|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/27/09 2:28 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:47:06 -0500, BAR wrote: In , says... I had health insurance that I paid for through my employer in the past. A claim was denied that should have been covered. My employer tossed up their hands as to say tough **** but I was locked in to paying premiums until the first of the year. I quit the employment. They lost in the long run, trust me. The free market is a farce in the insurance market. They all work in concert. I love the simple-minded elegance of "get the government out and everything will be ok." Yeah, right. Bend over. Farther. "Free market" is as phony as "Work will set you free". Feel good BS. Work has been very good to me so far. Zooooooooooooooooooooom! It really must suck to be you. Seeing the worst in everyone and everything. Your "so far" response was off the chart, bertie brain. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... The numbers you quoted don't match, and if it's off the 1040, then it's speculation. Where did Buffett say this? Line 37 is "after expenses" and most of the top 1% are in some kind of business. They manage to live off of "expenses" and don't have to report that as "income". I guess you have never filled out a schedule C. I guess you don't know much about me. In any case, the numbers you quoted weren't substantiated. Once I got off of a W-2 and started working on a 1099 I suddenly had lots of deductions I couldn't take before. If you have not heard Buffett's statement on taxes you haven't been paying attention., Google it. You posted it, thus it's up to you to justify it. Can you cite the source for this? Do you know a 20 something person who thinks health insurance is more important than a nice car? If you explain it to someone that age in a careful and complete way, then yes she'll get it. Have you actually tried to explain this to a young person? Most are ****ed they have to pay into Medicare and SS. If they don't get insurance at work, the idea of buying it is foreign to them. Yes. My niece gets it and she's 13. Otherwise it is just a medical brokerage. Nobody wants to buy insurance until they think their medical bills will be more than their premium. Nobody wants to buy car ins., but we're generally required by law to do that. ... But they have convinced us driving a car is not a right, it is just from the kindness of the government that we are allowed to drive. Why do you think it's a right? Is it written into the Constitution? It's a privilege that needs to be earned. What are you talking about, driving or health care. The Constitution is silent on both of them. Providing for the welfare of the general public is a basic goal of government. So is "the pursuit of happiness" (driving make me happy) but that is a goal, not a protected right. As long as that happiness doesn't intrude on others. And, yes, it's a goal. A good one. One that makes sense morally and fiscally. Your happiness in driving your car, isn't even close to the same thing. . on a policy of fiscal responsibility and that was a big part of the "contract" They may have bickered on TV but Clinton and Gingrich were actually a very effective team. Neither would have succeeded without the other. BS. Read up... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America From your article * require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress; * select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; * cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third; * limit the terms of all committee chairs; * ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; * require committee meetings to be open to the public; * require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase; * and implement a zero base-line budgeting process for the annual Federal Budget. None of which was implemented. It sounds like a formula for fiscal responsibility to me. Sounds like a Republican agenda. It wasn't that Perot was a serious candidate, it was the questions he made everyone else answer. No one answered anything. He was mostly ignored. I guess you didn't watch the debates Nothing came of anything he said. He was wrong on many things, and he faded away as most kook should. You notice that after that, the rules were changed to ensure another outsider could never get a seat at the table. If you are not anointed by the Remocrat/Depublican oligarchy, you can't enter the debates Ah, so it's back to conspiracy theories? Or, the more likely answer is that there hasn't been any viable third-party candidates. They aren't viable because nobody actually gets to hear them. The debates are completely off limits to anyone who wasn't propped up by the party aparachicks Ah... like Nader? I thought he decided the 2000 election. These days there is very little difference between the Ds and Rs. All you have to do is look at who gives them most of their money. Elections come down to abortion and guns. Nobody talks about banks, medical conglomerates or even the insurance companies in any real sense. Just look at the bills they are hashing out in conference right now. Wars keep on going on and rich people keep getting richer. Except until the last election. Thus, the Republicans were mostly voted out. Change is happening, albeit slowly and imperfectly, but it is happening. It would be training for a job that can't be exported and it would bend the health care cost curve. What else do you want? The high school dropout who was making $60,000 on the line putting the left front wheel on a Chevy is going to be in trouble, no matter what we do. Getting him a GED still won't get him UAW money. That is the 60 year old "union bubble" that globalism popped. Stop blaming the union for management's ill deeds. One immediate problem with it is that it'll never happen. You're going to force people into the school? Sure. How was the runaway wage spiral management's problem. If there was a problem, it was in not standing up to ridiculous demands ... but some companies did. If you don't know, I'm not going to be able to explain it to you in this place. Look it up, do some independent reading on the subject. They were Japanese and they built their factories in Tennessee where the union did not operate behind the power of a government gun..