Gordon Shumway wrote:

“The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who
is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools
should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him
their prince.

Very true.

“The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a
fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those
who made him their president."


Moreover, the fools elected a ton of socialist *******s to Congress,
thinking they were true American democrats, or not knowing enough to
even care.

--
Jack
Pessimist: One who, when he has the choice of two evils, chooses both.
http://jbstein.com

Bill wrote:
"Mike Marlow" wrote in message
...

I know I'm going to regret jumping into this pond. I just damned well
know it...

I had exactly the same gut-feelings! : ) Probably we're not the only ones.

Anyone regretting jumping in can freely jump out, no?

Mike's post was right on though, so it's good he decided to jump in,
even if he jumps right back out...

--
Jack
"I have not failed. I've just found ten thousand ways that won't work."
-Thomas Edison
http://jbstein.com

"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...

Fear not though, the socialist *******s have replaced checkable voter
cards with untraceable electronic voting machines, and coupled with far
less control on voter ID than on smokers ID, things have been looking up
for the Communist *******s controlling our country at the moment.

--
As it stands now, these machines come fraud enabled.

CW wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
J. Clarke wrote:

My point is that the Gestapo's razor wire could not keep people in a
little tiny prison, let alone a whole country, hence the notion that
"razor wire backed by an electric fence" will keep Mexicans out of the US
is wishful thinking.
Didn't do too bad containing the East Germans.

If it had been a single fence, it wouldn't have stopped anybody. The guard
towers, dog runs and 100 yards of clear (shooting) space between fences had
a lot to do with it. They rarely shot anyone though. They usually just put
the dogs on them.


How many of the 916 who died trying to cross were killed by the dogs?

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:10:36 -0400, Steve wrote:

On 2010-03-22 22:01:18 -0400, "J. Clarke" said:

This is not about supporting deadbeats and illegals, it's about the
government ordering us to buy something that we don't want. Not taxing
us and having it provided, but telling us you _must_ buy this product.

Show of hands, please. Who here does not already buy health insurance?

Talk about a biased poll :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:02:30 -0400, Jack Stein wrote:

Good point. Expanding on that, what they want is "single payer" or
socialized, government controlled and owned medical system. This never
works, and is anti-American to the extreme.

Universal health care can be implemented in several ways, single payer is
not the only way. Perhaps you could say "this never works" to all of the
countries that have UHC? They'd laugh and declare you nuts. But I guess
everyone's out of step but you.



--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:55:31 -0400, Jack Stein wrote:

YOU dare to talk about vote fraud after what happened in 2000 Florida?

You mean when a few socialist, democratic controlled, Florida counties
tried to punch out multiple voter cards at a time in a lame attempt to
defeat the overwhelming support of their constituents for Bush? This of
course resulted in the infamous hanging chards that for some reason
where always cast in favor of the dimwit AlGore.

Yes, there *are* alternate universes. Jack lives in one :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Jack Stein wrote:

So you are saying you are not allowed to teach your kids birth control
in Bergen county New Jersey?

Damn, government control has gotten way out of hand in your area, you
should move...

Well, if you don't wish to move to a state that supports the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, I suggest you point out Article I
to your local dictator. If you can't straighten things out with
Article I, perhaps Article II can give you some help... Good luck.

Inasmuch as Article I deals with the Congress and Article II enumerates the
powers of the president, I suspect you're referring to Amendment I (freedom
of religion except polygamy, etc.) and Article II (keep and bear arms except
in Chicago, etc.).

"Doug Winterburn" wrote in message
...
CW wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
J. Clarke wrote:

My point is that the Gestapo's razor wire could not keep people in a
little tiny prison, let alone a whole country, hence the notion that
"razor wire backed by an electric fence" will keep Mexicans out of the
US
is wishful thinking.
Didn't do too bad containing the East Germans.

If it had been a single fence, it wouldn't have stopped anybody. The
guard
towers, dog runs and 100 yards of clear (shooting) space between fences
had
a lot to do with it. They rarely shot anyone though. They usually just
put
the dogs on them.


How many of the 916 who died trying to cross were killed by the dogs?

I have no idea. Never an escape attempt while I was there. Going by locals.
Odd how the guards would hide when Americans were around. Probably would
have been a good time to escape.

