|
||||||||||||
|
Title: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 3rd, 2006, 4:39pm The verdict in the Mousauie (the terrorist) came in for Life instead of death..... This should send a message -- Come on over, bomb our town and then we'll give you three hots and a cot for the rest of your life.... Needless to say --this is NOT the way I would have voted, but then I wasn't on the jury... guess the jerk will have to wait for his virgins... BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Redd715 on May 3rd, 2006, 4:48pm on 05/03/06 at 16:39:49, BarbaraD wrote:
Maybe that was the idea..... ;) Bwahahaha |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by maffumatt on May 3rd, 2006, 5:13pm I agree with Pegg, the statments the guy made during the trial showed me he wanted to die. He won't live long I'm sure but it won't be the way he expected it to be. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by john_d on May 3rd, 2006, 5:28pm It's gonna suck, high-profile federal prisoners like that end up in a little room with no windows and the flourecent lights on 24/7. Zero privacy as he will be in full visibility of a guard that sits and watches him at all times. He's gonna live like that for a good for the rest of his life. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by chewy on May 3rd, 2006, 6:51pm I hoped for execution but on the other hand that would have meant automatic appeal. More celebrity exposure for a murderer. Let him rot. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 3rd, 2006, 6:53pm He wont last five years, just think about the high security that they had Gotti in....and he still got a beatin and a half by the cons. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 3rd, 2006, 6:59pm Oh yeah. I really wanna be him..... I'm with Matt and Jonny. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Opus on May 3rd, 2006, 8:05pm on 05/03/06 at 16:39:49, BarbaraD wrote:
We deprived him of the ability to go to heaven, what worse punishment, and deterrent to others could there possibly be. Opus/Paul |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 3rd, 2006, 11:54pm Bring back draw and quarter... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by superhawk2300 on May 4th, 2006, 8:47am I suppose it seems hard for some to understand but he shouldn't get what he wants, which is to die for his beliefs. Then on top of it he becomes a martyr, which will only make more people of his beliefs want to be like him. Unfortunatly for him his life will be long, long and shitty. I don't think he gets the virgins unless he dies in the act fighting his enemies. If he takes place in the act but doesn't die, and ends up dying of old age instead of fighting his foes, I think he gets a bag of dogshit, an AOL install CD (worse than dogshit), and a "I went to die for Allah and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt" t-shirt instead of the virgins. Can I someone else use his virgins if he can't be present to claim his prize?????? Someone should make sure he lives to die a natural death. Damn, Late for work again. I'll have to tell them I had a headache..... Jamey |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by chewy on May 4th, 2006, 8:53am Quote:
Right. He should get what the law allows. I dont believe US law takes martrydom into consideration one way or the other. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by superhawk2300 on May 4th, 2006, 9:06am Quote:
I agree. The law allows for execution or life in prison in his case. If I was a juror I would pick what he considered the least favorable of the two, and what has the best benefit to the US. I my mind that is life in prison. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by chewy on May 4th, 2006, 9:10am Quote:
Thats not a valid reason for choice. Has to be based on the facts, not what one favors or dis-favors. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by clarence on May 4th, 2006, 9:14am There was a story on CNN this morning showing the prison he will be in. As close to permanent solitary confinement as one can get, without being exactly it. This story describes some of it: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/04/moussaoui.verdict/index.html Still, I have a feeling that Jonny's prediction may come true - someone will get him...After all, cons (and guards!) are Americans too, and I can't see them putting up with this guy's mouth. Casey |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by cekelle on May 4th, 2006, 9:53am If I'm not mistaken about the whole virgin thing their belief system is that they must die by suicide "fighting" for the better cause of their faith and religion. Correct me if I'm wrong. This bastard just needs to die at the hands of good ole' Americans. Because then he won't be a martyr to his people. The problem here is that we are paying good money to keep him alive when that money could be used for something else more worthwhile. Wait...I'm talking about our federal government here. They'd probably use the money for something ridiculous like a crapper in the middle of nowhere "just in case" someone needs it rather than putting it to good use (the money not the crapper!). As far as Gotti goes Jonny at least he suffered up until his death. This guy probably won't even have a chance. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BobG on May 4th, 2006, 10:47am I don't know folks. There's big time Muslim gangs in our prisons. Major gangs, nasty gangs. They may want him as a leader and protect him. Where's the Bloods and the Crips when you need them. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by vietvet2tours on May 4th, 2006, 11:01am I wish clusters and no oxygen for him. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jimmy_B. on May 4th, 2006, 11:33am In the Judge's own words “Mr. Moussaoui, you came here to be a martyr in a great big bang of glory,” she said, “but to paraphrase the poet T.S. Eliot, instead you will die with a whimper.”... “You will never get a chance to speak again and that’s an appropriate ending.” He will spend 23 out of 24 hours in solitary confinement and never have a soapbox from which to spout his shite. Good Riddens |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Bob P on May 4th, 2006, 11:41am Quote:
Figures! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 4th, 2006, 11:53am on 05/04/06 at 11:33:26, Jimmy_B. wrote:
I didn't know they are going to put him in a Super Max. Brings back a kind story of some gang leader they had in the Super Max down in Tams. This guy was calling in hits on people from prison, so they sent him to Tams. After 4 years of no contact with people he forgot how to speak. Kinda fitting for this dirt bag...The only time he got out of his cell was to get into a little box that they used to transport him to the showers, after his shower he got back into the box and they took him back to his cell. The only other way to make this guy suffer enough is to stop his heart and then defib him 2,403 times, once for everyone who died in the attacks on 9/11. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by imnotbub on May 4th, 2006, 3:38pm on 05/04/06 at 09:53:37, cekelle wrote:
I used to think this too, but I heard (from THEM, as in THEY say, so don't crucify me if the data is incorrect) that to sentence him to death would cost more. He'll be on death row for years and years anyway, and the appeal process is boucoup denero (did I just mix French and Spanish? Damn, I'm smart) Multi-lingual American Steve [smiley=wow.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 4th, 2006, 4:10pm The price to house an inmate at a super max is $100,000 per year. If he lives 40 years thats going to be a chunk of change. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by medic1852 on May 4th, 2006, 4:35pm on 05/04/06 at 16:10:55, Jonny wrote:
I think to help offset this fee he should be required to work in a slaughter house for hogs! [smiley=finger.gif] Rodger |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Bob P on May 8th, 2006, 6:09pm Quote:
That didn't atke long! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 8th, 2006, 6:25pm I'm for putting him in the general population. :o Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 8th, 2006, 7:35pm on 05/04/06 at 16:10:55, Jonny wrote:
We are going to spend a trillion dollars in Iraq - that is 1 million piles of 1 million dollars. Don't be chintzy on dealing with real terrorists when we let you spend so much on a nation that wasn't involved in terrorism against the US and didn't even have weapons of mass destruction ;0 |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 8th, 2006, 7:42pm on 05/04/06 at 16:35:40, medic1852 wrote:
rodger that is just plain mean of you!!! would you deprive some deserving illegal immigrant of his job ;;D ...............tim |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 8th, 2006, 7:50pm on 05/08/06 at 19:35:14, floridian wrote:
You want WMD proof bitch?.....here it is!!...a damn satilite photo! http://www.museumofconceptualart.com/un_proof/un_proof_files/slide0004_image005.jpg |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 8th, 2006, 7:52pm on 05/08/06 at 19:35:14, floridian wrote:
Oh Gawd, are you going to beat this horse again....Clinton never, ever screwed up, nor Carter, nor LBJ, nor the Kennedys...I'm sorry that there weren't any WMDs and that Democracy is only for America. Hell, let every two bit dictator gas and kill his own people and we won't do shit about it ever again...Oh wait...you and Charlie would probably bitch about that, too... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by john_d on May 8th, 2006, 8:37pm on 05/08/06 at 19:50:40, Jonny wrote:
lmao!!! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 8th, 2006, 8:52pm on 05/08/06 at 19:52:51, Tom K wrote:
Yes, all president's have made mistakes, so I guess by your logic they are all the same. And no need to distinguish between making a mistake and really screwing things up. And it isn't a dead horse - it is a current mess that continues to cost lives and billions, and in case you haven't been following it, it's getting worse. Death squads run by the democratic government of Iraq, Turkey and the Kurds running armed panty raids into each other's territory, and US troops are on the ground Iran to prep for the next phase, which is going to be even uglier and more catastrophic for the U.S. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history Johnny - I'm worried there's some weird radioactive shit going on over there - trees that shed 12 foot leaves!! Amazing what a satellite image reveals. ;;D |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 8th, 2006, 8:59pm on 05/08/06 at 20:52:02, floridian wrote:
Are you saying we have boots on the ground IN Iran? If so....lets have some proof! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 8th, 2006, 9:05pm on 05/08/06 at 20:52:02, floridian wrote:
Yeah, cuz Rolling Stone magazine is the bastion of fair journalism, especially with a title like that. If Clinton was at the switch, they would be brushing this over like they did Mogadishu. Let's see, after a bunch of our guys get killed, including two very good friends of mine, we just pull up stakes and run away. Is that what we should do in Iraq? Just pull up and run, or maybe we should have just turned a blind eye and when Israel was vaporized or gassed, then go, "Tsk Tsk, that was a damn shame, better luck next time." As much as everyone wants to bitch about our involvement with Israel, they are one of the few allies we have in the area. And, if we don't do something about Iran, they are going to vaporize Israel or any one of the close allies we have in the area. No one knows what the range of Irans war heads are, but I guess we will have to take their word for it. Kinda like we took Saddam's word on him having WMDs. Since we haven't seen the Iranian WMDs, maybe they don't have them, either. It is all just a plot so we can blow the crap out of their country and then they can get money from us to rebuild. PS...where is the draft that you and Charlie were crying about like Chicken Little? Hmmm...that didn't materialize...kinda like the WMDs... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 8th, 2006, 10:37pm on 05/08/06 at 21:05:15, Tom K wrote:
