Matthews Stew_Matthews is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rye, NY
Posts: 675
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaidSomething

The way the administration is set up now is to outsource tons of jobs in American based companies to places like India and the Phillipines. I think people from all countries deserve to make a living...and do the best they can...BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF AN AMERICAN'S JOB!!! All our reservation centers have been sent overseas. You have NO IDEA the frustration from passengers and us employess have to deal with over their errors and the language barriers. NOW they want the saftey of all to be in jeapordy but outsourcing the jobs of Airplane maintenance to China and such...If I were you, and you fly...I'd be scared too. BIG ASS REPUBLICAN CEO'S FILLING THEIR POCKETS AND THE POCKETS OF THEIR CRONIES AT THE EXPENSE OF YOU, ME AND ALL OF US THAT CAN NOT MAKE ENDS MEET!!!
Obviously I am sorry about the way in which your health and job position has worked out. I hope you get back to doing a job that you enjoy soon.

I feel, but you may not, that there is an inconsistency in this section of your post. You work for an airline that does business with people all over the world and makes money from people all over the world. Isn’t it right, therefore, that it should share its jobs and suppliers across the world too? I do.

I can understand the concerns people have about jobs being relocated but that is what multinational companies are about. We, as citizens demand cheap food, cheap fuel, cheap airtravel, cheap clothes. Businesses have to find the cheapest raw materials and the lowest labor costs. Off shoring of jobs is just part of that drive to lower costs.

I’m sorry to say it isn’t a Republican conspiracy, or in fact an Obama one, it is simply free market economics. And it hasn’t changed one bit since Adam Smith wrote ‘The Wealth of Nations’ back in 1776, it’s just that the US hasn’t experienced the less attractive aspects of the free market to this extent before. That's the difference I think.

Last edited by Stew_Matthews; 06-09-2008 at 09:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-09-2008, 09:06 AM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew_Matthews View Post
. . . I’m sorry to say it isn’t a Repulican conspiracy, or in fact an Obama one, it is simply free market economics. And it hasn’t changed one bit since Adam Smith wrote ‘The Wealth of Nations’ back in 1776, it’s just that the US hasn’t experienced the less attractive aspects of the free market to this extent before. That's the difference I think.
Exactly. Moreover, if you do not like capitalism, then you are living in the wrong country.

Finally, not all CEO's are republicans. But, the CEO has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders to make the company as financially well set as possible. Do I personally think that pay should rise. Yes, I do. But, I have never run a multi billion dollar international company. I do know this though, If all employees of, say Delta, were given a 30% raise, the result would be a 50% percent or so raise in prices because any cut in pay for the top five could never compensate for amount of the increase in pay and the taxes and other expenses that go with it.

Note -- I am not talking about fraud or criminal activity.
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-10-2008, 01:44 AM
SaidSomething's Avatar
SaidSomething SaidSomething is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb West of Boston
Posts: 288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew_Matthews View Post
Obviously I am sorry about the way in which your health and job position has worked out. I hope you get back to doing a job that you enjoy soon.

I feel, but you may not, that there is an inconsistency in this section of your post. You work for an airline that does business with people all over the world and makes money from people all over the world. Isn’t it right, therefore, that it should share its jobs and suppliers across the world too? I do.

I can understand the concerns people have about jobs being relocated but that is what multinational companies are about. We, as citizens demand cheap food, cheap fuel, cheap airtravel, cheap clothes. Businesses have to find the cheapest raw materials and the lowest labor costs. Off shoring of jobs is just part of that drive to lower costs.

I’m sorry to say it isn’t a Republican conspiracy, or in fact an Obama one, it is simply free market economics. And it hasn’t changed one bit since Adam Smith wrote ‘The Wealth of Nations’ back in 1776, it’s just that the US hasn’t experienced the less attractive aspects of the free market to this extent before. That's the difference I think.
Thank you for your insight...you know I'm going to beg to differ.

