What people spend on health care has nothing to do with the job market. You can spend more on health care and get better results, that has nothing to do with your "global financial competition", minimum wage, or union actions.
These discussions are all about the deceptive use of the media to gain power. If the environmental "green movement" was that sincere, there would be no talk about world currencies or government since it actually harms the environment (if you literally believed their science, which I do not) to transport all these "competitive, cheap goods" all over the world.
There would be no talk of "net neutrality" when google searches or simply using the internet for a period of time are proven to waste as much energy as boiling a cup of water, or what ever it is they claim. If you can't buy a stack of compact discs to record your data, then what good is free internet?
People that can not afford internet access do not have the financial skills to use the internet appropriately, and net neutrality advocates point to the opportunity of lead programs that are really education centers, not internet access points. Training programs do not have to operate on the internet, and most job applications involve showing up, filling out a form, and having a contact number, employers to not have time to interact on the internet with potential employees.
Net neutrality's abuse potential outweighs its benefit, by giving the government the eventual control of personal communications and the freedoms privacy that represents.
Universal Disclaimer for the Public Domain, Version 1.4, dated Oct 10th, 2009
a) The views expressed by this website and the author to include all electronic forms of communication are not representative of advertisers, or other third parties that may store and or transmit the messages from this private computer, which you may observe at your own risk, with no liability to the authors, or any party related to transmitting, storing, or any other aspect of the material involved, including email correspondence, which is not necessary to the function of the website, and may or may not be archived. No personal information exchanged will be shared without your consent, or provided to third parties with out the express permission of the parties and, or, individuals concerned.
b) The author(s) of this content and those who may interact with it in various known or unknown electronic methods do not give permission to any third parties to share or provide private personal information who may operate as part of the internet communications system, including all parties, who may technically intercept communications due to the nature of network conditions beyond both the author's legal and physical control, unless those communications represent violations of the law, upon which the author, and or web site will cooperate to pursue any legal remedies.
c) The views expressed by the author or website may or may not contain factual information, due to the use of sarcasm or parody. The views may or may not be complete, either by design, to pre-empt being called a liar even if telling the truth, or by error due to typographical, grammer, or other technical communication problems not realized or imagined, or the possibility of views based on false or missing information, or with the intention of being used for entertainment purposes only, and not as a definitive judgement on the actions, character, or reputation of an organization, individual, or groups of individuals, with the intent of communicating with a limited group of people, and not the general public, however no distribution restrictions apply for fair use purposes described by the US Copyright Office, if no other restrictions are present or communicated, with all commercial proceeds associated with the distribution of the content to remain the sole possesion of the original author.
d) Any humor if used, is not intended to offend people, and may be designed to apply the principals of peer pressure through reverse examination to accomplish the communication of principals or ideas that consist of traditional or proposed social values that are proven to advance the common good, and are not meant to discredit, disparage or demean any person or entities in any professional or personal manner, by attempting to share through the eyes or opinion of the author, for which it is expected that you read at your own risk, with no liability held to the author or any third parties who may store, transfer, or forward this message to others, in the traditions of free speech, fair use, and to play a positive role in a society that believes that graphically depicting male homosexuals having sex, and other unusual sex acts is considered free speech or that the use of abortion to limit Negros, Latinos, and other races from "spreading the wealth around" as a "matter of privacy" (which the author does not condone).
e)The use of humor is a known ingredient in providing teachable moments, and to validate and even demonstrate artistic expressions that are not shared by others, as demonstrated by many valuable scientific observations that were scoffed at in the past, yet proven to be quite valid decades later, upon which the humor used in all electronic communications by the author are based, in the principals and traditions of free speech and pursuit of happiness, and may not be a representation of others, including God.
f) Additional use of automated anonymous page use tracking computer scripts (web page programs) may be licensed by www.google.com, for bandwidth verification or potential advertisement opportunities or incorporation of web master tools in the future.
