http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/12/1960s.era.baby.boomers/index.html?hpt=C2 (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/12/1960s.era.baby.boomers/index.html?hpt=C2)
Do you agree with all of that?
Quote from: Anne on May 12, 2011, 03:50:50 PM
Do you agree with all of that?
I do, and think it's a GREAT article with several salient points.
These are what I consider to be the three best:
1. The quote by Molly Ivins:
"It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America."
-- Molly Ivins, great American newspaperwoman2. This reiteration:
In no other period of our history did we make such dramatic progress in that never-ending struggle "to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America." 3. This part that evinces the racism and bigotry inherent in the RW/Tea Party/'conservative' (read - reactionary) politics:
Or, as Hodding Carter put it to historian Arthur Schlesinger, when Schlesinger asked why Southern white men hated Bill Clinton so much, "They look back with longing at the good old days -- the days when abortion was in the back alley, gays were in the closet, women were in the kitchen, blacks were in the back of the bus, and condoms were under the counter."
"Y" your little statement of "Never underestimate the power of a large group of stupid people. Brings to my mind the Tea Party which is a part of the main 34% power base of the Republican Party. And their stupidity is beyond belief. You can read it every day here on the Unknown Zone and it is scary and spooky. It would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous to middle class people and their freedom, especially women. :flag:
Though I tend to agree that some very good things did occur during the 1960's....such as the civil rights movement. But with that also came the "Hippie mentality" of drug use and random sex.....that spawned a generation of kids that "abusing" drugs became a norm, disrespecting authority was encouraged and the overall lack of moral decency grew rampantly.
So, I am not so sure "cured" America is appropriate.....there always seems to be a trade off on everything....good for bad...bad for good.
anyway, that is my 2 cents for this topic.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 12, 2011, 05:07:26 PM
Though I tend to agree that some very good things did occur during the 1960's....such as the civil rights movement. But with that also came the "Hippie mentality" of drug use and random sex.....that spawned a generation of kids that "abusing" drugs became a norm, disrespecting authority was encouraged and the overall lack of moral decency grew rampantly.
So, I am not so sure "cured" America is appropriate.....there always seems to be a trade off on everything....good for bad...bad for good.
anyway, that is my 2 cents for this topic.
Exactly
Quote from: Anne on May 12, 2011, 05:10:28 PM
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 12, 2011, 05:07:26 PM
Though I tend to agree that some very good things did occur during the 1960's....such as the civil rights movement. But with that also came the "Hippie mentality" of drug use and random sex.....that spawned a generation of kids that "abusing" drugs became a norm, disrespecting authority was encouraged and the overall lack of moral decency grew rampantly.
So, I am not so sure "cured" America is appropriate.....there always seems to be a trade off on everything....good for bad...bad for good.
anyway, that is my 2 cents for this topic.
Exactly
Pfft!
I refer you to history:
http://www.ukcia.org/research/cunion/cu63.htm
Chapter 63. The Haight-Ashbury, its predecessors and its satellitesThere's nothing new under the sun, and as I point out again and again, the current 'conservative' (read - reactionary) movement is STILL trying to fight the culture wars of the Sixties and once again proves the movement is reactionary to it's core.
I don't know how many times I've harangued y'all about the fact that you need to know history in order to understand things in context. ; )
Pardon me while I kiss the sky...
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 12, 2011, 06:30:40 PM
Pardon me while I kiss the sky...
Ahem.......
That would be..
" 'Scuse me while I kiss the sky!!"
Homage to Jimi. Saw him at 'stock.
Saw this article earlier today and I was very pleased indeed with it. Read it, agreed with it, and became frustrated as hell over the fact I was unable to post it here. (Cause I wasn't near a computer with access!)
To find it here when I arrived, was a sincere pleasure; and to read the responses this far, validating!
Everybody blames drugs on the sixties, but the reality is they've always been around. (Look at Mary Jane if you want an example). ONLY the stupidity of humankind would dare to make illegal what the creator created. . . :biggrin:
I loved this article. . .
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 12, 2011, 06:30:40 PM
Pardon me while I kiss the sky...
http://www.youtube.com/v/cnFSaqFzSO8
:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
They have always been around but in the 60's they were excessive and I think that is one reason we still have such a big problem today. In the 60's there was such a mood of 'no personal responsibility' it is someone else's fault, imo. That isn't good no matter where you sit.
Quote from: Anne on May 12, 2011, 07:58:54 PM
They have always been around but in the 60's they were excessive and I think that is one reason we still have such a big problem today. In the 60's there was such a mood of 'no personal responsibility' it is someone else's fault, imo. That isn't good no matter where you sit.
. . . So all those protests and the killing of college students (Kent State) were really NOT about holding individuals or entities accountable???? Really!??? (This kind of thinking today is, I suspect, a direct result of governmental endorsed prescription drug abuse)!
So all the "kids" who were killed by the mean ugly psyco government backed national guard were drugged up and at the same time doing what they were supposed to be doing, namely getting an education. Kent State was a bad scene but don't pass it off as a bunch of drugged up free love hippies that the government straffed with machine guns. I guess you think it was just fine that Ayres blew up buildings.
Speak for yourself about being in a prescription drug haze.
Quote from: Anne on May 12, 2011, 08:18:45 PM
So all the "kids" who were killed by the mean ugly psyco government backed national guard were drugged up and at the same time doing what they were supposed to be doing, namely getting an education. Kent State was a bad scene but don't pass it off as a bunch of drugged up free love hippies that the government straffed with machine guns. I guess you think it was just fine that Ayres blew up buildings.
Speak for yourself about being in a prescription drug haze.
Holy hell. . . are you going through withdrawal or something! :eek:
So answer the question my statement CLEARLY begs an answer to! (I'll rephrase in order to facilitate your understanding of it).
Were all those protests back in the 60's the result of a societal shift in morals designed to hold individuals and entities accountable, or was it just a direct result of ". . .but in the 60's they were excessive and I think that is one reason we still have such a big problem today. In the 60's there was such a mood of 'no personal responsibility' it is someone else's fault, imo."????
YOUR statement tends to support what you
try to accuse me of!
I'll take a chemscreen anytime and place. . . Wonder how yours would rate in comparison? :rolleyes: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Holding who accountable for what, makes a difference which protest you are talking about. Do you think the prevelance of drugs in the 60s was a good thing and were the driving force behind the protests?
I am quite sure mine would be clean, but was it you that was saying how inaccurate they are?
The strongest thing I take is asprin and I remember all those movements in the 60's as cop hating, drug induced, everybody over 30 is evil, government is evil, self serving, I want to do what ever I want to hell with what anyone else wants, free love, the world owes me a living types for the most part.
Quote from: Palehorse on May 12, 2011, 08:04:09 PM
. . . So all those protests and the killing of college students (Kent State) were really NOT about holding individuals or entities accountable???? Really!??? (This kind of thinking today is, I suspect, a direct result of governmental endorsed prescription drug abuse)!
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 01:42:42 PM
The strongest thing I take is asprin and I remember all those movements in the 60's as cop hating, drug induced, everybody over 30 is evil, government is evil, self serving, I want to do what ever I want to hell with what anyone else wants, free love, the world owes me a living types for the most part.
The birth of today's liberal/progressive.
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 13, 2011, 01:53:11 PM
The birth of today's liberal/progressive.
Exactly. :yes:
Because there aren't any bible-thumping neocons showing up at the Betty Ford clinic, banging their aides wives, trying to seduce their underage pages or giving blow jobs in public restrooms; huh? Self-righteous hypocrites...
