shooter

Those who are capable of paying for health care will no longer have a choice. They will be forced to pay.....under the point of a gun if necessary. The health care they will receive will not be nearly as timely if the government deigns to give it to them at all or nearly as good as once the government decides that your health is worth the expense to them.

You don't really think that people on welfare will be force to pay anything do you? If you do then I suggest your next trick should be to get blood from a turnip. It will be the the the rich, most of the middle class, the young, and those not yet born who will pay for this.

According to Nancy Pelosi if you don't pay for healthcare you should go to jail. Ergo, healthcare is not a right, it's an obligation.

The "Beat CovCath" T-shirts are not my favorite. I prefer to wear "Real Colonels Wear Red". P.S. I don't have a problem with adults showing their support for either a CovCath or a Highlands loss.:jump:

I am a firm believer that you can learn things from anybody and I am also a firm believer that you need to know your enemy. Therefore, I agree that quoting Mao or even saying that Mao was one of your favorite philosophers isn't by itself all that significant. However, given her political inclinations, that kind of comment has caught people's attention. The idea that a member of the Obama administration would be a communist sympathizer is hardly a stretch. I'm sure there are people right now looking into what she has said and done in the past. While this particular comment of hers is much ado about nothing, I would not be surprised at all if they find other more damaging comments. Time will tell.

Call me crazy but I have this pet peeve about the rule of law. If it's against the law, then the law should be enforced. If you don't think you should be against the law then get the law changed. If you can't get the law changed then too bad. Also, you need to read between the lines of the story. There is no such thing as "in strict compliance compliance with state law" in states like California. If you "need" a medical marijuana card (wink wink) they you can get one. This essentially legalizes marijuana in those states without a federal law being passed to legalize it. P.S. Also, selective enforcement of the law is one way that the Obama administration is politicizing the Justice Department.

I woke up this morning and was surprised to hear that Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. My observations: 1. You should be required to accomplish something tangible to get the award. 2. I knew that the prize reflected European political views, this just reinforces my already firm belief. 3. Giving the award to Obama is also a slap at George Bush. 4. While receiving this award is a poltical boost now, in the long term it could be a negative if Obama fails to live up to expectations that have been raised by receiving this award.

So essentially it's Bush's fault!:lol: Some things never change.

I have no problem with the Obama's taking the time and the money to try to bring the Olympics to Chicago. The marginal additional cost of them making the pitch is small compared to the prize they were trying to achieve. (Assuming you value being the host for the Olympics.) As far as the media is concerned, there certainly are those on the right who are overplaying the significance of this defeat of Obama's. However, there is no denying that it is a defeat just as there would be no denying it would have been a victory for him if his bid would have been successful. I believe this episode by itself is not signficiant. However, I also believe this is one small example that Obama isn't capable of performing miracles. As Obama accummulates additional and more signficant defeats, the people who voted for Obama will slowly realize that he won't be delivering all that they foolishly hoped he would. Some will become disillusioned with him. Others will not be able to bring themselves to admit that their savior has failed and will find scapegoats for the shortcomings of Obama and his policies. The blank slate of the primaries is being filled.

I am disappointed to say that it's been that way for the last couple of years.

If by "it" you mean the $758B stimulus bill, the WSJ bill didn't say that "it" was working. The WSJ said government intervention in the markets appears to have helped. However, government intervention is much more than just the stimulus bill. I believe that the fed loaning money to banks and the fed flooding the market with money has stabilized what was an precarious situation so that has been beneficial. But stabilization is not growth. Also, the stimulus package has had very little impact partially because most of the money hasn't even been spent yet and partially because most of the programs aren't very stimulative. But I am willing to say that "it" worked if that means we cancel spending the approximately $500B of the stimulus bill that hasn't been spent.

This was an entertaining game other than the result is not what I would have liked. Norwood has a very very good running game. They have a lot of size on the Oline and a talented tailback(#28). He have about 170 yds rushing and 4 TDs. Campbell Co looked good on their opening drive for a score throwing the ball for most of the yardage. However, after that the offense was inconsistent with dropped passes and turnovers. Campbell Co's other scores were on a Hail Mary pass right before halftime and a 95 yard kickoff return by Austin Johnson.

