I threw on the Devil's advocate hat and mulled this one over.

Did the Socilists have a valid point when they defended Klinton with the "he only lied about sex" arguement.

Generally, you knew what to expect from Klinton on an issue. You probably didn't like it, but you at least knew what to expect.

"Dubya" [a term that is never more fitting especially in light of his last speech] has lied about his position on several major issues; where he shows right [read: promise, vows, pledges] and then runs left after "showing right" got him what he wanted.

Is it better to have a known than an unknown?

Is the "unknown" NOW a Known ?

An advocate is a lawyer. Why would anyone want to be the devil's lawyer?? He already has enough lawyers. He doesn't need any more. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

I don't much care for Bush. I have been voting the lesser of 2 evils the last few elections. I would vote against him if only the other candidate wasn't so pathetic. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

My firearms are a major issue to me and with the Republicans in Washington we are much better off. The supreme court is due for many new appointments and the lower courts federal courts are important as well.

When Clinton got in one of the first things to happen was an IRS audit of the NRA!

I don't like some of the things that Bush has done. The no child left behind act is a disaster for our children and future. His failure to control illegal "immagrants" is another.

I do like the man personally however. This is what political parties are for. It's to win and get the most you can of what's good. When Perot ran it killed us even though he had a point or two.

If firearms are very important to you it's quite clear that the Repubican Party is the best choice of the two.

I guess I'l have to ask your definition of "better off"

Seems lately like the choice between getting raped quickly or slowly to me.

Either way, your still raped.

You got that right RAM!

Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place; a vote for President Bush this fall is as good as a vote for Hillary next time around. If Kerry wins, at least he MIGHT offer that woman a modicum of resistance in '08...

More than ever, this fall looks like a "lesser of two evils" election.

Combo

B end
O ver
H ere
I t
C omes
A gain
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

"Dubya" [a term that is never more fitting especially in light of his last speech] has lied about his position on several major issues; where he shows right [read: promise, vows, pledges] and then runs left after "showing right" got him what he wanted.


RAM what lies. Be specific I'm really tired of these vagarious accusations. We can get that from the media and the liberals .
If he has lied lets hear the lie and see if the charge holds water.
So far Bush has stuck to his guns and put his relection in danger. But still he pushes forward with his vision. The way has been rocky to say the least ,but he has not retreated one inch. He does not wake every morning and put his finger in the wind to keep his poll number high. It's so fashionable to hate Bush that many have turned off the thinking caps and are just rolling with the flow. Disagreeing with him is fine I do it all the time. But to bring charges against him without proof is the work of the left and their fashion whores.
Pat

Yeah, what Hooker said. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

BTW Hooker, be prepared for much 'cut & paste' rebuttal, taken from liberal news sources...

BW,

I am surprise anyone believes the reporters. And yet it happens. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Hooker;

Your fairly new here, so perhaps you missed the post, but for a while here there was a post tallying and listing "W"'s lies/ broken promises.


One of his lies is on the board now. titled "Total Soverignty" but apparently you missed that one.

Another is CFR. Lie, dereliction of duty, violation of oath of office

Another was his stand against "nation building" if he didn't break that one with Iraq, he certainly did in Haiti (so will call this just one lie, kinda like lie #3 a & b if that suits you)

His flip flop on the AWB would be a fourth

His wanting to legalize crimaliens after promising to stem the flow of illegals is a fifth

His reaffirmation to tightening the boarders after 9/11 and doing nothing could be a sixth.

BTW;

How many lies/broken promises do you require to prove a liar a liar?

Shall I keep listing??

Boy, ain't it easy to sit back in your armchair and criticize. Much harder to run a country, though.

I'll be gladly voting for Dubya again.

You forgot to list "weapons of mass destruction" and "the British Inteligence said" and "imminate danger" that some have been calling lies that were not. miles

None of the political claptrap expressed on this site, or any of the other sites that I frequent, means anything in the scheme of things. I am weary of all of the arguments I have heard and read and none of this sh[i][/i]it means anything. All that matters is what a voter does in the election booth and I doubt that what is stated here will change how a voter will actually vote.



As for me, I believe the most important duty our Federal Government has is to protect Americans and our way of life. I also believe that America is an empire, and in order to ensure our national interests, we must be prepared to eliminate any threat to our society, wherever it may appear, anywhere in the world.



This is exactly what our present government set out to do, but in my estimation, has been sidetracked from accomplishing. As a free society, we no longer seem to be directed by what is in our national interest, we are ruled by the media. The media is made up of businesses that are driven by the same motives as any other business, the need to make a profit. Our interests or the need to report the truth, are secondary, it they exist at all.



How many other countries in the world have a free and unfettered press that can openly criticize government policy as we have here? In our society, does that ability somehow make the media more honest in their portrayal of the news than the government they seem hellbent on destroying?



Another recent topic here had to do with the freedom that Americans enjoy to express their political free-will and to protest against the government. That's fine, but I don't ever recall any large segment of the population demonstrating in support of any of my beliefs or engaging in civil disobedience in support of my political agenda.



America today, is not ruled by the majority. The minority fringe elements of our society have found new ways to achieve political power that far outweigh their representation.

The mass media is not a "free and open press" any longer (if in fact it ever was). Deregulation of the communication industry has resulted in a mass media that does what is best for their corporate masters' bottom lines. For instance, ABC is owned by the Disney Corporation. Do you think that you'll ever actually see an investigative report by an ABC affiliate regarding the negative environmental impacts that Disneyworld has had on the Florida Everglades? I'm a fisherman and I damn well want to know. NBC is owned by General Electric. I'm not holding my breath waiting for an NBC affiliate to do an expose on the graft and corruption involved with GE's government contracts for cleanup of nuclear waste sites. I hunt and fish near those sites so it means something to me.

