We went to afganistion right after 911 which of course had emotion behind it but also a good reason. Also the CIA is to blame as they gave Bush the false info. It was becuase Germany did let the CIA talk the "informant"(not blaming Germany) When the CIA couldnt question him they basicly said screw it and told Bush about the WMDs.
Actually, if memory serves me, the CIA never talked to the informant, but Germany warned them that his credibility was questionable. I think the UN had also warned about his trustworthiness. Of course, neither of these views supported war with Iraq anyway, and the administration got what they wanted plus a clusterfuck to cover it up until we had deep roots in Iraq. I think it would be naive to say the CIA chose to pass false information, completely destroying their credibility, without serious pressure from the administration.
Bush lied...bla bla bla
And some of my best buddies died!
That aside though, the Iraq War is not his only blunder. He has done much more that may not have killed people in this country but crippled their spirit and enthusiasm to succeed and prosper. If there is anyone who thinks our tax system is okay, then they've got problems and I can't support them. He has done nothing to try to fix it. Instead he has grown the government.
leftist hippy wankers. There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody. What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years. If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else. War and conflict are man's natural condition.
So everyone who disagrees with this war is a leftist hippy wanker?
I wonder, did you go over there and put your efforts in to it? Or are you just someone who likes to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the sport of watching others die?
leftist hippy wankers. There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody. What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years. If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else. War and conflict are man's natural condition.
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
leftist hippy wankers. There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody. What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years. If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else. War and conflict are man's natural condition.
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
I can see why an independant would vote for Nader then McCain. It really doesn't have to do with Nader's views on Big Government but what he represents. He could possibly be a step in the right direction because he represents another voice in government, and would want to make more voices be heard. Despite being Big Government, he is also anti-bipartisan.
Also I think McCain's view on immigration hasn't changed since his bill for amnesty was shot down. People keep trying to peg him as a completely dishonest bastard. He said that there is no way to prosecute 34 million illegal immigrants and that it would be less costly to just offer amnesty, then spend the money and man power they would tracking down illegals for better border security. The intention still being keeping a tighter lock on illegal immigration.
* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.
* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.
* McCain’s campaign unveiled a Social Security policy that the senator would implement if elected, which did not include a Bush-like privatization scheme. In March 2008, McCain denounced his own campaign’s policy.
* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
* In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
* McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
* McCain said he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
Now, it’s worth noting that there are worse qualities in a presidential candidate than changing one’s mind about a policy matter or two. McCain has been in Congress for decades; he’s bound to shift now and then on various controversies.
But therein lies the point — McCain was consistent on most of these issues, right up until he started running for president, at which point he conveniently abandoned practically every position he used to hold. The problem isn’t just the incessant flip-flops; it’s the shameless pandering and hollow convictions behind the incessant flip-flops.
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
I am a forum troll hunter. Be afraid trolls, very afraid!
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
Nice scare tactic you have there lol.
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
Your mind is like a parachute, it's only useful when it's open. Don't forget, you can use the block function on trolls.
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
Nice scare tactic you have there lol.
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see through the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
I am a forum troll hunter. Be afraid trolls, very afraid!
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
Nice scare tactic you have there lol.
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see through the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
This is exactly what I am talking about. People can examine the same information and come up with multiple interpretations, all equally as good. You try and pass your opinion off as "intelligent" and attack those who disagree with you. If political parties were abolished I think it would get rid of some of this blind bias.
Really the first sentence in the last post was the only part I meant to be directed at you.
Your mind is like a parachute, it's only useful when it's open. Don't forget, you can use the block function on trolls.
leftist hippy wankers. There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody. What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years. If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else. War and conflict are man's natural condition.
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
What is a neo-con?
New breed of Republican.
In the past, being a Republican meant that you were for smaller government, lower taxes, the least amount of regulation, and a general belief that people should take care of themselves and own up to their decisions. This belief probably culminated itself around the time that Goldwater was around. That's why some Republican's today hate what their party has become and call themselves "Goldwater Republicans."
Today's Republican's are anything but that. They believe in using the government to promote their agenda, intruding into peoples personal lives to make them "behave", using the tax system and the I.R.S. to invade peoples lives and steal their earnings, and that the government is tasked to take care of people from the cradle to the grave.
I don't want to be a part of that Republican Party. And it is the reason that so many people are finding their choices in this race very disenchanting.
I can see why an independant would vote for Nader then McCain. It really doesn't have to do with Nader's views on Big Government but what he represents. He could possibly be a step in the right direction because he represents another voice in government, and would want to make more voices be heard. Despite being Big Government, he is also anti-bipartisan. Also I think McCain's view on immigration hasn't changed since his bill for amnesty was shot down. People keep trying to peg him as a completely dishonest bastard. He said that there is no way to prosecute 34 million illegal immigrants and that it would be less costly to just offer amnesty, then spend the money and man power they would tracking down illegals for better border security. The intention still being keeping a tighter lock on illegal immigration.
WHY should Nader be giving any group of people a voice in government? Since when is the federal government in America supposed to be a podium for promoting an agenda????
You want to cause change in America then have at it, but don't use the federal government to force people to follow your idea of what should be done. If I don't agree with you then do you think that making me conform by using guns and violence is going to win me over? Wrong.
This country was set up to promote state rights. That way if I don't like how one state is run I will move my butt to another state that suits me better. But taking away that choice by using the federal government to make a blanket order on the people is un-American.
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
Nice scare tactic you have there lol.
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see through the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
When you say that conservative extremists screw things up less, am I wrong to interpret that as saying that you're choosing the lesser of two evils? Are you meaning that our only choice is to pick the one that will screw the country up the slowest?
To me, I think of it this way. If our only choice is to pick the least wrong candidate then there is something wrong with the foundations of both of these parties.
I'm sorry but though you make some solid points this all sounds like the same-ole fear hearding that Bushy is synonymous for. So long as human beings exist there will be politics. So long as there are political bodies there will be wars, so ummm you can't have someone who doesn't want to go to war leading the country or you'll die! I have not heard / seen Obama openly state that he absolutely will not go to war. I have read interviews; wherein, he states that war should be the absolute final means of of accomplishing a goal.
Bottom line, Bush was angry, sadened, etc. when this happened. Anyone with any degree of managerial knowledge knows that it is never wise to make decisions when you are emotional. The fault does not totally lie with Bush (Congress and Americal in general shoulder their fair share), but when he pressures the intelligence community to find (read: make up) something as a means for him to "bring justice to America," then I have to pose the question - who is really making rash decisions here? Time passes and now the country, with a more clear prospective, sees that the emotional decision after 911 was perhaps not the best one. What's done is done but I felt back then as I do now - we were in no position, as a country, to even ponder the thought of war so soon after 911. Attacks will take place, of that you may be assured. If not from without then certainly from within. So are we to be ready to throw down the card of WAR at the first sign of terror? Statistically speaking it's literally impossible to police and consider all the possible ways a terrorist attack could happen. Even at my job which deals with railroad freight I can think of no less that half a dozen ways a terrorist could "easily" do "something" that would result in catastrophic death rates. I'll jump off this tangent and back to the point. There will always be war. There will always be the fear of war. There will also always be the severe consequences present when a country decides to go to war - why then should war not be used as a last resort when every other possible avenue is exhausted?
First off, I did not vote for bush, nor am I affiliated with any party. I vote for who I think will make the best decsions for this country. I did not agree that we should go into Iraq, in fact I totally disagree that we should have gone in at all. As I stated earlier though what has been done cannot be undone. We did go in, we cannot change that now. pulling out our troops could have devestating affects to the world. Obama promised the pulling out of our troops, I certainly hope he does not push that effort, no matter how bad we want out family members to come home. The fact that we went in means that we will not be able to remove our troops anytime soon , if ever. Every possible avenue may not apply to every situation, as well I hope that you are intelligent to understand that not every person out there can be dealt with with words. We need a leader that is capable of knowing when this is the case. Waiting for "words" can also leave you vulnerable for an attack. Our country does need to have more security, and we do need to have stronger defenses in place to prevent attacks from many different angles including from within. That is the leaders responsibility to make sure that all possibilities are considered and have plans for that. If the leader cannot do this then we need someone who can, or they need to have someone who can working for them. Yes we could be attacked with disease, chemical, and biological weapons. Our rescourses could be attacked or even be attacked from within our own healthcare system. All of these things need to be considered and have measures in place expecting thius to occur. Anything else would be considered "incompetent". The people of our country need to take who they elect to run this country more seriously. It is not a popularity contest, we need to really look at what they truely bring to the table.
John McCain will become president because Americans are 1) racist and 2) too foolish to vote for their own interests regarding the a) the economy, b) health care costs, c) tuitions costs, d) pork barrel and special interests spending, and e) much more.
Republicans exploit the so-called "values vote."
Those people deserve to be exploited, and good luck to them affording tuition, health care, and finding a decent job!
I would also like to point out that the reason none of the candidates healthcare policies are going to solve the problem is because they are treating the symptoms not the conditions.
1. We have a doctor shortage in this country. This could be easily solved by removing the idea that becoming a doctor is only for the priveledged or elite. If we offered programs that changed this we could easily change that. Make schooling to become a doctor free to all of those who qualify. Yes full scholarships including room and board for anyone who is smart enough to become a doctor and wants to.
Under that contract say for a set number of years after they graduate they work for the government at the free clinics and hospitals, allowing us to provide healthcare to all those who need it. After that time period they can continue working for the government or go into private practice for themselves.
2. Not all people even if health insurance is available to them can afford it, so trying to force them or encourage them to get health insurance is pointless. Health insurance at this time in this country is greatly lacking. It should never be left up to heallth insurance companies what test or medications the patients can have, at the current time health insurance compaies are refusing to pay for tests or medications that doctors are prescribing. The doctors only considerationshould be what is best for the patients, not whether or not an insurance company will pay for it. With medicaid at this time those patients are receiving better healthcare than many of our citizens on health insurance. There needs to be a crack down on health insurance companies to make them live up to their contracts and stop telling the patients and doctors what is best for them.
3. Pharmacutical companies are the single most worst problem with our healthcare system. They spend billions of dollars a year on catering to doctors offices, advertising, and providing lavish trips in an attempt to bribe the hands of our doctors. All of this at the expense to our patients. Research and development actually is the smallest expense they have when you look at the actual percentages. Working in the medical field myself, If I told you what I have seen you would be disgusted. They do not want to make you well, they want to make you dependant, I know this as fact because my sister has worked for them. She is an immuniologist, they have made medications to treat diseases that were never produced by the pharmacutical companies because they do not want one time fixes, if the medicine is not profitable they do not produce it. They only want to produce long term medications so that you have to keep buying it, and they keep having money coming in. As long as our pharmacutical industry is run like a business instead of an organization that actually wants to cure people we will continue to have this problem. In all honesty, they should be tried for "crimes against humanity" because what they are doing is truely that sick.
None of the candidates will address this issue how it needs to be addressed. From what I have seen of all their policies they make the situation worse not better. If they aren't going to really fix the problem they shouldn't mess with it at all.
Actually..... i've been with McCain from the start, and I will agree that was a great speech. Best of luck to him in the elections, he is definately qualified. He has my vote.
I find it revealing that the same person who could vote for Nader could also vote for McCain. It shows just how similar the Republican Party has become to a big government candidate like Nader.
I definately would not vote for Nader, it was a joke..... I guess it wasn't obvious enough
I would also like to point out that the reason none of the candidates healthcare policies are going to solve the problem is because they are treating the symptoms not the conditions.
We don't even have a health care system, we have a sick care system. We spend billions treating ailments that could have been prevented for one tenth the cost. Ensuring that all children have medical coverage pays dividends on costs of health care as they grow. This is Barack Obama's health care plan, to see that all children are covered.
ounce of prevention > pound of cure
1. We have a doctor shortage in this country. This could be easily solved by removing the idea that becoming a doctor is only for the priveledged or elite. If we offered programs that changed this we could easily change that. Make schooling to become a doctor free to all of those who qualify. Yes full scholarships including room and board for anyone who is smart enough to become a doctor and wants to.
Much of the shortage is due to the rising care needs of baby boomers. The shortage of doctors and nurses will grow increasingly worse over the next two decades. On the other hand, there seems to be no shortage of surgeons to perform 'elected' surgeries, such as breast augmentaions and hair replacement. Do we really live in a country that is satisfied to be rotting on the inside as long as it isn't noticeable from the outside?