(AKA a "right to work state") Ask yourself, who sold the most cars last year? Cars are only one industry, but in any case, the Japanese economy is no where near as stable or viable as the US economy. I won't force people to go to school, the global economy will ... or we will be paying them welfare until the government goes broke. Well, hang on. Either it's the global economy or what? Our entire economy is pretty much linked to the global economy. So, "paying them welfare" (something we're not doing anyway), isn't outside the global econonmy. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 14:28:11 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:47:06 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... I had health insurance that I paid for through my employer in the past. A claim was denied that should have been covered. My employer tossed up their hands as to say tough **** but I was locked in to paying premiums until the first of the year. I quit the employment. They lost in the long run, trust me. The free market is a farce in the insurance market. They all work in concert. I love the simple-minded elegance of "get the government out and everything will be ok." Yeah, right. Bend over. Farther. "Free market" is as phony as "Work will set you free". Feel good BS. Work has been very good to me so far. Zooooooooooooooooooooom! It really must suck to be you. Seeing the worst in everyone and everything. Not at all. I'm very happy and content over all. I've spent too much time here today, but my wife has been off doing some other things and nothing of value on TV, I have many of my projects caught up, come here to poke some with a stick. I guess you're it. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:04:02 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: If you have not heard Buffett's statement on taxes you haven't been paying attention., Google it. You posted it, thus it's up to you to justify it. "Buffett says he pays 18 percent of his salary to the IRS while the rest of his staff pays nearly twice that - 33 percent, a lopsided equation that put Buffett in a Robin Hood frame of mind. " http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3869458&page=1 Which has nothing to do with the figures you quoted... -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:04:02 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: If you explain it to someone that age in a careful and complete way, then yes she'll get it. Have you actually tried to explain this to a young person? Most are ****ed they have to pay into Medicare and SS. If they don't get insurance at work, the idea of buying it is foreign to them. Yes. My niece gets it and she's 13. Let's see if she still remembers at 25, although she won't really have a choice.. Of course she will. Why wouldn't she if it's consistently reinforced. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:04:02 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: What are you talking about, driving or health care. The Constitution is silent on both of them. Providing for the welfare of the general public is a basic goal of government. So is "the pursuit of happiness" (driving make me happy) but that is a goal, not a protected right. As long as that happiness doesn't intrude on others. And, yes, it's a goal. A good one. One that makes sense morally and fiscally. Your happiness in driving your car, isn't even close to the same thing. Why not? What if driving my car was a condition of my employment. Which has little to do with "happiness" as described. The point is you lefties are real quick to quibble about my right to bear arms, parsing a comma in a passage that says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged" but you make up rights that don't exist. Give me a break. Suddenly, when you run out of logical argument, you claim it's the lefties taking your guns. I guess you forgot about the recent Supreme Court ruling. It just says "Promote the general welfare", it says nothing about "providing" it.. So, how is ignoring 40 million without healthcare promotion? For that matter, "privacy" is not guaranteed either. I suppose the founding fathers didn't foresee the internet and the wire tap. Sure... sounds like you're in favor of restricting women's rights. That's the typical argument. Your right to have a gun is ok, but a woman's right to have control over her own body isn't. Insurance covers Viagra. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:04:02 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It wasn't that Perot was a serious candidate, it was the questions he made everyone else answer. No one answered anything. He was mostly ignored. I guess you didn't watch the debates Nothing came of anything he said. He was wrong on many things, and he faded away as most kook should. That kook did get people thinking about the deficit for a few years. That is not a bad thing That kook didn't do much for informed debate because he was a kook. Same goes for Ron Paul. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:04:02 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: They were Japanese and they built their factories in Tennessee where the union did not operate behind the power of a government gun..