Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
logo by BAMmGRAPHICS
The Dean's Circle Gang
- Allan Amor
- Becki
- CJGuam
- Chew Bird
- Chris
- Cindy
- Clay
- DanL
- Dave
- David Waite
- Desi
- Doug
- Doug
- Island Jewell
- JJones
- Joanna
- Johnny Borja
- King
- Nanci Waite Villegas
- Pat
- Paul
- Pete
- Randall Braman
- Renee
- Renne
- Ric Larson
- Rod
- Roxy
- Sam
- Sarah
- Sean
- Teresa Larson
- Valiza
- alice
- amy
- booniedawg
- fastjimmy61
- illustrationISM....
- jinny
- juliet
- mat
- rac
- tophersguam
- ~dana
47 comments:
no, its about power and control
Yes,the insurance industry still has us where they want us since there was not a public option. BTW if you want health insurance BUPA offers a plan that works everywhere in the world except the USA for about $900 and an $8000 dollar deductible. A good plan if you are in good health. I guess you could drive up to Canada or go to England or S. America.
Thats $900 a year.
$8,000 deductible?! I can't remember one year where I would have met that kind of minimum. And that includes two dislocated shoulders, a shattered wrist and a spinal column that looks something like a question mark on mri.
Hazards of the great game of football.
I think that type of policy is just to cover you in case you get something really bad. On the other hand my son had a colonoscopy and a few blood test and one doctor visit and two others at the school health unit, it was $6000 and ON TOP OF IT he had to pay about $1000 in co-pays. The same procedure in German cost about $150. Thank god they passed that new legislation because even though it turned out everything was okay there was an initial diagnosis that down the line might of excluded him or made him pay higher premiums. In many countries you can just go to the pharmacy or get preventative check ups relatively cheaply so for those you just could pay out of pocket and get a BUPA plan that would kick in if you had some major illness or condition.
I doubt the colonoscopy actually COSTS 150 in Germany, but that might be what you see as a consumer. Who pays the rest of the cost?
Everybody pays in. Way high taxes there Sean you would not like it at all.
With no such thing as a “free lunch”, who’ll pay the tab? Oh…wait…me! Mr. Taxpayer.
Matheeeew. You had to come back on the DC Blog and get things fired up again…after it was dormant for so many eons. I LOVE YOU MAN!!! I just cracked opened a “cold one”! But unfortunately for you, I’m going to drink it myself!!! Ha ha ha ha! Bottoms up dude! Hope to see you this summer!
Hehehe!Remember way back when I kept saying wait for it? And look now, all the democrats that are getting kicked to the curb politcally. Our own Governor here in Co. Bill Ritter called it quits and anounced he's done after this term. Thats why they rammed this bill down Americas throats the way they did. They're done. They're toast. Gigs up. I'm working on putting together an agenda/menu for this summer. I need to call DRL
and see what his schedule is like. Daves been ready. Patience and wait for it!
The Dems will say that the Reps want to "take things away" from Americans when the campaign on repealing this bill. They are, truly, the kings of spin.
If you want to know the truth about what this government says, just take the opposite of what comes out of their mouths.
"We will have the most ethical congress in history".
"This is the largest deficit reduction plan in history".
"I am no an ideologue".
"I believe in capitalism"
etc. etc. etc.
Sort of like "Mission Accomplished" huh?
The "Mission Accomplished" banner had nothing to do with W's speech on that carrier. It was referring to the carrier itself and the fact that it had just completed the longest ever deployment.
So, "mission accomplished" is really more like attributing "trickle down economics" to Reagan. Something he also had nothing to do with.
"public will have five days to look at every bill that lands on my desk" before he signs it into law.
Translated: Congress will vote on bills on Sunday and I will sign them into law before anyone knows what's in 'em.
And you talk about spin.
Okay so how about "Leave no child behind", where after cuts to Head Start under the previous administration 3 out of 5 previously eligible for Head Start were well, left behind.
Or how about "Support the Troops" while cutting nearly $15 Billion from Veterans programs including funding for war related injury rehab.
How about "compassionate conservatism", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
I could go on but...
If your point is that our dear leaders have a habit of saying and doing two different things than I yield it to you. Kindly do not, however attempt to portray this as peculiar to the current occupants.
Here's an idea - get the FEDERAL government out of education altogether. Let states and local governments handle this. Let the local communities fund it. Let the local communities decide what to teach.
Will everyone have the same test scores and curriculum? Of course not, but that's DIVERSITY, after all.
Hmmmmm? Congressman Bart Stupak must feel like an idiot about right now ‘cause… “President Obama signed the Senate health care bill into law Tuesday. He did not sign the executive order on abortion negotiated with Michigan Democratic Congressman Bart Stupak in an 11th-hour arrangement that may well have saved the entire health care reform effort”.
Ric, Stupak is just the first of many who will feel like idiots as this unfolds and the true nature of the cabal is realized.