Under that contract say for a set number of years after they graduate they work for the government at the free clinics and hospitals, allowing us to provide healthcare to all those who need it. After that time period they can continue working for the government or go into private practice for themselves.
This is largley what Barack Obama supports with a civil service tuition program, it's just not limited to the medical field. In essence, it offers a tax credit to students who volunteer for civil service.
2. Not all people even if health insurance is available to them can afford it, so trying to force them or encourage them to get health insurance is pointless. Health insurance at this time in this country is greatly lacking. It should never be left up to heallth insurance companies what test or medications the patients can have, at the current time health insurance compaies are refusing to pay for tests or medications that doctors are prescribing. The doctors only considerationshould be what is best for the patients, not whether or not an insurance company will pay for it. With medicaid at this time those patients are receiving better healthcare than many of our citizens on health insurance. There needs to be a crack down on health insurance companies to make them live up to their contracts and stop telling the patients and doctors what is best for them.
Our problems are not limited to treatment. We lay an nunstable foundation for healthy living from an early age. We feed our children garbage and cut physical education and art programs from schools, which only exacerbates the problem. We are, in effect, building a populace to keep pumping dollars into the health care industry long into the future.
3. Pharmacutical companies are the single most worst problem with our healthcare system. They spend billions of dollars a year on catering to doctors offices, advertising, and providing lavish trips in an attempt to bribe the hands of our doctors. All of this at the expense to our patients. Research and development actually is the smallest expense they have when you look at the actual percentages. Working in the medical field myself, If I told you what I have seen you would be disgusted. They do not want to make you well, they want to make you dependant, I know this as fact because my sister has worked for them. She is an immuniologist, they have made medications to treat diseases that were never produced by the pharmacutical companies because they do not want one time fixes, if the medicine is not profitable they do not produce it. They only want to produce long term medications so that you have to keep buying it, and they keep having money coming in. As long as our pharmacutical industry is run like a business instead of an organization that actually wants to cure people we will continue to have this problem. In all honesty, they should be tried for "crimes against humanity" because what they are doing is truely that sick.
I agree, we have a serious problem with pharmaceutical inundation. We are a nation of addicts. I can't count he number of reports I've seen where another 'medicine' was found to cause serious health risks. The FDA is failing us, and doctors are seemingly along for the ride, cashing in at every opportunity. My grandparents are taking 21 different prescriptions per day, all paid for by your tax dollars, thanks to Bush's Medicare "Part D" program. Prior to Madicare "Part D" they were taking 8.
The guy who championed this bill: Former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., who steered the bill through the House, retired soon after and took a $2 million a year job as president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the main industry lobbying group.
None of the candidates will address this issue how it needs to be addressed. From what I have seen of all their policies they make the situation worse not better. If they aren't going to really fix the problem they shouldn't mess with it at all.
Obama is doing more to address these issues than McCain, that's why I intend to vote for him.
Following pres bush2 's lead globalist McCain (R. Arizona) wants to eliminate national borders to the point the Americas become alot more like Europe's common market... eventually being three markets: Europe, Asia and the Americas; not sure how Africa, Australia and Greenland will fit in. ref
Ruled by the tri-city-corporation empire: London (economic, 1694,) Washington DC (military, 1871,) Vatican (theology, 1929.)
With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent. Latin America today is increasingly vital to the fortunes of the United States. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny. The countries of Latin America are the natural partners of the United States, and our northern neighbor Canada.
Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new twenty-first century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all. link
edit
Originally posted by beastliest21 1. We have a doctor shortage in this country
leftist hippy wankers. There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody. What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years. If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else. War and conflict are man's natural condition.
So everyone who disagrees with this war is a leftist hippy wanker?
I wonder, did you go over there and put your efforts in to it? Or are you just someone who likes to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the sport of watching others die?
We didn't put a gun to anybody's head to go over there. Every single person in the military signed up for it.
The troops are out there DOING WHAT THEY SIGNED UP TO DO. They're not whining, crying or asking to be send home, they're doing what it says on the job description.
Dem and Repub are essentially two flavors of liberal.
They both want bigger government, more laws and to codify morality.
John McCain will become president because Americans are 1) racist and 2) too foolish to vote for their own interests regarding the a) the economy, b) health care costs, c) tuitions costs, d) pork barrel and special interests spending, and e) much more.
