Lucky...

STOP the pain....make it go away Do I have to go thru the whole thing about this not being a term paper or legal doc? Go to sleep, Jeffrey.

Not at all, look at it: "Americans shouldn't have to go to the ER for treatable conditions, like asthma" You shouldn't have to go to the ER as your UNTREATED asthma becomes dangerously ill. He's saying everyone should have healthcare so they can go to their regular doctor and get medication, etc. It came off as weird at first to me too, but when you think it thru it's merely his way of saying those w/o medical care use the emergency room as tehir regular care as their dying, rather than have preventative regular care. Sorry Lucky, but speaking from personal experience, you can treat it all you want and still have an attack so bad that you end up in the ER. Right, but you can perform preventative maintenance on it and TRY to curtail attacks via medication, sprays, etc. I think that's what he meant. Asthma is treatable, of course yo0u can still have attacks that require ER attention.

Sheesh you too Jeffrey's stolen your password...

uh.. just goes to show you.... Don't be a Jeffrey.

Not at all, look at it: "Americans shouldn't have to go to the ER for treatable conditions, like asthma" You shouldn't have to go to the ER as your UNTREATED asthma becomes dangerously ill. He's saying everyone should have healthcare so they can go to their regular doctor and get medication, etc. It came off as weird at first to me too, but when you think it thru it's merely his way of saying those w/o medical care use the emergency room as tehir regular care as their dying, rather than have preventative regular care.

I agree, let's keep it exclusive, as the neo-cons have it drawn up to be.

Neither one is blowing me away with there brilliance. Typical political bullshit! It's a vary boring, safe debate...... my friends

What he's trying to say and I think it's obvious is that we should all have regular care, rather than not have it and rely on emergency care when things get bad.

All of them did have a hand in it.. BUT.. Ronnie Raygun scared them to end it finally. His increases in our military and the SDI were major things that finally made the Politburo realize they could not keep up and would have to spend resources they did not have to try to overcome that advantage. Like it or not those policies had an effect. They also had no problem believing that Ronnie would and could make a first strike. I think he was the first American president that actually thought he might be able to WIN a nuclear war Nah, I don't believe that, but we will just have to agree to disagree. Their economy was so f'd up that they didn't even look our way. I don't think they feared any recourse from us, tghey have the button too. Big nations are pussies, they fear each other so much that they regress to proxy wars at most or invasions of tiny countries.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Reagan was the original "cut and run", after the Beirut barracks bombing. He pulled out and let a couple of well known terrorists groups flourish. Hamas, Hezbollah. Without a dobt and history will rewrite his so-called legacy when the debt becomes other than just a nimber, which it now is heading toward. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Iran-Contra Yea, that was his Lewinsky, yet everyone instantly forgave him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>He crushed organized labor when he fired the air traffic controllers. And paved the way for the airline industry to bust unions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Star Wars was a BS waste of billions. Evidence of his senility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>.Russia was already on the decline and needed to go Capitalist. Yea, and fascist Ronnie took credit for the inevitable. >>>>>>>>>>>>>He was a third rate actor that Lew Wasserman made into Governor and then President. Yep, he was a USO bitch in teh Army and a B movie actor, then when Carter was given teh election due to Ford's crookedness, Carter was revealed to be a loser so fascist Ronnie just fell into that position. >>>>>>>>>>>I'm worried Palin will follow in his footsteps... What, become a senile, diaper-wearing old man

Which is why we called Reagan's economic plan, "VooDoo Economics" right? They were his, and he loved to kill labor unions and feed phat corporations. He tripled the debt, what can ya say? The "Me" generation.

7500 in training accidents? was our military that bad? maybe the democrats are not that good at protecting us or the military personel. There are no politicians on training missions or in war zones, training mishaps occur all the time, look at all the skydivng training deaths.

