The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Pittsburgh
Next: Incompatible jpeg?
From: Ray Fischer on 11 Sep 2009 23:34 Neil Harrington <not(a)home.today> wrote: > >"Larry Thong" <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> wrote in message >news:EKWdnfDeK_e0TTXXnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d(a)supernews.com... >> It seems the meaning and value of the word "apology" has been watered down >> to now mean "I'm sorry I got caught for doing whatever I did but was very >> happy doing it up and till the point I got caught." It's sad that this >> practice is commonplace with business's, politicians, investment brokers, >> religious figures, criminals alike. >> >> Good ole boy Joe Wilson, a Republican, called out "you lie" during Obama's >> speech and shortly apologizes after getting called out over it. > >He apologized for calling it out, which was a rude thing to do, but what he >called out was the truth. In fact the legislation before the House explicitely excludes illegals from coverage. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/09/joe-wilson/joe-wilson-south-carolina-said-obama-lied-he-didnt/ > Since Obama lies half the time And so the partisan bigot screeches the usual bullshit. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Walter Banks on 12 Sep 2009 15:11 Bill Graham wrote: > Yes. Health care, like everything else, costs money and has a cost/benefit > curve that goes along with it.....How many heart transplants do they give to > 80 year olds in one of the socialized medicine countries, like Norway or > Sweden? Probably the number are similar to the US. In Ontario the current trend is to be more aggressive earlier in heart disease to keep the existing pump working rather than replacing it later. In the US heath care debate cost/benefit is quickly switched to rationing and in most other countries with national heath care it is a debate about at what point in the treatment of a condition is it effective to be aggressive. It is one of the mindsets that makes the US heath providers very good at care for very serious conditions. The other extreme is Cuba who have similar life expectancies to the US who are very aggressive at treating conditions early. They get similar outcomes compared to the US for about 5% of the costs. Once the cost/benefit gets away from the rationing subset it is a good thing. I was very surprised a few months ago when cost/benefit came up so negatively in the US health care debate, I had previously never really thought about rationing as part of the same argument. w..
From: Walter Banks on 12 Sep 2009 15:44 Bill Graham wrote: > In my world, yes, yes, yes. Everyone (all 300 million of us citizens) should > have a government ID card, and/or a chip implanted in us that identifies us > as US citizens in good standing, and if we are sick, then the chip should > get us the treatment we need. Today's technology is more than adequate to > accomplish this. Well put
From: Walter Banks on 12 Sep 2009 15:44 Bill Graham wrote: > I drink a lot more prune juice than Bill, you are just a regular fellow . . . :)
From: tony cooper on 12 Sep 2009 17:01
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:44:12 -0400, Walter Banks <walter(a)bytecraft.com> wrote: > > >Bill Graham wrote: > >> In my world, yes, yes, yes. Everyone (all 300 million of us citizens) should >> have a government ID card, and/or a chip implanted in us that identifies us >> as US citizens in good standing, and if we are sick, then the chip should >> get us the treatment we need. Today's technology is more than adequate to >> accomplish this. > >Well put Yeah, right. With the chip acting as a homing device for the government to locate us at any time. Besides, all the chip would accomplish is to give birth to a new industry: manufacturing counterfeit chips and implanting them in illegals. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |