Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#5821
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.
#5822
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
#5823
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
#5824
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE1FB6.1C053487@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>And? Why is it that some groups (psudeo-liberals is my term for them) always
what
>to create laws they like out of thin air through judicial action and ignore
>legitimate ,if distasteful, laws because they don't like them. There is a
process
>for adding and removing laws. If insisting that these procedures be followed
>makes me a conservative, then I guess I am guilty. Unfortunately, most of the
>people I know who claim to be conservatives don't agree with many of my
ideas, so
>I guess I am lost in the wilderness.
>
>Ed
>
How is letting people do what they want in the privacy of their home with
another consenting adult "creating laws"? That's something any conservative
or libertarian should want the government to stay out of.
#5825
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE202D.BAE1C9E7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
#5826
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE202D.BAE1C9E7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
#5827
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety canbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE202D.BAE1C9E7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> But we know that the warming TODAY is due to CO2. It doesn't matter that
>> warmings in the past may have had other causes. That's like arguing that
>> since exercise raised your body temp. yesterday, a virus cannot be the
cause
>> of your fever today.
>
>"We" don't know that. "You" may believe what you wish.
>
>Ed
>
When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
#5828
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE2318.F0DD5CF7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?
#5829
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE2318.F0DD5CF7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?
#5830
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <3FCE2318.F0DD5CF7@mindspring.com>,
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?
"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>>
>> >The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>> >
>>
>> Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>
>This statement is the sort of crap uttered by psudeo-liberals that I find
>particularly offensive. Trying to redine the word "marriage" to cover same
---
>unions is not discrimination.
>
>Ed
>
Why is telling some people they don't have a right others have NOT
discrimination?