Lucky...

5 years later....... how briliant does this assertion seem?

And what if someone is able to fabricate a prostetic penis with C4, get thru the scanner with it and be discovered with it. WHat then, junk check? Cavity check? It isn't that far off, just 1 failed attempt. Shoe bomber = shoes off and scanned, lap burner = no lap tops or getting up 1 hr before landing, penis bomber would = penis checks before boarding.

I thought EVERYBODY has a built-in explosive pocket. How explosive it is, depends on what you ate a few hours ago and whether or not you can sneak a match on-board. Post that VID I sent you.. talk about hiding something I'd love to, but I've used up all my forum lives. Aint no way I am posting that.... that takes sick and twisted to new levels... although I think a couple people around this site... would be thinkin its nothing new. PM linky

His father was so conernced with his son's fanatical religious views that he contacted US authorities. And he has a scary muslim name... According to a redneck white woman who was on the acft in question, she said it was an African American. Just when I thought we were getting away from idiocy....

If you've ever been to divorce court the answer is YES.

Did you even read the post to which I linked? The cost of the deficit was figured into the expense, and it was still much cheaper. Yes, I read it. That still doesn't change the fact that there's a $7B deficit. The business is consistently in the red (and protected by law) and therefore should not be held up as an efficiently run company. Yes, we should make it exclusive, just like HC is today. Brilliant. BTW, look at the post I just entered about UPS losses the 4Q of 2007... - 2+B. Now make your, "private is more efficient" argument.

Did you even read the post to which I linked? The cost of the deficit was figured into the expense, and it was still much cheaper. Not to mention that as the Great Republican Recession kicked off, UPS lost > 2B in 1 quarter. If we tallied the losses of all private carriers since the Great Republican Recession started, it would dwarf that of the USPS. And I wonder who makes letter delivery available to all. Just think if the USPS went out of business, would mail delivery look like HC does today? So only part of society could mail a letter.

No, you just don't want anyone addressing it outside of your slim margin, just like private HC itself. It was about the use of mail boxes, as UPS can deliver letters, essentially mail. UPS cannot deliver to mailboxes, that was the issue. The USPS calls first class what UPS / FED EX would call something else, so you're intentionally getting stuck on the semantics of language while the outcome is the same. WHat is mail? Letters, packages? Sure and the USPS, UPS, FED EX delivers all of those, only the USPS can use US Mail Boxes. I have a private mailbox and get mail, letters, packages from all of these - your point is sadly meaningless again. Right, just as the private HC insurers don't want patients unless they can make a big profit; you're once again starting to understand our analogy - I'm proud of you. What I'm not proud of is that you think HC should be about money and not people. Remember, the USPS is about delivering mail, not about money. Just as the public option would be about delivering HC, not about money. You're such a great guy for saying fuck people and let's make money or not offer it. As for profit/loss, looks like UPS stocks were down low earlier this year from your party's Great Recession. http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=UPS#chart1:symbol=ups;range=2y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined DHL is considerably cutting operations: http://247wallst.com/2008/11/10/ups-fedex-losin/ UPS lost: The company reported a net loss of $2.576 billion ... in the 4th Q of 2007, even tho the connies tell us the recession wasn't until mid-2008. http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/TOP%20STORY/2155255/ So to act as tho the USPS is so inefficient and private carriers are doing well in the Great Republican Recession is weak. Most everyone is doing crappy and losing money....but after all...... it is about money and not people, right? Did you dress up for XMAS? If so, let me guess what you dressed as...... ____________________________ Now, to redress the previosu issue you keep running from: KELP WROTE: The cheapest rate for delivering a letter on UPS is $16.38. Not exactly the same thing, is it? Calling it a package, you can get down to 9.44. They can't deliver a 1 oz package without charging you as if it were a pound. Note also that they charge more to deliver to residential addresses, because they don't have mailboxes there. I WROTE: That's an intra-UPS policy, not a law. So what you've illustrated is that the gov option allows for more flexibility saving the user money over the private option. For once we agree. So to say, as you did in this thread: The discussion was regarding the USPS monopoly on first class letter delivery. is ridiculous, as you are talking diffs in cost and efficencies, now that you look less than correct, you want to limit the arg to the monopoly on 1st class letter delivery. You broadened the issue to cost, as did most others, so the issue is as well that of cost efficiency private vs public; a good point where we both agree.

