Lucky...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100223/pl_politico/33324 At least it's their own money, they usually trash the US economy.

If you consider cutting benefits to needy people and stuffing corporations full of cash to be all those flowery things above, you're right.

- Other than throw them away like trash, what do you do with the 40 million seniors, the millions of handicapped, the homeless kids, etc? I know, just do your usual glossing over on this one; not your problem. - A LIBERTARIAN would prefer that the government not do anything that isn't specifically enumerated in the constitution,... Talk about lemmings; isn't it OK to follow the gist of the US Const and make things work as changes occur? There is no way the FF could have imagined that we would do progressive things like, oh, look at people of color as more than 3/5 of a man, so since the document is so imperfect, let's look outside the box every now and then.

Since Libertarians and Repiblicans are 3-5 degrees off of each other, just refer to Republicans/conservatives, that is, unless you still wish to pretend you don't have vastly conservative beliefs.

If a conservative is attracted to someone of the same sex, they go to airport shitters and tap their foot under the stall partitions for gay sex. If they get caught they simply claim they shit with a wide stance.

+1

Either a Pure Democracy or a Parlaimentary Monarchy. Rationale: better for substantive representation than a Representative Democracy, which has little true representation. To me that's semantics. I don't care what you call it. As I see it, that compares to uneducated people calling themselves street smart so they can use the word, "smart" in their description.

Bullcrap. Hey, Max - who did you get more visits from, Dems or Reps? The Dems do far more for disabled vets than do the Repibs. Great, let's use a biased sample size of 1 that is non-random and call it data. Not to mention a visit doesn't bring substantive help. I wouldn't need a pat on the ass and a tiny American flag on a stick, I would need real substantive help, the R's simply don't provide that at the levels the D's do. In case ya didn't notice, the R's aren't people persons.

Seeing as how the Dems STILL have a majority in the House and until very recently had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, why don't you explain just HOW the Repubs have been 'cock-blocking' anything? If you call Lieberman a part of teh Dems, well, no need talking politics with the politically unaware. He killed the public option, a couple Dems weren't big on it, but he was teh Dr no on that. Remember, the guy the Dems in his state refused to nominate the incumbent senator? Remember, or are you just now learning this? Remember, then he ran as indep and 2/3 of the people who voted him in as an indep were registered Repubs? Your welcome, that is for the political history lesson. The Dems haven't have a 60+ vote base since the 1960's.

How nice, truth buster. See, we have myth busters, you must be truith buster. Right, make it harder to get for poor people, you mean. Allowing for less safe, subordinate care, unless you have money. Doinf absolutely no good, maybe drop premiums 10% at first, then the ins cos will collude and price fix. Right, make it impossible for poor peole to get coverage, WE HEAR YA. Yes, every time I check my diaper, I see tiny Republicans eating and robbing my shit blind.

Anyone who has read deeply and extensively into the history of the inner-most workings of the Nixon and Ford Administrations and their key top personnel, including Haig - which I have - knows how very true that is. I say that purely from an historical perspective. Do you really have to read that deeply into it to make that determination? From a standpoint of scholarly diligence and historical objectivity, and considering all the spin and demagoguery from Haig and Haig-allies on one side, the spin and demagoguery from Haig-antagonists (or critics) on the other side, together with media-polished pop culture, I'd have to say "Yes". Nah, it's pretty prima facie that Haig was in deep.

Truth was sacrificed. How many times did he repeat that he wasn't attacking Haig? Personally, I think that if you don't like a guy, when he dies, you say nothing. It's not necessary to overstate how great he was, but if you have nothing good to say, just let it rest. What truth was sacrificed?

Thank you for being the moral monitor for everyone, it is oh so unwelcome. I love the, "both sides" idea, reminds of the rhororic about, "both sides are equally responsible for the debt." Try to understand why people find conservatism so deplorable; THEY WANT TO SET THE RULES FOR EVERYONE FOR EVERYTHING. WHat's your point? We do. If you want to pretend Haig wasn't tied to politics, well, sorry. People in politics die, so death and politics have a relationship, if you don't like to read about it, don't pop in; how's that for moral moderation? (hangs head) And I feel so dirty, please forgive me. Calling a guy who was scandalous, a person who was tied to Nixon corruption is factual, and it's fair when alos saying he was a war hero; it's just objective and fair on both ends. Youw ant to ignore the truth and praise the limited. US corporations have bilked this country dry, millions have no HC, people are getting murdered all over the world, there is mass starvation, natural disaster kill thousands in one fell swoop and you choose to get your feathers ruffled and think the sole origin of all this evility is because of a thread about a war hero who moved on to become a corrupt politician? Get your priorities straight.

You don't think so many millions of people think the same thing? Remember, I'm not advocating he die, I'm just assuming that with all teh heart attacks, it must be a higher power. We all believe in Jebus and God as our loads in saviour, right?

You are unreal! No, I'm here and I'm real. It's a shame you can't put your feelings to words.

I may be.

qft He started having heart attacks at age 37. I hope the prognosis is good and he gets to stay with us a bit longer. Yea, he's been so fruitful to this country and his continued advice has been so inspirational even after he left office. I esp like how he's been chiding GWB for not giving Libby a full pardon, even wrote a book on it. All you guys who hated Clinton and ignored Reagan (as if he didn't pardon almost as many) for their 100's of backdoor pardons are also ignoring this factoid of Cheney; isn't selective application of justice fun?

Maybe you are unaware, but you can't call people a troll; it's a PA.

I wrote: Conservatives rallied about the black helicopters, inferring false paranoia, now that they are not in power, they are the ones who are realistically crying 'conspiracy.' It was sarcasm. I was projecting the sarcasm from the the RW about the left being paranoid. Then, when they are not in power, they are the ones realistically pointing out the black helicopters. Point is, whoever is not in power cries conspiracy.

Biological evolution exists all around you, everyday, including today. Elements of it are things like natural selection, which is impossible to disprove. People who overuse: - Proven - Fact Do so because they have neither. I see you use it in the negative, in a compound fashion. Science only disproves, honest science doesn't use proof in teh classic sense. In fact, hardcore scientists don't even believe in natural laws as stated because once something levitates all the other pieces of "FACT' and "PROOF" fall along with the laws of gravity. Science takes a lot of hypotheses and tests them from many angles, tries to only have 1 independent variable, makes observations, repeats as many times as possible and makes a conclusion. They post this conclusion in the form of a theory for their contemporaries to pick it apart. These other scientists try to disprove this theory/theories, if they can't they are abliged to state so and all or in part go along with the posted theory, if even by acquiescence. These words; fact and proof are often used in teh absolute as if to say there is such a thing on a constant basis. I've devolved into using them carefully, as they are used in conversation and it becomes cumbersome to converse and not use them, but the 2 words really are bullshit. Point is: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PERMANENT, ABSOLUTE PROOF, so it's irresponsible to go around throwing it around. Science is generally careful not to use it, religion and other unsubstantiated guesses use it as strong language to convince the naive. Remember, SCIENCE BEGS YOU TO DISPROVE THEM, RELIGION DARES YOU TO. So whatever the ultimate truth, religion's pursuit of it is nauseating, science's approach is noble and open. The theory of Evolution is the whole thing from primate to man, or a divergence from something to man with a simultaneous divergence to primate. This is a theory, but the individual elements of evolution are generally occurring today or have in the past, that is really supportable. The fact that anyone subscribes to absolute proof and/or absolute fact as you have stated shows me there are gullable people out there, regardless of the subject. Remember, the earth's shape was thought to be: - Flat - Round - Spherical So that's where we're at, right? Wrong, it's an oblate spheroid sinc eit rotates on its axis, the ends fall in, the middle swells. So we're done, right? We have absolute proof, right? No, it can change, the understanding of what we now have can change via new discovery. Or the actual shape could change via other phenomenon. So in science, EVERYTHING IS UP FOR GRABS AT ALL TIME, in religion, don;t fuck what has been absolutely proven by your diddy and your diddies before him. Religion's approach to origin and destiny is grotesque. SO do I, so let's teach every religion, like that of teh Muslim's too; agreed? Remember, the 1st doesn't allow for gov establishment of any religion, so we have to teach all the major ones so we aren't violating it, right? Attendance to what is mandatory? What gun point from whom to who?