g) Advertisements that may appear are not necessarily endorsed by the author, either by admission, or by silence, nor are related links, that may be provided for all or any of the following known or unknown purposes, but not limited to, informational, educational, and for the purpose of giving copy right credit referal information under the terms outlined in the conditions applied to the term "fair use" regarding conversations and print under US Copy Right Law.
h) It is the opinion of the author that effective 1 December, 2009, the proposed regulations from the FTC violate the first and fifth amendments of the United States Constitution, by infringing through economic affliction the burden without compensation all financial details concerning the communications of both free enterprise and opinion, and other civil rights such as "punishment must be fair" and not at the "discretion" of public officials, or that advertisers are assumed to be guilty of deception when United States law provides that you are innocent before being proven guilty, and are in fact demonstrations that there are current members of Congress that neither understand the spirit of the law our founding fathers made for the United States of America, or understand how they work in the opinion of the author, as of October 10th, 2009, especially in light of anticipated, and hopefully defeated, legislative taxes relating to energy use and the burden of publishers and advertisers to comply with the law and manage the environment, and in light that there are various consumer protection agencies, including the Better Business Bureau, which have free consumer information.
i)Although the content provided meets or exceeds those new requirements to the knowledge of the author, and modifications to version 1.3 of this disclaimer is a result of the opinion of the author that blogging is another definition for a potentially infinite number or forms of electronic communication, as such the author will retroactively apply this version, 1.4 to all forms of previous communications, when and wherever possible, as time allows, in order to properly convey the intention of the author and to demonstrate an enthusiasm to comply with the law, and not enthusiastically pursue getting high on cocaine as often as possible as Barack Hussein Obama has admitted in his book (paraphrase, synopsis), according to (mmm, mmm, mmm (sonic emphasis)) Rush Hudson Limbaugh, (mmm mmm mmm (sonic emphasis)).
j) Use of this disclaimer for either personal or professional use is permitted with no restrictions. These restrictions or disclaimers do not prohibit the author from pursuing or communicating in a truthful manner, or guarantee that the audience will understand all things as intended, and, or result in being called incoherent, or even a Chicken Chaser!
Mr. Obama's campaign manager is a poor liar in this regard, of just young and dumb?
Opportunity for the Obama administration is fading quickly to do the right thing, and when Americans get hungry, their eyes open.
Universal Disclaimer for the Public Domain, Version 1.4, dated Oct 10th, 2009
a) The views expressed by this website and the author to include all electronic forms of communication are not representative of advertisers, or other third parties that may store and or transmit the messages from this private computer, which you may observe at your own risk, with no liability to the authors, or any party related to transmitting, storing, or any other aspect of the material involved, including email correspondence, which is not necessary to the function of the website, and may or may not be archived. No personal information exchanged will be shared without your consent, or provided to third parties with out the express permission of the parties and, or, individuals concerned.
b) The author(s) of this content and those who may interact with it in various known or unknown electronic methods do not give permission to any third parties to share or provide private personal information who may operate as part of the internet communications system, including all parties, who may technically intercept communications due to the nature of network conditions beyond both the author's legal and physical control, unless those
re: health benefits of USA companies in U.S.A. have nothing to do with anything much re overall economy
If such is not a joke, then the polemic's author might console stockholders of the bankrupted GM, whom will be writing off their itty bitty losses in GM stock come April 15
GM cost has/had been approx $1500 per BOP, Chev, GMC, Hummer, and Saturn sold per each unionized worker's GM health benefits
Somebody, please correct me If I am factually full of it but just re that estimated $1500 per car sold, i already knew that i am 'out of it' generally
On Nov 5, 2:47 am, MagneticEnergy <butterfly77...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What people spend on health care has nothing to do with the job > market. You can spend more on health care and get better results, > that has nothing to do with your "global financial competition", > minimum wage, or union actions.
Health Care Spending in the USA is said to be 15% of the GDP -that's- One in Seven Dollars
Funding US Heath Care through US Jobs and US Incomes Taxes on American Workers ADDS to the Cost of American Products {Goods} and Services. Resulting in Increasing those Cost for Domestic Made Items; and Items that we Export {Made in the USA}; while Imported Items do not have those Costs Built into them.