Quote from: Exterminator on May 13, 2011, 03:26:14 PM
Because there aren't any bible-thumping neocons showing up at the Betty Ford clinic, banging their aides wives, trying to seduce their underage pages or giving blow jobs in public restrooms; huh? Self-righteous hypocrites...
Their problem is that they believe in something that doesn't exist anymore. If it ever did.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 13, 2011, 03:26:14 PM
Because there aren't any bible-thumping neocons showing up at the Betty Ford clinic, banging their aides wives, trying to seduce their underage pages or giving blow jobs in public restrooms; huh? Self-righteous hypocrites...
Or maybe bible burning, flag hating socialists that should be in rehab but can't admit they have a problem while fathering 'love children' or getting blow jobs in the oval office??
Careful where you throw stones.
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 13, 2011, 04:44:11 PM
Or maybe bible burning, flag hating socialists that should be in rehab but can't admit they have a problem while fathering 'love children' or getting blow jobs in the oval office??
Careful where you throw stones.
:thumbsup: :food4:
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 13, 2011, 04:44:11 PM
Or maybe bible burning, flag hating socialists that should be in rehab but can't admit they have a problem while fathering 'love children' or getting blow jobs in the oval office??
Careful where you throw stones.
Oh, :rotfl: Night Hawk or is it Bull Bat, what Democrat are you talking about that had a bastard love child. I know Dan Burton of Indiana did. Also blow jobs are a good birth control method. Being in the Navy I figure you knew about that.
Oh, I did forget Strom Thurman, Republican Senator had a black child out of wed lock. :salute: :grin2:
Quote from: The Troll on May 13, 2011, 05:42:34 PM
Oh, :rotfl: Night Hawk or is it Bull Bat, what Democrat are you talking about that had a bastard love child. I know Dan Burton of Indiana did. Also blow jobs are a good birth control method. Being in the Navy I figure you knew about that.
Oh, I did forget Strom Thurman, Republican Senator had a black child out of wed lock. :salute: :grin2:
John Edwards
Quote from: Anne on May 12, 2011, 09:50:24 PM
Holding who accountable for what, makes a difference which protest you are talking about. Do you think the prevelance of drugs in the 60s was a good thing and were the driving force behind the protests?
I am quite sure mine would be clean, but was it you that was saying how inaccurate they are?
It is quite apparent that you only purpose in responding to anything I post is to oppose and instigate.
From the start of this little fiasco, my position was one that was 180 degrees from that which you insinuated and assumed toward this poster.
I'm through answering your little tirades and playing your "trolling" game. . . :rolleyes:
You know damned well what my position is on drug screening, any drug screening, that falls short of a full spectrum bodily fluid analysis. . .
Wow. . . I had no friggin idea there were so many idiots in the world! :spooked:
THAT is scarier than anything Tim Leary could have ever created. . .
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 13, 2011, 05:55:05 PM
John Edwards
Christohper Lee
Maybe if they dropped the "family values" platform that they all like to stand on but few respect, they wouldn't be such targets.
Conservatives will argue to the point of insanity in defense of a Republican, but would be VERY hard pressed to find one who reflects the values they claim they look for.
Quote from: Palehorse on May 13, 2011, 07:02:38 PM
Wow. . . I had no friggin idea there were so many idiots in the world! :spooked:
THAT is scarier than anything Tim Leary could have ever created. . .
I worked with a pot head pipefitter. All so he had some rank in the Navy Reserves. At noon he would go out and smoke a joint. You could give him a measurement and by the time he got to the pipe machine he had forgot the measurements. I had to write them down.
But about a month before he would take his two week Navy cruise he would clean all of the dope out of himself. He wanted to pass the drug test.
I ask him about drugs on ship. All he would say, there were times he was glad it was peace time, because some of the guys couldn't find their ass. Go Navy. :rolleyes:
All I can say is that there is a reason individuals are "former" sailors. . . Just like the population in this world there are those who can, and those who cannot. Those not able to square themselves away eventually find themselves culled; by choice or otherwise. Sometimes it just takes a little time.
That fact is what created Spec War. The training itself will make normally strong individuals wet their pants. Those that don't get in. . . Those that do ring the bell. . .
And how strange is it that the same individuals who parrot the drug propaganda when it comes to the sixties, are often the same ones who rail against the sitting POTUS?
Indicative of a change phobia? :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:
Quote from: Palehorse on May 13, 2011, 07:45:24 PM
And how strange is it that the same individuals who parrot the drug propaganda when it comes to the sixties, are often the same ones who rail against the sitting POTUS?
Indicative of a change phobia? :yes: :yes: :yes: :yes:
And isn't it strange that there are those individuals that can't differentiate against someone being against a person from their being against that persons policies? There is a difference ya know. :razz:
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 08:06:20 PM
And isn't it strange that there are those individuals that can't differentiate against someone being against a person from their being against that persons policies? There is a difference ya know. :razz:
It'd be nice if such could be actually proven. . . But most fail to even make the most modest of efforts to do so. . . because they can't!
Quote from: Palehorse on May 13, 2011, 08:09:12 PM
It'd be nice if such could be actually proven. . . But most fail to even make the most modest of efforts to do so. . . because they can't!
We have said over and over and over why we don't like the policy and ya'll just won't listen is all or you prefer, not you personally but others, prefer to name call, put down, and change the subject rather than come back with a valid opinion. You do say why you feel like you do and show what you feel is proof that the program should work but there is no valid proof that it indeed will because there js nothing to compare it to except to Romney's disaster in Massachusetts which is almost identical to what Obama wants and it isn't working at all and similar things overseas which aren't working either.
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 08:19:50 PM
We have said over and over and over why we don't like the policy and ya'll just won't listen is all or you prefer, not you personally but others, prefer to name call, put down, and change the subject rather than come back with a valid opinion. You do say why you feel like you do and show what you feel is proof that the program should work but there is no valid proof that it indeed will because there js nothing to compare it to except to Romney's disaster in Massachusetts which is almost identical to what Obama wants and it isn't working at all and similar things overseas which aren't working either.
Policies! Policies! Policies! You keep putting that word out there, in the plural, but yet only cite one policy ad nauseum. The funniest part about that is that it isn't his policy anymore. It was raped and pillaged by the Republicans.
I can't believe you don't see why someone would be suspicious.
As for name calling, save it sister...pot meet kettle!
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 08:19:50 PM
We have said over and over and over why we don't like the policy and ya'll just won't listen is all or you prefer, not you personally but others, prefer to name call, put down, and change the subject rather than come back with a valid opinion. You do say why you feel like you do and show what you feel is proof that the program should work but there is no valid proof that it indeed will because there js nothing to compare it to except to Romney's disaster in Massachusetts which is almost identical to what Obama wants and it isn't working at all and similar things overseas which aren't working either.
Just look a :me: lie. Romney's health care in Massachusetts is a success. Also you so sensitive about name calling. If you see a skunk you say skunk. If you see a Republican, you say liar. :yes: :yes: :yes:
Quote from: The Troll on May 13, 2011, 09:49:05 PM
Just look a :me: lie. Romney's health care in Massachusetts is a success. Also you so sensitive about name calling. If you see a skunk you say skunk. If you see a Republican, you say liar. :yes: :yes: :yes:
I think you'd better check that out Troll. Even he admits it is a failure.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 13, 2011, 08:58:33 PM
Policies! Policies! Policies! You keep putting that word out there, in the plural, but yet only cite one policy ad nauseum. The funniest part about that is that it isn't his policy anymore. It was raped and pillaged by the Republicans.
I can't believe you don't see why someone would be suspicious.
As for name calling, save it sister...pot meet kettle!