My airline a few years ago was worldwide #1 and it's shrinking everyday. I just have a problem with an American based company...that has been here for ever in the airline industry...that started in America...and yes, we travel the world...however, don't you think quality=quality? By this...say, you love grapes. You die for them everyday. You finally get some of a street corner...and they smell like poison...would you eat them? Probably not. The outsourcing of jobs have made the cusomers and the agents and upper management and the papers and news...and everybody unhappy. I, swear...I love my job. I've got no where to go anyway...I take pride in my work. Not to say the outsourced doesn't but, back to the grapes. You wouldn't eat the grapes...no more than you would outsource your passengers saftey...and "the thing" that keeps them coming back to your airline. I't dumb. When it all started almost 8 years ago...it didn't work then...and it really isn't working now.

You guys are cool...

I'll blog more but, I'm zzzzzz

Jim
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-10-2008, 10:09 AM
SuzeQuze's Avatar
SuzeQuze SuzeQuze is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: By the sea.
Posts: 10,583
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaidSomething View Post
I'm glad you asked those questions. I'm not sure of her seeing the "same" intelligence reports. Her vote was NOT for the war in Iraq. If you check facts on your statements...and do some research NOT based on rumor...or 1/2 facts...you'll find your answers.

Thank you so much again, for your input.
That's not true, she voted for it.
__________________
~Suzy
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-10-2008, 11:04 AM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuzeQuze View Post
That's not true, she voted for it.
Well, no she did not for the war.

Here is the wording of the bill:

Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in "material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations" and urged the President "to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations" (Public Law 105-235);

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949;

Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1)," that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and "constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region," and that Congress, "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688";

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to "work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge" posed by Iraq and to "work for the necessary resolutions," while also making clear that "the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable";

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region;

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to


(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS. --


(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. -- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. -- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS

(a) The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 2 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of Public Law 105-338 (the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998).

(b) To the extent that the submission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides with the submission of any other report on matters relevant to this joint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congress pursuant to the reporting requirements of Public Law 93-148 (the War Powers Resolution), all such reports may be submitted as a single consolidated report to the Congress.

(c) To the extent that the information required by section 3 of Public Law 102-1 is included in the report required by this section, such report shall be considered as meeting the requirements of section 3 of Public Law 102-1.

###


That is wildly different than saying Hillary Clinton voted to go to war in Iraq. It was much more complicated than that in that and again, the world, though the UN resolutions referenced above thought SH had WMD, SH was not then cooperating in proving he did not, and the US and UN had been killing by unanimous ocnsent in Iraq for years, but suddenly W is out of left field for wanting to hold SH's feet to the fire, esp. after the US just witnessed what can happen when crazies have weapons of WMD or the ability to fabricate them -- Remember, her consituents were attacked by rterrorists and, though unrelated, SH was a trerrorist as well who defied the UN, had been proven to be an aggressor, had threatened US and attacked US allies and the US herself in the no fly zones To say that Hillary or any US Congressperson should have voted no to authorize W to pursue the investigations of WMD and n0t to give them the authority to use the military to enforce that is irresponsible on those facts.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________

And - since then, she has tried to remove the authorization, that W misused, and which I abhor him for -- e.g.,

Hillary Seeks To End War Authorization

WASHINGTON, May 4, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS/AP) Presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday sought to force another showdown with President Bush — and her Democratic rivals — over the Iraq war.

Sens. Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., announced they would introduce legislation that would require the president to seek a reauthorization from Congress to extend the military effort in Iraq beyond October 11, 2007.

"If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him," Clinton said in a speech on the Senate floor.

The two senators have not decided how they will seek to force a vote on the measure — whether through an amendment, a stand-alone bill, or a spending bill.

Her tough talk also contained a veiled jab at rival John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who has been outspoken in criticizing his own vote and that of other lawmakers in 2002 authorizing the war.

Clinton noted on Thursday that in 2002 she had also voted for an amendment offered by Byrd that would have limited the war authorization to one year. The measure was defeated, and Edwards voted against it.

"I supported the Byrd amendment on Oct 10, 2002 which would have limited the original authorization to one year and I believe a full reconsideration of the terms and conditions of that authorization is overdue," she said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino derided the proposal and attributed it to posturing for Democratic primary voters.

"Here we go again. The Senate is trying another way to put a surrender date on the calendar. Welcome to politics '08-style," Perino said.