On 2010-03-23 22:02:52 -0400, "J. Clarke" said:

And suppose everyone here has it, or nobody here has it, or some of us
have it and some of us don't, what of it? I'm sorry, but your poll has
no relevance to the point in question.

My question does have relevence, without regard to
"mandated-whether-I-want-it-or-not."

Do you have health insurance?

Do you want health insurance?

IF you want health insurance, but DO NOT have it, why?

If you DO NOT want health insurance, why?

Health is probably more germane to the general population than having a
Unisaw. If the government were mandating the purchase of that item, I
would agree with you. And let's disregard the entire SawStop issue, as
that IS irrelevent to this question.

BTW, in my state, at least, you have to provide proof of financial
responsibilty (i.e., insurance) before you can license a car. If you're
driving without insurance, you'd better damn well pray you don't hit a
BMW driven by a lawyer.

Here's another tip for you: Don't bet against the house.

Gordon Shumway wrote:

"The republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a
fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those
who made him their president."


That's why we need "special interests" and "lobbyists" and "backroom deals,"
to counter the frenzy of the unwashed mob.

Still, as Lawrence J. Peter (founder of the "Peter Principle") said: "I have
been studying governments, man and boy, for forty years (he was a Canadian).
I have yet to discover whether we are being led by well-meaning fools or by
really bright people who are just putting us on."

On 2010-03-23 13:18:50 -0400, Jack Stein said:

death of robust US medical research and development

One hell of a lot more is spent on marketing and intellectual property
protection than R&D. And don't even get me started on ag-chem and GM.
Monsanto, for one, is truly evil.

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:26:01 -0500, Upscale
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:04:29 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Absolutely nothing new there. It's just a different sort of tax,
similar to the confiscation ability your IRS has had and used for
many, many years. Feeble attempt to make it sound like something new
and different.


I understand that you can pay the IRS a fine instead of buying
insurance. The bill requires additional IRS operations to check if
all is covered and that all people are controlled on a monthly basis.
Look on the bright side: The bonus is the it doubles as a simulus bill
too, more IRS agent jobs are created.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:05:14 +0000 (UTC), the infamous Larry Blanchard
scrawled the following:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:06:07 -0700, busbus wrote:

The biggest thing I have a problem with is the fact that this bill has
more-or-less completely broken the back of our constitution and the
government our founding fathers created way back when.

I'm getting a little tired of this specious argument. When the
Constitution was written, medical care consisted of setting bones,
amputating gangrenous limbs, and bloodletting. Everything else was home
remedies. And I forgot, treating STDs with mercury. They didn't even
know what bacteria were. And sterilizing instruments? Hah!

Of course there was no provision for helth care - it didn't exist.

And if they had put something in it would only have applied to white male
property owners.

You obviously missed hearing this wonderful speech. (Had the choice
been between McCain/Obama/Bob Parks, I'd have voted Parks, Lew.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MC37aIRX5c

--
If we attend continually and promptly to the little that we can do, we
shall ere long be surprised to find how little remains that we cannot do.
-- Samuel Butler

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:39 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 9:32 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 6:09 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 1:54 AM, LDosser wrote:
"CW" wrote in message
...

"LDosser" wrote in message
...

Illegal Aliens. They deserve a bus ride to the Mexican border.


It's been tried. They generally beat the bus back.


Razor wire backed by an electric fence - the kind the Gestapo used.

And yet somehow Chuck Yeager and thousands of other downed airmen
managed to walk out of occupied Europe. Their "razor wire backed
by an
electric fence" wasn't even effective in keeping people inside a
prison.





Apples and Oranges

How so? Are you saying that Mexicans are less creative than Frenchmen?


Are you comparing Mexico to a prison?

My point is that the Gestapo's razor wire could not keep people in a
little tiny prison, let alone a whole country, hence the notion that
"razor wire backed by an electric fence" will keep Mexicans out of the
US is wishful thinking.


No, it isn't. Escaping from the Gestapo was risking life to save your
life.

And being in fear for your life makes razor wire and electric fences more
penetrable how?


Some brit once said that the prospect of hanging concentrates the mind
wonderfully.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:40 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 9:33 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:54:03 -0700, the infamous "LDosser"
scrawled the following:

"CW" wrote in message
...

"LDosser" wrote in message
...

