wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?

Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

Fred Dehl wrote:
The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong

Let's see, there are two possibilities here... 1- you are
dittohead drone who genuinely believes all this fascist
propaganda, but are new to this newsgroup and genuinely
believe this 2- you're a new sockpuppet ID for one of the
same old dittohead drones that's been proven wrong over &
over again

In either case, you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

Really? You mean like the way the Parks Service allows all
those poor people in their $100K motor homes to clog up
Yellowstone & Yosemite and all the other choice pieces of
taxpayer-owned real estate? Like the way the SEC is always
being careful to make sure that wealthy investors & stock
manipulators are not allowed to profit at the expense of
retirement funds? I could go on & on, but if you were ever
going to get the point, you already would have.

DSK

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
wrote in
oups.com:

they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor?

The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.


When the top rate was 70%, the top 1% of income earners paid 19% of all
taxes, at the current 36%? the top 1% pay 34% of all income taxes.

Once again, Kevin fails econ 101.

wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)


You don't know what you are talking about.

I was talking about the thesis/essay Kevin wrote and publish in rec.boats.
It sounded very profession, even if I didn't agree with the message. Don't
you agree?

; )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly
escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise"
ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial,
then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair
and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll
of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This
massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has
been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug
for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term
the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual
indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not
guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been
the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)


You don't know what you are talking about.



Tell us something we don't know :-)

I don't take the time to read fiction very often. :-)

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
. ..
I was talking about the thesis/essay Kevin wrote and publish in rec.boats.
It sounded very profession, even if I didn't agree with the message.
Don't
you agree?

; )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it
provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term
"smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts"
that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the
backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions,
with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the
squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health
system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want
it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured
persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly
escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care
system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but
all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average
American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise"
ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big
Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states
that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial,
then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair
and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that
are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their
corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of
its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll
of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This
massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused
massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has
been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA
folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that
they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of
corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug,
were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy
honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the
drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in
that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug
for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right
to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term
the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid,
Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual
indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office
and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not
guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been
the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found
guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that
you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to
them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the
truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid
Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought,
a
rare commodity within their ranks.