BJean

BTOW, I never said that everybody in the medical profession is evil. But the bottom line is what is guiding our medical care on a daily basis. How can you argue with that? And what is right about it? Why shouldn't we want the best medical care in the world?

plain, mostly because of all the crap talk and misinformation. (Some of the stuff we see here on LBT is a prime example.) BTW, where'd you get the stats on "most Americans" not wanting it - which poll?

I feel very sorry for you patty. And plain, the goverment has historically made jobs for Americans and in the process, it made this country a greater place to live. But in recent history, the focus has been on personal wealth to the exclusion of most working Americans. Now all but the upper middle class and the wealthy are hurting. Some people are complaining about unions, which on the surface is understandable. But if you dig a little deeper, you realize why unions came into existence and why they continue to exist. Corporate greed. And the amassing of wealth by a few to the detriment of many. If everyone played fair, unions wouldn't have become necessary. If everyone played fair, this country wouldn't be in such a melofahess.

Excellent points, Kat. Well done. Patty you claim you don't approve of smoking but you don't hold the person in low esteem because they smoke. And yet, you didn't approve of giving out free food to a smoker because if they have enough money to buy cigarettes, they can buy their own food. You pick and choose from the Bible. You say you don't, but you obviously do. And how pompous of you to say that I don't speak with God. It is your comments like these that reveal your true nature and the fact that you are judgmental and that you feel superior because of your beliefs. It is the tone of your writings and the claim that you know for a fact what God says that cause your arguments to fall flat. What you espouse is religion. Even when you say you don't approve of organized religion, your kind of blind faith is all about religion - not sprirtuality or goodness or generosity of spirit toward others - which is what Jesus represents. You represent religion, preaching, condemnation, self-glorification and hell fire and brimstone. Your brand of religion gives you an out for all of the negativism that you feel toward others. You use the Bible for religious purposes not to expand your own goodness. All of this is IMHO, of course and based on solely on your posts. You could be a black, Democratic, homosexual, abortion lover for all I know and just yanking everybody's chain. If that's the case, the only good that has come of our reading what you post is that it serves to solidify our own beliefs and the knowledge that we don't want to be a nutty right wing extremist. For that, I thank you. :thumbup:

You think the hospitals aren't making a profit? Yeah, right. I am not quite so sure about tort reform. It sure depends on how it's done. I don't think we as patients should be barred from seeking retribution for malpractice. Now if you're talking about putting some caps on what can be awarded, then I'll listen. But too many people believe that people shouldn't be allowed to sue because everybody gets so damn greedy during the process. Greed is the root of our problems. The insurance companies are greedy. They sure do make a lot of money by controlling our health care. The hospitals make money and making decisions based on the bottom line is causing our health care in the U.S. to deteriorate to the point of not being the best health care in the world. In fact, our health care is way, way down on the list. Our baby's mortality rates are lousy. Our life expectancy isn't the best. And the list grows with numbers that show us that our health care system is not adequately providing good health care for Americans even if they have insurance. Only the wealthy can afford to get the very best health care we have in the U.S. because they can afford to tell the hospitals, the doctors and the pharmacies that they will pay for anything that isn't covered by their insurance. Years ago hospitals, doctors and pharmacies were not the profit-at-the-cost-of-our-health, entities that they have become today. We have to right this situation that has gone so wrong. If we can get President Obama to work on it, it will be a start. Just the beginning of hopefully getting America's health care system back on the top of the list and get Americans the promise of a longer, more vital life.

kartman: "It is why I feel so strong about equality now. I voraciously fight racism, bigotry and religious intolerance now because I think they are at the root of so many of society’s ills. If we could embrace our differences rather than alienate each other we would all be better for it." It's this religious intolerance that seems to be polarizing so many Americans today. I heard President Eisenhower's daughter speak the other night. One of the interesting things she talked about was the fact that she is no longer a Republican. It was quite obvious that she denounces the religious intolerance that so many of the extreme right wing of that party espouse. I also heard her speak to the fact that right now America is in really bad shape because we are so separated and polarized as a nation. I agree with her. It seems to be another Bush legacy. Things that so many right wing extremists speak of regarding the Bible - for instance, the way they absolutely disrespect anyone who is gay because they thinks that's what God says to do - is unspeakably mean spirited and bigoted. It is not what God wants from us - to take away a gay person's rights, to disrespect them because of their sexual orientation - it is not! If one believes that God created us all, one must acknowledge that God made gays just the way they are. And he loves them as his children just as he loves all of his children here on earth. The early bible writers decided that the best way to increase their flock was to 1) disallow birth control and 2) disallow gay partnerships. The fact that the right wing extremists have seized upon passages that men wrote and included in the Bible and use those words to discrminate against fellow human beings is dispicable. To call them God's words is just plain wrong. And this is only ONE example of the bigotry and religious discrimination that we've read over and over here. There are more examples. And I, for one, am sick of patty saying it loud and clear in one post and then denying that she meant it that way in another. "Hate the sin and not the sinner." Sorry, I'm just not buying that B.S. I say live and let live. Do not cast the first stone. He who is without sin, etc.

plain, darling, I'm so glad you agree with me about the bad ole Republicans. What a twittish thing to say: "They will, however,make them either shift their operations overseas where labor and taxes are cheaper (putting more Americans out of work), or raise prices to compensate for the increased cost." They've already done that, dear. Their greed caused them to do that before anybody raised their taxes. Americans have already been put out of work because of it. That's exactly one of the reasons we have such a ridiculously high unemployment rate. Word to yo mamma. What the new president endeavors to make happen is to put Americans back to work. He wants to create jobs to take care of the past years that we've neglected our infrastructure, our environment and all the other things that the greedy corporations and our government refused to spend any money on. And it wasn't just the corporations and the governement who were greedy. We as individuals played the game just as hard. So now we ALL are going to have to pay. And if we care about this country and if we want to preserve our glorious way of life, we can make some compromises for the greater good. If we don't, we will go by the way of Rome. I jest a little, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility. For instance, do you think Americans would be willing to give up their clothes dryers for a while? Do you think we might consider putting those unsightly clothes lines back out in our yards and hang our clothes out in the sunshine instead of running our electrical sucking machine to do the job? That's a very small consideration, but all the small compromises we could make (reusing our grocery bags, maybe?) would add up when millions of people are not only willing but excited about participating for the greater good. That's the hope that our current administration has and it is the total opposite of what our past administration worked for.

To say that the Bible has not changed throughout the ages - thousands of years - is rather an odd claim, I think. It is wishful thinking and based on "faith". Why else would we have the "King James VERSION"? You can read that particular translation and another version and come up with some interesting differences. Theologians would say that they are essentially the same and interpretet them to mean essentially the same thing. And that is interesting because these versions were written within the scope of modern times. When you dig deep back into the times when the Bible was first written, it gets even more interesting. What do you make of all the time that people were living on earth when there was no religion at all? You think God just decided that we were finally sinful enough that he had to make himself known to us? And in so doing, he then had Moses bring down the commandments who throw them down in a rage to wake us up to our transgressions? Too many inconsistencies, too many things have to be simply taken on faith. We are not quite as irgnorant as people were in the early days. If it happened today, we'd sure be asking more questions and insisting on some serious explanations before we developed a strong, indisputable faith. I always think about early Christianity in the context of my ancestors, the Indians. My people thought they knew for a fact that nature ruled the earth. That's why they prayed to the rain god and sun god and moon god. To them, there were events and situations that proved that they understood who and what ruled the earth. Those things gave them "faith". They shared what we now call "folk lore" and I wonder if some day in the very distant future, some of our religious beliefs today will be considered "folk lore" because we will have expanded our brains and our knowledge of the truth. Just like we did once we learned that the earth wasn't flat.