(AKA a "right to work state") Ask yourself, who sold the most cars last year? Cars are only one industry, but in any case, the Japanese economy is no where near as stable or viable as the US economy. The Japanese car business in the US is doing just fine tho and that was my point. If you work for Honda or Toyota in Tennessee you are still working. A UAW worker in the rust belt ... not so much. So far... http://www.marke****ch.com/story/toy...decades-report -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. Read up on how government saves on health care. Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : “Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available” (Frogue et al, 2001) If you have the money, no problem with your family paying for extraordinary means to keep you alive. Even in a vegetative state. But when it comes to insurance, a 90 year old with a life expectancy of 6 months, who has no idea of who he is or where he is, does not need the rest of us to supply him extraordinary healthcare. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"Loogypicker" wrote in message ... On Dec 26, 4:21 pm, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John wrote in message . .. On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. Read up on how government saves on health care. Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : �Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available� (Frogue et al, 2001) obama has not yet appointed a god czar. We are anxioully awaiting his choice.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey, Ronnie Raygun had a clairavoyant czar so why in hell not? Mrs. Raygun had the czar, not ronnie. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"Loogypicker" wrote in message ... On Dec 26, 2:47 pm, "Bill McKee" wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John H wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yep, and that's just because it's Obama's plan. If GWB had of done the same (as with counseling sick vets) John would have uttered nary a word. Huh? Where is it Obama's plan? Is my plan! |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Jim wrote:
Rob wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace I think Mr. Plume has a woodie for you. I think he has a woodie for someone. I hope it's not me! |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 27, 10:18 am, wrote: On 12/27/09 10:15 AM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 27, 10:02 am, I am wrote: In articled02777de-b898-427e-a0a1- , says.... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? Pfffftttt, are you gonna' stop the "everything is Rush and Hannity" bull****?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You know what, Scotty? Go right to **** ahead. Do just like John, make yourself look like an unhinged, narrow minded fool. Actually, all three of you are unhinged, narrow-minded fools, along with BAR, the Krueger of the day, Canuck, the unemployed inventor of the florida panhandle, and a few others. You and JustHate, though, still share the trophy of dumbest posters in rec.boats.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - See you this spring! WAFA doesn't *read* my posts. I forgot, he reads *every* post. Carry on... |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? He can't help it. He and Rob are truly losers. Rob is obnoxious, so I've decided to just ignore his posts.. call it a New Year resolution. Rob had nothing to do with this post. Kill file and run is so typical of those who can't debate. Peace I'm going to respond to this one post, then you can go do your own thing. You've consistently tried to put me down, especially commenting about my looks as though that's some major point you're trying to make, spout completely regurgitate right-wing crap, and seem to be incapable of carrying on a civil discussion. I'm a fairly tolerant person, and I've tried to humor you, to be nice, and I hoped you'd get the message and start acting like an adult. My mistake. You're just like Jim, if not the same person, someone incapable of acting older than your shoe size. Peace yourself. You can have the last word, and I won't be responding going forward. Oh, and you're a jerk. As Donnie would say... Golly, Harry, what do I do now? **** off, Ms/Mr. Average. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/27/09 8:09 PM, Rob wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 27, 10:18 am, wrote: On 12/27/09 10:15 AM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 27, 10:02 am, I am wrote: In articled02777de-b898-427e-a0a1- , says.... On Dec 25, 7:14 pm, John wrote: ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it s not. " Another - "Because Dartmouth s analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus s would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth s approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H John, couldn't you, at least during the holidays stop your stupid and inane everything Obama is bad bull****? Pfffftttt, are you gonna' stop the "everything is Rush and Hannity" bull****?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You know what, Scotty? Go right to **** ahead. Do just like John, make yourself look like an unhinged, narrow minded fool. Actually, all three of you are unhinged, narrow-minded fools, along with BAR, the Krueger of the day, Canuck, the unemployed inventor of the florida panhandle, and a few others. You and JustHate, though, still share the trophy of dumbest posters in rec.boats.