Why Obama-Careİ SUCKS -cause- It's Funding is based on US Jobs and US Incomes Taxes on American Workers and Employers; and puts American Made Products {Goods} and Services at a Price Disadvantage Around the World; which is Bad for the American Economy and Kills American Jobs. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/ea97b840be227617
> These discussions are all about the deceptive use of the media to gain > power. If the environmental "green movement" was that sincere, there > would be no talk about world currencies or government since it > actually harms the environment (if you literally believed their > science, which I do not) to transport all these "competitive, cheap > goods" all over the world.
> There would be no talk of "net neutrality" when google searches or > simply using the internet for a period of time are proven to waste as > much energy as boiling a cup of water, or what ever it is they > claim. If you can't buy a stack of compact discs to record your > data, then what good is free internet?
> People that can not afford internet access do not have the financial > skills to use the internet appropriately, and net neutrality advocates > point to the opportunity of lead programs that are really education > centers, not internet access points. Training programs do not have > to operate on the internet, and most job applications involve showing > up, filling out a form, and having a contact number, employers to not > have time to interact on the internet with potential employees.
> Net neutrality's abuse potential outweighs its benefit, by giving the > government the eventual control of personal communications and the > freedoms privacy that represents.
> Universal Disclaimer for the Public Domain, Version 1.4, dated Oct > 10th, 2009
> a) The views expressed by this website and the author to include all > electronic forms of communication are not representative of > advertisers, or other third parties that may store and or transmit the > messages from this private computer, which you may observe at your own > risk, with no liability to the authors, or any party related to > transmitting, storing, or any other aspect of the material involved, > including email correspondence, which is not necessary to the function > of the website, and may or may not be archived. No personal > information exchanged will be shared without your consent, or provided > to third parties with out the express permission of the parties and, > or, individuals concerned.
> b) The author(s) of this content and those who may interact with it in > various known or unknown electronic methods do not give permission to > any third parties to share or provide private personal information who > may operate as part of the internet communications system, including > all parties, who may technically intercept communications due to the > nature of network conditions beyond both the author's legal and > physical control, unless those communications represent violations of > the law, upon which the author, and or web site will cooperate to > pursue any legal remedies.
> c) The views expressed by the author or website may or may not contain > factual information, due to the use of sarcasm or parody. The views > may or may not be complete, either by design, to pre-empt being called > a liar even if telling the truth, or by error due to typographical, > grammer, or other technical communication problems not realized or > imagined, or the possibility of views based on false or missing > information, or with the intention of being used for entertainment > purposes only, and not as a definitive judgement on the actions, > character, or reputation of an organization, individual, or groups of > individuals, with the intent of communicating with a limited group of > people, and not the general public, however no distribution > restrictions apply for fair use purposes described by the US Copyright > Office, if no other restrictions are present or communicated, with all > commercial proceeds associated with the distribution of the content to > remain the sole possesion of the original author.
> d) Any humor if used, is not intended to offend people, and may be > designed to apply the principals of peer pressure through reverse > examination to accomplish the communication of principals or ideas > that consist of traditional or proposed social values that are proven > to advance the common good, and are not meant to discredit, disparage > or demean any person or entities in any professional or personal > manner, by attempting to share through the eyes or opinion of the > author, for which it is expected that you read at your own risk, with > no liability held to the author or any third parties who may store, > transfer, or forward this message to others, in the traditions of free > speech, fair use, and to play a positive role in a society that > believes that graphically depicting male homosexuals having sex, and > other unusual sex acts is considered free speech or that the use of > abortion to limit Negros, Latinos, and other races from "spreading the > wealth around" as a "matter of privacy" (which the author does not > condone).
> e)The use of humor is a known ingredient in providing teachable > moments, and to validate and even demonstrate artistic expressions > that are not shared by others, as demonstrated by many valuable > scientific observations that were scoffed at in the past, yet proven > to be quite valid decades later, upon which the humor used in all > electronic communications by the author are based, in the principals > and traditions of free speech and pursuit of happiness, and may not be > a representation of others, including God.