kartman you are spot on. And regarding the war and all the rest, the only way we might be able to get us out of this hole is by raising taxes. You think Bush didn't know that? Of course he did. So did he man-up and take care of business? Nope. He gave a token tax rebate and then he waited out the inevitable so that the Democrats could do the responsible thing, which they usually do. And then the next election, the Republicans will be bashing the Democrats for raising taxes. People with a brain can see exactly how this stuff plays out. The fact that so many continue to buy into this totally transparent political behavior is the mystery. The Republicans are brilliant - they have the middle class believing that it is unAmerican to regulate corporations. Those corporations are feeding off the middle class to such an extent that we're almost to the point of having two classes in America. The very, very wealthy and the poor. What's been happening here is similar to what we see in many countries that mainstream Americans hate. Now we expect President Obama to fix it without actually making anyone pay. He can tax us all heavily or he can make the corporations pay their fair share. Do you all really think that making corporations pay their fair share is unfair and unAmerican? The Republicans have you believing that it is going to put small businesses out of business. This is economy is what is putting small businesses out of business. Deregulation brought all this on.

HappyhomeCC I'm curious, why have you asked these questions? Thanks kartman! I'm back in the loop a little and I have to say that I've sure missed reading your brilliant posts.

Balderdash, patty. The Bible tells us that it is right to take an eye for an eye. It speaks to war and fighting and all that. Utopia would never be achieved if all people lived according to the Bible because all people can't even agree on what the Bible says to do. Just because you think you have magically decoded everything in the Bible and you think you know exactly what God intends for us, doesn't mean that you're right - only that you BELIEVE you are. The Bible was written at a time when there was no way for the stories to be validated. Today if someone wrote one of the stories in the Bible, there would be cameras and news media all over it, proving it to be all true or not true. I'm not calling the Bible a pack of lies, but I am saying that it isn't necessarily an historical document that we should blindly embrace as the final word on human behavior. It's a lovely book and a facinating book and a cruel book and it is many things, but it is not a book that represents the absolute as you say that it does. As far as prostitution I totally disagree with the idea that prostitution is practically the same as a woman having dinner with a man and exchanging dinner for sex. Prostitution is not that. Prostitution is not a secreatary trading sex for a raise. Prostitution is sex with generally no emotional relationship, without a love connection, without respect from the prostitute for the john or vice versa. It is more of an animalistic behavior. There is obviously a need for that type of outlet for human creatures and that is why I believe it needs to be regulated and accepted for what it is. In this discussion it doesn't help to make it out to be an abomination or a date. It is something that is a part of humankind and has been for as long as people cared to document it. Expecting human beings to be godlike creatures is like beating your head against the wall. Ain't going to happen. So accepting the behavior for what it really is and dealing with it in a realistic and rational way and in a way that is beneficial to society, is what needs to happen.

Anybody notice that some of the biggest banks are posting huge profits this week? And it's all Bush's fault. :cursing:

Sounds like you peeps miss me. :cursing:

Hey Wheet! Great to get a bit of an update from you. Congrats on the baby! Hope all is well and it must be or you wouldn't be seeking gainful employment. Have no clue about drug testing, so I can't help you there. But I do hope it goes well for you and you get the job!

Patty, perhaps you were so busy listening to the Republican spin, you missed what was going on with everybody else regarding the decision to declare war on Iraq. All of the upper echelon of the military were absolutely not advising Bush that we should invade Iraq. And the only reason that Congress overwhelmingly voted for giving the president the power to do it was because his administration developed a "convenient truth" about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. If you were paying close attention to what was going on, you would have known how sketchy the whole thing was. Bush originally never said that we were going to drop bombs on Iraq because of 9/11. He couldn't claim that - there was absolutely no proof of it and in fact, there was proof to the contrary. That's why he needed the weapons of mass destruction argument. I can't believe I am actually still explaining this to an American citizen. I thought everyone at this point in time surely understood what when down. Not so? Well as Kartman clearly pointed out, that explains why we need history books to document these things. Barack Obama got a star beside his name in my books when he voted against giving Bush the power to invade Iraq. A golden star that was the beginning of my close look at him. It took me a good long while before I felt I knew enough about him to vote for him. The fact that you keep saying I am infatuated with him is truly laughable. Perhaps there are some people who believe him to be infallible, but I am not one of them. And it's just silly for you to pretend that everyone who supports Obama is "infatuated." Honestly, you really should listen to people who have opposing opinions from yours instead of just listening to the people you agree with in the media. If you would do that, it probably wouldn't change your mind, but at least you would be more savvy about what the opposition thinks so you could come up with arguments that make sense.

