Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Mexico has universal health...how many have died

Posted By: Kendra on 2009-04-28
In Reply to: For those of you who praise - Trigger Happy

from the swine flu?


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Someone has to pay for universal health care....
she knows that. Her plan will cost billions. The only way to pay for it is to force those who can afford it to buy it (as many choose not to so they can use that money for other things...and I don't mean eating...she knows that too). That is the one thing people who want socialized medicine, government-run health care don't realize. It is not FREE. If they don't get you in premiums they will get you in taxes...because who supplies the government with the money it spends...why that would be us, the taxpayers. What a concept. I don't know why Hillary saying she would not be opposed to garnishment should surprise anyone. That way when she hits us with higher taxes, they won't have to be quite as high. And don't think the "rich" can pick up the tab...they already pay way over 50% of the total tax money into the tills as it is, and there isn't enough money to go around. And while we are at it...show me a place in the Constitution where it says the government should provide health care, welfare, or anything like that? You won't find it. The founders were about less government, not more government. I don't understand why people would want to let themselves become tied to the government for their every need. Where does that place all the control? With the government, not with the people. Hello socialism, good-bye freedom. SIGH.
universal health care
Sorry, but I don't need that help. Having done my own research, I know that the health care system in Canada (your example) has major flaws, like ridiculous waits for even the most simple testing, not to mention the lack of choices for one's care, and that other countries have substandard care because of their universal systems. All this does is invite "country club medicine." Canadian citizens come to the US and pay out of their own pockets because their system does not work for them. If you think govt control is the answer to health care, you only need to look at what they have done to Medicare and Medicaid. Obama's health plan is one more component in his overall plan toward the socialization of this country. Hope you like it when your hard work and your paycheck does nothing BUT support others. Where is the incentive to work? Don't get me wrong; I do believe every individual should have access to health care. I also think every individual who is capable of contributing (working) should have to do so in order to reap that benefit, and I do not think government intervention is the answer. And your whole statement about the CEOs being rich makes me so nervous. What is your solution there? spread the wealth? She/he is not entitled to have more money than you? Yup, another step toward the socialization of this country. See how well that has worked worldwide.
I think there's a big misunderstanding about universal health care
And anyone that has had the cheapest medical insurance you can get knows this - just because you have insurance doesn't mean you're covered. It might cover doctor visits for sinus infections and such, along with certain prescription medications, but like the poster above said, God forbid you need something serious because the government can turn you down just as easily as an insurance company.

A friend of mine moved to the US from Canada because she found a lump in her breast. Her doctor in Canada told her to keep an eye on it and come back in six months. She waited and went back and the doctor told her he wanted to do a biopsy and to come back in four months for that. She came to the US for a second opinion, got a biopsy, was diagnosed with breast cancer, had surgery and recieved chemotherapy all in the four months it would have taken her to just have the biopsy in Canada. She has since become a citizen of the US and gave up her citizenship of Canada just for that reason. She is now a 6 year cancer survivor.

I don't want to see that kind of thing happen in this country and that's what we would get with universal health care. Agreed that something has to be done about the prices of medical treatment, but to put the government in charge of it is not the right way to go.
some universal health care info from

Oh my goodness, regarding universal health care, unfortunately these things are just not so.  How are things worse off - everyone is covered, for everything, no matter how rich or poor, or sick.  Will you have to wait longer, possibly, I don't know (do you have a reference for comparison) but you will be treated - absolutely no one is turned down who can derive benefit from treatment. 


Losing your best doctors?  Where are they going?


The government will pay for elective things like knee replacements, do pay for them every day. 


If you have cancer and the treatment is experimental, there are drug trials (for free), provincial assistance programs (for free) and compassionate release programs via drug companies (for free).  No "death certificates are signed"  If you are not happy with your treatment, you can see another doctor, any doctor you choose, and no one will say you cannot have a treatment or see a physican because of money!