> f) Additional use of automated anonymous page use tracking computer > scripts (web page programs) may be licensed bywww.google.com, for > bandwidth verification or potential advertisement opportunities or > incorporation of web master tools in the future.
> g) Advertisements that may appear are not necessarily endorsed by the > author, either by admission, or by silence, nor are related links, > that may be provided for all or any of the following known or unknown > purposes, but not limited to, informational, educational, and for the > purpose of giving copy right credit referal information under the > terms outlined in the conditions applied to the term "fair use" > regarding conversations and print under US Copy Right Law.
> h) It is the opinion of the author that effective 1 December, 2009, > the proposed regulations from the FTC violate the first and fifth > amendments of the United States Constitution, by infringing through > economic affliction the burden without compensation all financial > details concerning the communications of both free enterprise and > opinion, and other civil rights such as "punishment must be fair" and > not at the "discretion" of public officials, or that advertisers are > assumed to be guilty of deception when United States law provides that > you are innocent before being proven guilty, and are in fact > demonstrations that there are current members of Congress that neither > understand the spirit of the law our founding fathers made for the > United States of America, or understand how they work in the opinion > of the author, as of October 10th, 2009, especially in light of > anticipated, and hopefully defeated, legislative taxes relating to > energy use and the burden of publishers and advertisers to comply with > the law and manage the environment, and in light that there are > various consumer protection agencies, including the Better Business > Bureau, which have free consumer information.
> i)Although the content provided meets or exceeds those new > requirements to the knowledge of the author, and modifications to > version 1.3 of this disclaimer is a
> What people spend on health care has nothing to do with the job > market. You can spend more on health care and get better results, > that has nothing to do with your "global financial competition", > minimum wage, or union actions.
Health Care Spending in the USA is said to be 15% of the GDP -that's- One in Seven Dollars
Funding US Heath Care through US Jobs and US Incomes Taxes on American Workers ADDS to the Cost of American Products {Goods} and Services. Resulting in Increasing those Cost for Domestic Made Items; and Items that we Export {Made in the USA}; while Imported Items do not have those Costs Built into them. =================== BULLSHIT. Imported items have the double digit taxes of those countries plus the double digit inflation built into them,
All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. You are not worthy to argue or comment about American heathcare because yours sucks forever. Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, they are not rich like US but why their system is so efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck off. let Obama run his healthcare program. I know his economy is not no different than Bush, but don't just throw his idea off like you're a whole bunch of negro haters.
> All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. You are not worthy to > argue or comment about American heathcare because yours sucks forever. > Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, they are not rich like > US but why their system is so efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck > off. let Obama run his healthcare program. I know his economy is not no > different than Bush, but don't just throw his idea off like you're a whole > bunch of negro haters.
> All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. You are not worthy to > argue or comment about American heathcare because yours sucks forever. > Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, they are not rich like > US but why their system is so efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck > off. let Obama run his healthcare program. I know his economy is not no > different than Bush, but don't just throw his idea off like you're a whole > bunch of negro haters.
The funny thing about racists, -especially- the liberal ones, is that they never know who they are.
--
-- Popeye "If one does as God does enough times, one will become as God is." -Dr. Hannibal Lector.
> > What people spend on health care has nothing to do with the job > > market. You can spend more on health care and get better results, > > that has nothing to do with your "global financial competition", > > minimum wage, or union actions.
- - Health Care Spending in the USA is said to be 15% - - of the GDP -that's- One in Seven Dollars - - - - Funding US Heath Care through US Jobs and US - - Incomes Taxes on American Workers ADDS to the - - Cost of American Products {Goods} and Services. - - Resulting in Increasing those Cost for Domestic - - Made Items; and Items that we Export {Made in - - the USA}; while Imported Items do not have those - - Costs Built into them.
===================
- BULLSHIT. Imported items have the double digit - taxes of those countries plus the double digit - inflation built into them,
Exported Items generally do not pay the Domestic VAT Sales Taxes so that these items can be sold at the lowest Price on the International Market; and bring Income into the Country of Origin. .