And his first show back from surgery Beck said "I have seen our (healthcare) system at it's best and now I have experienced it at its worst." Also a week after his surgery Beck posted this on his website: "My doctors are Littlejohn and McClain from Stamford, Connecticut and they are the best of the best. These guys are absolutely amazing. I have the best team of doctors you can imagine. " Finally, on July 15, only 1 month ago, Glenn Beck said "America has the best health care system in the world. It does! Oh, is it perfect? No!" So Beck did make some blanket statements about health care both recently and shortly after he had the surgery. But in each case he quickly followed those statements with other statements which militated against the severity of his blanket statements. IMHO, Beck is an easy target because Beck is prone to hyperbole. A characteristic of Beck that Stewart ruthlessly exploits. However, one gets the impression that many of Stewart's watchers believe Stewart exposes people for who they "really are" when in truth Stewart does not and has no interest in providing and complete an accurate assessment of the views of his targets. He just wants to present his political views clothed in the best comedy he can.

Am I the only one who thinks that Beck wasn't necessarily being inconsistent in his remarks? (At least the ones shown by Stewart.) Isn't it possible that the US has the best healthcare in the world and yet problems still exist in the system? I've certainly have had good and bad experiences with people in a number of professions. Have all the doctors, lawyers, police officers, teachers or accountants you have encountered in your life been either universally good or universally bad? Were there no exceptions? Isn't it possible for me to criticize a professor at Harvard, Yale or Stanford and yet still claim that those institutions are some of the best institutions of higher learning in the world? Am I a hypocrit for believing Noam Chomsky is a complete loon but MIT is a great univerisity? P.S. Jon Stewert is very good at weaving together video clips to give the artistic and political effect he desires.

I don't know much about Greenup. What kind of offense does they run? Campbell Co runs a pass oriented offense. As a result, the key to beating Campbell Co is getting pressure on the quarterback and having good coverage on their receivers. In the scrimmage the Campbell QB had time to throw and there were several coverage breakdowns by Ashland resulting in big plays for Campbell Co. Scrimages typcially don't mean much and if Geenup is a run oriented offense, then Ashland's performance in the scrimmage would mean even less than what scrimmages usually mean.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/3824641099_4196b4d121_b.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2612/3824656157_9b5e5db290_b.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3559/3824644171_c02f8fa18b_b.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2470/3825454988_7ac67320b5_b.jpg

The game was played at Campbell Co. I missed the first hour of the scrimmage. When I got there it looked like the JV were on the field. Later in the scrimmage the starters went back out and Campbell Co moved down the field almost at will. Ashland had some good plays but couldn't seem to put enough plays together to score. I was told that the first hour was not much different than what I saw in the remaining two hours.

I'm wondering what happened to all those people who protested loudly against the government inserting itself into the Terry Schiavo case. Seems that many who were against it then want to institutionalize it now.

I am willing to concede that there is a high probability that some deaths could have been avoided if the timely assistance would have been rendered. How many? Nobody knows exactly. I am also curious who you are referencing when you say "your folks" and "you and your folks" in your post. Are you including Palin in that group?

While 227 died while waiting for an assessment, it doesn't necessarily follow that 227 died because they were waiting. In fact, one of the complaints that the Feds have with the state of Alaska is that the Feds see what appears to be a higher than expected death rate and the state is not bothering to investigate why they died. I said "few" because according to the info I have seen only a few (8) have filed law suits claiming that the wait contributed to someones death.

Prior to April 2006 a state government contractor had been administrating certain Medicaid plans in Alaska (CMS, HCBS, and PCS). Because the state legislature was not happy with how the contractor was administrating the plans and in an effort to control costs (sound familiar?) the legislature passed a law allowing the government to administer the plans and establishing new guidelines for admitting persons into the programs. Since the state government took over, the backlog of applicants waiting to be enrolled has nearly doubled and there has been a significant increase in lawsuits by individuals who (according to their lawsuit) were harmed (a few died) because services were either delayed or denied instead of being provided in a timely manner. The biggest complaint was that the state government was arbitrary in interpreting their regulations. The Feds came in and put a moratorium on enrolling new individuals to the federal program. The Feds also set out guidelines for the corrective actions that the state of Alaska needed to perform. I'm not sure how much responsibility Palin bears for this situation but it certainly is not a story that ignites enthusiasm for greater government involvement in health care.

You don't honestly believe that Obama was laying the blame on Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid do you?

How so? The Patriot Act was attempting to find/keep track of people who either had or were planning to commit illegal acts. That is absolutely a legitimate function of government. The debate on the Patriot Act concerns maintaining a balance between the conflicting needs of security and privacy. You can argue that the Patriot Act goes too far, but you can not reasonably argue that there aren't circumstances where security needs outweigh privacy concerns. Keeping tabs on law-abiding people for the sole reason that the government doesn't like their political statements is not a legitimate function of goverment. The purely politcal nature of this list leads me to ask: What legitimate governmental need is served by this list? It seems like apples and oranges to me.

If I were Bunning I would wear that distinction as a badge of honor!:lol:

Then there was the time that the Cold Spring police were under the delusion that I killed somebody............