I did not think Obama was for universal health coverage... see message
I thought he was just for a coverage to be available to all people - but not mandatory to take it. Am I wrong?
Universal health care is a frightening prospect.. sm
Ask anyone from Canada what they think of their health-care system and you're likely to be shocked. A friend's father has been waiting over a year on a list for a knee replacement, and another friend waited 42 hours on a gurney in the ER while having a heart attack. Nurses and doctors don't want to work there because the salaries are substandard and set by the government. Do you not think this is the direction we're headed in if Obama becomes president?
Universal health care and President Obama's real plan -

I see again that everyone is talking about President Obama's plan for universal health care and I once again feel the need to distinguish between universal health care and what the plan is that President Obama has campaigned for.  I have copied and pasted part of the web page, but also included the link at the bottom of this for you to see the whole plan. 


President Obama does not ask for universal health care where the government is in charge - he just wants the government to ensure that everyone has access to medical care and health insurance.  Why is it so difficult to understand that this is not socialized medicine, government run healthcare, or universal coverage plans?


Barack Obama and Joe Biden's Plan


On health care reform, the American people are too often offered two extremes - government-run health care with higher taxes or letting the insurance companies operate without rules. Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe both of these extremes are wrong, and that’s why they’ve proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference.


The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans, builds on the existing health care system, and uses existing providers, doctors and plans to implement the plan. Under the Obama-Biden plan, patients will be able to make health care decisions with their doctors, instead of being blocked by insurance company bureaucrats.


Under the plan, if you like your current health insurance, nothing changes, except your costs will go down by as much as $2,500 per year.


If you don’t have health insurance, you will have a choice of new, affordable health insurance options.


http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/


Health Insurance/Health Care sm

I figure either one of two things will happen. Either the US will go to a single payer system, i.e., national health care covering all through federal taxes and cost control by the government, or therre will be an implosion of the private system in x number of years with something different emerging from the ashes.


With the exhorbitant cost of health insurance, mandating coverage is not an answer. Anything can be mandated. The question is how does one pay for it?Massachusetts mandated individual coverage, and already has had to exclude 20% due to the cost of a policy, anywhere from $1,200 to $1,400 a month for family coverage.  Employers cannot afford to cover employees either due to the cost of health insurance.  The current system? Well, insurance companies can charge $3,000 a month for a health insurance policy, health care providers can charge $800,000 for a 3-day hospital stay, etc.  In the end no one, businesses or otherwise, will be able to keep "feeding the beast" and the current system will implode.


I think the proposal of being able to buy into Medicare is a noble one, but president Clinton pushed that years ago, and with much opposition and to no avail at that time.


I don't mean to sound so pessiimistic. Actually I'm not. There are 300 million people in this country, they have the ability to change anything, and hopefully they will take the initial steps to do that in November.


I went to Mexico
I am sure they will all go home if they cannot find jobs.

This summer the Euro was way above the dollar. I could not afford a souvenir. They still took the dollars, but were actually super picky about the quality of the money, asking me to give a newer bill, etc. I was only there briefly, but it was way more hostile to Americans than I remember, and more expensive, which I found kind of ironic all things considered.
mexico car plants
I saw somewhere this little tiny town in Mexico where they build gas guzzling trucks had to lay off 5% of its work force because of decreased demand. I think Detroit would have been thrilled with only 5% lay offs instead of this massacre.
Money wired to Mexico since 1/06:$42,363,149,000
Cost of Social Services for Illegals Since 1996-$397,480,946,017

Children of Illegal Aliens in Public Schools- 4,184,824

Cost of Illegals in K-12 Since 1996 - $14,828,106,397

Illegal Aliens Incarcerated- 351,087

Cost of Incarceration Since 2001- $1,477,239,843

Illegal Alien Fugitives - 663,347

Anchor Babies Since 2002-2,148,175

Skilled Jobs Taken by Illegal Immigrants Immigrants- 10,232,441

Illegal Immigration - American Legion

"The American Legion Policy on Illegal Immigration: A Strategy to Address Illegal Immigration in the United States" is a must-read for voters and political candidates alike. The impact illegal immigration has on crime, terrorism, employment, wages and even public health are all addressed in this comprehensive booklet. More importantly, The American Legion's common sense strategy to deal with this important issue offers not just a look at the problem but a solution as well.

Bet they knew Africa is a continent and Mexico,
x
Yes, but families are in Mexico and South America.
That was my point. Of course, I have no idea what prices are down there. Never been.
Crest toothpaste is made in Mexico.....
I read the labels on EVERYTHING. I don't buy food/consumption products from most foreign countries. Sometimes I'll get some fruit from Brazil, but from a manufacturing standpoint, no way. I do not buy ANY OTC meds from foreign countries. China poisoned their own babies, do you think they care about us?
New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime

What a shame that these two governors had to declare states of emergency simply because we have at president who knows that this problem exists but just doesn’t care enough about preventing another 9/11 to do anything about it.


From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=akXph_LySDzs&refer=latin_america#


New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime


Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- New Mexico and Arizona governors declared states of emergency for their borders with Mexico, pledging to increase funding to stop the rise in drug smuggling and violence by illegal immigrants.


New Mexico's Bill Richardson and Arizona's Janet Napolitano blamed a lack of money from the federal government that has left the borders and their residents unprotected by U.S. patrols.


``Governor Richardson was asked to take this action by local law enforcement and ranch families.'' Billy Sparks, Richardson's chief of staff, said in a phone interview today.


The declarations were made Friday by Richardson, 47, and yesterday by Napolitano, 47. Richardson, who has been named a possible 2008 presidential candidate, said in a press release there has been ``total inaction and lack of resources from the federal government.''


The escalation in violence during the past month, including gunshots fired at Columbus, New Mexico, police chief Clare May, the attempted kidnapping of three girls and the deaths of 100 cattle along New Mexico's 180-mile border with Mexico prompted Richardson to declare the emergency, Sparks said.


The declaration makes $750,000 of state funding available in affected counties. Richardson pledged to make an additional $1 million available. The money will be used to increase local law enforcement, open a new homeland security office in the border region and help build a fence to protect livestock near Columbus.


Fences, Neighbors


Unlike some border areas in the U.S., landowners in New Mexico maintain their own fences to keep illegal immigrants off their property. In one case a landowner's entire fence was stolen, Sparks said. The U.S. Border Patrol has 109 workers for 200 miles from El Paso, Texas, across New Mexico to Arizona, said Sparks. That is expected to increase by 75 in October.


Napolitano's order makes $1.5 million available to fight crime along the border, according to her press release.


``I intend to take every action feasible to stem the tide of criminal behavior on the Arizona side of the border,'' she said.


The number of unauthorized immigrants entering the U.S. each year rose to more than 700,000 in 2004 from 140,000 in the 1980s, according to the Arizona declaration.


Questions about the security of the U.S. border with Mexico have risen since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as officials have tried to limit movement into the U.S. of potential terrorists along with the illegal immigrants and drug smugglers. Immigration restrictions have forced more illegal crossings over landowner- built fences in Arizona and New Mexico.


The border emergency declarations were reported earlier today by the New York Times.


Numbers Jump


So far in the fiscal year that began in October, agents in the Yuma, Arizona, sector of the U.S. border patrol have captured 122,344 illegal immigrants, said Michael Gramley, spokesman for the sector. The previous record was 108,000 in 2000. The Yuma sector covers 126 miles of border in Arizona and California.


``We're taking greater strides toward reaching a higher level of border security,'' said Gramley, in a phone interview. ``The border patrol values any assistance that we receive from state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies.''


Federal officials said they have been making progress in increasing border security.


``Extraordinary progress has been made over the last couple of years as far as strengthening our borders,'' said Jarrod Agen, spokesman for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He declined to comment on the state of emergency in Arizona and New Mexico. ``It's the authority of the governors there.''


Both governors called on authorities in Mexico to increase security on their sides of the border, the press releases said.


Mexico's Response


Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement yesterday that it had agreed after meeting with Napolitano to support her actions and work to reduce crime on its side of the border. The ministry blamed organized crime for the border problems.


``On that side and on this side there's organized crime,'' Mexican President Vicente Fox said in an interview with reporters during a visit to the northern border state of Sonora yesterday. ``On that side and this side there's drug consumption. The question is how do all the drugs that cross over there reach the consumer markets? What's being done on that side?''


Texas Governor Rick Perry, 55 doesn't plan to declare an emergency because he believes protecting the U.S. border is the federal government's responsibility, said Robert Black, Perry's spokesman, in a phone interview. Texas's 1,200-mile border with Mexico is the longest of any U.S. state with a foreign country.


``The governor had said that you can't have homeland security without the federal government,'' said Black. ``The feds can't avoid their responsibility to the states.''

To contact the reporter on this story:
Darrell Preston in Dallas at dpreston@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 17, 2005 14:52 EDT


 


Bush won't meet with border officials despite evidence of Middle East infiltration through Mexico


Article Launched: 6/16/2006 12:00 AM


Bush declines to meet with border officials


Sara A. Carter, Staff Writer


San Bernardino County Sun


President Bush has refused to meet with border law-enforcement officials from Texas for a second time. His response to their request came in the form of a letter Monday, angering both lawmakers and sheriffs.


In fact, some Republican members of the House, upset by what they call the administration's seeming lack of concern for border security, are preparing to hold investigative hearings in San Diego and Laredo, Texas, early next month.


Members of the House Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation hope to expose serious security flaws that could potentially lead to terrorist attacks in the country, said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who is a member of the panel and has pushed for the hearings.


The next terrorist is not going to come in through (Transportation Security Administration) screening at Kennedy airport, Poe said. We already have information that people from the Middle East have come through the border from Mexico. They assimilate in Mexico learning to speak Spanish and adopt customs and then they cross the border into the United States.


Poe requested the meeting for members of the Southwestern Sheriffs' Border Coalition a group that includes all 26 border-county sheriffs from California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas. The sheriffs wanted to speak to the president about the increasing dangers in their communities and along the border.


The president is the busiest man in the world but he needs to take the time to talk to the border sheriffs and learn what's happening in the real world from them, Poe said. We can't understand why he refuses to meet with them.


In May, all of the Republican House members from Texas traveled to Washington to meet the president regarding border security. Bush did not meet with them, however, and former White House spokesman Scott McClellan was sent in his stead.


Poe said the White House letter dated Monday showed the disconnect between the administration and the American people who want the border secured.


The president would appreciate the opportunity to visit with border sheriffs, said the White House letter written by La Rhonda M. Houston, deputy director of the Office of Appointments and Scheduling. Regrettably, it will not be possible for us to arrange such a meeting. I know that you understand with the tremendous demands of the president's time, he must often miss special opportunities, as is the case this time.


Rick Glancey, spokesman for the sheriffs coalition, said its members are angry and disappointed in the president's response. Glancey said Bush's recent tour of the border with Border Patrol spokesmen did not reflect the reality of what locals live with every day.


It's a slap in the face to the hardworking men and women on the front lines of rural America who every day engage in border-security issues, Glancey said. He missed the opportunity to take off his White House cowboy boots and put some real cowboy boots on and walk in our shoes for a few minutes.


The border hearings will expose the truth to the American public and force the administration to take a serious look at the border, said Allan Knapp, Poe's legislative director.


Knapp and Poe have traveled twice to the border this year, spending time along barren stretches where they witnessed no security and numerous migrants crossing into the United States, they said.


We need to expose the lack of border security before it is too late, Poe said. We're fighting a war on terror in Iraq and we're winning, but we're losing our own border war. These hearings will be a necessary step in the right direction.


Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Chino-based Friends of the Border Patrol, said he has been called to testify before the panel in San Diego. Ramirez said he has turned in two years of Border Patrol documents and memos, which he will discuss before the committee.


The president has basically pushed his whole administration's agenda toward the war on terror, yet he can't find the time to meet with law-enforcement leaders responsible for border security, Ramirez said. It is appalling and outrageous that the war on terror and border security does not extend to the U.S. border.


universal healthcare
Where are you getting that information about Obama and universal healthcare? The last time I heard him speak about it he wanted universal healthcare for people who couldn't get healthcare but leave the option open to people who could get their own healthcare (as they are doing now) to do so. He also spoke about companies being held more responsible to providing affordable healthcare for employees. I don't remember him ever saying to knock out the entire healthcare system and make everyone have universal healthcare.

