Nuther police shooting

[T2K]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-06-17-police-shot_x.htm 

[OO1]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-06-17-police-shot_x.htm 

sad day - we salute these men and may God help the families -

[Taz]

Steven1963, on 12 Feb 2015 - 4:26 PM, said:

 

minermark, on 12 Feb 2015 - 2:44 PM, said:

Everyone should do a few ride-a-longs these days, times have changed, you pretty much can throw your current thoughts out the window when looking down the business end of a perps weapon, no matter the weapon. it's you or him.

It's just not what we think it is, TV/Media has blurred reality.

Do a few ride-a-longs and get back to me. see if you could live the life of an officer and what he/she faces daily.

 

Blah. They applied for the job, went through the training and know the risks. Not to mention they wear body armor.  The odds are slanted favorably to them.  At the end of the day if you can't handle the job without relying on killing someone throwing rocks in your direction then maybe you ought to choose a new career.

 

 

Local police where I grew up loved the young ride a long's.  With most of the officers all went well.  However Some Officers Took advantage of the Jail Bait Ride a Long's.   which sometimes got them removed from the force.  But not always.

 

I would not advocate for ride a longs with Police anymore then I would advocate putting environmentalist's on a Logger's Riggin crew  so they could experience the danger a riggin crew experiences every day.

 

Just like the Commercial Fisherman,  and High Lead Logger, the  American Police Officers chose their occupation.

 

 

eth2, on 12 Feb 2015 - 5:23 PM, said:

I am old enough to remember a different time. While the Andy Griffith Show, Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best, etc., portrayed idealized views of American life, the  important point is that they portrayed a view of America that was characterized by a high moral standard, traditional family values, and something for which to aspire, even if romanticized. What do we have today? Breaking Bad, Cops, and too any shows I  was embarrassed to watch with my teenager. Movie producers covet an "R" rating as they know without it attendance will suffer.

 

Shooting unarmed civilians, school shootings, children calling Family Services when they are disciplined, government blaming teachers for children who have no parental supervision or guidance to do homework, read, or engage in anything that does not involve mass carnage on a computer screen, are all part of the same macro issue. There is no moral compass that we can agree upon. Most anything is ok. 

 

We have come a long way in terms of basic issues of equality, but we have lost SO much in terms of basic standards of decency, responsibility and common morality. I am not a conservative, nor even a Republican, but I do miss the world of my childhood.

 

I remember the old shows.  Seems like the networks were able to entertain most of us without showing pictures that imply that people are killed, mutilated, or other such crap.

 

We used to leave guns hanging in the rack on the wall, and leave for vacation with all the doors unlocked.  Didn't think much about it back then.  What would happen if someone "needed" to get into the house?

 

Rocky and Bull Winkle show was normal fair on Saturday morning.   Leave it to Beaver was good too.

[Travis In Austin]

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon.

On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts.

Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation.

As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions.

The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout.

It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics.

Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support.

An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality.

I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either.

Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do.

Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people.

I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that.

The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want.

Then again, no man is an island.

[OO1]

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon.

On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts.

Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation.

As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions.

The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout.

It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics.

Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support.

An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality.

I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either.

Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do.

Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people.

I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that.

The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want.

Then again, no man is an island

 in the interim , the poor have no relief , inequalities are the norm -

 

we , have come full circle back to the emergence of the nation , and the creation of a new class of people -

[twistedcrankcammer]

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon.

On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts.

Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation.

As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions.

The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout.

It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics.

Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support.

An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality.

I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either.

Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do.

Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people.

I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that.

The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want.

Then again, no man is an island.

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.

Roger

[twistedcrankcammer]

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon.

On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts.

Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation.

As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions.

The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout.

It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics.

Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support.

An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality.

I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either.

Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do.

Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people.

I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that.

The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want.

Then again, no man is an island.

I am way more to the Right than just wanting to be left alone by the Government!

I want much, much smaller Government!

I want that you have to be a land owner to vote back so those that live off of government subsidies should not be able to vote for those who would govern because of how they would spend my taxes.