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - See you this spring! WAFA doesn't *read* my posts. I forgot, he reads *every* post. Carry on... Naw. I never read "every" post, but I do have my filters off for the moment, and I have seen a few of your recent posts. You're still the same undereducated, ill-mannered, foul litte **** you've always been. You wanted to know why you weren't getting debated? Easy answer: who wants to discuss matters with a rotting pile of **** like you? |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month? So who gets to play god? I am sure your health care would be cheaper if you were to sign a binding orrevokable document that says you will never require an operation over $100K and they are under no obligation to provided it. You cannot sue, whine, bitch, contemplate or whatever when your term is up. This is irrevocable in your lifetime. Don't worry, Americans just subscribed to this. Read up on how government saves on health care. Old farts looking for a free lunch, guess what, you might find you are too old to qualify for the by-pass or whatever.... http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/Canada.pdf A lot of truth under this title: Rationing : “Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available” (Frogue et al, 2001) If you have the money, no problem with your family paying for extraordinary means to keep you alive. Even in a vegetative state. But when it comes to insurance, a 90 year old with a life expectancy of 6 months, who has no idea of who he is or where he is, does not need the rest of us to supply him extraordinary healthcare. I certainly agree! That's one reason why we should allow docs to receive pay for end-of-life counseling to families. It was stripped out of the bill by the conservatives. Why? It was totally fiscally responsible. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 27/12/2009 12:44 PM, Harry wrote:
If those hillbillies in japan can build that car for $20,000, it's because they have a national health care system that spreads its cost over the entire country, and not the manufacturer of that car. Lets examine that in more detail. Japanese can make an auto for $20,000 in Japan and has health care. Probably the same class, style, power would have to be at least $35,000 at GM and be less reliable, and that doesn't include the 2009 $60,000 per auto bailout. So what else is wrong. First, when a Japanese company screws up, management is expected to fix it immediately or resign immediately. No big fat pensions with severences either, just gone. It is the only honorable thing he can do, other than to commit suicide. Boards and owners don't like excuses. They like solid realistic well executed plans. Start fouling up here and your next job is cleaning the toilets. Which is where most Japanese executives started. None of this float to the top like scum. Workers take individual responsibility for the health of their company, which includes the quality and cost of their work. Customer satisfaction. If something is wrong with their work and the customer finds it, they will learn about it. If the employee doesn't straighten up, the fedearation (union) might fire them first as the federation knows screwing around will cost their membership. Or the possibility of some after work corrections activity. Companies in Japan make life long commitments to employees. Honor and integrity mater. None of this hit 50 and lay you off to duck pension costs. Hell, a manager there would find himself gone for trying that BS. Get caught fixing the books, maybe 2 years later you quietly disappear and your family in disgrase can't get jobs. A whole different culture, much more defined social behavior where honor and integrity mater more than ruthlessness and corruption. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
|
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 16:08:56 -0500, RLM wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 12:20 AM, Steve B wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:23:51 -0800, "Steve B" wrote: "John wrote in message ... ...Change is coming! The NYTimes is giving seniors a Christmas present to ponder. http://tinyurl.com/yl9vumo "Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director and a disciple of the Dartmouth data, has noted. "We can no longer afford an overall health care system in which the thought is more is always better, because it's not."" Another - "Because Dartmouth's analysis focuses solely on patients who have died, a case like Mr. Putrus's would not show up in its data. That is why critics say Dartmouth's approach takes an overly pessimistic view of medicine: if you consider only the patients who die, there is really no way to know whether it makes sense to spend more on one case than another." A preview of things to come? -- Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year! John H If they were serious about saving money, wouldn't they just all get on a conference call instead of flying their jets to Denmark to schmooze around? Barry has some expensive tastes, and so does Michelle. Steve Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. Stevie is fresh meat to Usenet. Note how he is so impolite as to change the whole meaning of the thread without missing a beat or changing the subject line. From dead patients to jets to Denmark in the blink of an eye. He wasn't familiar with the high jacking of a thread until now and showed no style at it either. I would say John took one to the groin. My point was made with my post. Looks like the Obama 'death panels' are here after all, doesn't it? Nice attempt to hijack though! WADS! -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/28/09 8:25 AM, John H wrote:
Looks like the Obama 'death panels' are here after all, doesn't it? Your relatives called...they want to know where to sign you up for a death panel visit. Everyone is chipping in... |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
On 12/28/09 8:25 AM, John H wrote: Looks like the Obama 'death panels' are here after all, doesn't it? Your relatives called...they want to know where to sign you up for a death panel visit. Everyone is chipping in... My god, you are a funny duck. What is this obsession with Herring. Does he give you a woodie? -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 27, 7:24*pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message ... On Dec 26, 2:47 pm, "Bill McKee" wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John H wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die...." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. Putrus was referred to U.C.L.A. this year to be evaluated for a heart transplant. Some other medical centers might have considered Mr. Putrus too old for the surgery. But U.C.L.A.'s attitude was "let's see what we can do for him," said his physician there, Dr. Tamara Horwich. Indeed, Mr. Putrus recalled, Dr. Horwich and her colleagues "did every test." They changed his medicines to reduce the amount of water he was retaining. They even removed some teeth that could be a potential source of infection. His condition improved so much that more than six months later, Mr. Putrus has remained out of the hospital and is no longer considered in active need of a transplant. " -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill Hell of a difference between 71 and 85 or 90 years old. A 94 year old with congestive heart failure and you are going to spend a 100k or so to prolong life a month?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yep, and that's just because it's Obama's plan. If GWB had of done the same (as with counseling sick vets) John would have uttered nary a word. Huh? *Where is it Obama's plan? *Is my plan!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Counseling has been in the plan for a very long time. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 27, 7:22*pm, "Bill McKee" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message ... On Dec 26, 4:21 pm, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: On 26/12/2009 12:47 PM, Bill McKee wrote: "John wrote in message . .. On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:44:40 -0500, Gene wrote: On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:56:19 -0500, John wrote: However, I believe you should have the choice. What choice? Dying with dignity or being kept alive, with extraordinary means, in a persistent vegetative state? Indefinitely? And, there's always the chance that the extra little amount of medical care would add another ten fruitful years to your life. I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. Let's recap, per your link: ".... has earned a reputation as a place where doctors will go to virtually any length and expense to try to save a patient's life. " This sounds great until you have to admit that an insurance policy isn't an unlimited blank check. Sooner or later, whoever is "the deep pockets" is going to start "rationing health care." But let's get real and evaluate the next sentence..... "If you come into this hospital, we're not going to let you die....." Holy Crap, what incredible impertinence! That is just NOT their decision. But wait, if you are in a persistent vegetative state, and they keep your heart beating by extraordinary means..... uh..... you haven't "died" yet..... right? At least not until the money runs out and they have to start rationing...... trust me.... there is NO FREE LUNCH.... and this has NOTHING to do with humanitarian feelings toward you.... this is a cold, hard, business decision..... You missed this: "Take the case of Salah Putrus, who at age 71 had a long history of heart failure. After repeated visits to his local hospital near Burbank, Calif., Mr. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:28:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 14:21:20 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: So is "the pursuit of happiness" (driving make me happy) but that is a goal, not a protected right. As long as that happiness doesn't intrude on others. And, yes, it's a goal. A good one. One that makes sense morally and fiscally. Your happiness in driving your car, isn't even close to the same thing. Why not? What if driving my car was a condition of my employment. Which has little to do with "happiness" as described. Keeping my job would make me happy but happiness should include driving because you like to drive.. The point is you lefties are real quick to quibble about my right to bear arms, parsing a comma in a passage that says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged" but you make up rights that don't exist. Give me a break. Suddenly, when you run out of logical argument, you claim it's the lefties taking your guns. I guess you forgot about the recent Supreme Court ruling. I also know the DC government is defying that ruling. It's being litigated. Are you claiming that you don't think the courts will uphold a Supreme Court ruling? What is being litigated is the DC government's failure to follow the Heller ruling. The courts have already made the ruling, the DC government is ignoring it. You seem to think Wikipedia is the I-Ching, read this,particularly the last page. It is what is happening in DC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquiescence It just says "Promote the general welfare", it says nothing about "providing" it.. So, how is ignoring 40 million without healthcare promotion? They are not ignored. If they are really poor they get medicaid and the current bills are extending that to 133?