The point is, our forefathers new the importance of a free and independant press. I think that they would be appalled at the current state of the press in our country. There are no credible journalists left in the Big 4 (ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX), only a pack of opinion-spouting whores who represent the bottom-line interests of their corporate owners. Those interests are only rarely in line with what is good for the general public.

The internet is the last bastion of open communications in this country (and the world). Without the free exchange of ideas that boards like this represent, we'd be stuck with the pap that passes for daily news in the mass media outlets. The unregulated and open exchange of information by common folks like you and I is the only defense that remains against the special interests who now own the media.

olywa, that sounds nice, but in my experience, no one changes their mind based upon what is posted on the internet. Whether it's the information we seek or the information we agree with, it just tends to reinforce our already held positions.



Those people who don't know or who don't have firm convictions also don't care one way or the other. Those are the people who currently swing the elections and who the major political parties are trying to appeal to. It's a crying shame that idiots will determine our political future.

Quite often that is true. However, what passes for news and journalism these days is quite often only part of the story. The savvy individual pro-actively seeks out the rest of the story. An open and unregulated internet makes this a 'do-able' proposition. How often do you find yourself thinking, "Now why in hell isn't anyone in the media talking about this?"

If one cares about RTKBA and the moral issues of the day; abortion, homosexuality, porn etc, the only choice is GW Bush. I don't believe that he has lied, and he has stood by his guns in the area of terrorism.

No man is perfect, but considering who is available today, GWB is hands down the best choice.

Jerry

I ask those who criticize tell me specificaly what you would do better - I can call Chevy every day of the week to tell them the monte carlo sucks but until i offer a suggestion, POSITIVE CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK with a detailed plan as to make it better - guess what I'll be ignored.



Just as those who can only offer problems but no solutions.

"Boy, ain't it easy to sit back in your armchair and criticize. Much harder to run a country, though."
-----------------------------------------------------

I have bashed Bush a time or two, and in the back of my mind your thought quoted above has haunted my conscience. Am I right in doing this?

It has worked out in my conscience like this; as a blue collar guy from a blue collar family the son of a Gaudalcanal vet dad, us and ours all took an oath going way way back- to defend the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. All of us here as vets did that. Some of us here have some scars to show and a few dead friends in the ground or a cousin in a wheel chair or two, who never walked again... So when it comes time for us slugs from the trenches to put up or shut up generally we do it. We do our duty as boring or as exciting as it may be we do it. Life or death we do it. We defend a document, and pay that price at the cost of risking our lives and limbs. No college boy deferrments- do your duty son...

But Dubya said as he signed CFR, " it ain't constitutional but I'll sign it..." assuming the court would shoot it down??????

Horse crap. I might not be able to administer a large corporation but I know when to go to fist city and risk everything win or lose...

I have NO respect for college boy, silver spoon in his mouth, fight for the chamber of commerce only, George W Bush. RAM is correct. He has lied over and over again and is NOT a conservative. He had rolled over on every major conservative issue so far, and promises to roll over on more if given the chance, AWB being one example.

I am shocked and flabergasted that this great and good nation can only produce these two pathetic, weak, cowardly, ignorant and selfish men for president. It disgusts me, but I am beginning to think maybe we as a selfish wicked people deserve these sorts.

Teal;

I submit that the platform of the Constitution Party is a starting point for a solution.

Make a radical commitment to get back to the Constitution. Pare back Fed government to its very tightly defined parameters. Close down all the extra-curricular departments like the NEA and education and on and on it goes. Strip the feds of their tyrannical power and get it back in the hands of the states.

I agree its a good start - we need to get people like that in the local, state and then the federal govts. Just that there are a lot of internet complainers yet they aren't helping any. You know the old saying "if you aren't part of the solution your part of the problem"

Firearms is the most important thing to you? That's insane. We have a lot more pressing matters. How about health care? You gonna be able to afford coverage with your devalued pension and no social security? There's one for you. Social Security is the sacred cow that's got mad cow desease. Our deficit spending will mean less to deal with the baby boomers, and only 20% of pensions have any health care benefits at all. And what about terrorism? Sad fact is, it ain't gonna get any better. Anybody saying firearms is the most important issue needs to get some education, and then go to church because they are surely lacking a soul. "Long as I got my guns, don't make no differnce to me if we got elderly eatin' dogfood, a war we can't afford, terroists in the subway, and a bankrupt education system." Ideas like that make me question whether gun control isn't the smart thing in some cases.

Muleskinner Are you suggesting the schools need more money? Get a grip!! I let someone else say something about the other things.

Only moraly!

Firearms are important cuz with out them we can lose the rest rather easily. I for one do not expect the govt to havd me everything. I will NOT even entertain the thought that social(ism) security will even be an option.

Remember the ant who planned for the future while the grasshopper played. Thats me.

The govt is not there to whipe your butt and tell you how nice you are. The fact that heathcare is going down, SS is going down - rather that standing there cryin bout it prepare! Save $ on the side- put yourself in the best physical shape you can.

You can not plann for everything but there is no reason to pinn your hopes on someone else to do the work for you.

We throw a TON of $$ at our educational system jet it is not producing- why cuz teachers have to take care of the child rearing that should be done at home- cuz the teachers union doesn't want changes in the way things are done- remember they got fat off the old system.

Everyone standing around crying that life isn't perfect- Welcome to the real world!!!! DEAL WITH IT.

end rant.

ROGER ALL that Sir!

Agreed!