Health care, stimulus bill, energy policy, shall I go on?
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 10:24:12 PM
Health care, stimulus bill, energy policy, shall I go on?
As I've pointed out, the health care bill isn't his anymore. Minus one.
Are you sure the stimulus bill was Obama's brainchild? Might want to look that up. Exactly what do you dislike about the energy policy?
Please do go on, you're digging yourself deeper and deeper and I'm enjoying it. :yes:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 13, 2011, 10:44:01 PM
As I've pointed out, the health care bill isn't his anymore. Minus one.
Are you sure the stimulus bill was Obama's brainchild? Might want to look that up. Exactly what do you dislike about the energy policy?
Please do go on, you're digging yourself deeper and deeper and I'm enjoying it. :yes:
Give up Sandy, I don't know wither the Obama health plan covers mental illness. So there is nothing we can do for "ME". Since I am a Atheist I sure can't pray for her. :pray: :preach: :pope: and someone else put something in the pot for :me: :biggrin:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 13, 2011, 10:44:01 PM
As I've pointed out, the health care bill isn't his anymore. Minus one.
Are you sure the stimulus bill was Obama's brainchild? Might want to look that up. Exactly what do you dislike about the energy policy?
Please do go on, you're digging yourself deeper and deeper and I'm enjoying it. :yes:
If it isn't Obama's health care bill then just exactly whose is it? The stimulus bill was the brain child of the dem congress and he pushed it like a mad dog. The energy bill is BS and will result in higher energy costs for everyone plus cost jobs just like it did in where it has already been implemented. It turned out to be a total waste of money and saved very little.
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 04:22:28 AM
If it isn't Obama's health care bill then just exactly whose is it?
Were you awake for the part where the Republicans took a promising bill and bastardized it into a Republican pork wet dream?
bow chicka wow wow
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 04:22:28 AM
The stimulus bill was the brain child of the dem congress and he pushed it like a mad dog.
Besides the fact that quite a few Republicans had input and the fact that Bush had failed stimulus plans, this makes you dislike Obama how?
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 04:22:28 AMThe energy bill is BS and will result in higher energy costs for everyone plus cost jobs just like it did in where it has already been implemented. It turned out to be a total waste of money and saved very little.
I'm sure you must be an expert considering that you used a technical term like "BS" to support your point :biggrin: But, humor me, explain how exactly it will be a total waste of money and cost jobs. While you're at it explain what you have against clean energy and if your answer is "nothing" what you would propose in place of the president's plan. Please spare no details. :smile:
Quote from: me on May 13, 2011, 10:23:12 PM
I think you'd better check that out Troll. Even he admits it is a failure.
As old Dan Quail the Indiana Republican dumbass would say, "He's a flip flopper." Romney will say any thing to win. First in was for free choices now he isn't, next he was for a health care for the people in his state he was governor in. Now he's not. Just where does he stand. Guess what he's a lying flip flopper. Thanks Danny Boy Quail :eek:
But for someone who made his millions of dollars, buying good healthy business and taking their assets and putting the business out of business and selling them off piece by piece. Putting thousands of people out of work and made himself a millionaire.
What a hell of a good religious Mormon. :doh: :pray: :preach: :pope: :devil29:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 14, 2011, 08:15:40 AM
Were you awake for the part where the Republicans took a promising bill and bastardized it into a Republican pork wet dream?
bow chicka wow wow
The republicans have done nothing at this point because the dems are still in control of the final say.
QuoteBesides the fact that quite a few Republicans had input and the fact that Bush had failed stimulus plans, this makes you dislike Obama how?
Exactly what stimulus plan did Bush have that even made it out of the dem controlled congress? The only one that actually made it was the one the dems wanted that Bush gave in and signed at the end of his term.
QuoteI'm sure you must be an expert considering that you used a technical term like "BS" to support your point :biggrin: But, humor me, explain how exactly it will be a total waste of money and cost jobs. While you're at it explain what you have against clean energy and if your answer is "nothing" what you would propose in place of the president's plan. Please spare no details. :smile:
Ask those in Ky who are not out of work because of those wonderful power saving light bulbs we can't produce here because of regulations so their plant was shut down. The light bulbs are more expensive so there is an increased cost to the consumer to light their home. I have also noticed no difference in my light bill since using them and they are also a hazard if not disposed of properly. You won't be able to sell a home unless it meets certain "green" standards. Only certain materials can be used and they have to be installed by union people which increases the cost to home owners and puts people who could do just as good a job out of work plus the home owner who may be able to do just as good or better at the job can't do it himself. It also puts companies out of work who produce similar products out of work because that product is no longer allowed because it doesn't meet the "green" standard even though it may be proven to work just as good. Yes, there will be new green jobs but not as many as there will be jobs lost because of the standards and regulations. *light bulbs. Using corn for fuel didn't work in the 70's so why should it work now? It is raising the cost of food to consumers which is a double whammy on top of the cost increase because of the gas prices and was found to be a worse pollutant than gas when it was used before.
http://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy
http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/mcguintys-green-jobs-plan-could-kill-185000-jobs/
http://www.environmentaltrends.org/single/article/new-study-adds-uk-to-list-of-green-job-basket-cases.html
Let's have a sing along. :music1: :me: :me: :me: :music1: I'm in love with :me: :me: :me: :music1: Screw all of the pollution and the union workers. :music1: I'm in love with :me: :me: :me: :music1:
:music1: and least you for get it I want you to remember. :music1: It's all about :me: :me: :me: And ladies and gentlemen it is all about :me: :doh:
Quote from: The Troll on May 14, 2011, 11:58:41 AM
Let's have a sing along. :music1: :me: :me: :me: :music1: I'm in love with :me: :me: :me: :music1: Screw all of the pollution and the union workers. :music1: I'm in love with :me: :me: :me: :music1:
:music1: and least you for get it I want you to remember. :music1: It's all about :me: :me: :me: And ladies and gentlemen it is all about :me: :doh:
Hiring union workers to do work on your home should be by choice not a requirement when the same work can be done just a good and cheaper either by the home owner or someone who is non union. As long as it is done to spec why should it matter?
Well :me: I haven't seen any law where you have to hire a union worker to work on your house. If you build a new house you have to hire a state licenced plumber and a state licenced building contractor if you have to borrow money from a bank to build it and that costs as much as a union worker. These people don't work for nothing either. :yes:
But if they are building a tax payer paid for building it will be a union plumber and a union building contractor. Because they want it done right. They are not going to hire some scab, halfassed plumber like you. :trustme:
If that energy bill is passed one of the things in it is you can't sell your home unless it meets energy standards which includes hiring union labor to make the required energy saving repairs including caulking, glazing, insulation and things like that. And don't come back with that "only union people are able to do that type of work right" argument either because I know better.
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 04:11:12 PM
If that energy bill is passed one of the things in it is you can't sell your home unless it meets energy standards which includes hiring union labor to make the required energy saving repairs including caulking, glazing, insulation and things like that. And don't come back with that "only union people are able to do that type of work right" argument either because I know better.
I got a Thousand dollars, $1,000 that this will never happen in our life time. Want to bet the money. We will put the money in the bank and if I die before it happens, you will put $1,000 in my estate. If it go into effect before I die. I will give you a $1,000 dollars and kiss your big ass. Just more Republican fear, gloom, doom and smoke and mirrors.
You want to bet my Little Sweet ***** Willow. :girn2:
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 11:41:40 AM
The republicans have done nothing at this point because the dems are still in control of the final say.
Exactly what stimulus plan did Bush have that even made it out of the dem controlled congress?
