Lucky...

There are people who work (working poor) who are above the threshold for welfare, yet can't even come close to HC. The you have people with pre-existing, people like me who haven't had HC ins for years and would probably not be able to get it oe get affordable coverage due to the ins co's knowing people like me have deferred ins and would be a big risk. People like my GF who can't retire after working for 29 years at the same plce, she has pre-existings that prohibit her to retire and still have ins. The list goes on, but I guess you are comfortable to have a corporation decide who get care and how much it will cost. I feelbetter the gov making that decision.

Funny how the R's always whine about fillibuster enactment; my how times change. Funny how it won't be a Republican doing the filibuster. Sen. Lieberman is to thank for that. You mean it won't only be a Repub doing the filibuster. I'm sure many will join. To think Lieberman is anything but a Repub is silly. He backs the war spending and campaigned for McCain ferociously. The Desm will dangle his war chairs in front of his face to not only not FB, but to vote for HC. He wants to pretend he's a good Jewish person faithful to his origin, he hates Arabs/Palestine so he will give on HC to keep that, then watch Obama pull out the ME and the senate tell Lieberman to FO. Also, once the dems refused to nominate him for the Dem senate seat, he ran as an indep and was elected. Of the people who voted in Connecticut, 2/3 of his votes came from Repubs, so yea, he's all Independent

He also will not acknowledge that the gov is who run many manufacturing jobs out of this country with regulations pushed by OSHA and the EPA. And NO, I don't want a dangerous work place or a dirty planet. But common sense is gone today....... Since our friend won't address the issues, I guess we'll just have to use Lucky-nomics to figure out what he means. I'll give it a shot..... You keep citing this "12 million dead" because of Hoover. Would you care to share with the rest of us exactly what that number represents and where you got it? According to Lucky-nomics theory:Huh? Stick to the issues! I asked, "You keep mentioning that the government should open manufacturing facilities to create jobs. What would they manufacture without taking jobs away from present manufacturers?" According to Lucky-nomics theory:Money! Who would buy the product? According to Lucky-nomics theory:Buy? We could give it away! How would they pay the workers? According to Lucky-nomics theory: With the money they print...duh. Are you willing to give the government 90% of what you earn so they can do this? According to Lucky-nomics theory: Since we'll have lot's of extra money taxes could be eliminated.

He also will not acknowledge that the gov is who run many manufacturing jobs out of this country with regulations pushed by OSHA and the EPA. And NO, I don't want a dangerous work place or a dirty planet. But common sense is gone today....... You haven't substantiated that OSHA and the EPA ran jobs out and you won't cause that isn't how you roll - all that research. So you are declaring a dangerous workplace as good, if you want to waive safety for jobs, assuming there is any merit to your claim that OSHA and EAP have done this.

Sure, love to. As the GD kicked off, Oct 29, 1929 tax cuts were already in the works, so Hoover went fwd citing that, "THE MARKET WILL CORRECT ITSELF." Backing up, taxes were cut from 1925-1928 to just 25%, so Hoover cut the top brkt to 24% and figured that would help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States Chart at the lower-left. So then 12 million Americans died acording to this cite: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_died_in_the_Great_Depression They say 7 city an d 5 rural. this was a quick search I did, but now that I do a more comprehensive search it may be different. I've spent a couple hours looking for an answewr, I'm thinking it wasn't really tracked. I'll keep looking. This citation states 7 mill died of humger, I'm sure the other 5 mill is based upon lacking medical care, suicide, etc. http://aotearoaawiderperspective.wordpress.com/2009/04/23/imf-predicts-worst-recession-since-great-depression/ Here's where I got the number too: http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/ The researcher touched upon quite a hot topic in the article – the estimation of the number of victims of the Great Depression in the USA. The material presented in the article apparently made Wikipedia’s moderators delete the piece from the database of the online encyclopedia. http://www.cherada.com/articulos/10-million-americans-disappeared-during-the-great-depression-time Voluntary defenders of U.S. values who venture to discuss the matter with me, normally begin with a statement that those people were simply not born. However, if we take the age pyramid and distribute the people according to their dates of birth, it becomes apparent that 5.5 million children and two million grown-ups are missing from the 7.5 million. So, those two million people could not have been non-existent ? as they had been born. They could only die I think they're basing their findings on the census population, at least in part: http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/popclockest.txt That shows a disparity of 5.3M from 1930 to 1937. So I dunno, I think no one really knows, they just use inferrential data like the census. Also, fertility rates dropped significantly, so some may count the lives that would have been. I'm glad you asked and I spent all morning researching, I think I'll revise that to 7 million, that seems like a safe and fair number. It's not relevant tho, 2 million, 7 million, 12 million; it really doesn't matter, it could have been avoided if the gov/Hoover would have considered the economic mess as significant. Anyway, then Hoover realized how bad he fucked up and raised taxes in June 1932 with the Revenue Act of 1932: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1932 The, uh, market then fixed itself after intervention, not by voodoo. We have to find what is needed and not being provided or provided expensively and the proifit going to the rich to pool. Furthermore, we could pour whatever profits back into the people's pockets via lower costs. Some W.E. countriues have their medical set up this way; a non-profit co-op. Is it possible for you to be more abstract to make your point? Let's see, this mess, as well as the GD, were created by greedy corporate America, bailed out by the gov. The diff is the turd in charge during the GD decided it wasn't necc for THE GOVERNMENT to react. Remind you of Katrina? Turds say. 'let nature, the market, etc fix it,' compassionate, brilliant people are proactive: Clinton, Obama, GHWB, FDR, etc.

And the people, the needy may not be able to afford it, so either the gov tax to pay for it, deficit spend or open manufacturing facitilies to bot employ people and to distribute neeeded goods. Kinda liek you saying about teaching a man to fish.... same concept. Why would you be defeatist ridiculous? I mean if the gov set aside a chunk of land and taught people how to farm to produce, that would be a way. Altho I don't think we are that GD-era desperate, just an example. Apparenlty you're proud of who you voted for, hence you stated them. Did you vote for that other Repib offshoot, the Libertarians? They ave basically the same take on taxes as the R's, just more extreme.

Playing politics with my country is what got us into this mess. Why not forget party lines and vote your consience? Politics have never been a part of America . Most things Dem are things I agree with, so they are virtually one in the same. I am pro-guns and the R's are a little less aggressive about taking our guns, so I could go that way and have. Of course then civil rights go to hell, welfare goes to hell, the rich/corps run amuck, so to weigh it out I need to vote D to fullfill MOST of my agendas.

I thought several of us have quashed that fallacious argument by now. There is no way I can pay for X, you can pay for Y. etc. Tax revenue and outlays have virtually no correlation, so there is no way one can effect the other. Furthermore, if there were, I haven't enjoyed paying 1T for your war and 600B/yr for your military you think is so neccessary. I'm constantly working on it. Even if I had HC ins, I would want this, so your point is irrelevant. Last I checked in college 25% of welfare recipients were chronic. Not if they're in too bad shape or older, etc. So a person can change their station, that's why I advocate gov-paid HC and education, so we can advance health and intelligence rather than advancing wealth disparity and military destruction. Ultimately, all those R's telling D's if tehy don't like it, move. Well, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, MOVE.

Are you kidding me? Have you read all 2000 pages? I didn't think so. Whatever the outcome, youyr party didn't want to propose a fix, so here it is. The R electorate passed McCain by and chose a war coward and his VP thug; quit acting as if there isn't blame to spread and virtually all the debt was incurred under an R.

I agree, my post was just as stupid as attacking Michelle Obama. That was kind of the point..... It's a question Derrek. Why the media muzzle on her???? I do wonder if it's due to "first time I'm proud of my country" statement... But that's besides the orginial question which what community work she did. How does the media have a muzzle on her?

Gee, they did it after Hoover cut taxes slightly as the GD kicked off, almost 3 years later and 12 mill dead Hoover almost tripled them and FDR raised them a little a year later and then again. They were in the 70's-80's thru the 1930's and as much as 94% in WWII, then stayed in the 90's thru the 1950's, a very massive industrial time for us and businesses didn't die during that time, so how is raising the top brkt from 40% to 50-60% going to kill big business? The wealth disparity is spreading in a huge way, so how is it that the rich are overtaxed? And you say fuck the poor, just as Hoover did and 12 mill died. Look, when you guys keep clammering about everything for the rich and nothing for teh poor, your agendas are obvious. The RW is incompassionate. WHat looks silly is that vitually all of teh debt ocurred under a R president, then the minute a D gets in office you start clammering about the debt. How can your side conscionably whimper when just your last turd alone ramped it up 5T? And that isn't even bringing in fascist Ronnie.

And so it's all fucked up, your solution isssssssssssss: Allow for interstate purchasing of insurance I acan't afford it here, but I can afford it at a 10% discount via interstae competition . Good or bad, this is here as a result of the R's not having anything viable, just status quo. BTW, I see you've changed your tone from it won't pass, to when it passes . I realize the hardest is yet to come, but Fillibuster, which stands for: According to Binder and Smith, the origin of the word appears to be a cross between the English and Dutch for free booty, a term to describe looters who lived on others’ booty and spoils, is thought of as a dirty trick, a desperate last chance, etc. The R's look bad enough, they risk looking worse if they filibuster. The R's chided the D's for threatening it in 2005 as dirty pool, the R's threatened to change the rules of judicial nomination, now the R's are threatening it. If you're an R, probably the best thing you can do to get majority again and you truely feel HC will fail, would be to let it pass, have it be a missery and then let the votes role in. Otherwise whenever a person feels fucked by existing HC they can and could blame the R's for blocking what would be construed as a former possible fix. Again, if the R's had a solution, they could have proposed it and we wouldn't be in this so-called mess. Their solution was to say fuck the poor, fuck those with pre-existing illness, etc.