Muleskinner - Good points.

Where in the Constituion does it garantee healthcare?Where does it guarantee Social Security? Where does it guarantee that you won't have to eat dog food?In my opinion,it's the older generation that got us in this mess buy voting for all of this big government crap,and me and my kids are going to have to foot the bill.I'll never vote for a dem,EVER,they are SOCIALISTS,and socialism is the reason that the country is the way it is today,PERIOD!!!!Get pissed if you want to about this post,but I think this the truth.

Neither party is offering a Teddy Roosevelt. The real giants all served before or during WWII.
We've learned that having the same party in control of both houses of Congress and the White House means Republicans spend like a bunch of drunken Democrats, only on their pet pork.
Our "conservative" president has yet to veto a single spending bill.
He's brought us the Sec. Against Agriculture, Sec. Against the Interior, Sec. Against Veterans, and the Sec. Against Labor.
I'm a wage earner, I own a small farm, I'm interested in conservation, and I'm a vet.
I'm thinking that a political balance of power in Washington requires different parties in the various branches of our government.

RAM first let me tell you I enjoyed your post on the 13th amend. I've shared it with my friends off line it's made for some interesting decussions.
I'll have to get back to you on some of the others but I'll try to address the last two accusations.
{His wanting to legalize crimaliens after promising to stem the flow of illegals is a fifth}
He has not laid out this plan of action. I must admit on the surface this looks bad and at first I was totaly against it . But I can see where this may have divedends that will be benfical. If the program is structured properly. As a work program but not as amnesty program. I do not support rewarding poeple for braking laws. Since this plan as of yet is not written in stone, We as a poeple with a voice should be contacting our Reps. and pressuring them to structure this to help control entry in to the US by foreign nationals and at same time make it easier for those who wish to abide our laws to gain entry for work purposes.And above all protect American jobs and workers. Some of us see a lie I see opportunity to help fix a problem. This does not have to be a negative.
{His reaffirmation to tightening the boarders after 9/11 and doing nothing could be a sixth}
Let me say unfulfilled promisses are not not lies. This could be linked to the accusation above. I think we have a duty to pressure our leaders to make this thing work for us.I was taught that to critisize without helping is prejudice and prejudice is hate for it's own sake. It is easy to point out faults. But we should be pointing the way to make things right.
I'll have to gather my thoughts on these other 4 items and will get back to you.
Pat

A little support for teal325:

Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?

I do support teal and most of his ideas. I do not believe that Govt. should be all things to all people. It seems to me that the health care system got messed up when the Feds got involved. When I was young, we never had much money, but we always got to go to the Dr. if we needed to. When Medicare and free care for the poor came along the prices just going up. When the Govt. will pay a set ammt. to the Dr., then he wants that much from all. The problem with that is, the Govt. has more money that the average Joe and less sense about how to spend it. miles

Barak my friend, that says it all Sir.

Usually I disagree with him in some way or another, but he's right about firearms being the most important political issue today.


I'd agree with you there, but then of course I believe the government shouldn't be anything to anybody, except an unpleasant memory, a bad example, and a sober history lesson--like slavery, for instance. In fact, a lot like slavery.


Amen. On the other hand, everything gets messed up when the Feds get involved, so it shouldn't have been much of a surprise.


Of course, the government doesn't have any money of its own--only that which it was able to extort from others with the threat of force.

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA)
Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
4.) That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust Fund" rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to "put away," you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent "Trust" fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically-controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. The
Democratic Party gave these payments to the immigrants, even though they never paid a dime into it!

Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and violation of the
original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it!

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election year! If enough people view this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve. I for one am voting for BUSH....

Friend Tim,

Well said. Count me in for BUSH.

Your buddy Steve

OK, I'll bite. WHY haven't my Republican reps turned these around then?

Amen, WyoDogShooter...

I must say I'm tearing up <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> All this support when I bring this stuff up at work people look at me like I just shot their best dog.

I get a bunch of people talking about how the socialism that is in our scandanavian friends' countries is the answer- low crime nice living ect.. always talking about how great things are in country xyz. Well -- those countries local socialism and economies can not survive without the aid provided by MY country and MY dollars provided thru free enterprise.

Just something to think about.

WyoDogShooter-

That is a very very interesting post. I didn't know ANY of that. I did know that there is a religious exemption you can take to get out of FICA deductions.(at least that is what some folks told me)

Nonetheless I have to echo T Lee-
Dubya has a free hunting liscense in DC with a Repub house and senate. Why haven't they reversed some or all of this? Voting for Bush? hmmmm. He is a better slug than Kerry but that sure ain't saying much.

Free in the congress - I wouldn't say that - notice the number of judges STILL waiting for confirmation? Its the end of the term already!!!

you are correct. I retract, a little at least!

Nonetheless I have to echo T Lee-

Dubya has a free hunting liscense in DC with a Repub house and senate. Why haven't they reversed some or all of this? Voting for Bush? hmmmm. He is a better slug than Kerry but that sure ain't saying much

___________________________________________________

Not enough public outcry we complain among ourselves,When we should be in our representitives faces. Just like the wacko advocates who got these things put there in the first place. The 2 things that drive politicians weather liberal or conservative is lots of public outcry or lots of money. Money just makes them worse but public outcry keeps them honest. So write letters lots of them. Petitions dont do any good 50,000 names on a list wont impress anyone, but 50,000 letters in your mailbox and a postman with hernia will get some attention. Make photo copies of your letters and give them to friends and relatives to send, most poeple are to lazy to write a letter but will send one if all they are out is postage.

This does work I've seen it in action.

Pat

sorry, but I would consider this propaganda. If your intel is bad your decisions will be bad.

Urban Legend reference

Just when we was a havin a good time you went and ruint it all with some facts! argggg

I read the link and man it is a bit confusing!

Now I am sure I is uninformulated. or rather- stupid is as stupid does or something or another...

It isn't a matter of government subsidy or not, its a matter of what is most important. And you are in a fantasy land if you think healthcare doesn't need fixing. The pharmaceutical companies post record profits while the rest of the markets (and your savings account) is in the toilet, all the while old folks are cutting their pills in half to get buy. Insurance companies jack up premiums on the premise that malpractice claims are fueling the increase, when its really losses in the equity markets they are recouping. Investments are by far the largest revenue source for the insurance industry. They just want to divert attention from their real reason for driving costs up. And you wanna know why nobody has done anything to repeal social security? Its popular, that's why. Once in a while, someone has a good idea, and it doesn't matter which party he's in. What got social security in trouble was dipping into the trust until it became another pay-as-you-go tax program, instead of a pension program the way it was designed. Both parties are responsible for the bastardization of that program and both parties don't have the political gonads to fix it. That means doing something positive, not necessarily throwing more money at the problem. But even then, guys that support throwing money into the hands of corrupt government contractors, no questions asked, won't support spending money on old americans. Amazing. I expect each one of you who doesn't like social security to send their checks back, don't sign up for medicare, and go it alone into old age on their own truck.

Maybe the thing with health care is "why in the heck do we all of the sudden NEED all these pills/medications?"

My grandparents are in their late 70's don't take any pills yet their friends wash down basicaly a Skittle bag of pills a day. Seems to be that they went in for all the little check ups AARP tells them they need and BAM pill city. My grandparents only go to the doc if there is blood, paralysis, or blindness.

Healthcare is eating itself.

Are there really that many more problems now than even 5 years ago? Or is it we go to the DR to get pills for a pain that happens once every 5 weeks for 2 hours so we spend big $ on pills everyday rather than just DEAL WITH IT once in a while . Next thing you know this pill cocktail is hazardous - suing the DR and now you are on a new set of pills to combat the effects of the old one.

Seems to me that the healthcare problem is being created by those in it- You need this 80 /pcs pill 3x a day for 6 months because you COULD have knee pain when the humidity hits 95 (BTW you live in AZ).

AARP and all these "consumer information/watchdog/ groups" tell you all about the dangers of this and that - get to the DR he/she will make sure you don't have this disease (which only hits 1 in 4 trillion people) we will put you on the meds to make sure it don't happen to you!

They then complain bout the cost of meds to their members.

Have you noticed the large number of commercials on tv for various meds - they are from the pill companies themselves not a Dr - they want you to go to the Dr and now you have a room full of meds and wonder why you spend 400 a week on pills when an asprin once in a while would be ok.

Preach it Brother Teal, Hallejua!

BTW - My grand father still works 10 hrs a day 6 days a week. Its his hobby but still work. He restores Ford tractors from the 30s and 40s. Dyed in the Blue Ford man since the 30's

This subject drives me insane...really! What is most important is that I don't want to pay for your or anybody's health! I will take care of mine until they can take care of themselves.The fantasy world is that you and others think that government can do ANYTHING right, including healthcare an social security. Fixing healthcare means getting government out of it..PERIOD. Indentured servitude is prohibited by the Constitution;apparently you don't care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Im with you Bart, we need less govt, not more of it. Ever notice how many public fund agencies have work crews that start for work late, and must return several hours before they really needed to. In other words, govt workers arent exactly the highest motivated. As a tax payer I resent this waste of tax revenue. Police, military, coast guard,and Fireman excel, lets get that out of the way, but I am not impressed with the typical state, county, city, or federal employee. Fact is, they are lazy, and that is the problem with too big of government.

As for this thread, it still amazes me how the left is actually hoping we fail in Iraq, and frankly, seem to be doing everything in their power to assure that happens. If I was a soldier, the first thing I would do when I got home is organize a march against all you spineless democrats.

The reason social security and medicare were instituted to begin with was because IT WASN'T BEING DONE! The elderly were dying slow deaths because an industrialized, ubanized, landless, america wasn't willing to "take in" the parents. And explain to me just how you justify your belief that the benefits of a democratic, technologically advanced society are only due those at the upper income levels, or those with "willing" and able family trees? We have advanced to where we are BECAUSE of the democratic tenets of our system of government, not in spite of it. Just ask anyone who worked on the intercontinental railroad or early 19th century factory workers or migrant workers whether they felt like they had a chance at determining their own destiny. The social safety net provided by a democratic society is what makes progress possible. Otherwise, we'd all need to be packin' heat everyday because there would be no stability whatsoever. Living in a free society includes allowing opportunity and prosperity for all citizens. To a degree, government has to be the provider of certain goods and services because the markets are unable or unwilling to do so. Think of that every time you need a cop or take a drink of water. Social security is the same thing. It wasn't being done and most people (from both parties) wanted it done and thought it a national disgrace for old people to be dying in sickness and poverty. Talk yourself into thinking you'd be above it if you want, but unless it is at your door, such high talk is just mental masturbation. BTW, social security has ballooned beyond its original intent. When the average life expectancy was 65, benefits at that age were possible. But with life expectancy going higher all the time, it just makes sense for retirement to be at a later age. Half the people my age will make it to 85. Barring disability, I should be expected to work until age 75. But then, the AARP would never swallow that, and neither will our elected scumbags.

To make the quantum leaps we are making in extending the life expectancy in this country and the rest of the world is an expensive proposition. This is reflected in the cost of health care today. To blame it on overprescribing medication is simple minded logic.