I want illegals deported with prejudice and free fire zones open on the boarders for those that would try to sneak in, both cartel and illegals would be curtailed.

There are purportedly 1 homosexual per 20 people in the united states, I want no more *** actors or those acting as *** than that ratio to be allowed to be broadcast on Television.

I want Big Government the HeII out of schools.

I want a straight tax for ALL economic levels.

I want no more welfare except for those who are permanently mentally or physically disabled or those mothers who can prove a divorce was not their fault. No more screwing around on your husband and receiving benefits for it. Also, no more multiple pregnancies with increased benefits, you get pregnant on welfare, you maintain status quo on your allotted benefits.

I don't want a balanced budget, I want the national debt eliminated.

This is a primary starters list, but you get the idea...

Roger

Edited February 15, 2015 by twistedcrankcammer

[sheltie dave]

 

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.

Roger

 

 

When you look at the action, and then you look at the rhetoric, you realize there is a disconnect. It doesn't take too long to discern that the rhetoric exists to get people elected, while the actions(and results) are what the people actually stand for.

 

For example, conservatism and conservatives say they stand for small government, and lower taxes. When they actually run government, though, it grows by leaps and bounds. Like wise when they say they want to lower taxes, they actually lower taxes that benefit themselves, create more loopholes for the upper tier of taxpayers so they can pay less, and throw out a piece of cake that the relative poor will receive an added benefit of enjoying the trickle down crumbs of what accidentaly falls out of someone's pocket.

 

What we end up with is larger government, less tax income and larger deficits, people trying to spin what conservatism IS, and more jobs created by expanding WEALTH where folks ask you whether you want your extra value meal supersized. It doesn't compute.

[twistedcrankcammer]

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.

Roger

 

When you look at the action, and then you look at the rhetoric, you realize there is a disconnect. It doesn't take too long to discern that the rhetoric exists to get people elected, while the actions(and results) are what the people actually stand for.

 

For example, conservatism and conservatives say they stand for small government, and lower taxes. When they actually run government, though, it grows by leaps and bounds. Like wise when they say they want to lower taxes, they actually lower taxes that benefit themselves, create more loopholes for the upper tier of taxpayers so they can pay less, and throw out a piece of cake that the relative poor will receive an added benefit of enjoying the trickle down crumbs of what accidentaly falls out of someone's pocket.

 

What we end up with is larger government, less tax income and larger deficits, people trying to spin what conservatism IS, and more jobs created by expanding WEALTH where folks ask you whether you want your extra value meal supersized. It doesn't compute.

The same can be said of the Liberals, we just need a reel idealist on the Right. Problem is it would probably end up in assassination.

Roger

[sheltie dave]

So you don't have anyone who is a Conservatist, you just have people who talk about it? When, in reality, they are cut from the same cloth as Liberals. Hmmm.

[eth2]

As this thread has become highly politicized, I have stayed out of it.

However, I want to tell you all a story from my childhood:

My father was a skydiver and I would go with him on weekends to the airport where the club met. One of the members was a very nice man, in his 50's, who worked hard as a custodian at a hospital in Syracuse. His wife developed cancer, and despite the fact that he worked for a large hospital, had no health insurance. After she died he told my father the story, with tears running down his face, of how his wife would pretend to take her medication, but in reality return it to the bottle. The reason for this was they were losing everything because of the cost of treatment/medication.

How can a moral, civilized nation allow such things to occur? We were the ONLY first world country without universal healthcare. How can a conservative believe that we do not have a responsibility to our fellow man? As I know better than try to change the beliefs of hard core conservatives (or liberals for that matter), I am not going to get into arguments with Roger or anyone else. You form your beliefs based on how you see the world. I see the world as requiring my participation to try and make it better. That is why I now practice law on the plaintiffs' side. Previously I worked for the "other side" and made much more money. As you get older, other things become important.

"And that's all I have to say about that." Forest Gump

[akdave]

As this thread has become highly politicized, I have stayed out of it.However, I want to tell you all a story from my childhood:My father was a skydiver and I would go with him on weekends to the airport where the club met. One of the members was a very nice man, in his 50's, who worked hard as a custodian at a hospital in Syracuse. His wife developed cancer, and despite the fact that he worked for a large hospital, had no health insurance. After she died he told my father the story, with tears running down his face, of how his wife would pretend to take her medication, but in reality return it to the bottle. The reason for this was they were losing everything because of the cost of treatment/medication.How can a moral, civilized nation allow such things to occur? We were the ONLY first world country without universal healthcare. How can a conservative believe that we do not have a responsibility to our fellow man? As I know better than try to change the beliefs of hard core conservatives (or liberals for that matter), I am not going to get into arguments with Roger or anyone else. You form your beliefs based on how you see the world. I see the world as requiring my participation to try and make it better. That is why I now practice law on the plaintiffs' side. Previously I worked for the "other side" and made much more money. As you get older, other things become important."And that's all I have to say about that." Forest Gump

That's a compelling story (serious no sarcasm) but on the other side of that coin is a health care law designed to take care of THAT poor woman, which now drives premiums through the roof for other hard working folks who are just barely getting by. Our country is broke. The ONLY way to universally fund healthcare is to take more money from the people to pay for it. They can't. They grossly overspend now. I'd love to write a check for everyone's medical bills, but I don't have that kind of money. Our govt doesn't either. Once they get into the business of trying, things tend to get quite messy. (These aren't health care professionals making this the law of the land.).

Stories like you mentioned are heart breaking, but a duty to my fellow man, imho, does not mean give more power to a government. That, historically, has not worked out well now matter the romantic intentions.

[eth2]

As this thread has become highly politicized, I have stayed out of it.However, I want to tell you all a story from my childhood:My father was a skydiver and I would go with him on weekends to the airport where the club met. One of the members was a very nice man, in his 50's, who worked hard as a custodian at a hospital in Syracuse. His wife developed cancer, and despite the fact that he worked for a large hospital, had no health insurance. After she died he told my father the story, with tears running down his face, of how his wife would pretend to take her medication, but in reality return it to the bottle. The reason for this was they were losing everything because of the cost of treatment/medication.How can a moral, civilized nation allow such things to occur? We were the ONLY first world country without universal healthcare. How can a conservative believe that we do not have a responsibility to our fellow man? As I know better than try to change the beliefs of hard core conservatives (or liberals for that matter), I am not going to get into arguments with Roger or anyone else. You form your beliefs based on how you see the world. I see the world as requiring my participation to try and make it better. That is why I now practice law on the plaintiffs' side. Previously I worked for the "other side" and made much more money. As you get older, other things become important."And that's all I have to say about that." Forest Gump

That's a compelling story (serious no sarcasm) but on the other side of that coin is a health care law designed to take care of THAT poor woman, which now drives premiums through the roof for other hard working folks who are just barely getting by. Our country is broke. The ONLY way to universally fund healthcare is to take more money from the people to pay for it. They can't. They grossly overspend now. I'd love to write a check for everyone's medical bills, but I don't have that kind of money. Our govt doesn't either. Once they get into the business of trying, things tend to get quite messy. (These aren't health care professionals making this the law of the land.).

Stories like you mentioned are heart breaking, but a duty to my fellow man, imho, does not mean give more power to a government. That, historically, has not worked out well now matter the romantic intentions.

I had two cervical spine operations - total cost $650,000. Total days in hospital (for both operations) was 6 days. $7 for an aspirin, $1,700 per screw for the spine brace (10 such screws were required), and on and on. Perhaps we should be looking at how our healthcare dollars are spent rather than denying services. Perhaps we should train more doctors so that we do not have to wait 3 months for a physical. Despite being the highest cost per capita in health care, we are NOWHERE near the top in indices of healthcare outcomes. Let's stop blaming the people for our problems and look at the profiteers who are raping and pillaging the economy. Let's look at the cost of bailing out those profiteers like the bankers. Let's not blame the least fortunate for outcomes in which they play little part.

Edited February 15, 2015 by eth2

[eth2]

Damn, I said I was not going to get sucked into this.

I am done.

