Guess you didn't read this part . . .
Posted By: The Whole Story on 2008-09-24
In Reply to:
McCain suspending campaign due to crisis
...sm - ms
From Wall Street Journal and other sites:
"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal," Mr. Burton said in an email to reporters. "At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details."
McCain released statement minutes after responding to Obama.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Didn't you read this part?
"The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States."
Their system costs less per capita than our system. You bring up a good point about the doctors making less money, but should our doctors' main objective be getting rich or providing excellent care to patients? I'm sure many doctors would be happy to be able to help patients without having to beg insurance companies to cover the only cholesterol medications to help someone with severe CAD or not having to write letters pleading with insurance to cover a much-needed MRI or surgery. I transcribe letters like this all the time. Doctors are constantly taking time out of their day (and money out of their pockets) to jump through insurance companies' hoops. They are also often frustrated by patients with no insurance who refuse to pay for a potentially life-saving echocardiogram or colonoscopy. They might be happy with lower paychecks if they knew they could just go to work and help patients without having to stress about whether or not their patients can afford the medical help they need. I know some doctors are probably in it mostly for the money, but that is not the kind of doctor I want to go to!
However, I want to find out more about how France transitioned into their current program, as I imagine here it would be quite difficult to make so many changes. I believe we can do it eventually though, and anything this important is worth the effort. I do think we can learn a lot from their system though, because they have not done away with private health insurance and choices, and I think that system would be much easier for Americans to swallow.
I guess we didn't know it was a joke...if you go back and read (sm)
you said you have a very strong opinion and you keep it to yourself...which sounded like you were saying that is what we should all be doing too. But the point in response to you was that the board is for political opinions to be expressed and if it bothers anyone, they don't have to come on here. I am sorry you got your feelings hurt though. I am sure it was just a communication problem.
Guess you didn't read the post I made from a few days ago.
Sorry, but I haven't been able to post lately due to some problems, but the FOIA report I posted and said to pay attention to certain pages....Clinton KNEW there were WMD's in Irag in 1996! Did he do anything? Nope. He left the country he was visiting right before a bombing; i.e., he knew it was going to happen. The jist I got of the report was that he knew and did nothing.
Did you read that report? Don't want to dredge up old presidents but you seem to do it every chance you get, so I just have to respond to that. Bush also knew but did nothing because the CIA,DOJ, FBI and whatever other departments were to keep him informed but never worked together on anything so he got conflicting reports all the time. Was he a mind reader? Doubt it or 911 would not have happened.
Sorry, but this post does not hold water IMHO.
I didn't miss any part and didn't say...
anything either way. I just posted a link.
Guess you missed the part about
Afganistan is where it's at. Obama gets that. He also gets Islamic parties, politics, principles and culture and knows precisely how to use that knowledge to get the Moslem world to isolate their own fringe elements. Bush and McCain know how to promote policies that anger and empower terrorists to declare WWIII and turn the whole world up-side-down.
I guess you missed the part in his . . .
speech where he proudly mentioned that HE is a CHRISTIAN!!! Seriously, does that really sound like downplaying religion? GET REAL.
I guess I missed the part where she was...
conspiring to rid the world of gays. I read that she simply wished her daughter to not be exposed. Unfortunately, I agree with you that she is probably fighting a losing battle, but why is everyone so hard on her trying to keep that kind of thing away from her daughter? If she feels that strongly about it, then I would think that it is not only best for her to shield her child from such things, but her duty to keep her child from things that she views as harmful. Everyone has the right to protect his/her children from outside influence that he/she believes could be detrimental.
I guess you missed the part where he said one thing....
and voted another way. The teachers union in Chicago is responsible for the short days and skyrocketing salaries, but it is not translated in better educated kids. Did you not see the testing scores, the graduation rates, etc.? Of course not. When it got to the parts about Obama looking bad, skimmed right over that "substance." LOL. Sigh.
Guess that part about the economy went right over your head.
They are losing sleep over the economy and working hard for the next 17 days to get out the vote. I hardly think a republican plant that turned out to be a fraud has ANYBODY running scared, except maybe the ones who created him and planted him there. At least Obama gave an honest response to a dishonest person and HIS camp does not have to resort to such pathetic gimmicks in some lame attempt to shore up their tanking numbers.
Didn't O want everybody to "do their part" ?
xx
Yep, I read that part...
and probably the difference in the cost is split between the difference in what the doctors make in both places, and if there is some sort of a cap on services...meaning, the insurance plan tells the doctor that is what you get for that particular service. No negotiation, no nothing. That is the only way I can think of that the streamlined disbursement system would work. If they do not have clerical personnel handling it, that tells me they have specific charges for specific services, regardless. That would be another sticky wicket on this side of the pond with the medical profession.
Another thing mentioned, and why the French physicians are okay to charge less...medical school in France is tuition-free. There will be another huge hit on the American taxpayer....can you even imagine the cost of that on the front end?
Like I said, it looks good on the face...one would be interested in knowing how long it took from inception to where it was "working well" and the dollar cost involved in the conversion and the ongoing maintenance.
I wonder, when they apply the "broad tax on earned and unearned income" if the French people will love it as much as they do now. It is a consideration...
Not meaning to be a fly in the ointment, kam...just looking at in stark reality.
Have a good day!
Did you not read the part
about the questioning? "Are you worshiping God?" "Are you praying?"
If it was just about parking, why would that matter?
She knew; she didn't know which part he was talking about...
there are several parts of the Bush doctrine: The Bush Doctrine is a phrase used to describe various related foreign policy principles of United States president George W. Bush, created in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves, which was used to justify the invasion of Afghanistan.[1] Later it came to include additional elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate (used to justify the invasion of Iraq), a policy of supporting democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating the spread of terrorism, and a willingness to pursue U.S. military interests in a unilateral way.[2][3][4] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.[5]
He was trying to trap her and she didn't bite. Her first answer was a broad answer to a broad question. Then when he looked down his nose at her and specified the pre-emptive part of the doctrine, she have a great answer in my opinion.
The only thing I saw and was so amused by is that she was too smart to be baited. And it was frustrating the heck out of old Charlie. LOL.
Did you bother to read the part that said....
The Bush Administration admits there could be no oil production in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge until 2018 and production would not peak until 2027. [U.S. Department of Energy]
I didn't watch that part. I figured it would be ridiculous. What's the scoop?
x
I read that as righteous indignation on Bill's part.
I guess I didn't take B's post that way. SM
I use God as a comparison when I am really trying to make a point. I think that is what was going on, but only B can answer that. At any rate, I agree with B.
I guess you didn't pay attention....(sm)
when it came to direct quotes and video footage of Bush. In other words, Bush has video out there that directly contradicts what he is saying now in his exit interviews. For example, he is saying now that if he had known that the intelligence about WMDs was incorrect he would not have gone into Iraq. Previously he had said that it didn't matter that there were no WMDs, he would have gone ahead and invaded Iraq anyway---which he did. Exactly how much more proof do you need?
Guess you didn't see the post I did below
showing that Bush tried to regulate the industry as far back as 2001, but the dems would have none of it....those most opposed were all on the "take"; i.e., getting thousands of dollars in contributions from FM/FM.....or don't you believe it even when it comes from their own mouths?
Open your eyes and listen, or do you need a hearing test?
Gee....I guess I didn't realize
we wanted him to run our country further into the ground, spend a record amount of money, and turn our country into a socialist country. I mean....if we are dumb enough to really want that.....yes....Barry is doing an absolutely wonderful job!!!
Guess you didn't notice all the times he...
disagreed with Bush? No, of course not....
Ummm...guess you didn't see the apology below....
I had not read through all the threads yet. You took exception to McCain but it looks like you and I have a bit of a hair trigger ourselves....eh?
I am not hung up on Sarah Palin. I do like her. I think she is the most genuine of the 4. I think that is the way she talks in her everyday life, and doesn't bother to window dress and act like something she isn't. And how she expresses herself has nothing to do with intelligence or the lack thereof.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it (there is a folksy one for ya...lol).