There you go again, Tom ... by the second sentence, you are trying to revive a dead horse to flog. Any criticism of the current policies are defended by invoking Clinton and Carter, as if the past were still happening but the current events were not. If you want to get historical, consider that Osama's realization that the US would cut and run was triggered by Reagan's withdrawl from Lebanon after the Beirut bombing of the US Marine's barracks. The Mogadishu event reinforced that, to be sure. Both cases involved the US trying to control a situation they didn't understand. You remind me of a grandiose stock investor, who buys a stock, and won't sell if the stock goes down. Even when there is plenty of evidence that the stock will continue to go down. Sometimes its best to cut your losses rather than pretending it wasn't a mistake. Evidence of a US presence in Iran? - well, probably not enough to convince Jonny, but retired US AF Colonel Sam Gardiner says military action is already underway. Seymour Hersh, whose got more things right on Iraq than any other reporter (or administration official) says that they are underway. At this point, it is probably only a small number of special forces to scout the way, and US funded members of the MEK, an Iranian group that is on the State Department list of terrorist organizations, but which has an office and openly holds meetings in Washington, D.C. (Terrorism is bad when they do it, but we have to be flexible and keep that option on the table. And the fact that the MEK killed US Embassy personel in Tehran in 1979 is water under the bridge. Now we kiss the good Mujahedin and make up. Mmmh-mmmh!) Quote:
Where is the draft? Well, we aren't drafting civilians, merely 'stop-lossing' the volunteers so that they involuntarily serve longer than their enlistment. If I were cynical, I would say that a draft is out of the question until after the national elections this November, or another major terrorist attack against the US, should it happen. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 8th, 2006, 10:53pm Flo, I hate to get political on this board as i realize that we all have many things in common and in particular a massive enemy that we call the beast. Is it possible that someone who displays as much intelligence as you do on so many different subjects really believes that Saddam did not have WOMP and that thanks to the wimps at the united nations did not have ample time to export and hide them [smiley=huh.gif] If you wish to be an ostrich then do us all a favor and keep your head buried in the Florida sand. SUPPORT OUR TROOPS !!! That would include the commander in chief until this thing is over or you and yours get a chance to vote out the chain of command! ..tim, been there, done that, and have been let down by the tree hugging American left. Proud to be an American and to support our foreign policies until they have been changed by the (yes) democratic process! http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e374/haywoodboss/flag1.gif |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 8th, 2006, 11:00pm Your just mad cause of what I said about Reagan. 8) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 8th, 2006, 11:18pm Flo, I have to question the credentials of your sources. When I got out of the Army in 1973 with a lowly Top Secret Crypto Clearance it was made pretty clear that I was not to divulge any information (confidential and up) to outside sources or face possible federal prosecution. I guess Col. Gardiner didn't get that memo [smiley=huh.gif] ...................tim |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 8th, 2006, 11:32pm As far as the Colonel goes, I don't know if he is revealing information learned on the job, or through other sources. And when you were in the service, you were supposed to follow orders. Unless they were unlawful. That's really what a lot of people are alleging - not that the policies are bad, but that the current admin is lying, subverting the constitution, and carrying out an agenda illegally. The UN wimps? The US admin kept saying that they knew where the weapons were. Hans Blitz said ok, tell us. But the US never gave them a solid lead. Most intel people are now saying that Saddam may have pretended to have WMD as a deterrent to Iran and Turkey, may have had a few leftovers from before Gulf War I (some of which were sold to him by western countries, including the US), but did not have WMDs or a program to make them. The UN's conclusions are in better agreement with the facts than the conclusions made by the Bush admin. And this week, Rumsfeld is confronted by a former CIA employee about the WMD, and Rumsfeld tries to rewrite history by saying they never said he knew where they were - even though he said it to a microphone and it was recorded. Selective memory or bold-face lie? If it were only that, I would give him the benefit of the doubt. But the documented lies by the current admin are so thick that only a fool would trust them. And your wave the flag to hypnotize people trick won't work forever. Sooner or later people bump into things and come out of it. Support the troops? Fine. We could start by stop killing them. When the troops were in support of the war, your echo machine was quoting them in a long series of emails. Now a majority of the troops want to pull out by the end of this year, but you aren't telling everyone you know to pass that tidbit on via chain letters. Bush tried to recite the old saying: "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice ..." and that is as far as he got before he got flustered. Let me finish it - shame on you, Jonny. Youve been fooled again and again. The Project for a New American Century detailed the plan in their version of Mein Kampf, and with the help of co-signors like Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumfeld, have been carrying it out. As the document itself stated, "... the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor..." And when 9-11 happened, they saw it as a green light to carry out their plan to bring down Iraq and Iran. Quote:
And maybe you missed the Downing Street Memos, where our Allies, the Brits, recorded just how deceptive the Bush team was in the lead up to war. Lying about war as last resort, which is what he told Congress when he asked for authorization to use force. Contemplating dressing American troops in other uniforms and having a false-flagged plane shot down to provoke a war. Protect our troops, or sacrifice them as pawns to start a war, where more would be killed? If you think the current war in Iraq (or the next one in Iran) was a necessity to defend America, you are the one with your head stuck in the sand. Maybe you have inhaled too many metal fumes and are unable to read and comprehend a complex matter, so you resort to flag waving and that feeling in your chest. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 9th, 2006, 12:01am Flo , I must admit when I'm wrong, we should probably just pull out of all the places we have troops and just let the French and maybe the disenfranchised folks in Florida worry about global security. Not sure i get the reference to metal fumes but I sure do understand the flag waving remark and you are right I do wave it proudly and I don't hide behind fences! Funny thing that I spend most weekends with active duty troops and The ones I talk to don't seem to agree with your polls. Left wing bias maybe. Keep on spouting the media rhetoric and you might just get offered a job by a real unbiased news orginization like "the rolling stone" or "democracy now", or maybe even "sourcewatch". Do me a favor and when the sh#t hits the fan, don't get my back for me!! ....................tim |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by deltadarlin on May 9th, 2006, 8:20am Floridian, You are quite right when you say that there were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when we went in with our armed forces. HOWEVER, you seem to forget that Saddam continually refused to allow the UN inspectors into Iraq to do their job. How many sanctions did Saddam violate? How long did he ignore requests for the UN inspectors to inspect his plants and factories? What do you think killed those poor Kurds? A rash of diarrhea possibly? Saddam held the trump card for so long that he was probably able to smuggle out anything that *might* have been considered to be WMD's. Give me a break. I don't believe Saddam was *innocent* of anything. Now, as to whether we need to be there to establish a democratic government is another story. Not all countries can exist by democratic policies and Iraq is a prime example of that. 'darlin |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 9th, 2006, 9:30am Hey Flo, yes, I would cut my loss as an investor, but no, I wouldn't cut and run when it comes to a war. Everyone seems to forget that there are people involved in Iraq, not just our troops but people who have to live there. Cut and run now and those people will fall vicitim to another dictator who could very well be worse than Saddam. You are right, the person who takes over if we bailed could be a decent leader, but the chances are that they wouldn't be. When you use history to highlight your points, it is being enlightened, when someone else does it, it is beating a dead horse? Go figure...same old Bravo Sierra! Maybe I'm not "enlightened" as you are, but I highly doubt that there is some NWO looking to dictate our lives via a dressed up version of Mein Kampf. I cannot ever remember so much hatered for a President in my life. This "Slash and Burn" journalism is just sickening. And watching it be eaten up by people on the left is disgusting. We have a President who isn't concerned about his legacy, much like Clinton was/is, but someone who is trying to do the right thing. Are you one of the people who believes that there was no plane that hit the Petagon, that it was a missle? You "say" that you support the troops, but where is that support? You are trying to cut them off at the knees with all of your propaganda. Don't you think that it is compromising our mission when all of these left leaning "journalist" spew their drivel? Don't you think that our enemies read these same "stories" and think that they are winning? Personally, I would like to see every one of these "reporters" tried for Aid and comfort to the enemy. Or, because I'm a proud American who is a Republican, does that "taint" my view of everything and my opinion doesn't count or isn't right? I don't know, maybe having family who fought in every major battle that this country has had, makes me appreciate our freedoms just a little bit more. Or, as you will try to spin it, "clouds" my judgement and lets the right feed into my patriotism and make me one of their "tools". Opinions are like not a very nice persons, everyone has them. PS...Tanner, thank you for your scarifices in defending this country. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Bob P on May 9th, 2006, 10:34am I lived this anti-victory, get out before the job is done, attitude when I came back from Nam in '70. It turns my stomach to see the same thing happening. Thank God the troops are dedicated enough to see through it and do what they volunteered to do. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 9th, 2006, 10:38am My 2 cents on this one --- As one who lived thru Viet Nam and yes, life changed with that "no win" war, I'm seeing similarities in Iraq. I was against Viet Nam (who ever heard of it before Eisenhower promised troops there? And what did we accomplish except to get a lot of kids killed?) and I am against this war in Iraq. It's a "no-win" situation. As far as supporting the troops.... I just want all the kids home right now. They're doing their "patriotic" duty (going where they are sent), but to me not one American life is worth all the oil in Iraq -- and that's what this war is all about. I lost family and friends in Viet Nam and those who came back were "different" after what they experienced. I don't want to see that happen again. The mid-east will NEVER be democratic no matter how much retroric is sprewed. The Arabs hate the Jews and that's just the way it is and it's going to be that way 2000 years from now no matter what we do. They've been fighting all these years and will continue. We Americans don't have the Arab mind-set and will never understand how they think. That's also a fact. We're just wasting lives and money in Iraq. Iraq was the most westernized country in the mid east before we invaded it. Suddam did some things we don't understand (and the Kurds are nomands and not nice people if you'll look back at their history) but the people were happier than they are now. My question is - what is the difference in him telling them what to do and US telling them what to do and think? Instead of arguing with each other here, we need to be letting our Congressmen and Senators know how we feel. I know I do and I hold them responsible for their actions. We elected them and we CAN defeat them in the next election. Anyhow that's how I feel. Hugs BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 9th, 2006, 11:14am Quote:
Tom you hit the nail on the head! Just what he is concerned about is both perplexing and frightening. Giving up and leaving will create chaos beyond anyone's ability to handle. Why is it though that wanting this thing to end and to have our troops home and safe makes one unsupportive and unpatriotic and wanting our troops to stay and fix the problem makes one blind? This whole argument makes no sense to me. Everyone wants the same thing. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by imnotbub on May 9th, 2006, 11:46am As bad as this is, I think that we should be taking a long, hard look to the south of the border. South America is quickly becoming a major threat, and if they unite, which is what Simon Bolivar wanted to do years and years ago, I think we will be looking at another Roman empire colapse.i.e. spread too thin to protect ourselves. Then, all this middle east crap will look like small potatos. Steve |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 9th, 2006, 1:54pm "Support our troops." This is used too successfully to kill debate. Fortunately it's not as powerful as it was. We're learning that the most patriotic thing there is.... is to hold inept leaders' feet to the fire. It's the most American thing one can do. Blindly following strategic incompetence is what subjects of non-democratic countries have to do. Support isn't what they need. They need body armor and vehicles that protect them from very unfriendly fire. The insane and cruel policies of keeping them and their families impoverished and often on welfare or living on the edge, by not paying them at least at least enough to have bootstraps to pull on, is as un-American as anything I know. The thing about our wonderful idea of spreading democracy to these countries is that if and when we do, they will actually use it....to elect religious zealots favored by the majority sect and squash any starry-eyed hopes of creating the kind of democracies we think of. This won't change for decades, perhaps longer. These places aren't interested in it and you cannot impose it. It has to come from within. Spreading democracy will never be achieved if some of the worst regimes on the planet — Iran, & etc have so much oil money they can ignore the world, and if the rest of us — Europe, America, China and India — are forever coddling them to get access to their crude. Our 32% popular President is incapable.....on every level but inflicting pain on his own countrymen and the rest of the world. These people can handle that but know nothing of feeling it. Few of them have ever been in that position. They are presiding over one of the richest countries in the world....rich but populated with poor citizens. It's mediaeval, but then so are they and it's inexcusable and they use the Patriot Police to deflect attention so they can get away governing by fear and mis-direction. Reality has been dealt a stunning blow by Mr. Bush and at the expense of American freedom to think. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 9th, 2006, 2:41pm Charlie, I'm in 100% agreement with you on troop pay. If Clinton hadn't frozen troop pay in '95, then in '96 only increased it 2.2%, which was lower than the 3.5% of inflation, they wouldn't be at the poverty level. If we try to spread democracy to other countries, isn't that better than letting their people die? I'm sorry, I would rather have the chance and the tools to change something than have a gun pointed at my head, while watching my wife get raped. But hey, that's just me... The body armor and amrored vehicles have been in place and is a moot point. The only places that don't have armored vehicles are in the "Green Zone" and they are the ones that never leave the zone. I'm sure at this point, they are all armored since that story died about a year ago. Where is this "governing by fear and misdirection"? I don't know about you, but I sleep well at night. I don't walk around scared about the next attack. Life goes on, the only people I see that are afraid are the one's on the left who are crying wolf all the time. Maybe the left is driving the bus of fear because they don't have any plan themselves.... Oh, that's right, darn it. The Right and the Moonies control the media...I knew I read that on one of them thar Interweb stories...Yuk Yuk...please. If Bush was sooo corrupt, then why isn't there ongoing investigations? Don't tell me that if there were an investigation, that it wouldn't be public by now, the left would LOVE to have that run across the evening news. I don't need to hide behind patriotism or our troops. Just like you feel that you are right in your opinion, I feel just as strongly in mine. We've had these discussions before and probably will all the time, since we don't agree on much. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 9th, 2006, 2:52pm BTW, Clinton's lowest rating was 34%, Carter's was 27%, Nixon's was 24% and Reagan's was 35%...So everyone can take the "Worst President Ever" crap and cram it... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by medic1852 on May 9th, 2006, 3:09pm on 05/09/06 at 10:38:52, BarbaraD wrote:
Iraq is winnable. The goverment is affraid of the public and wont allow a concise victory. To win Iraq, #1 Pull the media out #2 Allow the Generals to run the war If you follow these two simple steps Iraq is winnable. Rodger |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by chewy on May 9th, 2006, 3:10pm Just what is it we win? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by medic1852 on May 9th, 2006, 3:12pm on 05/09/06 at 15:10:34, chewy wrote:
The sad part Chewy is I dont know. But that is How to win.. :-/ Rodger |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by mynm156 on May 9th, 2006, 3:14pm He's a DEADMAN! Put him in with the general population. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by deltadarlin on May 9th, 2006, 3:30pm Body armor ain't all what it seems to be either, ask any soldier on the front lines what more body armor means and they will tell you it means more lives lost. Quoe from Intel Dump, Micromanagement in Action,"While it is true that the study showed the Marines killed in Iraq would have survived their wounds with extra body armor, that does not translate into "if they had more body armor we would have lost fewer Marines." We might have lost MORE. If each Marine invading Fallujah had worn 30 extra pounds of body armor we would probably have lost a lot more Marines than we did. Each pound added to the burden of a fighting man comes at a price in endurance, speed, and mobility. There is a reason that infantry training stresses the "quick and the dead." Slowness in combat kills, while speed saves lives (please don't comment on "tactical patience," I am talking about individual movement techniques.) More armor protection does not necessarily translate into more safety and survivability. The Stryker combat vehicle could have three times as much armor on it, but it would then be slow and cumbersome. The additional armor would be counter-productive and lead to greater casualties. The same is often true with body armor. Thus while it seems intuitive that more armor will save lives, it is not necessarily correct. More body armor might result in more US lives lost. Those 300 Marines might have lived, but 500 others might have died as a result of the extra armor "protection." It is a call for the combat leaders to make, not Congressional committees. Any combat soldier will tell you that load management is one of the most important tests of leadership, and poor leaders always order you to carry everything "just in case." That way you never "do without" anything - well, except for your life. Our warriors have so much equipment, for so many different situations, that if forced to carry everything they become nothing more than easy targets. Well-equipped, exhausted, slow-moving, heavily-burdened, easy-to-hit targets. From Free Republic.com~U.S. Soldiers Question Use of More Armor, "U.S. soldiers in the field were not all supportive of a Pentagon study that found improved body armor saves lives, with some troops arguing Saturday that more armor would hinder combat effectiveness. The unreleased study examined 93 fatal wounds to Marines from the start of the Iraq war in March 2003 through June 2005. It concluded 74 of them were bullet or shrapnel wounds to shoulders or torso areas unprotected by traditional ceramic armor plating. Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division's 3rd Brigade "Rakkasans" are required to wear an array of protective clothing they refer to as their "happy gear," ranging from Kevlar drapes over their shoulders and sides, to knee pads and fire-resistant uniforms. But many soldiers say they feel encumbered by the weight and restricted by fabric that does not move as they do. They frequently joke as they strap on their equipment before a patrol, and express relief when they return and peel it off. Second Lt. Josh Suthoff, 23, of Jefferson City, Miss., said he already sacrifices enough movement when he wears the equipment. More armor would only increase his chances of getting killed, he said. "You can slap body armor on all you want, but it's not going to help anything. When it's your time, it's your time," said Suthoff, a platoon leader in the brigade's 1st Squadron, 33rd Cavalry Regiment. "I'd go out with less body armor if I could." |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 9th, 2006, 8:01pm Quote:
Hilarious. Clinton again. Everytime Bush and company have a chance to deny responsibility, Clinton is blamed. The Democrats could have a field day with Bush's record but they actually do take responsibilty now and then. They like the country rather than themselves. So Mr. Compassionate Conservative: Legislate around the wage freeze or repeal it like you do things your CEO pals and your incredibly greedy tax dodger friends tell you to. Of course Bush has the votes and uses support only when it suits someone's pocketbook. Quote:
The GOP control all three branches. It's not hard to understand. One of these days he'll go too far. A lot of conservatives admit holding their noses when voting for the shit Bill Frist and the Admistration come up with. The country has already paid a heavy price for it. Quote:
Every time something goes haywire we get a tour of red states by Bush and silly or inaccurate stories designed to make us shudder or look in another direction while he hopes the real world will go away. I don't worry about the next attack either. Bush wouldn't like that though. He's used 9/11 wage his terrorism war on us. His idea of leadership is stunning. After WTC, he told us to go shopping. What an incredible waste of the moment. A real leader would have seen that we were willing to give up a little comfort to really dig into the bin Ladens of the world. He chose to blow the unique opportunity. You know, I had some hopes after 9/11 but he's true to form. For just a minute, he said he was against the idea of requiring passports to go from Canada and back again... It's about a $100 proposition. I thought finally I found something good to say but he backed off on that too. We will have to pay something like $50 for some kind of border pass to see the Niagara Horseshoe Falls on the Canadian side. Everyone knows it will kill tourism and put an enormous dent in cross border commerce. No to worry though, he'll find a tax cut instead. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 9th, 2006, 8:40pm Well, since you seem to have all the answers, Charlie, what is your plan? You seem more than well versed in the ability to rip on a sitting President, so what plan do you have? All I see EVERY Democrat do is rip on the President, never give a plan, just throw jabs. Here is your big chance to wow us... Oh, wait...let me guess..."I'm not in office...it's not my job...blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada..." Or, like you have with previous posts, just pick out the parts you want to spin and have at it... Don't matter much to me, because either way, your utter blindness due to your total contempt for a person you have never met, adds much humor to my otherwise dull day. Thanks for the laughs, old dude... [smiley=laugh.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 9th, 2006, 8:46pm on 05/09/06 at 20:40:20, Tom K wrote:
Damn!!....Charlie and Flo could be the same person if thats the case.....LMMFAO ;;D It dont matter, I love them both and they know it!! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 10th, 2006, 9:20am It's a message board. I have my fun and I hope you do. It's good exercise. God knows at my age I need all I can get. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 10th, 2006, 9:42am To say the least, you guys are entertaining :) But instead of placing blame, we need to go from today to straighten out this mess. Speaches don't do the trick. Plan: Require passports be issued to each man woman and child (above 14 years old). These should be carried at all times (like in other countries) and subject to being checked. If the gov. would spend some money upgrading their computer system, these passports (and anyone coming into this country) could be "monitored" at all times. That way we wouldn't have to wonder where the illegal ailens are - when their visa expired - time to go home. All this BS about the War on Terrorism is just a lot of talk. Nothing concrete is being done - just blaming the last administration. We should have Bin Lauden in custody or dead, but we're still seeing tapes on CNN that he's supposingly still going strong. And Congress is a big joke right now -- there's just not enough talk shows to go around. They're all fighting for thier 5 minutes in the spotlight to say nothing. I don't know a liberal from a conservative and don't really care about being politically correct. This country is getting to be a dictatorship run by a bunch of idiots. Guess I'm just getting old enough to appreciate the good old days where you could raise your own kids, get a decent education and argue politics at the coffee shop along with football. Hugs BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by rickyshot on May 10th, 2006, 10:27am Thanks Roger and Tanner from the bottom of my heart. How do you spell courage?? R O G E R and T A N N E R SUPPORT OUR TROOPS |