Illegal Aliens. They deserve a bus ride to the Mexican border.


It's been tried. They generally beat the bus back.


Razor wire backed by an electric fence - the kind the Gestapo used.

My favorite fantasy is a vaporizing laser system on both borders.
No fuss, no muss, no burial fees, no transportation fees, no legal
fees, just a big puff of smoke as you're instantly toasted. The perp's
minerals will enrich the ground they drop to.


And the borders could serve as a weapons testing ground. I like it!

cough due process cough

And you really think you're good Americans don't you.


Well, we do seem to have a sense of humor. You, OTOH ...

Such suggestions were funny when I was 9. I outgrew them. Maybe you
should.


If you insist on a ****ing contest, try someone else.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:42 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 8:37 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:22:01 -0400, wrote:

40 Percent of personal bankruptcies caused by health care costs were
people WHO HAD INSURANCE. Various caps, exclusions, and limits kicked
in and ruined them.

Even if that's so, what's your point? What I can see is that there's
serious problems in the US and other places with healthcare. Everybody
who is crying foul about the currently health care legislation that's
coming into effect have conveniently neglected to offer some effective
solution to the current and increasing problem.

Maybe the currently legislation will screw things up worse, who knows?
But just maybe, it might be the beginning of something better. Sure
there's going to be growing pains, but just maintaining status quo
does not seem to be working out very well.


Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance rates
to rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured.

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Not yet. 2014.

A technicality. The law is passed.

There are three years and nine months to rectify that.

"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:37:41 -0700, "LDosser"
wrote:

Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance rates to
rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured. Also expect
all
the new taxes through 2013 will be used as general fund revenue. When the
money is actually needed starting in 2014 we'll borrow it from the Chinese
or whoever is stupid enough to loan it to us. Maybe Venezuela.

And wasn't all this done years ago when most services and
manufacturing were shipped off shore? Blame this new health
legislation all you want, but it seems to me that the US (and much of
Canada too) screwed themselves a long time ago by shipping everything
off shore and did so all in the name of immediate profit and gouging.



Something we can agree on. But I note that the manufacturing moving off
shore did not directly add to the deficit.

"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
Mark & Juanita wrote:

Gallup poll was skewed. Democrat/Republican/Independent internals
skewed heavily Democrat. It was also adults vs. likely voters.
Rasmussen poll of likely voters shows 41% favor, 54% opposed. Intensity
of likely voters is also significant: 26% strongly favor, 45% strongly
oppose. You do the math regarding what that means for November

The math would be much easier if someone could get a handle on ACORN and
voter fraud. ACORN is being prosecuted in 14 states at least for
registering fake voters.

ACORN FOLDED. Just this week.

"Upscale" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:24:13 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

And the defense of stealing continues ... at least you're consistent
if entirely devoid of moral conscience...

Figured you'd open your yap eventually. Apparently, over 50% of the US
population agrees with me putting you into the whining minority.


48%. With only 24% strongly supporting it.

"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
LDosser wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message

Those legislators who have decided to govern against the will of the
people (anywhere from 60 to 80% opposition depending upon the poll)
have sown the wind. They can expect to reap the whirlwind come
November.

Depends on how many fake voter registrations ACORN can get going so the
votes don't exceed the number of registered voters., and if the
socialist *******s can get the illegal alien vote legalized... well,
it's over.

ACORN is Folding.

I heard today Obama has reopened the taxpayers money drain into ACORNS
pockets. There is no way the socialist democratic party will let ACORN
die since ACORN is 100% socialist democrat supporter, and best of all gets
taxpayer money to fund its dirty work. Even if the name changes, it is
still ACORN, with it's several hundred corrupt fronts.
--
Jack
Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
http://jbstein.com


It really is FOLDING.

"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
Mark & Juanita wrote:
Jack Stein wrote:

2) The Republicans always have to have a margin of victory that exceeds
the margin of vote fraud. In this case, the anger is so significant, the
margin of fraud would be noticeable even to the leftist media.

Don't ever underestimate the left wing media machine. I would think any
voting district that had more voters than registered voters would be BIG
news, and HOTLY investigated and prosecuted. Nope, hardly raised an
eyebrow.

