posted on March 23, 2007 09:13:49 AM new
So Linda, I guess the one question we all would love to know is how do you feel about the marriage history of these Republican candidates? How does that affect your opinion of them? You blather on and on about hypocritical liberals, but when you put your morals and values on marriage to the test against these Republican candidates, how do they measure up?
I highly doubt you can answer that without referencing Clinton or some other bash fest against the left, or changing the subject all together as you normally do.
posted on March 23, 2007 01:57:41 PM new
Yes, I understand kiara that you are OFTEN confused about the difference between a FACT and an opinion. Many liberals share that same inability you have to distingish between the two.
===
Saying "I think you are a hypocrite" is an opinion.
It's a personal judgement.
But when one says "WHO TELL EVERYONE THEY ARE PURE AND GOOD" that is NOT an opinion....it's a FALSE statement of action taken by someone.
It NEVER happened and coincoach can't prove it did.
posted on March 23, 2007 02:51:30 PM new
shagmidmod
If you count Rudy's 3rd wife she has also been married 3 times. 6 marriages just between Rudy and his honey. LOL
Linbaugh said today that John Edwards and his wife held the press conference about his wife's recurring Cancer to just "JUMP START" his campaign.
posted on March 23, 2007 03:02:10 PM newYes, I understand kiara that you are OFTEN confused about the difference between a FACT and an opinion
No you are confused, Linda_K because you are unable to comprehend what others are saying. I was trying to show you the definition of an opinion because you keep calling most of us liars whenever we state our opinions here or even when we post facts with data to back it up.
A lie is done with deliberate intent to deceive. None of us are doing that except for you so that's how you earned the name Liar_K. Do you understand now?
Rusty and Coincoach made some excellent points about the candidates and the 'family values' platform for which they stand. Coincoach was speaking in general terms about the attitude they have and you don't want to or are unable to absorb the content of what they've said because you've made up your mind already when you stated:
The secular/atheist/agnostic left has NEVER had the values the religious right has.
Is that your opinion? Or is it a fact? It's not a lie is it?
posted on March 23, 2007 03:50:05 PM new
Linda said "Many liberals share that same inability you have to distingish between the two." Is that a fact or an opinion? Can you prove it? My statements were my opinion. I did not quote anyone or attribute a quote to anyone. Either you are playing games because you have no legitimate response or you have a serious reading comprehension problem.
posted on March 23, 2007 04:09:45 PM new
LOL....I had NO expectations that any of you would be able to comprehend the difference.
They're YOUR words, coincoach. YOU said them...YOU own them.
NONE of them have EVER said what you implied they have.
THAT is the truth.
============
Yea, and speaking about edwards....what a jerk....his wife has been diagnosed with re-occuring cancer and what is MORE important to him????
The campaign. Not spending her last few months, years with her and the children.....nope....typical low life liberals whose priorities are VERY screwed up.
posted on March 23, 2007 05:02:29 PM new
"""Yea, and speaking about edwards....what a jerk....his wife has been diagnosed with re-occuring cancer and what is MORE important to him????
The campaign. Not spending her last few months, years with her and the children.....nope....typical low life liberals whose priorities are VERY screwed up."""
Cheap shot and, of course, a mis-informed comment.
Elizabeth Edwards is all for going on with the campaign....going on with THEIR life!
That IS their life, stupid.
Her cancer is incurable but manageable....what do you propose, they sit on the sofa until she dies ?
It could be many, many years and she doesn't seem like the type to sit still and do nothing.
To serve their country seems to be very high on their list of what good liberals do!!!!!
And John won't be serving divorce papers on her before she's barely awake from surgery because he's boffing someone else like a REPUBLICAN.
posted on March 23, 2007 05:26:16 PM new
The right has met a new low with their mean-spiritedness and another smear campaign against the Edwards family. It's 2007 and many partners make decisions together and do what they think is best for each other and the family.
Perhaps because the religious right has the male partner as high priest of the house they fail to recognize that women in many relationships have an equal say in matters of importance. Elizabeth Edwards is a strong lady and is bringing attention to a disease that is important to all women. Politics aside, compassion should be shown to both her and her husband and all their family no matter what they decide now or in the future.
posted on March 23, 2007 06:10:00 PM new
Oh yea when people die they ALWAYS say they wished they'd spent more time doing their jobs....at work.
WRONG.
It shows a total lack of family values on his part.
Of course it's their decision to make. Never said it wasn't. And compassion for her has NOTHING to do with facing the facts that her life is VERY limited and he'd rather spend his time with the hectic schedule that running a campaign will take.
