"politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-08-2012, 10:19 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
(26-08-2012 10:06 AM)kunoxian drive Wrote:  1. that 8 year thing is only claimed by the party that is out of office. the republicans claimed it not to long ago when a conservative{namely ronalds regain} was replaced by bush. they don't sya the same thing now. but it's an all to covient go to argument. conveniently look who's using it now.

2. dooctor are planing on quiting if obama care is implimented. so regardless if there getting hired they wll probably be less doctors.

#1--it's claimed because it's how it works for a number of things. If I make a rule that expires a few years into my predecessor's term, it's going to extend things. If I instantly fix a problem, it will take some time for others to implement or change things. Even if a president cut ALL funding for roads and bridges and such--it would take years before we'd start having major issues. There's just a delay. It happens with any party, it doesn't matter who "claims it" it applies to either.

#2--and do you know why? It will increase the load and demand for them, and many are overworked as it is. They know there's no way they could do things without having help. Think about it, if everyone could see a doctor when they needed it.... it could easily double the workload (paperwork and patients)--and if someone told me I had to double my workload (no matter where it was), and didn't get me help, I'd consider quitting too! And then there's others who are in it for the money, and it could hurt their bottom line. It's not a "hey, we don't want people to be healthy! It's wrong!" It's a "we don't have the support to do this". Which is why there are now new fields and demands for positions to help where it's needed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 10:25 AM
"politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
(26-08-2012 10:08 AM)kunoxian drive Wrote:  ronald regain was replaced by clinton sorry...

Lulz.

I was willing to ignore the atrocious attempts at spelling, but historical facts cannot be ignored. Go check your list of presidents and rethink that last post.

Drinking Beverage

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 10:30 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
1. never trust any numbers coming form the following people shaun hanitty, racheal madow, rush limbaugh, or any comentaters you see on t.v. heck don't I on't trust the number sent by anybody because if you listen to those ppeople long enough you'll notice that there just making the same argumnets. their just flipping sides. and yes I used to listen to those four on a regular basis. it was quite madening non the least if you do so long enough with the right presidence in office they'll both make the same arguimens given enough tkme. I extend this to any news source now of days. they are sales men and we are ready to buy anything as long as it could be made to sound good. problem is. the winning side always makes the followiing two argument. the economy is ours and it is not anyones eleses {when they are wining and the economy is theres 8 year gap and all when they are doing bad.}

other arguments that don't work on me. the other side is like this one person that said this crazy bla bla bla.{painting th entire eparty as that person}

sorry got a phone call brb

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 10:31 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
let me check my memory may be bad.. lol

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kunoxian drive's post
26-08-2012, 10:36 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
sory it was bus=h one but the economy that clinton took to claim as his own was the republicans. and believe me he claimed a good one.

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 10:42 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
(26-08-2012 10:06 AM)kunoxian drive Wrote:  ...
2. dooctor are planing on quiting if obama care is implimented. so regardless if there getting hired they wll probably be less doctors.

As did the UK doctors in 1947

1. See vid
2. Please use a spell-checker... I'm finding it hard to understand you.




Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 10:42 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
btw I'll be willing to check anything but i git to go now.... thanx for at least trrying to help me... if I might be wrong I wll willing admit it when I see it.

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kunoxian drive's post
26-08-2012, 10:45 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
sorry i'll try to start to use spell check and btw I'll look into the video on both sides because he might be buased.

and please look into clintons economy.

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 11:15 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
(26-08-2012 10:30 AM)kunoxian drive Wrote:  1. never trust any numbers coming form the following people shaun hanitty, racheal madow, rush limbaugh, or any comentaters you see on t.v. .... {when they are wining and the economy is theres 8 year gap and all when they are doing bad.}

other arguments that don't work on me. the other side is like this one person that said this crazy bla bla bla.{painting th entire eparty as that person}

sorry got a phone call brb

I wouldn't know what they say. As I mentioned one of my first posts in this thread I believe, it was taught to me in school.... which just happened to be around 1993, found in a textbook and taught by the teacher, on the US Government. He said that the one thing that was bad was when a president was a 1-term president, you never saw just how good or bad they were for the country until they are out of office.

Some things just have a delay--especially if there's one built in. Like with minimum wage, if they said they would increase it to $10/hr, but do it over a two or four year period, we won't know the effects of the "$10 min wage" until a while after the min wage of $10 was active. If it was 2 years from now, it could take 3 or more years to see the effect. Now this doesn't say there wouldn't be short-term effects, but the new "normal" would take a while to see. Sometimes delays are just to let companies ease into the changes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2012, 11:22 AM
RE: "politicaly" which hand do you think I should cut off
I'm sorry to counter point you with a video butt...

http://youtu.be/KI6uyhRcZLY

the thing is it's according to who you ask..... I 'll make my point like this. a long time ago there was the issue of for lack of ability to spell or remember the places name.. I'll just call it the bay detention place where we keep terrorist or the bay for short. but if you go to certain people and according too where you get your news from. it is one of the following...

1. a spa and vacation place but more jail like.
2. a hell hole where there was pee on the beads

now what does this have to do with our current conversation. it points out my earlier point that you can't trust any source now of days without peer review. so I am going to look this up because I am reasonable but it may take me a while to find a none biased source{ like you would expect christian to do with god and science}. thank you for being patient if you do.

btw; I would vote for universal health care on the following basis.

1. it has been showed to work in the past. from what I've seen it hasn't due to cost. that's not saying much because there is other problems like them doing exactly what the insurance companies do.
2. there is something put in place where the government can not start to ration it at all
3. it dosen't end up being like the other government run programs {i.e. ssi and i happen to be using that program right know. btw saying that it's helped me is a waist of time because it's helped half my family and a lot of them are faking the nee for it in my opinion and that's just adding to the cost.}
4. the lawsuit situation where people can get a million dollars just because you scratched their ear thus raising doctors insurance is done something about.


p.s. something has to be done about generational welfare that's not a condition but I've seen it worth a lot of my family.a good bit of them are leeches but there is nothing i can prove. not to say that all of them are. to quote one."all you have to do is just say the right things and they'll give you a check.

1. Striding and swaggering rootlessness without end. The precious flow of life.
2. one should fear sweet a blood stained flower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: