On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:49:11 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:10:00 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:58:40 -0400, Jim wrote:

nom=de=plume wrote:

Bummer about competition. Medicare and the VA systems are failures and
have
driven the ins. companies into the ground.

Obama just needs to pump lots of money into those systems and everything
will be fine.

Isn't it strange how the VA has improved so dramatically from when
Bush was president. Then, the VA medical system was an example of how
inefficient Bush was.


?? Vets actually have a guy in charge of the VA who cares about them. Did
you miss that news?

Eric Shinseki - He was fired by Bush for being honest.

http://www.va.gov/

Shinseki resigned. He realized he was beating his head against a brick
wall (named Rumsfeld). lol lol


He was fired. He disagreed with Rumsfeld and was forced out.

He disagreed with Rumsfeld and resigned, as he should have. He
couldn't help it that Rumsfeld was a dork.

He was not 'fired'.

Your lack of knowledge is being displayed.....again.

lol

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:56:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?

Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than
a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a
Liberal.

Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay
double for something that doesn't.

Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.

Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...


You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before you
make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of the
VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and
will
continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

Can you say, double standard...??


What's that? You're clear as mud.

lol lol

I guess I could take Plume fishing, or sit down and eat.. I just can't
wade through the numerous out of context and references to
intellectually dishonest rhetoric.. Sorry Plumeeeee. Just don't have the
time anymore.

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:57:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article
,
says...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:33:35 -0700, jps wrote:


These are bandaids for a seriously broken system. Tort
reform
could
help the situation but it's going to require it's own
process.
Tort reform is a red herring. There are enough states
that
have
passed
tort reform to get a good idea whether it will work or
not.
Medical
malpractice costs are too small a percentage, roughly 1-1
1/2%,
to
affect
health care costs dramatically. There have also been
many
studies
that
note the tort reform savings do not "trickle down" to the
consumer.
The fact is, there have been several great suggestions and
dozens of
admendments/bills introduced that would provide bipartisan
to
the
bill
and each and every one has been rejected out of hand.
Obama
clearly
promised sunshine on the process but so far all we have
seen
is
Chris
Dodd's door in Washington and the democrats hiding behind
it.
Just
like
Monday when Obama spent 2 1/2 hours with the MSM plotting
an
agenda.
More time by the way than he has spent with his commanders
in
Afghanistan... I don't hate Obama, just want to see him
take
his
finger
out of the wind and be a president.
Nope, that's not true. Both houses have listened to and
included
many
Rep.
amendments. Look it up.
Went through this with someone here about two months ago..
You
are
wrong, period..
Prove it.
Trust me, I am not known for fabrication here... I am not much
for
going
over hundreds of posts from the past...
Or, you could just cite some sources that back up your
assertion...
that
would save you going over hundreds of posts.
Not so fond of searching youtube either.. I have a bunch of pics
to
post
for some folks I was photographing at the track today... But if
I
get
time I will.. While you have time however, you can show me cites
of
bills or amendments the Dems haven't squashed...

Five seconds worth of google search, including typing: republican
amendments to health care bill (no quotes).

http://whitenoiseinsanity.com/2009/0...lth-care-bill/
From Slate:

That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67 came
from
Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers
that
Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation
may
be
that they offered so many so they could later claim-as they are
now,
in
fact, claiming-that most of their suggestions went unheeded.)
Only
197
amendments were passed in the end-36 from Democrats and 161 from
Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans
classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.

I hope this helps!

It sure does. It shows that democrats in congress, buy and large,
are
complacent on the issue and probably haven't even read it. They
will
rubber stamp anything that is sent to them by king obama. Even
obama
doesn't really give a **** as long as the bill has his name on
top.


It shows that neither of you can support your own arguments.

What argument? Arguing with you would be like arguing with a box of
rocks.


Then, why do you keep trying? What's dumber than a box of rocks?

A pen name?


Like Tosk?

Uh no.. Tosk is the name I have given to my computer.


A made up name... like a pen name. Got it.

lol

Tosk is not a made up name, Tosk is real... Just ask Tom LOL...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:10:45 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:46:34 -0400, H the K
wrote:

UPS and FEDEX don't work. Bummer.

UPS and FedEx are not competing directly with USPS. USPS gets a $100M
subsidy to be at your house 6 days a week anyway so the packages they
deliver are just bonus cash to them.

BTW Click'n'Ship (USPS) is a great service if you haven't tried it and
could actually hurt UPS and FedEx if the world figured it out.

UPS, FedEx and USPS are direct competitors for at least some of my
shipping needs. There are circumstances wherein each presents an
advantage over the other.

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:29:07 -0400, wrote:

I agree that if someone changes insurance, they should get a break on
pre-esisting conditions (perhaps bringing some money along from the
company they have been paying into) but if this is someone who made
the conscious choice NOT to buy insurance, then they get sick and
suddenly want it ... fkm. You spun the wheel and took your chances.
Sell all of that "stuff" you needed more than insurance.

Let's assume for a minute that your subject was working for Walmart or
some other outfit making $10/hr and had to chose between a deduction
for health insurance or having enough money for food and rent?

**** 'em?

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:56:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?

Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more
efficient
than
a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning
into a
Liberal.

Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.

Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.

Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...


You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you
make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of
the
VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and
will
continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

Can you say, double standard...??


What's that? You're clear as mud.

lol lol

I guess I could take Plume fishing, or sit down and eat.. I just can't
wade through the numerous out of context and references to
intellectually dishonest rhetoric.. Sorry Plumeeeee. Just don't have the
time anymore.


Please feel free to either plonk or ignore my posts!

--
Nom=de=Plume

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:49:11 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:10:00 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
m...
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:58:40 -0400, Jim wrote:

nom=de=plume wrote:

Bummer about competition. Medicare and the VA systems are failures
and
have
driven the ins. companies into the ground.

Obama just needs to pump lots of money into those systems and
everything
will be fine.

Isn't it strange how the VA has improved so dramatically from when
Bush was president. Then, the VA medical system was an example of how
inefficient Bush was.


?? Vets actually have a guy in charge of the VA who cares about them.
Did
you miss that news?

Eric Shinseki - He was fired by Bush for being honest.

http://www.va.gov/

Shinseki resigned. He realized he was beating his head against a brick
wall (named Rumsfeld). lol lol


He was fired. He disagreed with Rumsfeld and was forced out.

He disagreed with Rumsfeld and resigned, as he should have. He
couldn't help it that Rumsfeld was a dork.

He was not 'fired'.

Your lack of knowledge is being displayed.....again.

lol


He was, in all respects, fired for telling the truth.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:57:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in
message
...
In article
,
says...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:33:35 -0700, jps wrote:


These are bandaids for a seriously broken system.
Tort
reform
could
help the situation but it's going to require it's
own
process.
Tort reform is a red herring. There are enough
states
that
have
passed
tort reform to get a good idea whether it will work
or
not.
Medical
malpractice costs are too small a percentage, roughly
1-1
1/2%,
to
affect
health care costs dramatically. There have also been
many
studies
that
note the tort reform savings do not "trickle down" to
the
consumer.
The fact is, there have been several great suggestions
and
dozens of
admendments/bills introduced that would provide
bipartisan
to
the
bill
and each and every one has been rejected out of hand.
Obama
clearly
promised sunshine on the process but so far all we
have
seen
is
Chris
Dodd's door in Washington and the democrats hiding
behind
it.
Just
like
Monday when Obama spent 2 1/2 hours with the MSM
plotting
an
agenda.
More time by the way than he has spent with his
commanders
in
Afghanistan... I don't hate Obama, just want to see
him
take
his
finger
out of the wind and be a president.
Nope, that's not true. Both houses have listened to and
included
many
Rep.
amendments. Look it up.
Went through this with someone here about two months
ago..
You
are
wrong, period..
Prove it.
Trust me, I am not known for fabrication here... I am not
much
for
going
over hundreds of posts from the past...
Or, you could just cite some sources that back up your
assertion...
that
would save you going over hundreds of posts.
Not so fond of searching youtube either.. I have a bunch of
pics
to
post
for some folks I was photographing at the track today...
But if
I
get
time I will.. While you have time however, you can show me
cites
of
bills or amendments the Dems haven't squashed...

Five seconds worth of google search, including typing:
republican
amendments to health care bill (no quotes).

http://whitenoiseinsanity.com/2009/0...lth-care-bill/
From Slate:

That said, some context: Of the 788 amendments filed, 67
came
from
Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew
jeers
that
Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another
explanation
may
be
that they offered so many so they could later claim-as they
are
now,
in
fact, claiming-that most of their suggestions went unheeded.)
Only
197
amendments were passed in the end-36 from Democrats and 161
from
Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate
Republicans
classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.

I hope this helps!

It sure does. It shows that democrats in congress, buy and
large,
are
complacent on the issue and probably haven't even read it.
They
will
rubber stamp anything that is sent to them by king obama. Even
obama
doesn't really give a **** as long as the bill has his name on
top.


It shows that neither of you can support your own arguments.

What argument? Arguing with you would be like arguing with a box
of
rocks.


Then, why do you keep trying? What's dumber than a box of rocks?

A pen name?


Like Tosk?

Uh no.. Tosk is the name I have given to my computer.


A made up name... like a pen name. Got it.

lol

Tosk is not a made up name, Tosk is real... Just ask Tom LOL...


It's made up or it's an Albanian dialect. You pick.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:26:16 -0400, Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:56:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?

Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than
a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a
Liberal.

Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay
double for something that doesn't.

Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.

Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...


You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before you
make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of the
VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and
will
continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

Can you say, double standard...??


What's that? You're clear as mud.

lol lol

I guess I could take Plume fishing, or sit down and eat.. I just can't
wade through the numerous out of context and references to
intellectually dishonest rhetoric.. Sorry Plumeeeee. Just don't have the
time anymore.

Exactly. lol

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...

You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before you
make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of the
VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and
will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And they
are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is tossing at
them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad, as those 20%+
without a job are not spending. The housing sales increase, but the price
decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just accelerated the purchases
and seems as if they are looking at $500 million if fraud with the
program. Look for the Dow to pull back 10-15% shortly. Put stops on your
stocks.

Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said anything
revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are
created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services,
which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way
your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of
yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded
activities.