You didn't answer a bit of it, here, I'll repost: The article title is: Top five health insurers posted 56 percent profit gains in 2009 So my point persists: In an economy that has MAJOR corporatiosn going tits up, these HC insurerers are still measuring profits in: - + profits - Millions Your own citation established that, what is your argument? What is the point of this? This is a typical ad hominem, it doesn't address teh issue. Yes, it says that ins cos are still prifiting, just not as much. But factor in teh economy and it's a miracle they can profit at all. Point is, in a bad economy they are making money when most / many industries are hoping to outlast the bad times. And in normal/good times they make 100's of millions while millions of people go w/o HC and top CEO's make insane salaries. You still haven't addressed your assertion that I, in thsi thread, stated HC cos are making record profits. Care to admit you're wrong? ________________________________________________ You didn't answer a thing, keep runnin and hope no one notices. Yea, go to your cubicle and then get a manicure, I worked in freezing, driving rain today and you? I know, you changed the water out for the girls in the office and answered a few calls.

Yea, we have a great Bill from the House with the public option with a requisite public option. The Senate Bill w/o the PO but had a 60-vote approval. I'm guessing we could get a PO thru the Senate with reconciliation and a 51 vote majority. It was unclear to me too, so I referenced what matters; Congress. I don't care about polls and with horrible political system - representative democracy - all that matters are the elected officials, the people's wish are just for entertainment.

The article title is: Top five health insurers posted 56 percent profit gains in 2009 So my point persists: In an economy that has MAJOR corporatiosn going tits up, these HC insurerers are still measuring profits in: - + profits - Millions Your own citation established that, what is your argument? What is the point of this? This is a typical ad hominem, it doesn't address teh issue. Yes, it says that ins cos are still prifiting, just not as much. But factor in teh economy and it's a miracle they can profit at all. Point is, in a bad economy they are making money when most / many industries are hoping to outlast the bad times. And in normal/good times they make 100's of millions while millions of people go w/o HC and top CEO's make insane salaries. You still haven't addressed your assertion that I, in thsi thread, stated HC cos are making record profits. Care to admit you're wrong?

Capitalism = the biggest debtor Communism = the biggest creditor Capitalism has been a dead ideology as of a long time ago, I'd say Reagan put the final sword in it. Of course a grotesque military was really the death blow, but if Capitalism is so great it should have been able to carry that burden. With all that said, a quasi-Capitalism / quasi-Socialism government with a reasonable military is the best, most successful form of government right now that extends the most benefot to all people. Capitalism teh way teh US does it is just done, no one wants to copy our model. Another pile of crap post So when you are unable to address a post you do this? Sad. Here it is, try again: Capitalism = the biggest debtor Communism = the biggest creditor Capitalism has been a dead ideology as of a long time ago, I'd say Reagan put the final sword in it. Of course a grotesque military was really the death blow, but if Capitalism is so great it should have been able to carry that burden. With all that said, a quasi-Capitalism / quasi-Socialism government with a reasonable military is the best, most successful form of government right now that extends the most benefot to all people. Capitalism teh way teh US does it is just done, no one wants to copy our model.

Capitalism = the biggest debtor Communism = the biggest creditor Capitalism has been a dead ideology as of a long time ago, I'd say Reagan put the final sword in it. Of course a grotesque military was really the death blow, but if Capitalism is so great it should have been able to carry that burden. With all that said, a quasi-Capitalism / quasi-Socialism government with a reasonable military is the best, most successful form of government right now that extends the most benefot to all people. Capitalism teh way teh US does it is just done, no one wants to copy our model.