Republicans exploit the so-called "values vote."
Those people deserve to be exploited, and good luck to them affording tuition, health care, and finding a decent job!
You bring up the point of racism..Is it considered racist to have college for your race only? organizations for your own race only? To have churches for your race only? If so then you would be calling all blacks that attend any of these racists. Equal rights does not mean better rights. Punishing people for things that happened in the past is not right either. The whole idea that quotas need to be in place to make sure you have x number of people of any certain race working for you, or choosing who gets a scholarship simply because of their race is absurd. The best possible candidate for the job or scholarship should not include race. If the white kid beats out the black kid they play the "race" card, when that has nothing to do with it at all. What are we teaching our children by saying that one race can have these things and another cannot? I am not a racist, but if you think that reverse discrimination solves anything, you are greatly mistaken. Do not punish our children for the crimes of people they didn't even know.
When you say that conservative extremists screw things up less, am I wrong to interpret that as saying that you're choosing the lesser of two evils? Are you meaning that our only choice is to pick the one that will screw the country up the slowest?
To me, I think of it this way. If our only choice is to pick the least wrong candidate then there is something wrong with the foundations of both of these parties.
And if the candidate we wanted to win in the Primaries did not make it to the general election, you recommend what? I choose to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than to not vote at all.
And if the candidate we wanted to win in the Primaries did not make it to the general election, you recommend what? I choose to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than to not vote at all.
If the candidate you wanted for president didn't win the primary, consider yourself on the fringe of society. Vote for your opinion of the lesser of two evils, of course. But, you should start making accommodations. Society will progress, if you fail to progress with it, you get left behind.
Have patience my lemming-like republicans, as soon as the GOP catches wind that at least 20% of republicans (hardcore right) are staying home election today, you will see Mr. McCain tap dance like no one else!
You will see McCain whore himself out to the far right when he realizes that not even they are on his side, and he will alienate all of the centrists and independents in the process. Any candidate who even mutters social issues like gay rights, abortion or any of these other worthless issues will lose, and lose fast.
So McCain is in a catch 22. If he wants the far rights vote, he has to burn all of the centrist bridges he has built up. If he ignores the whacko religious right, he loses by default. Good riddance too, because I am sick and tired of seeing the same old faces on the hill. McCain needs to do himself a favor and check himself into a retirement home. His wife needs to do a favor and come over to my crib after she drops him off, so I can make a sexy time...
Have patience my lemming-like republicans, as soon as the GOP catches wind that at least 20% of republicans (hardcore right) are staying home election today, you will see Mr. McCain tap dance like no one else! You will see McCain whore himself out to the far right when he realizes that not even they are on his side, and he will alienate all of the centrists and independents in the process. Any candidate who even mutters social issues like gay rights, abortion or any of these other worthless issues will lose, and lose fast. So McCain is in a catch 22. If he wants the far rights vote, he has to burn all of the centrist bridges he has built up. If he ignores the whacko religious right, he loses by default. Good riddance too, because I am sick and tired of seeing the same old faces on the hill. McCain needs to do himself a favor and check himself into a retirement home. His wife needs to do a favor and come over to my crib after she drops him off, so I can make a sexy time...
I'm not a huge fan of McCain...but if you think that this will be a new revelation to McCain in the general election, and that he hasn't already thought about this and is not currently deciding on how to handle it, then you are a fool....I know that this is the internet and that every thought that you have seems unique in its genius...but trust me, you're not the only one who has thought of this.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Comments
Actually, if memory serves me, the CIA never talked to the informant, but Germany warned them that his credibility was questionable. I think the UN had also warned about his trustworthiness. Of course, neither of these views supported war with Iraq anyway, and the administration got what they wanted plus a clusterfuck to cover it up until we had deep roots in Iraq. I think it would be naive to say the CIA chose to pass false information, completely destroying their credibility, without serious pressure from the administration.
Bush lied...bla bla bla
And some of my best buddies died!That aside though, the Iraq War is not his only blunder. He has done much more that may not have killed people in this country but crippled their spirit and enthusiasm to succeed and prosper. If there is anyone who thinks our tax system is okay, then they've got problems and I can't support them. He has done nothing to try to fix it. Instead he has grown the government.
===============================
I wonder, did you go over there and put your efforts in to it? Or are you just someone who likes to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the sport of watching others die?
===============================
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
===============================
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
What is a neo-con?
I can see why an independant would vote for Nader then McCain. It really doesn't have to do with Nader's views on Big Government but what he represents. He could possibly be a step in the right direction because he represents another voice in government, and would want to make more voices be heard. Despite being Big Government, he is also anti-bipartisan.
Also I think McCain's view on immigration hasn't changed since his bill for amnesty was shot down. People keep trying to peg him as a completely dishonest bastard. He said that there is no way to prosecute 34 million illegal immigrants and that it would be less costly to just offer amnesty, then spend the money and man power they would tracking down illegals for better border security. The intention still being keeping a tighter lock on illegal immigration.
Comprehensive McCain 'Flip-Flop' list
* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
* McCain considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.
* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.
* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.
* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor.
* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.
* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.
* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.
* McCain’s campaign unveiled a Social Security policy that the senator would implement if elected, which did not include a Bush-like privatization scheme. In March 2008, McCain denounced his own campaign’s policy.
* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.
* In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
* McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
* McCain said he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
* McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
Now, it’s worth noting that there are worse qualities in a presidential candidate than changing one’s mind about a policy matter or two. McCain has been in Congress for decades; he’s bound to shift now and then on various controversies.
But therein lies the point — McCain was consistent on most of these issues, right up until he started running for president, at which point he conveniently abandoned practically every position he used to hold. The problem isn’t just the incessant flip-flops; it’s the shameless pandering and hollow convictions behind the incessant flip-flops.
Posted this in another thread but it is viable here as well.
"Anyone notice what is happening before our own eyes? We cannot say anything about Obama that is not positive. We cannot talk about rev. wright, his tax reform, his wife, his ties to bill ayers, his muslim upbringing, his muslim parents, his inexperience, ect without being labeled as a racist hate mongerer. Our country is screwed if this man gets elected. The drive by media is ruining our country along with everyone that is dumb enough to think that left wing liberal ideas can help this country. He is proving that he has no clue what is going on and is winning because nobody can speak up against him without being branded as unamerican or racist."
Seems that it isn't just conservatives that are using fear tactics....
I am a forum troll hunter. Be afraid trolls, very afraid!
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
Your mind is like a parachute, it's only useful when it's open.
Don't forget, you can use the block function on trolls.
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see th
rough the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
I am a forum troll hunter. Be afraid trolls, very afraid!
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see th
rough the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
This is exactly what I am talking about. People can examine the same information and come up with multiple interpretations, all equally as good. You try and pass your opinion off as "intelligent" and attack those who disagree with you. If political parties were abolished I think it would get rid of some of this blind bias.Really the first sentence in the last post was the only part I meant to be directed at you.
Your mind is like a parachute, it's only useful when it's open.
Don't forget, you can use the block function on trolls.
And here´s another post from you fizzle322:
"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "
We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons? Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?
The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left. They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens. They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system. I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.
What is a neo-con?
New breed of Republican.In the past, being a Republican meant that you were for smaller government, lower taxes, the least amount of regulation, and a general belief that people should take care of themselves and own up to their decisions. This belief probably culminated itself around the time that Goldwater was around. That's why some Republican's today hate what their party has become and call themselves "Goldwater Republicans."
Today's Republican's are anything but that. They believe in using the government to promote their agenda, intruding into peoples personal lives to make them "behave", using the tax system and the I.R.S. to invade peoples lives and steal their earnings, and that the government is tasked to take care of people from the cradle to the grave.
I don't want to be a part of that Republican Party. And it is the reason that so many people are finding their choices in this race very disenchanting.
===============================
You want to cause change in America then have at it, but don't use the federal government to force people to follow your idea of what should be done. If I don't agree with you then do you think that making me conform by using guns and violence is going to win me over? Wrong.
This country was set up to promote state rights. That way if I don't like how one state is run I will move my butt to another state that suits me better. But taking away that choice by using the federal government to make a blanket order on the people is un-American.
===============================
Seriously, both parties want the best for the country. You are probably just listening to your bias your parents instilled in you as a child if you think one party is better than the other, aside from the occasional convert. The only real difference is idealolgy, both of which work just as well. People need to stop getting so emotional and just realize that other political idealogies can work just as well as there own. Some people wonder why the candidates attack each other, look at this thread, that is what everyone does, attack people that disagree with them.
To the thing about McCain flip flopping. I see no problem really with it. It just shows he keeps and open mind and will adapt his ideas when confronted with better ones, instead of being stubborn like most people. I would never want a president as closed minded as some of the people in this thread. The second you close your mind you become useless to society. I know most of you see an open mind as a bad thing though, you would rather have blind loyalty to an idealology.
I am a moderate republican. I would vote democrat if their candidate was moderate as well. I do not like any extremists, religious, political or otherwise. I just tend to think that conservative extremists screw things up less. I believe in capitalism and no, my political and religious beliefs come from my own soul searching and have nothing to do with my parents. An intelligent person can see through the lies of extreme liberalism. Just like intelligent people can see th
rough the lies of socialism and communism that liberalism so closely resembles. Not to say all liberals are bad, but the ones in the media and running for president are horrible.
When you say that conservative extremists screw things up less, am I wrong to interpret that as saying that you're choosing the lesser of two evils? Are you meaning that our only choice is to pick the one that will screw the country up the slowest?To me, I think of it this way. If our only choice is to pick the least wrong candidate then there is something wrong with the foundations of both of these parties.
===============================
First off, I did not vote for bush, nor am I affiliated with any party. I vote for who I think will make the best decsions for this country. I did not agree that we should go into Iraq, in fact I totally disagree that we should have gone in at all. As I stated earlier though what has been done cannot be undone. We did go in, we cannot change that now. pulling out our troops could have devestating affects to the world. Obama promised the pulling out of our troops, I certainly hope he does not push that effort, no matter how bad we want out family members to come home. The fact that we went in means that we will not be able to remove our troops anytime soon , if ever. Every possible avenue may not apply to every situation, as well I hope that you are intelligent to understand that not every person out there can be dealt with with words. We need a leader that is capable of knowing when this is the case. Waiting for "words" can also leave you vulnerable for an attack. Our country does need to have more security, and we do need to have stronger defenses in place to prevent attacks from many different angles including from within. That is the leaders responsibility to make sure that all possibilities are considered and have plans for that. If the leader cannot do this then we need someone who can, or they need to have someone who can working for them. Yes we could be attacked with disease, chemical, and biological weapons. Our rescourses could be attacked or even be attacked from within our own healthcare system. All of these things need to be considered and have measures in place expecting thius to occur. Anything else would be considered "incompetent". The people of our country need to take who they elect to run this country more seriously. It is not a popularity contest, we need to really look at what they truely bring to the table.
John McCain will become president because Americans are 1) racist and 2) too foolish to vote for their own interests regarding the a) the economy, b) health care costs, c) tuitions costs, d) pork barrel and special interests spending, and e) much more.
Republicans exploit the so-called "values vote."
Those people deserve to be exploited, and good luck to them affording tuition, health care, and finding a decent job!
I would also like to point out that the reason none of the candidates healthcare policies are going to solve the problem is because they are treating the symptoms not the conditions.
1. We have a doctor shortage in this country. This could be easily solved by removing the idea that becoming a doctor is only for the priveledged or elite. If we offered programs that changed this we could easily change that. Make schooling to become a doctor free to all of those who qualify. Yes full scholarships including room and board for anyone who is smart enough to become a doctor and wants to.
Under that contract say for a set number of years after they graduate they work for the government at the free clinics and hospitals, allowing us to provide healthcare to all those who need it. After that time period they can continue working for the government or go into private practice for themselves.
2. Not all people even if health insurance is available to them can afford it, so trying to force them or encourage them to get health insurance is pointless. Health insurance at this time in this country is greatly lacking. It should never be left up to heallth insurance companies what test or medications the patients can have, at the current time health insurance compaies are refusing to pay for tests or medications that doctors are prescribing. The doctors only considerationshould be what is best for the patients, not whether or not an insurance company will pay for it. With medicaid at this time those patients are receiving better healthcare than many of our citizens on health insurance. There needs to be a crack down on health insurance companies to make them live up to their contracts and stop telling the patients and doctors what is best for them.
