Jenn[_2_]
August 11th 09, 11:06 PM
In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On Aug 8, 5:21*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On Aug 8, 2:08*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On Aug 8, 1:16*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Aug 7, 7:42*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >,
> >
> > > > > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Aug 7, 4:18*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > > ,
> >
> > > > > > > > > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > "Wešve hired skilled grassroots organizers who are working
> > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > thousands of local volunteers to show Congress that
> > > > > > > > > > ordinary
> > > > > > > > > > Americans
> > > > > > > > > > continue to support President Obamašs agenda for change.
> > > > > > > > > > And
> > > > > > > > > > wešre
> > > > > > > > > > building new online tools to track events across the
> > > > > > > > > > country
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > > sure MoveOn members turn out at each one."
> >
> > > > > > > > > > From:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > > > Good.
> >
> > > > > > > > *Democracy according to Jenn, whoever can muster the biggest
> > > > > > > > crowd
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > thugs wins.
> >
> > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > Not at all. *But it's noted that when it was only the thugs that
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > agree with, it was OK.
> >
> > > > > > Those weren't "thugs". They were simply conservative citizens
> > > > > > expressing their displeasure.
> >
> > > > > > When liberals build support at the grassroots level, why that's
> > > > > > out-
> > > > > > and-out thuggery.
> >
> > > > > *Why is it when the dems tell the SEIU to jump, they ask how high?
> >
> > > > > Why is the SEIU, which is clearly biased in the debate,
> > > > > "sponsoring" townhall meetings like Carnahan's in St. Louis?
> >
> > > > Why are so many who are supporting the disruptions telling lies like
> > > > this?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337941*see 5:36 for
> > > > example
> >
> > > I'm surprised you didn't pick on the chick from Greenbay who is
> > > accused of lying about her party affiliation. *Rachel Maddox
> >
> > Moddow
> >
> > > is an
> > > interesting listen and I like to bounce from her to Hannity for
> > > contrast. *Both are grossly biased
> >
> > True
> >
> > > and extremely guilty of advocating
> > > an agenda and using selective reporting to support it.
> > > In a world of so many people you can find someone/somewhere saying or
> > > doing something that can substantiate a point. You can even find a
> > > stupid congressperson saying something on occassion.
> >
> > The difference is that I've never heard Rachel lie. *Can you point out a
> > time that she has lied?
>
> She's claimed that all the protests at town hall meetings are
> republican and insurance co. conspired. That's BS and you
> know it.
She did? Cite?
> >
> >
> >
> > > Anyway, with regard to comment that people will die. *How can you
> > > claim these are lies?
> >
> > Let's stop here and have you state which speaker you are referring to.
>
> I'm referring to the segment you flagged as a lie in the first Rachel
> link.
> I can't get it to replay right now.
The Rep. said that "seniors will be put in a position of being put to
death by their government". Care to defend that?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > *I here the counter argument that evil insurance
> > > companies kill people today with denial of coverage claims. *Do you
> > > think Obamacare is going to fix that?
> > > You simply can't know what exactly will happen because the decisions
> > > for what will be covered and how care will be managed will be
> > > delegated to some committee responsible for maintaining costs. It
> > > isn't in the bill in sufficient detail to know at this point.
> >
> > > There are lots of examples where people with some medical conditions
> > > are allowed to die under the social programs of other countries.
> > > Here's an example in Britain.
> >
> > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rat...
> > > in-Europe.html
> >
> > > His co-researcher, Prof Ian Kunkler from the Western General Hospital
> > > in Edinburgh, said waiting lists for radiotherapy were partly to
> > > blame.
> >
> > > "Although there has been a substantial investment in radiotherapy
> > > facilities, there is still a shortfall," he said.
> >
> > > "We have good evidence that survival for lung cancer has been
> > > compromised by long waiting lists for radiotherapy treatment."
> >
> > > Here's an aricle on a denial for life pro-longing breast cancer drugs.
> > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1159506/Life-prolonging-can...
> > > -banned-cost-much.html
> >
> > Cool. *If you believe that this will be the case under the plan, simply
> > stay with your insurance company.
>
> Won't be an option for me in early retirement. And there are many
> widely discussed provisions in some proposals that don't allow
> any changes. The second you or your insurance want to change
> anything in your existing coverage, you have to move to a gov't
> approved plan.
Cite?
> Again, it remains to be determined exactly
> what will be in the final bill. I hope we get time to find out
> and voice our opinion before the final vote.
> The other issue is that health providers use private insurance
> as the profit source while gov't programs underpay.
> The numbers are going to shift and it's unclear how that delicate
> balance is going to leave private insurance affordable for anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> > > >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337676*see 1:53 for more lies
> >
> > > *A bunch of crap I don't support. *But painting all the opposition
> > > with the same brush is equally a bunch of crap.
> >
> > I'm not doing that. *Note that I said "so many".
>
> Rachel does.
Cite? Plus, weren't you the one who said that, "The gays act..."? Why
yes, you were.
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:
> On Aug 8, 5:21*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On Aug 8, 2:08*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On Aug 8, 1:16*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Aug 7, 7:42*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >,
> >
> > > > > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Aug 7, 4:18*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > > ,
> >
> > > > > > > > > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > "Wešve hired skilled grassroots organizers who are working
> > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > thousands of local volunteers to show Congress that
> > > > > > > > > > ordinary
> > > > > > > > > > Americans
> > > > > > > > > > continue to support President Obamašs agenda for change.
> > > > > > > > > > And
> > > > > > > > > > wešre
> > > > > > > > > > building new online tools to track events across the
> > > > > > > > > > country
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > > sure MoveOn members turn out at each one."
> >
> > > > > > > > > > From:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > > > Good.
> >
> > > > > > > > *Democracy according to Jenn, whoever can muster the biggest
> > > > > > > > crowd
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > thugs wins.
> >
> > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > Not at all. *But it's noted that when it was only the thugs that
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > agree with, it was OK.
> >
> > > > > > Those weren't "thugs". They were simply conservative citizens
> > > > > > expressing their displeasure.
> >
> > > > > > When liberals build support at the grassroots level, why that's
> > > > > > out-
> > > > > > and-out thuggery.
> >
> > > > > *Why is it when the dems tell the SEIU to jump, they ask how high?
> >
> > > > > Why is the SEIU, which is clearly biased in the debate,
> > > > > "sponsoring" townhall meetings like Carnahan's in St. Louis?
> >
> > > > Why are so many who are supporting the disruptions telling lies like
> > > > this?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337941*see 5:36 for
> > > > example
> >
> > > I'm surprised you didn't pick on the chick from Greenbay who is
> > > accused of lying about her party affiliation. *Rachel Maddox
> >
> > Moddow
> >
> > > is an
> > > interesting listen and I like to bounce from her to Hannity for
> > > contrast. *Both are grossly biased
> >
> > True
> >
> > > and extremely guilty of advocating
> > > an agenda and using selective reporting to support it.
> > > In a world of so many people you can find someone/somewhere saying or
> > > doing something that can substantiate a point. You can even find a
> > > stupid congressperson saying something on occassion.
> >
> > The difference is that I've never heard Rachel lie. *Can you point out a
> > time that she has lied?
>
> She's claimed that all the protests at town hall meetings are
> republican and insurance co. conspired. That's BS and you
> know it.
She did? Cite?
> >
> >
> >
> > > Anyway, with regard to comment that people will die. *How can you
> > > claim these are lies?
> >
> > Let's stop here and have you state which speaker you are referring to.
>
> I'm referring to the segment you flagged as a lie in the first Rachel
> link.
> I can't get it to replay right now.
The Rep. said that "seniors will be put in a position of being put to
death by their government". Care to defend that?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > *I here the counter argument that evil insurance
> > > companies kill people today with denial of coverage claims. *Do you
> > > think Obamacare is going to fix that?
> > > You simply can't know what exactly will happen because the decisions
> > > for what will be covered and how care will be managed will be
> > > delegated to some committee responsible for maintaining costs. It
> > > isn't in the bill in sufficient detail to know at this point.
> >
> > > There are lots of examples where people with some medical conditions
> > > are allowed to die under the social programs of other countries.
> > > Here's an example in Britain.
> >
> > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rat...
> > > in-Europe.html
> >
> > > His co-researcher, Prof Ian Kunkler from the Western General Hospital
> > > in Edinburgh, said waiting lists for radiotherapy were partly to
> > > blame.
> >
> > > "Although there has been a substantial investment in radiotherapy
> > > facilities, there is still a shortfall," he said.
> >
> > > "We have good evidence that survival for lung cancer has been
> > > compromised by long waiting lists for radiotherapy treatment."
> >
> > > Here's an aricle on a denial for life pro-longing breast cancer drugs.
> > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1159506/Life-prolonging-can...
> > > -banned-cost-much.html
> >
> > Cool. *If you believe that this will be the case under the plan, simply
> > stay with your insurance company.
>
> Won't be an option for me in early retirement. And there are many
> widely discussed provisions in some proposals that don't allow
> any changes. The second you or your insurance want to change
> anything in your existing coverage, you have to move to a gov't
> approved plan.
Cite?
> Again, it remains to be determined exactly
> what will be in the final bill. I hope we get time to find out
> and voice our opinion before the final vote.
> The other issue is that health providers use private insurance
> as the profit source while gov't programs underpay.
> The numbers are going to shift and it's unclear how that delicate
> balance is going to leave private insurance affordable for anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> > > >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32337676*see 1:53 for more lies
> >
> > > *A bunch of crap I don't support. *But painting all the opposition
> > > with the same brush is equally a bunch of crap.
> >
> > I'm not doing that. *Note that I said "so many".
>
> Rachel does.
Cite? Plus, weren't you the one who said that, "The gays act..."? Why
yes, you were.