I currently have a friend going through a battle with leukemia. The costs after the bone marrow transplant will be close to half a million dollars. In the 50's he probably would have been dead already. Ten years ago his chances would have been about half of what they are today.

If it were your parents would you be willing to pay that amount to extend their lives a few years? I would imagines so.

The cost of health care has increased as the technology of health care has increased. We now have scanners and other machines that cost well into the millions of dollars. If your family member were to become ill, would you take them to a facility that had the latest in technology, or a facility that was outdated as to the latest technologies? We all know the answer. Kind of like asking if we would be having a war in Iraq if baby Bush's daughters were serving in the front line infantry. I think not.

I'm not saying that the insurance companies aren't screwing the consumers, because they clearly are. I have had dealings with some of them, and they will screw you every chance they get. But to blame it on the doctors overprescribing is a fallacy.

OK all, Bush sucks, kerry will suck, so what's the answer besides voting for the lesser of two evils????????????????????????????????????? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

The statement by you that insurance companies will screw you any chance they get is so typical of your outrageously ignorant statements. Honest people working for honest insurance companies are just as common, actually more common, as the types you refer to.

...vote defensively.

Combo

Am I missing something here? When did the republicans announce that they would not run a candidate in 08? miles

Rick - while in cases as you have pointed out your answers are correct. But you must admit that there is a VERY real problem with our societies penchant for self medication. And it is that "dependance" on meds that does have the seniors crying bout their meds cost.

I have been in the Navy for a little over 2 years, other than the initial physical in basic (6shots suck let me tell you) I have NEVER been to medical.
I ahve had corpsmen tell me to go and such but never went. We are always hearing how our bodies aren't responding to antibiotics anymore cuz we have been taking them since we were little, not this boy - when a big disease hits penicillian is gonna look like the finest peruvian blow to my body <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

The people who work for health insurance companies may be honest, but the system set up by the health insurance industry for dealing with claims is not. Try disputing a claim, then come and tell me how the insurance companies won't screw you. The system is set up to discourage disputes, and most people just simply pay the bills. I have a close relative who works for a dermatologist. Her job is to do the billing to the insurance company and refile the disputed claims. When she started, the office had over $200,000.00 in disputed claims for the last couple of years. Some claims were denied because they had been filed with the wrong code, the insurance company had changed some of the codes and never informed health care providers of the change.

Perhaps you, with your clearly superior intelligence, only deal with completley honest and forthright insurance companies. Us ignorant types are stuck dealing with the big insurance companies that are provided through our employment.

Hillary has been getting good media buzz for nearly 10 years regarding a run for president. What Republican do YOU know that can say the same? All she needs is an open slot and without a stronger Republican candidate than I see out there right now to oppose her, my bet is that she'll win it all.

Give her eight years in office and we'll all be discussing the ballistic performance of rocks.

Combo

Insurance companies' comparisons are similar to the debates on good policemen and bad policemen, lawyers, teachers, etc. There are good ones and bad ones. Honest people will not work for a dishonest insurer with a dishonest system or they would be dishonest, would they not? I have gads of experience on both sides and with hundreds of companies. I have been involved in tens of thousands of claims. From my viewpoint, the public sticks it to insurance companies much more than the other way around. Certain companies are obviously unethical or downright dishonest while others are not. You have to hope that you are insured by a good one or that if you are a third party, that the first party's insurer is a good company. Individually, I have been treated like a king by several insurers on my personal claims. In my career, involving the claims of others, I have seen the spectrum of generosity to bend over.



I apologize for sounding harsh before. You brought up a personally sensitive subject to me and I should have let it go.

Slasher has a point, it really isn't a matter of the "people" involved in insurance being crooked or straight, its the industry itself that creates the situation. They are there to make money on your insecurities, period. Take a simple life insurance policy. The company is betting you are going to live, and you are betting you are going to die. Now, look at an annuity. The insurance company is betting you will die, and you are betting you will live very long and be on the up side when you finally do go toes up. Make no mistake, they are not there to pay for your chemo, pay your spouse when you die, or help you get through your retirement years. They are there to make money from you. If it works out in your favor, then you have beat the odds (actuarial tables), but remember, the underwriters will take note of any such victories and it will be harder for the next guy to do the same thing. Its like real estate. Another cut throat business that good people get into with good intentions, but end up whoring anything that will sell, to whomever, as long as they make their 6%.

Sadly, men of conscience don't do well in politics. We end up voting for the lesser of evils more often than not. Hell, I thought Nixon was a good president. Too bad he was morally bankrupt. I don't know much about Kerry. He won't campaign in this area because it is solidly republican. I can't say I like his platform because I don't know what it is. But, I do know I dislike a liar, a poor financial manager, and people of dubious ethical standing when it comes to special interest. Had John McCain run, he would be my choice because while I may not agree with everything he stands for, he is a man of his word and beholding to no one. McCain-Powell would be my choice for a decent ticket.