Bingo

>>>>>>>>>>>>That's not really stating the whole story either. One issue is that military pay can't be too high because we can't have our soldiers driving expensive cars and then saying "No need to re-enlist" I already have bank. OK, so then both Bush's overpaid the troops then. My point was that Mister Cold War Reagan paid the troops he claimed to love so much, less then Clinton and the Bush's paid about the same as each other. Point is, Clinton is this military hater that the right likes to claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Next, the Reagan era was a recession along with a large standing military. Reagan added many troops to the roster, that's my point and when he did he decided paying them less than so-called military hater Clinton would do in later years was a good idea. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>High pay increases would have been impossible and considering the job market the competition wasn't there. Civilian enterprise has little to do with military pay, if anything. Since military pay is so low anyway, thre isn;t a great deal of difference from pres to pres. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Clinton era was during a boom when we were having a lot of trouble keeping the people we had put so much money into training for the modern smaller technology driven miltary just to have them leave for high paying private sector jobs. These are all nice guesses of yours, but they have several flaws. Troop numbers were intentionally decreased during the GHWB and Clinton years, so troop retention wasn't an issue. Furthermore, during GHWB's term, he paid more than Clintonb would and way more than fascist Ronnie did and he enjoyed a recession most of his term. But thanks, keep the guesses rolling, they're fun

Bingo....

Clinton was following thru on Bush 1's decisions.. and it was needed in my opinion. The military we fought the Soviets with... is not the military we need to fight THIS war... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Don't let em BS ya, GHWB cut about as many troops as Clinton, but in 1/2 the time = twice the rate. What I find totally incongruent is how many service members who served in the military at the time... only see that rather myopic "CLINTON CLOSED THE BASES" lens. Yes this hurt many of them financially.. BUT.. it was Bush the First that began the closings.. and it was REAGAN.. who won the war....yet they want to not realize that the war was over and they needed to get the hell out and be productive members of society in the civilian world. The myth that Reagan won the war is supported in so many ways: - The wall fell 4 months into Bush's term - The cold War was fought from 1946 to 1989, most prolific buidup was the nuclear testing from 46 to 58, after that it was proxy wars. - All the presidents from Truman to Reagan played a part in it. Yet when Reagan has Nancy whisper in his ear, utters something about Gorbachev tearing down that wall, and then dumps in his diapers we all melt and give him credit...... beyond me

Clinton was impeached. Dec 19th, 1998. The Senate then over turned it in Feb of the next year, but history books will show that he was indeed impeached. I don't think an impeachment gets overturned, I think an impeachemnt is just a political indictment and the political trial is at the senate, so in this case it was a finding of not guilty/not repsonsible. An impeachment is a political indictment, akin to a criminal indictment, but with a much lower standard of proof, a simple majority vs totality.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>It baffles me how many people think the current Bush is the worst. Me too, I chose Reagan, he started the whole neo-con crap. >>>>>>>>>>>>He was handed a pile of shit (created by former presidents) and expected to make it smell like roses. Really? 4% unemployment, annual debt virtually zeroed, annual surplus at 236B, stock market from 3500 to 9800 in 8 years; where's the crap? The US was at a high atteh end of Clinton's term. Wanna see crap, whomever wins this election will know what a pile of crap is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>.If clinton had spent less time banging his interns & closing US military bases and instead paid attention to the acts of terrorism (USS Cole), I really believe that 9/11 could have been averted if not avoided all together. 911 occurred due to lax security at our airports, something GHW Bush ignored after stirring it up, Clinton ignored and GW Bush ignored for 7 month, 3 weeks. Are you aware Bush took the entire month of August off? Hmmm, I wonder what an executive order to immediately increase security at the airports would have done to the 911 scheemers? Face it, it was an extremist group, not a country that attacked us and that throwing a trillion dollars over there and 4k, 5k, 20k dead heros at it wouldn;t make it better, we still had to fix our security which none of the 3 presidents did. Also, GHW Bush cut about as many troops as Clinton did, but in half teh time, meaning twice the rate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In the beginning of his first term, Bush had to deal with 9/11 and I think he did a damn good job and still is. A shame he didn't foresee the problem as the previosu 2 did not. >>>>>>>>>>>If Bush truly was that bad, he would have been impeached.... An impeachment comes from the house with a simple majority, the house was Repub until 1 year 9 months ago, so that would not have been possible. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.funny that piece of shit clinton, nearly was.... Pardon me what? Clinton was impeached on 2 of the 4 counts before him. The senate convicts on a supermajority (2/3) and they only came to 50/50 on the closest, meaning some Repubs voted no. MAybe you should read up on impeachment procedures. So you must think that Bush is a POS for commuting Scooter Libby, right? He was convicted in a criminal court, not a political court, of the same things, yet Bush commuted him and will likely give him a full pardon as he leaves office. Remember Scooter, he's the guy that revealed the name of a federal agent who's husband wrote bad things about Bush. So with all that, Scooter Libby did the same thing but at a criminal level; what do you think?