Anyway, an example of the effects of ACORN is Al Franken, socialist
******* from Minnesota. Franken won by 312 votes. ACORN claimed to have
registered 48,000. The fact ACORN uses tax money to registers ONLY
socialist Democrats, and the fact ACORN is guilty as hell in registration
fraud makes the math a little hard to do.

Jack, ACORN IS FOLDING.

"Phisherman" wrote
I understand that you can pay the IRS a fine instead of buying
insurance. The bill requires additional IRS operations to check if
all is covered and that all people are controlled on a monthly basis.
Look on the bright side: The bonus is the it doubles as a simulus bill
too, more IRS agent jobs are created.

In Massachusetts you have to pay a fine. Insurance for a young healthy
single person that would rather go without is about $5000 a year and the
fine is something like a few hundred bucks. Tough choice.

On 3/24/2010 10:01 PM, Steve wrote:
On 2010-03-23 22:02:52 -0400, "J. Clarke" said:

And suppose everyone here has it, or nobody here has it, or some of us
have it and some of us don't, what of it? I'm sorry, but your poll has
no relevance to the point in question.

My question does have relevence, without regard to
"mandated-whether-I-want-it-or-not."

Do you have health insurance?


Do you want health insurance?

Which has what to do with the legality of the Congress ordering people
to buy insurance?

IF you want health insurance, but DO NOT have it, why?

Which has what to do with the legality of the Congress ordering people
to buy insurance?

If you DO NOT want health insurance, why?

Which has what to do with the legality of the Congress ordering people
to buy insurance?

Health is probably more germane to the general population than having a
Unisaw. If the government were mandating the purchase of that item, I
would agree with you. And let's disregard the entire SawStop issue, as
that IS irrelevent to this question.

So you're saying that it's legal for the government to order people to
buy insurance but not to buy a Unisaw because in your opinion insurance
has greater utility?

BTW, in my state, at least, you have to provide proof of financial
responsibilty (i.e., insurance) before you can license a car.

Yawn. This has already been addressed. Licensing a car to be
operated on the public roads is a privilege. If one wants to avoid
purchasing the insurance one simply does not drive on public roads. Are
you saying that merely existing in the United States is now a privilege
which one needs the permission of Congress to exercise?

If you're
driving without insurance, you'd better damn well pray you don't hit a
BMW driven by a lawyer.


Which has what to do with the legality of the Congress ordering people
to buy insurance?

Here's another tip for you: Don't bet against the house.


Which has what to do with the legality of the Congress ordering people
to buy insurance?

On 3/24/2010 10:41 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:40 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 9:33 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:54:03 -0700, the infamous "LDosser"
scrawled the following:

"CW" wrote in message
...

"LDosser" wrote in message
...

Illegal Aliens. They deserve a bus ride to the Mexican border.


It's been tried. They generally beat the bus back.


Razor wire backed by an electric fence - the kind the Gestapo used.

My favorite fantasy is a vaporizing laser system on both borders.
No fuss, no muss, no burial fees, no transportation fees, no legal
fees, just a big puff of smoke as you're instantly toasted. The
perp's
minerals will enrich the ground they drop to.


And the borders could serve as a weapons testing ground. I like it!

cough due process cough

And you really think you're good Americans don't you.


Well, we do seem to have a sense of humor. You, OTOH ...

Such suggestions were funny when I was 9. I outgrew them. Maybe you
should.


If you insist on a ****ing contest, try someone else.

If you want to engage in ****ing contests around electric fences I want
to watch.

On 3/24/2010 10:47 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:42 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 8:37 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:22:01 -0400, wrote:

40 Percent of personal bankruptcies caused by health care costs were
people WHO HAD INSURANCE. Various caps, exclusions, and limits
kicked
in and ruined them.

Even if that's so, what's your point? What I can see is that there's
serious problems in the US and other places with healthcare.
Everybody
who is crying foul about the currently health care legislation that's
coming into effect have conveniently neglected to offer some
effective
solution to the current and increasing problem.

Maybe the currently legislation will screw things up worse, who
knows?
But just maybe, it might be the beginning of something better. Sure
there's going to be growing pains, but just maintaining status quo
does not seem to be working out very well.


Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance rates
to rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured.

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Not yet. 2014.

A technicality. The law is passed.

There are three years and nine months to rectify that.

So what are you proposing?

