NCclimber

Here I was thinking Bonfire was a friendly, non-confrontational forum. Edited to Add: I checked my PMs with any of the mods. The only thing I found regarding you was "I don't have much of a problem with Amazon. For the most part I find her very amusing."

Just cant help yourself can you... Can I get you a mirror?

Is everyone this catty, over here? I mean. it's not exactly the open arms welcome I was expecting.

Hi everyone. What's this place like? SC is pretty boring. I thought I'd hang around here for a while.

She's banned I hope it's not permanent. This place is poorer without her.

Way to go Republicans.

I wonder if Amazon is around, today?

Don't forget about which group fought to keep slavery.

First: Then: Thoughts?

By today's standards?

I apologizes if this is a re-post: ***Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter. The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups: 1. Liberals; and 2. Conservatives. Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed. Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement. Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement. Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girliemen . Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided. Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass. Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat. Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively.Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living. Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing. Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off.

Sorry... I think he's too busy telling everyone why and how (think of Alfalfa saying "and how) they are wrong.

Why is it that when you take from the rich and give to the poor it's "redistribution of wealth" but when you take from the poor and give to the rich it's a "free market econmy"? It's freaking bizarro Robin Hood economics. Forget any cite... WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I mean besides the fact that wealth re-distribution through taxation is simple a form of legal extortion, while any money "the poor" contribute to the free market economy is completely voluntary. And people like to whine about "the poor" being stuck in their circumstances. Go read The Grapes of Wrath. Nice piece of fiction to demonstrate a historical reality. Throughout this thread, a number of people have offered "solutions" that just scream ignorance of of economic reality as well as human nature. You can't take away the incentives for the providers and expect the same caliber of care.

So, what's this mean? That the prerequisite for being nominated is having the right person nominate you?

Go check out the FBI UCR for the last 10 years, and compare with data from Canada, Australia and the UK Home Office. It has also been posted in SC previously. *** Not as much as having your own duplicity exposed. You can look it up for yourself like I did - the data are all in the public domain. You do talk out of both sides of your mouth better than most. It's a nice compliment to the lies you post.... and refuse to own up to when exposed.

***Gore earns Nobel nomination for global warming work OSLO, Norway (AP) -- Former Vice President Al Gore has been nominated for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his wide-reaching efforts to draw the world's attention to the dangers of global warming, a Norwegian lawmaker said Thursday. "A prerequisite for winning the Nobel Peace Prize is making a difference, and Al Gore has made a difference," Conservative Member of Parliament Boerge Brende, a former minister of environment and then of trade, told The Associated Press. What's the prerequisite for being nominated? Heidi Sorensen, the July 1981 Playboy playmate of the month? So many questions... and it's not even eight o'clock.

Not as much as having your own duplicity exposed.

Another big ticket item that no one wants to discuss is the treatment of terminally ill patients. Boatloads of money is spent on people who are on the way out. As organs begin to fail, we hook 'em up to costly machines. Heart surgery on the infirm, who are failed in other ways? Have at it. Looking at the actual costs of care, treating people who are on the way out, this is a huge piece of the pie. No doubt, this opens up an ethical/moral pandora's box, but the costs are real and significant.

Data previously posted - look it up. Anyone notice a trend. Yes, people are too fucking lazy to look things up for themselves or check the archives. The thing is when you posted: I looked through this thread and didn't find any posts that proved that point. So, either it's there and I missed it or..... you're just using the "previously posted, look it up" ploy to duck the issue. As far as I can tell, you're just blowing smoke. feel free to prove me wrong. And that bit about "It has also been posted in SC previously" was a cute stunt. I wonder where among the 242,827 posts I might find that information.

If you are trying to make a point, the burden is on you to provide supporting evidence, not on me. Want to make a point, then YOU provide the data. Let's review: Do you have any sources to back back your claims? What are they? Are you implying that if guns were banned in the US, the Violent Crime and Homicide levels would be equal to current levels for all non-gun related incidents? Go check out the FBI UCR for the last 10 years, and compare with data from Canada, Australia and the UK Home Office. It has also been posted in SC previously. Previously posted in SC??? We do? Since when? Data previously posted - look it up. Anyone notice a trend.

The point you seem to miss is that before you offered that, you wrote about 100 lines of other stuff. The first several screen-fulls involved a general bashing of all things conservative, followed by an all-too-lengthy history of how you skillfully "played" the system. And you wonder why she missed your one paragraph on offering an apology.

Too true. RIP Molly Ivins.

I'm not sure about manufacturers, but the overwhelming amount of research funding comes from private sources. And I'd say it's a safe bet those private sources are interested in a decent return on their investment. Kill the investment incentive and funding will dry up. I recently read an article (I looked but couldn't find it) that compared medical funding here versus funding in all of Europe. I'm not certain, but I think US funding was something like 10 times greater than funding for all of Europe. Like I said, I'm not certain about this. If our government gets a monopoly on healthcare funding, I'd guess those research dollars will dry up, which in turn means most advancements (worldwide) will come to a crawl. Last year I had two MRIs and arthroscopic surgery to repair a painful herniated disc. I'm greatful for modern technology... and the drugs ain't too bad either.

Have you considered why there seems to be an across-the-board negative sentiment about your posting?

Everyone who can pay. ANNNNND....we're back around to the entitlements issue, again.... No. We are on the fundamental human rights issue. Having the government (read taxpayers) is a fundamental human right?