Tom Tancredo
in [Golf]
|
From: Carbon on 10 Feb 2010 20:52 On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:27:43 -0800, dene wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4b73448e$0$4877$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:07:50 -0800, dene wrote: >>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >>> news:4b722885$0$30937$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >>>> On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:59:47 -0500, BAR wrote: >>>>> In article <4b71f275$0$4941$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >>>>> nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... >>>>> >>>>>> That is very hard to imagine. Palin is a dull normal, unfit for >>>>>> high office even as a Republican. I just can't see her fooling >>>>>> enough voters to win a national election. >>>>> >>>>> Whom did you vote for in November of 2008 for POTUS? >>>> >>>> I win. >>> >>> No....you got fooled. >> >> I thought Obama was going to beat Hillary back when nearly everyone >> assumed she would win. I knew if he got the nomination he would beat >> whoever the Republicans nominated. And then of course McCain picked >> the dingbat and "solved" the financial crisis, and by then the >> inevitable was obvious to everyone. I also said that Obama is more of >> a pragmatic centrist than either the right or left realizes, that the >> far left would feel betrayed even as the center right found they >> could work with him. From where I sit, I'm one of the few who didn't >> get fooled. > > If you believed in hope and change, along with a catalogue of other > campaign promises, then you got fooled. Don't feel bad.....so did the > majority of Americans....this time. > > They will not be fooled again in 2010 and 2012. I understood that even if he had won a total landslide it would have been very difficult to push real change through, just due to the innately corrupt nature of Washington. I was happy enough that the voters managed to elect someone who wasn't an obvious retard. I would not count Obama out. You guys have underestimated him before.
From: Jack Hollis on 10 Feb 2010 21:05 On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:15:46 -0800, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: >> >conceivable that they are losing money, hand over fist? >> >> In California, the state does not have to approve rate increases. The >> increase only effects 800,000 individual policyholders. Looks like >> ABCB is either losing money on individual policies, or just wants to >> get out of the business entirely. > >There is some merit to the latter theory. In Oregon, Regence Blue Cross >suddenly changed their individual plans, lowering their benefits without any >significant rate decrease. Their emphasis are now high deductible HSA >plans. > >Reason....they were certain the Senate bill was going to pass with the >guaranteed issue provisions. If somebody games the law, i.e. waits until >they are sick and then applying for insurance, then it's likely they will be >buying the best plan out there. Blue Cross is making sure they are no >longer the best. Other insurers will follow suit and consequently, plans >that are lower than $2500 deductible will be a thing of the past. Businessmen will always adjust. Interesting that on the ABC News tonight they failed to mention that this rate increase effects less than 3% of the California market.
From: William Clark on 10 Feb 2010 21:06 In article <4b735a66$0$12438$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message > news:clark-2E8C9B.09512510022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <hkucap$45e$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>, > > "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > > >> "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >> news:wclark2-5484D7.06572310022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article <4b72976f$0$12444$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> > "Moderate" <sparky@_engineer_.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> > >> >> I didn't see your reply and I wasn't talking to you, anyway. > >> >> ******************************************** > >> >> > >> >> ... but you did move the goal posts. Gottcha. > >> > > >> > Did you have that punch line written on the palm of your hand? > >> > >> Please try and keep up William. We were not discussing your rosy palm. > > > > No, it's just that "gotcha" is about as long a word as either you or the > > Palinquitter could manage. And both of you need a prompter to answer a > > simple, staged, question. > > Whereas you and Obama would sooner tell a lie than the truth. Better write that on the palm of your hand - so that next time you might remember that "gotcha" only has one "t".
From: dene on 10 Feb 2010 21:21 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b7362cf$0$4864$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:27:43 -0800, dene wrote: > > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > > news:4b73448e$0$4877$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >> On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:07:50 -0800, dene wrote: > >>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >>> news:4b722885$0$30937$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>> On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:59:47 -0500, BAR wrote: > >>>>> In article <4b71f275$0$4941$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > >>>>> nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > >>>>> > >>>>>> That is very hard to imagine. Palin is a dull normal, unfit for > >>>>>> high office even as a Republican. I just can't see her fooling > >>>>>> enough voters to win a national election. > >>>>> > >>>>> Whom did you vote for in November of 2008 for POTUS? > >>>> > >>>> I win. > >>> > >>> No....you got fooled. > >> > >> I thought Obama was going to beat Hillary back when nearly everyone > >> assumed she would win. I knew if he got the nomination he would beat > >> whoever the Republicans nominated. And then of course McCain picked > >> the dingbat and "solved" the financial crisis, and by then the > >> inevitable was obvious to everyone. I also said that Obama is more of > >> a pragmatic centrist than either the right or left realizes, that the > >> far left would feel betrayed even as the center right found they > >> could work with him. From where I sit, I'm one of the few who didn't > >> get fooled. > > > > If you believed in hope and change, along with a catalogue of other > > campaign promises, then you got fooled. Don't feel bad.....so did the > > majority of Americans....this time. > > > > They will not be fooled again in 2010 and 2012. > > I understood that even if he had won a total landslide it would have > been very difficult to push real change through, just due to the > innately corrupt nature of Washington. I was happy enough that the > voters managed to elect someone who wasn't an obvious retard. > > I would not count Obama out. You guys have underestimated him before. His best chance at relection would occur if the Republicans take control, as they did in '94. Americans are largely uncomfortable with one party rule. -Greg
From: assimilate on 11 Feb 2010 00:50
On 9-Feb-2010, "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote: > So you're certain beyond any doubt that government intervention in the > economy has had nothing to do with the growth in GDP in Q3 and Q4 of > 2009 or with the drop in unemployment in January 2010? Why do you ask such juvenile questions? This is not a court of law, so I don't need to be certain beyond any doubt. :-P However it is safe to say that w/o the Stimulus and the car bailouts we would be better off today. The net effect of these steps (along with cash for clunkers and the housing tax credit) is uncertanity. Couple this with all the veiled and not so veiled threats from the political class towards businessmen and you get a climate where no one wants to hire or invest in new capital projects. -- bill-o |