||||||||||||
|
Title: The Canadian-US border sRe: The verdict is in.... Post by BobG on May 10th, 2006, 11:55am on 05/09/06 at 20:40:20, Tom K wrote:
Hey Tom, I know you are talking to Charlie but I'll answer anyway, for me, not Charlie. Every Democrat? That might be true. I'm registered as a republican and I like to rip on Georgie. I think he's a jerk and a total failure as a president and human being. No, I have never met him. Have you? A plan? Here's mine for a starter.....The Canadian-US border should be left alone. It’s the Mexico-US border that is a problem. Georgie Bush, IF he was a man, should go to Mexico, find Vicente Fox, grab him by the shirt collar and bitch-slap the shit outa that grease ball. Or invite him to Texas and some bird hunting with Cheney. Hey Charlie......Thanks for the laughs, wise old dude... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The Canadian-US border sRe: The verdict is in. Post by Margi on May 10th, 2006, 12:06pm on 05/10/06 at 11:55:55, BobG wrote:
For the first time in our lives, we've just applied for our Canadian passports, so we can travel hassle-free to the States. But...ya gotta do what ya gotta do, right? :-/ |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The Canadian-US border sRe: The verdict is in. Post by Tom K on May 10th, 2006, 12:09pm on 05/10/06 at 11:55:55, BobG wrote:
How is he a total failure as a President, jerk and human being? Do you forget what has happened in Rowanda? The leaders there don't feed their people and shoot the ones who speak out about it. Hmmm...kinda think that they are bigger jerks and worse human beings. Or is it that you just don't agree with him, so that makes him a jerk, bad human being and failure as a President. Scroll up a few posts and look at the other President's who have worse ratings than he does. If things were sooo bad in the USA, why did the Dow finish at the highest point it has ever been at in history, just last week? And don't use the old oil excuse. And if you are going to use the Haliburton excuse, do some fact checking and see how many contracts they were awarded under Clinton, too. Haliburton wins these contracts because they are specialized in the field, not because of patronism. on 05/10/06 at 11:55:55, BobG wrote:
Yeah, cuz Bush going down to Mexico and pulling that would really give everyone something to talk about, wouldn't it? For your last part, it wasn't a rip on Charlie, since we have both been going over this since before the last Presidential election, he knows where I stand and I know where he does. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Redd715 on May 10th, 2006, 12:17pm What is it they used to say about Sex, Religion and Politics? I think we'd all be |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 10th, 2006, 12:26pm on 05/10/06 at 12:17:36, Redd715 wrote:
Can I get an AMEN! Good call Redd... [smiley=bow.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The Canadian-US border sRe: The verdict is in. Post by BobG on May 10th, 2006, 12:29pm on 05/10/06 at 12:09:19, Tom K wrote:
Something to talk about? You bet it would. Might even get George's approval rating up to, say........37. Hey Mr. President. It's time pull up your big girl panties and show Fox what a man you are! LOL [smiley=laugh.gif] Fat chance that will ever happen. :D I love political threads ;) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Racer1_NC on May 10th, 2006, 12:31pm on 05/10/06 at 09:42:30, BarbaraD wrote:
PAPERS! PAPERS PLEASE! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 10th, 2006, 1:35pm I just want Flo and Charlie and everyone else to know that I believe this wouldn't be my home country of choice if everyone agreed all the time. (like that could ever happen) ;;D I received this from one of my very dear friends on the POW/MIA board that I belong to and just thought you might enjoy seeing it if you haven't already. Obviously not my point of view but hey it is entertaining :) http://thinkwebworks.com/redraidernation/TAPES/dear-mr.HTML .....tim.......ok now on to the sex talk [smiley=laugh.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 10th, 2006, 4:49pm That's awesome.... someone should send it to Georgie.... Naw, he'd never understand it.... And what's a sex life [smiley=huh.gif] [smiley=huh.gif] Hugs BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 10th, 2006, 5:02pm Meeting politicians and celebrities, usually colors ones opinion of them. I plead guilty to that but I've never met a President or one that became one, even before I left the GOP. I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980...hard to believe from these posts. I wasn't all that excited about him. About that time the GOP started weeding out the libertarians in the party. Like Bill Maher said: Republicans used to just be mean old men that watched over the pursestrings. Not any more. They are almost all...or at least pretend to be for campaign purposes... a bunch of puritans and nosy old farts chipping away at my privacy and trying to kill the New Deal which has been successful for 70 years. Not good for us. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 10th, 2006, 5:02pm on 05/09/06 at 15:12:36, medic1852 wrote:
It seems that the media is only a "If it bleeds, it leads" media....I aint seen this article on any front pages, have you? Seized Papers Said to Show Qaeda in Iraq Is Worried By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: May 9, 2006 BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 8 (AP) — The Council of Holy Warriors, Al Qaeda's branch in Iraq, is worried that its cells in the Baghdad area are ineffective, with one militant describing their activities as nothing more than a "daily annoyance" to the Iraqi government, according to two documents released Monday by the United States military. The military said it had seized the documents on April 16 during raids in and around Yusifiya, a town 10 miles south of Baghdad that has long served as a base for Sunni Arab extremists. The documents indicate that the group is worried that it is unable to secure a solid base within Baghdad, military officials said. The documents seemed to be released as part of an American campaign to deflate the image of the local branch of Al Qaeda and that of its leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The documents were made available four days after the military released what it said were clips that the group had cut from a video before posting it on the Web. In those clips, Mr. Zarqawi fumbles with an American-made machine gun. In the version on the Web, Mr. Zarqawi appears as a confident, skilled warrior. In one of the newly released documents, an unidentified member of the group wrote that the cells in Baghdad are capable of only "hit and run" operations, leading the public to conclude that "the Shiites are stronger in Baghdad and nearer to controlling it," while the mujahedeen "are not considered more than a daily annoyance to the Shiite government." The other document released Monday outlined the group's strategy in Baghdad. It said the Council of Holy Warriors should focus on the capital and reduce its attacks on Sunni areas. Focusing on Baghdad, the document stated, would force the United States military to shift more of its resources there, which would allow the militants to regroup in their traditional bases. Those bases include the ones in Anbar Province, where the cities of Falluja and Ramadi are situated. The writer says that the American and Iraqi government forces "were able to absorb our painful blows," enlist new recruits and "take control of Baghdad as well as other areas, one after the other." |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Donna_D. on May 10th, 2006, 5:11pm Something tells me that when Tom and Charlie meet in Milwaukee there will be hugs all around....and THEN a good politcal debate. First round for you two fellows is on me! DD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 10th, 2006, 5:28pm Quote:
Nope. That would be no fun. I like what I did with Thomas in Davenport. We acknowledge that I am a commie and he a fascist. Then we got plastered. I REALLY got hammered. Gonna be nice to Tom. Without each of us holding up our side of the Capitol, it would fall over. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/happy dancers.gif.... well maybe not that close :o I'm too old to fight. My aunt welcomed me to the club of old farts downing a handful of pills every day. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by tanner on May 10th, 2006, 6:30pm on 05/10/06 at 17:28:28, Charlie wrote:
my sentiments exactly Charlie. The girl that sent me the very left wing video clip above knows full well that we agree to disagree and we love each other for our common causes and just because we both respect each other. plus the sneaky little minx proably knew that I would cross post the darn thing spreading "her side", oh well... tim |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 10th, 2006, 10:42pm on 05/10/06 at 17:28:28, Charlie wrote:
Yeah, what the hell is all fun about hugs and dancing, anyhow? I've gone too many rounds with Charlie to have it come down to fists. Plus, if I damage my hands, no chop chop for work, you know. We can get one thing out of the way right now, though. He's a commie and I bring the iron boot of oppresion. There, done! That way we can get onto the drinking right away!! [smiley=laugh.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 11th, 2006, 10:26pm on 05/09/06 at 00:01:17, tanner wrote:
Whenever the facts are unpleasant, just charge left-wing bias. If the research shows that smoking causes cancer, the doctors are tools of the socialist government seeking to control your lungs. If the glaciers are melting, any one that suggests a link to industrial carbon in the atmosphere is a loony tree-hugger. Quote:
Quote:
Maybe here: Quote:
Quote:
Those poor Kurds. Bush 41 didn't care about the gassing of the Kurds when it happened - he punished Saddam by giving him military aid. The fact that Saddam was a bitch was never a secret, but the oil boys thought he was our bitch until he invaded Kuwait. Then the US hears about the human rights violations. Concern for human rights can be noble, but you are naive if you think that U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is driven by concern for human rights, then or now. Sanctions violated? Yeah, he tried cheating on the edges, but the sanctions as a whole kept him in a box. And how many UN resolutions has Israel been in violation of for decades, starting with Security Council Resolution 242 calling on them to return illegally siezed land, right through violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and building a nuclear arsenal of probably 200 bombs?? It's hard to maintain credibility when we look the other way when our friends break the rules, and then we rant about the importance of the rules and try to enforce them when countries we don't like do the same thing. Quote:
Lets see - when we warned you not to paint yourself in a corner in Iraq, you told us to STFU. When we suggested that you not walk over the wet paint, you told us to STFU. You didn't listen to us then, and now that you have slipped in the paint and tracked it all over, you are demanding that we develop a magic plan to unbreak things and clean it up with no costs?? You can have my plan, but it isn't magic and you don't really want to follow it, because you are blaming liberals for a mess created by a Republican President given free reign by a Republican Congress. As if we held you back some how by counselling discretion instead of 'valor.' 1. Acknowledge how we got to where we are - 9/11 was used as a pretext to implement a plan to invade Iraq, which 'did not pose a threat' to the US, according to both Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in early 2001. Then hold real investigations and hold people accountable for the lies that got us into the mess. 2. Don't attack Iran. The fools that told us that Iraq would be a 'cakewalk' really don't understand that the whole region is in danger of coming unglued, and attacking Iran is a good way to guarantee that. 3. Set up a timetable for withdraw from Iraq. Reasonably soon. Follow it. 4. Implement a budget that is fiscally responsible. As someone said - lets get back to the sex. Hookergate!! Poker, Cigars, and Prostitutes!! Sex workers that were male, female, and children!! A long standing tradition that has gone on for over a decade, and not only has cost two top political appointees to the CIA their jobs, but may snare 15 Congresscritters and a slew of defense contractors!! Billions of dollars of our money blown for their pleasure, by good patriots who were cheering for the war!! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 11th, 2006, 11:33pm on 05/11/06 at 22:26:13, floridian wrote:
