You guys even called Bill Clinton a socialist when he first ran.
Whoever Democrats nominate for president is always labeled a marxist/socialist/communist by Republcians.
If Democrats are socialists, then you guys are fascists.
Do Republicans ever get tired of playing the treason and socialist card?
They might be tired of it, but right now, it's just about all they got.
Actually, I feel sorry for them.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Is Bill Clinton a Pathological Liar?
On WHYY radio, former President Bill Clinton was asked about a Philadelphia official who took offense at his comparing Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, to Rev. Jesse Jackson, thinking it an attempt to marginalize Obama as "the black candidate."
Clinton was asked: "Do you think that was a mistake, and would you do that again?"
"No," he responded. "I think that they played the race card on me. And we now know, from memos from the campaign and everything, that they planned to do it along."
Today in Pittsburgh, Clinton was asked what he meant by saying the Obama campaign was playing the race card on him.
“When did I say that, and to whom did I say that?” Clinton asked, per ABC News' Sarah Amos.
“On WHYY radio yesterday," he was told by an NBC/National Journal reporter.
“No, no, no," Clinton said. "That’s not what I said. You always follow me around and play these little games, and I’m not going to play your games today. This is a day about election day. Go back and see what the question was, and what my answer was. You have mischaracterized it to get another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us, and I choose not to play your game today. Have a nice day.”
Huh?
That's exactly what he said.
Is Bill Clinton a Pathological Liar?
He's a politician isn't he... ?!
Still there is absolutely no competition when he's compared with Bush is there?
Reply:Do you remember what you said yesterday?
Bill Clinton only lies about sex. Would you? Would any husband lie about illicit sex?
Is George W Bush a pathological liar?
Is John McCain a liar or a flip flopper?
Thanks
Reply:The Democrats are the ones that stuck us with that liar for 8 years.
Nice job.
People view Bill, Hillary, Pelosi, and Chelsea as liars.
Reply:Yes, and it obviously runs in the family.
Reply:He's pathological in so many ways.
Reply:neh the title of Pathological Liar was given to Bush in 2004
nice try!!!
Reply:They both are. Narcissists are like that.
Reply:Who cares? He can not run again and isn't now.
Reply:NO NO NO ..OBAMA IS YOU MUST NOT SEEN YET WHAT KIND OF MAN HE IS WAKE UP PLZ
Reply:That title belongs to George W Bush
nice try though
Reply:No, but George W. Bush is!
Reply:I'd have to say there are a lot of pathological lies about Bill Clinton. The right wing radio loons have been doing this for the last 20 years. They created their little strawman 'enemy of the people' and called 'The Liberal'. Anyone not fully on board with the fascisti morons that hijacked the Republican party gets smeared. Bill Clinton is just one of many that these vicious attack dogs of the GOP sic on anyone they think is even mildly against their support for the multi-national corporations, the Oil Mafia and the radical clerics of the Jesus freak right. The ditto-heads eat this #$%* up. Bill Clinton isn't perfect, but he's miles ahead of these cheap #@#$%26amp;%$# that never quit trying to bring him down. Disgusting..they should be ashamed! No kiddin'!
Clinton was asked: "Do you think that was a mistake, and would you do that again?"
"No," he responded. "I think that they played the race card on me. And we now know, from memos from the campaign and everything, that they planned to do it along."
Today in Pittsburgh, Clinton was asked what he meant by saying the Obama campaign was playing the race card on him.
“When did I say that, and to whom did I say that?” Clinton asked, per ABC News' Sarah Amos.
“On WHYY radio yesterday," he was told by an NBC/National Journal reporter.
“No, no, no," Clinton said. "That’s not what I said. You always follow me around and play these little games, and I’m not going to play your games today. This is a day about election day. Go back and see what the question was, and what my answer was. You have mischaracterized it to get another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us, and I choose not to play your game today. Have a nice day.”
Huh?
That's exactly what he said.
Is Bill Clinton a Pathological Liar?
He's a politician isn't he... ?!
Still there is absolutely no competition when he's compared with Bush is there?
Reply:Do you remember what you said yesterday?
Bill Clinton only lies about sex. Would you? Would any husband lie about illicit sex?
Is George W Bush a pathological liar?
Is John McCain a liar or a flip flopper?
Thanks
Reply:The Democrats are the ones that stuck us with that liar for 8 years.
Nice job.
People view Bill, Hillary, Pelosi, and Chelsea as liars.
Reply:Yes, and it obviously runs in the family.
Reply:He's pathological in so many ways.
Reply:neh the title of Pathological Liar was given to Bush in 2004
nice try!!!
Reply:They both are. Narcissists are like that.
Reply:Who cares? He can not run again and isn't now.
Reply:NO NO NO ..OBAMA IS YOU MUST NOT SEEN YET WHAT KIND OF MAN HE IS WAKE UP PLZ
Reply:That title belongs to George W Bush
nice try though
Reply:No, but George W. Bush is!
Reply:I'd have to say there are a lot of pathological lies about Bill Clinton. The right wing radio loons have been doing this for the last 20 years. They created their little strawman 'enemy of the people' and called 'The Liberal'. Anyone not fully on board with the fascisti morons that hijacked the Republican party gets smeared. Bill Clinton is just one of many that these vicious attack dogs of the GOP sic on anyone they think is even mildly against their support for the multi-national corporations, the Oil Mafia and the radical clerics of the Jesus freak right. The ditto-heads eat this #$%* up. Bill Clinton isn't perfect, but he's miles ahead of these cheap #@#$%26amp;%$# that never quit trying to bring him down. Disgusting..they should be ashamed! No kiddin'!
What is capitalism?
does anyone one know what capitalism is. would clinton cards and tesco be capitalists.
What is capitalism?
I have two apples, you have none. You want one of my apples, so I sell you one of them. That is capitalism.
Anyone who has what someone else wants and is willing to sell it to make a profit is a capitalist.
Reply:Capitalism is a society based on private ownership, competition and allowing market forces to determine prices and output quantities. It defines itself in contrast to the 20th century system of the Soviet Block and other state-owned industry based societies (and sometimes in contrast to feudalism). So it is also based on the idea of a labour market, where people are free to choose who to employ and where to seek work.