On Nov 9, 11:37 pm, "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote: - All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. - You are not worthy to argue or comment about - American heathcare because yours sucks forever. - Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, - they are not rich like US but why their system is so - efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck off. - let Obama run his healthcare program. - I know his economy is not no different than Bush,
That's just so much Liberal-Fascist Name Calling and NOT FACTS.
- but don't just throw his idea off like you're - a whole bunch of negro haters.
So Pelosi & Reid & Obama are all 'negros' will i never knew . . .
"RHF" <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:498d887b-5a36-43a3-8455-6ad548c5c0a7@i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com... On Nov 9, 11:37 pm, "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote: - All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. ===================== Posts the idiotic jerk. =================== - Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, ======================
By whose measure? According to the W.H.O. USA health care is the best.
> "RHF" <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote in message > news:498d887b-5a36-43a3-8455-6ad548c5c0a7@i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Nov 9, 11:37 pm, "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote: > - All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. > ===================== > Posts the idiotic jerk. > =================== > - Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, > ======================
> By whose measure? According to the W.H.O. USA health care is the best.
Actually, the W.H.O. ranks France as #1.
The US is ranked #37.
1 France 2 Italy 3 San Marino 4 Andorra 5 Malta 6 Singapore 7 Spain 8 Oman 9 Austria 10 Japan 11 Norway 12 Portugal 13 Monaco 14 Greece 15 Iceland 16 Luxembourg 17 Netherlands 18 United Kingdom 19 Ireland 20 Switzerland 21 Belgium 22 Colombia 23 Sweden 24 Cyprus 25 Germany 26 Saudi Arabia 27 United Arab Emirates 28 Israel 29 Morocco 30 Canada 31 Finland 32 Australia 33 Chile 34 Denmark 35 Dominica 36 Costa Rica 37 United States of America 38 Slovenia 39 Cuba 40 Brunei 41 New Zealand 42 Bahrain 43 Croatia 44 Qatar 45 Kuwait 46 Barbados 47 Thailand 48 Czech Republic 49 Malaysia 50 Poland 51 Dominican Republic 52 Tunisia 53 Jamaica 54 Venezuela 55 Albania 56 Seychelles 57 Paraguay 58 South Korea 59 Senegal 60 Philippines 61 Mexico 62 Slovakia 63 Egypt 64 Kazakhstan 65 Uruguay 66 Hungary 67 Trinidad and Tobago 68 Saint Lucia 69 Belize 70 Turkey 71 Nicaragua 72 Belarus 73 Lithuania 74 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 75 Argentina 76 Sri Lanka 77 Estonia 78 Guatemala 79 Ukraine 80 Solomon Islands 81 Algeria 82 Palau 83 Jordan 84 Mauritius 85 Grenada 86 Antigua and Barbuda 87 Libya 88 Bangladesh 89 Macedonia 90 Bosnia-Herzegovina 91 Lebanon 92 Indonesia 93 Iran 94 Bahamas 95 Panama 96 Fiji 97 Benin 98 Nauru 99 Romania 100 Saint Kitts and Nevis 101 Moldova 102 Bulgaria 103 Iraq 104 Armenia 105 Latvia 106 Yugoslavia 107 Cook Islands 108 Syria 109 Azerbaijan 110 Suriname 111 Ecuador 112 India 113 Cape Verde 114 Georgia 115 El Salvador 116 Tonga 117 Uzbekistan 118 Comoros 119 Samoa 120 Yemen 121 Niue 122 Pakistan 123 Micronesia 124 Bhutan 125 Brazil 126 Bolivia 127 Vanuatu 128 Guyana 129 Peru 130 Russia 131 Honduras 132 Burkina Faso 133 Sao Tome and Principe 134 Sudan 135 Ghana 136 Tuvalu 137 Ivory Coast 138 Haiti 139 Gabon 140 Kenya 141 Marshall Islands 142 Kiribati 143 Burundi 144 China 145 Mongolia 146 Gambia 147 Maldives 148 Papua New Guinea 149 Uganda 150 Nepal 151 Kyrgystan 152 Togo 153 Turkmenistan 154 Tajikistan 155 Zimbabwe 156 Tanzania 157 Djibouti 158 Eritrea 159 Madagascar 160 Vietnam 161 Guinea 162 Mauritania 163 Mali 164 Cameroon 165 Laos 166 Congo 167 North Korea 168 Namibia 169 Botswana 170 Niger 171 Equatorial Guinea 172 Rwanda 173 Afghanistan 174 Cambodia 175 South Africa 176 Guinea-Bissau 177 Swaziland 178 Chad 179 Somalia 180 Ethiopia 181 Angola 182 Zambia 183 Lesotho 184 Mozambique 185 Malawi 186 Liberia 187 Nigeria 188 Democratic Republic of the Congo 189 Central African Republic 190 Myanmar
"Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in message news:...