You're right, you're always right and we can't bring up Clinton doing anything wrong because that will only be "living in the past"...sheesh...I know...to get rid of the decifict...we'll tax the dead...oh, wait...been there done that..."We are only in the war for oil..."If that's the case, why is the price so high...How and where do you get off saying that someone doesn't care about human rights violations then or now? Granted, you did come up with a plan, and were actually the only one who put some thought into it, unless it was cut and pasted from some other web site, so I will give you some credit there...But honestly, Flo, do you really believe all the stuff you say? Honestly? Do you really think that there are that many people who don't understand that there is a good majority of Iraqis who are happy we are there and are behind us 110%? Do you really want to see Iran with the capability of nuclear weapons? What is a fiscally resonsible budget these days? Giving more of my money to the poor? Welfare reciepents? Bush set up the prescription drug plan, but since it wasn't set up by a Democrat, it must be bad, right? I, for one, hope we never get a national medical plan. My insurance is just fine the way it is. I don't pay for my O2, I get my first $600 worth of prescriptions for free, every year. Plus, I can go to whatever doc I want. You are always preaching how the government can't do anything right, but you want to turn the running of your life over to them, how exactly does that work? You want the "Right" out of your life, but wasn't it Tipper Gore, as in Al Gore's wife, who wanted to ban certain music because it contained bad lyrics? Isn't she the one who got her husband to pass legislation to put that stupid black and white sticker on records? Hmmm...what party is good ol' Al in? Seems as though the people who are screaming the most about getting the "Right" our of their lives, are more than happy to turn theirs over to the "Left". Funny how that works, isn't it. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 2:06am on 05/11/06 at 23:33:29, Tom K wrote:
First, I dont remember saying the war was only about oil. If you read the PNAC documents (signed by Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Rumsfeld and other movers and shakers), then there is clearly more to it than that. They want the US to be the single unchallenged superpower, and they want to remake the middle east to their liking. They believe in a domino theory, where they can go in and topple governments they don't like, and the end result is that the middle east will be filled with friendly happy governments. One of the Bush Administration officials did give a speech where he promised cheaper oil as a result of the war. Obviously, another miscalculation. Quote:
Well, lets see. The US repeatedly rile up the Kurds when it suits our purposes, and then pull back when it suits us, and they get massacred. We ignore the massacre of Kurds when it suits us, and beat our chest about the injustices done to the Kurds when it suits us. We overthrow a democratically elected government in Iran, install a monarch, and train his goons to torture. And then we can't understand that when the Shah is thrown out, the people who replaced him don't like us. And then there's the Mujahedin of Afghanistan. How many billions did we give them? We didn't care that they oppressed women or wanted to ban TV - they were fighting the Soviets, so we helped them. Human rights of the locals couldn't compete with our geopolitical goal of being a thorn in the side of the Soviet Union. Sure, we talked about how terrible things were under the Russians in Afghanistan - so we fueled a bloody war, which led to the replacement of a brutal pro-Soviet government with an even more brutal anti-Soviet AND anti-western Taliban government. Yeah, that was a brilliant example of how the US was so concerned with human rights. Nobody gave a rats azz about human rights under the Taliban until they were linked to 9-11. Then it was an outrage. But if the status of women was lowest under the Taliban, it was second lowest in Saudi Arabia. Which really isn't a concern of the US government, as far as I can tell. The State Department has written a few reports lamenting the plight of women or religious minorities in Saudiland, but it is business as usual for the president and his financial backers, the 'Good' bin Ladins. Quote:
Thanks. If you read my posts, you will see that when I quote, I give attribution or put it in quotes or a quote block. Quote:
You gotta be smoking something stronger than the stuff available at the Kangaroo mart. Really. Polls conducted by Paul Bremer's Provisional Authority found a majority of Iraqis wanted us to leave in 2004. A large majority in many provinces feel that attacks against the US military are morally justified, and in the friendly provinces, only 40 to 50% of the population feel that is ok to attack the US. The interim prime minister (the guy we put in power temporarily) said that human rights abuses a few months ago have reached a level that exceeds that under Saddam - not that all of that is attributed to the US forces, but most Iraqis do blame the US in general, because we are the occupier and we are in charge. Most Iraqi's did cheer when we took Saddam out of power. Since then, they have overwhelmingly soured on the US. -- continued -- |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 2:06am Quote:
No. But wishes aren't nickles. The idea that the US can singlehandedly keep countries from developing military technology is not very realistic, especially when they have a large population and resources. We are talking 1940s technology. The reality is that international cooperation can delay things, a unilateral war would lead to a middle east wide war. And you are assuming that Iran hasn't already bought a nuclear weapon from Korea, Pakistan, or the Russian Maffia. In which case, we wouldn't prevent Iran from obtaining a bomb, we would provoke them into using it for self defense. Quote:
Quote:
Anyone who calls themselves an economic conservative thinks the prescription drug plan stinks. Who would think it is a good idea NOT to negotiate for the best price we can get on drugs? Yes, it provides some benefits for the elderly. At an inflated cost. And the program is a strange beast - the government pays, but private insurance companies all run their own complicated programs, which they also profit from. Quote:
Bully for you. How many people on this board don't have insurance? How many lost insurance because they lost their job, maybe due to economic factors, maybe due to missing one too many days from cluster headaches? Know Dave E? He just went homeless - disabled due to clusters and malpractice, the medical bills were just too much, so out he goes. But you have it good, so there is no need to change the system. Do you mean to come across as a prick? Honestly, what do you think coverage is like in primitive countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, or Japan? They spend less on health care per person than we do (half as much per capita in the UK), every one is covered, and their health is better. We definitely don't want anything like that here. And do have any real idea what the efficiency of Medicaid and Medicare are compared to private medical insurance? Less than 5% of Medicaid/Medicare money goes to overhead and administration. Private medical insurance typically involves 1/3 overhead. And do you think you will have private insurance all your life?? Not if you have an average lifespan. The private companies will dump you like a turd when you get older - why should they cover a person likely to be unprofitable? You'll be grateful for government insurance then, if it is still available. So yes, I say bring on a single payer insurance system. Where we can still choose our own doctor, like they do in Europe. Where everyone has coverage. I don't expect such a system to be perfect, but better than our current patchwork. And if such a program fixes our current problems, you can count on me to bitch and work to fix whatever new problems might arise. Quote:
There is a difference between putting warning labels on multimedia containing sex or violence, and banning it. If the material is labeled, then people can make better decisions. Tipper might be a bit naive, but isn't the menace that you try to paint her as. Same with foods. I don't want to ban every ingredient and additive - but I do want it labelled so I can make a decision and avoid things that don't agree with me. Instead, we have food where the ingredients include "flavorings" which means "we aren't telling you what is in this." |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 7:48am I'm not cutting and pasteing all of the last 2 posts so I'm doing the number thing... 1. None of this happened under your boy, so all Republicans are bad...oh wait, this falls under that "New wave Mein Kampf" thing doesn't it? Bush is the new Hitler... 2. Yeah, we gave arms and money to bin Laden when he was fighting the Russians. Stop the major enemy of the cold war with a few arms and some cash? Seemed like a good idea at the time. Good thing that there is hind sight, because you can always see the mistakes afterward! Wait...isn't your whole arguement based on hind sight, more on that later.... 3. Fine, we will pull everyone out. Screw 'em. Would that make you feel better? When there is a major civil war, we will just walk away. But hell, we would then be blamed for that. Is it a bad situation, yes, but we are there and have to see the mission to the end. 4. Hmmm...I could be wrong but 1940's technology blew the crap out of Japan...So, after all your reading you haven't seen anything that gives you the impression that Iran is totally willing to blow the crap out of Israel and you are ok with that? Just wipe Israel off the map, because we don't need to get our hands dirty anymore. But when we look back on it, we can blame the US for not doing anything... 5. Yes, I understand how a budget works, thank you very much. Do you understand that there was never a big deal made about the deficit until the '90's, (by that President that we aren't supposed to mention by name...), and even he ran one. Enron accounting doesn't make a balanced budget. So when your tax refund check came in, did you return it to the government? "Oh, thank you but I don't need this..." And in past wars, both sides of Congress were behind the President, less it look like treason. Not today, but that is for another time.... 6. So we will call the prescription drug plan a draw? 7. Am I a prick, depends on who you talk to. There are jobs out there that provide better health coverage than you would ever find via the government. With all your lamenting about how bad the government runs things, I am very suprised that you would be willing to turn this over to them. The same type of system that they have in America Jr? Where they tell people not to come into the hospital because they dont' have the money to treat them? This is a capitalistic society and therefore you have to pay to play, but when you do, you have the best in the world. I would rather have to go without to see my neuro than go through 20 tons of red tape to see someone who shrugged off my CH...been there done that. Listen, 3 years ago I almost checked out. If I wasn't in my health care plan, I wouldn't have gotten the best oncologist in the area, in the 30 minutes it took. My life was saved because of it, I'm not convinced that the government can do it better. I, for one, find it hard to belive that you really would give up your choice for government run... 8. You're right there is a big difference, but isn't it you and Charlie that says the little things lead to bigger ones...? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by rickyshot on May 12th, 2006, 8:47am Although I don't always agree with Flo ( I tend to lean to the conservative side) I have to agree with Flo on Health Care. People who have good jobs with good health coverage sometimes do not know what time it is. I was the working poor in America. I had poor health coverage or none at all. I was in Hell. I lost jobs and the medical bills kept piling up. Many times I could not afford the simplest of meds. My family suffered immensely from this to this day we feel the reprecussions. Poverty is no fun. You can't tell me that in the richest country in the world you can't have medical care for each citizen. I was homeless and in a shelter with 3 young children thanks to the American medical system and pull yourself up by your bootstrap mentality but they forget to give you the straps. I came to Canada with the clothes on my back and my kids. While the medical system is far from perfect and is rife with problems which I won't get into, the bottom line is that everyone has medical care. That made a world a difference in my life. That is the main reason I stay here. I don't really like it here and miss my home but you can't argue with a "normal" life again. BTW I did pull myself up I started over , learned French and saved for 15 years and got my new townhouse condo two years ago, which I am sorry to say would have been impossible in the US. Also thanks to medical care, I can work and not on disability. No job in the US would have been so understanding and I could not afford the copayments with the crappy major medical coverage that most jobs offer the average working man there. Where is the compassion. Only thing I can see about the argument between dems and republicans is that they are all worse than the mafia and government is a necessary evil we all deal with. Anyone who thinks those people on top really give a damn about the average man has buried more than their heads in the sand. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by superhawk2300 on May 12th, 2006, 8:49am Just some data for you arguers. I get a presription from Canada. US: $450.00 per month - Canada: 150.00. Exact same product, made in same plant, in same packaging. If my choices are government waste and red tape or greedy CEO's chosing the level of my health care, I'll take the governement waste. The problem with America is we have to yeild to BOTH mindsets, not just one. It couldn't be worse. I can't see how any CH sufferor who has had to pay retail for meds could see it any other way, but I guess brain inplanted belief systems are powerful. Anyone who supports Bush's healthcare plan has no right to complain about the cost of our meds, AND should not be allowed to by meds from Canada for what they really cost. Making record profits off of sick people and denying care to others is something I beleive is against my rights as an American. I am very anti-gov involvment when ever possible but the governement is supposed to provide for people, using their tax money to provide returns to them, instead of bailing out billion dollar corporations that have been run into the ground by CEO's with golden parachutes. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by deltadarlin on May 12th, 2006, 9:02am on 05/12/06 at 02:06:32, floridian wrote:
I'm sure there are many, but to an extent this argument is flawed. I had a friend who had non-Hodgkins lymphoma. She had no insurance. Was she able to get adequate care? Yes she was, in fact, she got exceptional care and it didn't cost her a penny. Her medical bills exceeded half a million dollars and her out of pocket expense was zilch (you used *one* example so I did too, ;) ). on 05/12/06 at 02:06:32, floridian wrote:
I've watched numerous shows on the health care system in these countries. There are still some gaps in who is covered in some (Japan coming to mind) of these countries. And you are quite right, I never want socialized medicine. Helen and I have disagreed on this before. HOWEVER, I also have friends that live in these countries and while there are those who champion the system, there are those who bemoan the fact that there are massive waiting periods (mental health is a the *step-child* here) and sometimes you have to jump through hoops to get a specialist. on 05/12/06 at 02:06:32, floridian wrote:
If you want to see a specialist, you can't just call one up and make an appointement, you must be referred and sometimes the waiting period is horrendous. japan actually has the best health care system of all the socialized medicine countries. In some opf the socialized medicine countries, physicans are discouraged from having a private practice, the encouragement lies in joining the health care system, et al. If I'm not mistaken, Tennessee tried Hilary's idea of socialized medicine and it didn't work that well. The program was proposed to enroll nearly 2 million citizens and was projected to result in a cumulative cost savings to Tennessee and the federal governmnet of $7.2 billion by the end of the 5-year demonstration period. However, major start-up problems encountered by the state and by managed care organizations and limitations imposed by the government have significantly constrained these expectations. At the end of its first year, more than 1.2 million people were enrolled, but the program ran a $99 million deficit. One also has to take into consideration the population of said countries~US has 295,734,134, Japan has 127,417,244, Germany has 82,431,390, the UK has 60,441,457 and Canada has 32,805,041. The larger and more diverse the population, the more difficult it is to centralize anything. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 9:14am on 05/12/06 at 08:47:00, rickyshot wrote:
Good for you for pulling yourself up and making it. I did basicaly the same thing, put myself through culinary school, worked a full time job and put in 20 hours a week in a restaurant for free. I was putting in 120 hours a week, did it for a year and made something of myself. Was it fun? Hell no and I was in cycle for most of the year, spending $3K a month on meds, to boot. Why is it ok for me to do it but if we ask someone else to make something of themselves, we are evil and don't have any compasion? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by rickyshot on May 12th, 2006, 9:21am quite right superhawk... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 9:45am On the flip side of corporations making record profits is the small business. What if you were to design the replacement for the paperclip? Let's say that your design netted you $1 Billion per year. Then the Original Paper Clip Revitialization Group said that you are making record profits off of your "stolen" idea. They want to shut you down because your company put X number of original paper clip makers out of work. What do you do? Isn't it your right to be able to make as much money as you can from your invention? Granted this is a simplized example, but all of the elements hold true. So, in another country they don't make as much per capita as the US does, so you charge less, but it is around the same profit margin per capita as in the US. Would you lower your profits in one country? Would you lower those profits if you were plugging that money into R&D to make a better paperclip that was more effective? Worked longer or faster? If you answer no to all of those questions, then what you effectively have done is say that you are now putting a limit on what someone can earn with their product. Now let's say that product is time as a receptionist. Since you really only answer phones, get coffee and greet guests who enter a company, the governement says that this job can only be paid $8.50 per hour. Your receptionist is great and does far more than the job discription above, but since she is called a receptionist, she can only make that much money. What happens? Does she continue to do all the extras or does her productivity go down? This is a vicious circle, if we limit the amount of money drug companies make, or oil companies, then we are opening the door to limit how much we all can earn at our jobs. It didn't work for Communist Russia, I don't really think it can work here. But what it would collectively do is kill the enterprenuaial (sp) spirit in America and kill the will to do better to provide for themselves and their families. Then we all lose. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 10:32am Quote:
Not quite equal. Oil and meds are necessities to live life as we know it. Paperclips are a convenience. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 10:44am on 05/12/06 at 10:32:57, karma wrote:
Fine, then we will use the example of every Business 100 level class...Widgets. The basic principles still hold true, no matter how you want to spin it. ::) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 11:31am Its not spin its a fundamental difference in economics The product doesn't make the difference, its the use of the product. If I need medication to live or to live a quality life then I have no choice. If I need gas to live a quality life. Then I either cut out other things so I can afford the gas or suffer until I can rearrange my life style to do without. Some people can't. Either way oil companies and Insurance/ pharma companies have me by the short and curlies and they know it. Paperclip/widget makers know I don't need them so they make their products affordable or don't make them at all. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 11:40am on 05/12/06 at 11:31:13, karma wrote:
Fine, then put the oil companies and pharm companies into the example and you have the same outcome. Limit how much a company, pharm, oil, etc, can make and that limit will travel toward every facet of employment. The example still holds true for those companies no matter what you want to say. Do you want your job put on a sheet that says you can only make X amount of money per year, no matter where in the world your job is, or how much you do above and beyond? Is that fair to you? Would you be happy with that outcome? I don't think you would, nor would anyone else. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by maffumatt on May 12th, 2006, 11:50am http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshelf/brochures/gasolinepricesprimer/Images/pump.gif average profit on one gallon of gas is 8 cents, taxes on one gallon is up to 64 cents in some states. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 12:09pm Heard on the radio this morning that for 80% of patients, part D of Medicare is more expensive than simply buying your meds from a Canadian pharmacy. Then I found other info that about half of the time, Costco is cheaper than Medicare part D. So the good news is that Bush did get a plan to cover seniors. The bad news is, that after spending all billions of government dollars, and after the individual pays $11 to $63 a month, most are no better off. At least the pharmaceutical and insurance companies come out ahead. Quote:
|
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 12:11pm I understand what you are trying to say and while that may be true in a free market the Oil and Pharma markets are run by a handful of companies that have consolidated to make it impossible for anyone else to compete. Zero competition in a market that sells basic necessities will result in higher prices and higher profits period! The trickle down affect you are talking about doesn't work when the profits are shared by only a handful of companies and their COB's I would be interested to see just how many people think they have benefited from soring medical and oil prices in the last years. I've not argued that price controls should be implemented in fact I have argued against it before. I would however, support an independent investigation looking for cartel like practices. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 12:20pm on 05/12/06 at 12:09:13, floridian wrote:
Flo, wouldn't you agree that it is easy to find the 1 or 2% of people that this plan doesn't work for, that they would pay more using the plan than not, and that this is what would be highlighted in a story to make someone look bad? If we went into your background, found 1% of the people you know who think you are a jerk, and there was a story that was going to be put out about you and that story was to be negativly driven, wouldn't you expect them to use those people? Damn, that hind sight thing just keeps popping up, doesn't it... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 12:20pm on 05/12/06 at 10:32:57, karma wrote:
A necessity? Yes, but only partially. Our attitudes towards oil when it was $1 a gallon or less locked us into behaviors that 'require' high levels of consumption. People who talked about conservation when gas was cheap in the late 80s or 90s were considered kooks. Now the people who moved further away from their job and bought a bigger car are in pain. We might be starting to see demand destruction for oil - when it was cheap, thrift was not considered a virtue. Got a feeling that high prices are here to stay, and that it will change behavior. Too bad we wasted 50 years designing our country to be inneficient. Freeways and suburbs have some advantages, but minimizing fuel consumption was not on the list of design considerations. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 12:23pm on 05/12/06 at 12:11:55, karma wrote:
I agree that it isn't easy to open your own gas company, but should we give them the opprotunity to build other places to produce these products, so we can get prices lower? No one is talking about the refineries that were damaged by Katrina and that are still offline. Could this be raising prices? If we had other refineries across the country, ones that weren't running at 100% capacity already, wouldn't it make sense to build some more so this sort of thing didn't happen again? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 12:29pm on 05/12/06 at 09:14:27, Tom K wrote:
