SuperJerk

Yeah, I just saw that... http://mightygodking.livejournal.com/tag/photoshopped+crap

You guys really MUST provide some links for those.

Abortion IS a big issue. There is a huge group of single-issue voters who are anti-abortion. This lobby is so powerful that the GOP hasn't nominated a pro-choice candidate for president or vice president since 1976. It may not matter to you, but it matters to them, and they have the political muscle to stop someone from getting the Republican nomination. It will take only one appointment to the SCOTUS to overturn Roe V. Wade, and they're life-long dream of having it overturned will be realized. The next president will probably be the one to make that court appointment.

I never thought I'd say this, but John Boehner makes me miss Newt Gingrich.

I hate how nobody ever compares Iraq to the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, or World War I.

The Bride in Kill Bill was loosely based on Doris Kearns Goodwin.

Just call it a preview of the Guiliani campaign.

Both the movie and the "Karen Sisco" tv series were good, but quickly gone and forgotten.

Are there more besides this one and the issue where Goliath died?

Congratulations on being older than me.

Most Lawmakers Support Clinton's Military Strikes But some Republicans raise questions about the timing of anti-terrorist attacks

I have it and it's easy to setup. Does anyone know if the 360 will work with wireless adapters besides the official X-Box one (that retails for $99)? I too would like to know this. I have a Linksys set up in our apartment, but I really don't want to shell out 100 bucks for something that I likely wouldn't use but for roster updates. if you really want you can just get some cat5 cable and run it to the 360, that's a much cheaper way to do it. My X-Box 360 isn't even on the same floor of my house as my router. Then get a wireless adapter, if the knock off doesnt work return it. Things cost money. Most stores won't take back open electronics items if they're in working order. I figured I could save myself some time to see if anyone had tried it for themselves, but I'm guessing no one has.

This chart is funny. http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/09/anna-n...a-embarassment/ Even worse, that chart is only for 1 day's worth of coverage. In their defense, "reference" could mean anything, though.

Barack the Vote

Maybe its the kind of DVD where you get to watch people get up for popcorn and go to the restroom.

I didn't avoid the question, I just didn't answer a loaded question based on something I never said. I never said you'd get a raise if there was universal healthcare. I said you're probably getting lower wages now because your company has to pay for your health insurance. Your assumption that universal health care would lead to lower quality of care is not a premise I accept. There are plenty of government run programs and agencies that are cost-efficient and well-run. To assume quality would automatically go down because the government is involved is an argumentative short-cut that I don't find convincing. Now, let's look at your real question, which is why would "the people who already have health coverage as I described would benefit from a national system"? I believe I answered this when I said: "And what about the cost to society of people going without health care?" Those societal costs can affect everyone. For example: -Lowered economic productivity due to unhealthy workers. We want our economy to be productive so we can all enjoy the standard of living it affords us. But a sick worker isn't a productive worker, and productivity and efficiency are valuable qualities our economy needs. -Lowered educational opportunities for children who frequently miss school due to illness (i.e. "brats with runny noses"). When kids miss school because they're sick all the time, isn't there a greater chance they'll grow up to become a burden on society in adulthood? And that other guy's kid who does come to school with a runny nose is probably infecting the entire 3rd grade. -Higher infant mortality rates. Not only are dead babies a bad thing by itself (you may disagree), but the cost of taking care of that child was money that was wasted if they die in the first year. That kid isn't going to grow up to contribute to our society in any way, because he or she will be dead. -Diseases being spread instead of being treated. Sure you have health insurance to help treat the illness, but wouldn't you be better off if you didn't get sick in the first place? -Because preventative health care is an economic luxery for the lower class, there's a greater cost in the long run to tax-payers and insurance providers for emergency medical care of preventable diseases and ailments.

Someone with a better memory than me needs to make an Anglesault entry.

Number 11.

The American people, including you, are already paying heavily for health care in the form of premiums, taxes, and hidden costs. But, because you don't immediately see the cost (even though you're still paying it), you're perfectly content to deny a significant portion of the population access to health care so long as you don't have to see the price you're paying? And what about the cost to society of people going without health care?

Yes, you and you alone would be stuck with everyone else's hospital bills, and the rest of us wouldn't have to pay a dime.

Abuse of power my ass. That's just good moderating on your part, sir.

Are we talking about movies we haven't watched since we bought the DVD, or DVDs of movies we've never seen? Do a lot of people buy DVDs for movies they've never even seen? I do that occasionally, if it looks like something I'll really like and its cheap.

You probably aren't getting it for next to nothing, though. Your employer is probably passing the cost of the insurance on to you in the form of lower wages. Thus, it is being "yanked out" of your check without you even realizing it.

So, let me get this straight... You get insurance for below cost because your employer subsidizes your premium. But you wouldn't want anyone else to have their health insurance paid for on their behalf because you don't want to have to pay for part of it (as well as for more of your own)? In other words, you want to continue to get something for next-to nothing at the expense of people who can't afford it getting it at all?