% or 150% of the federally defined poverty level. And what about the people who are working who aren't offered coverage and who can't afford it on their own?????? Car or medical insurance ;-) In real life the poverty level is set high enough where most of the people you are talking about qualify for medicaid. Perhaps some people just need to reevaluate their priorities. One of the points made in the legislation is a way to bring down the cost is to make everyone buy insurance, whether they think they can afford it or not. For that matter, "privacy" is not guaranteed either. I suppose the founding fathers didn't foresee the internet and the wire tap. Sure... sounds like you're in favor of restricting women's rights. That's the typical argument. Your right to have a gun is ok, but a woman's right to have control over her own body isn't. Insurance covers Viagra. You would be wrong, I am pro choice In that case, what's your problem with regulating the ownership of guns? Are you afraid Obama will knock on your door? This is not about me particularly but the fear is not that Obama will knock on your door, they are afraid of a BATF sniper shooting their unarmed wife who was carrying a deadly baby. (Randy Weaver) Ruby Ridge... Do you think it's at all possible that human beings make mistakes? Do you seriously believe it's a conspiracy? This was all over loaning a BATF informant a hacksaw and then showing him how to use it. In case you think this was justifiable,. this is what the review board says "The Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility Ruby Ridge Task Force Report (10 June 1994) stated in section I. Executive Summary subhead B. Significant Findings that the second shot did not satisfy constitutional standards for legal use of deadly force. That review also found the lack of a request to surrender was "inexcusable", since Harris and the two Weavers were running for cover without returning fire and were not an imminent threat." We don't fear government per se, it is government run amok that troubles us. The same ones you gripe about when the NSA is sniffing packets from your Email but nobody died from a government wiretap. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote: On Dec 28, 1:09*pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983 @e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place. It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative. Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me. So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 28, 11:11*am, Harry wrote:
On 12/28/09 11:05 AM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am wrote: In , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. *It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? *I understand they ate a lot of caviar. *That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller...... |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 28, 11:11 am, wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 28, 3:22*pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983 @e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place. It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative. Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me. So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU. -- John H Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to Loogy"? Where did I state that? "Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents." |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 11:11 am, wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. The radon gas in your celler hole is eating your brain. -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Dec 28, 2:58*pm, Harry wrote:
On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 11:11 am, *wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. Herr Krause. You sound jealous. You may have a boat, and you may have a degree, but it seems you have less friends than those you mentioned. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On 12/28/09 5:32 PM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Dec 28, 2:58 pm, wrote: On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 11:11 am, wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. Herr Krause. You sound jealous. You may have a boat, and you may have a degree, but it seems you have less friends than those you mentioned. i'm not looking for "friendships" with on-line right-wing trashmen who conceal their identities or on-line left-wing morons like loogie. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote: On Dec 28, 3:22*pm, John H wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983 @e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place. It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative. Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me. So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU. -- John H Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to Loogy"? Where did I state that? "Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents." I said this: "Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate." Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry. -- John H "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Churchill |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