Try to keep up, will ya? At least pay attention if you want to attempt to discuss something.
http://theunknownzone.us/smf/index.php?topic=15404.0
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0222/Obama-s-healthcare-plan-gets-chilly-GOP-reception
He had to concede just about every point on the plan to appease the Republicans AND add a ton of pork. The rest of the world knows about this. How did you miss it?
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 11:41:40 AM
The only one that actually made it was the one the dems wanted that Bush gave in and signed at the end of his term.
Good grief! You can't even keep up w/your Demi-god:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/11/news/economy/bush_stimulus/
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01_44/b3755032.htm
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 11:41:40 AM
Ask those in Ky who are not out of work because of those wonderful power saving light bulbs we can't produce here because of regulations so their plant was shut down. The light bulbs are more expensive so there is an increased cost to the consumer to light their home. I have also noticed no difference in my light bill since using them and they are also a hazard if not disposed of properly. You won't be able to sell a home unless it meets certain "green" standards. Only certain materials can be used and they have to be installed by union people which increases the cost to home owners and puts people who could do just as good a job out of work plus the home owner who may be able to do just as good or better at the job can't do it himself. It also puts companies out of work who produce similar products out of work because that product is no longer allowed because it doesn't meet the "green" standard even though it may be proven to work just as good. Yes, there will be new green jobs but not as many as there will be jobs lost because of the standards and regulations. *light bulbs. Using corn for fuel didn't work in the 70's so why should it work now? It is raising the cost of food to consumers which is a double whammy on top of the cost increase because of the gas prices and was found to be a worse pollutant than gas when it was used before.
Specious and unproven to be related.
Quotehttp://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy
Blog post by a writer who didn't take the time to make a connection between points w/in the bill to his "sky is falling" prediction based on another country. Apples and oranges. Not to mention he has an agenda, so therefore isn't creditable:
http://www.american.com/author_search?Creator=Kenneth P. Green
Quotehttp://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/mcguintys-green-jobs-plan-could-kill-185000-jobs/
Seriously? WTH does this have to do with Obama's plan?
Quotehttp://www.environmentaltrends.org/single/article/new-study-adds-uk-to-list-of-green-job-basket-cases.html
I've already cited why Kenneth Green isn't creditable.
Your research skills stink. How can you possibly have an informed opinion, if you don't know how to become informed? :confused:
You use Huffington Post and want to put down my sources??????? :rotfl: :rotfl:
Explain to me why he isn't a credible source. Is it because his opinions and research differ from yours?
http://www.aei.org/scholar/112
Biography
Kenneth P. Green, an environmental scientist by training, has studied public policy involving risk, regulation, and the environment for more than 16 years at public policy research institutions across North America. He is the author of numerous policy studies, magazine articles, newspaper columns, encyclopedia and book chapters, and even wrote a textbook for middle-school students entitled Global Warming: Understanding the Debate. Ken has testified before regulatory and legislative bodies at both state and federal levels, and speaks frequently to the public and in the media. Ken has twice served as an expert reviewer for the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and, in addition to his regular studies, is interim director of AEI's Center for Regulatory Studies.
Experience
* Executive Director, Environmental Literacy Council, 2005-2006
* Chief Scientist, Director of Centre for Studies in Risk, Regulation, and Environment, Fraser Institute, 2002-2005
* Chief Scientist, Director of Environmental Program, Reason Foundation, 1994-2002
* Expert Reviewer, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group 1, 2001
* Member, California Departmental Transportation Advisory Committee, 1996-2001
* Member, California REACH Commission, 1996-99
* Environmental Program Analyst/Writer, Hughes Aircraft Company Corporate Office, 1990-94
Besides the fact that he didn't provide a nexus between his opinions and facts related to the bill? :rolleyes:
Hypocritical of you to assume that I discredited him b/c his opinion differs from mine (even though I don't really have an opinion of the UK energy plan) when the only reason you chose him is b/c his opinion mirrors yours. Nevermind that he did a poor job supporting his opinion with relevant facts.
Quote from: me on May 14, 2011, 06:00:50 PM
You use Huffington Post and want to put down my sources??????? :rotfl: :rotfl:
WTF?
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 14, 2011, 06:26:39 PM
WTF?
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on August 09, 2009, 12:37:59 PM
I thought we had a thread for healthcare reform, but I can't find it. Maybe it was one of the other threads that got off topic. At any rate, I thought you may enjoy reading a portion of the transcript from the weekly address.The transcript in it's entirity as well as the video is enclosed in the link.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/08/obama-uses-jobs-report-to_n_254563.html
Looks like a Huffington Post link to me.
Quote from: The Troll on May 14, 2011, 04:44:16 PM
I got a Thousand dollars, $1,000 that this will never happen in our life time. Want to bet the money. We will put the money in the bank and if I die before it happens, you will put $1,000 in my estate. If it go into effect before I die. I will give you a $1,000 dollars and kiss your big ass. Just more Republican fear, gloom, doom and smoke and mirrors.
You want to bet my Little Sweet ***** Willow. :girn2:
:me: You want to put your money where your Night Hawk mouth (BIG) is. You choose the bank. Lambie Pie. :kiss:
Quote from: me on May 15, 2011, 12:23:24 AM
Looks like a Huffington Post link to me.
:biggrin: from 2009!?! LMAO!
Nevermind the other more recent links I posted to support my position. ;D Please note, they weren't opinion nor biased. The reason I linked you to the thread was to show you that we've already discussed the topic that you seem so bewildered by now. I forgot that you never get the point and tend to hone on on the most irrelevant thing you can find. What about the other link? Got a problem with the CS Monitor too?
2009! ;D If that's the best you can do, I give up.
Quote from: The Troll on May 15, 2011, 09:43:44 AM
:me: You want to put your money where your Night Hawk mouth (BIG) is. You choose the bank. Lambie Pie. :kiss:
Good luck with that. ;D
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 15, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
:biggrin: from 2009!?! LMAO!
Nevermind the other more recent links I posted to support my position. ;D Please note, they weren't opinion nor biased. The reason I linked you to the thread was to show you that we've already discussed the topic that you seem so bewildered by now. I forgot that you never get the point and tend to hone on on the most irrelevant thing you can find. What about the other link? Got a problem with the CS Monitor too?
2009! ;D If that's the best you can do, I give up.
One trouble with what you are posting is it hasn't been implemented yet it's just in the beginning stages. What I posted is coming from sources where identical, or close to identical, programs which are already in place are not working so what makes your proof any more valid than mine? What you have is theory not proof. It's like an engineer submitting plans to a contractor that look good on the paper but when the building is built it doesn't work and isn't practical.
Quote from: me on May 15, 2011, 05:19:40 PM
One trouble with what you are posting is it hasn't been implemented yet it's just in the beginning stages. What I posted is coming from sources where identical, or close to identical, programs which are already in place are not working so what makes your proof any more valid than mine? What you have is theory not proof. It's like an engineer submitting plans to a contractor that look good on the paper but when the building is built it doesn't work and isn't practical.
Didn't you say it caused job loss. :confused:
What you posted is specious speculation without the benefit of comparison to the actual plan. Have you seen the plan? Read it? If not, how do you know his points are valid? If so, then call me Missouri (show me).
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 15, 2011, 05:53:50 PM
Didn't you say it caused job loss. :confused:
What you posted is specious speculation without the benefit of comparison to the actual plan. Have you seen the plan? Read it? If not, how do you know his points are valid? If so, then call me Missouri (show me).
You just helped me make my point. It's a
plan just as Obama's plans are plans and these are all opinions which we are all entitled to based on many different sources. Some plans have already been put into reality in different parts of the world so some sources are coming from actual figures as to whats going on within those already implemented plans and not just figures within the plans which have yet to be put into place and have become operational. They are based more on a fact than a speculation.