The owner of each and every company, and the owner of any piece of land, is a capitalist - he or she decides what to do with their property, based on current market prices and various projections on how to get the most return on your investment.
Capitalist societies rely on competition to ensure that goods stay cheap for the consumer. Monopolies and cartels are therefore to be avoided.
The main criticisms of capitalist societies are that they can sometimes leave unscrupulous (or oversized) companies to do things that a good system of laws and enforcement through the regulators could have prevented; and that it benefits the rich most (who can make a living off owning companies and company shares), while making employees accept that they are only entitled to a restricted share of the revenues (and no share of the profit).
Reply:An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.
thats capitalism
Reply:it is an economic system which makes a private company to produce goods/services in exchange of profits.
Reply:It is all about buying and selling. Supply and demand. You buy something for £1.00. your friend gives you £2.00. for it. Your friend has what they want. You have made a £.1.00.you are happy. Thats` capitalism. Yes, Clinton Cards and Tesco are capitalists.
Reply:Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive hypothetical free market. These include factors of production such as land and other natural resources, labor and capital goods. Various theories have tried to explain what capitalism is, to justify, or critique the private ownership of capital, and to explain the operation of markets and guide the application or elimination of government regulation of property and markets. However, this can be controversial because there are and have been forms of capitalism which use some state ownership such as Keynesianism, New Deal, and forms of Social Democracy. Some would not agree that such systems constitute a "free market" but are arguably capitalistic in nature.
Reply:Capitalism is a form of state based upon free commerce. The government allows companies to do business in their own way and leaves the companies alone.
The expectation is that the companies will do the right thing and protect the environment while building their businesses. Companies are also expected to pay employees fairly and properly so that families can survive on those incomes. Of course, we know that companies are not that responsible in the real world.
If you read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations you will learn all about Capitalism.
Take care,
Troy
Reply:Capitalism is an economic theory that allows a person to sell his or her possessions to anyone he or she chooses. Capitalism touts freedom of competition, (anyone can sell anything at the price they chose, regardless of who's selling it) the right to keep ones own profits, instead of giving them to the government, and the right to own personal property.
Clinton Cards, and Tesco are defiantly capitalist. They both make profit (capital) and trade with whoever they want freely. Britain on the whole is Capitalist.
The alternatives to Capitalism are Socialism, where the government owns commodities and the citizens own the government, and Communism, which is similar. Socialism is more directly democratic than Communism, but Communism is based on the principle that the best person for the job gets the job, and therefore, democracy is kind of irrelevant. In both Communist and Socialist states, capital (property and money) belong to the government, and trade is regulated. Socialism is less intense than communism, and as a result things like medical care can be socialized, the government owns it, there is no corporate profit to be made, and the citizens pay into it and get care for free.
Reply:Capitalism is one of the greatest evils in the world. It is a system of economy in which capital is privately owned. The bourgeoisie control the means of production and distribution with little or no government interference. IT leads to the bourgeoisie being in tyrannical control and the proletariat being trapped in wage slavery.
Reply:thats the oppiste of communism communism bad
running shoes
What is capitalism?
I have two apples, you have none. You want one of my apples, so I sell you one of them. That is capitalism.
Anyone who has what someone else wants and is willing to sell it to make a profit is a capitalist.
Reply:Capitalism is a society based on private ownership, competition and allowing market forces to determine prices and output quantities. It defines itself in contrast to the 20th century system of the Soviet Block and other state-owned industry based societies (and sometimes in contrast to feudalism). So it is also based on the idea of a labour market, where people are free to choose who to employ and where to seek work.
The owner of each and every company, and the owner of any piece of land, is a capitalist - he or she decides what to do with their property, based on current market prices and various projections on how to get the most return on your investment.
Capitalist societies rely on competition to ensure that goods stay cheap for the consumer. Monopolies and cartels are therefore to be avoided.
The main criticisms of capitalist societies are that they can sometimes leave unscrupulous (or oversized) companies to do things that a good system of laws and enforcement through the regulators could have prevented; and that it benefits the rich most (who can make a living off owning companies and company shares), while making employees accept that they are only entitled to a restricted share of the revenues (and no share of the profit).
Reply:An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.
thats capitalism
Reply:it is an economic system which makes a private company to produce goods/services in exchange of profits.
Reply:It is all about buying and selling. Supply and demand. You buy something for £1.00. your friend gives you £2.00. for it. Your friend has what they want. You have made a £.1.00.you are happy. Thats` capitalism. Yes, Clinton Cards and Tesco are capitalists.
Reply:Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive hypothetical free market. These include factors of production such as land and other natural resources, labor and capital goods. Various theories have tried to explain what capitalism is, to justify, or critique the private ownership of capital, and to explain the operation of markets and guide the application or elimination of government regulation of property and markets. However, this can be controversial because there are and have been forms of capitalism which use some state ownership such as Keynesianism, New Deal, and forms of Social Democracy. Some would not agree that such systems constitute a "free market" but are arguably capitalistic in nature.
Reply:Capitalism is a form of state based upon free commerce. The government allows companies to do business in their own way and leaves the companies alone.
The expectation is that the companies will do the right thing and protect the environment while building their businesses. Companies are also expected to pay employees fairly and properly so that families can survive on those incomes. Of course, we know that companies are not that responsible in the real world.
If you read Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations you will learn all about Capitalism.
Take care,
Troy
Reply:Capitalism is an economic theory that allows a person to sell his or her possessions to anyone he or she chooses. Capitalism touts freedom of competition, (anyone can sell anything at the price they chose, regardless of who's selling it) the right to keep ones own profits, instead of giving them to the government, and the right to own personal property.
Clinton Cards, and Tesco are defiantly capitalist. They both make profit (capital) and trade with whoever they want freely. Britain on the whole is Capitalist.