On 12/28/09 5:32 PM, TopBassDog wrote: On Dec 28, 2:58 pm, wrote: On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 11:11 am, wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. Herr Krause. You sound jealous. You may have a boat, and you may have a degree, but it seems you have less friends than those you mentioned. i'm not looking for "friendships" with on-line right-wing trashmen who conceal their identities or on-line left-wing morons like loogie. Bah humbug. Friends. Who needs them. I can count my friends on 1 finger and that friendship is on shaky ground and she might even evict me from that stinking basement apartment. Anybody got a room to rent? -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983 @e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place. It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative. Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me. So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU. -- John H Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to Loogy"? Where did I state that? "Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents." I said this: "Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate." Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry. Give it up, ****-for-brains. You make up more political crap than almost any poster here. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
Harry wrote: On 12/28/09 5:32 PM, TopBassDog wrote: On Dec 28, 2:58 pm, wrote: On 12/28/09 3:54 PM, Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 11:11 am, wrote: You, loogy, are an out an out lie. You don't have a boat, you don't have a college degree, you aren't a licensed engineer. Most likely, you are a shut-in with a miserable little existence. You are the Atlanta counterpart of your good buddy justhate.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This from the basement dweller... Just as we suspected...you have no boat, no degree, no engineering license. Just like your buddy justhate. Herr Krause. You sound jealous. You may have a boat, and you may have a degree, but it seems you have less friends than those you mentioned. i'm not looking for "friendships" with on-line right-wing trashmen who conceal their identities or on-line left-wing morons like loogie. Bah humbug. Friends. Who needs them. I can count my friends on 1 finger and that friendship is on shaky ground and she might even evict me from that stinking basement apartment. Anybody got a room to rent? Flajim has already outed himself as the Harry ID Spoofer. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:19:00 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: This is not about me particularly but the fear is not that Obama will knock on your door, they are afraid of a BATF sniper shooting their unarmed wife who was carrying a deadly baby. (Randy Weaver) Ruby Ridge... Do you think it's at all possible that human beings make mistakes? Do you seriously believe it's a conspiracy? It is not a conspiracy, just a warning of what happens when you let the government get out of control. The "government" wasn't out of control. Perhaps a small group of people at most. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
Harry wrote:
John H wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote: On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote: In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983 @e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says... On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry wrote: Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as Germany so nobody had to share a ride. Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done. I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was spent on that extravaganza. BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters. I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too. Nothing too good for our tax dollars. Steve Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time? Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled higher than republican/conservative b.s. I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about? Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate. I think this is the correct loogic. "Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either. Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place. It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative. Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me. So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU. -- John H Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to Loogy"? Where did I state that? "Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents." I said this: "Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to emulate." Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry. Give it up, ****-for-brains. You make up more political crap than almost any poster here. Whomever this spoofer is, he is loosing it. He has gone over the edge. |
Merry Christmas Seniors...
wrote in message
... On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:39:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Ruby Ridge... Do you think it's at all possible that human beings make mistakes? Do you seriously believe it's a conspiracy? It is not a conspiracy, just a warning of what happens when you let the government get out of control. The "government" wasn't out of control. Perhaps a small group of people at most. The government, in this case, was BATF and FBI HRT and those people were clearly out of control.They were confusing themselves with something they saw in a Rambo movie. The only response they were capable of was a military assault when the proper response was two guys in a white Crown Vic and wrinkled suits. This peaked in Waco but it really didn't get proper scrutiny until that picture showed an agent pointing a machine gun at Elian Gonzoles. Come on... the agent wasn't point at the kid. This is just so much hokum. In both RR and Waco, there were lots and lots of guns on the premises. -- Nom=de=Plume |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com