The Post Office does a fair amount of temp hiring every year in December to handle the holiday volume. Although I have heard that the volume is so low this year, it matches ordinary volumes of previous years. I guess people have cut down on cards this year. In the wake of the "nutter with a gun" incident at the post office recently, I wonder how the government is going to respond to people that start complaining about politics at the Post Office. Don't get distracted by Kelp's misdirection; he's unable to debunk other analagous correlations so he came here so he wouldn't have to post there anymore.

This illustrates your total lack of understanding of data-type references. We used The post office and toll roads general operating protocol over the years with millions of transactions to illustrate how things work and how things work in common with each other as a way to determine how public HC would work cheaper and more efficent than corporate-controlled HC. The USPS is to mail delivery, as the public option is to HC. Using millions of random mail deliveries IS statistically significant, as is using millions of UPS / FE EX deliveries. Using 1 non-random pissed off customer is both: 1) Non-random and 2) The smallest sample size Your example is relegated to a meanIngless rant, both with the Asian and with you in here. It is called, "STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT." Just because you had your ass handed to you when I illustrated that you and I agree that the USPS offers more flexibility and affordability than private options, just as the public option would have, and you can't address it - you start a new thread instead of addressing it. Why would I expect less?

Phuck smot pokers

Now that's a cogent reply. Value given for value received - in other words, it's all your post was worth in regards to a reply. Just keep on trying to spoon-feed us your RW rags. When you can't refute the data, attack the source - it's all you have. I'm not attacking the source, I'm just saying it's typical Mike to give us a RW rag site. BTW, I think you have the def for ad hominem out of whack.

Now that's a cogent reply. Value given for value received - in other words, it's all your post was worth in regards to a reply. Just keep on trying to spoon-feed us your RW rags.

Now that's a cogent reply.

I don't shadow you, so I didn't know / care. Point is, it's a RW rag and you are notorious for posting them. It has the rag I posted: NCPA. A RW rag. Now we're talking. Again, it's a RW rag, it's meaningless to me and all should ignore it. I recall a recent RW rag (Cato institute) I read said FDR tripled taxes, when it was Hoover with the Revenue Act of 1932 who raised them 260%. So these are repositories of misinformation.

Sure it was, many people participated in the analogy where we compared public HC to the public mail system; did you lose track? Sure it is, do you see Kelp in here? Nor do I.

You didn't post the link once, you just post a page and hope we miss the RW rag stamp on the bottom. I'm not necc saying it's bad data, just don't feed us data from BS sources. It's your cite = your homework. I didn't provide it, you did, you provide better source. I've never commented upon the accuracy of it, just the source is something that Hannity would cite, which makes it a joke from its inception.

Ah no, all I want is for him to acknowledge that he and I agree that the USPS provides a cheaper, more flexible alternative to private carriers. Then you enter to run misdirection; he thanks you.

Just a quick analysis of your source reveals that the US, despite having 50% more neonatal specialists than Canada and 100% more than Great Britain, as well as 15% more intensive care beds than Canada and 200% more than Great Britain, the US has the same neonatal mortality rates as Canada and United Kingdom. That certainly does not indicate higher effectiveness or higher efficiency in the US system. To be fair, your source does provide some pretty graphics; it just doesn't support your assertion. Not to mention his source is as credible as the Heritage Foundation rag. Mike is notorious for that.

It will be difficult to be worse than 37th among the developed world (the US' current rank w/r/t healthcare). Current rank w/r/t socialized healthcare, you mean. No, I wrote what I meant. And I wrote what the comparison actually *is*. Is there a problem with that? So you now admit that 36 nations with socialized healthcare are doing better than the USA. I guess we're getting somewhere. I've always admitted that 36 countries scored higher on a scale based on the desirability of socialized medicine, yes. I don't know why you think that's something new. I've also always noted that the USA takes top rank in the only criterion in the study that actually shows how well the docs and hospitals are doing their jobs. It's a good thing you haven't changed, Mike. The usual no source cited, so I have to look up your RW rag by myself. Turns out it's the NCPA. National Center for Policy Analysis; a self-proclaimed non-partisan rag, where they denounce the inheritance tax and other non-partisan goodies like that. What a crock. http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18329 Oh, I love their reference to the Heritage Foundation too - even a larger RW rag than the one you cited. If you can't understand that posting extremist rags is BS, you never will. Try posting truely objective data.

Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010527541_gunban17m.html AR and SKS owners: get ready to submit yourself for a background check. I suppose this would cover M14's/M1A's, and M1 Carbines too. And of course, this background check effectively registers you with the state as an "assault weapon" owner, and someone who needs to be watched closely. Hi John, Ya' started a good one!! Just love this "Military style" ban?/ Funny how that goes. You've seen a standard Ruger 10/22. Saw one at the gun store day before yesterday all accessorized to look like a whiz-bang, bi-pod mounted AR- what ever the current rendition is!! It's not what they are, it's what they "look like" to the hoplaphobes. Add enough plastic forestocks and other goodies and ya' could make Davey Crockets' "Old Betsy" look like Luke Skywalker's Blaster!! So WHY do the manufacturers add all that stuff? Could it be that it appeals to the same immature minds that think a Camaro with racing stripes and 4 tailpipes is cool, although it doesn't go any faster or handle any better? If the gun-o-philes only care about functionality, all that cosmetic stuff is a waste of money, right? The manufacturers' marketing folks got it all wrong. Kalbaby, Why did you bother responding to my post?? If I wanted to hear your stupid drivle I'd a asked ya! As I told you once before, I'm really glad that I don't know you personally. If we ever end up on the same dive on some DZ somewhere, I'll scratch off the dive. Don't worry, you'll never snivle a beer off me, you'll not only get turned down, you'll get turned face down. So comment to everyone else all you want but I'm not interested in anything you say. From what you've posted already and you claim to be a Skydiver, I'm amused that you havn't made a crater yet. I'm thinking compensation might be an issue here.

So, he should do as you say and not as you do, apparently? All conservatives love the cheerleading support, but no, I answer a point, Kelp continues to run from that. KELP: The cheapest rate for delivering a letter on UPS is $16.38. Not exactly the same thing, is it? Calling it a package, you can get down to 9.44. They can't deliver a 1 oz package without charging you as if it were a pound. Note also that they charge more to deliver to residential addresses, because they don't have mailboxes there. ME: That's an intra-UPS policy, not a law. So what you've illustrated is that the gov option allows for more flexibility saving the user money over the private option. For once we agree. KELP: 18 consecutive posts. Did you just return from a moderator enforced vacation? You don't need to reply to every single post, you know. AKA: Paraphasation would be: Geez, yhou sure answer a lot of posts. Mike, I'm sure you can understand, he addressd the number of posts I wrote, not a word in them. Point is, Kelp and I agree that the post office delivers cheaper and with more flexibility than do private providers...... just like HC and most other enterprises.

So attack teh poster instead of the post - gottcha, loud and clear. AKA ad hominem. I'm sincerely proud of you. Now, if you're done covering your style of responding, go ahead and answer this: That's an intra-UPS policy, not a law. So what you've illustrated is that the gov option allows for more flexibility saving the user money over the private option. For once we agree.

Which Jebus do you believe in, the one that white America worships - the one who looks like Charlie on the ZigZag package? Or the Hispanic one with darker features? Or the one African Americans worship, the one with dark features? I guess we can just make up our own Jebus and then say he created us in his image, even tho he has many diff images, depending upon who worships him, her, it, etc..... Rant alert. I didn't say anything about Jebus. I made that assuption - I'm sorry, are you Muslim, perhaps Budhist?

Likewise...in every damn post you make. Well at least you're original. You're not. Did you not get the sarcasm? By saying you are, I'm saying you're not. Anyway, thx for showing appreciation for me by mirroring me.