QuoteThe report's key finding is that for every job created in the United Kingdom in renewable energy, 3.7 jobs are lost.
http://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy
In you guys debate both of you and the rest of the people of the world are forgetting one important thing. Each day the world grows in population. Especially in the poor country. But every day there are more and more computers running all of the work.
Each and every day jobs are lost to automation. No company wants to hire anyone. Just look at the stores where you check yourself out, for free. The next thing companies will want is for you to stock their shelves for free.
A new brewery in England, Guiness Beer Co. Once the grain bins have been filled, the electricity and water is turned on. The total brewing of the beer is automated with one man on each shift monitoring the computers operations of the plant. Just think three men controls all of the production of Guiness beer in the world. It the same with canned corn. Once the ears or corn are put in the machine, it is untouched by human hands until in come out in a cook can of corn.
Just like in Alabama Honda auto assembly plant. Once a finished floor base is placed on the automated assembly line the car is untouched by human hands from start to finish of the body shell, same way with the doors. With all of the illegal aliens, jobs being out sourced to slave nations no body will be working the American economy. There will be only service jobs paying minimum wage and not even that if the Republicans get complete control of the country and destroy minimum wage. I can not see how Predatory Capitalism will continue to work when everybody works for nothing and the rich gets everything. Long live the Kings and Queens. To hell with the unclean and unclothe people. Work, die and get the hell out of the way. The new brave world.
Because all of the information, manufacturing plants, printing, bloggs, everything will be owned by a few super rich people and super rich corporations and the people will be working for for nothing and in poor working conditions because we have Republicans who think the people don't deserve a union and the rich and the corporations rules everything. Because they are the ones who creates the great jobs. To all of this is say :azz:
Quote from: me on May 15, 2011, 06:37:33 PM
You just helped me make my point. It's a plan just as Obama's plans are plans and these are all opinions which we are all entitled to based on many different sources. Some plans have already been put into reality in different parts of the world so some sources are coming from actual figures as to whats going on within those already implemented plans and not just figures within the plans which have yet to be put into place and have become operational. They are based more on a fact than a speculation.
http://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy
I have to say this...then your point is stupid.
If you don't know what Obama's plan is, then how can you and the anti-Obama author of that article claim to know the outcome. Opinions are only as good as the facts they're built on. Since his opinion isn't built on any facts regarding Obama's plan, it's irrelevant. I know it's hard for you to concede that anyone that thinks like you could be wrong. Just as it would be difficult for you to admit that without knowing the details of Obama's plan there's NO way to know if the two plans are alike.
Just admit that you don't know anything about his plans and you hate him because he's a Democrat and he could walk on water and you'd find some internet "expert" to support your theory that the water supply is now tainted. Maybe you hate him because of his race. Either is way more believable than policies, b/c you clearly don't have a clue what they are.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 15, 2011, 08:36:57 PM
I have to say this...then your point is stupid.
If you don't know what Obama's plan is, then how can you and the anti-Obama author of that article claim to know the outcome. Opinions are only as good as the facts they're built on. Since his opinion isn't built on any facts regarding Obama's plan, it's irrelevant. I know it's hard for you to concede that anyone that thinks like you could be wrong. Just as it would be difficult for you to admit that without knowing the details of Obama's plan there's NO way to know if the two plans are alike.
Just admit that you don't know anything about his plans and you hate him because he's a Democrat and he could walk on water and you'd find some internet "expert" to support your theory that the water supply is now tainted. Maybe you hate him because of his race. Either is way more believable than policies, b/c you clearly don't have a clue what they are.
Well we know one thing about :me: If Jesus came back as a Democrat :me: would gather some of her :sneaky: friends and start building a cross for the next morning. :Pope:
Quote from: Exterminator on May 12, 2011, 02:21:57 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/12/1960s.era.baby.boomers/index.html?hpt=C2 (http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/12/1960s.era.baby.boomers/index.html?hpt=C2)
Ex, I'm sorry for hijacking your thread for this nonsense.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 15, 2011, 08:36:57 PM
I have to say this...then your point is stupid.
If you don't know what Obama's plan is, then how can you and the anti-Obama author of that article claim to know the outcome. Opinions are only as good as the facts they're built on. Since his opinion isn't built on any facts regarding Obama's plan, it's irrelevant. I know it's hard for you to concede that anyone that thinks like you could be wrong. Just as it would be difficult for you to admit that without knowing the details of Obama's plan there's NO way to know if the two plans are alike.
Just admit that you don't know anything about his plans and you hate him because he's a Democrat and he could walk on water and you'd find some internet "expert" to support your theory that the water supply is now tainted. Maybe you hate him because of his race. Either is way more believable than policies, b/c you clearly don't have a clue what they are.
Obama's health care plan is based on one like the one that failed in Massachusetts and his other plans are based on the ones that are failing in the UK and other places so therefore are valid comparisons. His plan is just a plan so it is as I said and you can say it's stupid all you want I still have just as much right to disagree with it as you do to like it and disagreeing with something does not make me stupid in spite of what you are being programed to believe.
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 09:38:16 AM
Obama's health care plan is based on one like the one that failed in Massachusetts and his other plans are based on the ones that are failing in the UK and other places so therefore are valid comparisons. His plan is just a plan so it is as I said and you can say it's stupid all you want I still have just as much right to disagree with it as you do to like it and disagreeing with something does not make me stupid in spite of what you are being programed to believe.
I'm going to hate myself for this...sources?
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 09:38:16 AM
Obama's health care plan is based on one like the one that failed in Massachusetts and his other plans are based on the ones that are failing in the UK and other places so therefore are valid comparisons. His plan is just a plan so it is as I said and you can say it's stupid all you want I still have just as much right to disagree with it as you do to like it and disagreeing with something does not make me stupid in spite of what you are being programed to believe.
Since I don't believe anything you say. Why is it when a poll of the countries with "Socialized medicine" the vote is over whelming for Socialized medicine. Canada, England, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Norway, New Zeland, Australia and all of the civilized country in the world.
Miss Sissy Pants your idea is so far out on and wrong about The Democrats health plan, it's beyond the moon. I say, the cow jumped over the moon, but I say this girl, she couldn't play hop Scotch, because her B-B brain would rattle in her hard head, Ding Dong. Hee, hee, hee. I say the girl is slow. :biggrin: Ring your bell Miss Froggy. :wink: :biggrin:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 16, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
I'm going to hate myself for this...sources?
Why bother you would just say I was stupid or the resourse was not a valid one. I'll see if I can find a clip of good old Mit admitting it was a mistake and isn't working would that satisfy you? He did that on National TV ya know. Of course they probably chose not to run it on the lame stream media networks.
And Troll if they like their health care so much in Canada and other countries why do a lot of people come to the States to have their operations for cancer and such? Yes, people from here go to other countries for some experimental treatments sometimes that aren't approved here yet but in most cases those prove not to be of any benefit in the long run.
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 02:50:24 PM
Why bother you would just say I was stupid or the resourse was not a valid one. I'll see if I can find a clip of good old Mit admitting it was a mistake and isn't working would that satisfy you? He did that on National TV ya know. Of course they probably chose not to run it on the lame stream media networks.
And Troll if they like their health care so much in Canada and other countries why do a lot of people come to the States to have their operations for cancer and such? Yes, people from here go to other countries for some experimental treatments sometimes that aren't approved here yet but in most cases those prove not to be of any benefit in the long run.