While I hate insurance companies about as much as anything, seeing bills from hospitals that have $230.00 band aids on them, really pisses me off.
It's easy to sit back and say we need a better healthcare system, but as long as the doctors are charging the kind of fees that they are, insurance companies have no choice but to pass this off to the working man.
Insurance companies are making money alright, but my neighbor in our industrial complex just saw the bill for his prostrate surgery which was over $45,000.00 for 4 hours worth. That's f#cking rediculus...What man on earth is worth that kind of money per hour?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

As far as the guns go, I'm sure none will be too surprised at my point of view, but when it comes time to go to the ballot box, firearm ownership is "the issue".
How soon we forget how other countries fell to socialism and communism. It's real simple, get everyone dependent on the goverment for their retirement, healthcare, and ass wiping, then confiscate your guns. Without your firearms, you don't defend yourself from the goverment, and you've already given them total control of your life.
Maybe some of you would prefer that the jackbooted thugs explain to you in detail how you're gonna live, but I for one will not.
Your damn guns aren't just for shooting pop cans and [email]f@cking[/email] deer people......they're for defending yourself and your family from criminals, and goverment.
Our forefathers didn't write that in as the second amendment just to be amusing themselves.....they lived it, and they knew how important it was then, and expected it to be just as important now. They spilled their blood on this great soil so we could sit here in the comforts of our home and enjoy this freedom. I doubt they could have imagined what a sorry bunch of bleeding heart liberals the majority of this country has become, but they came damn close by writing our Constitution and Bill of Rights....Too bad our wonderful politicians don't uphold their oath to defend it.
Americans sit back and think that everything is going be just great, and we'll never see another revolution, but we are a very young country to say the least, and to say it could never happen here again is crazy.

On that note......Bush is getting my vote and every other Republican that sides with my rights to own firearms.

The fact of the matter is, if it weren't for the Second Amendment.......you wouldn't have the rest of them, or your Social Security, Medicare, cell phone, car, tv, radio, or the ability to speak........guess that would have been something like Iraq a year ago ehh????

Mr. Williams is correct. The framers of the Constitution agonized over every word and how it was written. The 10 ammendments are in that order for a reason. There is a reason why it is the 2nd ammendment.

In my post I was referring to the health insurance industry, and I find some of the practices they use for creating float time quite questionable. If you talk to any health care provider, you will undoubltedly here how hard it is to deal with insurance companies, and how they have a dedicated person on staff to deal with the paperwork generated by the insurance companies. Who pays for this? We all do. Could you imagine if someone sent you a bill for a service rendered and you had the right to refuse paying it because it was submitted with the wrong code or wrong form? Or you could say that at another shop the charge for the service performed was x amount of $'s less, so that's all you will pay? The health insurance providers do it all the time, and because of their influence, they get away with it. Unfortunatley, these practices are used by most of the major health care insurers, and soon become the industry norm.

As far as sounding harsh, forget about it! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

That sums it up quite nicely Sir. How soon some forget though.

As to medical cost, my Doctor, who is also a friend, pays over ONE MILLION dollars a year for malpractice insurance on his group. AND THEY HAVE NEVER HAD A CLAIM! That my friends is a big nut to crack before you get paid. I lay all this squarly on the shouldes of the insuranc industry and shady trial lawyers out there. Please note I said SHADY, not all lawyers are that way.

Olywa....what nuke waste gubmint contracts does GE hold?

Got that right, Ringman. Throwing more money at a problem (schools) won't make them better. Other countries spend far far less money on schools and turn out a far far better education.

It ain't a money issue.

Huh? How are we financing Scandinavia's socialism? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
Spot on.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Doctors Education
Hospital's and Doctors Liability
Best equipment available
Pre- and post-surgery care
Doctors wages
Support staff wages

Wanting best care possible.


The list goes on.

We have thousands of insurance companies. Very few will write malpractice insurance. There are so few that one or two companies per state write it in many cases and one doctor cannot afford to testify against another in the same state for fear of the consequences to his premiums.

If it were profitable, hundreds of insurance companies would be fighting for the business. They are not. Awards have not gone up as a percentage but premiums as T Lee stated have skyrocketed. Therein is the confusing part about this.

Speaking of such, my doctor loves the Medicare system and feels it works wonderfully, promptly, and is fair and that they should have left well enough alone. And, yes, he has people that do nothing all day long but mess with insurance paperwork and their reps.

I have seen the dark side of doctors' incompetence, too. You would be amazed at the sheer numbers of horror stories that are indeed true as to the suffering and deaths caused by bad doctors or doctors with tunnel vision or who simply cannot think outside the box.

I still think I would prefer American medical care to about any place else. Malpractice is being addressed in many states as doctors are packing it in and leaving for states with cheaper rates as per Mississippi where jurors simply love to tag doctors, right or wrong. Seems ignorant jurors who have no concept of money amounts and cannot grasp right or wrong or should not be judging doctors in the first place are behind much of the malpractice problems with insurance.

I do not know of any country on this planet that does not recieve aid from the US in some way shape or form. For some of these countries that aid lets them survive and provides a very real net of financial security. If these countries had to survive on their economy alone they could not.

That is what I meant. If these countries that are SOOO much better than the US because of their socialist societies had do do with out the aid (financial) of the US their economy would implode and that society would not be all that attractive.

I beg to differ.

I wager that it is the US economy that would implode if we would isolate ourselves from foreign economies. European economies depend on the USA far less than we depend on them.



We're not "financing" their lifestyle, IMHO.



That may have carried some truth in the cold war past in the time of big military spending, but not today.

I am not saying we need to get away from foreign economies- just that even other systems that seem to be better may also in fact depend on ours to stay viable.

"Huh? How are we financing Scandinavia's socialism?"

ya I agree, how are financing them?

proof?

We all depend on each other...just don't get delusional and assume we don't depend on others.

I am saying that other countries benifit from our countries free trade system. They benefit from the aid provided to them by our government through loans, loan quarrenyees and the like. The place the govt gets that $$ is from the taxes collected on teh money made in our free trade society.

The particular conversation went like this:

Friend: I know somebody in Finnland who has a modest ving supplied by the government, no wories not rich but no poor and the govt takes care of everything. Here in the US there are too many rich people it isn't right that there are people who don't make as much as the guy next to them. I don't like the fact that there are people out there who only make 25k a year while someone is allowed to make 5 mil a year.