On 3/24/2010 10:29 PM, Phisherman wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:26:01 -0500,
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:04:29 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Absolutely nothing new there. It's just a different sort of tax,
similar to the confiscation ability your IRS has had and used for
many, many years. Feeble attempt to make it sound like something new
and different.


I understand that you can pay the IRS a fine instead of buying
insurance. The bill requires additional IRS operations to check if
all is covered and that all people are controlled on a monthly basis.
Look on the bright side: The bonus is the it doubles as a simulus bill
too, more IRS agent jobs are created.

Upscale's problem is that he does not understand that purchasing a
product from a business is not a tax.

On 3/24/2010 10:54 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:24:13 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

And the defense of stealing continues ... at least you're consistent
if entirely devoid of moral conscience...

Figured you'd open your yap eventually. Apparently, over 50% of the US
population agrees with me putting you into the whining minority.


48%. With only 24% strongly supporting it.

And the public supporting something doesn't make it legal anyway.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 10:41 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:40 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 9:33 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:54:03 -0700, the infamous "LDosser"
scrawled the following:

"CW" wrote in message
...

"LDosser" wrote in message
...

Illegal Aliens. They deserve a bus ride to the Mexican border.


It's been tried. They generally beat the bus back.


Razor wire backed by an electric fence - the kind the Gestapo used.

My favorite fantasy is a vaporizing laser system on both borders.
No fuss, no muss, no burial fees, no transportation fees, no legal
fees, just a big puff of smoke as you're instantly toasted. The
perp's
minerals will enrich the ground they drop to.


And the borders could serve as a weapons testing ground. I like it!

cough due process cough

And you really think you're good Americans don't you.


Well, we do seem to have a sense of humor. You, OTOH ...

Such suggestions were funny when I was 9. I outgrew them. Maybe you
should.


If you insist on a ****ing contest, try someone else.

If you want to engage in ****ing contests around electric fences I want to
watch.


)

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 10:47 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:42 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 8:37 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:22:01 -0400, wrote:

40 Percent of personal bankruptcies caused by health care costs
were
people WHO HAD INSURANCE. Various caps, exclusions, and limits
kicked
in and ruined them.

Even if that's so, what's your point? What I can see is that there's
serious problems in the US and other places with healthcare.
Everybody
who is crying foul about the currently health care legislation
that's
coming into effect have conveniently neglected to offer some
effective
solution to the current and increasing problem.

Maybe the currently legislation will screw things up worse, who
knows?
But just maybe, it might be the beginning of something better. Sure
there's going to be growing pains, but just maintaining status quo
does not seem to be working out very well.


Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance
rates
to rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured.

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Not yet. 2014.

A technicality. The law is passed.

There are three years and nine months to rectify that.

So what are you proposing?


Fix what they've done. Fast!

Treat the insurance companies like utilities. What they have done instead is
give the insurance companies the greatest windfall in history.

On 3/25/2010 12:02 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 10:47 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:42 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 8:37 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:22:01 -0400, wrote:

40 Percent of personal bankruptcies caused by health care costs
were
people WHO HAD INSURANCE. Various caps, exclusions, and limits
kicked
in and ruined them.

Even if that's so, what's your point? What I can see is that
there's
serious problems in the US and other places with healthcare.
Everybody
who is crying foul about the currently health care legislation
that's
coming into effect have conveniently neglected to offer some
effective
solution to the current and increasing problem.

Maybe the currently legislation will screw things up worse, who
knows?
But just maybe, it might be the beginning of something better. Sure
there's going to be growing pains, but just maintaining status quo
does not seem to be working out very well.


Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance
rates
to rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured.

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Not yet. 2014.

A technicality. The law is passed.

There are three years and nine months to rectify that.

So what are you proposing?


Fix what they've done. Fast!

Treat the insurance companies like utilities. What they have done
instead is give the insurance companies the greatest windfall in history.

So how do you propose to fix what they've done? First you have to get
the current bunch out of office.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/25/2010 12:02 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 10:47 PM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 3:42 AM, LDosser wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2010 8:37 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Upscale" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:22:01 -0400, wrote:

40 Percent of personal bankruptcies caused by health care costs
were
people WHO HAD INSURANCE. Various caps, exclusions, and limits
kicked
in and ruined them.