3. Pharmacutical companies are the single most worst problem with our healthcare system. They spend billions of dollars a year on catering to doctors offices, advertising, and providing lavish trips in an attempt to bribe the hands of our doctors. All of this at the expense to our patients. Research and development actually is the smallest expense they have when you look at the actual percentages. Working in the medical field myself, If I told you what I have seen you would be disgusted. They do not want to make you well, they want to make you dependant, I know this as fact because my sister has worked for them. She is an immuniologist, they have made medications to treat diseases that were never produced by the pharmacutical companies because they do not want one time fixes, if the medicine is not profitable they do not produce it. They only want to produce long term medications so that you have to keep buying it, and they keep having money coming in. As long as our pharmacutical industry is run like a business instead of an organization that actually wants to cure people we will continue to have this problem. In all honesty, they should be tried for "crimes against humanity" because what they are doing is truely that sick.
None of the candidates will address this issue how it needs to be addressed. From what I have seen of all their policies they make the situation worse not better. If they aren't going to really fix the problem they shouldn't mess with it at all.
I find it revealing that the same person who could vote for Nader could also vote for McCain. It shows just how similar the Republican Party has become to a big government candidate like Nader.
I definately would not vote for Nader, it was a joke..... I guess it wasn't obvious enough
STOP WHINING!
Following pres bush2 's lead globalist McCain (R. Arizona) wants to eliminate national borders to the point the Americas become alot more like Europe's common market... eventually being three markets: Europe, Asia and the Americas; not sure how Africa, Australia and Greenland will fit in. ref
Ruled by the tri-city-corporation empire: London (economic, 1694,) Washington DC (military, 1871,) Vatican (theology, 1929.)
With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent. Latin America today is increasingly vital to the fortunes of the United States. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny. The countries of Latin America are the natural partners of the United States, and our northern neighbor Canada.
Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new twenty-first century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all. link
fyiedit
I wonder, did you go over there and put your efforts in to it? Or are you just someone who likes to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the sport of watching others die?
We didn't put a gun to anybody's head to go over there. Every single person in the military signed up for it.
The troops are out there DOING WHAT THEY SIGNED UP TO DO. They're not whining, crying or asking to be send home, they're doing what it says on the job description.
Dem and Repub are essentially two flavors of liberal.
They both want bigger government, more laws and to codify morality.
You bring up the point of racism..Is it considered racist to have college for your race only? organizations for your own race only? To have churches for your race only? If so then you would be calling all blacks that attend any of these racists. Equal rights does not mean better rights. Punishing people for things that happened in the past is not right either. The whole idea that quotas need to be in place to make sure you have x number of people of any certain race working for you, or choosing who gets a scholarship simply because of their race is absurd. The best possible candidate for the job or scholarship should not include race. If the white kid beats out the black kid they play the "race" card, when that has nothing to do with it at all. What are we teaching our children by saying that one race can have these things and another cannot? I am not a racist, but if you think that reverse discrimination solves anything, you are greatly mistaken. Do not punish our children for the crimes of people they didn't even know.
And if the candidate we wanted to win in the Primaries did not make it to the general election, you recommend what? I choose to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than to not vote at all.
I'm not an elitist, I'm a realist.
Have patience my lemming-like republicans, as soon as the GOP catches wind that at least 20% of republicans (hardcore right) are staying home election today, you will see Mr. McCain tap dance like no one else!
You will see McCain whore himself out to the far right when he realizes that not even they are on his side, and he will alienate all of the centrists and independents in the process. Any candidate who even mutters social issues like gay rights, abortion or any of these other worthless issues will lose, and lose fast.
So McCain is in a catch 22. If he wants the far rights vote, he has to burn all of the centrist bridges he has built up. If he ignores the whacko religious right, he loses by default. Good riddance too, because I am sick and tired of seeing the same old faces on the hill. McCain needs to do himself a favor and check himself into a retirement home. His wife needs to do a favor and come over to my crib after she drops him off, so I can make a sexy time...
I'm not a huge fan of McCain...but if you think that this will be a new revelation to McCain in the general election, and that he hasn't already thought about this and is not currently deciding on how to handle it, then you are a fool....I know that this is the internet and that every thought that you have seems unique in its genius...but trust me, you're not the only one who has thought of this.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.