Me: You do realize that the money this government uses to help out others comes from the taxes that we pay? Right? and it is that cash that helps tose countries' economies right?

F: look at the military - basicaly a socialist situation- for the people in it they (we) are paid some $ enought to gat by and the rest is provided by the govt - seems to work for me.

Me: Well that may be true but the Military could not function on the product of the members inside of it- it is dependant on the free market out side of the mil for the $$ to run -derived from the taxes off the income created by an open trade economy.

Look at communist China- moving very rapidly to a tree trade based type of economy on the state level- doing so cuz that is what is needed to subsidise the rest of the "social programs" that come with a society that depends on the govt for everything.

------------------------------

My point was that while things may look greener on the other side - you have to realize that we are not all islands and while a system may look perfect on the outside it does depend on things some would consider the "problem" BTW the person complaining about people making more than others (classic class warfare) is getting her masters - you guessed it - so she can make more $$ as a contractor when she is out of the Army.

I wasnot trying to say that Scandanavia could not survive with out us - just that our system is a very reall part of other countries' ability to survive under their system- not that it is better or worse than ours- I do not know of another country loaning us money- now there are trade agreements and that is part of the give and take of a world economy.

Mattias - I did not say we did not depend on others just taht in a lot of cases they need us more than we need them.

It was a general comment, not directed at you specifically.
But I'll have to disagree with your notion that "they need us more than we need them".

If you are speaking of European nations, you are dead wrong.
A very common misconception.

Heard of steel tariffs lately? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

That would be 1 part of the economy - if they don't need us at all why is it they are crying about th e economy impact of us pulling our military out of europe?


Just a question - what would happen if we cut off ALL foreign aid to every country that currenty recievs money from us?

How many countries' economies would be left standing in 5 years? Ours would be hust no doubt as those countries would be forced to tax and tarrif heavily anything going in or out of their countries but I would say that it would be alot wors for them than, relativly speaking for us - all that money spent on aid would have to be used to soften the hit our economy would take from the retribution from us pulling our aid.

Personaly I think we should be gatting a better return on our investment so to speak. We give you a ton of cash- which you don't pay back - I just feel like we should be getting a little more in return thats all. Like all those African countries - Diamons cost way too much - It too expensive for me to mess up with the wife - jewlery is draining the account !! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> (thats a joke BTW)

They're not.... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />



As to the rest of your posts, it depends on what countries you are talking about. I assume we're still talking about Europe?

Europe imports a lot more american goods than America imports european goods. Foreign "Aid" to Europe, especially western europe, is virtually non-existant.
Europe does a lot of trading with newly opening markets in the Former soviet bloc, as well as Asia.

I am telling ya, they don't need us near as bad as we need them....

Yes they are complaining per my friends returning from Germany and now Sout Korea is complaining that they are gonna lose so much money by the American forces moving south - away from the DMZ.

It doesn't seem to be widespread complaining, as I try following particularly German media, and more often than not, the response towards withdrawal of US troops is positive.

You don't even have to stray out of our sphere of "influence". Just listen to the 'Ricans over the closure of Roosevelt Roads! They cut their own noses off to spite their face!

BTW, don't kid yourself into thinking that military bases in Europe account for more than a miniscule fraction of their economies.

As for loans to Africa...well, like I said elsewhere, foreign aid should stop altogether (Not trade!)

Mathias you an I are never gonna agree on a lot of things so I am gonn let things lie - not a flame,complaint ect.



The things I know - I know cuz I talk to the people on the ground and I read the intell reports (Iraq - that conversation will go round and round for the next 50 years much like I am sure the Civil war did in general stres across the country)



I am just gonna back away and let others play - so to speak - In all honesty all of these conversations are really draining. I'll stick to T-lee's jokes, hunting and pistols (as they have captured my imagination lately).



Oh sure as I see things that really strike me I'll pop in but I really do not have the energy anymore - need to save it for the fight that will surely come if that jerk Kerry gets in. Then it will be an all out brawl as I will ahve to fight to keep the little bit I do make in my pocket, my guns and way of life.



I have no ill feelings personaly against anyone who does not agree with me just don't agree thats all - thats how this country got here - we just didn't agree with England!

T- I have a ton of friend that are here instead of PR - some of them have PR wives and their families are HOWLIN bout the lose of the range - now want us just to give them the $ we spent there to subsidise them but not use the range.

.

WOW!! 100% in agreement with you, Sir. In fact, you sound so much like me there, it's scary. I used to argue this type of stuff endlessly here, now I get tired....
Please also keep in mind that at least for me, these discussion are "intellectual fun". I do not hold grudges, and would probably have beers with just about anyone I've ever argued with on a forum, including you.

Well if you are buyin...... I am pretty sure you could next day air a cooler full of beer? Do not believe that falls under hazmat..

See that is one of the great thigs about this place - aside from some trolls most everybody would be beer/shootin budies aside from the differences.

Thumbs up sir! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Don't even think of sendin that cooler COD- I sent a guitar amp back - was like 120 for shipping from TX to St Louis IIRC !!

I don't shoot beers, I DRINK em! I will shoot bears though. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Drinkin them is the best way to get cans for plinking - just not at the same session tho!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

All this talk about beer is making me thirsty, time for a Killians red.

Still at work...

Gonna grab an Amber Bock or three myself, all this has made me thirsty!

Oat soda flushes out your cholesterol...

Up here in PA these old German yankees have this lager called Yingling, not that I have drunk any of it... heh heh

But folks say I don't really have much cholesterol,, but then again neither them nor I is a doc or anything...