Even if that's so, what's your point? What I can see is that
there's
serious problems in the US and other places with healthcare.
Everybody
who is crying foul about the currently health care legislation
that's
coming into effect have conveniently neglected to offer some
effective
solution to the current and increasing problem.

Maybe the currently legislation will screw things up worse, who
knows?
But just maybe, it might be the beginning of something better.
Sure
there's going to be growing pains, but just maintaining status quo
does not seem to be working out very well.


Oh, no question we'll move from the status quo. Expect insurance
rates
to rise by a Significant amount, thus creating more uninsured.

You're not allowed to be uninsured anymore. They can confiscate your
property for that now.

Not yet. 2014.

A technicality. The law is passed.

There are three years and nine months to rectify that.

So what are you proposing?


Fix what they've done. Fast!

Treat the insurance companies like utilities. What they have done
instead is give the insurance companies the greatest windfall in history.

So how do you propose to fix what they've done? First you have to get the
current bunch out of office.


ALL of them. ALL Incumbents regardless of party. The problem is not so much
Liberal/Conservative or Democrat/Republican as it is 535 people who think
they are Entitled to hold office and in their arrogance believe they know
what is good for everyone else.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
On 3/24/2010 9:55 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
LDosser wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message

Those legislators who have decided to govern against the will of
the people (anywhere from 60 to 80% opposition depending upon the
poll) have sown the wind. They can expect to reap the whirlwind
come November.

Depends on how many fake voter registrations ACORN can get going so
the votes don't exceed the number of registered voters., and if the
socialist *******s can get the illegal alien vote legalized... well,
it's over.

ACORN is Folding.

I heard today Obama has reopened the taxpayers money drain into ACORNS
pockets. There is no way the socialist democratic party will let
ACORN die since ACORN is 100% socialist democrat supporter, and best
of all gets taxpayer money to fund its dirty work. Even if the name
changes, it is still ACORN, with it's several hundred corrupt fronts.
--
Jack
Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
http://jbstein.com


It really is FOLDING.

But the same people will show up in other venues, peddling their political
malignancies, and sponging off the working folk to pay for it. The name
and structure of the organization is immaterial ...


Smaller bugs are easier to crush.

Upscale wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:30:07 -0700, Mark & Juanita
Math is not exactly your strong suit, is it?

You don't read too well do you?

Your original post dealt exclusively with the number of doctors and how :
"The current number of physicians per people Â*in Canada is NOT
significantly different. Despite spending more per capita, the U.S.
does not deliver better medical care than many other countries.

26 Number of physicians per 10,000 people in the United States
19 Number of physicians per 10,000 people in Canada "

You specifically stated that "the current number of physicians per people
in Canada is NOT significantly different" So, what did I fail to read that
makes my rebuttal of that erroneous remark incorrect?



That's 27% fewer doctors per 10,0000 people compared to the US
(referenced
to the US allocation, 37% fewer referenced to the Canadian allocation) .
It also means that the US has about 385 people per doctor while Canada has
526
people per doctor. A difference of 142 people per doctor seems pretty
significant.

It is significant until you read further and see that the US spends
approximately twice the amount of money per capita on its medical
services. If Canada spent an equivalent percentage of money, it would
have more doctors per capita that the US.

I suppose the fact that it is not just doctors that make health care has
escaped you. MRI's, CAT scanners, and other equipment are also part of the
health care system. In the US, we have more than one or tow MRI machines
per state compared to what ya'll have in Canada.



Guess you're not too bright either.

Yeah, whatever there sparky. Typical lib, if you can't win the argument
with facts, go for ad hominem.



If medical care in the US is not better than Canada, why did one of your
country's leaders elect to have his heart surgery done in the US rather
than
Canada? Why do Canadians who can afford it coming to the US for treatment
rather than enduring the waiting list in the equivalent care Canada?

Doesn't necessarily make US medical service better, just faster in
this case. Money usually does that.


Given that many people seek medical care to reduce/eliminate pain or some
sort of discomfort, it seems like faster is a pretty darned important
criteria.



If the US is so much better, then why hasn't he moved permanently to
the US. He can afford it. The answer is that there's many things he
likes better in Canada. Guess the US isn't perfect with everything eh?

Twit!