Thank you Kartman. I'm impressed.

You know maybe someday our system may change. If there is enough support for it and someone to champion it, perhaps it is not out of the realm of possibility. And I am certainly not opposed to change - we could use a good shaking up I think. I've worked for elected government officials and it is sometimes quite disillusioning to see, up close, how things really get done behind the scenes. But as for politics in the here and now, I stand by my post.

Anyone up for discussing the antics of the righteous Governor of South Carolina? How about Rush Limbaugh's claim that he could have been the Republican's John Kennedy? The gov is supplying lots of discussion material folks, or are the neo-cons staying in bed today with the covers pulled over their heads?

You don't understand about party platform, plain? It'd be good if you read about the different stances that the parties stand for. Sure there are things that the Democratic party has in their platform that I don't necessarily embrace, but I have to always consider the alternative. That being the Republican party platform which I disagree with nearly entirely. (A few exceptions, to be sure.) But I don't really have to go on a rant to explain the wisdom of my position. Your last paragraph pretty much says it all. Keep up the fight to get an Independent party if you believe that is the right thing to do. But don't be surprised if your vote for just the man, winds up electing the person who has poor values and bad judgment and a man whose political party you happen to disagree with vehemently. I have to add that you'd possibly not only be putting the opposition's political party in control of public policies, but also in control of your future.

P.S. Have a good vacation! (Seriously!)

Patty sez: "Dems need to get over the past mistakes that they feel brought us to this point and consider the mistakes that are going on right now that will bring us tremendously farther into ruin. We don't base our opinions on someone by their predicessor. We base them on what they do. So from hence forth, let's stop looking at Bush's (or any other past president's) doings and concentrate on the present. huh? " Huh? First of all we've had it up to our ears in Clinton talk - and that has gone on during the entire last 8 years of the Bush administration. Funny thing though, there was little talk about Clinton's policies - just lots of talk about cigars and blue dresses and lying about innapropriate sexual contact. Why was there little talk about Clinton's policies? Because he left office with the economy doing well, things pretty peachy keen for most Americans. Then comes Bush. First thing out of the chute, we go through 9/11. Then he uses it to further his own personal (and Cheney's) ambitions. The rest is history and we always, always need to learn from past history. That is why it is beneficial for us to continue to examine and discuss exactly what Bush did while in office. Every screw up, every falsehood, every piece of protection of the wealthy's ability to amass obscene fortunes (at the expense of regular Americans), that he put into place. We must never allow another Bush in office and the only way that is going to happen is to continue to talk about his administration and everything that happened during his term. As for the Iraq war, you are once again very wrong. There were lots and lots of us out here who were against bombing Iraq. We were the ones who were the most shocked and awed, when we sat in front of our televisions that fateful night and watched our country drop bombs on Baghdad. Something none of us ever believed our country would do - preemtive strikes on a country that had not attacked us in any way. It went against everything that we thought this country was about. We cried real tears that night. And that was only the beginning. Obscenities were continued to be committed by our country and we watched in shock while it all unfolded. People were rounded up and put into prison in Guantanamo without trial or even the hope of a trial. Claims constantly made that there is no such thing as global warming. Claims that it made sense to give tax breaks to the oil companies, while our gasoline prices rose to ridiculous highs (drill, baby drill.) Public education hitting a new low, environmental protections being slashed, piddling little tax refund checks designed to make us think he was doing something for middle Americans but which didn't fool anybody (or did it?) and the list goes on and on and on. And yes, to answer your question, plain - I probably would have voted for just about anybody to get the incredibly destructive Republicans out of office. And so I did, as did millions of other Americans. I certainly was not alone. But make no mistake about the votes we cast for President Obama - we were thrilled to get someone with a brain and a conscience in that office. The relief you've seen on the faces at his rallies was not "drinking the kool-aide mind-numbing adoration". It was simply relief and a sense of thanking God that at long last maybe we would get someone who cared deeply about this country. We are relieved to have a man at the head of our country who makes a sincere effort to get along with other nations instead of alienating every country across the globe, a man who makes an effort to not be extremist in the plans he puts forth and the policies he endorses, a man who we can be proud of when he opens his mouth, a man who is willing to take responsibility for his actions and those of his country. Which is in stark contrast to what we had for the past 8 years: a man who hid behind his office, a man who embarrassed us when he visited other countries, a man who was willing to bend the truth to get his way, and a man who just wanted to be rich and powerful no matter who it hurt. While you're on your vacation I'd like for you to think about something while you're gone and bring back an answer for all of us. Why exactly do you still think that the Iraq war was a good thing? It is one of the most puzzling things about your posts.

It is a mystery to me why some people think that because Obama is a good speaker and not bad to look at, that it in some way affects what we think of his leadership abilities. We like his policies. We like them. We really like them. Why do you think we voted for him? You seem to think it's because it has something to do with his looks, his charisma, his skin color, his wife, what else am I missing? Get over it. We are in suppot of Obama's handling of foreign countries, we like his stance on global warming and education... and I could go on but you get the point... I think.

Who said anything about his charisma? We were so beaten down by the horrible Bush policies, we wouldn't have cared if a man with better policies had two heads and spoke with a lisp. Why didn't we hear you complain about Bush's policies that helped to create this mess? The same mess that had made Obama's actions (and Bush's initially) necessary? I don't recall you ever criticizing Bush for spending BILLIONS every week in Iraq. Don't you think that went a heckofa long way toward bankrupting our budget? Does it mean a thing to you that under your man, government grew even though the man said he was against big government? And what about that dirty, senseless war? How long have we been in Iraq? Was that what the nation bargained for when we elected the likes of George W. Bush and that stinker Dick cheney? Bush was given his turn. It didn't work. Now give Obama a turn. If and when we go belly up, you can be the first to say "I told you so, suckers!" Until then you're just blowing a bunch of hot air. Btw, I'll be all ears (or eyes as the case may be) when you have a well thought-out plan for revitalizing our economy and helping to repair the global economy from the far west to the far east.

And plain, in theory I certainly understand your disdain for people who are willing to stay with one particular party even if they are not crazy about the candidate. But I don't agree that they are singularly wrong for backing a candidate because of his or her party alignment and I certainly don't believe that people who are strong Republicans or Democrats, are necessarily sheep. Since political parties stand for certain issues, you can separate the man/woman from his/her party to some extent, but if what you believe in are Republican values, voting for a Democrat won't further your cause. In fact, it will give the opposition more power. That might not be very important to you, but don't kid yourself, it is important to the big picture.

plain, I agree with you about Sanford. I am especially sorry for what all of this has to be like for his children. They certainly don't deserve this. It almost looks as if he is trying to run his wife off. The fact that she "understands" and may have been willing to stay with him may be just the opposite of what he's wanting to have happen. Maybe the dude is so moonstruck he's willing to do just about anything to dump his wife and hook up full-time with his Argentinian hussy. :-) And obviously one of the reasons people were initially so aghast at his behavior is because he gave the impression that he was such a straight arrow. Speaking of arrows, now he's been "shot through the heart" as Bon Jovi would say. Tsk, tsk. For shame. *she says shaking her good finger at him*