That's too bad, because I just cracked one open, and it really hits the spot. I've been burning some brush out back, and it got quite warm. If you never tried some Killians Irish Red, it is gooood. Rates right up there with Leinenkugel Red, and believe me, here in Wis. we know our beer. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Would kill to get a Leinenkugel down here in TX - Leinies is an upper midwest regional beer and the best for fishin/ meetin women (met my wife over one) and genneral Hank Hillin------------ YEP!







Honneyweis-- berryweis gonna have to take some leave and drive a u haul back. Is that bootleggin? Modern day Smokey and the abndit.

If I am drinkin' that furrin stuff, it's Guiness all the way.

Another really good regional beer is Point. They have quite a few varieties, and the brewery tour is highly recommended (I speak from personal experience). The one beer I really can't drink is Sam Adams. Why people buy it is a mystery to me. Now Guiness is a damn fine ale also.

The local tap has a weekly special on Leinies Red-$2.75 for a 28oz mug. 3 or 4 mugs of that fine brew and life is good.

Hasseroeder for me....wait, that's only a fond memory of my old home.

Whats local ?

Point is good- can not drink that horse pee that is Sam Addams.

Guiness ok - I still havent learned to enjoy it well enough. Very popular as a black and tan in the Green Bay area.

Rock is ok too.

Local-? you got me.

You have to have Guiness a few times and it starts to grow on you. I don't care for the regular beers like Miller, Bud, or any of the lighter beers. Once you get hooked on the heavier beers, the reds, darks, and bocks, the other stuff just tastes like water. Coors is probably the worst of the regular beers, it really has no taste to it.

That be FACT my man! Colorado kool-aid needs sugar and could be a kids drink!

Local - I mean't if you close enough to green bay - Green BAy Brewery makes their oen honey beer - pretty good and cheaper than the Leinies. I like the Belgian Blue Moon too. Hard to find that naywhere other than WI too.

teal, your typing looks like you been in the beer locker pretty heavy already!

NAW -- my fingers are faster than my typing ability- had to take a typing test for my job - 35 words a min. 2 fingers - was the only way I could get above 4% accuracy.

I've had the Blue Moon, excellent also. I have probably sampled more of their beverages, as I used to live in Kewaunee.

I also have had some great small brews up in the twin cities. Summit pale ale is very fine, and Apollo Lager is quite tasty.

Sprecher is probably one of the best beers ever. I believe it is brewed in Milwaukee. I haven't had it for ages, but it is fantastic. If you ever get a chance, buy it. It's worth the price.

OK, I can relate. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Even though i am the boss - I can not even think of beer before I go to work - sad really cuz , to get me into work at 10:30 at night takes a lot of discipline!!!

Or beer! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

It is nice driving home at 7 am thinking of all the others just going into work!!!

Beer, now were a talking.



summit pale ale is the best.

I had some point pale ale last week, not bad.

Sprecher is good if you can get it fresh

Lake front brewery is good, there riverwest is great , but it has to be fresh too.

Grays is good too.

central waters in Junction city makes great beer

I have had them all can't even remeber them all

chief oshkosh red was good, can't find it anymore thou



http://www.lakefrontbrewery.com/

http://www.graybrewing.com/

http://www.pointbeer.com/

http://www.leinie.com/index.html

http://www.hinterlandbeer.com/

http://www.huberbrewery.com/



point special beer, brewed to prefection the old time, .............POINT special beer.



Walters, the beer that is beer

They are the primary operator for the cleanup operations at the Hanford Nuclear reservation. They were also instrumental in crating the mess there over during the last 5 decades. I have no axe to grind against the hard working folks who are there trying to clean up that mess despite huge health risks. But I do have concerns about the bottomless pit that taxpayer dollars is being thrown into with no real relief in sight.

Muleskinner - Do you remember what the Bush campaign said about McCain during the 2000 primaries? They accused him of being FOR breast cancer because of a vote he took in the Senate. Let's not forget just how dishonorable the Bush campaign was under Karl Rove. And Dubya did nothing to stop it. I beleive that if McCain had won in 2000 we wouldn't have near the trouble we have today.

McCain, as well as Perot are anti-gun pukes as well. But if that doesn't bother you, I guess that's okay.
McCain and Perot should have both been in the Democratic party, because they're nothing but wolves in sheep clothing.

You guys are getting away from the topic of beer!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />



It is funny that people rail on Bush say it should have been McCain and yet IIRC it was the McCain/Feingold Act.

McCain? No thank you, he is the wost sort of RINO. The problem is a total lack of really solid, Constitution upholding, honest candidates!

You Sir are correct- we need more Mr. Smiths (Jimmy Stewart)

Both parties really need some new blood in the ranks - the ones that get the most pub for their ideas have been there for far too long.

I am talking bout some real fresh faces not sons of senetors or brothers of congressmen but guys and girls who maybe built up a business and decided to run - got in and brings some common man/woman ideas to the table.

back to beer now please <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

GE has never had a hand in Hanford. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

They have never held any kind of nuke cleanup contracts, to my limited knowledge.

They are/were involved in commercial reactors, though.

Hanford's been DuPont,Kaiser, Westinghouse, Fluor, etc....

Mathias - take a look at this link. GE has a long and sordid history at Hanford. If you don't like the link I supplied you can do your own Google search on "GE Hanford".

oops - forgot the link

http://www.warprofiteers.com/article.php?list=type&type=16

Excuse me...my bad. GE has never held a contract in Hanford Cleanup. And that was the original point I was trying to make.

They have never been prime contractor for cleanup.