The Democrats are not the first to suggest Congress vote whether to reauthorize the war. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, floated the possibility months ago, but it has gone nowhere.

Clinton's position on the Iraq war has been a subject of constant debate among Democrats as they weigh the candidates seeking the presidential nomination. She voted to authorize the war, but has long criticized the Bush administration's handling of the conflict. While others have called for an immediate withdrawal, Clinton has favored redeploying troops out of Iraq within 90 days.

She also supports a goal of removing all combat troops except those needed for residual missions by March 2008.

Edwards urged Congress to pass again a bill Mr. Bush just vetoed that would have begun troop withdrawals in October.

"Congress should stand its ground and not back down to him. They should send him the same bill he just vetoed, one that supports our troops, ends the war, and brings them home," he said.

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said of the Byrd-Clinton plan: "While I applaud this effort, sadly, it will not change the president's course in Iraq."

Meanwhile, House Democratic leaders indicated they are not ready to back down in their confrontation with President Bush on Iraq.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other party leaders are considering a bill that would fund the war as Mr. Bush wants, but only guarantee the money through July. After that, Congress could block additional money from being sent if the Iraqi government does not meet certain political and security goals.

The proposal, not yet endorsed or briefed to caucus members, would be a direct challenge to the president, who has demanded Congress fund the war with no strings attached. This week, Mr. Bush vetoed a $124.2 billion bill that would have provided money for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan while requiring troops to begin coming home by Oct. 1.

Democrats say they will provide troops in combat the resources they need and will send Bush a bill by the end of the month. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has reported that the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to fund war operations until July.

In a closed-door leadership meeting Thursday, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., suggested that the House guarantee funding of the war only through July. The bill would provide additional money after that point, but give Congress a chance to deny those funds be used if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.

Under Obey's proposal, members would vote separately on whether to fund some of the domestic spending in the Iraq bill that Bush opposed, such as agricultural assistance.

The plan was described by Democratic aides who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan. According to a senior Democratic leadership aide, the plan has not been endorsed by Pelosi or in the Senate.

The move likely would appease a large number of House Democrats who are reluctant to vote for a war spending bill unless it moves toward getting troops out of Iraq. Such a plan would signal to caucus members that the speaker was not willing to back down to Bush and, at the same time, support the troops.

While the House could narrowly pass the measure, it is unlikely to find similar backing in the Senate, where some leading Democrats say they want to fund the war through September.

Several Republicans, including Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and John Sununu of New Hampshire and Reps. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Adam Putnam of Florida, have said they are open to restricting the more than $5 billion in aid for Iraq if the Baghdad government does not meet certain benchmarks.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2760370.shtml
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world

Last edited by strandinthewind; 06-10-2008 at 11:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-10-2008, 01:20 PM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

But - hey - d0n't take my word for it

Clinton defends successor's push for war
Says Bush 'couldn't responsibly ignore' chance Iraq had WMDs

(CNN) -- Former President Clinton has revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq but chastised the administration over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

Clinton, who was interviewed Thursday, said he did not believe that Bush went to war in Iraq over oil or for imperialist reasons but out of a genuine belief that large quantities of weapons of mass destruction remained unaccounted for.

Noting that Bush had to be "reeling" in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, Clinton said Bush's first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining "chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material."

"That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for," Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.

"So I thought the president had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, 'Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.' You couldn't responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks," Clinton said.

Pressed on whether the Iraq war was worth the cost to the United States, Clinton said he would not have undertaken the war until after U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix "finished his job."

Weapons inspectors led by Blix scoured Iraq for three and a half months before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 but left after President Bush issued an ultimatum to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to leave the country.

"I want it to have been worth it, even though I didn't agree with the timing of the attack," Clinton said.

Clinton blamed the Abu Ghraib prison abuses on poorly trained National Guard personnel and higher-ups in the Bush administration.

The former president said he was not surprised by the abuses committed by U.S. forces at Abu Ghraib but that he was surprised by their extent.

"There is no excuse for that," Clinton said.

Clinton blamed the abuses on the higher echelons of the Bush administration.

"The more we learn about it, the more it seems that some people fairly high up, at least, thought that this was the way it ought to be done," he said.

