Amentep

You don't seem to know me very well, Gifted1. I want this to happen not to get the benefits, but to see this country tear itself apart. I firmly believe that this country would be better off if it was split into smaller nations. Health care is one of the biggest schism in this country. If we continue to follow schism after schism, our politicians will cause a civil war along ideological lines which the end result would be a sundered country. United we fall. Divided we stand. The LAST Civil War worked out so well, didn't it?

To be fair to Gfted1, I believe (and may or may not be correct) that the difference in this case would be that the neighbor was also paying taxes into the system that funds the fire department. I think he feels that the health care for all as designed in this bill would create a system that would benefit individuals who had no intention of paying into and maintaining the system that they're using. There's also a minor public good in containing fires rather than letting Mrs. O'Leary's cow burn down Chicago that I don't think Gfted1 sees as translatable in the same way with basic public health. If Gfted1's neighbor without insurance breaks his leg it doesn't increase Gfted1's chance of breaking his leg; this just isn't the case with a fire at his neighbor's house that could spread to his own home. The only case where it would matter would be in massive outbreaks and face it the government is going to intervene in a pandemic whether there's universal health care or not.

I don't believe I ever said it was okay to buy votes, thank you. That both sides are equally corrupt (IMO at least) was my point.

I don't think the Republicans "hide it better"; I seem to recall (although specifics escape my hazy memory at this time) a number of instances where Republican backed bills that was unpopular enough with the other side resulted in a dissection of the "backroom deals" and "riders" on a bill. I think its mostly about how angry passage of a bill makes the other side (can we get a viable third party now? Or do away with the party system entirely? kplsthnxbai).

Given the guys (and bear) profiles that have been linked, I don't think the website prevents men from joining and adding themselves to the list of payable players (whether anyone pays to play with them is an entirely different matter, but I'm not sure if it can be seen as discriminatory in the customers choose not to avail themselves to the totality of the offered services/service-providers).

I think the imminent legal challenges from the states and the potential passing of local legislation to prohibit mandatory insurance and possible other challenges indicate it will be many years before its "too late" for the genie to be put back in the bottle.

Hmm. Well, I can't argue with that. I think it's implied, however, that the "PlayDate" is very much a living person? Yeah I don't even understand anything at that link. It's like reading some bizarre foreign language made up of near-English. At any rate, whoever made the profile (and for the bear) probably is a living person (at least at the time the entry was made).

To quote (the stage direction of) Shakespeare - "Exit, pursued by a bear".

I was not fond of Bush either. While I could understand the rationale for going into Afghanistan, I always felt that his (and therefore ours as a country) reasoning for going into Iraq was disingenuous. I think there was also a gross misunderstanding of the region and its perceptions as well; some would argue this doesn't matter but I think anyone who thought about it a bit would realize that history indicates what we were stated to be doing would be difficult enough without giving ammunition for others by acting in a high handed fashion.

And does it have any sort of eating or feeding upkeep mechanism (hate that in games)?

There's nothing on the GameCrush website that indicates the "PlayDate" has to be an attractive young female human.

As someone who found some enjoyment in Oblivion (before my computer bit the dust) and in FO3 how directly comparable are the games? Are there classes? How much control do you have (if any) in character creation?

I don't think he's saying Bush had anything to do with 9/11 I think he's saying that 9/11 → war on terror → invasion of Iraq on "they have weapons of mass destruction" claims that proved false and that was establishing a precedent that the US could invade other sovereign countries whenever the US "believed" that country was a threat.

To be fair, the island sinking (I don't think the nuke blowing in 1977 necessarily sank the island) could have put a crimp in Jacob's plan. Assuming Jacob ever existed in the other timeline.

To be fair its kinda hard to condemn something without actually talking about it. "You know that stuff I hate? Yeah I really hate that stuff."

80000 dollars is still way too much. Unless they replaced the leg with a golden one with studded diamonds and breasts. Go big or go home. I really doubt the materials are the problem in terms of cost, the rod could not have been much more than $1k. In fact I get it out in a few months, I hope I get to keep it! A night at a hospital can run you $10-20k even without surgery. There are major problems with health care costs in this country. This bill doesn't fix that, but it could open the door to further reform. Not including the one night at the hospital, I think my broken ankle ended up costing me about $25,000; IIRC half of it was for the hospitals "stuff" during the out-patient surgery (including the plate & screws they put in) and the rest covered the doctor, anesthesiologist, etc. I'd imagine it'd have been a lot more had I paid for the night in the hospital (and the painkillers).

Sorry, Gifted1 you aren't my type. But he's got a big, robust...health insurance! Edit: Frankly I'm surprised that anyone is surprised about Ahmadinejad's statements, personally.

Except I think that that's a separate issue - companies don't have to prey on the lonely to be full of money-ravenous suits who only care about the money they can wring from others. But there are many companies and individuals that provide service to the lonely; I'm not sure that its necessarily a negative thing provided the lonely person is getting something that, for them, they feel is worth the money they paid. Didn't say it shouldn't be commented on, just that in my opinion as long as the customer feels that they're receiving reciprocity vis a vis what they get vs the money they paid then I'm not going to pass a value judgment on the business anymore than I would "web-cam girls" or "dating services".

Never played the game but nothing I saw on it during the brief few minutes I'd given to looking at it felt very inspiring. For those who like it, what is it about the game that makes you like it?

As long as the person paying feels they're getting something worth the money they paid, then *shrugs*

I've not seen the original in a couple of years and the new ones not out yet?

But did he knock people out while running missions for the SPA? Did he tranq anyone while co-director of the League for Industrial Democracy?

I seem to recall that you could knock people out as opposed to kill them, but knocking people out isn't really non-violent in the way I'd think a pacifist would be.

I liked the Ritchie/Downey SHERLOCK HOLMES as well. It wasn't quite the original series but I thought it was truer than a lot of adaptions. I found it funny that a lot of people were put off by "Battling Sherlock" when the novels - if my memory holds - has reference to him boxing and knowing Victorian era Martial art/self-defence method Bartitsu (misspelled "Baritsu")

I'm pretty sure you end up paying for it anyhow, either through raised insurance premiums or through local taxes to support the hospital. I live in a county that supports a local Level 1 Trauma center and they pull tax money to keep it running from the surrounding counties. Of course there's always problems with that which for years have threatened the place staying open... I'm under the impression that insurance ran hospitals will hike prices to insured customers to cover the fact that they're unlikely to recoup most of the money charged to insurance-less emergency patients and to make the hospital itself profitable. So - and perhaps I'm wrong - the question seems to be "does the money go to and come from the insurance company, the local government or the federal government in terms of subsidizing the health care of the currently uninsured".