So what you're saying is that Clinton isn't a military hater after all....I get it. Another statistic about military cuts is that GWB cut about as many troops as Clinton did. Not to mention military pay raises under Clinton were considerably higher than under Fascist Ronnie. Lot of mistruths out there, huh?

Really? Watergate scandal surfaced before the Nov 72 elections. It grew legs after the crook was elected, but it was discovered before.

So how do you feel about Palin's stance on anti-choice and the feminist movement? Pro Life/Anti abortion/anti Choice is the number one reason I've voting Repulbican. Let's stop killing babies. It is amazing that we are still doing this barbaric act. And yet you have no problem with the death penalty, right? Back on topic: .....and the feminist movement? How is it that Palin supports the women's movement when she opposes choice?

Yea, not to ever defend OJ, but this is how we have so many innocent people in prison, we really do. This is teh difference between substantive due process and procedural, hell, he didn't even receive the customary procedural due process as framed defendants usually do. With that said, good riddance.

So how do you feel about Palin's stance on anti-choice and the feminist movement?

Wow. THAT was a leap. I was trying to say that what the public thinks made him guilty in a case where he was found NOT guilty, the majority of people made that decision based on the news, not on the case that was put to a judge and jury. Nothing more, nothing less. No views regarding sexual preference or energy output levels of any individuals. or OJ personally. Lighten up there Francis. That case was televised, so we were privy to all that but the filings. I don;t care what media attention does, the US Const, for all its claimed glory, wasn't followed as it usualy isn't. When I would refer to teh US Const to teachers/professors they would kinda roll tehir eyes....I didn't get it then - do now. The courts are gonna do what they're gonna do, let the poor slobs appeal their little hearts out.... this is what makes America joke, at least Asian and Middle Eastern countries addmit their corruption, we deny and hide behind nationalism or great er good.

>>>>>>>>>What about when we "bend" our decisions based on media snips of the entire court case? We don't make decisions, just have opinions based on occurrences. The media is irrelevant in court cases and is often banned. We can't blame constitutional missteps on the media. So, are you saying the media released false jury questionaires that admited by at least 5 jurors to feel that the 95 acquittal was disagreeable? Did the media lie or do you believe that? So the aweful liberal media loves gays, lazy people and now OJ.... Hmmm, ok. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There's no way we say everything that happened in either trial. No, but we do know thatteh jury was stacked with whitey, whitey that didn't like OJ's 95 acquittal....is that impartial by our beloved US constitution? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>..There are an assload of details commonly missed when the media covers legal issues. So let's just call it good and turn our heads. We do know that 5 of 12 didn't like this free. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not defending him in anyway...but a court room is much different that what the TV and newspapers tell us it is. I know, that's why I have a degree in justice and have attended many high profile cases at trial and sentencing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>A jury of your peers simply is not possible. My peers seem to always find a way out of jury duty. Well, that isn't guaranteed by the 6th anyway, the 14th points to equal protection. But an impartial jury is guaranteed and I think we can all agree that a jury comprised of 5 of 12 who think the guy shouldn't be out walking around isn't impartial.... and that doesn't even address the racial composition issue.