This is my favorite, I use it all the time, and I could apply it to the big O's explanation of his association with Ayers:
Barack, sweetie, that dog don't hunt. lol.
Guess he didn't have room for his beloved pie.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0ftD7Y7dCn1mI/340x.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.daylife.com/photo/0ftD7Y7dCn1mI&usg=__pkklKSLi37kzI-vyh3oHYNXbrzk=&h=425&w=340&sz=33&hl=en&start=6&tbnid=tiw8xBS9CFOXFM:&tbnh=126&tbnw=101&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Blooks%2Bpie%2Bphoto%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den
LOVE this shot of him. A man, alone with his pie.
I guess you did not read your own posts --
In this second posting, you will see that it sends you to the USA.gov website, which has a link to the office of hte president elect...
also, in your first link (in the first posting), it clearly states: "It is an office -- it's just a quasi-government office for planning the takeover of the government," said Stephen J. Wayne, a professor at Georgetown University's department of government."
It also states that President Bush had his transition team in place a whole month before the election was even over. Obama is doing nothing wrong trying to get ready to hit the ground running. With the way things are in our country right now, we don't need somebody waiting until the last minute to get ready to assume his role.
Guess that 1-day stock market rally didn't exactly
x
This paragraph is in my post...I guess you forgot to read it...nm
Well, clearly you didn't read...sm
About how the blog came about, so you've missed the point. (Why am I not surprised?)
It's a blog. It's not meant to be unbiased, any more than a blog called something like "welovelovelovesarahpalin!" would be unbiased. BTW, I'm sure there's a blog like that out there somewhere, which you are free to post the url for - for her fans. (You're probably feverishly searching for it right now, come to think of it. Just ask sam, she probably has a dozen right at her fingertips. LOL) And if you do post something like that, I will not feel the need to say "That's biased!" if it's a blog.
Either side, it's women expressing their opinion, and I think that's a good thing, to get involved.
I didn't say I wasn't going to read it, gt. sm
Try and get some rest, honey. Obviously you are just not thinking clearly right now. Come back when you are thinking right. Buh-bye
Perhaps you didn't READ my post
I said -- keep it the hell out of politics.
You're welcome to claim whomever you'd like as your Saviour in the privacy of your own home and the community of your own church.
You didn't read my post
I was referring to people I talk to, as I stated. I don't generally talk to Churchill or Chomsky. In fact, I don't even pay much attention to them, nor should you. Just as I don't pay much if any attention to crazy right-wingers. Just common sense.
Didn't I just read your this line in another
xx
you didn't read it did you. I'm a conservative
x
There ya go - just another example you didn't actually read the article
If you read the article you would know the article talked about where Obama stands on issues.
Plain and simple truth. But guess that is kind of hard for some to understand.
Actually, you didn't read the post then
Didn't say she was a liar. There is a difference with calling someone a liar and saying you don't believe them.
She over did it with the drama. Sure maybe she donated to charities on her own, but all the drama about contributing to the greater care, organizing for charity, painted and nailing carpeting in "poverty stricken homes" as her "gift to her children" oh yes, all while she didn't have a pot to you know what in, all while making only 5.30 an hour. And on top of all that she moved in with her parents to take care of her dying father while herself working full-time as a supervisor several states away (wow what a commute each day that must have been). On and on an on an on. Could it have happened? Sure anything could happen. Do I believe it personally? Not in my lifetime. But that's not saying it didn't happen. Just sounds like she should be awarded the model citizen of the century award.
BTW - there is a clear difference between saying you don't believe someone and them attacking you personally.
So I'd boo-hoo on yourself.
I didn't bash anyone...and I read them all
I think that you are unfairly bashing the poor man. Diagree with his politics--fine--that's what the board is for, but what is with the personal attacks. If you don't like the words he uses, that's okay, but why make a big deal out of it. If he talks over your head, I am sure that he didn't mean to. I don't find what he writes hard to understand. I simply disagree with tons of people attacking him on a personal level--or you for that matter. I did not attack anyone personally, nor would I. I did READ all the posts and did give my comment. I stand by it.