Why do Canadians come to the United States for operations. It's easy, they got the extra money. Why do wealthy people go to India for organ transplants. Because they have the money. They have a lot of money but they can't afford to have it done here. Back in the dark age of America when a woman needed abortion and couldn't get here. If she or family was rich they sent her to Europe. I have a friend today who tried to get abortion for his wife 49 years ago. His wife had German Measles and his daughter came out total damage to where she had to have 24 hour care and just this year she had her 48 year birthday. She blind, can't hear and she weight 48 pounds. How much money has that cost. Israel have just a good medicine and in some ways better than the United States and they got Socialized Medicine.
Tell me :me: What would you do if you didn't have Medicare and the government drug plan and no union benefits. And when you're in your 70's and all you have is $1,500 dollars the Republicans want to give you to buy health and drugs care with.
You know where you would be. You could kiss you butt good bye, You would be dead or flat on you big ass dieing. Baby Cakes. Wake up Honey Poo, you got a dog in the fight and if you listen to you Republicans friends, their big dog is going to bit your big ass. :doh: :jester:
Quote from: The Troll on May 16, 2011, 04:28:16 PM
Why do Canadians come to the United States for operations. It's easy, they got the extra money. Why do wealthy people go to India for organ transplants. Because they have the money. They have a lot of money but they can't afford to have it done here. Back in the dark age of America when a woman needed abortion and couldn't get here. If she or family was rich they sent her to Europe. I have a friend today who tried to get abortion for his wife 49 years ago. His wife had German Measles and his daughter came out total damage to where she had to have 24 hour care and just this year she had her 48 year birthday. She blind, can't hear and she weight 48 pounds. How much money has that cost. Israel have just a good medicine and in some ways better than the United States and they got Socialized Medicine.
Tell me :me: What would you do if you didn't have Medicare and the government drug plan and no union benefits. And when you're in your 70's and all you have is $1,500 dollars the Republicans want to give you to buy health and drugs care with.
If they have so much money why do the come here if their medical care is so good there? You have got to be kidding about wealthy people going to India to have transplants. Have you hit your head? Give me one example and not something out of the National Enquirer either.
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 02:50:24 PM
Why bother you would just say I was stupid or the resourse was not a valid one. I'll see if I can find a clip of good old Mit admitting it was a mistake and isn't working would that satisfy you? He did that on National TV ya know. Of course they probably chose not to run it on the lame stream media networks.
And Troll if they like their health care so much in Canada and other countries why do a lot of people come to the States to have their operations for cancer and such? Yes, people from here go to other countries for some experimental treatments sometimes that aren't approved here yet but in most cases those prove not to be of any benefit in the long run.
Well, If you had a link to the final draft Republicanized healthcare plan (remember you really can't call it Obama's anymore b/c it's been changed so much) and a link to the healthcare plan in Mass. Then a link to Obama's energy plan and a link to the one it's being compared to. I want to see how they're alike and different and decide for mysel if they are the same or if they differences need to be evaluated. In other words, a source where we can think and form out own opinion rather than a spoonfed biased editorial.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 16, 2011, 06:07:22 PM
Well, If you had a link to the final draft Republicanized healthcare plan (remember you really can't call it Obama's anymore b/c it's been changed so much) and a link to the healthcare plan in Mass. Then a link to Obama's energy plan and a link to the one it's being compared to. I want to see how they're alike and different and decide for mysel if they are the same or if they differences need to be evaluated. In other words, a source where we can think and form out own opinion rather than a spoonfed biased editorial.
You know what? Never mind. I may as well have been speaking in Hebrew. You accuse EVERY one of being sheep, but I've yet to see you post a source that wasn't editorialized or an original document. You don't know what a creditble source is and have never researched the source of your sources. You want to assume that if they agree with what you want to think, that's good enough, so just forget it.
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 05:27:32 PM
If they have so much money why do the come here if their medical care is so good there? You have got to be kidding about wealthy people going to India to have transplants. Have you hit your head? Give me one example and not something out of the National Enquirer either.
Wrong again Squirrel Bait, they like to chew on nuts. Your so stupid and so ill prepared for mental combat. For you the war is over. And guess what I don't want you for a prisoner. Mental illness is a hard thing to fix. Hee, hee, hee. :chick:
Read this and you'll be a little smarter, Snow Ball. :kiss:
Http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/health&id=5751386
Type mistake
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sectrion=news/health&id=5751386
I found out it didn't have two "http://http: I wanted to show you :me: I do make some mistakes. But never the blunders you make. :grin2:
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 05:27:32 PM
If they have so much money why do the come here if their medical care is so good there? You have got to be kidding about wealthy people going to India to have transplants. Have you hit your head? Give me one example and not something out of the National Enquirer either.
OK Jelly Bean here's your answer see how ill informed you are. You want a whole lot more information. Just Google in American going overseas of medical treatment. Isn't it funny how over a half a million Americans go overseas for health care. Now go back up and read the website I found for you, Peanut. :biggrin: I waiting for you to admit you're slow. Hee, hee, Hee
Quote from: me on May 16, 2011, 02:50:24 PM
Why bother you would just say I was stupid or the resourse was not a valid one. I'll see if I can find a clip of good old Mit admitting it was a mistake and isn't working would that satisfy you? He did that on National TV ya know. Of course they probably chose not to run it on the lame stream media networks.
And Troll if they like their health care so much in Canada and other countries why do a lot of people come to the States to have their operations for cancer and such? Yes, people from here go to other countries for some experimental treatments sometimes that aren't approved here yet but in most cases those prove not to be of any benefit in the long run.
Learn how to read Troll.
Quote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 08:29:30 AM
OK Jelly Bean here's your answer see how ill informed you are. You want a whole lot more information. Just Google in American going overseas of medical treatment. Isn't it funny how over a half a million Americans go overseas for health care. Now go back up and read the website I found for you, Peanut. :biggrin: I waiting for you to admit you're slow. Hee, hee, Hee
Also never mind the fact that the 500,000 number is just an estimate and probably based on flawed data. I can't tell because the article is 3 1/2 years old and the sources sited no longer exist online. From what I can tell while searching this is that the only numbers given are given by companies who provide Medical Tourism services. Their numbers are suspect because they would possibly inflate the numbers to make it look as though everyone is doing it. I have found estimates of 100,000 to 750,000 Americans seek medical care overseas. One of the reasons the number is inflated is that included in the estimates are regular tourists on vacation that happened to fall ill or get injured and receive medical treatment while on vacation. These people did not travel solely to seek medical treatment and should not be counted in those numbers. Also the way that some countries hospitals count their medical tourists can greatly inflate these numbers also.
It is explained here:
http://treatmentabroad.blogspot.com/2010/03/medical-tourism-statistics-comparing.html
And from what I can tell, there are no 'real' numbers available as no one has done the research properly.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 16, 2011, 06:28:26 PM
You know what? Never mind. I may as well have been speaking in Hebrew. You accuse EVERY one of being sheep, but I've yet to see you post a source that wasn't editorialized or an original document. You don't know what a creditble source is and have never researched the source of your sources. You want to assume that if they agree with what you want to think, that's good enough, so just forget it.
Now you're catching on!
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 17, 2011, 12:41:28 PM
Also never mind the fact that the 500,000 number is just an estimate and probably based on flawed data. I can't tell because the article is 3 1/2 years old and the sources sited no longer exist online. From what I can tell while searching this is that the only numbers given are given by companies who provide Medical Tourism services. Their numbers are suspect because they would possibly inflate the numbers to make it look as though everyone is doing it. I have found estimates of 100,000 to 750,000 Americans seek medical care overseas. One of the reasons the number is inflated is that included in the estimates are regular tourists on vacation that happened to fall ill or get injured and receive medical treatment while on vacation. These people did not travel solely to seek medical treatment and should not be counted in those numbers. Also the way that some countries hospitals count their medical tourists can greatly inflate these numbers also.
