|
O/T: Knee Jerk
Sen. Max Baucus reports health care bill out of committee.
Sen. Mitch McConnel immediately grabs mike and opposes. Must be a good bill. Lew |
Knee Jerk
Lew Hodgett wrote:
Sen. Max Baucus reports health care bill out of committee. Sen. Mitch McConnel immediately grabs mike and opposes. Must be a good bill. Last count, Baucus has one vote for his bill. Right now, with the Kennedy seat vacant, the Democrats can't break a filibuster (they still need 60 votes and there are only 59 Democrats). Interestingly, if another Democrat dies - leaving them with 58 - they'll only need 58 votes to invoke cloture. Pray for the continued breathing of Robert Byrd. |
Knee Jerk
And naturally, they get to count the communist, Liberian and so forth as
Democrats... all non-Republican. Martin HeyBub wrote: Lew Hodgett wrote: Sen. Max Baucus reports health care bill out of committee. Sen. Mitch McConnel immediately grabs mike and opposes. Must be a good bill. Last count, Baucus has one vote for his bill. Right now, with the Kennedy seat vacant, the Democrats can't break a filibuster (they still need 60 votes and there are only 59 Democrats). Interestingly, if another Democrat dies - leaving them with 58 - they'll only need 58 votes to invoke cloture. Pray for the continued breathing of Robert Byrd. |
Knee Jerk
Gee, I thought Bob died a few years ago. He must be 90+?
HeyBub wrote: Lew Hodgett wrote: Sen. Max Baucus reports health care bill out of committee. Sen. Mitch McConnel immediately grabs mike and opposes. Must be a good bill. Last count, Baucus has one vote for his bill. Right now, with the Kennedy seat vacant, the Democrats can't break a filibuster (they still need 60 votes and there are only 59 Democrats). Interestingly, if another Democrat dies - leaving them with 58 - they'll only need 58 votes to invoke cloture. Pray for the continued breathing of Robert Byrd. |
Knee Jerk
When I was an obnoxious teen, bitching about how screwed up
things were, the adults would ask "And your proposed solution for correcting the problem is . . .?" Opposing something is very easy. Fixing something you think isn't working - well that takes a lot more time and effort. When opposing a change one must always consider the price of doing nothing. The uninsured get medical treatment when it's an emergency. And emergency room costs are multiples of the cost of doctor visits before things get critical - and really expensive. The other thing to be aware of is which industries and which lobbyists are opposing the change, what ever the proposed change is, and examine their reason(s) for that opposition. I'm willing put money on the it's not for altruistic reasons. And if you've ever had a "problem" with your health insurance company, especially if it's a life threatening thing, be aware that it's in THEIR best interest for you to die - before they have to expend any money on you. At least with the government you CAN try and get your elected congress person and senator to look into your problem. With an insurance company - your screwed - AFTER you probably have spent months on the phone talking to someone in a Call Center - in Pakistan or the Philipines or Honduras - who may or may not speak english. |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message You don't have a right to healthcare anymore than you do to a house, a car, or a vacation. All these things must be earned. For just one minute, why don't you try substituting "FREEDOM" in place of your continual healthcare attacks? Because in all honesty, many people who face serious difficulties with their healthcare view it NO DIFFERENTLY than a direct limitation of their freedom. I KNOW this to be fact. And, it has the exact same effect. Unfortunately, you don't have the imagination or intelligence to realize that. You take advantage of your right to freedom by continually whining how much it costs you. I wonder how you'd deal with it if that part of your freedom was removed? Pathetic little wimp. Can you sink any further? |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message You don't have a right to healthcare anymore than you do to a house, a car, or a vacation. All these things must be earned. For just one minute, why don't you try substituting "FREEDOM" in place of your continual healthcare attacks? Because in all honesty, many people who face serious difficulties with their healthcare view it NO DIFFERENTLY than a direct limitation of their freedom. I KNOW this to be fact. And, it has the exact same effect. Unfortunately, you don't have the imagination or intelligence to realize that. You take advantage of your right to freedom by continually whining how much it costs you. I wonder how you'd deal with it if that part of your freedom was removed? Pathetic little wimp. Can you sink any further? Your "freedom" is not such thing. It's at the expense of another citizen. Your "free" healthcare means someone else has less money for their own family's needs. My worldview is not built on stealing, yours is. My worldview isn't dependent on impoverishing other people. Your's is. I don't ask third parties in government to do my stealing. You