As for McCain... I guess you like the economy and the war. He's not going to change anything if he's elected.
This is your opinion, not a universal truth
Many historians would differ with you on that.  Remember, truth is often the result of interpretation of fact.  It's a slippery slope, that's for sure.  But please don't proclaim your version of the truth as absolute fact.  It comes across as ignorance mixed with narrow-mindedness just a wee bit, and I have been guilty of the same at times.
France is getting universal healthcare right...

Great post piglet.  I so agree with what you all had to say in support of changing our current system.  Canada probably has the worst universal healthcare system, and yet the average Canadian lives 3 years longer than the average American.  People always point to the flaws in their system and just assume that we will make all the same mistakes.  Of course their system has flaws, just as our system has many fatal flaws.  England and France actually have great universal healthcare systems.  Here is an article I found about France's successful program:


"France's model healthcare system
By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007

MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.

Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.

The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.

An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States.

That's because the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, Sécurité Sociale.

Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.

Nor do France's doctors face the high nonmedical personnel payroll expenses that burden American physicians. Sécurité Sociale has created a standardized and speedy system for physician billing and patient reimbursement using electronic funds.

It's not uncommon to visit a French medical office and see no nonmedical personnel. What a concept. No back office army of billing specialists who do daily battle with insurers' arcane and constantly changing rules of payment.

Moreover, in contrast to Canada and Britain, there are no waiting lists for elective procedures and patients need not seek pre-authorizations. In other words, like in the United States, "rationing" is not a word that leaves the lips of hopeful politicians. How might the French case inform the US debate over healthcare reform?

National health insurance in France stands upon two grand historical bargains -- the first with doctors and a second with insurers.

Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.

French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by Sécurité Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.

The French system strongly discourages the kind of experience rating that occurs in the United States, making it more difficult for insurers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions or to those who are not in good health. In fact, in France, the sicker you are, the more coverage, care, and treatment you get. Would American insurance companies cut a comparable deal?

Like all healthcare systems, the French confront ongoing problems. Today French reformers' number one priority is to move health insurance financing away from payroll and wage levies because they hamper employers' willingness to hire. Instead, France is turning toward broad taxes on earned and unearned income alike to pay for healthcare.

American advocates of mandates on employers to provide health insurance should take note. The link between employment and health security is a historical artifact whose disadvantages now far outweigh its advantages. Economists estimate that between 25 and 45 percent of the US labor force is now job-locked. That is, employees make career decisions based on their need to maintain affordable health coverage or avoid exclusion based on a preexisting condition.

Perhaps it's time for us to take a closer look at French ideas about healthcare reform. They could become an import far less "foreign" and "unfriendly" than many here might initially imagine."


http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...lthcare_system/


Universal healthcare NOT the answer!!

  1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?
  2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.
  3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness.
  4. Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility.
  5. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.
  6. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
  7. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care.
  8. Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.
  9. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.
  10. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.
  11. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.
  12. Government is more likely to pass additional restrictions or increase taxes on smoking, fast food, etc., leading to a further loss of personal freedoms.
  13. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.

NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA!  His plans will fail and they will up the cost of everything.  Stop the government spending!  Don't vote for someone wanting to add more programs that will INCREASE government spending.  That is why our economy is in deep crap right now.


When did socialism and universal healthcare
nm
Obama's universal healthcare will be SO much
nm
Does not mean Universal Healthcare is answer.
nm
maybe they could give it to construct universal healthcare
The economy would thrive!!! Employers would have more $$$, individuals would have more $$$. I know I spend close to $300 a month just on individual coverage. If not manditory universal coverage just allow anyone to be accepted into the Medicade program that wishes to do so.
Universal Music Publishing is calling
xx
Obama's universal plan failed miserably in other
nm
Obama's plan is just to ensure insurance availability for all - not universal healthcare - you na
x
Yes, he died
He rose again and He lives today in the hearts of those who are His faithful.  No one is forcing Him on you, that is your free choice...which He gives to you.
Tell me how many people have died

in Iraq compared to Vietnam?  We have lost 1,700 soldiers in Iraq compared to what, nearly 100,000 or more in Vietnam.  Give us a break.  Nobody believed it before the 2004 election.  Why do you all keep spouting the same unsubtantiated crap over and over?  It really makes you all look stupid.  I'm beginning to wonder if the left has any original thoughts.  You all sound like clones of each other.  EVERY milestone for Iraq has been met thus far.  We turned sovereignty over to the Iraqi's and they've had elections.  They are re-building infrastructure at an alarming rate....Iraq is a success.  The loser John Kerry put out a letter today stating that we needed to have definite goals in Iraq.  Everytime John Kerry said we couldn't accomplish something in Iraq we did!!  John Kerry doesn't know when to shut up and realize "he lost", but obviously thinks he's a contender for 2008...I almost feel sorry for the guy...almost.


Sure there are insurgents, but the damage they ar inflicting is minimal....and yes, there are Iraqi's who LOVE Americans, believe it or not.   I live near a military base, and several soliders have told me how the Iraqi people cry when they leave.  


You can believe all the crap the media is telling you, but your precious Downing Street Memo is not evidence of anything.  Bush has not been proven to lie, period. You can say it all you want, but it doesn't make it true.   The little fairy tales the left make up about Bush and then get their buddies in the media to echo are just that "fairy tales."  


Some of them are in Iraq. And some of them have died. sm

The issue of illegal immigration has been around way long than Bush's term in office.  While I do agree it is an even bigger problem with terrorism looming, this was something that should have been addressed long long ago.


Father died at age 70 nm
nm
It died once before, remember? And the once
(which the dear ol' boys in the 'Pub-Club' want to get rid of, remember?), Wall St. and the USA did even better than before. It collapsed because of a major flaw, and too much GREED. The same things we're faced with today. I can survive a Depression just fine. I'm an MT, and we're already experiencing one.
how dare you say that anyone died for no...
reason!!!? Saddam was a terrible mass murderer and needed to be taken care of. We should have never let it get this far. I am sure that the men and women who died did not think that it was for no reason.
And I am right there with you, my Mom is 90, my dad died last year, my mom........sm
after paying for her wonderful Part D in addition to her Medicare to cover them was left with a few hundreds of thousands of dollars for his care, like antibiotics, like respiratory therapy for his pneumonia which he acquired from the surgery, like weeks in the ICU and RICU.......my Dad's life savings gone in a heartbeat, literally. Yes, so much better!!!
What about the 3000 people who died on 9-11?
What about them? When is it big enough to fight over? Ever?
my grandmother until my grandfather died because...

My grandmother said they did not agree on politics and she would never vote for the same person he did, so therefore her vote would cancel his out and she felt like that was wrong because he was the head of the household!!!  Can you believe - as soon as he died, she never missed voting again for who she wanted.


I'm a died-in-the-wool feminist, and have -
I can see through his reasons for picking a woman as Veep. But if things are allowed to continue on the downward spiral America's been on for the past 8 years, we're in big trouble.

In Obama, I see HOPE for middle class America.

In McCain,I see NO HOPE for us at all.
I knew an MT who did just that - died at her desk.
!
I think his dad died of a heart attack at 70? nm
.
Obama has said his mom who died of ovarian

cancer greatly influenced his life.  He said she was gentle, kind, and strong.


Barack's grandmother died
 
What about the thousands that died in WWII to

keep us free from the nazi regime/communism? What about the Korean War? They died, too, to keep communism from spreading.


Viet Nam was another story. They died and people here were so outspoken about it (just like it is happening now), and  that it brought the moral of the tropps down. When our president pulled them out so quick, all he-- broke out. The Viet Cong and Cambodia armies slaughtered thousands.


Those fighting now mostly support and believe in what they are doing. If the troops are pulled out as quick as O wants, the same thing may happen there. This is why they are trying to get Iraq's military and police set up so another Viet Nam will not happen. Support our troops.


 


Stating our servicemen died for nothing.....
is misinterpreted. No one wants to lose one single troop. The war is senseless and our troops have to believe in what they are doing in order to survive. But, most could claim all wars are senseless. No, I did not know people were protesting our service people (the war, YES, but not our actual service members - head in the sand on that point). Ignorance, if they understood anything at all, they would understand that our troops are doing their jobs by following orders.
Try being happy that people died so you have a right to complain

*FOR WHAT???  So people halfway around the globe can have democracy?  Please....*


That is about as selfish a statement I've heard as of late.


What if the soldiers had gotten *so tired* in World War I or II?


What if the revoluntary soldiers had gotten *so tired* in the Revoluntionary war?  


Your world would be different today, that is, if you would have existed at all.


Even if you have family or friends in Iraq or Afghanistan right now your complaining and fussing about all the work they are doing is doing nothing to help them.  Support them.  Send them a letter or a care package.  It would make a soldier's day, be it someone you know or someone you don't, and it would certainly brighten your mood in the process.  You don't have to support the president or the war, but your frustrations can be turned around into producing something good for someone else.


Marine in Fahrenheit 9/11 has died in Iraq...sm
May he rest in peace.


DETROIT - A Marine and one-time recruiter who appeared in Michael Moore's documentary film Fahrenheit 9/11 has died in a roadside bombing in Iraq.

Staff Sgt. Raymond J. Plouhar, 30, died Monday of wounds suffered while conducting combat operations in Iraq's volatile Anbar province, the Defense Department said Tuesday.

Plouhar, who was stationed at Camp Pendleton, Calif., had taken four years off from active duty to serve as a recruiter in Flint after donating one of his kidneys to his uncle. He is seen in the 2004 film approaching prospective recruits in a mall parking lot.

It's better to get them when they're in ones and twos and work on them that way, he says in the film.

Although Plouhar willingly appeared in the movie, which is critical of the Bush administration's actions after Sept. 11, his father said Plouhar didn't realize it would criticize the war.

I'm proud that my son wanted to protect the freedom of this country whether we all agree with the war or not, he said.

Plouhar grew up in Lake Orion, about 30 miles north of Detroit.

He is survived by a wife and two children, ages 5 and 9. They live in Arizona.
Yep....the rights that the military have fought and died for...
over the years. You know, the might want to say thank you once nin awhile for that too...but that would take common courtesy. Too much to expect I guess. Take, take, take, but never say thank you for those who sacrificed for what is being taken...and taken...and taken FOR GRANTED.
"Who died and made you boss?"

OMG!!  Toooooooooo funny! 


When you described the various religious beliefs of your family members, you illustrated very well why government and religion don't mix.


Whether I (or you) agree with their views, they still have the right to have those views. 


Rick James died in 2004
of a heart attack. That was too bad. I loved Superfreak.
Bush lied and thousands died!

Reaping the rewards.


Who died and made you the "free speech" police? sm
Who cares what you think of Sam's posts. You are free to read or not read. That is what debate is all about. And I use that term loosely in regards to some of posters on this board. Most of the posters have legitimate points of view. If you are that upset over what she posts, then feel free to disregard what she puts. You should be able to figure out what the message is about by reading what is under the thread and not having to open the thread.

If you don't agree with our consitutional right to freedom of speech, then you need to rethink your priorities. Nobody will ever agree with anybody else 100% on this board and in real life, and I wouldn't expect them to. That is what makes our world go around.

Don't like the posts?? Don't read or go to another board. I agree with Sam.
Bush's lies and people died for NO cause, NO reason!
That's the difference.  We gave AL Queida and Taliban a gift they never thought they would receive when we invaded Iraq.  They took out the guy who was keeping Iran as quiet as possible, not allowing them to enter their air space/borders. Now, Al Queida has a GREAT recruiting tool!!  No, they couldn't have asked for more.  And that's the DIFFERENCE!!!