You mean like you? See recent posts!Originally Posted by johnwk
Posted 1 August 2.35pmOriginally Posted by johnwk
Posted 1 August 9.41amOriginally Posted by Cap_Birdseye
In any event, I never intended my words to be ascorbic. If they were taken that way, it was not my intention.
More of your obfuscations. How about sticking to the subject of the thread? You made an unsubstantiated innuendo attacking my moral character, and misdirected the subject matter. You wrote:
Now, how about going back to POST 56, have a spot of tea, and start over, without the insulting innuendos and sticking to health care as it relates within the framework of America‘s constitutional system?You ask how its done Johnwk. We in Britain deliver free universal health care to all under our National Health Service (NHS). Your approach Johnwk seems to be one of "looking after no.1", let the poor, over-weight, alcoholic, etc go to hell - what a lovely Christian way of thinking! Its a dog-eat-dog mentality where the strongest (and richest) survive and the weakest (and poorest) go under, not the sort of society I'd like to live in quite frankly, even if I have to pay (and I do pay), extra taxes to support the NHS.
Now instead of crying about it, why don't YOU get back on subject.
Lead by example, not by complaining.
Case in point. Very belittling and using terms like "spot of tea" to imply that his British association somehow makes him unfit to talk about America. Otherwise, why bother putting the extra effort into teling him to get a "spot of tea".Now, how about going back to POST 56, have a spot of tea, and start over, without the insulting innuendos and sticking to health care as it relates within the framework of America‘s constitutional system?
And, just like Sparkle, we know it is you who is writing these things because YOUR FULL FRIGGING NAME IS AT THE TOP!
Why do all the egomaniacs on this board insist on signing their name at the end of a post that ALREADY HAS THEIR NAME ON IT>??!??!
Get out of high school biology. He is not asking you not to be an organic acid, but rather not BITTER like self same substance:
So the next time you criticize someone on their spelling, try to use the correct word to, well, correct him with.
Yeah, you know, like driving across a bridge in Minneapolis, and deciding to stop for gas first. Luck.Luck? Do you also believe in the tooth fairy and having a Queen as the brit in this thread does?
Or having the day off from work on 09/11/2001, and not getting your lungs full of who knows what. Luck.
So how about those kids? Visit the dentist often?
Aside from the quote, it is an accepted premise within the medical community that a person’s life style and the choices one makes directly relates to how long and how well one lives.Dr. Roizen says the biggest mistake people make is thinking their health is mostly genetic and they can't do anything about it. Instead, he says 25% of how long and well you live is your genes, 75% is the choices you make.
Your silly comment about writing off 25 percent of the population to attack federalism which I promote, suggests the people in the various states would write off the 25 percent of its population you mentioned. Why would you write off those people living in N. Y.? Do you not care for your neighbor in a time of need? See how silly your comment is Zippy?
Last edited by johnwk; August 2nd, 2007 at 07:45 PM.
So what is wrong with that? As a non-American I cannot see what the problem is, obviously I may be missing something here becuase as a Brit I'm used to having a national government that governs the whole country.The White House said the bill “goes too far in federalizing health care.”
Considering that the war in Iraq is costing American taxpayers more than $1,000 per second, I think it's money well spent.The bill would increase spending on the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over the next five years.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that as of June, up to $250 Billion had been spent on combat operations alone!
Robert Sunshine, the Budget Office's assistant director, said it would cost $250 Billion to sustain even a reduced number of 30,000 troops over the next three years. If 75,000 American soldiers remain stationed in Iraq for another five years, the bill would rise by more than $450 Billion, he said.
Ironically one of Bush's top budget advisors, Lawrence Lindsey, was fired in 2003 when he estimated that the war would cost $100 Billion, a figure described at the time as "ridiculous" and "far too high", but now seen as a gross underestimate.
I'd rather see the money being spent on children's health needs rather than feeding the ever-hungry Military/Industrial/Petroleum (MIP) complex!
According to the Congressional Budget Office:
Just a cursory glance at the figures indicates where priorities lie - Bombs before Kids!The current allocations of federal money, totaling $5 billion a year, are not enough for states to maintain their current programs.
Isn't it time Bush was made to honour his pledge instead of always kow-towing to the dark forces of MIP!Senators of both parties said the bill would help Mr. Bush fulfill a promise he made at the Republican National Convention in New York City on Sept. 2, 2004.
“America’s children must have a healthy start in life,” Mr. Bush said then. “In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for the government’s health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need.”
Last edited by Capn_Birdseye; August 3rd, 2007 at 05:00 AM.
The White House said the bill “goes too far in federalizing health care.”
Congress does not have the constitutional authority to enter the states and meddle in the health care needs of the people therein. If there is such a need, the people within each state have retained that power within their own state border.
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State." see Federalist Paper No. 45
Amendment IX (1791)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X (1791)
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
You seem to forget why there was a war of independence ___
“He has erected a multitude of new offices (Washington‘s existing political plum job Empire) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance” ___Declaration of Independence