[akdave]

Getting under the hood of the health care industry I can certainly agree with. It is no where near comparable in cost to the rest of our economy. My son broke his wrist and it cost somewhere total around 5k and he only needed a splint and ace bandage. On the bill breakdown they wanted $500.00 for "Surgery" to wrap his arm. No doctor touched my son at any point. A nurses asst wrapped an ace bandage and got 500 for it. Wife questioned it, they took their three business days to review it and said it was correctly billed. Not sure what a banker had to do with that as a villain of sorts, but someone's making good money on that. (I realize it's a minor example, but empathize with the absurdity of health care costs). That's change I could get behind, bringing that cost back down to earth. It's the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US (I believe).

I just don't trust government bc they can take your liberty. I used to do that for a living. I'd rather deal with 100 corrupt corporations than one corrupt government and imho, the root of all of these issues is just that - corruption. It's our common enemy, it's stinks in govt, in business, in relationships. Humans are corruptable and humans run corps and govts. Sorry OP I realize this is way off topic.

[twistedcrankcammer]

A Doctor still gets the Delivery fee for an infant whether they make it there or not, the nurse who DID the delivery gets their $30 an hour base pay for performing the Doctors job. I have seen Nurses talk a Doctor through using a new instrument or a new procedure in Surgery, the Doctor still gets full price (It is a "Practice" after all) and the nurse still gets their $30 an hour. There is a reason all these foreign Doctors are coming here. But Doctors are only a small tip of the iceberg, Hospitals gouge, Insurance companies Screw, and medical suppliers and pharmaceutical companies bend you over without grease. We also have the poor screwing the present system which passes the cost on to you. You have no idea how many welfare cases flood the ER because they want a pass to get out of working for their welfare because their back hurts, or Johnny has the sniffles and they take the squad in because they don't want to burn the gas (This is WAY more common than one might believe)and they always bring 13 family members and they want the royal treatment, free pops and snacks for everyone, warmed blankets and treat the nurse that is at the same time taking care of them, and working to pay for their care, like something beneath them and their personal servant. I cannot handle working in the ER because of this. I can't stand for it!

Roger

[Travis In Austin]

Joesph McCarthy was a conservative Republican in the 50s. So was Nixon.

On the issue of governmental intrusion, protection from police intervention, what some people call "liberty" was primarily established by what are considered "liberal" courts.

Erosion of those protections are generally considered to be the result of "conservative" court decisions, with the exception of Scalia's decisions relating to the right of confrontation.

As it relates to what police are able to do, or not do, it is primarily derived from conservative court decisions.

The problem with mixing economic conservatism, eliminating welfare state as you refer to it for example, with social/religious conservatism is you cannot be all things to all people. You have to compromise on every issue. "I will support your tax cut and cut welfare, but you have to support my farm subsidy bill. I will cut medicare but you have to support support auto bailout.

It seems everyone is conservative unless it effects their state or district. Then trades are made, which is called politics.

Speaking of television, it revolutionized America, an in, it was a revolution. It has been credited with costing Nixon the election, causing an outrage in the North upon seeing treatment of blacks in the South leading to Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and video from Vietnam every night on TV, the first televised war, cut off support.

An "idealistic state" in the 50s, if you were white and male I guess so. I loved Andy Griffith, all of his shows, including Matlock. But TV isn't reality, it is entertainment which is an escape from reality.

I'm a "true" "conservative", I want small government, I want it out of my life. If someone wants to drink, smoke pot, or whatever else it is nobodys business what they do in their own home, including their bedroom if consenting adults. I dont want government being in the religion business, how I worship and where is none of their business. What happens between a patient and a doctor is nobody's business. If I want a gun in my house that is no one's business either.

Of course, there are other conservatives who tell me they want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can tell doctors what they can and can't do.

Then I have other conservatives telling me they want want government just a tiny bit bigger so they can control what happens in people's bedrooms, in school rooms. I have other conservatives telling me we need to conduct surveillance and collect data on people.

I amswer them all the same, you don't like abortion, it's a moral issue, I don't need to pay government to teach religion or morals. Same sex marriage, mixed race marriage, mixed religion marriage, moral and religious questions, I don't want to pay government to do that.