Implying that the United States should lead by example, Clinton said of the abuses, "No. 1, we can't pull stunts like that, and No. 2, when we do, whoever is responsible has to pay."

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/cli...raq/index.html
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-10-2008, 03:24 PM
Stew_Matthews's Avatar
Stew_Matthews Stew_Matthews is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rye, NY
Posts: 675
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaidSomething View Post
Thank you for your insight...you know I'm going to beg to differ.

My airline a few years ago was worldwide #1 and it's shrinking everyday. I just have a problem with an American based company...that has been here for ever in the airline industry...that started in America...and yes, we travel the world...however, don't you think quality=quality? By this...say, you love grapes. You die for them everyday. You finally get some of a street corner...and they smell like poison...would you eat them? Probably not. The outsourcing of jobs have made the cusomers and the agents and upper management and the papers and news...and everybody unhappy. I, swear...I love my job. I've got no where to go anyway...I take pride in my work. Not to say the outsourced doesn't but, back to the grapes. You wouldn't eat the grapes...no more than you would outsource your passengers saftey...and "the thing" that keeps them coming back to your airline. I't dumb. When it all started almost 8 years ago...it didn't work then...and it really isn't working now.

You guys are cool...

I'll blog more but, I'm zzzzzz

Jim
Again, I am not attempting to argue with you for some intellectual entertainment, but I think you miss the point. The airline industry in the US has shrunk because of competition. In the recent past US airlines used to block book ‘slots’ at European airports e.g. Heathrow. It meant that no other airline could land irrespective of whether other airlines wanted to use the airport. This meant that the likes of American Airlines and United (with British Airways) ran a virtual cartel. Virgin airlines forced the issue in Europe, whereas in the past, people like Freddie Laker went out of business. The upshot was that the industry was made more competitive through regulation and only those with the best ‘value for money’ tariffs have survived. No airline can be the cheapest to every destination – it can’t be done and you know that.

I ignored the safety thing first time ‘round because I didn’t like the assertion you made that people outside the US don’t care about aircraft safety. Fact is, the safest airline is Quantas and they aren’t American. Planes aren’t dropping out of the sky across the world and there is no evidence to suggest that an engineer in Hong Kong can’t do a job as effectively as someone in New York.

I live in Chicago and can see the pain that United airlines staff are facing. But it is economics – full stop. If BA offer $600 return to London and United $800, people want the cheapest and no fancy in flight meal will change that I'm afraid.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-10-2008, 03:32 PM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

^^^

I agree.

And, the price of fuel is the no. 1. thing ruining the airlines now. And, fuel likely will only get more expensive. So, either the formerly $200 or so flight from Chicago to Manhattan will have to go to $300 or so soon on all airlines. Or, they will go broke and be foreced to cut dangerously into seemingly uncutable areas. I mean there are only so many $25 extras the public will pay for
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Bekka (Bramlett) & Billy (Burnette) - Bekka & Billy - 1997 Almo Sounds - Used CD picture

Bekka (Bramlett) & Billy (Burnette) - Bekka & Billy - 1997 Almo Sounds - Used CD

$9.00



RITA COOLIDGE CD THINKIN' ABOUT YOU BEKKA BRAMLETT LETTING YOU GO WITH LOVE 1998 picture

RITA COOLIDGE CD THINKIN' ABOUT YOU BEKKA BRAMLETT LETTING YOU GO WITH LOVE 1998

$14.99



RICH MAHAN*BEKKA BRAMLETT / HOT CHICKEN WISDOM *PROMO COPY CD picture

RICH MAHAN*BEKKA BRAMLETT / HOT CHICKEN WISDOM *PROMO COPY CD

$10.00



The Zoo Shakin' the Cage CD Mick Fleetwood Bekka Bramlett Billy Thorpe picture

The Zoo Shakin' the Cage CD Mick Fleetwood Bekka Bramlett Billy Thorpe

$14.72



RPM RADIO PROGRAMMING #T229 JOE COCKER/BEKKA BRAMLETT, YES, DENNIS DeYOUNG,BASIA picture

RPM RADIO PROGRAMMING #T229 JOE COCKER/BEKKA BRAMLETT, YES, DENNIS DeYOUNG,BASIA

$14.99




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved