Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#5811
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that are
> so important to same --- couples?
All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
heterosexual couples.
> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a man
> / woman union?
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're opposed
because same---- unions make you feel bad.
I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or whatever
should hold legal sway over equal rights.
DS
> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that are
> so important to same --- couples?
All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
heterosexual couples.
> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a man
> / woman union?
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're opposed
because same---- unions make you feel bad.
I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or whatever
should hold legal sway over equal rights.
DS
#5812
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that are
> so important to same --- couples?
All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
heterosexual couples.
> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a man
> / woman union?
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're opposed
because same---- unions make you feel bad.
I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or whatever
should hold legal sway over equal rights.
DS
> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that are
> so important to same --- couples?
All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
heterosexual couples.
> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a man
> / woman union?
There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're opposed
because same---- unions make you feel bad.
I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or whatever
should hold legal sway over equal rights.
DS
#5813
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On 03 Dec 2003 09:51 PM, Daniel J. Stern posted the following:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#5814
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On 03 Dec 2003 09:51 PM, Daniel J. Stern posted the following:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#5815
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On 03 Dec 2003 09:51 PM, Daniel J. Stern posted the following:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, C. E. White wrote:
>
>> Exactly what are the great benefits of a traditional marriage that
>> are so important to same --- couples?
>
> All the same responsibilities and rights that are granted to married
> heterosexual couples.
>
>> insulting millions of people who deeply believe that a marriage is a
>> man / woman union?
>
> There, that wasn't so hard, was it? You finally admit that you're
> opposed because same---- unions make you feel bad.
>
> I don't happen to believe that you feeling bad, icky, insulted or
> whatever should hold legal sway over equal rights.
The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
#5816
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <S1pzb.2055$WT6.1103@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
#5817
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <S1pzb.2055$WT6.1103@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
#5818
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <S1pzb.2055$WT6.1103@twister.socal.rr.com>,
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bql33p$c29$30@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <3FCE0F53.10617B9D@mindspring.com>,
>> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Since when to conservatives as an aggregate tell people what kind of
>---
>> to
>> >> >have??? You're posting from an alternate reality again.
>> >> >
>> >> Sodomy laws?
>> >
>> >Have any new ones been enacted recently? I thought almost all such laws
>were
>> >enacted many years ago and were definitely middle of the road sort of
>laws at
>> the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Ed
>> >
>> Which states kept them until just recently, and fought for them in the
>> courts? Texas, Georgia, conservative states. Which USSC justices wanted
>to
>> uphold them? Thomas, Scalia, the conservative justices.
>
>Once again, this should be a limited government issue. Heaven forbid we
>should trust local jurisdictions to govern themselves. Heaven forbid Thomas
>and Scalia should read the constitution *as written* and judge accordingly
>notwithstanding leftist activism that can't win legislatively.
>
>
Heaven forbid people should read the 9th amendment.
#5819
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3fce1e95.263879672@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com >,
mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>health
>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>insurance
>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>
>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
Japan,
>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
everybody?
>>>
>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>canadian health care problems
>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>friends promise.
>>>
>>
>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>
>>Try this:
>>
>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
Co
>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>
>
>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>opinion of you.
If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
situation from a consumer's point of view.
mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>health
>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>insurance
>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>
>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
Japan,
>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
everybody?
>>>
>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>canadian health care problems
>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>friends promise.
>>>
>>
>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>
>>Try this:
>>
>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
Co
>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>
>
>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>opinion of you.
If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
situation from a consumer's point of view.
#5820
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3fce1e95.263879672@news.mi.comcast.giganews.com >,
mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>health
>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>insurance
>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>
>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
Japan,
>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
everybody?
>>>
>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>canadian health care problems
>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>friends promise.
>>>
>>
>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>
>>Try this:
>>
>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
Co
>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>
>
>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>opinion of you.
If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
situation from a consumer's point of view.
mielkman@excite.com (John Mielke) wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Dec 03 10:54:53 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>wrote:
>
>>In article <2c7qsvgrtldnv0d50g0u57c2j0cadcc7if@4ax.com>,
>> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 03 15:37:02 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <Us5zb.282500$275.1000782@attbi_s53>,
>>>> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>>>>>In article <bqinb6$him$8@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, it'd be terrible if everybody were covered and we spent less on
>>>>health
>>>>>> care, as Europe, Canada, and Japan do, wouldn't it? Terrible for
>>insurance
>>>>>> companies, drug companies, HMOs, etc, that is.
>>>>>
>>>>>How would we spend "less on health care" ? Instead of paying for health
>>>>>insurance we would pay *AT LEAST* that much in additional taxes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Why is it, then, that every western European nation, plus Canada and
Japan,
>>>>spend less per capita on health care than the US yet still cover
everybody?
>>>
>>>Lloyd, you might want to do a Google search on the keywords:
>>>canadian health care problems
>>>This would let you see reality instead of the utopia your liberal
>>>friends promise.
>>>
>>
>>Oh great, he wants me to absorb his right-wing propaganda.
>>
>>Try this:
>>
>>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.e...cs/HealthCare/
Co
>>nsumerReports-Sep92.html.gz#Does%20Canada%20Have%20The%20Answer?
>
>
>So now a simple google search is "right-wing propaganda"? Every one
>of 2,280,000 pages is right wing? No wonder people have such a low
>opinion of you.
If you cite right-web web sites, and medical-insurance-drug industry sites,
then, yes, they're propaganda. Consumer Reports analyzed the health care
situation from a consumer's point of view.