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

Jack Stein wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:
Jack Stein wrote:

2) The Republicans always have to have a margin of victory that exceeds
the
margin of vote fraud. In this case, the anger is so significant, the
margin of fraud would be noticeable even to the leftist media.

Don't ever underestimate the left wing media machine. I would think any
voting district that had more voters than registered voters would be BIG
news, and HOTLY investigated and prosecuted. Nope, hardly raised an
eyebrow.


Good point.


Anyway, an example of the effects of ACORN is Al Franken, socialist
******* from Minnesota. Franken won by 312 votes. ACORN claimed to have
registered 48,000. The fact ACORN uses tax money to registers ONLY
socialist Democrats, and the fact ACORN is guilty as hell in
registration fraud makes the math a little hard to do.


I'll grant you that one also.

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

"LDosser" wrote:

ALL of them. ALL Incumbents regardless of party. The problem is not
so much Liberal/Conservative or Democrat/Republican as it is 535
people who think they are Entitled to hold office and in their
arrogance believe they know what is good for everyone else.

Don't forget the Senate.

That gives you another 100 seats.

Why not run for office if you are so upset?

That gives you a shot at three seats at a minimum.


Lew

LDosser wrote:

"Jack Stein" wrote in message
...
Mark & Juanita wrote:
Jack Stein wrote:

2) The Republicans always have to have a margin of victory that exceeds
the margin of vote fraud. In this case, the anger is so significant,
the margin of fraud would be noticeable even to the leftist media.

Don't ever underestimate the left wing media machine. I would think any
voting district that had more voters than registered voters would be BIG
news, and HOTLY investigated and prosecuted. Nope, hardly raised an
eyebrow.

Anyway, an example of the effects of ACORN is Al Franken, socialist
******* from Minnesota. Franken won by 312 votes. ACORN claimed to have
registered 48,000. The fact ACORN uses tax money to registers ONLY
socialist Democrats, and the fact ACORN is guilty as hell in registration
fraud makes the math a little hard to do.

Jack, ACORN IS FOLDING.

Nope, just re-constituting. Just like the hydra, lop off one head and two
more grow back


--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

Larry Blanchard wrote:

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:02:30 -0400, Jack Stein wrote:

Good point. Expanding on that, what they want is "single payer" or
socialized, government controlled and owned medical system. This never
works, and is anti-American to the extreme.

Universal health care can be implemented in several ways, single payer is
not the only way. Perhaps you could say "this never works" to all of the
countries that have UHC? They'd laugh and declare you nuts. But I guess
everyone's out of step but you.


Yep, it's working great in Great Britain, isn't it? Canada is headed the
same direction. Right now it's wait times, rationing will come next.
Problem with socialism it that you eventually run out of other peoples'
money.





--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:10:36 -0400, the infamous Steve
scrawled the following:

On 2010-03-22 22:01:18 -0400, "J. Clarke" said:

This is not about supporting deadbeats and illegals, it's about the
government ordering us to buy something that we don't want. Not taxing
us and having it provided, but telling us you _must_ buy this product.

Show of hands, please. Who here does not already buy health insurance?

(raises hand)
I can't afford it now and sure won't be able to afford Obamacare.

--
If we attend continually and promptly to the little that we can do, we
shall ere long be surprised to find how little remains that we cannot do.
-- Samuel Butler

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:33:18 -0700, the infamous "LDosser"
scrawled the following:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 22:54:03 -0700, the infamous "LDosser"
scrawled the following:

"CW" wrote in message
...

"LDosser" wrote in message
...

Illegal Aliens. They deserve a bus ride to the Mexican border.


It's been tried. They generally beat the bus back.


Razor wire backed by an electric fence - the kind the Gestapo used.

My favorite fantasy is a vaporizing laser system on both borders.
No fuss, no muss, no burial fees, no transportation fees, no legal
fees, just a big puff of smoke as you're instantly toasted. The perp's
minerals will enrich the ground they drop to.


And the borders could serve as a weapons testing ground. I like it!

Ayup. We'll catch some ragheads on the north and wets on the south.
(Since Lew -already- called me a bigot, I thought I'd measure up. Crom
knows we don't want to make libtards feel bad.) wink

--
If we attend continually and promptly to the little that we can do, we
shall ere long be surprised to find how little remains that we cannot do.
-- Samuel Butler