The alternatives to Capitalism are Socialism, where the government owns commodities and the citizens own the government, and Communism, which is similar. Socialism is more directly democratic than Communism, but Communism is based on the principle that the best person for the job gets the job, and therefore, democracy is kind of irrelevant. In both Communist and Socialist states, capital (property and money) belong to the government, and trade is regulated. Socialism is less intense than communism, and as a result things like medical care can be socialized, the government owns it, there is no corporate profit to be made, and the citizens pay into it and get care for free.
Reply:Capitalism is one of the greatest evils in the world. It is a system of economy in which capital is privately owned. The bourgeoisie control the means of production and distribution with little or no government interference. IT leads to the bourgeoisie being in tyrannical control and the proletariat being trapped in wage slavery.
Reply:thats the oppiste of communism communism bad
running shoes
What do you feel is the answer to the health insurance crises within the United States?
I was in the hospital last week with a viral infection and I don't have health insurance from my employer. Lucky for me I have a medicaid card that will pay for my hospital stay but there are way too many people that can't afford health insurance, their employer doesn't offer coverage, and have no means of paying for a hospital stay. All of the people running for president (on the GOP) don't want the government to be involved cause it would increase taxes and they don't want to force employers to insure their employees either. Hospitals should not be forced into taking a loss cause the patient doesn't have insurance. This is one of the few things I agree with Hillary Clinton on and normally I'm a conservative republican.
What do you feel is the answer to the health insurance crises within the United States?
All I can say is that it's a disgrace that the United States of America is incapable of providing health care for it's citizens. I won't even bother with the argument that we can spend billions on a war but not on our own citizens.
If somebody wanted to reform the government (i.e. reduce the horrific waste in money) there would be no need to raise taxes. We're already providing great health care to all those federal employees. That's right kids, you are paying for George and Dick's insurance, all those congressmen, and even the guy that audits your tax form. I won't even mention medicare and medicade.
Meanwhile, the average working stiff has been brainwashed into thinking his taxes will go up, even though he's paying anywhere from half to 2/3 of his own premium supplied by his employer.
I see no reason at all why we can't have some type of universal health care, except for the fact once those idiots in Washington get their hands on it, we're all doomed.
Reply:Cut the Insurance Companies out of the loop - they are soaking up all the money.
Reply:Most health problems stem from people refusing to take care of themselves, especially self-abuse (alcohol, drugs, tobacco, over-eating, promiscuity, dangerous living, refusal to eat properly...).
If people do not want to live according to healthful guidelines, why should any one else have to pay for their medical care?
If you take all the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, half are below average, yet still treat people. So, less than half of health care is average, which is not that good.
Drugs cause more problems than they resolve.
Solution? Live properly, be responsible for your own actions.
I have never been covered by health insurance; can't afford it.
Reply:Where do you think this money will come from? It will come from OUR pockets.. and it will be MORE than we're paying now. What will we have gained from it?
The #1 problem is the lawsuits hospital face.. deal with those and see what the situation is then.
Reply:GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT!!! government regulating and control over the health industry has skyrocketed prices and the quality has shot down. If you want national health care go to a VA hospital and let me know how you like it.
Reply:Put an end to the frivolous law suits. Adapt a "loser pays" methodology; it would still allow legitimate suits to be filed, and, if our courts weren't so tied up with insane law suits, the suit would be resolved much, much faster.
BS law suits have driven the cost of malpractice insurance - even for the best doctors - right through the roof. Not only have these law suits helped drive the cost of health care up so much, but the prohibitive costs are starting to drive doctors out of practice.
As someone with a chronic health condition, I have to say that I do NOT want the govt taking over my health care. Good gravy - it took me fifteen years to get a diagnosis with excellent private benefits; I'm sure I'd still be waiting for the feds. Plus, someone close to me has MS pretty badly - the only relief she's found is from experimental drugs. Do you think the feds would make experimental drugs available to her and others in her situation? I don't think so.
Reply:Tort Reform is a big one. Unlike goldwater republican stated we need some government intervention in the way our insurance companies practice. Also how about letting small businesses cluster together so they can buy health insurance for their comapnies.
Reply:Three things: The medical industry including doctors, nurses, hospitals, etc. have to charge less for their services. They are grossly overpaid. The other is that the prescription industry have to cut the cost of medicine and other medical related supplies. Lastly, there should be reasonable control against malpractice.
Reply:Most people can't afford to buy a house. Should the government provide them?
Social programs caused this problem. More of them is not going to fix it. Take your pet to the vet. There is no insurance. He can give your dog the same medications humans take for a fraction of the cost. Go to the eye doctor, the dentist. Why aren't the costs spiraling upward in these areas? Could it be because very few of their services are covered?
Medical insurance should be for catestrophic care only. Think about it. We all have auto insurance. What does it pay for? Damages that result from accidents to vehicles or people. It doesn't pay for tires, batteries, brake pads and oil changes. Could you imagine what the price of these things would be if it did? People would be running in getting new parts and serviced whether they need it or not. Why not, they don't have to pay.
Reply:My solution?
Take a balanced approach.
First of all, instead of finding new cures and such, start doing research on how medicine and health care to the average person can be made more affordable. If heart surgery cost only 100 dollars to perform, would you need to pay for insurance? No, for the need for insurance arises when people need something, but cannot afford it. Insurance companies are like financial communes with a private corporation calling all the shots (usually not to your benefit but theirs) where people pool their money together to help one another out. Kinda like a bunch of people living in one apartment and a accountant subleased his room to them.
Second of all, create a health care system designed to treat infectious disease only. This hospitals would be used to treat any thing that is a communicable disease, may it be the common cold, the flu to AIDS or anything that can be considered a threat to the public at large. This would seem cold, but things like cancer and heart attacks would not be covered by this public health plan for this are not problems that can be infectious. The idea behind this is if these infectious diseases are taken care of, in the long run eventually the cases will cease to exist, thus eventually in the long run will reduce the need for such a program. While at it, we should design these hospitals to be able to handle an epidemic or a bio-terror attack. No hospital in the US currently is equipped to detect or handle the workload or the massive trauma in such an emergency. We should focus on this now.