Funny how the R's always whine about fillibuster enactment; my how times change.

Here's a list of the Dems who voted against it. Glad no AZ Dems are in there, we must be more progressive than I thought. http://www.myfreedompost.com/2009/11/39-democrats-who-voted-against-pelosis.html Before you think these guys are all for, uh, freedom, at least one voted against it as it is too weak: Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH)

Rush.....oh Rushy..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9sirG0UEGg

So much for those equal rights for everyone. "You have the right to think and to say anything you want, as long as you agree with me." Standard belief system for people with his point of view. edit: spelling And you have the right to add nothing and complain about people who do, glad to see you excersizing it.

It's probably worth noting that his character never actually shoots and kills anyone in that movie. He chases off the gang members at the begining with a bat, after they crash during the driveby he shoots one of them in the leg and leaves them there, and he ends up stabbing the racist surplus store owner in a struggle for his life. I feel like I'm arguing with Belgian over: - 20 degrees is where carb icing starts as a rule vs - 20 degrees is where carb icing is most susceptable Come on, it was a reference/analogy to a ficticious movie and comparing it to real life. The idea of a man being stripped of his ability to survive creates some whackos where there otherwise wouldn't be, that's my point.

http://www.wesh.com/news/21541263/detail.html They played a taped interview from a supervisor/manager at the engineering firm. This manager said his "work product" was bad, they tried to help him, they couoldn't so they let him go. I believe the manager; how bout you?

Nah. Although between you poling 1,000 males, and RushMC's thread about "Feeling Lucky", I can understand why that's on your mind. But I never pole myself.

If the country is starving thnethe gov has options: - Be a Hoover, McCain, Republican, Libertarian or Lawrocket and watch 10, 20 , 30+ million die and wave the flag of freedom from tyrany; shrug shoulders and say the market will correct itself. - Pay some corporation to provide basic sustenance to all of the needy by way of harsh tax increases on the rich - Deficit spend to provide basic sustenance to all of the needy by way of hammering the debt. Your hero, Hoover thought he would try it your way, 12 mill died, of course you won't comment on that. If people are dying, there is a demand. Maybe not a paying demand, but still a need and a demand. Not neccessarily, either tax or deficit spend and make the beloved corps even more rich off the blood of the needy, who were made that wasy largely die to corporate greed. Of course a true conservative capitalist only wants capitalism and a free market based upon the rules of the government completely deregulating them so they can prey upon theconsumer. Great Repiblican presidents like Teddy Roosevelt cared, now the new (neo) conservatives think not; unbridled capitalism via no regulation. The corporations have the biggest advantage, they can't be thrown out and can basically hide and act as tho their misdeeds are a mistake.

The government opening manufacturing facilities? I didn't know that the government was in the manufacturing business. They're not, that's why they would open them if unemployment became too harsh. Of course you would rather the country relive the GD in the name of some antequated ideal where the gov stays out of saving the country and 10's of millions......ever wonder why your side is sitting?

Every chance I get

This is consistent with what Bill says all the time about people bitching about social spending and not bitching about military spending. It's ok to spend as long as it either helps you or you agree with it, otherwise it's theft, larceny, hiway robbery and just plain wrong.

Abstract is one of those universal words with many meanings. Here is teh def: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/abstract 1. Considered apart from concrete existence: an abstract concept. 2. Not applied or practical; theoretical. See Synonyms at theoretical. 3. Difficult to understand; abstruse: abstract philosophical problems. 4. Thought of or stated without reference to a specific instance: abstract words like truth and justice. 5. Impersonal, as in attitude or views. 6. Having an intellectual and affective artistic content that depends solely on intrinsic form rather than on narrative content or pictorial representation: abstract painting and sculpture. So your definition isn't incorrect, it wasn't the context in which I used it. My point is that using extremes is abstract in that it is theorhetical, not literal. Yes, but he could be receiving vacation pay while in jail . No, this was just one piece of the work we need to do to bring worker's benefits up to par; vacation alone won't make the deal. No, as I told Mike, I think you can do that now, have partial representation. Either way, the gov needs to appaoint a gov mediator at workplaces to note events as a union drive starts, as teh company is sleazy and will do nasty shit to break unions.