From: Howard Brazee on
On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 21:58:51 GMT, assimilate(a)borg.org wrote:

>> >This is just an indication of how radical some of the Obama's advisors
>> >are. Van Jones is another example of how out of touch with America
>> >Obama and his advisors are.
>>
>> Whenever politicians disagree with *me*, I take it as an example of
>> how out of touch with America those politicians are. After all, it
>> only makes sense that the whole country agrees with me.
>
>do you know anything of Van Jones Howard? He is not mainstream.

No, I don't. But I stand by my observation.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison
From: Carbon on
On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 22:08:43 +0000, assimilate wrote:
> On 4-Sep-2009, "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Will you explain what the difference is between "rationing" and the
>> way things are done now? -
>
> Now coverage is a matter of contract: what the policy says it will
> cover and if one party does not live up to the terms then in can be
> brought before the authorities to settle. Rationing socialist style is
> where one party is the state and who is going to arbitrate a dispute
> between you and the state? Why the state. Wonder how that's going to
> work out?

"Rationing socialist style." I like that. Nice aroma.

In your opinion, is more healthcare rationing done in Canada or the US?
I'm always interested in the intersection between reality and ideology,
so I'm genuinely curious if you'll be able to bring yourself to concede
the obvious.
From: Carbon on
On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 22:00:25 +0000, assimilate wrote:
> On 5-Sep-2009, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
>> So that's KnitWit's excuse.....that it was written out of context, 32
>> years ago.
>>
>> The out of context argument is complete rubbish. What they say is
>> obvious.
>>
>> The only way to describe the person who wrote these things is as an
>> Eco-Fascist. Someone who is willing to suspend democracy, the
>> Constitution and human rights to protect the environment.
>
> You must have hit a nerve Jack. I don't think I've ever seen BK in
> such a tizzy.

Bobby catches Jack trying to slide a rancid mound of bullshit past and
it's a tizzy? Are you sure you're not completely misrepresenting the
situation?
From: dene on

"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4aa44318$0$4975$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 22:08:43 +0000, assimilate wrote:
> > On 4-Sep-2009, "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Will you explain what the difference is between "rationing" and the
> >> way things are done now? -
> >
> > Now coverage is a matter of contract: what the policy says it will
> > cover and if one party does not live up to the terms then in can be
> > brought before the authorities to settle. Rationing socialist style is
> > where one party is the state and who is going to arbitrate a dispute
> > between you and the state? Why the state. Wonder how that's going to
> > work out?
>
> "Rationing socialist style." I like that. Nice aroma.
>
> In your opinion, is more healthcare rationing done in Canada or the US?
> I'm always interested in the intersection between reality and ideology,
> so I'm genuinely curious if you'll be able to bring yourself to concede
> the obvious.

Rationing is done more in Canada. What Bill describes as the contract
system is dead one straight....and it correlates to my 20 years in the biz.
Furthermore, there is accountability if the contract is broken. Conversely,
there is accountability if the contract/policy was obtained on a fraudulent
basis.

-Greg


From: dene on

"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4aa3e396$0$4943$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 11:32:46 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote:
> > On 06 Sep 2009 14:43:39 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >>On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:18:28 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote:
> >>> On 06 Sep 2009 02:38:47 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In Canada if you're sick and you need expensive care, you get it,
> >>>> period.
> >>>
> >>> Canadians get it all right, but not the way they think. Canada's
> >>> health care rationing kills.
> >>
> >>Spare me the bullshit.
> >
> > From the Canadian Supreme Court decision July, 2005.
> >
> > "Delays in the public system are widespread and have serious,
> > sometimes grave, consequences," wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin
> > and Justice John Major. "Inevitably where patients have
> > life-threatening conditions, some will die because of undue delay in
> > awaiting surgery."
> >
> > I assume that this decision came after a long trial with many expert
> > witnesses followed by a period of deliberation. Now if the greatest
> > legal minds in Canada say that the Canadian health care system results
> > in people unnecessarily dying, then who am I, or you for that matter,
> > to disagree.
>
> I guess things didn't work out on rec.sport.soccer, huh?

Nice diversion, Carbs, but why don't you address Jack's cite.

-Greg