Get rid of the campaign contributions. Lobbying is why medicine is so expensive for the pharmaceutical corporations constantly lobby politicians to pass laws in their favor and such financial influencing works, thus laws get passed the increase these corporations' profits, at every ones' expense. In fact, finding a way so any one can afford to run for a federal level election and still get as much air time as the major candidates are now would be a major start to improving a lot of things in our country.
The last option I have thought of is do it yourself.
Since mentioned early, insurance companies are nothing but a bunch of people pooling their money together to reduce everyone else's expenses, why not cut out the greedy, corporate middle man? Either get together with extended family members you can trust or with members of your communities and pool money together to cover each other in case some one in the group does gets injured or ill. The advantage of this is you are all keeping an eye one each other and know each other, so you know right away who really needs the money or not. This way you will not have insurance adjusters refusing your claim when you fall deathly ill, just to have an increase in profit at the expense of your life nor would you have to deal with the long lines and wait times dealing with the goverment for approval who don't even give too shakes about you, much less knows that you exist. I however suggest talking with a legal expert or an experienced mediator who has extensive legal knowledge to find a way to set such a thing up
in order to keep all members in check and trustworthy.
Reply:Well how on earth did you receive any treatment if you have no health insurance?
Why is it that you received the healthcare that you needed even though you had no insurance, but no one else does? Could it be that in reality, the "crisis" is way overblown for political purposes? The cases of people not receiving care because they had no insurance are few and far between. Why do you not rely on your own personal experiences, but instead rely on the bull sh#$ fed to you by politicians with an agenda?
Reply:Just like medications, Wal Mart started selling some for 4$ a prescription. Now other drug suppliers are doing the same. It will have to come from the private sector. All the government does is F#CK THINGS UP!
What do you feel is the answer to the health insurance crises within the United States?
All I can say is that it's a disgrace that the United States of America is incapable of providing health care for it's citizens. I won't even bother with the argument that we can spend billions on a war but not on our own citizens.
If somebody wanted to reform the government (i.e. reduce the horrific waste in money) there would be no need to raise taxes. We're already providing great health care to all those federal employees. That's right kids, you are paying for George and Dick's insurance, all those congressmen, and even the guy that audits your tax form. I won't even mention medicare and medicade.
Meanwhile, the average working stiff has been brainwashed into thinking his taxes will go up, even though he's paying anywhere from half to 2/3 of his own premium supplied by his employer.
I see no reason at all why we can't have some type of universal health care, except for the fact once those idiots in Washington get their hands on it, we're all doomed.
Reply:Cut the Insurance Companies out of the loop - they are soaking up all the money.
Reply:Most health problems stem from people refusing to take care of themselves, especially self-abuse (alcohol, drugs, tobacco, over-eating, promiscuity, dangerous living, refusal to eat properly...).
If people do not want to live according to healthful guidelines, why should any one else have to pay for their medical care?
If you take all the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, half are below average, yet still treat people. So, less than half of health care is average, which is not that good.
Drugs cause more problems than they resolve.
Solution? Live properly, be responsible for your own actions.
I have never been covered by health insurance; can't afford it.
Reply:Where do you think this money will come from? It will come from OUR pockets.. and it will be MORE than we're paying now. What will we have gained from it?
The #1 problem is the lawsuits hospital face.. deal with those and see what the situation is then.
Reply:GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT!!! government regulating and control over the health industry has skyrocketed prices and the quality has shot down. If you want national health care go to a VA hospital and let me know how you like it.
Reply:Put an end to the frivolous law suits. Adapt a "loser pays" methodology; it would still allow legitimate suits to be filed, and, if our courts weren't so tied up with insane law suits, the suit would be resolved much, much faster.
BS law suits have driven the cost of malpractice insurance - even for the best doctors - right through the roof. Not only have these law suits helped drive the cost of health care up so much, but the prohibitive costs are starting to drive doctors out of practice.
As someone with a chronic health condition, I have to say that I do NOT want the govt taking over my health care. Good gravy - it took me fifteen years to get a diagnosis with excellent private benefits; I'm sure I'd still be waiting for the feds. Plus, someone close to me has MS pretty badly - the only relief she's found is from experimental drugs. Do you think the feds would make experimental drugs available to her and others in her situation? I don't think so.
Reply:Tort Reform is a big one. Unlike goldwater republican stated we need some government intervention in the way our insurance companies practice. Also how about letting small businesses cluster together so they can buy health insurance for their comapnies.
Reply:Three things: The medical industry including doctors, nurses, hospitals, etc. have to charge less for their services. They are grossly overpaid. The other is that the prescription industry have to cut the cost of medicine and other medical related supplies. Lastly, there should be reasonable control against malpractice.
Reply:Most people can't afford to buy a house. Should the government provide them?
Social programs caused this problem. More of them is not going to fix it. Take your pet to the vet. There is no insurance. He can give your dog the same medications humans take for a fraction of the cost. Go to the eye doctor, the dentist. Why aren't the costs spiraling upward in these areas? Could it be because very few of their services are covered?
Medical insurance should be for catestrophic care only. Think about it. We all have auto insurance. What does it pay for? Damages that result from accidents to vehicles or people. It doesn't pay for tires, batteries, brake pads and oil changes. Could you imagine what the price of these things would be if it did? People would be running in getting new parts and serviced whether they need it or not. Why not, they don't have to pay.
Reply:My solution?
Take a balanced approach.
First of all, instead of finding new cures and such, start doing research on how medicine and health care to the average person can be made more affordable. If heart surgery cost only 100 dollars to perform, would you need to pay for insurance? No, for the need for insurance arises when people need something, but cannot afford it. Insurance companies are like financial communes with a private corporation calling all the shots (usually not to your benefit but theirs) where people pool their money together to help one another out. Kinda like a bunch of people living in one apartment and a accountant subleased his room to them.