FWIW. Gallup poll 3/23 shows 48% favorable 40% negative. I guess the other 2% have been vacationing on another planet.
12%
oops, yeah 12%.
Wow that sure is a lot of people to be on another planet all at once ain't it?
It is even more shocking considering the cuts and NASA. It is doubtful any Americans will get off this planet in the near future without begging a ride from the Russians. What a pity.
So...are you for more, or less Federal government spending? It doesn't say anything in the Constitution about funding moon rocket shots you know.
See how irrelevant that reasoning can sometimes be when applied to modern day scenarios?
I am for far less spending overall, but spending money on the right things. Taking from one state to give to another - wrong thing. Taking from one citizen to give to another - wrong thing.
The space program is absolutely in America's best interest and is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the budget. But, hey, the newly transformed America can't be leaders in anything and should just be average. So, who needs to lead in apace anyway?
Actually I believe that the intent is for private industry to take on some of the R&D and implementation of space exploration. Given some on the right's incessant bleating over the current administrations disdain for, and takeover of Corporate America, one might think that they would view this as a step in the right direction.
That said. Some of the things that NASA has accomplished on their budget is nothing short of miraculous. A real testament to American ingenuity.
Hey check out Buzz Aldrin, dancing with the the stars. What a cool ole guy,
Let's not forget all the money we are going to save by mandating that restaurants cut calories and sodium content on their menus.
And I feel a lot safer for my kids knowing that Nancy and Harry made sure that registered sex offenders would have plenty of government funded viagra.
Go Fed!
Government funded viagra for sex offenders? Where did that come from? Is that contained in the Bill before, or after the "Death Squads"?
Look at the amendments the senate is working on with the so called 'reconciliation' bill, trying to pull some of the garbage out of the dumpster.
Well that may be but, viagra for sex offenders, really?
If ever there were a time to dispense with the embellishments this could be it.
That is the nature of this statist movement. No one can be excluded from any "benefit" no matter how irregular, abnormal or outside the mainstream they are. Because that would, after all, be discriminatory.
Viagra is, ahem, only the tip of the spear. I predict Viagra, abortion on demand, sexual reassignment surgery, the morning after pill, stomach stapling - all at the tax payers expense.
But, don't worry, we won't be spending any tax payer funds on mammograms and colonoscopies for those under 50. At least until someone realizes that 50+ year olds aren't worth spending anything on at all.
oh okay then have it your way.
You know the thing I like best about the new Bill is the fact that Frodo the Hobbitt that lives with me now can get insurance.
Even better, if my pet unicorn gets pregnant the government will pay for the abortion.
Doug, I'm sorry. I scolded My pet unicorn for acting in such a manner.I tried to keep him indoors. sorry, he got out.
Thank goodness the government will take care of this.
Patsy, not to worry. Boy unicorns will be boy
unicorns.
Good thing we live in a country where the government wants to exercise power and control over unicorns and will clean this little mess up for them. With someone else's money of course.
and a coat hanger..
That's not good Dave.
OK. I agree men. I don't want to pay for
abortions. I do agree that women have a right to that, early on, to end an unwanted pregnancy. We,(the people) shouldn't have to pay for it. Their mistake...own up and pay up.
OK. I agree men. I don't want to pay for
abortions. I do agree that women have a right to that, early on, to end an unwanted pregnancy. We,(the people) shouldn't have to pay for it. Their mistake...own up and pay up.
I think the morning after pill should be free and available from public health. Think of all the welfare and foster care money saved.
something to think about Juliet
ignoring the moral and ethical issues for a moment... I see a fundamental incompatibility with the decision being entirely up to the woman while the man is still (potentially) responsible depending on which decision is made.
If there is a "transfer of sperm ownership" (wow, that just takes all the romance out, doesn't it?) then the woman would be fully responsible for what she does with it and the decision she makes, but then men wouldn't be accountable.
On the other hand, if the man and woman are entering a "partnership" involving the sperm and the ova, then they would both have say in the eventual outcome.
What we have now is a silent partnership "thanks for the sperm, no shut up". and, sometimes, "pay up".
So, which is it? The choice and the responsibility can't really be separated, can they?
Sean, if decisions were based on logic then Women wouldn't get pregnant in the first place.lol Paying up has nothing to do with the right of the woman it is about the interest/support of the child. Avoiding pregnancy is totally in the hands of men. Just don't do the sperm transfer.
If it were more often "in the hands of men" then we wouldn't be having this conversation...
Lol, so new meaning to " A bird in the hand is worth two in the Bush."
scary. at GW. was a good girl.(sorta) I went to school, made good grades, didn't get pregnant, but I went to school with girls who did. I felt bad for them...15, 16 yrs old. I remember going to school with girls that had their jeans unzipped, making room for the baby.
scary. was at GW and I was a good girl.(sorta) I went to school, made good grades, didn't get pregnant, but I went to school with girls who did. I felt bad for them...15, 16 yrs old. I remember going to school with girls that had their jeans unzipped, making room for the baby.
Post a Comment