Floyd Lawson

Excellent question.

Yes, he is. Examples>>>>> Of course, you've never been one to let the facts get in the way.

Your wasting your time with him. This is exactly the mind-set that this president has. They don't value the lives of our older citizen or the unborn, to them they are expendable.

And a right cross to the head, I think Ranger has Ed on the ropes. Seriously you described him spot-on.

I agree with you rc. A lot of these people will end up the same as the those who were in mortgages that they could not afford. This program is another big government give away, when it's gone, we'll be right back in the same situation. This rush to buy is just temporary.

While the cash for clunkers program has been considered a success, the adminisrtation of it has been a failure, from computer system meltdowns to under-estimated demand. This is small compared to what a national healthcare program would be. Now it should be clear the the government can't run anything efficiently and why there would be long lines and rationing. Link

According to the HR web site, HR 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, was introduced into the House on July 14, 2009. And I say that NOW is the time to get excited about this bill and the president's attempt to jam it down our throats. Why wait? Most congressmen will be home this month and some will be holding "town hall" meetings so this will afford the American people an opportunity to let them know how we feel about this bill and ask the tough questions>>>>>like what's the hurry? and how are we going to pay for this? So we shouldn't be sitting on our hands and letting this happen.

It has everything to do with the govt. trying to manage,>>>>>>>anything. They totally under estimated this program and had to stop it. Just like they are under estimating the cost of socialized medicine. This so-called clunker program is awaste of my tax dollars. Why should have to help buy you a car?

This should really raise our confidence that the government could manage our health care @ a trillion $$ but can't manage this one with a billion $$.

So you are employed in the health and safety field?

You should know about brain-damaged twaddle. And if you go back and look you'll see that suv injected the term "a long time", not me, I'm just trying to determine how long that was. Capice? I'm sure this young man appreciates you defending his "extensive" background of historical studies.

It's all in your perspective.

How much is a long time?

I noticed you dodged the SS comment again. You're the one who bought that into the post, but when someone presents you with the facts, you changed the subject. Very convenient.

Nice try, that bill came out of a democrat congress led by Tip O'Neil. Maybe you don't totally understand how our government functions. All spending comes in the form of a bill, a spending bill if you will. As stated before the dems held a sizable majority so they knew what they were doing. I know this is difficult for you since you have tried your best to paint this totally as a Reagan deal. However, the very next year, 1984, Reagan went on the carry 49 of 50 states in the election plus the Repub. picked up 16 additional seats in the House so obviously people were pleased with what he was doing. Your problem is that you know just enough to make you look stupid, and you probably got these few talking points from the union hall. You obviously haven't done much research.

I think you're referring to HR1900 Social Security Amendments of 1983, and you're right what they (Reagan, Bush I Clinton and Bush II) was wrong. But please remember that this bill came out of the House of Rep., which at the time the dems held a 67 to 33% advantage. So they are not wothout blame. And Ronald Reagan is the best President of our time.

So if the majority of the province is middle age or younger and they don't want to spend these funds on alzheimers, a disease of the old, then they would have to move to another province or suffer? [ So stories like this aren't true?? My health-care prejudices crumbled not in the classroom but on the way to one. On a subzero Winnipeg morning in 1997, I cut across the hospital emergency room to shave a few minutes off my frigid commute. Swinging open the door, I stepped into a nightmare: the ER overflowed with elderly people on stretchers, waiting for admission. Some, it turned out, had waited five days. The air stank with sweat and urine. Right then, I began to reconsider everything that I thought I knew about Canadian health care. I soon discovered that the problems went well beyond overcrowded ERs. Patients had to wait for practically any diagnostic test or procedure, such as the man with persistent pain from a hernia operation whom we referred to a pain clinic—with a three-year wait list; or the woman needing a sleep study to diagnose what seemed like sleep apnea, who faced a two-year delay; or the woman with breast cancer who needed to wait four months for radiation therapy, when the standard of care was four weeks. link Matthew

You'd be more believable if you used facts and not emotions. or just cite your source for the 200,000 number. The main reason that your health insurance continues to go up is because of all the people who use the system and don't pay (12 million illegals). Nothing is ever free, so when someone goes the the ER or has an emergency surgery and lacks the ability to pay, you know that that expense is not written off. It's added to the bill of those who can pay. So this notion of a national health care is more of the same, except now you have the option of spending your money for coverage, with Obama-care you'll pay in higher taxes, whether you use it or not. And guess what, most of the people who don't currently have health insurance are the same people who pay NO income taxes. So with Obama-care they'll still pay no taxes but will have FREE health care. So when it becomes FREE for them they'll use it and the system will not be able to handle the load and that's when it starts to look like the Canadian and European systems, BROKEN!

Nice sentiment, too bad you didn't express the same "let's all sing kumbaya attitude" when Bush was President.

Best military movie:

Psycho: The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you.

Joe Biden makes Day Quayle look like a Rhodes Scholar

You need to stop listening to Alex Jones so much, you're getting paranoid.

Yeah, they have it now and we see what they are doing, tripling the national debt.

Nice try, you seem to forget that the dems had control of Congress for the last 2 years, and it was people like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are complicit in the home mortgage meltdown. But keep telling yourself this, just wait till interest rates skyrocket because of this new debt, then who will you blame?