do. |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message BULL****! Freedom costs money. It costs more money that it would ever cost for a national healthcare service. It costs citizen's money. And, freedom costs lives. Armed forces who fight overseas to preserve the American way of life. Local police forces, National Guard. Where EXACTLY do you think the money comes from to pay for those services? Are you really so self absorbed that you can't see that? Your "freedom" is not such thing. It's at the expense of another citizen. Your "free" healthcare means someone else has less money for their own family's needs. My worldview is not built on stealing, yours is. My worldview isn't dependent on impoverishing other people. Your's is. I don't ask third parties in government to do my stealing. You do. |
Knee Jerk
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in
: And naturally, they get to count the communist, Liberian and so forth as Democrats... all non-Republican. Since when do Liberians get to vote here? |
Knee Jerk
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Gee, I thought Bob died a few years ago. He must be 90+? Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Born in 1917. He is ~92. |
Knee Jerk
The real answer is remove bureaucratic impediments to interstate
competition among private healthcare providers, put a feedback loop in place to punish the ambulance chasers that manufacture insane legal claims, and inch the government *out* of healthcare entirely in the next 25 years or so. Jeffrey Skilling may be looking for work, once he is paroled. |
Knee Jerk
You don't have a right to healthcare anymore than you do to a house, a car, or a vacation. All these things must be earned. -- Tim, how old is your mother? Is she on Medicare? Why is she entitled to it? |
Knee Jerk
People who paid into the existing system have a reasonable right to expect they will get back what they put in. But the system today pays out far, far more than the recipients every put in. The system is iniquitous and should never have been implemented in the first place - it is a ponzi scheme the like of which Madoff would only have dreamed. The way you get out of it is by diminishing benefits 4% per year for the next 25 years until it is gone entirely. Retire today, get full benefits for life. Retire next year, get 96% benefits, and so on. This is bad logic: The government screwed up social services for the last 60 years - let's have them do more of it. If it never should have been implemented, then urge your mother to swear it off, and you pay for her healthcare out-of-pocket. Put your money where you mouth is. |
Knee Jerk
To extend the Madoff analogy, as long as you're sure you'd get YOUR money
back (with 11% interest of course), it's ok to invest with him, even if you knew he was a phony? I doubt you or your mother will ever put into Medicare what you'll take out. So isn't it hypocritical to participate in the program? Are you funding your own healthcare needs for your retirement? |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 12:17*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
[snip] Out on a week-end pass, Tim? |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message have to (politely) ask for voluntary charity. If that fails, I'll become fertilizer a bit earlier than I'd like. Do us all a favour and move that time line up substantially, will you? With all the bull**** you spew you're likely to exfoliate everybody else in rec.woodworking long before you manage to do the same to yourself. |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message Defending the borders benefits everyone more-or-less equally. Stealing from some citizens to give to others harms freedom. Your kind of "freedom" only exists because you are diminishing another person's freedom. The kind of freedom I'm talking about is much more involved and costly than your trivial reference to it as border control. It consists of the society you live in that permits fools like you to spout your crap. That freedom costs money. It's the money for police forces that let you walk the streets without being attacked. It's also the money involved in hiring the people to legislate the laws that tolerate people like you. It's even the infrastructure that takes your garbage away and paves the streets you drive on. As usual, you're such a useless twit, that I keep finding myself drawn into your rhetoric. One day perhaps, you might find yourself somewhere that you can make a real contribution. But, it's certainly not rec.woodworking where you've contributed absolutely nothing in several years of showing everybody what an selfish, whining, little ass you are. |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 1:32*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 12:17 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: [snip] Out on a week-end pass, Tim? No, just thought I'd go slummin' ... Go on then...stop dragging your ass in here... |
Knee Jerk
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 1:32 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 12:17 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: [snip] Out on a week-end pass, Tim? No, just thought I'd go slummin' ... Go on then...stop dragging your ass in here... Aw how cute, you and your life partner Upscale missed me ... Isn't in interesting how some, who are offended by remarks, simply want the speaker to shut up? Or go away? Or want his wife to feed him lots of pork chops so he'll die of a heart attack? In history, exile, shunning, ostracism, and the like were often employed for those who violated the norms of society or arrayed themselves against the political order. |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 6:38*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote: Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 1:32 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 12:17 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: [snip] Out on a week-end pass, Tim? No, just thought I'd go slummin' ... Go on then...stop dragging your ass in here... Aw how cute, you and your life partner Upscale missed me ... Isn't in interesting how some, who are offended by remarks, simply want the speaker to shut up? Or go away? Or want his wife to feed him lots of pork chops so he'll die of a heart attack? In history, exile, shunning, ostracism, and the like were often employed for those who violated the norms of society or arrayed themselves against the political order. Like Guantanamo? |
Knee Jerk
Tim, thanks for being a good sport and sharing your opinion with us,
predictable as it is. You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. |
Knee Jerk
Like Guantanamo? Isn't that a salad? Wait...oh never mind. I'm thinking of guacamole. |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
Isn't in interesting how some, who are offended by remarks, simply want the speaker to shut up? Or go away? Or want his wife to feed him lots of pork chops so he'll die of a heart attack? In history, exile, shunning, ostracism, and the like were often employed for those who violated the norms of society or arrayed themselves against the political order. Like Guantanamo? Pretty much, except there are those who advocate integrating the Gitmo Guests into Mr Rogers neighborhood. In my view, that's carrying the anti-exile mindset a bit too far. |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 7:30*pm, "Perry Aynum" wrote:
Tim, thanks for being a good sport and sharing your opinion with us, predictable as it is. You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. Oh fur chrissakes don't get him fomenting.... |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 12:07*am, Dave Balderstone
wrote: Well, I keep killing the off-topic threads about US politics that people insist on forcing upon the wreck, but it seems to be a losing battle. Sorry, Dave. As you have noticed, this is primarily a coffee clatch of experts that get together and exchange their expert opinions on politics and economics. Few are woodworkers, and it is pretty much the same guys every time that adamantly expressed their opinions backed by furious googling to make sure they get it right. They rail out at an unjust world that doesn't understand how things should be (according to them, anyway). You would be better to killfile the posters, not the posts. Robert |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 10:02*pm, "
wrote: opinions backed by furious googling That just cracked me up.... |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 18, 10:46*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote: On Sep 18, 7:30 pm, "Perry Aynum" wrote: Tim, thanks for being a good sport and sharing your opinion with us, predictable as it is. You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. Oh fur chrissakes don't get him fomenting.... I love you man ... L'shana tova, tikatevu |
Knee Jerk
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:13:51 -0500, Jack Stein wrote:
You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. By that you mean he doesn't ever agree with the bottom feeding, freedom hating, socialist *******s that attempt to debate him, right? No, he means Tim is so predictable that almost anyone here could write his posts for him :-). But I may be unfair to Tim - he may have changed - I haven't read his posts in a long time. -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
Knee Jerk
Perry Aynum wrote:
Tim, thanks for being a good sport and sharing your opinion with us, predictable as it is. You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. By that you mean he doesn't ever agree with the bottom feeding, freedom hating, socialist *******s that attempt to debate him, right? I guess thats better than simply calling him a "useless twit", or a "misguided douche-nozzle"... Well, different words anyway... -- Jack Got Change: USA ===== USSA! http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
|
Knee Jerk
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:13:51 -0500, Jack Stein wrote: You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. By that you mean he doesn't ever agree with the bottom feeding, freedom hating, socialist *******s that attempt to debate him, right? No, he means Tim is so predictable that almost anyone here could write his posts for him :-). Well, yeah. Morality is absolute and there are only so many ways to describe it. Liberalism is, however, situational and there are millions of ways to fashion the explanation. It's the difference between: 1. Thou shalt not murder, and 2. Killing someone should be avoided execpt in the following cases: a. When the subject is an abusive spouse, b. When the subject is a potentially abusive spouse c. When the subject is someone the potentially abusive spouse knew d. When the subject is the sexual partner of a spouse e. When the subject is the potential sexual partner of a spouse f. When the subject is a fetus, g. When the subject is a potential fetus, h. When the subject is a child molester (but not by the state), i. When the subject might be a child molester (but not by the state) j. When there is no difference between the subject and the aggrieved (race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, age, ability to speak Lithuanian, etc.) ... |
Knee Jerk [OT CA/US POLITICAL]
Dave Balderstone wrote:
Well, I keep killing the off-topic threads about US politics that people insist on forcing upon the wreck, but it seems to be a losing battle. So my proposed solution is that every post about anything to do with your ****ed-up country's political and financial system that is causing so much grief world-wide that isn't directly related to woodworking be labeled with [USA-POLITICAL-CRAP] in the subject line so that those of us who are outside the US and/or just wanting to see mostly wooddorking posts here (yeah, I know... good luck!) can filter this bull**** with some ease. Of course this proposal is futile, so don't even bother responding... Thanks for the opportunity to vent. You're welcome. :) You have my sympathies - if not my active support. I've wondered from time to time whether we (the entire group) talk about politics too much or not enough. Less would lower traffic, but probably not have much effect on the number of woodworking posts - and more might lead to improved consensus on issues that affect us all. (Yeah, it'd be appropriate to use a different forum, but I don't think that's likely to happen.) I suppose we could also tag posts as to METRIC/IMPERIAL and NEANDER/NORM/CNC content as well... :-T -- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/ |
Knee Jerk
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... Larry Blanchard wrote: On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:13:51 -0500, Jack Stein wrote: You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. By that you mean he doesn't ever agree with the bottom feeding, freedom hating, socialist *******s that attempt to debate him, right? No, he means Tim is so predictable that almost anyone here could write his posts for him :-). Well, yeah. Morality is absolute and there are only so many ways to describe it. Liberalism is, however, situational and there are millions of ways to fashion the explanation. It's the difference between: 1. Thou shalt not murder, and 2. Killing someone should be avoided execpt in the following cases: a. When the subject is an abusive spouse, b. When the subject is a potentially abusive spouse c. When the subject is someone the potentially abusive spouse knew d. When the subject is the sexual partner of a spouse e. When the subject is the potential sexual partner of a spouse f. When the subject is a fetus, g. When the subject is a potential fetus, h. When the subject is a child molester (but not by the state), i. When the subject might be a child molester (but not by the state) j. When there is no difference between the subject and the aggrieved (race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, age, ability to speak Lithuanian, etc.) I guess Dickey Cheney is more liberal than I thought. He's fashioned one or two explanations to suit his situation(s). Dave in Houston |
Knee Jerk
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:34:07 -0500, HeyBub wrote:
Well, yeah. Morality is absolute and there are only so many ways to describe it. Funny, I thought the Christians, the Muslims, and the Buddhists had at least 3 different takes on that "absolute" you claim :-). The ayatollahs believe in an "absolute" morality too. It's just different than yours. -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
Knee Jerk
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 12:13:51 -0500, Jack Stein wrote: You may want to work on mental agility, as you seem to have a certain rigidity in your though process. By that you mean he doesn't ever agree with the bottom feeding, freedom hating, socialist *******s that attempt to debate him, right? No, he means Tim is so predictable that almost anyone here could write his posts for him :-). Yeah, Tim and everyone else. Who has an opinion that changes to the point of being unpredictable? But I may be unfair to Tim - he may have changed - I haven't read his posts in a long time. Fairness has little to do with it. Opinions do not change with the wind, unless you're an air head. -- Jack Got Change: General Motors ===== Government Motors! http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk [OT CA/US POLITICAL]
Morris Dovey wrote:
Dave Balderstone wrote: Well, I keep killing the off-topic threads about US politics that people insist on forcing upon the wreck, but it seems to be a losing battle. You have my sympathies - if not my active support. I've wondered from time to time whether we (the entire group) talk about politics too much or not enough. Less would lower traffic, but probably not have much effect on the number of woodworking posts - and more might lead to improved consensus on issues that affect us all. (Yeah, it'd be appropriate to use a different forum, but I don't think that's likely to happen.) Nope, not going to happen. The best thing to do is filter everyone that posts off topic questions if you insist on eliminating all off topic messages. You will not have to spend much time reading though, as most contributors, not all, but most contribute on all sorts of off topic stuff. My personal feeling is I can easily skip anything I'm not interested in. There is plenty I'm not interested in, but have no issue with those who are interested enjoying themselves. I enjoy hearing what my fellow woodworkers have to say on a variety of subjects, even on woodwork. I suppose we could also tag posts as to METRIC/IMPERIAL and NEANDER/NORM/CNC content as well... Every message has a subject, not much trouble to skip the subjects you find not interesting. Pretty sure thats a prime reason for having a subject, an ability to sort by subject, and a mouse. -- Jack Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/ http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk [OT]
Jack Stein wrote:
My personal feeling is I can easily skip anything I'm not interested in. There is plenty I'm not interested in, but have no issue with those who are interested enjoying themselves. I enjoy hearing what my fellow woodworkers have to say on a variety of subjects, even on woodwork. Me, too. I've found it interesting that there seems to be a correlation between the kinds of woodworking people do and their mode of engagement in non-woodworking discussions. I've also found that exposure here to differing viewpoints has broadened my perspectives, and helped me recognize some of the complexities and difficulties in finding 'cut and dried' answers to (what I think are) important problems. I'm inclined to not filter posters, but do start ignoring sub-thread(s) when discussion becomes rancorous or non-constructive - for the same reasons I'd choose not to walk into a saloon where there's a barfight in progress. :) -- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/ |
Knee Jerk [OT]
On Sep 20, 2:43*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote: Jack Stein wrote: My personal feeling is I can easily skip anything I'm not interested in. *There is plenty I'm not interested in, but have no issue with those who are interested enjoying themselves. *I enjoy hearing what my fellow woodworkers have to say on a variety of subjects, even on woodwork. Me, too. I've found it interesting that there seems to be a correlation between the kinds of woodworking people do and their mode of engagement in non-woodworking discussions. I've also found that exposure here to differing viewpoints has broadened my perspectives, and helped me recognize some of the complexities and difficulties in finding 'cut and dried' answers to (what I think are) important problems. I'm inclined to not filter posters, but do start ignoring sub-thread(s) when discussion becomes rancorous or non-constructive - for the same reasons I'd choose not to walk into a saloon where there's a barfight in progress. :) Based on what I've read this week, I am going to start filtering myself .... Brilliant idea and long overdue. |
Knee Jerk [OT]
On Sep 20, 3:27*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote: On Sep 20, 2:43 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote: Morris Dovey wrote: Jack Stein wrote: My personal feeling is I can easily skip anything I'm not interested in. *There is plenty I'm not interested in, but have no issue with those who are interested enjoying themselves. *I enjoy hearing what my fellow woodworkers have to say on a variety of subjects, even on woodwork. Me, too. I've found it interesting that there seems to be a correlation between the kinds of woodworking people do and their mode of engagement in non-woodworking discussions. I've also found that exposure here to differing viewpoints has broadened my perspectives, and helped me recognize some of the complexities and difficulties in finding 'cut and dried' answers to (what I think are) important problems. I'm inclined to not filter posters, but do start ignoring sub-thread(s) when discussion becomes rancorous or non-constructive - for the same reasons I'd choose not to walk into a saloon where there's a barfight in progress. :) Based on what I've read this week, I am going to start filtering myself ... Brilliant idea and long overdue. I'm sorry I cannot see the post to which you're responding ... Self filtration, in excess, can lead to blindness. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:49 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter