bicycle-forum.net Promoting biking discussion.

Main Date: 30 Jun 2007 06:48:23 From: Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer Subject: Download Michael Moores Sicko http://www.badongo.com/file/3521831 You should read on how to join the files from the site before you download it. or you can download the torrent. (preferred) Install UTorrent from http://utorrent.com/download.php get the standalone Then download from http://www.badongo.com/file/3522562 Double click the downloaded file to start the torrent download. -- Windows Media Player may need codecs to view this movie. Works fine with VLC Media Player.   Date: 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 7:24 am, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > >> > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds > >> > > > in > >> > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > >> > > Started? > > >> > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > >> > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > >> > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > >> > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > >> London blitz began September 1940. > > > The victors write the history books. > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a time in > history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military weapon. And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror among others ever been moral? [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 04 Jul 2007 13:58:59 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183553777.748374.15140@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 4, 7:24 am, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> >> Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a time >> in >> history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military >> weapon. > > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > among others ever been moral? It wasn't used, you might try to read history instead of re-writing it. > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful >     Date: 04 Jul 2007 09:44:08 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > among others ever been moral? > > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia Whose moral code are you using? Please define [your definition] terror. -- Slack     Date: 04 Jul 2007 08:53:16 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] {sarcams -- correct Usenet word, BTW -- resumed} Yeah, those poor, pushed down DOCTORS in Britain were just oppressed to the point of carbomb caboom... Get a clue, Tommy.   Date: 04 Jul 2007 05:12:48 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > The victors write the history books. > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > back in the thread to see who actually brought > Churchill into the discussion. If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > I should also make it clear that I never said > Jonny Sunshine enjoys carnal relations with swine. I was making a point as to what I was NOT saying. Mr. Press is merely making a gratuitous insult here. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 04 Jul 2007 12:02:36 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183551168.904780.196570@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com > , Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > > Churchill into the discussion. > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your unsupported assertion different from the written history? According to you, no different at all. Both are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything you say? -- Michael Press   Date: 03 Jul 2007 16:05:28 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 2, 10:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Peter Cole wrote: > > > A Muzi wrote: > > > > SocSecTrainWreck? wrote: > > > >> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > > >> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > > >> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > > >> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > > >> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > > >> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > > > So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > > > to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > > > > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] > > > This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th > > century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized > > their infamous response to the Irish famines. > > > Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November > > 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the > > high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who > > still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the > > experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last > > 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. > > There is no way the USA can adopt the Scandinavian > method. The collection of differences is unbounded. > Climate is one. Size is another. The USA is too damn > big to sit back and be a cozy little family with a > benign paternalistic system. The real problem is that the population has been indoctrinated with the religion of "American Exceptionalism" and refuses to accept arguments based on logic and reason on how the general welfare could be improved. > The rest of the world will not allow it. Huh? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 03 Jul 2007 16:02:11 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > Started? > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > London blitz began September 1940. The victors write the history books. The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 04 Jul 2007 07:24:33 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183503731.402946.294370@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> > > Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >> > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds >> > > > in >> > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the >> >> > > Started? >> >> > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? >> >> > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs >> > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian >> > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. >> >> London blitz began September 1940. > > The victors write the history books. > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a time in history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military weapon. > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful >     Date: 04 Jul 2007 06:20:35 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183503731.402946.294370@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com > , Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > The victors write the history books. > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. My contribution here is limited to challenging your assertion of `started'. You need to go back in the thread to see who actually brought Churchill into the discussion. I should also make it clear that I never said Jonny Sunshine enjoys carnal relations with swine. -- Michael Press   Date: 02 Jul 2007 18:39:48 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > Started? > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 03 Jul 2007 03:42:35 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183426788.695244.10110@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > Started? > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. London blitz began September 1940. -- Michael Press       Date: 03 Jul 2007 15:32:00 From: Marty Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote in message news:rubrum-7DC1F5.20423502072007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com... > In article > <1183426788.695244.10110@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> > Johnny Sunset wrote: >> > >> > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds >> > > in >> > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the >> > >> > Started? >> > >> > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? >> >> The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs >> to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian >> housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > London blitz began September 1940. > > -- > Michael Press As Homer Simpson would say.... "DOH".   Date: 02 Jul 2007 18:30:12 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 2, 4:52 pm, Peter Cole wrote: > Andrew Muzi wrote: > > SocSecTrainWreck? wrote: > >> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > >> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > >> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > >> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > >> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > >> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > > So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > > to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > > > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] > > This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th > century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized > their infamous response to the Irish famines. > > Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November > 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the > high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who > still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the > experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last > 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. > > The real comparison is not with the Marxist/Leninist-style central > economies -- everybody (including the former USSR, China, etc.) have > figured out that was a failed experiment, too -- but with the socially > progressive democracies like the Nordic countries. Reagan, Bush, > Thatcher and their ilk are dinosaurs, still justifying essentially > mean-spirited, punitive social policies in the name of (non-existent) > pragmatism, or worse, some sort of twisted concept of "freedom". The > ideas are bankrupt, the average guy is just being chumped by corporate > interests running unchecked. The two-bit philosophizing is just adding > insult to injury. The argument the right usually replies with is that those countries have the advantage of (relatively) homogenous populations, which is a rather racist and jingoistic argument. It is too bad that there are so many barriers to emigration/ immigration, so more people could choose not to live in economically brutal societies. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 03 Jul 2007 08:04:36 From: Peter Cole Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > On Jul 2, 4:52 pm, Peter Cole wrote: >> Andrew Muzi wrote: >>> SocSecTrainWreck? wrote: >>>> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans >>>> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not >>>> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of >>>> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton >>>> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, >>>> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. >>> So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; >>> to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! >>> "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] >> This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th >> century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized >> their infamous response to the Irish famines. >> >> Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November >> 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the >> high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who >> still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the >> experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last >> 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. >> >> The real comparison is not with the Marxist/Leninist-style central >> economies -- everybody (including the former USSR, China, etc.) have >> figured out that was a failed experiment, too -- but with the socially >> progressive democracies like the Nordic countries. Reagan, Bush, >> Thatcher and their ilk are dinosaurs, still justifying essentially >> mean-spirited, punitive social policies in the name of (non-existent) >> pragmatism, or worse, some sort of twisted concept of "freedom". The >> ideas are bankrupt, the average guy is just being chumped by corporate >> interests running unchecked. The two-bit philosophizing is just adding >> insult to injury. > > The argument the right usually replies with is that those countries > have the advantage of (relatively) homogenous populations, which is a > rather racist and jingoistic argument. Right. I suppose there's still a little room for argument on how far the government should go in equalizing health care, but I think the idea that it's economically damaging is obsolete. The continued reduction of government support for education and R&D seems obvious economic suicide. On a related note, I wonder how many of those who bemoan the loss of US "manufacturing" jobs ever actually worked in a factory. I did, briefly. The job became available when the kid I replaced lost his hand in the machine I was hired to operate. I don't see how a factory worker would ever want their kids to do factory work -- all the ones I know wouldn't. Given our relative wealth, US society should be much further along the development curve. Regressive, punitive and obsolete ideologies are to blame.       Date: 03 Jul 2007 09:02:36 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <psSdnbRhN7HIphfbnZ2dnUVZ_uygnZ2d@comcast.com >, Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net > wrote: > I suppose there's still a little room for argument on how far the > government should go in equalizing health care, but I think the idea > that it's economically damaging is obsolete. The economic damage is in not equalizing health care so that every person in the US has access to good care. > The continued reduction of government support for education and R&D > seems obvious economic suicide. Hey! We got a war to pay for. Sacrifices have to be made. We trust in the ingenuity of future Americans to figure out how to pay for today's excesses... umm, successes.         Date: 03 Jul 2007 19:23:55 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:02:36 -0500, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote: > >> The continued reduction of government support for education and R&D >> seems obvious economic suicide. > >Hey! We got a war to pay for. Sacrifices have to be made. We trust in >the ingenuity of future Americans to figure out how to pay for today's >excesses... umm, successes. Damn straight! Maybe we can just outsource the health care to the third world so the US masses can afford it. I can visualize the support line quality now!           Date: 03 Jul 2007 16:05:53 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <2f8l83p5kbmhk1jm5homtbgumajdrmpnkc@4ax.com >, still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:02:36 -0500, Tim McNamara > <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > > > > >> The continued reduction of government support for education and > >> R&D seems obvious economic suicide. > > > >Hey! We got a war to pay for. Sacrifices have to be made. We > >trust in the ingenuity of future Americans to figure out how to pay > >for today's excesses... umm, successes. > > Damn straight! > > Maybe we can just outsource the health care to the third world so the > US masses can afford it. I can visualize the support line quality > now! "Thank you for calling QualCare Incorporated. Your call is being answered by an automated system. For actual assistance at any time, hang up and dial 9-1-1. - if you are obsessive compulsive, please press "1" repeatedly. - if you are co-dependent, please press "2" to help someone else. - if you suffer from multiple personality disorder, please press "3", "4", "5" and "6". - if you are paranoid-delusional, we know who you are and what you want. Just stay on the line so we can trace the call. - if you are schizophrenic, listen carefully and a little voice will tell you which number to press. - if you are manic-depressive, it doesn't matter which number you press. No one will answer anyway. Thank you and have a nice day."   Date: 02 Jul 2007 05:55:56 From: lightninglad Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 1:20 am, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net > wrote: > [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] > > In article <qPnhi.287$SJ1....@fe05.news.easynews.com>, > > Ride-A-Lot <mitchell@[nospam]schnauzers.ws> wrote: > > Bill Sornson wrote: > > > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > > think that people actually believe what he says without looking at > > the history books. > > Interestingly enough, when people do examine his claims line by line > they are remarkably accurate. You can validly disagree with his values, > his attitude, his conclusions, his grandstanding technique or even just > dislike his personality but when it comes to the facts the guy does his > homework. Where he falls down as a documentarian is that he sometimes > misses the correct context in which to place those facts. > > When it comes to health care, the field in which I work, the system we > have in the US is inexcusably broken. It costs too much and doesn't > deliver adequately. The American health care system is ranked, IIRC, > 37th in terms of outcomes but 1st in cost. We spend twice as much as > the next most expensive country for health care for poorer outcomes > (that's not all the health care system's fault, BTW- the American > sedentary lifestyle and rampant obesity are important contributors to > poorer outcomes. We're in worse health to begin with and that affects > outcomes). > > Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, which > in turn means that they do not have good access to health care services. > Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs 19% of my take home > income- $31 less per month than my house payment) and inefficient. > Insurance company overhead (including profit and operating costs) > average between 10% and 30% according to industry figures; by > comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How about that, the government > is actually more efficient than "the market." > > Americans will get national healthcare through the government. The > impetus for this is not going to come from Michael Moore and the pinko > Left. It's going to come from the business sector and the Right trying > to find ways to put American businesses on a competitive footing with > companies in the rest of the world. The current hybrid programs in a > few states, ones which impose a de facto health care tax on every child > woman and man by requiring them to buy health insurance or face legal > penalties, will fail due to being too expensive for individuals to > tolerate and too costly for states to subsidize. Interestingly most of > those plans were formulated by insurance industry groups. Hmmm. They > too see the writing on the wall and know that their days are numbered. Well said. Australia had 'Medicare' under a labour government. Everyone had insurance for a 1% levy on their income. The Conservatives are dismantling it so we have the wonderfully overpriced and inefficient American system that sucks money out of those that can least afford it to benefit wealthy corporations. Our government is pumping subsidies in to the private insurance companies and still people are deserting in droves. That's OUR money being given to private enterprise. It's been calculated that a publicly funded health insurance scheme would require a tax levy of around 1.5 to 2% and that would cover the over prescription of useless drugs like Statins. Go on! Ask me - or better still I refer you to Doctor Malcolm Kendrick. Pharmaceutical companies want EVERYONE on prescription drugs. You'll never persuade me that's a good thing. Like the man said, "Don't shoot the messenger."   Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:20:38 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 11:18 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > > owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > > right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > > and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > A radio station around here was financed by donations > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > of the outraged was music to my ears. And you think your joy in the misuse of donations reflects well on yourself? > You sound exactly like one of those smug station > staffers before they were heaved out on to the street. So you believe public assets should be turned over to private corporations who use them to make a profit while ignoring the public interest? Corporate welfare, indeed. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 02 Jul 2007 18:53:03 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183353638.328276.284780@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com > , Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 11:18 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > > > owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > > > right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > > > and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > > > A radio station around here was financed by donations > > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > > of the outraged was music to my ears. > > And you think your joy in the misuse of donations reflects well on > yourself? Do I? > > You sound exactly like one of those smug station > > staffers before they were heaved out on to the street. > > So you believe public assets should be turned over to private > corporations who use them to make a profit while ignoring the public > interest? Do I? > Corporate welfare, indeed. -- Michael Press     Date: 02 Jul 2007 07:55:14 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183353638.328276.284780@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com > , Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 11:18 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > > > owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > > > right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > > > and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > > > A radio station around here was financed by donations > > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > > of the outraged was music to my ears. > > And you think your joy in the misuse of donations reflects well on > yourself? > > > You sound exactly like one of those smug station > > staffers before they were heaved out on to the street. > > So you believe public assets should be turned over to private > corporations who use them to make a profit while ignoring the public > interest? Corporate welfare, indeed. Get off your high horse, and smell the biscuits. -- Michael Press   Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:17:05 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 11:28 pm, Michael Press wrote: > ... Moore is a > rabble rouser, an opportunist, a fear-monger, and a > liar. He pretends to care, but he does not care. Mind reader? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 23:42:12 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > On Jul 1, 11:28 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> ... Moore is a >> rabble rouser, an opportunist, a fear-monger, and a >> liar. He pretends to care, but he does not care. > > Mind reader? Grasper of the obvious.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:15:39 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 11:57 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > >> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > >> what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > >> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > Michael Press wrote: > > Started? > > Tom thinks he invented the V1 and V2 maybe? Nope - those were invented before I was born (indefinite pronouns strike again). The RAF was not able to operate in daylight over German controlled areas of Europe in 1940, and therefore unable to conduct precision bombing on traditional military targets. In the interests of doing something, the RAF conducted nighttime bombing raids on populated areas of Germany (prior to the indiscriminate German bombing of England). -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 02 Jul 2007 18:45:03 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183353339.802317.291470@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 11:57 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > >> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > >> what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > >> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > Michael Press wrote: > > > Started? > > > > Tom thinks he invented the V1 and V2 maybe? > > Nope - those were invented before I was born (indefinite pronouns > strike again). > > The RAF was not able to operate in daylight over German controlled > areas of Europe in 1940, and therefore unable to conduct precision > bombing on traditional military targets. In the interests of doing > something, the RAF conducted nighttime bombing raids on populated > areas of Germany (prior to the indiscriminate German bombing of > England). You said "Winston Churchill that started the deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2". It looks like he did not according to <http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm > Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. The London blitz began September 1941. British abandoned strategic bombing in February 1942, and went to large scale bombing of cities. -- Michael Press       Date: 03 Jul 2007 16:34:08 From: SMS Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Michael Press wrote: > The London blitz began September 1941. > British abandoned strategic bombing in February 1942, > and went to large scale bombing of cities. The large scale bombing of cities _was_ strategic. "Dresden was chosen by the British as a way of breaking the German's hearts. They wanted to show them want wanton destruction was; they wanted to make them think about what Hitler had brought down on their heads."   Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:21:12 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 9:46 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness > > doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by the > > Reagan reactionaries. > > Ah, so you're in favor of "equal time" for (tax-supported) PBS, NPR, the > NYT/LAT/WP (and many other daily papers), Media Matters (a tax-exempt Dem > front group masquerading as a research entity), CBS, NBC, *MSNBC*, Meet the > Press (today's show being the most one-sided I've seen in a LONG time), > COLLEGE FACULTIES, REPORTERS (9-to-1 Democrat voters and supporters), the > Blogosphere, etc etc etc etc??? How about Airhead America? Gonna make them > 50-50 lib/con? Most of those mentioned above already support the corporate governance system. > I'll tell you why Liberal ("Progressive") talk radio has failed miserably: > because people already hear that (whiny, cry-baby, complaining) viewpoint > every single day in nearly every mainstream medium. > > The reason conservative talk radio succeeds is becaue it IS "alternative". Having heard talk radio, its appeal appears to be mostly to the simple- minded who like issue reduced to a few bellowed sound bites. The conclusion from this is obvious. > The funniest comment about the Unfairness Doctrine was that the current > situation is a "market failure". Liberals /hate/ free markets; always have > and always will. > > (BTW, you're completely wrong about the Unfairness Doctrine's history, too. > Look it up.) The Fairness Doctrine was abolished by a Reagan appointed FCC board, and when Congress voted to restore it, Reagan vetoed the bill ((S. 742, 100th Congress). -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:41:57 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > On Jul 1, 9:46 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> >>> If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness >>> doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by the >>> Reagan reactionaries. >> Ah, so you're in favor of "equal time" for (tax-supported) PBS, NPR, the >> NYT/LAT/WP (and many other daily papers), Media Matters (a tax-exempt Dem >> front group masquerading as a research entity), CBS, NBC, *MSNBC*, Meet the >> Press (today's show being the most one-sided I've seen in a LONG time), >> COLLEGE FACULTIES, REPORTERS (9-to-1 Democrat voters and supporters), the >> Blogosphere, etc etc etc etc??? How about Airhead America? Gonna make them >> 50-50 lib/con? > > Most of those mentioned above already support the corporate governance > system. > >> I'll tell you why Liberal ("Progressive") talk radio has failed miserably: >> because people already hear that (whiny, cry-baby, complaining) viewpoint >> every single day in nearly every mainstream medium. >> >> The reason conservative talk radio succeeds is becaue it IS "alternative". > > Having heard talk radio, its appeal appears to be mostly to the simple- > minded who like issue reduced to a few bellowed sound bites. The > conclusion from this is obvious. Precisely, just like pro-wrestling. Buffoons entertaining buffoons. Greg -- http://ticketmastersucks.org       Date: 02 Jul 2007 06:20:57 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote in message news:138gt0565irrc5b@corp.supernews.com... > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> On Jul 1, 9:46 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>> >>>> If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness >>>> doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by the >>>> Reagan reactionaries. >>> Ah, so you're in favor of "equal time" for (tax-supported) PBS, NPR, the >>> NYT/LAT/WP (and many other daily papers), Media Matters (a tax-exempt >>> Dem >>> front group masquerading as a research entity), CBS, NBC, *MSNBC*, Meet >>> the >>> Press (today's show being the most one-sided I've seen in a LONG time), >>> COLLEGE FACULTIES, REPORTERS (9-to-1 Democrat voters and supporters), >>> the >>> Blogosphere, etc etc etc etc??? How about Airhead America? Gonna make >>> them >>> 50-50 lib/con? >> >> Most of those mentioned above already support the corporate governance >> system. >> >>> I'll tell you why Liberal ("Progressive") talk radio has failed >>> miserably: >>> because people already hear that (whiny, cry-baby, complaining) >>> viewpoint >>> every single day in nearly every mainstream medium. >>> >>> The reason conservative talk radio succeeds is becaue it IS >>> "alternative". >> >> Having heard talk radio, its appeal appears to be mostly to the simple- >> minded who like issue reduced to a few bellowed sound bites. The >> conclusion from this is obvious. > > Precisely, just like pro-wrestling. Buffoons entertaining buffoons. > > Greg > -- > http://ticketmastersucks.org If talk radio is "Buffoons entertaining buffoons", why would so many intelligent elite liberals want so badly to be part of it?         Date: 02 Jul 2007 14:14:27 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 06:20:57 -0500, "DI" <di9999@cox.net > wrote: > >If talk radio is "Buffoons entertaining buffoons", why would so many >intelligent elite liberals want so badly to be part of it? It appears that they do at a much lesser extent than the other half, but I suppose it's because they figure if you ignore things then they don't get rebutted. For them, they unfortunately give it about a 10% rebuttal. They use the same lame response rate to offensives against them in the general election and it shows. (Not taking either side, just watching the tennis ball go back and forth :-)           Date: 02 Jul 2007 16:00:10 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <4t1i835l6i0b4kdt7grg4hin6v7u6ip07r@4ax.com >, still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 06:20:57 -0500, "DI" <di9999@cox.net> wrote: > > > > >If talk radio is "Buffoons entertaining buffoons", why would so many > >intelligent elite liberals want so badly to be part of it? Ummm. DI? The elite are conservatives, not liberals. The best wine and brie parties are at Republican headquarters and dinner parties. > It appears that they do at a much lesser extent than the other half, > but I suppose it's because they figure if you ignore things then they > don't get rebutted. For them, they unfortunately give it about a 10% > rebuttal. They use the same lame response rate to offensives against > them in the general election and it shows. The liberals just aren't good at polemics. Did you ever actually listen to Al Franken and his crew on Air America? It was just painful to hear them trying to descend to the psychotic depths of Rush Limbaugh and Anne Coulter (who really does seem to be crazy).       Date: 01 Jul 2007 23:45:06 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko G.T. wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> On Jul 1, 9:46 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>> >>>> If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness >>>> doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by >>>> the Reagan reactionaries. >>> Ah, so you're in favor of "equal time" for (tax-supported) PBS, >>> NPR, the NYT/LAT/WP (and many other daily papers), Media Matters (a >>> tax-exempt Dem front group masquerading as a research entity), CBS, >>> NBC, *MSNBC*, Meet the Press (today's show being the most one-sided >>> I've seen in a LONG time), COLLEGE FACULTIES, REPORTERS (9-to-1 >>> Democrat voters and supporters), the Blogosphere, etc etc etc >>> etc??? How about Airhead America? Gonna make them 50-50 lib/con? >> >> Most of those mentioned above already support the corporate >> governance system. >> >>> I'll tell you why Liberal ("Progressive") talk radio has failed >>> miserably: because people already hear that (whiny, cry-baby, >>> complaining) viewpoint every single day in nearly every mainstream >>> medium. The reason conservative talk radio succeeds is becaue it IS >>> "alternative". >> >> Having heard talk radio, its appeal appears to be mostly to the >> simple- minded who like issue reduced to a few bellowed sound bites. >> The conclusion from this is obvious. > > Precisely, just like pro-wrestling. Buffoons entertaining buffoons. And yet all this angst on the part of Feinstein, Kerry, Clinton (via surrogates only, of course), Dean, etc. Why?   Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:24:00 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 6:00 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > >>> Bill Sornson wrote: > >>>> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive > >>>> leader" S. > >> Johnny Sunset wrote: > >>> Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > >>> context? > > Andrew Muzi wrote: > >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > >> indolent. There's another definition? > SocSecTrainWreck (who?)wrote: > > Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) > > toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of > > Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is > > despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that > > stuff. > > > On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > > share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > > happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > > the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > > years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > > while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you > > should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic > > system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that > > have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits > > of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as > > long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been > > stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much > > wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you > > into blaming it on "progressives". > > So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] Wasn't Reagan popular because he offered $1.25 in government services for $1.00 in taxes? And guess who for the most part earns the interest on government bonds that comes in large part from taxes on wages - those will the capital to invest in such bonds! Heck, David Stockman admitted later on that Reagan's tax policy was intended to make the rich richer. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:20:23 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 5:56 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > <SocSecTrainWreck (who?) anonymously wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 12:47 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > > Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) > > toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of > > Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is > > despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that > > stuff. > > And, the left-wingers are right behind them. The left-wing of the politicos > are trying to restrict rights as much as you claim the right-wing is. Have > you heard about the recent "fairness doctrine" that the left-wing of the > Democrat > Party are trying to impose on the talk radio personalities? This is nothing > less than an attempt to restrict free speech. How about just letting the > people decide what is going to do well in the market place? Air > America failed miserably because no one, NO ONE, listened to it. The > extreme left tried and failed. I don't think that restrictions on free > speech, > especially when it should be up to the public on commercial airwaves, is > an admirable action. If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by the Reagan reactionaries. Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > > share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > > happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > > the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > > years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > > while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you > > should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic > > system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that > > have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits > > of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as > > long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been > > stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much > > wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you > > into blaming it on "progressives". > > And this is different from the rest of the world in what way? Highly > doubtful that the middle class in the rest of the world are making great > strides in economic progress. Because the same forces of oligarchy are at work. [1] Note to Bill Sornson: since "Oz" claims to have killed filed me, I will not address him/her/it directly. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 02 Jul 2007 04:18:12 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183342823.296982.101190@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com > , Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. A radio station around here was financed by donations to then through a foundation. The idea was that they broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices against the axis of evil. One day the people who actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost all the staff because the staff was saying things that the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you never really know where the money is going. The squeals of the outraged was music to my ears. You sound exactly like one of those smug station staffers before they were heaved out on to the street. -- Michael Press       Date: 02 Jul 2007 10:19:54 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Michael Press wrote: > In article > <1183342823.296982.101190@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> > , > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially >> owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the >> right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), >> and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > A radio station around here was financed by donations > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > of the outraged was music to my ears. You're a sociopath. Greg -- http://ticketmastersucks.org         Date: 02 Jul 2007 18:52:28 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <138ictqb3o84tbf@corp.supernews.com >, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote: > Michael Press wrote: > > In article > > <1183342823.296982.101190@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> > > , > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > >> owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > >> right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > >> and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > > > > A radio station around here was financed by donations > > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > > of the outraged was music to my ears. > > You're a sociopath. Diagnosing someone as a sociopath is a delicate matter. Furthermore, the assessment protocol is closely held, and not readily available. You probably do not have the protocol, and if you did and made the above assertion, then you would be up on ethics violations; or else the people who gave you the protocol would be up on ethics violations. -- Michael Press           Date: 02 Jul 2007 14:28:23 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net > wrote in message news:rubrum-84FFAA.11522802072007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com... > In article <138ictqb3o84tbf@corp.supernews.com>, > "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> Michael Press wrote: >> > In article >> > <1183342823.296982.101190@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> >> > , >> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman >> > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially >> >> owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the >> >> right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), >> >> and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. >> > >> > A radio station around here was financed by donations >> > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they >> > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their >> > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up >> > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices >> > against the axis of evil. One day the people who >> > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost >> > all the staff because the staff was saying things that >> > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members >> > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a >> > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my >> > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you >> > never really know where the money is going. The squeals >> > of the outraged was music to my ears. >> >> You're a sociopath. > > Diagnosing someone as a sociopath is a delicate matter. > Furthermore, the assessment protocol is closely held, > and not readily available. You probably do not have > the protocol, and if you did and made the above > assertion, then you would be up on ethics violations; > or else the people who gave you the protocol would be > up on ethics violations. Very rich, indeed. You think pyschology is some secret society or something? Greg -- Ticketbastard tax tracker: http://ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html Dethink to survive - Mclusky             Date: 02 Jul 2007 22:35:18 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <138irfo1sgria73@corp.supernews.com >, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote: > "Michael Press" <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote in message > news:rubrum-84FFAA.11522802072007@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com... > > In article <138ictqb3o84tbf@corp.supernews.com>, > > "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > > >> Michael Press wrote: > >> > In article > >> > <1183342823.296982.101190@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> > >> > , > >> > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > >> > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> Secondly, "Oz" should realize that the airwaves are not commercially > >> >> owned, but are the COMMON property of ALL US citizens (despite the > >> >> right to use them being given away in an act of corporate welfare), > >> >> and theoretically are to be used for the PUBLIC INTEREST. > >> > > >> > A radio station around here was financed by donations > >> > to then through a foundation. The idea was that they > >> > broadcast programs on a variety of popular views. Their > >> > popularity was based on a perception that they spoke up > >> > for the `little guy' and spoke up for small voices > >> > against the axis of evil. One day the people who > >> > actually _owned_ the radio station locked out almost > >> > all the staff because the staff was saying things that > >> > the _owners_ did not like. They threw out staff members > >> > in the presence of armed guards. I was ecstatic in a > >> > combination of Schadenfreud and the triumph of my > >> > conceit that when you give dollars to a charity you > >> > never really know where the money is going. The squeals > >> > of the outraged was music to my ears. > >> > >> You're a sociopath. > > > > Diagnosing someone as a sociopath is a delicate matter. > > Furthermore, the assessment protocol is closely held, > > and not readily available. You probably do not have > > the protocol, and if you did and made the above > > assertion, then you would be up on ethics violations; > > or else the people who gave you the protocol would be > > up on ethics violations. > > Very rich, indeed. You think pyschology is some secret society or > something? I think that you do not know how to diagnose a sociopath. Neither do I know how. Furthermore, you consider an epithet to be an argument. You do not make an effort to actually construct an argument. As to what I think, you need only read what I write. -- Michael Press     Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:46:51 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > If "Oz" [1] was informed, he/she/it would realize the "fairness > doctrine" is not new, but was in place for decades until dumped by the > Reagan reactionaries. Ah, so you're in favor of "equal time" for (tax-supported) PBS, NPR, the NYT/LAT/WP (and many other daily papers), Media Matters (a tax-exempt Dem front group masquerading as a research entity), CBS, NBC, *MSNBC*, Meet the Press (today's show being the most one-sided I've seen in a LONG time), COLLEGE FACULTIES, REPORTERS (9-to-1 Democrat voters and supporters), the Blogosphere, etc etc etc etc??? How about Airhead America? Gonna make them 50-50 lib/con? I'll tell you why Liberal ("Progressive") talk radio has failed miserably: because people already hear that (whiny, cry-baby, complaining) viewpoint every single day in nearly every mainstream medium. The reason conservative talk radio succeeds is becaue it IS "alternative". The funniest comment about the Unfairness Doctrine was that the current situation is a "market failure". Liberals /hate/ free markets; always have and always will. (BTW, you're completely wrong about the Unfairness Doctrine's history, too. Look it up.) BS (have fun)   Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:13:44 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 5:44 pm, SocSecTrainWreck (who?) wrote: > On Jul 1, 12:47 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > > > > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > > >> ... > > >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive > > >> leader" S. > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > > > context? > > > I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > > indolent. There's another definition? > > Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) > toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of > Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is > despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that > stuff. > > On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you > should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic > system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that > have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits > of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as > long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been > stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much > wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you > into blaming it on "progressives". Here is the question: would a LBS proprietor do better if the middle class could afford to spend more on bicycles and related items, or if the very wealthy become even more so at the expense of the middle class? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:05:25 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 5:31 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: >> On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. > > >> Johnny/Tom, > > >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > He knows who he is, that's all that matters, it's probably none of your > business. But I have every right to call out him/her for not being willing to stand behind his/her opinion. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 02 Jul 2007 06:15:54 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183341925.574397.41600@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 5:31 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: >>> On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. >> >> >> Johnny/Tom, >> >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on >> >> usenet. >> >> > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? >> >> He knows who he is, that's all that matters, it's probably none of your >> business. > > But I have every right to call out him/her for not being willing to > stand behind his/her opinion. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful You have the right to call him out, but it won't do you a lot of good because he also has the right to ignore you and all the other nutcases. >   Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:01:37 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 5:28 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > > "Shawn" wrote: > > >> We spend nearly twice as much per capita on health care than Canada. > >> Canada covers everyone though. Don't you think we should be able to > >> cover everyone, and still do better? Or do you have no faith in > >> America's ability to take on tough problems and provide better solutions? > >>http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm > > >> BTW, Canadian life expectancy is a bit higher too. > > > No, I have no confidence in the government to do anything right where it > > concerns taking care of the population or individuals. History is replete > > with examples of government initiatives that have been derailed and/or > > not served the purpose for which they were intended. Government/ > > Big Brother is not the answer to every problem. > > > Oz > > Make that "the answer to any problem" So we should eliminate government, since it is not the answer to any problem? We can start with the military and federal law enforcement then, by "DI's" contention. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:26:13 From: Corvus Corvax Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 7:16 pm, Slack <dont_even_th...@bout.it > wrote: > > Why do we celebrate a women's "choice" to kill her own baby, but I can't > choose to throw-down two In-&-Out cheese burgers w/fries! Babies have more Omega 3 fatty acids. And they taste better. CC Foodie     Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:37:18 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:26:13 -0700, Corvus Corvax <corvuscorvax@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 7:16 pm, Slack <dont_even_th...@bout.it> wrote: >> >> Why do we celebrate a women's "choice" to kill her own baby, but I can't >> choose to throw-down two In-&-Out cheese burgers w/fries! > > Babies have more Omega 3 fatty acids. And they taste better. > > CC > Foodie > So you're Chinese? -- Slack   Date: 01 Jul 2007 15:44:29 From: Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 12:47 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org > wrote: > > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > >> ... > >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive > >> leader" S. > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > > context? > > I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > indolent. There's another definition? Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that stuff. On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you into blaming it on "progressives".     Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:00:20 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko >>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive >>>> leader" S. >> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this >>> context? > A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the >> indolent. There's another definition? SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: > Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) > toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of > Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is > despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that > stuff. > > On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you > should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic > system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that > have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits > of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as > long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been > stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much > wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you > into blaming it on "progressives". So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971       Date: 02 Jul 2007 17:52:42 From: Peter Cole Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko A Muzi wrote: > SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: >> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans >> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not >> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of >> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton >> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, >> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized their infamous response to the Irish famines. Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. The real comparison is not with the Marxist/Leninist-style central economies -- everybody (including the former USSR, China, etc.) have figured out that was a failed experiment, too -- but with the socially progressive democracies like the Nordic countries. Reagan, Bush, Thatcher and their ilk are dinosaurs, still justifying essentially mean-spirited, punitive social policies in the name of (non-existent) pragmatism, or worse, some sort of twisted concept of "freedom". The ideas are bankrupt, the average guy is just being chumped by corporate interests running unchecked. The two-bit philosophizing is just adding insult to injury.         Date: 03 Jul 2007 03:40:59 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <SMidnfCW4rg27hTbnZ2dnUVZ_tunnZ2d@comcast.com >, Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net > wrote: > A Muzi wrote: > > > SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: > > >> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > >> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > >> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > >> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > >> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > >> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > > > > > So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > > to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > > > > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] > > This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th > century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized > their infamous response to the Irish famines. > > Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November > 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the > high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who > still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the > experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last > 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. There is no way the USA can adopt the Scandinavian method. The collection of differences is unbounded. Climate is one. Size is another. The USA is too damn big to sit back and be a cozy little family with a benign paternalistic system. The rest of the world will not allow it. -- Michael Press           Date: 03 Jul 2007 07:10:00 From: Peter Cole Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Michael Press wrote: > In article > <SMidnfCW4rg27hTbnZ2dnUVZ_tunnZ2d@comcast.com>, > Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote: > >> A Muzi wrote: >> >>> SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: >>>> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans >>>> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not >>>> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of >>>> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton >>>> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, >>>> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. >>> So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; >>> to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! >>> >>> "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] >> This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th >> century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized >> their infamous response to the Irish famines. >> >> Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November >> 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the >> high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who >> still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the >> experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last >> 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. > > There is no way the USA can adopt the Scandinavian > method. The collection of differences is unbounded. > Climate is one. Size is another. The USA is too damn > big to sit back and be a cozy little family with a > benign paternalistic system. The rest of the world will > not allow it. > Since when did the US start caring about the rest of the world? Interesting point about the climate. Never heard that before.             Date: 03 Jul 2007 17:29:40 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <iKadnZ_iEuMVsxfbnZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@comcast.com >, Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net > wrote: > Michael Press wrote: > > In article > > <SMidnfCW4rg27hTbnZ2dnUVZ_tunnZ2d@comcast.com>, > > Peter Cole <peter_cole@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> A Muzi wrote: > >> > >>> SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: > >>>> On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > >>>> share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > >>>> happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > >>>> the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > >>>> years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > >>>> while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > >>> So you 'progressives' would go with 'from each according to his ability; > >>> to each according to his needs'? [lenin] Bah! > >>> > >>> "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] > >> This debate is well over 100 years old, going back at least to the 19th > >> century laissez-faire principles of the English, which rationalized > >> their infamous response to the Irish famines. > >> > >> Jeffrey Sachs wrote an interesting cover page editorial in the November > >> 2006 issue of Scientific American comparing the progress of the > >> high-tax, high-income, Nordic countries to those like the US & GB who > >> still follow laissez-faire social policies. His conclusion: the > >> experiment is over, those countries have beaten us handily over the last > >> 50 years, both economically and in quality of life. > > > > There is no way the USA can adopt the Scandinavian > > method. The collection of differences is unbounded. > > Climate is one. Size is another. The USA is too damn > > big to sit back and be a cozy little family with a > > benign paternalistic system. The rest of the world will > > not allow it. > > > > Since when did the US start caring about the rest of the world? > Interesting point about the climate. Never heard that before. It is not a matter of what USA foreign policy cares about. The USA has too much mass to be ignored, hence the rest of the world will treat the USA differently from the way they treat Scandinavia. -- Michael Press       Date: 01 Jul 2007 23:11:56 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "A Muzi" <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote in message news:138gcgtsv9s2j9d@corp.supernews.com... > "Government is not the answer. Government is the problem" [Reagan] Amen, bro! Amen! Oz     Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:56:01 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko <SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net > wrote in message news:1183329869.531191.98490@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 12:47 pm, A Muzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote: > Yeah. Progressive means to me that we strive ("progress", as a verb) > toward achieving the promise and the idealism of the Declaration of > Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, which is > despicable to the right wing because they don't believe in any of that > stuff. And, the left-wingers are right behind them. The left-wing of the politicos are trying to restrict rights as much as you claim the right-wing is. Have you heard about the recent "fairness doctrine" that the left-wing of the Democrat Party are trying to impose on the talk radio personalities? This is nothing less than an attempt to restrict free speech. How about just letting the people decide what is going to do well in the market place? Air America failed miserably because no one, NO ONE, listened to it. The extreme left tried and failed. I don't think that restrictions on free speech, especially when it should be up to the public on commercial airwaves, is an admirable action. > On an economic scale, to me, progressive means that all Americans > share in the economic growth of our country, something that has not > happened for about 30 years. Since the mid-70s, real income growth of > the middle class has been near zero, with the growth of the Clinton > years offset by negative or flat growth most of the rest of the time, > while the very wealthiest Americans have become much better off. > Here's news for ya Muzi: if you think you're not as well off as you > should be after all your hard work, it's because the current economic > system has basically taken from the productive, i.e., the people that > have made the American economy what it is today, and given the fruits > of their productivity to the very wealthiest. You can argue this as > long as you want but this is a fact: middle class real income has been > stagnant for 30 years while the wealthy have become much, much > wealthier. And they are doing it partly by suckering guys like you > into blaming it on "progressives". And this is different from the rest of the world in what way? Highly doubtful that the middle class in the rest of the world are making great strides in economic progress.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 15:28:44 From: Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 6:54 am, Ride-A-Lot <mitchell@[nospam]schnauzers.ws > wrote: > SocSecTrainWr...@earthlink.net wrote: > > On Jun 30, 1:47 am, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me> wrote: > >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > > Because (LOL) you might care (LOL) about the tens of millions of > > Americans (LOL) that have no health insurnace, or (LOL) they only > > think they do until they need it. (This last one really has me > > ROTFLMAO.) And the uninsured kids: they are just _hilarious_. > > > And that joke about Michael Moore's weight: that's just _so_ funny, > > because (get it?) a fat guy is by definition incapable of doing > > anything of value. Let's all have a hearty laugh about Michael Moore's > > weight, Stop it, I mean it, you're a funny guy, Sornson. My sides > > hurt. Whew! > > The fat bastard started as a comedian (LOL) before he all of a sudden > decided he was a socialist. Assuming you're talking about Moore, he comes from a family of Michigan autoworkers and labor activists. From what I can tell, he has always been a progressive, first as a journalist, and then as a tv and film director. However, dark, satirical humor has always been part of his creativity. Speaking of dark humor, it's gotta be something to see you and Sornson sitting at your computers, LOLling at your own cleverness as you compose your _very_ funny witticisms.     Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:34:23 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko <SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net > wrote in message news:1183328924.617212.69830@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > Assuming you're talking about Moore, he comes from a family of > Michigan autoworkers and labor activists. From what I can tell, he has > always been a progressive, first as a journalist, and then as a tv and > film director. However, dark, satirical humor has always been part of > his creativity. That, in and of itself, says a lot about him. > Speaking of dark humor, it's gotta be something to see you and Sornson > sitting at your computers, LOLling at your own cleverness as you > compose your _very_ funny witticisms. I happen to think that Ride-a-Lot and Sornson are funny as hell. You don't? Oz   Date: 01 Jul 2007 14:33:11 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 4:27 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. > > >> Johnny/Tom, > > >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > I could just killfile you and post away. The fact that I am actually > engaging you in conversation indicates that I am being accountable for what > I write. And if the argument goes badly, you could come back next week with a different pseudonym. As I said, no accountability. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia   Date: 01 Jul 2007 14:31:29 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 4:25 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: > >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. > > >> Johnny/Tom, > > >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > Whatever, Johnny/Tommy. > > This whole discussion has devolved into a playground scrap and, quite > frankly, what your putting forth now is just plain silly. > > When you want to get back to the issue at hand let me know. I want to know why "Oz" is afraid to put his/her real name behind his/ her statements. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia     Date: 01 Jul 2007 21:32:49 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183325489.517972.318880@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 4:25 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: >> >> > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: >> >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. >> >> >> Johnny/Tom, >> >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on >> >> usenet. >> >> > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? >> >> Whatever, Johnny/Tommy. >> >> This whole discussion has devolved into a playground scrap and, quite >> frankly, what your putting forth now is just plain silly. >> >> When you want to get back to the issue at hand let me know. > > I want to know why "Oz" is afraid to put his/her real name behind his/ > her statements. Off to the killfile Johnny/Tommy. See ya, it's been fun.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 14:18:49 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. > > Johnny/Tom, > > I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 17:31:41 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183324729.508901.31990@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. >> >> Johnny/Tom, >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful > He knows who he is, that's all that matters, it's probably none of your business.       Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:36:34 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "DI" <di9999@cox.net > wrote in message news:fXVhi.464934$g24.104261@newsfe12.phx... >> Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? >> >> -- >> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia >> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful >> > He knows who he is, that's all that matters, it's probably none of your > business. DI, thank you. And, it wouldn't have mattered if I had told him my real name anyway. He probably wouldn't have believed me. For that matter, how do we even know his real name is Tom Sherman. Point being, no one know who anyone is on the internet. Oz     Date: 01 Jul 2007 21:27:21 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183324729.508901.31990@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. >> >> Johnny/Tom, >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? I could just killfile you and post away. The fact that I am actually engaging you in conversation indicates that I am being accountable for what I write.     Date: 01 Jul 2007 21:25:37 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183324729.508901.31990@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz"(who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. >> >> Johnny/Tom, >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. > > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? Whatever, Johnny/Tommy. This whole discussion has devolved into a playground scrap and, quite frankly, what your putting forth now is just plain silly. When you want to get back to the issue at hand let me know.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 14:01:51 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 3:54 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously TOP POSTED: > I like your little anonymous BS. Who are you - Johnny Sunset or Tom > Sherm[a]n. Can't tell. You must be new around here. The "Johnny Sunset" is a joke to annoy certain overly uptight people who were offended by the "Johnny NoCom" posts. Go by the signature. Sheesh! It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 21:05:21 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183323711.665291.152230@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. Johnny/Tom, I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on usenet. Oz   Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:57:13 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 3:52 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:22:48 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 3:02 pm, Slack (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: > > >> > On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> > > >> >> This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: > > >> >> Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any > >> >> man > >> >> who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir > >> Winston > >> >> Churchill. ... > > >> > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > >> > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > >> > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > >> And your point is? > > > Since Winston Churchill is being presented as an authority by the > > anonymous "DI", I though illustrating W.C.'s moral character as a > > Conservative politician would be relevant. > > You must be a GRS. A gamma ray spectrometer? I think not. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:34:34 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset wrote: > On Jul 1, 3:52 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:22:48 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >>> On Jul 1, 3:02 pm, Slack (who?) anonymously wrote: >>>> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: >>>>> On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: >>>>>> "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> >>>>>> This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: >>>>>> Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any >>>>>> man >>>>>> who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir >>>> Winston >>>>>> Churchill. ... >>>>> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in >>>>> what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the >>>>> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? >>>> And your point is? >>> Since Winston Churchill is being presented as an authority by the >>> anonymous "DI", I though illustrating W.C.'s moral character as a >>> Conservative politician would be relevant. >> You must be a GRS. > > A gamma ray spectrometer? I think not. LOL, Surely a geek though. Shawn   Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:52:28 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 3:33 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > > Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater > > was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically > > left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian > > values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. > > Can't argue with you there. The neo-cons are hardly conservative. > > > Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. > > There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the > > left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, > > regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth > > (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite > > have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet > > style labor camps. > > Yet. However, killing opposition media and changing the consitution so > that he can stay in power is a pretty good start. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the opposition media has hardly been killed off, and has operated in a way that would be considered treasonous in the US. And if you think that treasonous speech is protected in the US, you are quite naive. > > Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big > > corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks > > like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their > > campaign donations. > > Wow! This must be the first administration to have allowed this kind > of thing to occur under its watch. Now I really am shocked. > > Of course, the Democrats would never, ever, allow anything like this > to happen. Yeah, right. That was the policy of the Clinton Administration to some extent. Of course, Willie Clinton betrayed his base on many issues, and was practically indistinguishable from Bush I and Dole on all issues except pandering to the Christian Coalition. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Socialism for corporations and "free enterprise" for the rest of Americans!"     Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:54:12 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko I like your little anonymous BS. Who are you - Johnny Sunset or Tom Shermon. Can't tell. "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183323148.490858.233210@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 3:33 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: >> >> > Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater >> > was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically >> > left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian >> > values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. >> >> Can't argue with you there. The neo-cons are hardly conservative. >> >> > Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. >> > There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the >> > left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, >> > regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth >> > (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite >> > have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet >> > style labor camps. >> >> Yet. However, killing opposition media and changing the consitution so >> that he can stay in power is a pretty good start. > > As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the opposition media has > hardly been killed off, and has operated in a way that would be > considered treasonous in the US. And if you think that treasonous > speech is protected in the US, you are quite naive. > >> > Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big >> > corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks >> > like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their >> > campaign donations. >> >> Wow! This must be the first administration to have allowed this kind >> of thing to occur under its watch. Now I really am shocked. >> >> Of course, the Democrats would never, ever, allow anything like this >> to happen. Yeah, right. > > That was the policy of the Clinton Administration to some extent. Of > course, Willie Clinton betrayed his base on many issues, and was > practically indistinguishable from Bush I and Dole on all issues > except pandering to the Christian Coalition. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > "Socialism for corporations and "free enterprise" for the rest of > Americans!" >   Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:45:18 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 3:29 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > > Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum > > extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil > > corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- > > democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. > > While shutting down opposition media outlets? > > Yep, there's a great guy for ya! The action was not renewing a broadcast license of a television station that supported violent overthrow of the legitimately ELECTED government. If a US station had done the same, it would have been shut down the same day, not allowed to broadcast for the half-decade remaining in its current licensing period. By the way, the station in question is still free to transmit by satellite and cable. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia Rationality, as the primary cognitive system for comprehending our world, has been rejected in favor of unyielding dogmatic belief. - David Michael Green     Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:52:26 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183322718.346506.112890@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 3:29 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: On Jul 1, 3:29 pm, "Johnny Sunset" or is it "Tom Shermon" anonymously wrote: > The action was not renewing a broadcast license of a television > station that supported violent overthrow of the legitimately ELECTED > government. If a US station had done the same, it would have been shut > down the same day, not allowed to broadcast for the half-decade > remaining in its current licensing period. Same legitimately elected government that changed the constitution so that the president could stay in office without elections? That is definitely a model that we need here. Hell, with that mindset the Clintons would still be in power.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:22:48 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 3:02 pm, Slack (who?) anonymously wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> > > >> This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: > > >> Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any > >> man > >> who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir Winston > >> Churchill. ... > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > And your point is? Since Winston Churchill is being presented as an authority by the anonymous "DI", I though illustrating W.C.'s moral character as a Conservative politician would be relevant. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:52:52 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:22:48 -0700, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 3:02 pm, Slack (who?) anonymously wrote: >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >> > On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> >> >> >> This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: >> >> >> Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any >> >> man >> >> who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir >> Winston >> >> Churchill. ... >> >> > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in >> > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the >> > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? >> >> And your point is? > > Since Winston Churchill is being presented as an authority by the > anonymous "DI", I though illustrating W.C.'s moral character as a > Conservative politician would be relevant. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia You must be a GRS. -- Slack   Date: 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> > > > On Jul 1, 1:32 pm, still me? wrote: > >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:00:55 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: > >> >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > >> >> indolent. There's another definition? > > >> >And conservative means stealing from labor that actually creates > >> >wealth, and gives it to capital which was typically earned by means > >> >other than labor. > > >> I don't know that that's the definition of conservative :-) However, > >> it does fit most of the past and current robber barons, who were > >> traditionally conservative, and are now neo-conservative - neo being > >> even more on target for your statement. > > > I was misusing conservative in its true sense in response to misuse of > > progressive. > > > Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater > > was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically > > left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian > > values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. > > >> >Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum > >> >extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil > >> >corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- > >> >democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. > > >> hardly a guy to hang your hat on, but giving money back to the people > >> is never a bad thing. I expect they have their own version of neo-cons > >> soaking up a lot of it though. > > > Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. > > There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the > > left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, > > regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth > > (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite > > have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet > > style labor camps. > > >> >Has there even been a fascist government the US did not like, as long > >> >as the leaders of that government did not challenge the supremacy of > >> >US based corporations? > > >> I'm confused, are we including the fascist regime in power in the USA > >> right now? :-) > > > Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big > > corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks > > like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their > > campaign donations. > > > -- > > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > > "Socialism for corporations and "free enterprise" for the rest of > > Americans!" > > This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: > > Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man > who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir Winston > Churchill. ... Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 02 Jul 2007 06:26:45 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183318948.273816.17770@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful Are you talking about the 1920's conflict between the British and Kurds? That has never been proven, as a matter of fact it's been pointed out the technology to deliver gas by aircraft was not developed until the mid 1930's, then by the Germans. >     Date: 02 Jul 2007 03:44:27 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183318948.273816.17770@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the Started? > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? -- Michael Press       Date: 01 Jul 2007 23:57:22 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko > Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in >> what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the >> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? Michael Press wrote: > Started? Tom thinks he invented the V1 and V2 maybe? -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971     Date: 01 Jul 2007 13:02:44 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:42:28 -0700, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 1, 2:32 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote:> >> >> This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: >> >> Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any >> man >> who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir Winston >> Churchill. ... > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia And your point is? -- Slack   Date: 01 Jul 2007 12:00:05 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 1:32 pm, still me? wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:00:55 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: > >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > >> indolent. There's another definition? > > >And conservative means stealing from labor that actually creates > >wealth, and gives it to capital which was typically earned by means > >other than labor. > > I don't know that that's the definition of conservative :-) However, > it does fit most of the past and current robber barons, who were > traditionally conservative, and are now neo-conservative - neo being > even more on target for your statement. I was misusing conservative in its true sense in response to misuse of progressive. Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. > >Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum > >extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil > >corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- > >democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. > > hardly a guy to hang your hat on, but giving money back to the people > is never a bad thing. I expect they have their own version of neo-cons > soaking up a lot of it though. Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet style labor camps. > >Has there even been a fascist government the US did not like, as long > >as the leaders of that government did not challenge the supremacy of > >US based corporations? > > I'm confused, are we including the fascist regime in power in the USA > right now? :-) Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their campaign donations. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "Socialism for corporations and "free enterprise" for the rest of Americans!"     Date: 02 Jul 2007 14:19:18 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:00:05 -0700, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: <snip > >Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater >was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically >left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian >values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. Well, at least Barry was half way there. You are right, today's neo-con is a fascist to the core. He plays social values mostly for popular support and to mask his true objectives. You have to admire their game plan though - putting the puppet Bush in office and continuing to pull his strings any way they want, and putting Cheney, a patron saint of neo-cons, in the power position. Simply brilliant maneuvering. The robber-barrons live, right down to the removal of anti-trust barriers that were implemented to limit them the first time. <snip > >Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big >corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks >like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their >campaign donations. No kidding, see above. Give me a few billion for a measly couple of million any day.     Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:33:55 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183316405.277991.279570@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater > was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically > left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian > values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. Can't argue with you there. The neo-cons are hardly conservative. > Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. > There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the > left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, > regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth > (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite > have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet > style labor camps. Yet. However, killing opposition media and changing the consitution so that he can stay in power is a pretty good start. > Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big > corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks > like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their > campaign donations. Wow! This must be the first administration to have allowed this kind of thing to occur under its watch. Now I really am shocked. Of course, the Democrats would never, ever, allow anything like this to happen. Yeah, right. Oz     Date: 01 Jul 2007 14:32:03 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183316405.277991.279570@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 1, 1:32 pm, still me? wrote: >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:00:55 -0700, Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the >> >> indolent. There's another definition? >> >> >And conservative means stealing from labor that actually creates >> >wealth, and gives it to capital which was typically earned by means >> >other than labor. >> >> I don't know that that's the definition of conservative :-) However, >> it does fit most of the past and current robber barons, who were >> traditionally conservative, and are now neo-conservative - neo being >> even more on target for your statement. > > I was misusing conservative in its true sense in response to misuse of > progressive. > > Most Republican's are no longer conservative. Heck, if Barry Goldwater > was still around, he would be called a RINO for being too politically > left. The days of the Republican Party that supported libertarian > values, fiscal responsibility and small government are long past. > >> >Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum >> >extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil >> >corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- >> >democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. >> >> hardly a guy to hang your hat on, but giving money back to the people >> is never a bad thing. I expect they have their own version of neo-cons >> soaking up a lot of it though. > > Chavez is hardly a saint, but better than his predecessors by far. > There is an unfortunate tendency for some misguided persons on the > left to promote anyone who opposes the right to heroic status, > regardless of there true nature. Any Venezuelan not born to wealth > (almost all of them) are better off under Chavez, and the rich elite > have NOT had their property confiscated or been sent off to Soviet > style labor camps. > >> >Has there even been a fascist government the US did not like, as long >> >as the leaders of that government did not challenge the supremacy of >> >US based corporations? >> >> I'm confused, are we including the fascist regime in power in the USA >> right now? :-) > > Well, the current regime appoints lobbyists and executive from big > corporations to be "regulators" of those corporations, so it looks > like the Bush "Rangers" and "Pioneers" got a great bargain for their > campaign donations. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > "Socialism for corporations and "free enterprise" for the rest of > Americans!" > This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir Winston Churchill. ...       Date: 02 Jul 2007 17:17:42 From: Peter Cole Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko DI wrote: > This all reminds me of a quote of a great Statesman: > > Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man > who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains. -Sir Winston > Churchill. ... > > "Conservative by the time you're 35" "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain." There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this. Paul Addison of Edinburgh University makes this comment: "Surely Churchill can't have used the words attributed to him. He'd been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?" <http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=112 > Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant.   Date: 01 Jul 2007 11:00:55 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 12:47 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > >> ... > >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive > >> leader" S. > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > > context? > > I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > indolent. There's another definition? And conservative means stealing from labor that actually creates wealth, and gives it to capital which was typically earned by means other than labor. Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. Has there even been a fascist government the US did not like, as long as the leaders of that government did not challenge the supremacy of US based corporations? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:29:46 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183312855.973983.175530@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum > extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil > corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- > democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. While shutting down opposition media outlets? Yep, there's a great guy for ya! Oz     Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:32:41 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:00:55 -0700, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: >> I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the >> indolent. There's another definition? > >And conservative means stealing from labor that actually creates >wealth, and gives it to capital which was typically earned by means >other than labor. I don't know that that's the definition of conservative :-) However, it does fit most of the past and current robber barons, who were traditionally conservative, and are now neo-conservative - neo being even more on target for your statement. >Of course Chavez is terrible for giving money back from petroleum >extraction back to the people of Venezuela, instead of foreign oil >corporations and a few wealthy elites who obtained their power by non- >democratic (and otherwise immoral) means. hardly a guy to hang your hat on, but giving money back to the people is never a bad thing. I expect they have their own version of neo-cons soaking up a lot of it though. >Has there even been a fascist government the US did not like, as long >as the leaders of that government did not challenge the supremacy of >US based corporations? I'm confused, are we including the fascist regime in power in the USA right now? :-)       Date: 04 Jul 2007 19:17:08 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 8:30 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe > > > bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended > > target. > > Well! I'm sure that made it all better*. > > Assuming you're in command, how would you react, assuming the survivors > can vote? Hell, anyone reading the next morning's papers can vote. Even > given British bombers, I'd send them off. You? "Strategic Bombing" was a failure from not only a moral point of view, but was also generally ineffective from a military point of view. The resources of the RAF could have been put to better use than indiscriminately bombing German civilians. > *If you're pursuing intent, those whacky moslem Bombing Doctors just > wanted to make the world a better place by immolating Scotsmen. Does > that make it OK by you? What does this have to do with the discussion? Since it has been brought up, it is certainly no worse morally than killing civilians with expensive, high-tech bombs and missiles in a country that was illegally attacked and invaded. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia "We have just got to hope, that whatever retaliatory action the Bush government undertakes to satisfy its own people for the twin towers does the least possible damage to the struggle against terrorism." - Sir Michael Howard         Date: 04 Jul 2007 21:10:13 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > On Jul 4, 8:30 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe >> >>> bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended >>> target. >> >> Well! I'm sure that made it all better*. >> >> Assuming you're in command, how would you react, assuming the >> survivors can vote? Hell, anyone reading the next morning's papers >> can vote. Even given British bombers, I'd send them off. You? > > "Strategic Bombing" was a failure from not only a moral point of view, > but was also generally ineffective from a military point of view. The > resources of the RAF could have been put to better use than > indiscriminately bombing German civilians. > >> *If you're pursuing intent, those whacky moslem Bombing Doctors just >> wanted to make the world a better place by immolating Scotsmen. Does >> that make it OK by you? > > What does this have to do with the discussion? > > Since it has been brought up, it is certainly no worse morally than > killing civilians with expensive, high-tech bombs and missiles in a > country that was illegally attacked and invaded. If those bombs and missiles /targeted/ innocent civilians, you'd have a point. (Oh, except for that illegal attack and invasion part. Just ask Hillary.)       Date: 04 Jul 2007 18:21:57 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 8:13 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:. > > > On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > >> > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > >> > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas > >> > > > > > > > > > on the Kurds in > >> > > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that > >> > > > > > > > > > started the > > >> > > > > > > > > Started? > > >> > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in > >> > > > > > > > > > WW2? > > >> > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with > >> > > > > > > > incendiary bombs > >> > > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of > >> > > > > > > > civilian > >> > > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > >> > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > >> > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > >> > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive > >> > > > > > of > >> > > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > >> > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against > >> > > > > > uncivilised > >> > > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > >> > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral > >> > > > > > standard > >> > > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist > >> > > > > > [1]. > > >> > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my > >> > > > > > suggesting > >> > > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using > >> > > > > > Churchill as > >> > > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > >> > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > >> > > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > >> > > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > >> > > > > Churchill into the discussion. > > >> > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > >> > > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > > >> > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts > >> > > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your > >> > > unsupported assertion different from the written > >> > > history? According to you, no different at all. Both > >> > > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything > >> > > you say? > > >> > The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due > >> > to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, > >> > 1940. > > >> > August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers > >> > unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. > > >> > September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas > >> > in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German > >> > cities. > > >> This page records > >> Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. > >> Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. > > >> <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> > > > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe > > bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended > > target. > > How would they know they was off course and it was accidental if in fact it > was, you're not very smart are you? > > It's obvious you're being negative just to argue, I don't see any reason to > waste anymore time with you. And "NO" you haven't won anything before you > start thinking I'm whipped, you cannot and have not proven a thing except > you are not capable understanding the basic facts and are obsessed with > trying to change history. Adios, Johnny, Sherman, or Tom, whatever you > call yourself. Boo hoo hoo, the anonymous sniper doesn't want to play anymore (until he/she/it comes back with a new pseudonym). -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:27:07 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 4:51 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > >> Bill Sornson wrote: > >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} > >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Ride-A-Lot wrote: > >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the > >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern > >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. > >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make > >> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. > G.T. wrote: > > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > > financially take advantage of that. > > Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets > per household. Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the > overwhelming bulk of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our > labor mobility is higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true > resource. Average income is misleading. What is the average weight of one gorilla and 100 marmosets? The huge increases in wages for relatively few compensate for the general decline for most when the average is calculated. The rising cost of college tuition, and the falling wages for jobs other than those that assist the already rich in becoming richer, means a lower quality of life for most based on the pure material basis that US economists and pundits love so much, not to mention the less quantifiable but more important considerations. > p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. When you hear negativity and envy > about 'the rich', look at their dissolute ineffective progeny - whatever > it us , it doesn't 'stick'. Which all works out just fine. Really? The rich put the real money in trust funds so the progeny can not waste it. We live in a society where being related to and knowing the right people is much more important for success than hard work and ability. Working hard and doing one's work well is rewarded by being assigned more work. P.S. DON'T even consider getting to sick to work if you live in the US and are not independently wealthy or have someone to support you - it will make your life a living hell for years to come [1]. [1] Been there, done that. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:26:40 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 11:19 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > >> ... > >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a > >> progressive leader" S. > > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > > context? > > Since Mr. Sherman doesn't seem capable of asking a direct question, guess > he'll never know! LOL Nice way to duck the question, Sornson. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 00:30:13 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset wrote: > On Jun 30, 11:19 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: >> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a >>>> progressive leader" S. >> >>> Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this >>> context? >> >> Since Mr. Sherman doesn't seem capable of asking a direct question, >> guess he'll never know! LOL > > Nice way to duck the question, Sornson. ROTFL   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:24:05 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 4:51 pm, Andrew Muzi wrote: > >> Bill Sornson wrote: > >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} > >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Ride-A-Lot wrote: > >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the > >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern > >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. > >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make > >> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. > G.T. wrote: > > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > > financially take advantage of that. > > Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets > per household. Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the > overwhelming bulk of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our > labor mobility is higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true > resource. Average income is misleading. What is the average weight of one gorilla and 100 marmosets? The huge increases in wages for relatively few compensate for the general decline for most when the average is calculated. The rising cost of college tuition, and the falling wages for jobs other than those that assist the already rich in becoming richer, means a lower quality of life for most based on the pure material basis that US economists and pundits love so much, not to mention the less quantifiable but more important considerations. > p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. When you hear negativity and envy > about 'the rich', look at their dissolute ineffective progeny - whatever > it us , it doesn't 'stick'. Which all works out just fine. Really? The rich put the real money in trust funds so the progeny can not waste it. We live in a society where being related to and knowing the right people is much more important for success than hard work and ability. Working hard and doing one's work well is rewarded by being assigned more work. P.S. DON'T even consider getting to sick to work if you live in the US and are not independently wealthy or have someone to support you - it will make your life a living hell for years to come [1]. [1] Been there, done that. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:12:06 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 2:37 pm, "G.T." aka Greg Thomas wrote: > Ride-A-Lot wrote: > > Bill Sornson wrote: > >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > > think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the > > history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern > > praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. > > > Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make one > > of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. > > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > financially take advantage of that. Wait until the Chinese figure out that once all the good blue collar jobs have been moved from the US, the overpaid management jobs can also be outsourced - replace a $20,000,000/year US CEO with a Chinese CEO at 1/100 of the cost. :) -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:06:14 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > ... > Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive > leader" S. Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this context? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 12:47:02 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: >> ... >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive >> leader" S. Johnny Sunset wrote: > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > context? I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the indolent. There's another definition? -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971       Date: 04 Jul 2007 17:22:46 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 5:12 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously wrote: > On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:57:12 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > On Jul 4, 4:33 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously snipes: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > On Jul 4, 11:44 am, " Slack" who? wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > >> wrote: > >> >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading > >> terror > >> >> > among others ever been moral? > > >> >> > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if > >> it is > >> >> > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > >> >> Whose moral code are you using? > > >> >> Please define [your definition] terror. > > >> > Refer back to this quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned > >> > gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - > >> > Winston Churchill. > > >> > Apparently W.C. thought is was moral to attack Arabs and Kurds with > >> > poison gas to terrorize them, presumably since they were NOT white, > >> > Christian Europeans. > > >> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? > > >> Let's try this again: Whose moral code are you using to make a moral > >> judgement call on what Churchill did or didn't believe? > > > The question as written does not make sense - how can one make "moral > > judgment call" over questions of what a particular person's beliefs > > were? What a person believes is independent of moral codes. > > You might want to swing by your local book store and pick up a good > dictionary. What does my having a dictionary have to do with you creating a logical question? > >> Here, I'll show you how this works:>> > "Has spreading terror among > >> others ever been moral? > > >> Actually, yes it has been. God used [the spread of] terror many-many > >> times in the old testament. Terror is again dispensed in the the New > >> Testament in the book of Acts and Revelation. > > > Lets us stick to the real world, and ignore mythology. > > > -- > > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > > While you're at the bookstore, might as well pick up a Bible, too.... > while there's still time. How about joining the reality based community while there is still time? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful       Date: 04 Jul 2007 17:21:02 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > > > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > > > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > > > > > Churchill into the discussion. > > > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > > > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > > > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts > > > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your > > > unsupported assertion different from the written > > > history? According to you, no different at all. Both > > > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything > > > you say? > > > The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due > > to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, > > 1940. > > > August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers > > unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. > > > September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas > > in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German > > cities. > > This page records > Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. > Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. > > <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended target. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful         Date: 05 Jul 2007 04:02:30 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183594862.839093.28070@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > > > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > > > > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > > > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > > > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > > > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > > > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > > > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > > > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > > > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > > > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > > > > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > > > > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > > > > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > > > > > > Churchill into the discussion. > > > > > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > > > > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > > > > > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts > > > > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your > > > > unsupported assertion different from the written > > > > history? According to you, no different at all. Both > > > > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything > > > > you say? > > > > > The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due > > > to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, > > > 1940. > > > > > August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers > > > unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. > > > > > September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas > > > in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German > > > cities. > > > > This page records > > Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. > > Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. > > > > <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> > > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe > bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended > target. On 27 August 1940, Winston Churchill sent a letter to Adolf Hitler. ------------------------------- Adolf Hitler Somewhere in the Hartz Mountains Dear Adolf, Whoops! Sincerely, Winston Churchill Shopkeeper, KCB. ------------------------------- -- Michael Press           Date: 04 Jul 2007 21:11:09 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Michael Press wrote: > In article > <1183594862.839093.28070@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman > <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>> On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> >>>>>> On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>>>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on >>>>>>>>>>>> the Kurds in what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill >>>>>>>>>>>> that started the >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Started? >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? >>> >>>>>>>>>> The first combined use of high explosive bombs with >>>>>>>>>> incendiary bombs to maximize both civilian casualties and >>>>>>>>>> the destruction of civilian housing was the RAF raid on >>>>>>>>>> Cologne on May 30, 1942. >>> >>>>>>>>> London blitz began September 1940. >>> >>>>>>>> The victors write the history books. >>> >>>>>>>> The RAF was the first to use methods that were more >>>>>>>> destructive of life and housing than mere explosive bombing >>>>>>>> under Churchill. >>> >>>>>>>> "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against >>>>>>>> uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston >>>>>>>> Churchill. >>> >>>>>>>> Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral >>>>>>>> standard one would want to live up to, unless one is a white >>>>>>>> supremacist [1]. >>> >>>>>>>> [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my >>>>>>>> suggesting that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that >>>>>>>> using Churchill as an authority on proper belief has its moral >>>>>>>> difficulties. >>> >>>>>>> My contribution here is limited to challenging >>>>>>> your assertion of `started'. You need to go >>>>>>> back in the thread to see who actually brought >>>>>>> Churchill into the discussion. >>> >>>>>> If you want to believe official histories written by the victors >>>>>> as gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. >>> >>>>> You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts >>>>> contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your >>>>> unsupported assertion different from the written >>>>> history? According to you, no different at all. Both >>>>> are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything >>>>> you say? >>> >>>> The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing >>>> due to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on >>>> July 7, 1940. >>> >>>> August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers >>>> unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. >>> >>>> September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian >>>> areas in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on >>>> German cities. >>> >>> This page records >>> Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. >>> Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. >>> >>> <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> >> >> Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe >> bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended >> target. > > On 27 August 1940, Winston Churchill sent a letter to Adolf Hitler. > > ------------------------------- > Adolf Hitler > Somewhere in the Hartz Mountains > > Dear Adolf, > > Whoops! > > Sincerely, > > Winston Churchill > Shopkeeper, KCB. > ------------------------------- This new and improved (FUNNY) Michael Press is much appreciated! LOL         Date: 04 Jul 2007 20:30:12 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe > bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended > target. Well! I'm sure that made it all better*. Assuming you're in command, how would you react, assuming the survivors can vote? Hell, anyone reading the next morning's papers can vote. Even given British bombers, I'd send them off. You? *If you're pursuing intent, those whacky moslem Bombing Doctors just wanted to make the world a better place by immolating Scotsmen. Does that make it OK by you? -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971         Date: 04 Jul 2007 20:13:47 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183594862.839093.28070@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> > > Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >> > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: >> > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: >> > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas >> > > > > > > > > > on the Kurds in >> > > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that >> > > > > > > > > > started the >> >> > > > > > > > > Started? >> >> > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in >> > > > > > > > > > WW2? >> >> > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with >> > > > > > > > incendiary bombs >> > > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of >> > > > > > > > civilian >> > > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. >> >> > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. >> >> > > > > > The victors write the history books. >> >> > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive >> > > > > > of >> > > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. >> >> > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against >> > > > > > uncivilised >> > > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. >> >> > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral >> > > > > > standard >> > > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist >> > > > > > [1]. >> >> > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my >> > > > > > suggesting >> > > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using >> > > > > > Churchill as >> > > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. >> >> > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging >> > > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go >> > > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought >> > > > > Churchill into the discussion. >> >> > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as >> > > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. >> >> > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts >> > > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your >> > > unsupported assertion different from the written >> > > history? According to you, no different at all. Both >> > > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything >> > > you say? >> >> > The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due >> > to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, >> > 1940. >> >> > August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers >> > unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. >> >> > September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas >> > in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German >> > cities. >> >> This page records >> Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. >> Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. >> >> <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> > > Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe > bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended > target. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful > > How would they know they was off course and it was accidental if in fact it was, you're not very smart are you? It's obvious you're being negative just to argue, I don't see any reason to waste anymore time with you. And "NO" you haven't won anything before you start thinking I'm whipped, you cannot and have not proven a thing except you are not capable understanding the basic facts and are obsessed with trying to change history. Adios, Johnny, Sherman, or Tom, whatever you call yourself. >           Date: 04 Jul 2007 21:06:41 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko DI wrote: > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in > message news:1183594862.839093.28070@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... >> On Jul 4, 5:40 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>> On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> >>>>>> On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>>>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Johnny Sunset wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas >>>>>>>>>>>> on the Kurds in >>>>>>>>>>>> what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that >>>>>>>>>>>> started the >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Started? >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in >>>>>>>>>>>> WW2? >>> >>>>>>>>>> The first combined use of high explosive bombs with >>>>>>>>>> incendiary bombs >>>>>>>>>> to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of >>>>>>>>>> civilian >>>>>>>>>> housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. >>> >>>>>>>>> London blitz began September 1940. >>> >>>>>>>> The victors write the history books. >>> >>>>>>>> The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. >>> >>>>>>>> "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against >>>>>>>> uncivilised >>>>>>>> tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. >>> >>>>>>>> Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral >>>>>>>> standard >>>>>>>> one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist >>>>>>>> [1]. >>> >>>>>>>> [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my >>>>>>>> suggesting >>>>>>>> that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using >>>>>>>> Churchill as >>>>>>>> an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. >>> >>>>>>> My contribution here is limited to challenging >>>>>>> your assertion of `started'. You need to go >>>>>>> back in the thread to see who actually brought >>>>>>> Churchill into the discussion. >>> >>>>>> If you want to believe official histories written by the victors >>>>>> as gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. >>> >>>>> You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts >>>>> contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your >>>>> unsupported assertion different from the written >>>>> history? According to you, no different at all. Both >>>>> are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything >>>>> you say? >>> >>>> The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing >>>> due to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on >>>> July 7, 1940. >>> >>>> August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers >>>> unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. >>> >>>> September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian >>>> areas in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on >>>> German cities. >>> >>> This page records >>> Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. >>> Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. >>> >>> <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm> >> >> Note that the August 23/24 air raids on London were by Luftwaffe >> bombers that were off course and were NOT bombing their intended >> target. >> >> -- >> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia >> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful >> >> > How would they know they was off course and it was accidental if in > fact it was, you're not very smart are you? > > It's obvious you're being negative just to argue, I don't see any > reason to waste anymore time with you. And "NO" you haven't won > anything before you start thinking I'm whipped, you cannot and have > not proven a thing except you are not capable understanding the basic > facts and are obsessed with trying to change history. Adios, > Johnny, Sherman, or Tom, whatever you call yourself. "Nazi empathizer"?       Date: 02 Jul 2007 09:39:07 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <138fq5dlcfk229a@corp.supernews.com >, A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org > wrote: > > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > >> ... Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a > >> progressive leader" S. > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > > context? > > I thought it meant stealing from the productive and giving to the > indolent. There's another definition? Good grief, Andrew, that's just incredibly rude and judgmental. How about "providing a minimum decent standard of living for those who can't care for themselves" as a different construction? Disabled veterans? Schizophrenics? People with MS? Are these people "indolent?" My best friend from high school just went on Social Security disability. He has an inherited neurological disorder (spinocerebellar ataxia) which renders him unemployable in the competitive job market. He's going to spend the rest of his life- he's 48- trying to make ends meet on less than $1500 per month. Is he "indolent" too? As far as "stealing from the productive and giving to the indolent" goes, that would be a reasonable definition of capitalism as it is all too often mis-enacted: stealing from labor to give to the executives.     Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:19:42 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset wrote: > On Jun 30, 10:44 am, Bill Sornson wrote: >> ... >> Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a >> progressive leader" S. > > Does Sornson even know what the word progressive means in this > context? Since Mr. Sherman doesn't seem capable of asking a direct question, guess he'll never know! LOL   Date: 30 Jun 2007 21:04:58 From: Johnny Sunset Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 10:20 am, Tim McNamara wrote: > ...We spend twice as much as > the next most expensive country for health care for poorer outcomes > (that's not all the health care system's fault, BTW- the American > sedentary lifestyle... Finding the motivation to exercise can be hard when one is working 60-75 hours per week. > ... > Americans will get national healthcare through the government. The > impetus for this is not going to come from Michael Moore and the pinko > Left. It's going to come from the business sector and the Right trying > to find ways to put American businesses on a competitive footing with > companies in the rest of the world.... I thought they were doing that by outsourcing the jobs - blue collar AND white collar? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 30 Jun 2007 23:29:56 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183262698.771595.259680@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jun 30, 10:20 am, Tim McNamara wrote: > > ...We spend twice as much as the next most expensive country for > > health care for poorer outcomes (that's not all the health care > > system's fault, BTW- the American sedentary lifestyle... > > Finding the motivation to exercise can be hard when one is working > 60-75 hours per week. Not to say that this isn't common, however none of my friends have work schedules like this. I do work with a lot of people who do have second jobs- all of them work in nursing homes and most are social workers. In some cases they have been on their jobs for years and still need a second job. > > ... Americans will get national healthcare through the government. > > The impetus for this is not going to come from Michael Moore and > > the pinko Left. It's going to come from the business sector and > > the Right trying to find ways to put American businesses on a > > competitive footing with companies in the rest of the world.... > > I thought they were doing that by outsourcing the jobs - blue collar > AND white collar? Some are. I was thinking more about jobs that are not readily outsource-able, such as small business employees.   Date: 30 Jun 2007 11:25:32 From: JD Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 29, 10:47 pm, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me > wrote: > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL HAHAA, Plump Fiction. I'd punch that fat fuck in the face, but am afraid of losing my fist in that pile of blob with the lying, gaping hatchet wound in it. JD     Date: 02 Jul 2007 12:47:31 From: Dzontra_Volta Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko > > HAHAA, Plump Fiction. I'd punch that fat fuck in the face, but am > afraid of losing my fist in that pile of blob with the lying, gaping > hatchet wound in it. > > JD you americans wouldnt be so angry at him and you woulndt pay him this much atention if you werent affraid he was right. i dont like the man either, hes to much arogant for my taste, but in basic things he is right. usa and therefore the whole world is indirectly controlled by multinational companies and the way things are now suits them and thats why they are doing everthing they can to keep it this way. you can say whatever you want, but its common sense. and republicans, well, they are just their allies. Tudli-du-uu!   Date: 30 Jun 2007 02:07:28 From: Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jun 30, 1:47 am, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me > wrote: > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL Because (LOL) you might care (LOL) about the tens of millions of Americans (LOL) that have no health insurnace, or (LOL) they only think they do until they need it. (This last one really has me ROTFLMAO.) And the uninsured kids: they are just _hilarious_. And that joke about Michael Moore's weight: that's just _so_ funny, because (get it?) a fat guy is by definition incapable of doing anything of value. Let's all have a hearty laugh about Michael Moore's weight, Stop it, I mean it, you're a funny guy, Sornson. My sides hurt. Whew!     Date: 04 Jul 2007 13:45:19 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 1:58 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 4, 7:24 am, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > >> Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a time > >> in > >> history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military > >> weapon. > > > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > > among others ever been moral? > > It wasn't used, you might try to read history instead of re-writing it. Whether it was used or not is irrelevant in this case. Winston Churchill publicly stated he was in favor of using poison gas on the Arabs and Kurds of Mesopotamia, which is an adequate ground to make a moral judgment of his character. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful       Date: 04 Jul 2007 16:16:15 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183581919.669420.298540@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 4, 1:58 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> >> > On Jul 4, 7:24 am, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: >> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> >> >> Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a >> >> time >> >> in >> >> history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military >> >> weapon. >> >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror >> > among others ever been moral? >> >> It wasn't used, you might try to read history instead of re-writing it. > > Whether it was used or not is irrelevant in this case. Winston > Churchill publicly stated he was in favor of using poison gas on the > Arabs and Kurds of Mesopotamia, which is an adequate ground to make a > moral judgment of his character. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful > Can you read, sounds a little like tear gas?, I don't know if tear gas was even available in 1919 but of course tear gas wouldn't fit your political agenda would it? In a War Office minute of 12 May 1919, Winston Churchill argued for the use of gas in certain situations in general terms: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected." [     Date: 04 Jul 2007 13:42:29 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 11:44 am, " Slack" who? wrote: > On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > > among others ever been moral? > > > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is > > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > Whose moral code are you using? > > Please define [your definition] terror. Refer back to this quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. Apparently W.C. thought is was moral to attack Arabs and Kurds with poison gas to terrorize them, presumably since they were NOT white, Christian Europeans. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful       Date: 04 Jul 2007 14:33:10 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:42:29 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 4, 11:44 am, " Slack" who? wrote: >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror >> > among others ever been moral? >> >> > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is >> > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] >> >> Whose moral code are you using? >> >> Please define [your definition] terror. > > Refer back to this quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned > gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - > Winston Churchill. > > Apparently W.C. thought is was moral to attack Arabs and Kurds with > poison gas to terrorize them, presumably since they were NOT white, > Christian Europeans. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Let's try this again: Whose moral code are you using to make a moral judgement call on what Churchill did or didn't believe? Here, I'll show you how this works: >> > "Has spreading terror among others ever been moral? Actually, yes it has been. God used [the spread of] terror many-many times in the old testament. Terror is again dispensed in the the New Testament in the book of Acts and Revelation. -- Slack         Date: 05 Jul 2007 09:19:38 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <op.tuyl5ke5f3vmig@slacker.dslextreme.com >, ?Slack <dont_even_think@bout.it > wrote: > Here, I'll show you how this works: > > >> > "Has spreading terror among others ever been moral? > > Actually, yes it has been. God used [the spread of] terror many-many > times in the old testament. Terror is again dispensed in the the New > Testament in the book of Acts and Revelation. So your God is a terrorist. (As far as Revelations is concerned, you are aware that those events never happened? That they were a "vision" which is just fancy talk for hallucination? And that Revelations was written for a specific group of people at a specific time in history which is not us?). The truth is that terrorism has been used time and again by deluded followers of religions to suit an agenda of dominance. God didn't do it, people did in the misguided belief that they were serving God. And still do.     Date: 04 Jul 2007 13:39:12 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is > > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > {sarcams -- correct Usenet word, BTW -- resumed} Yeah, those poor, pushed > down DOCTORS in Britain were just oppressed to the point of carbomb > caboom... Who said anything about Doctors in Britain, and what does this have to do with Winston Churchill approving bombing Mesopotamians in order to terrorize them? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful       Date: 04 Jul 2007 13:55:05 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Bill Sornson wrote: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> >>> [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it >>> is by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] >> >> {sarcams -- correct Usenet word, BTW -- resumed} Yeah, those poor, >> pushed down DOCTORS in Britain were just oppressed to the point of >> carbomb caboom... > > Who said anything about Doctors in Britain, and what does this have to > do with Winston Churchill approving bombing Mesopotamians in order to > terrorize them? "violence is only terrorism if it is by the weak against the strong" Whoosh.     Date: 01 Jul 2007 19:09:28 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 5:36 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "DI" (who?) anonymously wrote: > > >> Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > > He knows who he is, that's all that matters, it's probably none of your > > business. > > DI, thank you. And, it wouldn't have mattered if I had told him my real > name anyway. He probably wouldn't have believed me. For that > matter, how do we even know his real name is Tom Sherman. > > Point being, no one know who anyone is on the internet. There are plenty of people who post to rec.bicycles.tech who can easily be verified as real people, in particular the LBS proprietors and employees. Their locations and hours of operation are on their websites, so one can just drop in if one so chooses. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:57:30 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 1, 4:32 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: > > > On Jul 1, 4:25 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" wrote: > > >> > On Jul 1, 4:05 pm, "Oz" (who?) anonymously wrote: > >> >> "Johnny Sunset" wrote: > > >> >> > It is brave to post political opinions behind a pseudonym. > > >> >> Johnny/Tom, > > >> >> I adopted a psuedonym precisely because of the nuts you find on > >> >> usenet. > > >> > Or you don't want to be accountable for what you write? > > >> Whatever, Johnny/Tommy. > > >> This whole discussion has devolved into a playground scrap and, quite > >> frankly, what your putting forth now is just plain silly. > > >> When you want to get back to the issue at hand let me know. > > > I want to know why "Oz" is afraid to put his/her real name behind his/ > > her statements. > > Off to the killfile Johnny/Tommy. > > See ya, it's been fun. And "Oz" can always come back with another pseudonym to respond. Again, no accountability from the anonymous. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful     Date: 30 Jun 2007 11:54:28 From: Ride-A-Lot Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: > On Jun 30, 1:47 am, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me> wrote: >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >> >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >> >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Because (LOL) you might care (LOL) about the tens of millions of > Americans (LOL) that have no health insurnace, or (LOL) they only > think they do until they need it. (This last one really has me > ROTFLMAO.) And the uninsured kids: they are just _hilarious_. > > And that joke about Michael Moore's weight: that's just _so_ funny, > because (get it?) a fat guy is by definition incapable of doing > anything of value. Let's all have a hearty laugh about Michael Moore's > weight, Stop it, I mean it, you're a funny guy, Sornson. My sides > hurt. Whew! > The fat bastard started as a comedian (LOL) before he all of a sudden decided he was a socialist. Friggin liberal Hollywierd is all about raising social consciousness to get rid of the guilt they feel for having so much money in the first place. If Michael Moore was such a good guy for "exposing" the capitalist system, he would take some of the $105 Million he made from his last movie and pay for the guys other finger to be reattached instead of just filming the poor bastards decision. -- o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o www.schnauzers.ws       Date: 30 Jun 2007 19:28:33 From: wizardB Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko > The fat bastard started as a comedian (LOL) before he all of a sudden > decided he was a socialist. Friggin liberal Hollywierd is all about > raising social consciousness to get rid of the guilt they feel for > having so much money in the first place. If Michael Moore was such a > good guy for "exposing" the capitalist system, he would take some of the > $105 Million he made from his last movie and pay for the guys other > finger to be reattached instead of just filming the poor bastards decision. Back in those day that asshole looked just like the Michelin man and now here's filled in all the ripples       Date: 30 Jun 2007 08:44:59 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Ride-A-Lot wrote: > SocSecTrainWreck@earthlink.net wrote: >> On Jun 30, 1:47 am, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me> wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >> >> Because (LOL) you might care (LOL) about the tens of millions of >> Americans (LOL) that have no health insurnace, or (LOL) they only >> think they do until they need it. (This last one really has me >> ROTFLMAO.) And the uninsured kids: they are just _hilarious_. >> >> And that joke about Michael Moore's weight: that's just _so_ funny, >> because (get it?) a fat guy is by definition incapable of doing >> anything of value. Let's all have a hearty laugh about Michael >> Moore's weight, Stop it, I mean it, you're a funny guy, Sornson. My >> sides hurt. Whew! >> > > The fat bastard started as a comedian (LOL) before he all of a sudden > decided he was a socialist. Friggin liberal Hollywierd is all about > raising social consciousness to get rid of the guilt they feel for > having so much money in the first place. If Michael Moore was such a > good guy for "exposing" the capitalist system, he would take some of > the $105 Million he made from his last movie and pay for the guys > other finger to be reattached instead of just filming the poor bastards > decision. I plonked the Train Wreck (for obvious reasons); this merely affirms my decision. (And "Plump's Fiction" was a play on "Pulp Fiction", as both works are...FICTION. HTH!) Bill "calling MM a documentarian is like calling Hugo Chavez a progressive leader" S.         Date: 04 Jul 2007 14:57:12 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 4:33 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously snipes: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > On Jul 4, 11:44 am, " Slack" who? wrote: > >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > >> > among others ever been moral? > > >> > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it is > >> > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > >> Whose moral code are you using? > > >> Please define [your definition] terror. > > > Refer back to this quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned > > gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - > > Winston Churchill. > > > Apparently W.C. thought is was moral to attack Arabs and Kurds with > > poison gas to terrorize them, presumably since they were NOT white, > > Christian Europeans. > > Do you have a reading comprehension problem? > > Let's try this again: Whose moral code are you using to make a moral > judgement call on what Churchill did or didn't believe? The question as written does not make sense - how can one make "moral judgment call" over questions of what a particular person's beliefs were? What a person believes is independent of moral codes. > Here, I'll show you how this works:>> > "Has spreading terror among others ever been moral? > > Actually, yes it has been. God used [the spread of] terror many-many > times in the old testament. Terror is again dispensed in the the New > Testament in the book of Acts and Revelation. Lets us stick to the real world, and ignore mythology. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful           Date: 04 Jul 2007 15:12:11 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 14:57:12 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 4, 4:33 pm, " Slack" (who?) anonymously snipes: >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: >> > On Jul 4, 11:44 am, " Slack" who? wrote: >> >> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:56:17 -0700, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman >> wrote: >> >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading >> terror >> >> > among others ever been moral? >> >> >> > [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if >> it is >> >> > by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] >> >> >> Whose moral code are you using? >> >> >> Please define [your definition] terror. >> >> > Refer back to this quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned >> > gas against uncivilised tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - >> > Winston Churchill. >> >> > Apparently W.C. thought is was moral to attack Arabs and Kurds with >> > poison gas to terrorize them, presumably since they were NOT white, >> > Christian Europeans. >> >> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? >> >> Let's try this again: Whose moral code are you using to make a moral >> judgement call on what Churchill did or didn't believe? > > The question as written does not make sense - how can one make "moral > judgment call" over questions of what a particular person's beliefs > were? What a person believes is independent of moral codes. You might want to swing by your local book store and pick up a good dictionary. >> Here, I'll show you how this works:>> > "Has spreading terror among >> others ever been moral? >> >> Actually, yes it has been. God used [the spread of] terror many-many >> times in the old testament. Terror is again dispensed in the the New >> Testament in the book of Acts and Revelation. > > Lets us stick to the real world, and ignore mythology. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia While you're at the bookstore, might as well pick up a Bible, too.... while there's still time. -- Slack             Date: 05 Jul 2007 09:20:45 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <op.tuynylixf3vmig@slacker.dslextreme.com >, ?Slack <dont_even_think@bout.it > wrote: > While you're at the bookstore, might as well pick up a Bible, too.... > while there's still time. Time for what?         Date: 04 Jul 2007 14:51:06 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 4:16 pm, "DI" who? anonymously wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 4, 1:58 pm, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > >> > On Jul 4, 7:24 am, "DI" (who?) anonymously snipes: > >> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > >> >> Why don't you say when this quote was made? It was made in 1919, a > >> >> time > >> >> in > >> >> history when the entire world was using poisonous gas as a military > >> >> weapon. > > >> > And that makes the use of poison gas more moral? Has spreading terror > >> > among others ever been moral? > > >> It wasn't used, you might try to read history instead of re-writing it. > > > Whether it was used or not is irrelevant in this case. Winston > > Churchill publicly stated he was in favor of using poison gas on the > > Arabs and Kurds of Mesopotamia, which is an adequate ground to make a > > moral judgment of his character. > > > -- > > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful > > Can you read, sounds a little like tear gas?, I don't know if tear gas was > even available in 1919 but of course tear gas wouldn't fit your political > agenda would it? > > In a War Office minute of 12 May 1919, Winston Churchill argued for the use > of gas in certain situations in general terms: "I am strongly in favour of > using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so > good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not > necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause > great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no > serious permanent effects on most of those affected." The British conducted conventional terror bombing against the residents of Mesopotamia for most of the 1920's, killing tens of thousands, many innocent civilians. Did Churchill ever protest against this? -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful           Date: 04 Jul 2007 17:14:06 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:1183585866.347587.252150@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 4, 4:16 pm, "DI" who? anonymously wrote: >> >> Can you read, sounds a little like tear gas?, I don't know if tear gas >> was >> even available in 1919 but of course tear gas wouldn't fit your political >> agenda would it? >> >> In a War Office minute of 12 May 1919, Winston Churchill argued for the >> use >> of gas in certain situations in general terms: "I am strongly in favour >> of >> using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be >> so >> good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not >> necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which >> cause >> great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave >> no >> serious permanent effects on most of those affected." > > The British conducted conventional terror bombing against the > residents of Mesopotamia for most of the 1920's, killing tens of > thousands, many innocent civilians. Did Churchill ever protest against > this? Don't know, you'll have to ask him. > > -- > Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia > The weather is here, wish you were beautiful > > >         Date: 04 Jul 2007 14:44:31 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 3:55 pm, Bill Sornson wrote: > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Bill Sornson wrote: > >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > >>> [start sarcasm] Oh wait, I forgot, violence is only terrorism if it > >>> is by the weak against the strong. [end sarcasm] > > >> {sarcams -- correct Usenet word, BTW -- resumed} Yeah, those poor, > >> pushed down DOCTORS in Britain were just oppressed to the point of > >> carbomb caboom... > > > Who said anything about Doctors in Britain, and what does this have to > > do with Winston Churchill approving bombing Mesopotamians in order to > > terrorize them? > > "violence is only terrorism if it is by the weak against the strong" > > Whoosh. That would go over your head, Sorni. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful         Date: 04 Jul 2007 14:01:49 From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: > Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > > > Churchill into the discussion. > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your > unsupported assertion different from the written > history? According to you, no different at all. Both > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything > you say? The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, 1940. August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German cities. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful           Date: 04 Jul 2007 22:40:59 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1183582909.730076.267340@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Jul 4, 2:02 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > Johnny Sunset <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 4, 1:20 am, Michael Press wrote: > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > On Jul 2, 10:42 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 10:44 pm, Michael Press wrote: > > > > > > > > Johnny Sunset wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Is that the same Winston Churchill who used poison gas on the Kurds in > > > > > > > > > what is now Iraq? The same Winston Churchill that started the > > > > > > > > > > Started? > > > > > > > > > > > deliberate indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas in WW2? > > > > > > > > > The first combined use of high explosive bombs with incendiary bombs > > > > > > > to maximize both civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian > > > > > > > housing was the RAF raid on Cologne on May 30, 1942. > > > > > > > > London blitz began September 1940. > > > > > > > The victors write the history books. > > > > > > > The RAF was the first to use methods that were more destructive of > > > > > life and housing than mere explosive bombing under Churchill. > > > > > > > "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised > > > > > tribes [to] spread a lively terror..." - Winston Churchill. > > > > > > > Churchill's views on colonial domination are hardly the moral standard > > > > > one would want to live up to, unless one is a white supremacist [1]. > > > > > > > [1] N.b. This comment should NOT be interpreted as to my suggesting > > > > > that Mr. Press is a white supremacist, merely that using Churchill as > > > > > an authority on proper belief has its moral difficulties. > > > > > > My contribution here is limited to challenging > > > > your assertion of `started'. You need to go > > > > back in the thread to see who actually brought > > > > Churchill into the discussion. > > > > > If you want to believe official histories written by the victors as > > > gospel, be my guest. After all, the military never lies. > > > > You make an assertion, then when the documentary facts > > contradict your assertion, you claim foul. How is your > > unsupported assertion different from the written > > history? According to you, no different at all. Both > > are unreliable. Or are we to take as fact everything > > you say? > > The RAF starting night bombing (by definition imprecision bombing due > to the available technology) of Germany, including cites, on July 7, > 1940. > > August 24, 1940 - an off course formation of German bombers > unintentionally bomb civilian areas of London. > > September 5, 1940. Hitler orders deliberate bombing of civilian areas > in England in retaliation for continued RAF night attacks on German > cities. This page records Aug 23/24 - First German air raids on Central London. Aug 25/26 - First British air raid on Berlin. <URL:http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm > -- Michael Press   Date: 29 Jun 2007 22:47:24 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: {Illegal Spam Snipped} Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL     Date: 30 Jun 2007 08:11:16 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Bill Sornson wrote: > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL Michael Moore is just the liberal incarnation of guys like O'Liely and Rushtard. All are full of verbal flatulence, blatantly twisting the truth with their sensatio-tainment to drown out reasoned discourse. At least most of the left doesn't take MM very seriously. Also, don't confuse the messenger with the message. US health care is a disaster. Some years ago W said, regarding single payer insurance, that it would cost $1.5 trillion/y to insure everyone in the US under such a system. Surprise! We were spending $1.5 trillion/y on health care at that time and 40 million (plus) Americans *still* had no health insurance. BTW we're spending about twice as much per person on our crappy "system" as the rest of the industrialized world. So MM may not be your favorite gun totin', car exec bashing, liberal fart bag. That doesn't mean the health care system he's bashing this time around is in a sustainable condition. Shawn       Date: 30 Jun 2007 16:18:10 From: SMS Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Shawn wrote: > Bill Sornson wrote: >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >> >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >> >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Michael Moore is just the liberal incarnation of guys like O'Liely and > Rushtard. All are full of verbal flatulence, blatantly twisting the > truth with their sensatio-tainment to drown out reasoned discourse. At > least most of the left doesn't take MM very seriously. > > Also, don't confuse the messenger with the message. US health care is a > disaster. Some years ago W said, regarding single payer insurance, that > it would cost $1.5 trillion/y to insure everyone in the US under such a > system. Surprise! We were spending $1.5 trillion/y on health care at > that time and 40 million (plus) Americans *still* had no health > insurance. BTW we're spending about twice as much per person on our > crappy "system" as the rest of the industrialized world. > So MM may not be your favorite gun totin', car exec bashing, liberal > fart bag. That doesn't mean the health care system he's bashing this > time around is in a sustainable condition. > > > Shawn While most of what Moore says in Sicko is accurate, there are some things where he should have been more careful. The high infant mortality rate in the U.S. is partially due to the fact that more high-risk pregnancies are brought to term than in other countries, though the poor neo-natal care is certainly a contributing factor. The lower life expectancy is partially due to the health care system, but is also due to the Republicans and their promotion of subsidies for industries that promote an unhealthy lifestyle in terms of diet and exercise.         Date: 01 Jul 2007 07:57:02 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote in message news:4686e48f$0$27246$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net... > While most of what Moore says in Sicko is accurate, there are some things > where he should have been more careful. The high infant mortality rate in > the U.S. is partially due to the fact that more high-risk pregnancies are > brought to term than in other countries, though the poor neo-natal care is > certainly a contributing factor. Poor neo-natal care? You gotta be kidding me. The U.S. has to have one of the best, if not the best, neo-natal care in the world. No where in the entire world does an infant have the opportunity to survive than he/she does in the U.S. > The lower life expectancy is partially due to the health care system, but > is also due to the Republicans and their promotion of subsidies for > industries that promote an unhealthy lifestyle in terms of diet and > exercise. Really? How about individual responsibility? So, industries are responsible for the poor health of people in this country? And, the Republicans support industries that promote this lifestyle? Yeah, right. Last time I checked, the Democrats weren't backing away from supporting these industries either. I eat right and exercise because I need to eat right and exercise - not because the government or some industry is telling me I need to. On the other hand, if you need to be spoon fed how you should live your life I guess you've already given the right to these entities to do so. That's sad. Take care of yourself and don't blame others for why you are fat and are having health problems. It is often stated that the U.S. is the fattest nation on the planet. I don't disagree but it is because of the lifestyle choices that these people have made. Take a look at the people on this forum. Each and every one of them, with the exception of Mike Vandeman, is actively living the lifestyle they choose, which just happens to be one filled with proper eating and abundant exercise (mountain biking and other forms of biking). Maybe we're just rebels. I don't know but to blame industry or the Republicans for our health problems is giving them rights they should not and do not possess - not in my life and not in the lives of the people on this forum. Oz           Date: 01 Jul 2007 09:31:29 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <nEMhi.5241$vi5.3744@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net >, "Oz" <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote: > "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message > news:4686e48f$0$27246$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net... > > > While most of what Moore says in Sicko is accurate, there are some > > things where he should have been more careful. The high infant > > mortality rate in the U.S. is partially due to the fact that more > > high-risk pregnancies are brought to term than in other countries, > > though the poor neo-natal care is certainly a contributing factor. > > Poor neo-natal care? You gotta be kidding me. The U.S. has to have > one of the best, if not the best, neo-natal care in the world. No > where in the entire world does an infant have the opportunity to > survive than he/she does in the U.S. "The US has to have" just isn't true. Infant mortality rates in the US are not that low- many countries have lower rates than the US. Countries with lower infant mortality rates include Australia, Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. There are, of course, many countries with much higher infant mortality rates- typically in Central and South America, Africa and the Middle East. > > The lower life expectancy is partially due to the health care > > system, but is also due to the Republicans and their promotion of > > subsidies for industries that promote an unhealthy lifestyle in > > terms of diet and exercise. At least 18 countries have a higher life expectancy than the US, too. > Really? How about individual responsibility? So, industries are > responsible for the poor health of people in this country? And, the > Republicans support industries that promote this lifestyle? Yeah, > right. Last time I checked, the Democrats weren't backing away from > supporting these industries either. Industries are indeed responsible- to an extent- for American health problems. There are a number of ways in which this is true: air and water pollution, food contamination with bacteria and other contaminants, saturation marketing of foods with trans-fats because they are cheap and shelf-stable, etc. Those are direct contributions. There are indirect contributions too, such as a huge emphasis on marketing products that are "sedentary friendly" to children. > I eat right and exercise because I need to eat right and exercise - > not because the government or some industry is telling me I need to. > On the other hand, if you need to be spoon fed how you should live > your life I guess you've already given the right to these entities to > do so. That's sad. Most people- as pointed out by Thoreau in _Walden_ all those years ago- don't realize there is an option. > Take care of yourself and don't blame others for why you are fat and > are having health problems. It is often stated that the U.S. is the > fattest nation on the planet. I don't disagree but it is because of > the lifestyle choices that these people have made. Take a look at > the people on this forum. Each and every one of them, with the > exception of Mike Vandeman, is actively living the lifestyle they > choose, which just happens to be one filled with proper eating and > abundant exercise (mountain biking and other forms of biking). Which is good for us, but "we" are a minority. As a society, we have designed our cities to discourage a healthy lifestyle. Social engineering for profit surrounds us at every turn. > Maybe we're just rebels. I don't know but to blame industry or the > Republicans for our health problems is giving them rights they should > not and do not possess - not in my life and not in the lives of the > people on this forum. I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded insufferably smug >.             Date: 01 Jul 2007 15:44:07 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:31:29 -0500, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote: >I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life >for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded >insufferably smug>. I opt to live healthy too - but despite his offensiveness and obvious partisan nature, Mr. Moore raises a valid point. Healthcare is broken in the USA. The "insurance companies" are a needless middleman sucking up profit and regulating care with no benefits to the end consumer. The medical profession/association aren't helping. The Congress & Administration is in the pocket of the health and drug industries. Anyone who doesn't believe that has never: - purchased health insurance for their employees and seen the bill - or purchased health insurance independently and seen the bill - or had major surgery and seen the bill The health system in the USA is seriously broken.               Date: 02 Jul 2007 04:28:53 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <jfif83tubruh03tcludoustkiets770hkr@4ax.com >, still me <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:31:29 -0500, Tim McNamara > <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > > >I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life > >for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded > >insufferably smug>. > > I opt to live healthy too - but despite his offensiveness and obvious > partisan nature, Mr. Moore raises a valid point. No, he does not raise it, because health care is the 500 pound gorilla. Everybody already knew. Moore is a rabble rouser, an opportunist, a fear-monger, and a liar. He pretends to care, but he does not care. -- Michael Press               Date: 01 Jul 2007 12:25:36 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "still me" <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote in message > The health system in the USA is seriously broken. I'll tell what I think is seriously broken - the auto insurance industry. I can at least justify spending thousands of dollars each year on health insurance but auto insurance? I haven't had an accident or a ticket in years but I don't get a break on that. That affects people just as much as heath insurance, especially since auto insurance companies are now using credit ratings to set policy prices and a lot of lower income folks have poor credit ratings. Oz                 Date: 01 Jul 2007 21:36:30 From: Pikachu Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <1AQhi.9693$c06.3511@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net >, "Oz" <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote: > "still me" <wheeledBob@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > The health system in the USA is seriously broken. > > I'll tell what I think is seriously broken - the auto insurance industry. I > can at least justify spending thousands of dollars each year on health > insurance but auto insurance? I haven't had an accident or a ticket in > years but I don't get a break on that. That affects people just as much as > heath insurance, especially since auto insurance companies are now using > credit ratings to set policy prices and a lot of lower income folks have > poor credit ratings. But at the very least you can choose a car-free/lite lifestyle. I am not sure you can happily opt for a health-free lifestyle. The company I work for gives me a biweekly breakdown of how much of my health insurance they are footing. It is so much that for the lessor paid employees, this benefit makes up a substantial portion ( >25%) of their remuneration package.                 Date: 01 Jul 2007 17:18:08 From: (PeteCresswell) Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Per Oz: > I haven't had an accident or a ticket in >years but I don't get a break on that. Wait until you do have a chargeable accident. You'll find out that you don't really have insurance so much as a deferred payment plan - because they'll raise the rates on you to recoup what they paid out. -- PeteCresswell               Date: 01 Jul 2007 12:14:05 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "still me" <wheeledBob@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:jfif83tubruh03tcludoustkiets770hkr@4ax.com... > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:31:29 -0500, Tim McNamara > <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > >>I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life >>for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded >>insufferably smug>. > > I opt to live healthy too - but despite his offensiveness and obvious > partisan nature, Mr. Moore raises a valid point. Healthcare is broken > in the USA. The "insurance companies" are a needless middleman sucking > up profit and regulating care with no benefits to the end consumer. > The medical profession/association aren't helping. The Congress & > Administration is in the pocket of the health and drug industries. I don't know if I would go so far as to say that. I may be an exception to the *rule* but I never have a problem getting the healthcare services I need. Admittedly, I am low maintenance (not bragging by any means - I just don't go to the doctor very often) but it seems to me that most everyone I know is comfortable with the healthcare services they receive and don't compain about the cost. Again, this is a small segment of the overall population but that is my experience. I am humored though to hear people complain about how much healthcare in the United States sucks when people from the Great White North (aka Canada) flock to the great US of A to get procedures that they can't get there. I would say that Canada's healthcare system in in need of repair. Instead of saying that healthcare is broken here, I would say that some portions of the "system" need to be fixed. And; for puposes of general information, Republicans and Democrats, alike, are in the back pockets of the insurance industry. It's called lobbying and NO ONE in Washington is exempt from this truth. > Anyone who doesn't believe that has never: > - purchased health insurance for their employees and seen the bill > - or purchased health insurance independently and seen the bill > - or had major surgery and seen the bill > > The health system in the USA is seriously broken. I don't have any experience with being an employer and buying insurance for my eployees or buying it myself but I do have experience paying for insurance for my family and the costs keep going up while the benfits are reduced. Thank goodness my family is healthy and we really do not use what we have. Insurance, for the most part, is a perk that companies offer that they have no obligation to offer. Therefore, most companies are providing a services to their employees that they don't *have to*.                 Date: 01 Jul 2007 17:15:37 From: (PeteCresswell) Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Per Oz: >I don't know if I would go so far as to say that. I may be an exception >to the *rule* but I never have a problem getting the healthcare services >I need. The "low maintenance" is the key. You're the industry's dream customer. You pay but they don't. A distant family member got his legs crushed between two cars at a gas station. He had health insurance by virtue of his union job. But he was so disabled that he lost the job. His wife worked two jobs to cover the health insurance premiums. Never missed a payment. Was never late on a payment. But when renewal time came the company dropped him. Some years later, he died in poverty - leaving his family also in poverty. Somewhere, I heard that since then there was some legislation passed that says that an insurance company cannot drop somebody under those circumstances. But as far as I know, there is nothing to prevent the insurance company from raising the rates to something the afflicted person cannot pay. Seems like the same thing to me: you get too sick or too injured and your insurance company effectively stops covering you - just when you really need insurance. Also, try spending a night in a cardiac emergency ward because you passed out on a bike ride and some cardiologist did what he thought was prudent - while you were unconscious. Then try getting outsourced (along with the other 400 people in your division) from the company you've worked a lot of years for. Now go out and price health insurance. Two of Moore's basic contentions seem inescapable to me: -------------------------------------------------------- - For-profit insurance companys don't increase profits by paying out benefits. They increase profits by finding reasons *not* to pay benefits and/or by cutting back on the dollar amounts of what benefits they do pay out. *Somebody* has to exercise this control, or there would be a total feeding frenzy at the healthcare trough - and for-profit corporations are probably the most effective at it in the sense of paying out the fewest dollars. - For-profit insurance companies are driven to cherry pick. They want to recruit healthy people, avoid recruiting non-healthy people, and get rid of non-healthy people they are currently covering. Their overriding imperative is to make money for their shareholders. If a management team starts signing up AIDS sufferers, or kids with leukemia they'll very soon be replaced by another management team. -------------------------------------------------------- It's not a "good" thing or a "bad" thing. It's just the way profit-making corporations work: period. A legitimate question, however, is whether or not it is an appropriate model for health care. I don't claim any particular depth of knowledge or wisdom, but as far as I know, the USA is the only industrialized nation where this model is the one used. It also seems to me like this is somewhat to the disadvantage of the economic competitiveness of our industries who have to compete with industrial entities in other countries who do not have health care as an overhead item. -- PeteCresswell                 Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:06:46 From: still me Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 12:14:05 -0400, "Oz" <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote: >I don't know if I would go so far as to say that. I may be an exception >to the *rule* but I never have a problem getting the healthcare services >I need. Admittedly, I am low maintenance (not bragging by any means >- I just don't go to the doctor very often) but it seems to me that most >everyone I know is comfortable with the healthcare services they receive >and don't compain about the cost. Again, this is a small segment of the >overall population but that is my experience. The people complaining are those that are paying the bills, either directly or in their (smaller) businesses. Have you checked the percentage of uninsured Americans lately? >I am humored though to hear people complain about how much healthcare >in the United States sucks when people from the Great White North (aka >Canada) flock to the great US of A to get procedures that they can't get >there. I would say that Canada's healthcare system in in need of repair. Healthcare costs, and the mechanism for paying for them, is broken in the USA. Quality, in general, is good if/when you get care. >Instead of saying that healthcare is broken here, I would say that some >portions >of the "system" need to be fixed. And; for puposes of general information, >Republicans and Democrats, alike, are in the back pockets of the >insurance industry. It's called lobbying and NO ONE in Washington is >exempt from this truth. I agree although I do lay much of the blame for drug costs at the feet of the current administration. Keeping it illegal to buy drugs from Canada is one example. Refusing to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices is another. I have to laugh when I hear drug companies and their mouthpieces state that it costs billions to bring drugs to the market - while leaving out the second half of that sentence "and we think Americans should pay for it but not other countries". <snip > >Therefore, most companies are >providing a services to their employees that they don't *have to*. I agree, they don't "have to". But, individuals need realistic options for buying their own coverage. $10K per year for an 80% policy is not reasonable for most families. I also suggest that employer policies that allow you to go to the doctor for free, or $15, etc are nonsense. If you are gainfully employed, you should be able to spring for the true cost of a Dr's office visit, which is four or five times that. It would be like expecting a zero deductible policy on your car. Insurance should be to pay for larger items, not costs we can afford out of pocket. But, it's just one more symptom of the broken system.                 Date: 01 Jul 2007 11:17:30 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Oz wrote: > "still me" <wheeledBob@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:jfif83tubruh03tcludoustkiets770hkr@4ax.com... >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 09:31:29 -0500, Tim McNamara >> <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: >> >>> I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life >>> for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded >>> insufferably smug>. >> I opt to live healthy too - but despite his offensiveness and obvious >> partisan nature, Mr. Moore raises a valid point. Healthcare is broken >> in the USA. The "insurance companies" are a needless middleman sucking >> up profit and regulating care with no benefits to the end consumer. >> The medical profession/association aren't helping. The Congress & >> Administration is in the pocket of the health and drug industries. > > I don't know if I would go so far as to say that. I may be an exception > to the *rule* but I never have a problem getting the healthcare services > I need. Admittedly, I am low maintenance (not bragging by any means > - I just don't go to the doctor very often) but it seems to me that most > everyone I know is comfortable with the healthcare services they receive > and don't compain about the cost. Again, this is a small segment of the > overall population but that is my experience. > > I am humored though to hear people complain about how much healthcare > in the United States sucks when people from the Great White North (aka > Canada) flock to the great US of A to get procedures that they can't get > there. > I would say that Canada's healthcare system in in need of repair. We spend nearly twice as much per capita on health care than Canada. Canada covers everyone though. Don't you think we should be able to cover everyone, and still do better? Or do you have no faith in America's ability to take on tough problems and provide better solutions? http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm BTW, Canadian life expectancy is a bit higher too. Shawn                   Date: 01 Jul 2007 20:06:47 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net > wrote in message news:tImdnexwibI2fBrbnZ2dnUVZ_oupnZ2d@comcast.com... > We spend nearly twice as much per capita on health care than Canada. > Canada covers everyone though. Don't you think we should be able to cover > everyone, and still do better? Or do you have no faith in America's > ability to take on tough problems and provide better solutions? > http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm > > BTW, Canadian life expectancy is a bit higher too. No, I have no confidence in the government to do anything right where it concerns taking care of the population or individuals. History is replete with examples of government initiatives that have been derailed and/or not served the purpose for which they were intended. Government/ Big Brother is not the answer to every problem. Oz                     Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:35:48 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Oz wrote: > "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message > news:tImdnexwibI2fBrbnZ2dnUVZ_oupnZ2d@comcast.com... > >> We spend nearly twice as much per capita on health care than Canada. >> Canada covers everyone though. Don't you think we should be able to cover >> everyone, and still do better? Or do you have no faith in America's >> ability to take on tough problems and provide better solutions? >> http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm >> >> BTW, Canadian life expectancy is a bit higher too. > > No, I have no confidence in the government to do anything right where it > concerns taking care of the population or individuals. History is replete > with examples of government initiatives that have been derailed and/or > not served the purpose for which they were intended. Government/ > Big Brother is not the answer to every problem. I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. Big difference these days. Shawn                       Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:43:41 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net > wrote in message news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... > I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. Big > difference these days. Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy lifestyles? That should fairly well tackle the healthcare crisis in America, or greatly reduce it. Choices, Shawn. Choices. Oz                         Date: 01 Jul 2007 22:23:37 From: SMS Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Oz wrote: > "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message > news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... > >> I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. Big >> difference these days. > > Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their > own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility > for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy > lifestyles? Part of the problem is the government not just butting out entirely, but encouraging and subsidizing the unhealthy lifestyle. One need look no further than the school lunch program for an example of the government promoting and paying for an unhealthy lifestyle. The food manufacturers, ranchers, and milk producers pay big bucks to politicians to influence policy such as the food pyramid, and price supports, as well as the government purchase and distribution of unhealthy food products such as surplus cheese. As one publication stated, "School lunches are loaded with fat—and the beef and dairy industries are making sure it stays that way." When Reagan began dismantling the food safety agencies, he didn't go far enough. He left the facade, which made many individuals believe that the government was still actively involved, when in many cases the industries were allowed to police themselves. If he had totally gotten rid of these agencies, rather than merely crippling them, at least no one would have retained any illusions that the government was doing more than token enforcement of food safety laws.                         Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:28:57 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Oz wrote: > "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message > news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... > >> I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. Big >> difference these days. > > Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their > own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility > for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy > lifestyles? > > That should fairly well tackle the healthcare crisis in America, or greatly > reduce it. Sure, but we'd still be spending twice as much per capita than the rest of the developed world until individuals vote out the pigs at the health care trough in the pockets of the insurance and drug companies. Shawn                         Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:16:22 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:43:41 -0700, Oz <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote: > > "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message > news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... > >> I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. >> Big >> difference these days. > > Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their > own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility > for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy > lifestyles? > > That should fairly well tackle the healthcare crisis in America, or > greatly > reduce it. > > Choices, Shawn. Choices. > > Oz > > Why do we celebrate a women's "choice" to kill her own baby, but I can't choose to throw-down two In-&-Out cheese burgers w/fries! -- Slack - bored waiting for the last couple of bike build components                           Date: 01 Jul 2007 23:25:47 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "?Slack" <dont_even_think@bout.it > wrote in message news:op.tus6xkgsf3vmig@slacker.dslextreme.com... > On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:43:41 -0700, Oz <re_osborn@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message >> news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... >> >>> I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. >>> Big >>> difference these days. >> >> Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their >> own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility >> for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy >> lifestyles? >> >> That should fairly well tackle the healthcare crisis in America, or >> greatly >> reduce it. >> >> Choices, Shawn. Choices. >> >> Oz >> >> > Why do we celebrate a women's "choice" to kill her own baby, but I can't > choose > to throw-down two In-&-Out cheese burgers w/fries! Slack, my friend, you can do whatever you like and I will support you fully in your decision to do so. Are the In-&-Outs anything like White Castle sliders? Oz > -- > Slack - bored waiting for the last couple of bike build components                             Date: 01 Jul 2007 16:36:15 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:25:47 -0700, Oz <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote: > "?Slack" <dont_even_think@bout.it> wrote in message > news:op.tus6xkgsf3vmig@slacker.dslextreme.com... >> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:43:41 -0700, Oz <re_osborn@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message >>> news:PNidnY_4F9_YsRXbnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@comcast.com... >>> >>>> I wasn't talking about the government. I was talking about Americans. >>>> Big >>>> difference these days. >>> >>> Okay. Then how about individual American being responsible for their >>> own actions? How about individual Americans taking the responsibility >>> for eating right, getting exercise and adopting otherwise healthy >>> lifestyles? >>> >>> That should fairly well tackle the healthcare crisis in America, or >>> greatly >>> reduce it. >>> >>> Choices, Shawn. Choices. >>> >>> Oz >>> >>> >> Why do we celebrate a women's "choice" to kill her own baby, but I can't >> choose >> to throw-down two In-&-Out cheese burgers w/fries! > > Slack, my friend, you can do whatever you like and I will support you > fully > in your decision to do so. Are the In-&-Outs anything like White Castle > sliders? > > Oz >> -- Yeah, there are from what I've heard. Actually, I don't eat there very often, not because I don't want to, but it seems like you can never get thru the drive-thru in under 20 mins. -- Slack                     Date: 01 Jul 2007 17:28:15 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Oz" <re_osborn@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:rPThi.7738$Rw1.3465@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > "Shawn" <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote in message > news:tImdnexwibI2fBrbnZ2dnUVZ_oupnZ2d@comcast.com... > >> We spend nearly twice as much per capita on health care than Canada. >> Canada covers everyone though. Don't you think we should be able to >> cover everyone, and still do better? Or do you have no faith in >> America's ability to take on tough problems and provide better solutions? >> http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/chcm010307oth.cfm >> >> BTW, Canadian life expectancy is a bit higher too. > > No, I have no confidence in the government to do anything right where it > concerns taking care of the population or individuals. History is replete > with examples of government initiatives that have been derailed and/or > not served the purpose for which they were intended. Government/ > Big Brother is not the answer to every problem. > > Oz Make that "the answer to any problem"             Date: 01 Jul 2007 11:29:35 From: Oz Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message news:timmcn-143032.09312901072007@news.iphouse.com... > In article <nEMhi.5241$vi5.3744@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net>, > "Oz" <re_osborn@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message >> news:4686e48f$0$27246$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net... >> >> > While most of what Moore says in Sicko is accurate, there are some >> > things where he should have been more careful. The high infant >> > mortality rate in the U.S. is partially due to the fact that more >> > high-risk pregnancies are brought to term than in other countries, >> > though the poor neo-natal care is certainly a contributing factor. >> >> Poor neo-natal care? You gotta be kidding me. The U.S. has to have >> one of the best, if not the best, neo-natal care in the world. No >> where in the entire world does an infant have the opportunity to >> survive than he/she does in the U.S. > > "The US has to have" just isn't true. Infant mortality rates in the US > are not that low- many countries have lower rates than the US. > Countries with lower infant mortality rates include Australia, Austria, > Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, > Italy, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, > Switzerland and the United Kingdom. There are, of course, many > countries with much higher infant mortality rates- typically in Central > and South America, Africa and the Middle East. The OP stated that the US has a high infant mortality rate. He was speaking out of his ass. >> > The lower life expectancy is partially due to the health care >> > system, but is also due to the Republicans and their promotion of >> > subsidies for industries that promote an unhealthy lifestyle in >> > terms of diet and exercise. > > At least 18 countries have a higher life expectancy than the US, too. Must be the fault of the Republicans. Right? That was one of his points. >> Really? How about individual responsibility? So, industries are >> responsible for the poor health of people in this country? And, the >> Republicans support industries that promote this lifestyle? Yeah, >> right. Last time I checked, the Democrats weren't backing away from >> supporting these industries either. > > Industries are indeed responsible- to an extent- for American health > problems. There are a number of ways in which this is true: air and > water pollution, food contamination with bacteria and other > contaminants, saturation marketing of foods with trans-fats because they > are cheap and shelf-stable, etc. Those are direct contributions. There > are indirect contributions too, such as a huge emphasis on marketing > products that are "sedentary friendly" to children. Again, the OP of this portion of the thread referred to lifestyles. Pollution does not make up a lifestyle choice. Again, choice. You can choose to eat every one of your meals at McDonald's which is as expensive, if not more, than making healthy choices by buying better foods at super markets and cooking them yourself. Again, choice. So, You're telling me that I have compelling recourse to blame the government and industry if I end up weighing 400 pounds? Give me a friggin' break. >> I eat right and exercise because I need to eat right and exercise - >> not because the government or some industry is telling me I need to. >> On the other hand, if you need to be spoon fed how you should live >> your life I guess you've already given the right to these entities to >> do so. That's sad. > > Most people- as pointed out by Thoreau in _Walden_ all those years ago- > don't realize there is an option. BS. Copout. >> Take care of yourself and don't blame others for why you are fat and >> are having health problems. It is often stated that the U.S. is the >> fattest nation on the planet. I don't disagree but it is because of >> the lifestyle choices that these people have made. Take a look at >> the people on this forum. Each and every one of them, with the >> exception of Mike Vandeman, is actively living the lifestyle they >> choose, which just happens to be one filled with proper eating and >> abundant exercise (mountain biking and other forms of biking). > > Which is good for us, but "we" are a minority. As a society, we have > designed our cities to discourage a healthy lifestyle. Social > engineering for profit surrounds us at every turn. You sound like a socialist. I believe in individual responsibility. >> Maybe we're just rebels. I don't know but to blame industry or the >> Republicans for our health problems is giving them rights they should >> not and do not possess - not in my life and not in the lives of the >> people on this forum. > > I have opted out of much of "the American way" and live a better life > for it <snipped list of lifestyle choices because they sounded > insufferably smug>. So, basically, you're saying that you're smarter than the average American because you were able to figure a better lifestyle. You're saying that the average American is too stupid to figure out that they are just a cog in the grand system and that they have no choice but to just follow along. Sorry but I have to give people more credit than that.       Date: 30 Jun 2007 09:51:04 From: Michael Press Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <BJmdnV5VspsY-RvbnZ2dnUVZ_tGvnZ2d@comcast.com >, Shawn <s.currynospam@bresnan.net > wrote: > Bill Sornson wrote: > > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Michael Moore is just the liberal incarnation of guys like O'Liely and > Rushtard. All are full of verbal flatulence, blatantly twisting the > truth with their sensatio-tainment to drown out reasoned discourse. At > least most of the left doesn't take MM very seriously. > > Also, don't confuse the messenger with the message. US health care is a > disaster. Some years ago W said, regarding single payer insurance, that > it would cost $1.5 trillion/y to insure everyone in the US under such a > system. Surprise! We were spending $1.5 trillion/y on health care at > that time and 40 million (plus) Americans *still* had no health > insurance. BTW we're spending about twice as much per person on our > crappy "system" as the rest of the industrialized world. > So MM may not be your favorite gun totin', car exec bashing, liberal > fart bag. That doesn't mean the health care system he's bashing this > time around is in a sustainable condition. It is complicated and has many aspects that can be pointed out as faults. It is so complicated that anyone who claims he has a solution has tunnel vision, or is deluded, a fear-monger, a liar, an opportunist, a shill, a dupe, or some combination of the above. Any changes made will be made by the winner, with no improvement to the situation. MM is an opportunist, a fear-monger and a liar. -- Michael Press         Date: 30 Jun 2007 11:54:08 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Michael Press wrote: > In article > <BJmdnV5VspsY-RvbnZ2dnUVZ_tGvnZ2d@comcast.com>, > Shawn <s.currynospam@bresnan.net> wrote: > >> Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >> Michael Moore is just the liberal incarnation of guys like O'Liely and >> Rushtard. All are full of verbal flatulence, blatantly twisting the >> truth with their sensatio-tainment to drown out reasoned discourse. At >> least most of the left doesn't take MM very seriously. >> >> Also, don't confuse the messenger with the message. US health care is a >> disaster. Some years ago W said, regarding single payer insurance, that >> it would cost $1.5 trillion/y to insure everyone in the US under such a >> system. Surprise! We were spending $1.5 trillion/y on health care at >> that time and 40 million (plus) Americans *still* had no health >> insurance. BTW we're spending about twice as much per person on our >> crappy "system" as the rest of the industrialized world. >> So MM may not be your favorite gun totin', car exec bashing, liberal >> fart bag. That doesn't mean the health care system he's bashing this >> time around is in a sustainable condition. > > It is complicated and has many aspects that can be > pointed out as faults. It is so complicated that anyone > who claims he has a solution has tunnel vision, or is > deluded, a fear-monger, a liar, an opportunist, a > shill, a dupe, or some combination of the above. Any > changes made will be made by the winner, with no > improvement to the situation. MM is an opportunist, a > fear-monger and a liar. Almost all true. The only thing stopping health care reform is the insurance industry management and the drug companies. Decapitate them through reform legislation and the problem is solved (yeah I know <snicker, snort, guffaw >). Shawn     Date: 30 Jun 2007 07:42:15 From: Ride-A-Lot Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Bill Sornson wrote: > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. -- o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o www.schnauzers.ws       Date: 30 Jun 2007 12:37:03 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Ride-A-Lot wrote: > Bill Sornson wrote: >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >> >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >> >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >> > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the > history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern > praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. > > Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make one > of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to financially take advantage of that. Greg -- http://ticketmastersucks.org         Date: 01 Jul 2007 18:06:46 From: Mike Vandeman Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:37:03 -0700, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote: >Ride-A-Lot wrote: >> Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>> >> >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. >> >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make one >> of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. This kind of unreasoning, ignorant fear is IDENTICAL to the way mountain bikers react to other forms of truth-telling, such as http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7. All it means is that Michael Moore hit the nail on the head. -- I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.) Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of! http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande         Date: 30 Jun 2007 16:21:35 From: SMS Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko G.T. wrote: > Ride-A-Lot wrote: >> Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>> >> >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. >> >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >> > > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > financially take advantage of that. We'll be very similar to Argentina, a once wealthy nation whose leaders squandered and stole the nations wealth, decimating the middle class.           Date: 01 Jul 2007 10:00:35 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote in message news:4686e55c$0$27246$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net... > G.T. wrote: >> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>> >>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>> >>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>>> >>> >>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the >>> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern >>> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. >>> >>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make one >>> of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >>> >> >> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than >> after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of people >> have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly where I >> think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in another decade >> because they hold so much of our debt and there's only going to be a few >> people in the USA who are going to be able to financially take advantage >> of that. > > We'll be very similar to Argentina, a once wealthy nation whose leaders > squandered and stole the nations wealth, decimating the middle class. That's precisely where we're heading. -- Ticketbastard tax tracker: http://ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html Dethink to survive - Mclusky Greg         Date: 30 Jun 2007 16:51:44 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko >> Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > Ride-A-Lot wrote: >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. G.T. wrote: > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > financially take advantage of that. Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets per household. Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the overwhelming bulk of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our labor mobility is higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true resource. p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. When you hear negativity and envy about 'the rich', look at their dissolute ineffective progeny - whatever it us , it doesn't 'stick'. Which all works out just fine. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971           Date: 30 Jun 2007 15:13:52 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko A Muzi wrote: >>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > >> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at >>> the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>> sirius now. >>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >>> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. > > G.T. wrote: >> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than >> after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of >> people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly >> where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in >> another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only >> going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to >> financially take advantage of that. > > Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets > per household. That's pure bullshit. Over the past 15 years purchasing power has slowly been falling for the middle class because our minimal amount of inflation is still significantly more than the pathetic annual increase in earnings of a typical family. Oh, yeah, but executive compensation continues to grow phenomenally. > Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the > overwhelming bulk of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our > labor mobility is higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true > resource. > > p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. Sure. http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/ Do you make $15 million a year? Will you ever? How many people do you think could make $15 million a year while still having a viable economy? 200 million people, or magnitudes less? Greg -- http://ticketmastersucks.org             Date: 30 Jun 2007 18:33:13 From: A Muzi Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko >>>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at >>>> the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>>> sirius now. >>>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >>>> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >> G.T. wrote: >>> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather >>> than after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful >>> of people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's >>> exactly where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of >>> China in another decade because they hold so much of our debt and >>> there's only going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be >>> able to financially take advantage of that. > A Muzi wrote: >> Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets >> per household. G.T. wrote: > That's pure bullshit. Over the past 15 years purchasing power has > slowly been falling for the middle class because our minimal amount of > inflation is still significantly more than the pathetic annual increase > in earnings of a typical family. Oh, yeah, but executive compensation > continues to grow phenomenally. > A Muzi wrote: >> Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the overwhelming bulk >> of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our labor mobility is >> higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true resource. >> p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. G.T. wrote: > Sure. > http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/ > Do you make $15 million a year? Will you ever? How many people do you > think could make $15 million a year while still having a viable economy? > 200 million people, or magnitudes less? One might slice any data set to a few outliers. There are about 9 _million_ millionaires here, more self-employed than ceos by a magnitude. Some citizens had zero income last year. So what? In a dynamic economy, few stay in one group forever. As I wrote a few days ago, the concept 'equality of opportunity' is poorly understood now, to our greater loss. Sorry, but "Slaves of China" set me off. You're welcome to the last word, that's all for me. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971               Date: 01 Jul 2007 10:44:02 From: John Henderson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko A Muzi wrote: > There are about 9 _million_ millionaires here, more > self-employed than ceos by a magnitude. Some citizens had zero > income last year. So what? > In a dynamic economy, few stay in one group forever. As I > wrote a few days ago, the concept 'equality of opportunity' is > poorly understood now, to our greater loss. We all need to be aware of one great widely-held but rarely explicitly-stated myth though. Just because /anybody/ can become wealthy, it doesn't follow that /everybody/ can. John             Date: 30 Jun 2007 16:27:01 From: =?utf-8?B?4paAU2xhY2s=?= Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 15:13:52 -0700, G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com > wrote: > A Muzi wrote: >>>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >> >>> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at >>>> the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>>> sirius now. >>>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >>>> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >> G.T. wrote: >>> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than >>> after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of >>> people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly >>> where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in >>> another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only >>> going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to >>> financially take advantage of that. >> Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and assets >> per household. > > That's pure bullshit. Over the past 15 years purchasing power has > slowly been falling for the middle class because our minimal amount of > inflation is still significantly more than the pathetic annual increase > in earnings of a typical family. Oh, yeah, but executive compensation > continues to grow phenomenally. > >> Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the overwhelming bulk >> of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our labor mobility is >> higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true resource. >> p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. > > Sure. > > http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/ > > Do you make $15 million a year? Will you ever? How many people do you > think could make $15 million a year while still having a viable economy? > 200 million people, or magnitudes less? > > Greg LOL... the irony is killing me! If there could be one organization that could be held responsible for the destruction of that middle-class, its' the frig'n AFLCIO. Of course, ultimately, the blame lays at the feet of the Unions in this country who have systematically decimated US manufacturing. -- Slack               Date: 30 Jun 2007 17:50:33 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko â–€Slack wrote: > On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 15:13:52 -0700, G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> A Muzi wrote: >>>>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>> >>>> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>>>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary >>>>> to think that people actually believe what he says without looking >>>>> at the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>>>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>>>> sirius now. >>>>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they >>>>> make one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >>> G.T. wrote: >>>> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather >>>> than after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful >>>> of people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's >>>> exactly where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of >>>> China in another decade because they hold so much of our debt and >>>> there's only going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be >>>> able to financially take advantage of that. >>> Slaves? Hardly. USA has steadily increasing average income and >>> assets per household. >> >> That's pure bullshit. Over the past 15 years purchasing power has >> slowly been falling for the middle class because our minimal amount of >> inflation is still significantly more than the pathetic annual >> increase in earnings of a typical family. Oh, yeah, but executive >> compensation continues to grow phenomenally. >> >>> Plus, a huge and growing number of millionaires the overwhelming bulk >>> of whom are first-generation, i.e., self-made. Our labor mobility is >>> higher than anywhere ever in history and that's a true resource. >>> p.s. ours is not a 'class' system. >> >> Sure. >> >> http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/ >> >> Do you make $15 million a year? Will you ever? How many people do >> you think could make $15 million a year while still having a viable >> economy? 200 million people, or magnitudes less? >> >> Greg > > > LOL... the irony is killing me! If there could be one organization that > could be held > responsible for the destruction of that middle-class, its' the frig'n > AFLCIO. Of course, ultimately, > the blame lays at the feet of the Unions in this country who have > systematically decimated US > manufacturing. How do you figure? Union decline pre-dates the exodus of manufacturing jobs (the heart of the middle class). Shawn         Date: 30 Jun 2007 15:05:38 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko G.T. wrote: > Ride-A-Lot wrote: >> Bill Sornson wrote: >>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>> >>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>> >>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>> >> >> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the >> history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern >> praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. >> >> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >> > > I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than > after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of > people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly > where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in > another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only > going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to > financially take advantage of that. You sound like a nut case. Unfortunately I think your right on the money (owed to China, for the poison food they ship us). Shawn           Date: 30 Jun 2007 15:06:10 From: G.T. Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Shawn wrote: > G.T. wrote: >> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>> >>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>> >>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>>> >>> >>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at >>> the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>> sirius now. >>> >>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >>> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >>> >> >> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather than >> after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful of >> people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's exactly >> where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of China in >> another decade because they hold so much of our debt and there's only >> going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be able to >> financially take advantage of that. > > You sound like a nut case. > Unfortunately I think your right on the money (owed to China, for the > poison food they ship us). > Excluding the nut case portion of us being slaves to China it's a fact that the we're losing the middle class very rapidly and it's a fact that China is catching up to Japan in how much debt of ours they hold. Japan never will call in that debt and China will most likely never call it in so as to not disrupt the global economy but one never knows. Greg -- http://ticketmastersucks.org             Date: 30 Jun 2007 17:29:39 From: Shawn Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko G.T. wrote: > Shawn wrote: >> G.T. wrote: >>> Ride-A-Lot wrote: >>>> Bill Sornson wrote: >>>>> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >>>>> >>>>> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >>>>> >>>>> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >>>>> >>>> >>>> Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to >>>> think that people actually believe what he says without looking at >>>> the history books. The you get the media and people like Howard >>>> Stern praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the >>>> sirius now. >>>> >>>> Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make >>>> one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. >>>> >>> >>> I, for one, would rather have someone stirring the pot now rather >>> than after we've sunk to being a third-world country where a handful >>> of people have power and the rest of us have nothing. And that's >>> exactly where I think we're heading. We're going to be slaves of >>> China in another decade because they hold so much of our debt and >>> there's only going to be a few people in the USA who are going to be >>> able to financially take advantage of that. >> >> You sound like a nut case. >> Unfortunately I think your right on the money (owed to China, for the >> poison food they ship us). >> > > Excluding the nut case portion of us being slaves to China it's a fact > that the we're losing the middle class very rapidly and it's a fact that > China is catching up to Japan in how much debt of ours they hold. Japan > never will call in that debt and China will most likely never call it in > so as to not disrupt the global economy but one never knows. I figured you meant economic slaves. I'd feel more comfortable if the people of China had some input, and not just the despot of the day. Shawn       Date: 30 Jun 2007 09:14:44 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko Ride-A-Lot wrote: > Bill Sornson wrote: >> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: >> >> {Illegal Spam Snipped} >> >> Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL >> >> > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > think that people actually believe what he says without looking at the > history books. The you get the media and people like Howard Stern > praising his every word. I am thinking about ditching the sirius now. > > Michael Moore is the next Mao Tse Tung, only I don't think they make > one of those gray peoples uniforms in his size. http://www.slate.com/id/2102723/ (old but worth reading again) http://www.mooreexposed.com/ (surf from there)       Date: 30 Jun 2007 10:20:10 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] In article <qPnhi.287$SJ1.149@fe05.news.easynews.com >, Ride-A-Lot <mitchell@[nospam]schnauzers.ws > wrote: > Bill Sornson wrote: > > Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote: > > > > {Illegal Spam Snipped} > > > > Why on earth would I want to watch "Plump's Fiction"? LOL > > Finally, a sane comment about that communist asshole. It's scary to > think that people actually believe what he says without looking at > the history books. Interestingly enough, when people do examine his claims line by line they are remarkably accurate. You can validly disagree with his values, his attitude, his conclusions, his grandstanding technique or even just dislike his personality but when it comes to the facts the guy does his homework. Where he falls down as a documentarian is that he sometimes misses the correct context in which to place those facts. When it comes to health care, the field in which I work, the system we have in the US is inexcusably broken. It costs too much and doesn't deliver adequately. The American health care system is ranked, IIRC, 37th in terms of outcomes but 1st in cost. We spend twice as much as the next most expensive country for health care for poorer outcomes (that's not all the health care system's fault, BTW- the American sedentary lifestyle and rampant obesity are important contributors to poorer outcomes. We're in worse health to begin with and that affects outcomes). Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, which in turn means that they do not have good access to health care services. Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs 19% of my take home income- $31 less per month than my house payment) and inefficient. Insurance company overhead (including profit and operating costs) average between 10% and 30% according to industry figures; by comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How about that, the government is actually more efficient than "the market." Americans will get national healthcare through the government. The impetus for this is not going to come from Michael Moore and the pinko Left. It's going to come from the business sector and the Right trying to find ways to put American businesses on a competitive footing with companies in the rest of the world. The current hybrid programs in a few states, ones which impose a de facto health care tax on every child woman and man by requiring them to buy health insurance or face legal penalties, will fail due to being too expensive for individuals to tolerate and too costly for states to subsidize. Interestingly most of those plans were formulated by insurance industry groups. Hmmm. They too see the writing on the wall and know that their days are numbered.         Date: 01 Jul 2007 04:16:28 From: Chuck Davis Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message news:timmcn-8CEFB2.10201030062007@news.iphouse.com... > [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] > > ... > > Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, which > in turn means that they do not have good access to health care services. > Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs 19% of my take home > income- $31 less per month than my house payment) and inefficient. > Insurance company overhead (including profit and operating costs) > average between 10% and 30% according to industry figures; by > comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How about that, the government > is actually more efficient than "the market." > > Americans will get national healthcare through the government. > ... I'd be interested to see the source of the 1% figure. It's hard to believe that all of the paper work required for Medicare/Medicaid records and billing only amounts to 1%. Maybe I just need to know "1% of what?" I don't mind learning stuff. Ironically, if Michael Moore and all Americans as grossly overweight as he is were to lose their excess weight and eat healthily, many of the health care issues would be solved. A little "more" irony is: the healthier you make Americans, the longer they'll live and the longer they'll collect Social Security. That'll accelerate that crisis - but it will give Michael Moore an opportunity to make another movie. Maybe he can call this one "Old Farto". I look forward to the government picking up the tab for my health care. When that's in place, let me know where to send my mortgage and grocery bills. If they're responsible for my health care, they sure as Hell had better take care of my shelter and food. ChuckD           Date: 30 Jun 2007 23:40:36 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <wUFhi.11351$B25.1341@news01.roc.ny >, "Chuck Davis" <Newsgroup@hiscastle.net > wrote: > "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message > news:timmcn-8CEFB2.10201030062007@news.iphouse.com... > > [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] > > > > ... > > > > Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, which > > in turn means that they do not have good access to health care services. > > Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs 19% of my take home > > income- $31 less per month than my house payment) and inefficient. > > Insurance company overhead (including profit and operating costs) > > average between 10% and 30% according to industry figures; by > > comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How about that, the government > > is actually more efficient than "the market." > > > > Americans will get national healthcare through the government. > > ... > > I'd be interested to see the source of the 1% figure. It's hard to believe > that all of the paper work required for Medicare/Medicaid records and > billing only amounts to 1%. Maybe I just need to know "1% of what?" I > don't mind learning stuff. 1% was what was recently quoted in the NYT: other sources give 2.1% and 3%. Still impressive. The real place to look would be the cms.gov or the CBO websites, I don't have time tonight to sift through those and am leaving in the morning for a bit of vacation. The information ought to be out there- a brief glance through Google shows what appears to be some good analysis from both the "right" and the "left" as well as the usual dreck.         Date: 30 Jun 2007 11:43:22 From: DI Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message news:timmcn-8CEFB2.10201030062007@news.iphouse.com... > [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] > > Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, which > in turn means that they do not have good access to health care services. > Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs 19% of my take home > income- $31 less per month than my house payment) and inefficient. > Insurance company overhead (including profit and operating costs) > average between 10% and 30% according to industry figures; by > comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How about that, the government > is actually more efficient than "the market." > I've been on Medicare for 2 years, I have the same doctors as I had with private insurance. The care I get is no where near as good as before, they aren't allowed to run some tests and are only paid for a fraction of what they normally would charge. Guess who makes up the difference in what they normally charge and what Medicare will pay, not me because they aren't allowed to do bill me (by law), it's people like you who have private insurance who gets the padded overcharges. I just recently crashed my bike and took a trip to the emergency room, total bill was $1800, Medicare paid $233, I paid a $50 copay. The $233 might have covered the leg brace they gave me. I tell my friends who are under 65 to get healthy before their 65th birthday, because after that, they want you to die. You are no longer paying in but instead are a liability.           Date: 30 Jun 2007 13:05:42 From: Tim McNamara Subject: Re: Download Michael Moores Sicko In article <KKvhi.467822$JN6.57999@newsfe17.phx >, "DI" <di9999@cox.net> wrote: > "Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message > news:timmcn-8CEFB2.10201030062007@news.iphouse.com... > > [cross-posted newsgroups trimmed] > > > > > Between 41 and 46 million Americans don't have health insurance, > > which in turn means that they do not have good access to health > > care services. Health insurance is heavily overpriced (mine costs > > 19% of my take home income- $31 less per month than my house > > payment) and inefficient. Insurance company overhead (including > > profit and operating costs) average between 10% and 30% according > > to industry figures; by comparison, Medicare's overhead is 1%. How > > about that, the government is actually more efficient than "the > > market." > > I've been on Medicare for 2 years, I have the same doctors as I had > with private insurance. The care I get is no where near as good as > before, they aren't allowed to run some tests and are only paid for a > fraction of what they normally would charge. Guess who makes up > the difference in what they normally charge and what Medicare will > pay, not me because they aren't allowed to do bill me (by law), it's > people like you who have private insurance who gets the padded > overcharges. I just recently crashed my bike and took a trip to > the emergency room, total bill was $1800, Medicare paid $233, I paid > a $50 copay. The $233 might have covered the leg brace they gave > me. There is some truth to that and some- as far as I know- misinformation seems to have been given to you. If a physician is "not allowed to run some tests" that has come from the people they work for, not Medicare. I am not aware of any medical tests that Medicare will not pay for. You have to recognize that the bill you get from the hospital and other health care providers has nothing to do with reality. It's what they wish they got paid. If you had private insurance, they too would have paid only a fraction of that bill- probably more then Medicare allowed- and the rest would have been written off under the terms of the provide agreement. 50% "discounts" are not at all unusual. At my last physical, the bill for standard blood tests was $200+ but my insurance paid something like $60 and the rest was the "provider's responsibility." The main reason for these excessively high bills is to keep upward pressure on reimbursement rates. The problem is that if you go in without health insurance, they'll try to make you pay the full rate. The people who can least afford to pay- they'd buy insurance if they could- also get charged the highest amounts for their health care. This happens at my clinic, too. I get around it by making services "no charge" or underbilling (putting down 30 minutes instead of 60 on my billing sheets). As I see it, why waste my business office staff's time sending out bills that the customer can never pay? All that does is make everyone feel bad and achieves nothing positive.