Second of all, create a health care system designed to treat infectious disease only. This hospitals would be used to treat any thing that is a communicable disease, may it be the common cold, the flu to AIDS or anything that can be considered a threat to the public at large. This would seem cold, but things like cancer and heart attacks would not be covered by this public health plan for this are not problems that can be infectious. The idea behind this is if these infectious diseases are taken care of, in the long run eventually the cases will cease to exist, thus eventually in the long run will reduce the need for such a program. While at it, we should design these hospitals to be able to handle an epidemic or a bio-terror attack. No hospital in the US currently is equipped to detect or handle the workload or the massive trauma in such an emergency. We should focus on this now.
Get rid of the campaign contributions. Lobbying is why medicine is so expensive for the pharmaceutical corporations constantly lobby politicians to pass laws in their favor and such financial influencing works, thus laws get passed the increase these corporations' profits, at every ones' expense. In fact, finding a way so any one can afford to run for a federal level election and still get as much air time as the major candidates are now would be a major start to improving a lot of things in our country.
The last option I have thought of is do it yourself.
Since mentioned early, insurance companies are nothing but a bunch of people pooling their money together to reduce everyone else's expenses, why not cut out the greedy, corporate middle man? Either get together with extended family members you can trust or with members of your communities and pool money together to cover each other in case some one in the group does gets injured or ill. The advantage of this is you are all keeping an eye one each other and know each other, so you know right away who really needs the money or not. This way you will not have insurance adjusters refusing your claim when you fall deathly ill, just to have an increase in profit at the expense of your life nor would you have to deal with the long lines and wait times dealing with the goverment for approval who don't even give too shakes about you, much less knows that you exist. I however suggest talking with a legal expert or an experienced mediator who has extensive legal knowledge to find a way to set such a thing up
in order to keep all members in check and trustworthy.
Reply:Well how on earth did you receive any treatment if you have no health insurance?
Why is it that you received the healthcare that you needed even though you had no insurance, but no one else does? Could it be that in reality, the "crisis" is way overblown for political purposes? The cases of people not receiving care because they had no insurance are few and far between. Why do you not rely on your own personal experiences, but instead rely on the bull sh#$ fed to you by politicians with an agenda?
Reply:Just like medications, Wal Mart started selling some for 4$ a prescription. Now other drug suppliers are doing the same. It will have to come from the private sector. All the government does is F#CK THINGS UP!
The media bias against Sen. Clinton?
This is ridiculous. Did these people not notice at the start of the Clinton campaign she was already crowned the nominee by the MSM? Obama's had his fair share of bad press over non-issues like Rev. Wright just like Clinton's non-issue over "Snipergate." The media fluxuates in good guy/bad guy get over it. Your thoughts on why they played the media hates us/sexist card?
The media bias against Sen. Clinton?
The media hasn't really played the sexist card. More like the racist card. The bottom line is, our country would be a lot better if we didn't have a bunch of fools in it.. The media consists of fools, and right now our government is filled with irresponsible people. The only way we can make things better is to first start with ourselves. Until we do that, then the media will dictate what we should do and naturally people will follow..
Reply:Simple, its all about money. NBC and MSNBC are owned by GE. The CEO of GE is an obama supporter, and donated to his campaign as did most of the employees of GE. IF they would have reported all there is to know about obama, he would not have gotton a vote. You can say so what-but you let the media pick the candidate, and your vote was worthless.
Reply:Give me a F'ing break--the media IS biased !Run by FAR LEFT LIBERAL LOONS thats no secret--take a look at MSNBC,NBC...the Huffingtonpost,dailyKos,moveon.org--ALL BIASED--if you think they are not,you have to be one of the most gullible people on YA.
Reply:I feel that except for FOX, all the media outlets were pro-Obama and anti-Hillary...mainly due to who owns the outlets...these liberal owners got orders from headquarters (the DNC mostly) to crucify Hillary and wax poetic about Obama...simple really...everyone who is non-biased noticed this...
Reply:There sure was. http://cmpa.com/Studies/Election08/elect...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31...
Reply:Conservatives have been telling you for years, so I guess now you can see that the mainstream media will always support the most liberal candidate.
Reply:most of the media is for obama! tune into fox once in a while, just to see something fair and balanced, "o'riley" mccain 08
Reply:I think that this is one of those just because I am not in the lime light the media is against me.
Reply:Clinton is backing Obama. This is old news.
Reply:i'm voting for mccain
Reply:the media gave fair shares on both. But media really do not like clitons which perfectly fine by me.
I am not doing the stories
Reply:Doesn't really matter, they both got slammed. I'm not opposed to Clinton being VP. But whoever Obama wants is fine with me.
Obama 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The media bias against Sen. Clinton?
The media hasn't really played the sexist card. More like the racist card. The bottom line is, our country would be a lot better if we didn't have a bunch of fools in it.. The media consists of fools, and right now our government is filled with irresponsible people. The only way we can make things better is to first start with ourselves. Until we do that, then the media will dictate what we should do and naturally people will follow..
Reply:Simple, its all about money. NBC and MSNBC are owned by GE. The CEO of GE is an obama supporter, and donated to his campaign as did most of the employees of GE. IF they would have reported all there is to know about obama, he would not have gotton a vote. You can say so what-but you let the media pick the candidate, and your vote was worthless.
Reply:Give me a F'ing break--the media IS biased !Run by FAR LEFT LIBERAL LOONS thats no secret--take a look at MSNBC,NBC...the Huffingtonpost,dailyKos,moveon.org--ALL BIASED--if you think they are not,you have to be one of the most gullible people on YA.
Reply:I feel that except for FOX, all the media outlets were pro-Obama and anti-Hillary...mainly due to who owns the outlets...these liberal owners got orders from headquarters (the DNC mostly) to crucify Hillary and wax poetic about Obama...simple really...everyone who is non-biased noticed this...
Reply:There sure was. http://cmpa.com/Studies/Election08/elect...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/31...
Reply:Conservatives have been telling you for years, so I guess now you can see that the mainstream media will always support the most liberal candidate.
Reply:most of the media is for obama! tune into fox once in a while, just to see something fair and balanced, "o'riley" mccain 08
Reply:I think that this is one of those just because I am not in the lime light the media is against me.
Reply:Clinton is backing Obama. This is old news.
Reply:i'm voting for mccain
Reply:the media gave fair shares on both. But media really do not like clitons which perfectly fine by me.
I am not doing the stories
Reply:Doesn't really matter, they both got slammed. I'm not opposed to Clinton being VP. But whoever Obama wants is fine with me.
Obama 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why is Fox News or Fox Lies obsessed with smearing Senator Obama with controversy?
Why are Fox News, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, the Clinton’s etc etc scare of the qualified black man running for president? They have to spread false rumors, lies, half truths and inject the race card/race baiting.
Why is Fox News or Fox Lies obsessed with smearing Senator Obama with controversy?
Jaz you can tell by the answers your getting, what kind of people your're dealing with. What's sad is so many more feel this way but they wont admit it. They'll grin in your face and call you a ***** behind your back. They'd rather have another 100 years of Bush than vote for Black candidate that's 100x more qualified to do the job. That's some serious psychological issues going on there. What's really sad is they think they're normal.
Reply:They are reporting facts. I don't think anyone is afraid of a qualified black man. I would vote for a qualified black man or woman in a second. The thing that scares people is not that Obama is black, but that he is not qualified. I don't care what color his skin is or what gender he is, he is not qualifed to be head of state.
Race is only an issue for people like you who love to play the "race card," as you put it. You assume that Obama is not liked because of his skin color and not because of his own obvious racism and ineptitude.
Reply:Dearest *New girl * "friend" JAZ:
What?
Isn't Fox~
"Fair %26amp; Balanced"? :-(
Seriously ......
I feel you PAIN~ girl!
We must remember that~
Fox %26amp; many naive voters are
"Scared" of Sen. Obama.
(The TRUTH Hurts!)
Thus ........
the FEAR Factors/Smears are Amp'ed UP!
(Race, Religion etc.)
The excitement %26amp; success of Sen. Obama's
Candidacy is too much for them. Many
are really JEOLOUS of the effective
Campaign he is waging. Front-Runners
usually always get RIPPED UP!
It's much "easier" for Fox to Smear %26amp; LIE!
The Majority of our Electorate Vote By
Their FEARS~ instead of Intelligence!
Fox Staffers are the same!
Does this make ANY Sense to you?
Keep Posting Jaz!
PS: Personal to Jaz!
Re: "Slow Or FAST?"
I like it SLOW TOO~
EXCEPT I am *NOT Out Of Practice!
:-)
Reply:I find fox to be fairly unbiased. All they are doing is getting peoples opinions on everything. I watch fox news all the time and all they do is point out the things that actually are a stretch from a candidate. They slammed clinton about Bosnia and he commercials. I think your being too judgmental just because things are being said against someone you are supporting.
Reply:the global elites are trying to stack the deck prior to the national elections, so they don't have to worry which party wins the White House.
If you get to choose between two choices they approve of, you still feel like you have power over your government, and accept the outcome.
Some of you better get your heads out of the dirt, and wake up to what is actually taking place.
Newscorp(FOX) is bigger than most people think. And the owner is partnered with the Clintons on many of there projects.
FOX news stirring up contraversy about the Clintons, does nothing but gains them support.
Is anyone here really stupid enough to believe that people who own and are connected with multibillion$$ corporations gives a hoot about liberal vs conservative, or Republican vs Democrat for anything other than to lead the masses around like a bull by its nose??!
Reply:The Fox Network is a clear example of someone not wanting to give up power. This network is so bend feeding off fear, and division. Obama represents change in a lot of ways; this is something that Fox and a great deal of corporations don't want. Don't worry like my grandfather use to always say " A truth will stand-up when everything around is falls down."
Reply:first of all, it's a presidential campaign.. lots of smearing happens all the time on BOTH sides of the aisle.. with that being said, there's nothing smearing about Obama's voting record, there's nothing smearing about Obama's association with a known terrorist, there's nothing smearing about Obama's long-standing relationship with the likes of Wright, there's nothing smearing about Obama's refusal to denounce Wright's viewpoints, there's nothing smearing about Obama's foreign policy, and there's nothing smearing about Obama's tax plan... all of his negatives speak for themselves.. it's not smearing if it's true and meaningful..
Reply:It seems to me that he has done a good enough job on his own of creating questions about his credibility. I find it hard to believe that he attended that church for twenty years and did not know what Rev. Wright stood for. Apparently so does Rev. Wright.
Maybe the fear is not of a qualified black man running for president, but for this man to become president. I would happily accept ANY qualified person at this point.
Reply:I don't think I would use the term "qualified black man running for President" and Barak Obama in the same sentenced.
Most of the people injecting the race card into the campaign are the more liberal pollsters saying people aren't voting for Obama because he is black.
Me? I just don't see Barak being a good President based on his policies and what he has said
Reply:How is he qualified? Fox is the most unbiased news source. They have opinions from both sides.
Just face the facts: Obama is not experienced enough to be president. His empty promises easily sway people like you. Please tell me 3 accomplishments of Barack Obama.
Reply:Qualified? Now, Condi Rice is qualified. Obama is just a good speaker and that's about it. Heck half the folks on this forum have just as much experience as he does in running something. Senators barely know where their towns are in the state they are elected in for crying out loud.
Reply:I don't like his tax increases and redistribution of wealth. That never works, and usually makes it worse for more people. Those who own their own companies will certainly cut back and maybe even lay people off. I don't see any "change" there. I live in Upstate NY and we have the highest taxes, spend the most on education, have every government program under the sun, and guess what? Companies are gone and we have the 2nd highest poverty rate.
raising taxes does not raise more revenue...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18595849/
Reply:Because Fox cares more about the republican party than they care about America.
Fox news and their allies are the ones who are playing the race card and race-baiting. The last thing they want is for race *not* to be a factor. The dirty hypocrites.
Reply:Fox News the National Inquirer of news. They are the month piece of the far right. They avoid the issues and attack the persons character. Why are the views of John Hagee ignored by Sean, Bill and company?
Reply:Just to clarify for you - in your list of people, only one is with Fox News. Since you didn't give an example of a lie one can only assume you don't have any examples. Therefore, your assertion is false.
Reply:because viewers are obsessed with it; when the viewers have completely picked over the topic it will be dropped; it sometimes takes a fair amount of inspection to decide where the lies, half truths, and racism is
Reply:The problem is not his race. The problem is that he is not qualified to be President. I have heard nothing that has not been true. If you have specifics I challenge you to post them.
Reply:Who do you work for? How do you make your money? What is your mortgage payment? How much taxes do you pay? I am try to figure out how many people like you are out there, and how you think? How are we producing people like you?
Reply:Please cite OBJECTIVE examples of the rumors, lies, half truths, and race-baiting. Otherwise, you're just stating your biased opinion.
Reply:Because they do it at some point to each of the canidate's. They always have and they always will. Doesn't matter that he is black he doesn't get a free ride from press smearing just like the rest don't either.
Reply:It's because Obama is the only candidate who will bring about real change. The right wing extremists don't want an intelligent liberal to get anywhere near the White House because he will likely succeed and set back the extreme right.
Reply:I would love to see the false rumors, there aren't any. If a qualified African American was running then we would see if anyone was afraid but since one isn't we don't know..
Reply:Did you know there's something called the remote. Didn't think you Obama supporters were that swift anyway.
Reply:those are OPINION programs and it's called sensationalism. that is why most them shout and scream while attacking any view they don't share.
Reply:Obama has ruined his own campaign. He didn't need help from news organizations.
Reply:Sorry Obama is not qualified.
Reply:Wow, maybe if you listen to them when not high on crack you would know what you just said is a load of horse droppings.
Reply:Why does Obama hate Whites?
Reply:Fox News ain't all that credible.
Reply:Obama has done this to himself. Stop being a victim.
Reply:Because they know he will whip McCain in a general election.
Why is Fox News or Fox Lies obsessed with smearing Senator Obama with controversy?
Jaz you can tell by the answers your getting, what kind of people your're dealing with. What's sad is so many more feel this way but they wont admit it. They'll grin in your face and call you a ***** behind your back. They'd rather have another 100 years of Bush than vote for Black candidate that's 100x more qualified to do the job. That's some serious psychological issues going on there. What's really sad is they think they're normal.
Reply:They are reporting facts. I don't think anyone is afraid of a qualified black man. I would vote for a qualified black man or woman in a second. The thing that scares people is not that Obama is black, but that he is not qualified. I don't care what color his skin is or what gender he is, he is not qualifed to be head of state.
Race is only an issue for people like you who love to play the "race card," as you put it. You assume that Obama is not liked because of his skin color and not because of his own obvious racism and ineptitude.
Reply:Dearest *New girl * "friend" JAZ:
What?
Isn't Fox~
"Fair %26amp; Balanced"? :-(
Seriously ......
I feel you PAIN~ girl!
We must remember that~
Fox %26amp; many naive voters are
"Scared" of Sen. Obama.
(The TRUTH Hurts!)
Thus ........
the FEAR Factors/Smears are Amp'ed UP!
(Race, Religion etc.)
The excitement %26amp; success of Sen. Obama's
Candidacy is too much for them. Many
are really JEOLOUS of the effective
Campaign he is waging. Front-Runners
usually always get RIPPED UP!
It's much "easier" for Fox to Smear %26amp; LIE!
The Majority of our Electorate Vote By
Their FEARS~ instead of Intelligence!
Fox Staffers are the same!
Does this make ANY Sense to you?
Keep Posting Jaz!
PS: Personal to Jaz!
Re: "Slow Or FAST?"
I like it SLOW TOO~
EXCEPT I am *NOT Out Of Practice!
:-)
Reply:I find fox to be fairly unbiased. All they are doing is getting peoples opinions on everything. I watch fox news all the time and all they do is point out the things that actually are a stretch from a candidate. They slammed clinton about Bosnia and he commercials. I think your being too judgmental just because things are being said against someone you are supporting.
Reply:the global elites are trying to stack the deck prior to the national elections, so they don't have to worry which party wins the White House.
If you get to choose between two choices they approve of, you still feel like you have power over your government, and accept the outcome.
Some of you better get your heads out of the dirt, and wake up to what is actually taking place.
Newscorp(FOX) is bigger than most people think. And the owner is partnered with the Clintons on many of there projects.
FOX news stirring up contraversy about the Clintons, does nothing but gains them support.
Is anyone here really stupid enough to believe that people who own and are connected with multibillion$$ corporations gives a hoot about liberal vs conservative, or Republican vs Democrat for anything other than to lead the masses around like a bull by its nose??!
Reply:The Fox Network is a clear example of someone not wanting to give up power. This network is so bend feeding off fear, and division. Obama represents change in a lot of ways; this is something that Fox and a great deal of corporations don't want. Don't worry like my grandfather use to always say " A truth will stand-up when everything around is falls down."
Reply:first of all, it's a presidential campaign.. lots of smearing happens all the time on BOTH sides of the aisle.. with that being said, there's nothing smearing about Obama's voting record, there's nothing smearing about Obama's association with a known terrorist, there's nothing smearing about Obama's long-standing relationship with the likes of Wright, there's nothing smearing about Obama's refusal to denounce Wright's viewpoints, there's nothing smearing about Obama's foreign policy, and there's nothing smearing about Obama's tax plan... all of his negatives speak for themselves.. it's not smearing if it's true and meaningful..
Reply:It seems to me that he has done a good enough job on his own of creating questions about his credibility. I find it hard to believe that he attended that church for twenty years and did not know what Rev. Wright stood for. Apparently so does Rev. Wright.
Maybe the fear is not of a qualified black man running for president, but for this man to become president. I would happily accept ANY qualified person at this point.
Reply:I don't think I would use the term "qualified black man running for President" and Barak Obama in the same sentenced.
Most of the people injecting the race card into the campaign are the more liberal pollsters saying people aren't voting for Obama because he is black.
Me? I just don't see Barak being a good President based on his policies and what he has said
Reply:How is he qualified? Fox is the most unbiased news source. They have opinions from both sides.
Just face the facts: Obama is not experienced enough to be president. His empty promises easily sway people like you. Please tell me 3 accomplishments of Barack Obama.
Reply:Qualified? Now, Condi Rice is qualified. Obama is just a good speaker and that's about it. Heck half the folks on this forum have just as much experience as he does in running something. Senators barely know where their towns are in the state they are elected in for crying out loud.
Reply:I don't like his tax increases and redistribution of wealth. That never works, and usually makes it worse for more people. Those who own their own companies will certainly cut back and maybe even lay people off. I don't see any "change" there. I live in Upstate NY and we have the highest taxes, spend the most on education, have every government program under the sun, and guess what? Companies are gone and we have the 2nd highest poverty rate.
raising taxes does not raise more revenue...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18595849/
Reply:Because Fox cares more about the republican party than they care about America.
Fox news and their allies are the ones who are playing the race card and race-baiting. The last thing they want is for race *not* to be a factor. The dirty hypocrites.
Reply:Fox News the National Inquirer of news. They are the month piece of the far right. They avoid the issues and attack the persons character. Why are the views of John Hagee ignored by Sean, Bill and company?
Reply:Just to clarify for you - in your list of people, only one is with Fox News. Since you didn't give an example of a lie one can only assume you don't have any examples. Therefore, your assertion is false.
Reply:because viewers are obsessed with it; when the viewers have completely picked over the topic it will be dropped; it sometimes takes a fair amount of inspection to decide where the lies, half truths, and racism is
Reply:The problem is not his race. The problem is that he is not qualified to be President. I have heard nothing that has not been true. If you have specifics I challenge you to post them.
Reply:Who do you work for? How do you make your money? What is your mortgage payment? How much taxes do you pay? I am try to figure out how many people like you are out there, and how you think? How are we producing people like you?
Reply:Please cite OBJECTIVE examples of the rumors, lies, half truths, and race-baiting. Otherwise, you're just stating your biased opinion.
Reply:Because they do it at some point to each of the canidate's. They always have and they always will. Doesn't matter that he is black he doesn't get a free ride from press smearing just like the rest don't either.
Reply:It's because Obama is the only candidate who will bring about real change. The right wing extremists don't want an intelligent liberal to get anywhere near the White House because he will likely succeed and set back the extreme right.
Reply:I would love to see the false rumors, there aren't any. If a qualified African American was running then we would see if anyone was afraid but since one isn't we don't know..
Reply:Did you know there's something called the remote. Didn't think you Obama supporters were that swift anyway.
Reply:those are OPINION programs and it's called sensationalism. that is why most them shout and scream while attacking any view they don't share.
Reply:Obama has ruined his own campaign. He didn't need help from news organizations.
Reply:Sorry Obama is not qualified.
Reply:Wow, maybe if you listen to them when not high on crack you would know what you just said is a load of horse droppings.
Reply:Why does Obama hate Whites?
Reply:Fox News ain't all that credible.
Reply:Obama has done this to himself. Stop being a victim.
Reply:Because they know he will whip McCain in a general election.
Clintons Supporters Should Support Mccain and insist we be given Affirmative Action status, do you agree?
Since we is so uneducated, we need a hand up. We need a United Clinton Supporter College Fund, and first choice at Govt Jobs, and I wants me one of them Food Stamp Cards, and some free housing.
Clintons Supporters Should Support Mccain and insist we be given Affirmative Action status, do you agree?
Hey ObamaHat, that is very creative. Unfortunately, ( from the answers that I read ) they do not get it... Yeah, college educated people ( Obama supporters according to the press ) do not have any sense of humor. But do not worry, they will sober up in November.
Reply:I don't want an Affirmative Action President.
I don't want Oprah's Book Of the Month Club President.
I don't want a President who took the Black Value System Pledge. http://tucc.org/black_value_system.html
I don't want a President who attends a Black Liberation Theology Church.
Reply:Nope
Reply:blame yourself for what you are in life and why should hillary supporters support mccain, that would be an act of betrayal
Reply:I don't think McCain is for affirmative action.
Reply:This mockery is embarassing to those of us who legitimately take issue with Obama's platform
Reply:I like food stamps!
Reply:If you are looking for a handout instead of a hand up....talk to Obama.
Reply:LOL, I agree!
Reply:If you think that McCain is similar to Hillary, by all means you should vote for him.
Reply:ooooooo quit being a bunch of winey biotches!!!
Reply:And you'll get it too. You and your descendents just need to go through 400 years of slavery and then 100 years of second-class citizenship first.
Reply:nope. i support Obama now. McSame is not fit to be president.
Reply:I wouldn't blanket Hillary's entire constituency with that claim, but I can certainly tell that you are a moron.
Help for melasma
Clintons Supporters Should Support Mccain and insist we be given Affirmative Action status, do you agree?
Hey ObamaHat, that is very creative. Unfortunately, ( from the answers that I read ) they do not get it... Yeah, college educated people ( Obama supporters according to the press ) do not have any sense of humor. But do not worry, they will sober up in November.
Reply:I don't want an Affirmative Action President.
I don't want Oprah's Book Of the Month Club President.
I don't want a President who took the Black Value System Pledge. http://tucc.org/black_value_system.html
I don't want a President who attends a Black Liberation Theology Church.
Reply:Nope
Reply:blame yourself for what you are in life and why should hillary supporters support mccain, that would be an act of betrayal
Reply:I don't think McCain is for affirmative action.
Reply:This mockery is embarassing to those of us who legitimately take issue with Obama's platform
Reply:I like food stamps!
Reply:If you are looking for a handout instead of a hand up....talk to Obama.
Reply:LOL, I agree!
Reply:If you think that McCain is similar to Hillary, by all means you should vote for him.
Reply:ooooooo quit being a bunch of winey biotches!!!
Reply:And you'll get it too. You and your descendents just need to go through 400 years of slavery and then 100 years of second-class citizenship first.
Reply:nope. i support Obama now. McSame is not fit to be president.
Reply:I wouldn't blanket Hillary's entire constituency with that claim, but I can certainly tell that you are a moron.
Help for melasma
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