The freedom "to be let alone" is what I want.

Then again, no man is an island.

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.

Roger

I'm not confused, "conservative" politicians are confused. Read William F. Buckley, the father od modern conservatism is this country, a true conservative. He was a staunch supporter of civil rights, eliminating antisemitism, and advocated for the legalization of all drugs.

Travis

[Travis In Austin]

You are confusing what some conservatives want or have done with what conservatism IS.

Roger

When you look at the action, and then you look at the rhetoric, you realize there is a disconnect. It doesn't take too long to discern that the rhetoric exists to get people elected, while the actions(and results) are what the people actually stand for.

For example, conservatism and conservatives say they stand for small government, and lower taxes. When they actually run government, though, it grows by leaps and bounds. Like wise when they say they want to lower taxes, they actually lower taxes that benefit themselves, create more loopholes for the upper tier of taxpayers so they can pay less, and throw out a piece of cake that the relative poor will receive an added benefit of enjoying the trickle down crumbs of what accidentaly falls out of someone's pocket.

What we end up with is larger government, less tax income and larger deficits, people trying to spin what conservatism IS, and more jobs created by expanding WEALTH where folks ask you whether you want your extra value meal supersized. It doesn't compute.

I like this, very well stated. People take positions they think are liberal or conservative, but which are in fact the opposite.

[Travis In Austin]

Very well said.

Special interests above "We the people."

[OO1]

As this thread has become highly politicized, I have stayed out of it.

However, I want to tell you all a story from my childhood:

My father was a skydiver and I would go with him on weekends to the airport where the club met. One of the members was a very nice man, in his 50's, who worked hard as a custodian at a hospital in Syracuse. His wife developed cancer, and despite the fact that he worked for a large hospital, had no health insurance. After she died he told my father the story, with tears running down his face, of how his wife would pretend to take her medication, but in reality return it to the bottle. The reason for this was they were losing everything because of the cost of treatment/medication.

How can a moral, civilized nation allow such things to occur? We were the ONLY first world country without universal healthcare. How can a conservative believe that we do not have a responsibility to our fellow man? As I know better than try to change the beliefs of hard core conservatives (or liberals for that matter), I am not going to get into arguments with Roger or anyone else. You form your beliefs based on how you see the world. I see the world as requiring my participation to try and make it better. That is why I now practice law on the plaintiffs' side. Previously I worked for the "other side" and made much more money. As you get older, other things become important.

"And that's all I have to say about that." Forest Gump

strictly greed  -  the country does not want to help fund a universal health system as it entails that a public healthcare system could take some resources away that the private system takes for granted -

 

-so as only a tax or an earning deduction or a corporate tax could fund this system ,  the government has not decided to allow public funding for healthcare - why , very simple , they are ,  themselves  , covered by insurance , paid in full for life -why should they care -

 

-now take away these benefits and they might  just care -after all , they are sufficiently well paid that they could pay their own way -

 

 

universal public  health care is funded by the taxpayer -it is not free -it comes out from the taxes paid to the Government  -

 

in the modern world , as taxes are going up everywhere , countries with universal healthcare , are pulling slowly out of public healthcare as they want to tax just about everything  else instead -

 

-in the USA a Doctor earns  20-30  times more than a doctor in the UK  -10  times more than in Canada -could you convince the Doctors to accept lower pay to work in a universal public system -

 

in countries like Canada , universal healthcare is decreasing at an alarming rate as more doctors come on board  with private care -as the public system is slower to treat the common emergencies due to a lack of new  funds - a secondary private system is  growing -fully financed -

 

- in the USA , when a poor person needs care , the private system has no way of billing the individual as the government will not accept the charges -the government would have to start by negociating a billing structure with major hospitals - and build entirely new hospitals for the public healthcare funded by the taxpayer -

 

-healthcare is a debate that always gets sidelined and forgotten during and after every election -it is sad to say that in the USA we do not care enough to actively ask for the Government to implement a public health care system -

 

while we talk of everything else - abortion-civil rights , marriage rights ,, gun rights , etc ,