Most supportive wifes would offer that choice to their husband....and most loving husbands would WANT to spend their time with their loved one. TIME...an item that can NEVER be replaced....never made up.
He has all the money he could possibly want....and he'd rather be a typical politician.
My guess is with as many as are already running for the nomination....he'll lag towards the back of the pack.
None the less...imo, it shows a total lack of family values on his part.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 06:33:16 PM new
John Edwards loves his wife and family but perhaps he also has such a love for his country that he wants a better future for his children and would like to see America return to a respected nation with a president that is admired worldwide.
posted on March 23, 2007 06:37:11 PM new
There you go, being judgmental again. There you go, using that "Family Values" phrase. You have no idea how they came to their decision. She is an attorney--a bright woman who can make her own decisions. Did it ever occur to you that she might rather be busy with the campaign than sit home and worry about her health? Keeping your life as close to normal as possible is often the best way to deal with illness. That may not be your choice, but it is hers. There is no right way or wrong way to deal with serious illness. You do what works for you.
You are busy criticizing John Edwards, who has been nothing but supportive to his wife through several heartbreaking incidents in their lives. What do you say about old Newt who dumped his wife while she was hospitalized with cancer? Now there is something you can judge!
[ edited by coincoach on Mar 23, 2007 06:40 PM ]
posted on March 23, 2007 07:12:39 PM new
LOL....what you appear not to 'get' coincoach is that I can form my personal judgements about BOTH of them.
But it's always been the liberals that have for YEARS and YEARS said that people's personal lives should remain personal. lol lol
Just pointing out their hypocrisy once again.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 07:16:34 PM new
linduh, you are such a dope....and the word is "WIVES" NOT "wifes". How stupid!
No wonder you never can defend your vile positions...your uneducated ignorant status is SO apparent.
And YOU, the rabid repug are once again screaming about "family values". Tell us about Newt's
Haha! I love this from the drooler:
""Oh yea when people die they ALWAYS say they wished they'd spent more time doing their jobs....at work.""
WHEN people die they still can talk !!!!????
REALLY! Sorry, linduh , but only YOU can hear them then!
posted on March 23, 2007 07:21:54 PM new
Yes, you are good at "judgments", Linda. You said "But it's always been the liberals that have for YEARS and YEARS said that people's personal lives should remain personal. lol lol Just pointing out their hypocrisy once again." Hypocrisy? You better look up the definition of the word. In the last several posts, we liberals have been trying to tell you that whatever they decide to do in this PERSONAL matter is the Edwards' business, not yours.
posted on March 23, 2007 07:28:17 PM new
There you are just out and out WRONG, coincoach.
It is EVERY Americans business. lol
With bone cancer, treatments, etc....she's going to be pretty sick before she dies. And they have small children that need looking after.
Don't think for one minute her illness isn't going to be a BIG consideration for anyone who's wanting to run the US. Why do you think Presidents are ALWAYS getting such complete medical exams? lol Because people want to be as reasured as possible that he's healthy.
Any intelligent person KNOWS that edwards would be VERY distracted with an ill and dying wife. Don't fool yourself.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 07:38:02 PM new
And if Edwards is distracted he could just take as much vacation as bushit did and he'd be home all the time !!!
posted on March 23, 2007 07:45:40 PM new
The distraction of a dying spouse is NOT the same as being on working vacations.
edwards would still be distracted....like clinton was while talking to world leaders and using his cigars on monica. tsk tsk tsk
And with so many liberals/dems wanting the job....it's just one stike against edwards that the others don't have.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 07:59:53 PM new
"Any intelligent person KNOWS that edwards would be VERY distracted with an ill and dying wife. Don't fool yourself." Distracted? Really? Just a few posts ago, you implied that Edwards didn't even give a crap for his wife's condition.
"Why do you think Presidents are ALWAYS getting such complete medical exams? lol Because people want to be as reasured as possible that he's healthy."
FDR ran the country while in a wheel chair. Eisenhower had several heart attacks while running the country. Even Woodrow Wilson (or rather, Mrs. Wilson)ran the country while in a coma from a massive stroke President Bush is the picture of health, and look at the mess we are in.
You and I have no idea what is in store for the Edwards. I knew someone in the same situation as Mrs. Edwards who lived for 20 years--most of them without pain or disability. I wish the same for Mrs. Edwards. And--it is not bone cancer, it is metastatic breast cancer--a completely different animal. Don't bury her yet.
[ edited by coincoach on Mar 23, 2007 08:02 PM ]
posted on March 23, 2007 08:07:17 PM new
I'm not. I speaking the reality that the liberals can NEVER stand reading.
Bone cancer = death.
How long? No one except her doctors know.
Being in a wheelchair is no where near as serious as having terminal cancer.
Read the line....HER cancer is NOT CUREABLE. Does that not say enough to you? It should, imo.
And yes, when the media first reported that he was going to step away from his campaign...I felt differently. Then they immediately cleared that up and said he'd be going forward.
THAT speaks VOLUMES as to HIS priorities TO ME.
Yes, it sure does. We give our time to what we LOVE. He is chosing to give his energy and time to politics.
shame on him.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 08:18:20 PM new
coincoach - the article I read said her breast cancer had spread to her rib BONES.
=========
mingo....go throw up on someone else. You have no clue as to what I felt when I DID read he was going to pospone his campaign because of his wife's new diagnosis.
You only THINK you do because of how sick your mind is.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Mar 23, 2007 08:20 PM ]
posted on March 23, 2007 08:27:33 PM new
She does not have bone cancer. Bone cancer originates in the bone. She has a metastatic lesion in one rib from BREAST cancer. Not at all the same. Provided her tests do not show any other lesions or metastasis, she could survive 5 years, 10 years even 20 years. She cannot be cured, but her cancer can be managed with low dose chemo, which will not make her sick like the initial chemo. She won't even lose her hair. Hopefully, she will have many years ahead of her.
Why do you keep flipping back and forth between, he will be distracted by his wife's illness and he should be ashamed for not being distracted by his wife's illness?
posted on March 23, 2007 08:28:22 PM new
I'd have no way of knowing how much edwards supposedly loves our country.
But I CAN see what his PRIORITIES are....and it's NOT spending that time with his wife and family.
That's liberal 'family values' for you. All screwed up.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 08:31:32 PM new
Elizabeth Edwards' metastasized breast cancer should be treatable
Experts say she could have a good quality of life for many more years with medication.
By Thomas H. Maugh II, Times Staff Writer
March 23, 2007
The recurrence of Elizabeth Edwards' breast cancer years after treatment is a serious setback, but probably one she can live with for five to 10 years, perhaps even longer, experts said Thursday.
Still, she will have to take medications for the cancer for the rest of her life.
Such recurrences are not unusual. About a third of breast cancer patients have a disease that has metastasized, or spread from the original location, typically to bones.
If the disease has spread, "we do not feel that it is curable, but it is treatable," said Dr. Linnea Chap, a breast cancer specialist at Premier Oncology in Santa Monica, which is affiliated with St. John's Health Center.
"We have very good treatments that can allow patients to live with breast cancer for many years with a good quality of life."
Cancer metastases are so difficult to cure because surgery is no longer an option once the disease has spread beyond its original confined location, said Dr. Marisa Weiss, president of breastcancer.org and a cancer specialist at Lankenau Hospital in the Philadelphia area. Drugs also become less effective because the metastasized cells "get into hiding spots that the drugs can't get into as easily."
Experts cautioned that it was difficult to predict treatment and outcome for Edwards because the details of her tumor had not been made public.
The treatment is individualized, depending on the characteristics of a patient's cancer. The approach can be as minimal as a pill to block estrogen, which contributes to the growth of many breast cancers. "That is taken daily and is very well tolerated," Chap said.
If the cancer has spread more widely, her physician will probably be more aggressive, using drugs such as Xeloda — an oral drug that blocks an enzyme needed by tumors — or one of the taxane drugs, such as paclitaxel or docetaxel. Those drugs must be given intravenously, and have stronger side effects.
Either might be given in combination with Avastin, which blocks the growth of blood vessels supplying nutrients to the tumors.
The patient also is typically given monthly doses of one of the bisphosphonate drugs, such as Actonel or Fosamax. These drugs do not attack the tumor directly, but strengthen the bone, making it more resistant to fractures. They have also been shown to reduce bone pain in the metastases.
If the cancer has spread to organs other than the bones, as Edwards' physician has hinted, then the initial therapy would be more aggressive, using the strongest of those drugs.
"If it is just in the bones, then the outlook is more favorable than for cancer that has gone to the liver," Weiss said.
posted on March 23, 2007 08:32:39 PM new
LOL...so now you're an oncologist huh? lol
Cancer in a rib bone...IS bone cancer to me. Doesn't matter WHERE the original cancer came from....it's where it is NOW.
I don't feel I'm flipping back and forth.
I think he's a DOG for chosing to spend his time trying to get the dem nomination when this is obviously a HUGE change in her medical condition.
Going to deny that, Doc? LOL LOL LOL
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on March 23, 2007 08:34:49 PM new
Thanks for the INFORMED posts, Coincoach! Now I understand it better myself. But then ,again, I can read AND comprehend.