You obviously didn't really read her post...what's happened
You used to be a pretty straightforward poster even though we were often at odds. Now you seem nasty.
I read that entire article and I still didn't see where it said sm
U.S. military was protecting the Hezbollah supporters. Am I really missing it?
Obviously you didn't read the whole article. Figures....sm
That's why I usually use non-Fox links, so the demmies will "try" to read with open mind....lol....or maybe not.....whatever.....ciao
Evidently you didn't read the package.
Most of the money will not go to the people. So far, I have not come across anything that deals with foreclosures, etc. The item I posted last night from our local newspaper is the so-called stimulus package that will help foreclosures.
Read the doggone bill that they are trying to pass, please. Then you may see the light of day.
Boy Wonder didn't READ the bill, let alone write it!
##
Evidently you didn't read the post....
no one said a black person wouldn't vote for anyone but Obama (HELLO.....Steele, etc., etc.).
Apparently you didn't read closely enough..........sm
My point was that by replacing the food stamp program with the commodity program, which does not allow for "luxury" foods like rib-eye, etc., perhaps more people would be willing to get off the welfare wagon and go back to work.
Where in the heck did you come up with you idea?
I didn't bother to read your post....
I couldn't get past your heading "staying on the subject" .... the only "subject" is you..... Obama's "subject". You probably don't get that either! LOL
Nope, didn't think you'd read my message
Let me repeat....
Actually Cavuto didn't say Fox News. He said Fox.
Murdock and Fox have been in the business since 1985.
I watched the videos.
It's really too bad you didn't take the time to read the entire transcript
of what William Bennett said, Democrat. But I am not surprised.
Wow! I read the results, but didn't know the nay sayers were repugs...sm
I mean repubs. Interesting.
Didn't read your response before I wrote mine....
lol. Good post :)
You didn't read the AP news story on Ogden?
I posted it below in a post yesterday.
you must be referring to the previous admin. - GW didn't like to read much......
he did miss that memo about an impending attack on our country using our own private airlines..........Boy wonder? Must be referring to his super hero underwear.
You evidently didn't read my post - it was not a question
of if you think he's done harm. He has, it's a fact and no matter how much you want to cover it up you can't. You think bowing to our enemy, telling other countries we are selfish, and that we don't want our jobs so they can have them, tripling our deficit (nothing Bush had to do with -sorry can't pull that crap anymore), lining the pockets of his rich friends and CEOs, filling his cabinet with unqualified crooks and thieves, and the list goes on and on and on. And that's just the first 90 days. So the question was how many more years will it take to undo the harm. You can keep drinking the kool-aid thinking socialistm/communism is fine. It is not. Even the other countries keep telling him - "Don't go there, it is not a path you want to take", while other country leaders who are telling him not to go there are saying "why aren't you listening to us. We've been there and done that and it doesn't work".
Hence, how many more years will it take to undo the harm he has already done (and its only been less than 90 days). My guess is at least 2. It's going to be hard once he's out of office, but I do have faith the country will bounce back as long as we have some decent politicians in the office and take congress out from the control of the crats.
It's obvious you didn't read a DARN thing.....
First of all, real history is not taught in college either.... unless you are soooo lucky as to get a professor who actually LOVES history and really DID his/her homework.
My son is a history/political major and LOVES history... and I can assure you, he would put history teachers to shame in what they "think" they know.... the crap the government puts in their history books is all they are ALLOWED to teach in our public "government ran" schools!
Our history IS politics....where have you been? Teaching our kids politics IS teaching them history.... WOW! Glad my son is teaching them and not you!
This guy has been teaching for 19 years with NO complaints about his informative web site.... the parents have ALWAYS like it!
Only ONE person complained......ONE!!! No doubt a liberal jackarse who has NO loyalty or love for this country whatsoever.... another lost soul.
This guy had an introductory video where he says he truly wanted his kids to LOVE America.........what the heck is wrong with that?
He was told to remove that video because everyone "did not love America"..... huh? Then I suppose they can sit on their sorry sad butts and hate everything....who cares? This guy did nothing wrong but encourage students to love their country but of course, you WOULD have something wrong with that! Geesh!
|
