Obama's Balls OK?

[the_idle_threat]

Did Texas do the cover for New Yorker this month?

[the_idle_threat]

Re: Obama's Balls OK?

Jesse Jackson had the misfortune of being overheard saying, "See, Barack been, um, talking down to black people on this faith based ... I want cut his balls off ... Barack ... he's talking down to black people." Jackson appeared to make a stabbing or cutting motion with his hand as he made the remarks.

I was wondering how long it would take before The Left started turning on Obama just like they did Bill Cosby. Well, at least Barack can blame such hateful/hurtful thoughts and speeches on his “typical white” grandma.

Jesse went on to say, "My appeal was for the moral content of his message to not only deal with the personal and moral responsibility of black males, but to deal with the collective moral responsibility of government and the public policy which would be a corrective action for the lack of good choices that often led to their irresponsibility.''

Collective moral responsibility? I wish he would stop pushing HIS morals on me. And anyway, what about the separation of Church and State?

At least he was honest when using the word “collective”. We better get used to that one.

Hey Howard

Welcome to the Forum !!!

Agreed. Although I'm a bit late to the party in saying so.

[Freak Out]

Hey Texas...have you ever received medical care in another country other than at a US base? Have you experienced how the system works in Canada and Germany first hand?

Just curious, what part of Tex are you suggesting needs to be examined?

Frontal lobe.

[Harlan Huckleby]

i'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

[texaspackerbacker]

Hey Texas...have you ever received medical care in another country other than at a US base? Have you experienced how the system works in Canada and Germany first hand?

This somehow slipped past me yesterday. I have been amazingly healthy. The only night I ever spent in a hospital was 55 years ago--tonsilectomy, age 6. You can count on one hand the times I've been to a doctor anywhere since I got out of the army in '79. I only went while I was in to get out of duty.

I have, however, spoken first hand to dissatisfied Canadians. That plus tons of horror stories that weren't first hand tell me their system is a horror story.

Ours, on the other hand, for all the reasons I stated in the other post, is the best in the world.

There basically are only three criteria: QUALITY--ours is second to none, NOBODY GOING WITHOUT NEEDED CARE--virtually everybody gets it, and CHOICE/FREEDOM--nobody has more than we do.

I suppose it could be argued that the fourth criterion is cost. I was in an HMO through my wife/her job just over $200 a month for the whole family until the kids grew up and I had her drop family coverage. She now pays about $75 a month for herself, and I've been uninsured the last 4 or 5 years--except for the VA, which I haven't really availed myself of. And now, three of our forum conservatives want to take away MY RIGHT to choose not to be insured? I have to ask WHY?

The system ain't broke; Why in the hell even think about fixing it? This is NOT a rhetorical question. An answer consistent with conservative principles would be nice.

[HowardRoark]

Hey Texas...have you ever received medical care in another country other than at a US base? Have you experienced how the system works in Canada and Germany first hand?

This somehow slipped past me yesterday. I have been amazingly healthy. The only night I ever spent in a hospital was 55 years ago--tonsilectomy, age 6. You can count on one hand the times I've been to a doctor anywhere since I got out of the army in '79. I only went while I was in to get out of duty.

I have, however, spoken first hand to dissatisfied Canadians. That plus tons of horror stories that weren't first hand tell me their system is a horror story.

Ours, on the other hand, for all the reasons I stated in the other post, is the best in the world.

There basically are only three criteria: QUALITY--ours is second to none, NOBODY GOING WITHOUT NEEDED CARE--virtually everybody gets it, and CHOICE/FREEDOM--nobody has more than we do.

I suppose it could be argued that the fourth criterion is cost. I was in an HMO through my wife/her job just over $200 a month for the whole family until the kids grew up and I had her drop family coverage. She now pays about $75 a month for herself, and I've been uninsured the last 4 or 5 years--except for the VA, which I haven't really availed myself of. And now, three of our forum conservatives want to take away MY RIGHT to choose not to be insured? I have to ask WHY?

The system ain't broke; Why in the hell even think about fixing it? This is NOT a rhetorical question. An answer consistent with conservative principles would be nice.

It sounds as though you are insured via the VA. I'm more than OK with that.

It costs over $1000/month for my family.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Go down to the Phoenix Children's E.R. tomorrow. Bring your I-Phone, report what you see.

I am not Tex.

I think there is a problem with the system right now. But the solution, I think, is to make it more market driven. Or, I should say...market driven.

Ah, market driven..your answer for health care and education.

Please explain the nature of the free market and non intervention when it comes to conservatives.

I'm curious as to how you rationalize intervention in:

1. The treasury lending money to Morgan to buy Bear.
2. The gov't involvement in IndyMac
3. the treasury and banks trying to shed bad assets. (superfund)
4. The s&l crisis.

[texaspackerbacker]

Hey Texas...have you ever received medical care in another country other than at a US base? Have you experienced how the system works in Canada and Germany first hand?

This somehow slipped past me yesterday. I have been amazingly healthy. The only night I ever spent in a hospital was 55 years ago--tonsilectomy, age 6. You can count on one hand the times I've been to a doctor anywhere since I got out of the army in '79. I only went while I was in to get out of duty.

I have, however, spoken first hand to dissatisfied Canadians. That plus tons of horror stories that weren't first hand tell me their system is a horror story.

Ours, on the other hand, for all the reasons I stated in the other post, is the best in the world.

There basically are only three criteria: QUALITY--ours is second to none, NOBODY GOING WITHOUT NEEDED CARE--virtually everybody gets it, and CHOICE/FREEDOM--nobody has more than we do.

I suppose it could be argued that the fourth criterion is cost. I was in an HMO through my wife/her job just over $200 a month for the whole family until the kids grew up and I had her drop family coverage. She now pays about $75 a month for herself, and I've been uninsured the last 4 or 5 years--except for the VA, which I haven't really availed myself of. And now, three of our forum conservatives want to take away MY RIGHT to choose not to be insured? I have to ask WHY?

The system ain't broke; Why in the hell even think about fixing it? This is NOT a rhetorical question. An answer consistent with conservative principles would be nice.

It sounds as though you are insured via the VA. I'm more than OK with that.

It costs over $1000/month for my family.

True about the VA. Although I have never used it, I've heard horror stories about it as the closest thing we have in this country to socialized medicine--along with the military and dependent health care system.

SPECIFICALLY, what do you see as bad about the current system, and what would you like to see that would improve it? I sincerely hope the answer doesn't turn out to be grabbing people's RIGHT to choose not to be insured and throwing it in the trash.

[HowardRoark]

Go down to the Phoenix Children's E.R. tomorrow. Bring your I-Phone, report what you see.

I am not Tex.

I think there is a problem with the system right now. But the solution, I think, is to make it more market driven. Or, I should say...market driven.

Ah, market driven..your answer for health care and education.

Please explain the nature of the free market and non intervention when it comes to conservatives.

I'm curious as to how you rationalize intervention in:

1. The treasury lending money to Morgan to buy Bear.
2. The gov't involvement in IndyMac
3. the treasury and banks trying to shed bad assets. (superfund)
4. The s&l crisis.

Please refer to my thread, Moral Hazards and Happy Meals for the Circle Jerk.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=13174

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Go down to the Phoenix Children's E.R. tomorrow. Bring your I-Phone, report what you see.

I am not Tex.

I think there is a problem with the system right now. But the solution, I think, is to make it more market driven. Or, I should say...market driven.

Ah, market driven..your answer for health care and education.

Please explain the nature of the free market and non intervention when it comes to conservatives.

I'm curious as to how you rationalize intervention in:

1. The treasury lending money to Morgan to buy Bear.
2. The gov't involvement in IndyMac
3. the treasury and banks trying to shed bad assets. (superfund)
4. The s&l crisis.

Please refer to my thread, Moral Hazards and Happy Meals for the Circle Jerk.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=13174

I see nothing there that explains to me how you rationalize intervention.

[HowardRoark]

True about the VA. Although I have never used it, I've heard horror stories about it as the closest thing we have in this country to socialized medicine--along with the military and dependent health care system.

SPECIFICALLY, what do you see as bad about the current system, and what would you like to see that would improve it? I sincerely hope the answer doesn't turn out to be grabbing people's RIGHT to choose not to be insured and throwing it in the trash.

But, you are insured. Your insurance is funded by the taxpayer.

Specifically, the costs are going up at 2-3 times inflation in this country.

The key is to have the consumer make a consumer decision in healthcare. This is best accomplished via HSAs and high deductible policies.

Also, costs go higher because I have to absorb the costs of the people who choose, as you call it, to not be responsible. Someone has to pay for these people. It sounds as though you might be insulated from this issue because of your circumstance.

Lastly, we also have worldwide Socialism in medicine. Medical devices and medicines are priced cheaper by the companies in other countries because they know that the middle-upper class citizens of the U.S. will bear the costs. This has to change too.

Specifically, I would ask you, what should we do with the people in this country who need medical attention who either choose to be uninsured, or are simply not insured?

[HowardRoark]

Go down to the Phoenix Children's E.R. tomorrow. Bring your I-Phone, report what you see.

I am not Tex.

I think there is a problem with the system right now. But the solution, I think, is to make it more market driven. Or, I should say...market driven.

Ah, market driven..your answer for health care and education.

Please explain the nature of the free market and non intervention when it comes to conservatives.

I'm curious as to how you rationalize intervention in:

1. The treasury lending money to Morgan to buy Bear.
2. The gov't involvement in IndyMac
3. the treasury and banks trying to shed bad assets. (superfund)
4. The s&l crisis.

Please refer to my thread, Moral Hazards and Happy Meals for the Circle Jerk.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=13174

I see nothing there that explains to me how you rationalize intervention.

When did I rationalize said intervention?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

His answer is nothing...because they can receive care today, with the best system in the world, the lowest prices, etc.

who can't receive care in this country?

[HowardRoark]

His answer is nothing...because they can receive care today, with the best system in the world, the lowest prices, etc.

who can't receive care in this country?

Tex, Ty is answering for you. Do you feel dirty?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Go down to the Phoenix Children's E.R. tomorrow. Bring your I-Phone, report what you see.

I am not Tex.

I think there is a problem with the system right now. But the solution, I think, is to make it more market driven. Or, I should say...market driven.

Ah, market driven..your answer for health care and education.

Please explain the nature of the free market and non intervention when it comes to conservatives.

I'm curious as to how you rationalize intervention in:

1. The treasury lending money to Morgan to buy Bear.
2. The gov't involvement in IndyMac
3. the treasury and banks trying to shed bad assets. (superfund)
4. The s&l crisis.

Please refer to my thread, Moral Hazards and Happy Meals for the Circle Jerk.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=13174

I see nothing there that explains to me how you rationalize intervention.

When did I rationalize said intervention?

I asked the question. YOu said look at the thread..therefore it is in answer to my rationalization question.

NOw, you come back with "when did i..." Strange.

Please explain how gov't intervention is ok in these instances...certainly it isnt' the free market.

And, after that, i'd like you to explain what will happen in a similar instance in the education market.