"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


If a doctor needs to make $1.5mm a year, fine. But that doctor should
earn that
kind of money because he or she is specially worth it, rather than
simply
because "Oh, well, that person's a doctor and that's the going market".

I'd rather a doctor get paid 1.5 mill, than some sports "star".

Dave



At no point in a person's life does he/she NEED to consult with a sports
star. Their incomes are whatever someone's silly enough to pay them. Not the
same as a doctor.

Make that your immagination. Because that's all you have to speculate
with right now.

Dave

Dave, Dave, Dave. Is there any hope for you at all?

Read the friggin speech. Just run a search engine for State fo the Union
Speech. In the last 40% of the speech he associates
SH with nuclear weapons at least a half dozen times. Don't take my word for it,
go look at the actual words of the POTUS. Read what he said, not what Rush
Limbaugh now tells you he said.

The implications are repeated, and deliberate. You think a reference to a
"mushroom cloud" isn't manipulative?

Given the choice, where do you think the brightest and best qualified
medical personell would choose to work? What questions would that raise
about the disparity in healthcare between the two? How long until the
left starts screaming about the unequal healthcare access for the

There is no doubt that somebody would try to make an issue of of the fact that
a Public Health Hospital (once common in this country) didn't deliver the same
level of customized, boutique medical attention available at "Sky's the Limit
Clinic."

Probably as good an excuse as any for the
hard hearted factions on the right to justify
doing *nothing*, (except allowing the private insurance companies they all hold
stock in to remain obscenely profitable and charge predatory rates).


I'd rather a doctor get paid 1.5 mill, than some sports "star".

Dave



I'd rather attract some people to the profession who were interested in the
practice of medicine for reasons not associated with being in the top .01% of
American wage earners.

In most communities, you can live in a very fine home, vacation a few times a
year, own a boat, a couple of cars, and put away plenty for an early and
comfortable retirement on no more than $300-400 thousand a year. Why a guy
thinks he needs five times that amount is beyond me.NOT THAT HE SHOULDN"T BE
FREE TO EARN IT IF HE CAN- but it shouldn't be considered normal compensation
for
a 9-5 flu and sniffles pediatrician.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
So where's the lie? Where's the "manipulation"? Hmmmmm?

You'll never know. You'd have to open your mind as well as your eyes to
see it.
:-)

Open minded, eh? That's the problem with liberals...they're so open-minded
that very often their brains fall out.

*Pretend* I'm open-minded...then answer my question:
"Where's the lie?"

No, it's not "manipulative". According to ours and the Brits' intelligence
services, Hussein has been trying to get his hands on nukes for years. MI6
has said that he tried to acquire uranium from Niger. CIA couldn't confirm
nor deny that specific report. However, the CIA's position was also that he
was actively trying to maintain and enlarge his stock of WMD's...including
nukes.

Unfortunately, when dealing with nukes, you can't wait for the mushroom
cloud as "proof" that the guy was up to no good.






"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Make that your immagination. Because that's all you have to speculate
with right now.

Dave

Dave, Dave, Dave. Is there any hope for you at all?

Read the friggin speech. Just run a search engine for State fo the Union
Speech. In the last 40% of the speech he associates
SH with nuclear weapons at least a half dozen times. Don't take my word
for it,
go look at the actual words of the POTUS. Read what he said, not what Rush
Limbaugh now tells you he said.

The implications are repeated, and deliberate. You think a reference to a
"mushroom cloud" isn't manipulative?

Israel knew how to handle these things, with a wink and a nod. Remember?

"NOYB" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
No, it's not "manipulative". According to ours and the Brits'
intelligence
services, Hussein has been trying to get his hands on nukes for years.
MI6
has said that he tried to acquire uranium from Niger. CIA couldn't
confirm
nor deny that specific report. However, the CIA's position was also that
he
was actively trying to maintain and enlarge his stock of WMD's...including
nukes.

Unfortunately, when dealing with nukes, you can't wait for the mushroom
cloud as "proof" that the guy was up to no good.






"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Make that your immagination. Because that's all you have to speculate
with right now.

Dave

Dave, Dave, Dave. Is there any hope for you at all?

Read the friggin speech. Just run a search engine for State fo the Union
Speech. In the last 40% of the speech he associates
SH with nuclear weapons at least a half dozen times. Don't take my word
for it,
go look at the actual words of the POTUS. Read what he said, not what
Rush
Limbaugh now tells you he said.

The implications are repeated, and deliberate. You think a reference to
a
"mushroom cloud" isn't manipulative?

Gould 0738 wrote:

Make that your immagination. Because that's all you have to speculate
with right now.

Dave

Dave, Dave, Dave. Is there any hope for you at all?

Read the friggin speech. Just run a search engine for State fo the Union
Speech. In the last 40% of the speech he associates
SH with nuclear weapons at least a half dozen times. Don't take my word for it,
go look at the actual words of the POTUS. Read what he said, not what Rush
Limbaugh now tells you he said.

The implications are repeated, and deliberate. You think a reference to a
"mushroom cloud" isn't manipulative?

I'm not arguing that he said those things. I'm arguing the point where
you automatically assume that they're false, without any evidence, other
than a few sound bytes to go on.

Dave

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
You go girl!!

Thanks, but I didn't realize I was posting here. I noticed the
crossposts to several groups a few minutes ago and just wanted to
come in and apologize for intruding on rec.boats.

If ya'll would like to continue the discussion, try
news:misc.news.internet.discuss .

Thanks and again, sorry for the intrusion.


--


Regards of the NW,
Kathy

On 17 Jul 2003 17:48:47 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

[Most snipped]


In the next paragragh, Bush again portrays SH as an emerging nuclear power. A
dictator "assembling the world's most dangerous weapons". He finishes with a
few sentences of cheap, graphic references to horrific torture procedures to
further demonize Hussein. ((Hussein probably is/was a real *******, I'm not
disputing that, only pointing out the techniques with which we were decived and
manipulated in the SOTU speech)

"The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already
used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead,
blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are
obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch.
International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the
torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid
on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If
this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)"


I didn't spend a lot of time reading your analysis of each paragraph, thank God.
I went to the bottom to see your line of 'reasoning' about the last paragraph.
You state, "In the next paragraph, Bush again portrays SH as an emerging nuclear
power." Where? Bush refers to, "...the world's most dangerous weapons...used
them on whole villages." This is not a reference to nuclear weapons, unless SH
used some nukes that no one knows of.

"...thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. ...torturing
children..." These are what you call, "...cheap, graphic references .. to
further demonize Hussein." He may have been demonizing SH, but not without
cause. SH was/is a demon. I cannot, for the life of me, see how you can put down
anyone for demonizing him. Did you feel manipulated? Do you honestly believe SH
was a good guy in disguise? If he really was a bad guy, then the pronouncement
of same is not 'manipulation'.

I'm glad Bush didn't wake up and say, "It's a sunny day in Washington, D.C.
today." All you folks would be searching for that one cloud to make him a liar.
Face it, you'd be much happier if you just wrote, "I hate Bush, I hate Bush, I
hate Bush, ..." ad infinitum.
John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

"Kathryn Simpson" wrote in message
...
Thanks, but I didn't realize I was posting here. I noticed the
crossposts to several groups a few minutes ago and just wanted to
come in and apologize for intruding on rec.boats.

If ya'll would like to continue the discussion, try
news:misc.news.internet.discuss .

Thanks and again, sorry for the intrusion.


Hmm. Interesting timing. :-)