> "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:l7KdnXIRbKbMhWTXnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@posted.toastnet... >> All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. You are not worthy >> to argue or comment about American heathcare because yours sucks forever. >> Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, they are not rich >> like US but why their system is so efficient! So quit argue and shut the >> fuck off. let Obama run his healthcare program. I know his economy is >> not no different than Bush, but don't just throw his idea off like you're >> a whole bunch of negro haters.
Pelosi's victory for women
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi scored a giant gain for feminism last weekend. In shoving her controversy-plagued healthcare reform bill to victory by a paper-thin margin, she conclusively demonstrated that a woman can be just as gritty, ruthless and arm-twisting in pursuing her agenda as anyone in the long line of fabled male speakers before her. Even a basic feminist shibboleth like abortion rights became just another card for Pelosi to deal and swap.
It was a stunningly impressive recovery for someone who seemed to be coming apart at the seams last summer, when a sputtering, rattled Pelosi struggled to deal with the nationwide insurgency of town hall protesters -- reputable, concerned citizens whom she outrageously tried to tar as Nazis. Whether or not her bill survives in the Senate is immaterial: Pelosi's hard-won, trench-warfare win sets a new standard for U.S. women politicians and is certainly well beyond anything the posturing but ineffectual Hillary Clinton has ever achieved.
As for the actual content of the House healthcare bill, horrors! Where to begin? That there are serious deficiencies and injustices in the U.S. healthcare system has been obvious for decades. To bring the poor and vulnerable into the fold has been a high ideal and an urgent goal for most Democrats. But this rigid, intrusive and grotesquely expensive bill is a nightmare. Holy Hygeia, why can't my fellow Democrats see that the creation of another huge, inefficient federal bureaucracy would slow and disrupt the delivery of basic healthcare and subject us all to a labyrinthine mass of incompetent, unaccountable petty dictators? Massively expanding the number of healthcare consumers without making due provision for the production of more healthcare providers means that we're hurtling toward a staggering logjam of de facto rationing. Steel yourself for the deafening screams from the careerist professional class of limousine liberals when they get stranded for hours in the jammed, jostling anterooms of doctors' offices. They'll probably try to hire Caribbean nannies as ringers to do the waiting for them.
A second issue souring me on this bill is its failure to include the most common-sense clause to increase competition and drive down prices: portability of health insurance across state lines. What covert business interests is the Democratic leadership protecting by stopping consumers from shopping for policies nationwide? Finally, no healthcare bill is worth the paper it's printed on when the authors ostentatiously exempt themselves from its rules. The solipsistic members of Congress want us peons to be ground up in the communal machine, while they themselves gambol on in the flowering meadow of their own lavish federal health plan. Hypocrites!
And why are we even considering so gargantuan a social experiment when the nation is struggling to emerge from a severe recession? It's as if liberals are starry-eyed dreamers lacking the elementary ability to project or predict the chaotic and destabilizing practical consequences of their utopian fantasies. Republicans, on the other hand, have basically sat on their asses about healthcare reform for the past 20 years and have shown little interest in crafting legislative solutions to social inequities. The usual GOP floater about private medical savings accounts is a crock -- something that, given the astronomical costs of major medical crises, would be utterly unworkable for families of even average household income.