It is explained here:
http://treatmentabroad.blogspot.com/2010/03/medical-tourism-statistics-comparing.html
And from what I can tell, there are no 'real' numbers available as no one has done the research properly.
Who care if the information is four years old. American medical cost has went up and you know that people are leaving the United States for more foreign medical treatment. Probably over a Million people to day.
The website is from a person connected with private medical treatment and probably has a hidden agenda. But me said that no Americans were going outside the country for organ transplants or medical services.
I wish you think what you are saying before you put it out. We need creditable sources. Not the trash you present. Please think before you make a ass of yourself. :wink: :smile: I just wish that you would pratice the Golden Rule. Do un to others as you would have done un to you. Just think about it, it might sink in. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 02:17:29 PM
Who care if the information is four years old. American medical cost has went up and you know that people are leaving the United States for more foreign medical treatment. Probably over a Million people to day.
The website is from a person connected with private medical treatment and probably has a hidden agenda. But me said that no Americans were going outside the country for organ transplants or medical services.
I wish you think what you are saying before you put it out. We need creditable sources. Not the trash you present. Please think before you make a ass of yourself. :wink: :smile: I just wish that you would pratice the Golden Rule. Do un to others as you would have done un to you. Just think about it, it might sink in. :biggrin:
What!!! The contributer's "About Me" right on the page I linked:
Quote
I am Managing Director of Intuition Communication Ltd, a web publishing business in the healthcare sector. Our sites include Private Healthcare UK, the UK's leading portal for private healthcare services and the rapidly growing medical tourism site, Treatment Abroad. I am a regular speaker and commentator on medical tourism.
He is an advocate for medical tourism. If anything he would want the numbers higher to give the impression that EVERYONE is seeking medical treatment in foreign countries.
If what I posted is soooo bad then how about you post some evidence to refute it? remember, credible, verifiable sources.
Do you wear a mask or a Scott Air pack when you are sorting the fly shit out of the black pepper. It is an almost impossible job, but you are really good at it. :yes: :smile: :laugh:
QuoteQuote from: me on May 16, 2011, 02:50:24 PM
Why bother you would just say I was stupid or the resourse was not a valid one. I'll see if I can find a clip of good old Mit admitting it was a mistake and isn't working would that satisfy you? He did that on National TV ya know. Of course they probably chose not to run it on the lame stream media networks.
And Troll if they like their health care so much in Canada and other countries why do a lot of people come to the States to have their operations for cancer and such? Yes, people from here go to other countries for some experimental treatments sometimes that aren't approved here yet but in most cases those prove not to be of any benefit in the long run.
Learn how to read Troll. QuoteQuote from: The Troll on Today at 08:29:30 AM
OK Jelly Bean here's your answer see how ill informed you are. You want a whole lot more information. Just Google in American going overseas of medical treatment. Isn't it funny how over a half a million Americans go overseas for health care. Now go back up and read the website I found for you, Peanut. :biggrin: I waiting for you to admit you're slow. Hee, hee, Hee
Quote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 02:17:29 PM
Who care if the information is four years old. American medical cost has went up and you know that people are leaving the United States for more foreign medical treatment. Probably over a Million people to day.
The website is from a person connected with private medical treatment and probably has a hidden agenda. But me said that no Americans were going outside the country for organ transplants or medical services.
I wish you think what you are saying before you put it out. We need creditable sources. Not the trash you present. Please think before you make a ass of yourself. :wink: :smile: I just wish that you would pratice the Golden Rule. Do un to others as you would have done un to you. Just think about it, it might sink in. :biggrin:
Quote from: me on May 17, 2011, 03:12:31 PM
Learn how to read Troll.
This is great coming from someone who can't conjugate the verb, "to be."
Quote from: me on May 17, 2011, 03:12:31 PM
Learn how to read Troll.
Wrong again, most of these operations are legal here in the United States. Like a spinal fusion, $60,000 here and $15,000 in India. It's the money :me: Yes it's the money :me: :rolleyes: :razz:
Quote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 04:52:46 PM
Wrong again, most of these operations are legal here in the United States. Like a spinal fusion, $60,000 here and $15,000 in India. It's the money :me: Yes it's the money :me: :rolleyes: :razz:
Do ya think maybe the difference in the cost of being a surgeon could be involved in the price of the surgery? Do their surgeons have the huge expense of malpractice ins that ours do thanks to attorney's suing for ridiculous amounts and frivolous suits. No, not all medical suits against surgeons or doctors fit into those categories but we have become a suit happy country and it drives the cost of insurance up dramatically for certain occupations. I imagine you sue a surgeon or doctor in India they're gonna tell you "sorry 'bout your bad luck" and be done with ya.
Quote from: me on May 17, 2011, 06:45:01 PM
Do ya think maybe the difference in the cost of being a surgeon could be involved in the price of the surgery? Do their surgeons have the huge expense of malpractice ins that ours do thanks to attorney's suing for ridiculous amounts and frivolous suits. No, not all medical suits against surgeons or doctors fit into those categories but we have become a suit happy country and it drives the cost of insurance up dramatically for certain occupations. I imagine you sue a surgeon or doctor in India they're gonna tell you "sorry 'bout your bad luck" and be done with ya.
That is a problem going overseas. No lawyer protection. But if you don't have insurance to cover a $60,000 operation, you do $20, 000 in cash you can get the operation and get fixed and well.
But :me: If you had an operation here in the United States and the doctor put some wrong medicine in the wrong spot and put you in a wheel chair for life. Would you sue? Or would you say, well no one is perfect doc. We will just forget about it. I don't think so. You would sue his ball off. :yes: :smile:
QuoteQuote from: me on May 17, 2011, 06:45:01 PM
Do ya think maybe the difference in the cost of being a surgeon could be involved in the price of the surgery? Do their surgeons have the huge expense of malpractice ins that ours do thanks to attorney's suing for ridiculous amounts and frivolous suits. No, not all medical suits against surgeons or doctors fit into those categories but we have become a suit happy country and it drives the cost of insurance up dramatically for certain occupations. I imagine you sue a surgeon or doctor in India they're gonna tell you "sorry 'bout your bad luck" and be done with ya.
Once again you fail to read.
Quote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 06:56:56 PMThat is a problem going overseas. No lawyer protection. But if you don't have insurance to cover a $60,000 operation, you do $20, 000 in cash you can get the operation and get fixed and well.
But :me: If you had an operation here in the United States and the doctor put some wrong medicine in the wrong spot and put you in a wheel chair for life. Would you sue? Or would you say, well no one is perfect doc. We will just forget about it. I don't think so. You would sue his ball off. :yes: :smile:
Fail to read what? I sure like the way you give an answer it has some many excape clauses, openings to get out of what you said. You sound like an ambulance chasing lawyer.
No lawyer talk. Just what did I fail to read? Sugar lump. :wink:
Quote from: The Troll on May 18, 2011, 12:39:26 PM
Fail to read what? I sure like the way you give an answer it has some many excape clauses, openings to get out of what you said. You sound like an ambulance chasing lawyer.
No lawyer talk. Just what did I fail to read? Sugar lump. :wink:
Quote from: The Troll on May 18, 2011, 12:39:26 PM
Fail to read what? I sure like the way you give an answer it has some many excape clauses, openings to get out of what you said. You sound like an ambulance chasing lawyer.
No lawyer talk. Just what did I fail to read? Sugar lump. :wink:
:doh:
One more time. How big am I going to have to make before you can finally see it anyway Troll?
