Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 4 Nov 2006 08:47 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >So all you're doing here is criticising the failings of your current system. > >Quite so. It needs radical overhaul. > > To go to a single payer system implies an expansion of the Medicare > system. So a national health insurer will not work well. The use of the word *so* implies some cause-effect relationship which you have failed to show. I'm sorry but simple assertions based on political doctrine count for nought. > Congress even did something sensible and passed an extraordinary > insurance. The youngsteres who ran AARP caused their subscribers > to get it repealed. I know nothing about this. > >It's rare here to find a doctor who *doesn't* do NHS work. > > Is his license tied to volunteering? Licence ? You mean his qualification as a doctor. That's dealt with by the BMA ( British Medical Association ) as it always has been. Most doctors here simply work for the NHS since it's the largest health care employer in the land. There's no compulsion to do so and you can work in private practice to or even both, just like any other job. Graham
From: Eeyore on 4 Nov 2006 08:48 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > >Yeah, so? That bitterness is a good summary of those peoples' personal > >experiences. How does that invalidate the study? > > The conclusions from the data showed the opposite. Eh ? Do explain what you mean. Graham
From: Eeyore on 4 Nov 2006 08:50 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> > >> >So you choose to listen to somebody who isn't even running for office, > >> > >> Kerry? He's running for President. > > > >Is he ? > > Yes. Time will tell if his latest slip of foot-in-mouth > disease will affect his campaign. I wasn't aware that he had committed to run. Given his apparent lack of 'charisma' he might actually make a better vice-presidential candidate perhaps ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 4 Nov 2006 08:53 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > >>>So you choose to listen to somebody who isn't even running for office, > >> > >> Kerry? He's running for President. > > > >Funny, we're not electing a president next week. Focus. > > I'm not the one who has to focus. The Democrats are the ones > who have to focus. That is what I'm saying in this thread. > They are avoiding everything that has to do with reality. Such as ? Graham
From: unsettled on 4 Nov 2006 08:54
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <S8J2h.682$Mw.315(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >>"MooseFET" <kensmith(a)rahul.net> wrote in message >>news:1162566543.051602.226320(a)f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... >> >>>It is likely that he will give it a try. This week's comments were a >>>botched joke. We already knew that Kerry can't tell a joke to save his >>>life so in the long run it won't matter. What will matter is that he >>>has already lost one election and it is likely that the voters will >>>never forgive him for that. >>> >>>In the US they have things called "primaries" where the folks from the >>>same party run against each other for the right to run in the general >>>election. Kerry is not likely to come in above 4th place in the >>>primaries where three people are running. >> >>Good lord, I hope not. > > > I've been telling that the Democrat leadership are insane. It is an appeasement repeat taken from from Britain's history at the early stages of WW1 and WW2. We can't defend liberty by appeasing those who would end it. |