International models of socialized medicine have been developed for nations and populations that are usually vastly smaller than our own. There are positives and negatives in their system as in ours. So what's the point of this trade? The plight of the uninsured (whose number is far less than claimed) should be directly addressed without co-opting and destroying the entire U.S. medical infrastructure. Limited, targeted reforms can ban gouging and unfair practices and can streamline communications now wastefully encumbered by red tape. But insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry are not the sole cause of mounting healthcare costs, and constantly demonizing them is a demagogic evasion.
How dare anyone claim humane aims for this bill anyhow when its funding is based on a slashing of Medicare by over $400 billion? The brutal abandonment of the elderly here is unconscionable. One would have expected a Democratic proposal to include an expansion of Medicare, certainly not its gutting. The passive acquiescence of liberal commentators to this vandalism simply demonstrates how partisan ideology ultimately desensitizes the mind.
Last week's startling gubernatorial victories by Republicans in Virginia and New Jersey were routinely dismissed as local aberrations by the liberal media or inflated as referendums on President Obama by the conservative media. But voters were clearly revolting against the deranged excess spending of government at both state and federal levels. So it was as much a protest against Congress as against the White House.
Obama sure needed a lift and got it from Pelosi. The administration has seemed to be drifting lately. Obama has dithered for months about a strategy for Afghanistan -- another rats' nest we should pull our troops out of overnight. Then there was the bizarre disproportion in Obama's flying to Denmark to flog a Chicago Olympics yet not having time to make it to Germany to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall -- which suggests a frivolous provincialism as well as ignorance of history among the president's principal advisors. And Obama's muted response to last week's massacre at Fort Hood has exposed ambiguities and uncertainties in the U.S. government and military about how to respond to homegrown militant Islam. The presidency is a heavy burden -- a prize that can become a curse.
> On Nov 9, 11:37 pm, "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote: > - All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. > - You are not worthy to argue or comment about > - American heathcare because yours sucks forever. > - Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, > - they are not rich like US but why their system is so > - efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck off. > - let Obama run his healthcare program. > - I know his economy is not no different than Bush,
> That's just so much Liberal-Fascist Name Calling > and NOT FACTS.
> - but don't just throw his idea off like you're > - a whole bunch of negro haters.
> So Pelosi & Reid & Obama are all 'negros' > will i never knew . . .
On Nov 9, 11:37 pm, "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> All of you Rightards are such stupid idiotic jerks. You are not worthy to argue or comment about American heathcare because yours sucks forever. Look at the French healthcare, They are world's #1, they are not rich like US but why their system is so efficient! So quit argue and shut the fuck off. let Obama run his healthcare program. I know his economy is not no different than Bush, but don't just throw his idea off like you're a whole bunch of negro haters.
Forgery:
Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds- media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com! nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH! Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com! local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.posted.toastnet! news.posted.toastnet.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:37:52 -0600 From: "EHWollmann" <arcturian...@earthlink.net> Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave,alt.fan.rush- limbaugh,alt.fan.letterman,alt.religion.christian,alt.politics.republican,a lt.energy.homepower,misc.transport.trucking References: <0a4157ac-328b-4406-99f4-0ce3fb0d3...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <c3625541-af76-461a-b70d-38378c10b...@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: (OT) : Why You American DickeheadHealth Care SUCKS? Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 23:37:51 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Message-ID: <l7KdnXIRbKbMhWTXnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@posted.toastnet> Lines: 10 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.251.77.232 X-Trace: sv3-tlVVNB1fZxmpD3ysDvR45wyqNVBGBHTabRy7Fm75xK6+R +CgqwRnizew57BmwUE/yTDhMw2tYcCEh8B!FdZHQkpjzckXz5gK+aWn5L4ZUdPPgymk+Qx/ vzkMX0Hyq3ECgz7NOUY7U/nS0s/ocRy53aAKEN0w!wIOl +VUcymJItDgBXaHGYJ4UBAN8ufu+ X-Complaints-To: ab...@toast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: ab...@toast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
|