Quote from: The Troll on May 18, 2011, 12:39:26 PM
Fail to read what? I sure like the way you give an answer it has some many excape clauses, openings to get out of what you said. You sound like an ambulance chasing lawyer.
No lawyer talk. Just what did I fail to read? Sugar lump. :wink:
QuoteQuote from: me on May 17, 2011, 06:45:01 PM
Do ya think maybe the difference in the cost of being a surgeon could be involved in the price of the surgery? Do their surgeons have the huge expense of malpractice ins that ours do thanks to attorney's suing for ridiculous amounts and frivolous suits. No, not all medical suits against surgeons or doctors fit into those categories but we have become a suit happy country and it drives the cost of insurance up dramatically for certain occupations. I imagine you sue a surgeon or doctor in India they're gonna tell you "sorry 'bout your bad luck" and be done with ya.
Once again you fail to read.
QuoteQuote from: The Troll on May 17, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
That is a problem going overseas. No lawyer protection. But if you don't have insurance to cover a $60,000 operation, you do $20, 000 in cash you can get the operation and get fixed and well.
But :me: If you had an operation here in the United States and the doctor put some wrong medicine in the wrong spot and put you in a wheel chair for life. Would you sue? Or would you say, well no one is perfect doc. We will just forget about it. I don't think so. You would sue his ball off. :yes: :smile:
Quote from: Nighthawk on May 18, 2011, 12:58:13 PM
:doh:
Good Boy, you're getting better with smilely faces. If you go to help at the top of the page you can make a copy of the smiley faces and you can make you post a little more interesting. It might be to expensive for you, it takes 21 sheets of papper. :biggrin: :thumbsup: :salute: :tiphat: :kiss: :seeya2: :dark: :spot:
:det:
For you, it is always on.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 16, 2011, 10:27:26 AM
I'm going to hate myself for this...sources?
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-fall/mandatory-health-insurance.asp
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110413/cm_ac/8285515_failure_of_mass_health_care_reform_could_compromise_romney_presidential_run
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10268
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/massachusetts-the-canary-in-the-coal-mine-for-obamacare/
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/february/massachusetts_is_no_.php
Quote from: me on May 18, 2011, 05:31:20 PM
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2008-fall/mandatory-health-insurance.asp
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110413/cm_ac/8285515_failure_of_mass_health_care_reform_could_compromise_romney_presidential_run
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10268
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/massachusetts-the-canary-in-the-coal-mine-for-obamacare/
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/february/massachusetts_is_no_.php
Here's an idea: The number one rule of proving a point is having one. I asked for sources to support your premise. These do not. I'll let YOU figure out why not.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 18, 2011, 07:47:52 PM
. . . I'll let YOU figure out why not.
:think: Yeah. . . Ummmmm . . . :think:
Good luck with
that! :sarcasm:
Quote from: me on May 18, 2011, 02:28:19 PM
Once again you fail to read.
You have a lot of nerve. ;D
Nerve is simple when the "bar" doesn't exist! :yes:
Boy oh boy the Republican dirty tricks team is going full out on Romney. :me: if you notice never read anything from the other side.
CATO one of the biggest and best financed Republican think tank, is it going to say anything but the Republican line. I don't need these shitty bloggs. :finger2:
:det:
:ME" this is what I think of all of you Teabagger Republican information.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 18, 2011, 07:47:52 PM
Here's an idea: The number one rule of proving a point is having one. I asked for sources to support your premise. These do not. I'll let YOU figure out why not.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obamacare-is-romneycare-2-0/
ObamaCare Is RomneyCare 2.0
Posted by Chris Moody
Former Massachusetts governor and possible 2012 presidential contender Mitt Romney has spent a lot of time campaigning against the recent health care overhaul.
One problem: It looks a lot like the law he signed in 2006 while he was governor of Massachusetts.
"In every important respect the Obama plan and the Romney plan are identical," says Michael Cannon, Cato director of health policy studies.
In a new video, Cato's David Boaz and Michael Cannon explain how alike the two plans really are. Watch:
Cato scholars have been critical of Romney's health care plan since its inception. In June 2006, Michael Tanner authored the Cato Briefing Paper, "No Miracle in Massachusetts: Why Governor Romney's Health Care Reform Won't Work," and concluded:
[T]he act goes far beyond an individual mandate to radically change the way health insurance is bought and sold in the state. Many observers see Massachusetts's reforms as a model for the nation, but a closer look provides ample reasons to be skeptical.
...Health care needs more consumer control and freer markets, not more government regulation, controls, and subsidies. The Massachusetts reform takes us in the wrong direction.
(It was not long before Tanner's predictions about the Massachusetts plan came true.)
Romney's record on health care will certainly come up if he pursues further political aspirations in the next few years. As David Boaz asks, "How can he lead the charge against a health care plan that is modeled on his own? How can he go around denouncing a government takeover and an intrusion of people's rights when he authored a very similar plan?"
Good question.
:sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69:
Quote from: Palehorse on May 19, 2011, 07:32:41 PM
:sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69: :sm69:
Just answering a question that was asked a few pages back is all.
Now back to the 60's controversy. :razz:
It's "puff-puff-pass"! Don't bogart! :biggrin:
(OH. . . and for you jackasses out there. . . I just EDITED this to correct a spelling error!)
Quote from: me on May 19, 2011, 07:07:25 PM
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obamacare-is-romneycare-2-0/
ObamaCare Is RomneyCare 2.0
Posted by Chris Moody
Former Massachusetts governor and possible 2012 presidential contender Mitt Romney has spent a lot of time campaigning against the recent health care overhaul.
One problem: It looks a lot like the law he signed in 2006 while he was governor of Massachusetts.
"In every important respect the Obama plan and the Romney plan are identical," says Michael Cannon, Cato director of health policy studies.
In a new video, Cato's David Boaz and Michael Cannon explain how alike the two plans really are. Watch:
Cato scholars have been critical of Romney's health care plan since its inception. In June 2006, Michael Tanner authored the Cato Briefing Paper, "No Miracle in Massachusetts: Why Governor Romney's Health Care Reform Won't Work," and concluded:
[T]he act goes far beyond an individual mandate to radically change the way health insurance is bought and sold in the state. Many observers see Massachusetts's reforms as a model for the nation, but a closer look provides ample reasons to be skeptical.
...Health care needs more consumer control and freer markets, not more government regulation, controls, and subsidies. The Massachusetts reform takes us in the wrong direction.
(It was not long before Tanner's predictions about the Massachusetts plan came true.)
Romney's record on health care will certainly come up if he pursues further political aspirations in the next few years. As David Boaz asks, "How can he lead the charge against a health care plan that is modeled on his own? How can he go around denouncing a government takeover and an intrusion of people's rights when he authored a very similar plan?"
Good question.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qAP2GaD-fgk/TOMNJuTCXFI/AAAAAAAAAL4/nS2yIN8RZ2I/s1600/Red_X.svg.png)
Here's a hint: Someone's
opinion doesn't prove
your point.
We got Cato! Where's the Green Hornet? :icon_twisted:
:biggrin:
Quote from: Palehorse on May 19, 2011, 08:14:19 PM
It's "puff-puff-pass"! Don't bogart! :biggrin:
(OH. . . and for you jackasses out there. . . I just EDITED this to correct a spelling error!)
http://youtu.be/k3tS7ihFiyg
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 19, 2011, 09:17:05 PM
http://youtu.be/k3tS7ihFiyg
I like this one better. . . :biggrin:
http://www.youtube.com/v/EvGJvzwKqg0&feature=related