No matter how bad the circumstances are, some people will rise above it and become sucessful. Gotta admire the mettle of people that do that. But it is also true that when opportunities and the support system decrease, more people will fail. Education is a prime example - there are people that are able to climb a mountain barefoot every day to get to school, and they go on to do well despite the odds. But on a societal level, the number of people that graduate college is linked to government support for those institutions, along with financial aid to make it possible. The fact that someone beats the odds does not repeal the laws of statistics. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 12:46pm Quote:
Any company worth it salt has hurricane insurance including loss of buisness. This is a nonargument. It would affect supply though. But gas supply stocks have increased in the last months. So supply is not a problem. Quote:
How in the world do you get 1% - 2% out of this? Quote:
Flo, "as we know it" is a key part of this sentence |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 12:47pm on 05/12/06 at 12:20:42, Tom K wrote:
I would question your veracity if you found that 1% of my accquaintences thought I was a jerk. I am confident that a large majority would recognize me as a cantankerous bastard. But what does that have to do with anything? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 12:55pm on 05/12/06 at 12:47:32, floridian wrote:
It's like the man in the street interviews. They aren't going to take the people who answer the questions about who was the 16th president correctly. They are going to take the ones who don't have a clue. IF you are going to write a negative story and have it in your mind that it is going to show this in a bad light, right off the bat, you aren't going to put the people who are saving money with the plan, in the story. Let's face it, Republican or Democrat, the media is more tabloid driven than fact driven. Most reporters go out with their agenda in mind before they even start writing the story. That is my point. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 12:57pm on 05/12/06 at 12:46:53, karma wrote:
Having insurance doesn't put extra gas in the system. That is the point, not the coverage for loss of product. Didn't see the 80% listed in the quote. I still find it hard to believe that 80% number, since statistics can be manipulated to say anything that you want them to. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 1:20pm Quote:
Then the fact that the government reported an increase of about 10% in gas stocks for April may also be manipulated? :o |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 1:27pm on 05/12/06 at 13:20:06, karma wrote:
Since you appear to be in the group of "The governement doing something is better than doing nothing, isn't it a moot point for you, anyhow? Sure that number may be manipulated, and this is supposed to shock me, how? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by floridian on May 12th, 2006, 1:28pm on 05/12/06 at 12:46:53, karma wrote:
Yeah, and desires must become necessities if we are to live the life we want. I see your point, but am opposed to blurring the line between need and want. The dismal science is about making difficult choices in the face of scarce resources; lot of people having to deal with economics in their life lately. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by catlind on May 12th, 2006, 2:03pm With regards to health care and medications in Canada, specifically Ontario since each province has it's own system: The government regulates billing for the doctors. Doctors in Ontario have a cap, they can only bill up to $100,000 from the Ontario HEalth Insurance Plan, after that they are out of luck. They cannot under the law charge fees over and above OHIP services. So, they end up seeing masses of patients for free. Many doctors have and continue to leave Ontario for the US. They can actually make some money here. The pharmaceutical companies have a federal government regulation of prices of medications. They can only charge up to the caps the government has in place. You too can have the same benefits in the US if you are willing to let the federal government and state governments impose wage and billing caps and pricing regulations. Is that what you want in what is often coined as the most capitalistic country in the world? The grass often looks greener on the other side, but once you get there you discover that there are as many problems with insects in the ground as where you came from, they are just different kinds of insects. Cat |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 4:48pm Quote:
Tom, I'm in the group that believes that people should do what is legal. Since the perception is that oil companies and pharma companies may be fixing prices then I want an independent, government sponsored investigation on weather or not its true. Government sponsored only because they have the rescources to get it done. Independent because government can't be trusted to deal with what they may find. I'm in the group that isn't yet affected to much by high medical costs, but I want to make sure that I can afford it when I need it. I'm in thegroup that isn't much directly affected by high oil prices but am indirectly affected when transportations costs double my cost of living. (I live on an island where evrything is imported) I'm in the group that believes that this president has caused damage that will take years to recover from. Rep. or Dem I don't care, if a guy is a failure then he is a failure. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 6:24pm This arguement has been debated before, and probably will be til the end of time. Too high for one person is affordable for another. Pharm and oil companies have the same rights as anyone else to make a profit, to think otherwise is rediculous. What is too much profit? On proir discussions about drugs, people were bitching that Viagra was being splashed all over the television, on NASCAR and in print. That it was "more important" to make "boner" pills than meds for us. No one got the point that the profits for those pills go into R&D for other meds. LSD was found by accident as was 'Trex. Research drives both the oil and pharm industries. Take away profit and you kill R&D. Additionally, if oil was sooo scarce, wouldn't the companies that produce it's byproducts be looking for someother way to make money off of us in the future? If you were the CEO of a oil company, would you just say the hell with it, oil is going to run out and when it does we are out of a job. No, you would want to keep making the money you are now. I bet everyone on this board, when they first found out about 'Trex, O2 or whatever said to themselves, "I'd pay a million bucks for this", now that it has become old hat, everyone bitches on how much it cost. I've been using 'Trex for as long as I can remember and I still would pay whatever they wanted to get it. Maybe my view is a little skewed, but I still want to know that there is no end to the money I can make in my lifetime. Put a cap on these companies and you put a cap on everything. Is that really that difficult to figure out? As for the President, I really could care less what other countries think of our President. America has never been about being all nicey nicey all the time. The world comes to us to handle things and when they don't go the way they are planned, we get blamed. What Bush should say to the UN, "You people all bitch and moan when things go wrong, fine. From now on, you fawking deal with it, we are done. Someone threatening to blow up your country, too bad. You owe some other country billions of dollars, pay up. Don't like it? Too damn bad." The problem with that is that America isn't like that. Do you think that if Russia or Britian had all the military resources we have, that they wouldn't take over the world? "The sun never sets on the British Empire", until 20-25 years ago, that was true. If we wanted to, we would be running the world by now, and there wouldn't be a damn thing any country could do about it. That's the reality. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 12th, 2006, 6:43pm I have no problems with profits, I don't have a problem with big profits. I do have a problem with manipulating the market for "illegal profits and the perception is there that that is what is happening. Clear that up and they can make all the profits they want as long as its legal. Many Americans live outside the Continental U.S. ;) Quote:
Maybe Bush and friends wet dream but not reality. I can't believe that people really think like that. Thats some scary chit. I'm done! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Jonny on May 12th, 2006, 6:45pm on 05/12/06 at 18:43:17, karma wrote:
Im down with every word of that quote!! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 12th, 2006, 9:41pm How do YOU know that the profits are illegal? Because you think they are? Because they are too high so they must be illegal, right. What is scary about taking over the world? Used to happen all the time, Rome, England, Spain, France...The reason it doesn't happen now is because we aren't a dictatorship or a monarchy. I love that way any Democrat thinks that Bush is just out to run the world...give me a break...Do ya, do you really think he is? Please... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 14th, 2006, 1:16pm I'm a little late as I haven't been here for these lively rants but I have to post because of my recent experience. You see, Bush and for that matter most of the Republicans, try at every chance to make health care more difficult for the average bloke; great for themselves and the tax-cutted CEOs. Bush has zero interest or faith in his own countrymen unless that "faith" comes from "intelligent designer" voters in red states. They try to scare sick and elderly people from crossing the border into Canada by telling them that by some miracle the drugs produced here and Europe lose their ginger or become toxic in Toronto (where thousands of Canadians die on the streets after taking these drugs) and they can at least get a portion of the medicine they need. The greed and well-displayed hatred by the Adminsitration for us, should turn everyone's stomach. With Bush-style Republicans, you'll get more expensive drugs. Democrats might not be able to turn it around but they won't make things worse for those choosing between heat or drugs. People still buy the idea that it's worth living in poverty and dying young because seeing a specialist is the core of our health care system. It isn't. There are far too many specialists interested in income rather than patients. I have a lot of experience with this and it makes me sick. I have been able to get my GP to handle most things that a specialist will do so long as it isn't life-threatening. These guys are available but out of reach for millions (not for Congressmen though that have unlimited free health care) It's hard for me but I've been able to do this because I have no choice. I can't afford nor am I able to drive (never have driven) 75 miles each way several times a week for redundant testing in order to get these specialists to prescribe drugs. I've made most of my doctors understand that if I did this, it would be all I would be doing for the rest of my life and make it impossible to sustain any income at all. With national health, I would at least be able to get my teeth fixed without making it a pilgrimage. I'll take Svenn's health care over ours anyday. Someday I hope that we will join other western countries in making health care available to everybody. You never know, when everyone is healthy and able to focus on other issues, they may be well enough to see the light and not vote against their own interests. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by maffumatt on May 14th, 2006, 1:21pm this thread hurts my head |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 14th, 2006, 2:36pm Quote:
http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/OUCH.png You're right. Charlie http://www.kolobok.wrg.ru/smiles/standart/scratch_one-s_head.gif?SSImageQuality=Full |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 14th, 2006, 3:30pm on 05/14/06 at 13:16:35, Charlie wrote:
Against government control over most things, but you want government health care? Odd. I'm sure that there are people, like yourself, who would do better with a national health care system. Fine. Why does it have to be all or nothing? If I don't want to join that plan because my insurance is better, then why should I be forced. It's not my fault that someone can't pay for their care, but you are going to penalize me, by making me join this national program. Personally, I think that sucks and takes away another freedom, the freedoms you bitch about Bush taking away. Problem is, there wouldn't be this issue if some other things were fixed. According to the Census Bureau web site, 14.6% of the population has no heath insurance. Which figures out to be about 41.2 million people. Take out 8.5 million for uninsured children, which are covered under their parents plan and that gives you 32.7 million. Take out adults 18-24, there is no published number, only a statement that says 72% have no coverage. Having been that age, I can say that I didn't want coverage at that age because it was just money that could have gone into my pocket. So I think we can safely call them a group of about 8 million? So now we are down to about 24.7 million. The number of illegal aliens in this country ranges anywhere from 10 million to 20 million, depending on what article you read. So that leaves roughly 14.7 million on the high end to 4.7 million on the low end. Basing the percentages off of the last census, there are 240 million people living here, so that would mean that the number of uninsured is somewhere between 1% and 6%, roughly. Or somewhere around the number of unemployed. Do we really need to give the government control of our health care for that few people? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Charlie on May 14th, 2006, 7:24pm Yes. Government health would work better than the convoluted mess we have now. New York State Medicaid is clumsy but at least it works. Its abuse come from hospitals and clinicians, not from the people needing it. It's the drug companies that refuse to let the government bid or buy drugs in bulk to allow those needing it to afford them. It's the core of the Medicare drug benefit that is mostly beneficial to drug companies. It's greed at its worst. I guess government is fine only when spending its way to trillions in debt to China, not for helping its own. I believe that some other countries are already using or proposing to let people choose to belong to a program or not. Perhaps I would opt out too if practical. My Medicaid picks up the overflow and pays my HMO premiums. I think that's a bit clumsy but it beats the hell out of the lies from my HMO and the lovely "it's not listed on our formulary" if they don't like the cost of my anti-seizure drugs. We have been asked to buy the long expressed, but never tried, idea that government health would be more expensive to you or me in many ways. I don't believe it in large part because of those telling us so. These guys are not interested and one has to wonder why....just like the oil companies' altruistic intentions toward us. Just about big everything have been buying out contracts of older employees and trying to kill health care and pensions because it just adds to profit; screw helping former loyal workers or goodwill. I like big business when it follows the same rules we do but it's clear that they just don't like us. Evidently Brits and Canadians have less freedom than we do with government health care..... Of course they can ride trains that actually go somewhere and on time an without rattling their teeth because of terrible government control. What horrible places to live..... It matters not, the percentages when it comes to this. No one should be left out. Not one that needs it. Charlie |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 14th, 2006, 9:27pm The sad fact is that you cannot afford to get seriously ill in the U.S. unless you have health insurance or are wealthy. Why? Because the health care system is run by businessmen and not doctors but if you can afford it it ranks among the best in the world. The health care system where I live covers 100% of the employed and it's mandatory for every employed person to pay into it. When you reach a certain salary scale you are no longer eligable for the benefits but still must pay. No one is forced to use the system but most do and must pay into it regardelss. Local health care costs are govt controlled and the healthcare itself is adequate but not on par with the U.S. BUT if you need serious work done other, excellent facilities are avaiable offisland and their to do it and costs are covered. Med costs are decent and doable. Pharmacists and doctors are helpful so all in all it works. example: Having a baby in the U.S. prenatalcare/anesthesiologist/hospital/doc, the works costs around $35,000.00 if I remember correctly Hvaing a baby here with all the same ingredients +/-$2,000.00 Things to make you go hmmmmmm. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by maffumatt on May 14th, 2006, 10:37pm There a couple reasons that I am not in favor of government run health care. If you want to see what kind of bureaucracy that it would be look at the Veterans Administration Hospitals. The care is far from the best, the doctors have no incentives to do their best and you don't even have a Dr its just who ever is on duty at the time. My Father was almost killed by them. Their answer to every problem is a pill. He would have died if he depended on the VA for his health care. 2 any time you depend on the government you will be disappointed, you can count on that. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 15th, 2006, 7:30am Matt, I have to disagree with you on the VA. Bill got some of the best care at the VA hospital - better than the "civilian" hospitals. Of course I'm the type of person who "insists" upon good care when it's one of mine. I just explained to the docs what I wanted done and they got really interested in his case. But you just gotta 'splain it to them in words they can understand. I think a National Health Care System would work if we did it right. There's just too many of us without insurance (I can't get it because I have a "pre-existing" condition). Hugs BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by maffumatt on May 15th, 2006, 8:06am The VA had my dad on 14 different meds, 5 were psychotic meds for his nightmares and anxiety. He was a walking zombie, he was having heart attacks and was so screwed up that he didn't care. If Georgia wouldn't had looked at all of his meds and made him go to the cadiologist in Texarkana he wouldn't have made it another month or two. The bottom part of his heart was so scared up from the attacks that he had on 15% use of it. The Dr. in Texarkana said that there was no way any doc could have missed that. He is now on only 4 meds and you've him Barbara, he isn't a zombie any longer. The Dr. in Texarkana had one word to describe the care he had recieved "malpractice." |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by deltadarlin on May 15th, 2006, 8:27am on 05/14/06 at 21:27:42, karma wrote:
I'm going to disagree with you here. If you are not insured, there is the public health care system. I have several friends that have had MAJOR health problems with medical bills past the half-million mark and their care was no different than care I would have received from my private insurer (if fact, it was probably better). In Louisiana, we have a public access health care system. Up until a few years ago, Louisiana State University hospital in Shreveport was a part of that system. As with most state hospitals, it was operating in the red and facing major problems. The hospital took itself out of the state system, began operating independently of the state system and now is a *flagship* hospital (it's a NFP hospital, so that's not an issue, but it's not in the hole any more either). LSUS also took over management of the hospital in Monroe, LA. Lo and behold, once the state beurocracy (sp?) was removed, not only did the debt management situation become better, the services themselves improved greatly (we use the hospital in Shreveport and we have insurance). on 05/14/06 at 21:27:42, karma wrote:
What happens if you aren't employed? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 15th, 2006, 8:38am Weather they can collect it or not is a different story but wouldn't your friends still be responsible for paying? Quote:
As with most medical facilities you cannot be turned away from the hospital. Daily medical care is an issue though. Quote:
It would be interesting to see how they much they pay for medication vs. a state run or private hopsital. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by deltadarlin on May 15th, 2006, 9:15am Whether you pay or not is based on whether you can afford to pay or not (fees are based on a sliding scale). One of my friends had to pay a little back and the other did not owe a penny. *Who* pays *what* for medication? The patient or the hospital? |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 15th, 2006, 9:53am on 05/14/06 at 21:27:42, karma wrote:
Ok, maybe I'm not reading this correctly or am reading through a cloud of Trileptal...You pay no matter what and you can utilize the system for free until you make a certain amount of money per year? What drives people to want to make that kind of money? Talk about the "Man Keeping You Down"! Second part I'm confused about...Having a baby here costs $35K, over there it is +/-$2K? So it could cost anywhere between $33K-$37K? Am I reading that right or not? [smiley=huh.gif][smiley=huh.gif] (Where is the "Got No Friggin' Brain because of Meds Smilie??? LOL!) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 15th, 2006, 9:57am Quote:
Both actually but an NFP facility should be charging close to actual cost plus overhead. My guess would be that since the HMO, Insurance, drug company scenario is eliminated then costs for both the hospital and the patient is greatly reduced. Doctor and specialist costs should also be less if the same scenario is eliminated. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by BarbaraD on May 15th, 2006, 10:45am When Bill was in Venezuela, he had a heart problem and was put in a Private Hospital. 10 days in ICU costs $2500. In the US he never got out with less than $40K. Something is wrong with OUR system when health care costs are this high. Oh, I know the insurance companies "discount" the costs, but still..... I'm really careful about what tests the docs run on me... since I have to pay for them. And another thing -- why don't the hospitals "discount" to a self-paying person? And YES, I've asked them and they just say they can't do it. To me this is BS - why not set the rates to the discounted price in the first place? That way it wouldn't eat the lunch of everyone who doesn't have insurance. Frankly, I think it's time we got some "Common Sense" back into the medical field. Let Doctors practice medicine and let the insurance companies do the paying - not the telling of doctors HOW to practice and what's an acceptable RX and what's not. Buddy cost me $250 when he was born. Today I couldn't AFFORD to have him! Hugs BD |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by karma on May 15th, 2006, 11:09am Quote:
I can't tell you how many doctors I know that are frustrated to the point of quitting because of this. Tom, Everyone pays, its socialized medecine. I don't mind paying. I pay myself and I pay a % added to my employees salaries. Thats just the way it is and everyone is happy. Having a baby here costs +/-2k |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by imnotbub on May 15th, 2006, 11:52am on 05/12/06 at 18:24:39, Tom K wrote:
Rome, England, France,Spain...etc.etc. See a commonality here? None of them STILL rule the world. Why, you may ask. It's a lot easier to take the world over than it is to keep it. Rome? gone. England, not exactly a world powerhouse by themselves. France,Spain......insignificant in the grand scope. Russia, Overextended themselves, broke. We better smell the coffee here. Too much more of this overextension and we will not be worrying about illegal aliens. Could we rule the world? At one time, we did. The dollar was KING. Now it's weak. Time to real it in. Stop the hemmorhage. There is a country real close to us that concerns itself with other countries troubles and other peoples plights instead of its own. Cuba. They send money all over the world to help regimes that they agree with. Look at the plight of the Cubans. Think it can't happen here? Think again my friends, with no money, you have no friends. No friends, and you have serious troubles. Our allies will run like little girls if there is nothing to gain by remaining friends. I'm ramblng again. Steve |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: The verdict is in.... Post by Tom K on May 15th, 2006, 12:18pm on 05/15/06 at 11:52:47, imnotbub wrote:
With that statement I was trying to show everyone who thinks we are evil, should think again. A lot of people think that we bring sufferage and tyrany (sp) to the world and the truth is that we don't. We don't run over countries and conquer them. We could with our military power, but that isn't our style. There are far worse countries out there, that treat their people far worse. Rowanda, up until recently China, etc. Hell, for most of the posts on this thread alone, we would never hear from or see some of the posters, again if we didn't have our freedom. Do you think that the people that marched on the 1st would be able to get away with that in those countries, let alone Mexico? I think not. I think everyone needs to step back and think about that before they go bashing what we do have. Not trying to play the "Patriotic" card, but just reflecting on how much we have here. Yeah, you have to pay more for oil and meds, but hell you don't get shot in the head for speaking your mind...I kinda like the trade off. But hey, that's just me...YMMV |
||||||||||||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |