Hillary On Dave Last Night

Hillary must have threatened major lawsuits against Youtube.com because they have pulled all of the SouthPark episodes making fun of Hillary and her southern voice in Selma, AL.

So what does mean??? Hillary says that the surge is working and that "we have to be prepared to fight the new war." Is she really saying that we will have more wars to fight when she is elected, and that the people who put her in office are the ones who will benefit financially via gov't contracts?

I'll give Hillary credit for learning from her mistakes. She clearly understands the best tactic to broaden government intrusion in the medical arena is to enter via the back door. This talking point about Bush denying healthcare to children is bunk-ola. He will happily renew the SCHIP program as it exists;what he rightly opposes is an expansion of the program that broadens the definition of a child to somebody up to 25 years of age living at home (!) and expanding benefits to include families earning up to $80,000 per year (!!!). I don't call an unemployed 24 year old living at home a child, I call them a bum, and people bringing home $80,000 don't need any of my tax dollars to procure insurance for their kiddies. Basically, expanding SCHIP as Hillary desires guarantees hundreds of thousands, if not millions will depend on the government to secure health insurance for them. Then, at some point down the road when the program is to be renewed, there will be an attempt to broaden the beneficiary pool yet again, and again, and the moochers who like somebody else 'taking care of them' will raise a fuss about how unfair they are being treated (dreading of course the confrontion with their deadbeat adult kids about getting off the couch and paying their own way through life).

I know healthcare is your profession, but you seem to get more fired up about the government providing basic healthcare for people than hosing 2-3 billion a week in Iraq. Is that a fair observation, or am I just angry that UCF is my hometown team? 80k a year for a family in many major cities is not a substantial income. Heck, Walton county is paying over 100k for their Bug Czar. I also see no problem for a 24 year old at home if they're still in school, or starting at the bottom trying to save for a new home. Government healthcare is inevitable, as they already make up most spokes of the wheel with Medicare/caid, Military, Federal agencies. I think it sad many prisoners in our country have seen a doctor more than hard working folks of modest means. Moore's film about the state of healthcare in the U.S, has many valid points.

Speaking of Hillary, why is it that these candidates address only "their" party? I thought the President was supposed to represent all the people, not only their party. (this applies to both sides)

Here is another question for you. InYouTube - HILLARY CLINTON @ DNC: "I'll End This War", Hillary says that if she had been President, she would not have started this war. In Dec 1998, Bill Clinton sent our troops to Iraq for combat. In 2002, Hillary voted to give an open checkbook to GWBush and allowed our troops to go to war, without even questioning the reasons why. Now, she says that she wouldn't have started this war. I think she speaks with a forked tongue. Can anyone explain this one to me?

Okay...that takes care of Hillary...who's next?

I know healthcare is your profession, but you seem to get more fired up about the government providing basic healthcare for people than hosing 2-3 billion a week in Iraq. Is that a fair observation, or am I just angry that UCF is my hometown team? 80k a year for a family in many major cities is not a substantial income. Heck, Walton county is paying over 100k for their Bug Czar. I also see no problem for a 24 year old at home if they're still in school, or starting at the bottom trying to save for a new home. Government healthcare is inevitable, as they already make up most spokes of the wheel with Medicare/caid, Military, Federal agencies. I think it sad many prisoners in our country have seen a doctor more than hard working folks of modest means. Moore's film about the state of healthcare in the U.S, has many valid points.

What is your definition of basic healthcare? I assure you, the government will provide us not with healthcare but will legislate volumes of rules, regulations, red tape, tax increases and beuraucracy while placing the burden of living within an incredibly complex system on providers and patients that may very well limit access to basic, and probably advanced healthcare in the first place. When I was 24 I had an apartment, worked and went to school...I also had a policy from Blue Cross that cost less than $100 per month. You know what I didn't have? Cable TV, the sacrifice of which covered more than half of my monthly premium. It is about people getting their priorities straight, and the same can be said of the family making $80k. If they can't make ends meet, then adjust something and make your family a priority-if adults bring kids into the world, it is their responsibility to make sure their basic needs are met, and, I dare say, basic healthcare is a fundamental need any parent worth their salt will bust their rump to provide their offspring. I agree that helping more people of modest means attain access to routine healthcare is an admirable goal, but I do not want the feds trying to fix it! I think a much better way of going about this is to let those folks spend $40 for an annual office visit, another $40 on annual lab tests and utilize generic medications if the need arises. This is not a fantasy! It could be accomplished if more people let go of the concept that they need health insurance for routine medical services and simply paid out of pocket for office visits AND purchased insurance to cover hospitalization, which would be a much more affordable policy than one that covers everything from office visits to drugs to ICU care.

What is your definition of basic healthcare? I assure you, the government will provide us not with healthcare but will legislate volumes of rules, regulations, red tape, tax increases and beuraucracy while placing the burden of living within an incredibly complex system on providers and patients that may very well limit access to basic, and probably advanced healthcare in the first place. When I was 24 I had an apartment, worked and went to school...I also had a policy from Blue Cross that cost less than $100 per month. You know what I didn't have? Cable TV, the sacrifice of which covered more than half of my monthly premium. It is about people getting their priorities straight, and the same can be said of the family making $80k. If they can't make ends meet, then adjust something and make your family a priority-if adults bring kids into the world, it is their responsibility to make sure their basic needs are met, and, I dare say, basic healthcare is a fundamental need any parent worth their salt will bust their rump to provide their offspring. I agree that helping more people of modest means attain access to routine healthcare is an admirable goal, but I do not want the feds trying to fix it! I think a much better way of going about this is to let those folks spend $40 for an annual office visit, another $40 on annual lab tests and utilize generic medications if the need arises. This is not a fantasy! It could be accomplished if more people let go of the concept that they need health insurance for routine medical services and simply paid out of pocket for office visits AND purchased insurance to cover hospitalization, which would be a much more affordable policy than one that covers everything from office visits to drugs to ICU care.

And here is one of the the roots of your problem. You can't change people after they have had these kids. The answer is lots of info and working to break the cycle of kids having sex/no sex education/kids getting pregnant/now can't get jobs/no good example set at home/no fathers at home, etc...but it all starts with preventing these pregnancies in the first place. That is where we should be throwing the money.

And here is one of the the roots of your problem. You can't change people after they have had these kids. The answer is lots of info and working to break the cycle of kids having sex/no sex education/kids getting pregnant/now can't get jobs/no good example set at home/no fathers at home, etc...but it all starts with preventing these pregnancies in the first place. That is where we should be throwing the money.

Do we start by sending all the Bratz dolls back to China?

Do we start by sending all the Bratz dolls back to China?

Yes please. Ugh I hate those awful things!!

http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_47_Million_Americans_Living_without_Health_Insurance_08270.html not good news

Why do women seem to hate her so much? I don't understand why women don't step up to the plate and support one of their own, with all the talk about needing a woman to run the country. What is wrong with Hillary? Is it the jealousy thing that always seems to pop up when a strong woman excels? You know, when women say they admire a strong woman but call her a Bee I Tee See H behind her back?

I hope I don't offend any SoWal ladies but I honestly would like to know if there is a reason women don't like her. Is it her personality, or something specific she's done? If the former keeps her from the White House then maybe we're not ready for a female president. If the latter, spill.

I don't think all women hate her, mostly just the Republican ones. ;-)

The women who do not like her, are the ones who truly believe that a woman's place is at home, not running the country. At least the ones I know personally that do not like her feel that way.

I don't think all women hate her, mostly just the Republican ones. ;-)

The women who do not like her, are the ones who truly believe that a woman's place is at home, not running the country. At least the ones I know personally that do not like her feel that way.

I don't think all women hate her, mostly just the Republican ones. ;-)

The women who do not like her, are the ones who truly believe that a woman's place is at home, not running the country. At least the ones I know personally that do not like her feel that way.

Yep, you just summed up Rapunzel's philosophy:funn:

I don't think all women hate her, mostly just the Republican ones. ;-)

The women who do not like her, are the ones who truly believe that a woman's place is at home, not running the country. At least the ones I know personally that do not like her feel that way.

I don't think that most people (and women in particular) who dislike Hillary's politricks, think as you mention above.

Minnie you passed 100 Posts!!! Keep on, keepin' on, sista!

I don't think all women hate her, mostly just the Republican ones. ;-)

The women who do not like her, are the ones who truly believe that a woman's place is at home, not running the country. At least the ones I know personally that do not like her feel that way.

Nope.

I don't think that most people (and women in particular) who dislike Hillary's politricks, think as you mention above.

Yep.

Yep, you just summed up Rapunzel's philosophy:funn:

OMG you are so dead. I'm telling.

OMG you are so dead. I'm telling.

She knows, she was just too disinterested to suffer foolishness yesterday

Minnie you passed 100 Posts!!! Keep on, keepin' on, sista!

Thank you, thank you, and I am just getting warmed up.:sick:

http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_47_Million_Americans_Living_without_Health_Insurance_08270.html not good news

Bob, I just saw this link. Just curious, is this data being gathered by the same census bureau that is urging a halt to deportation of illegal aliens so they can 'be counted', and if so, are they lumping the illegals into the uninsured population?

To quote my daughter, "I don't know". I do know most folks will drop major medical if they have a financial setback. There's got to be a better way for everyone to participate in funding access to both preventative and reactive healthcare.

Amen, I wonder why there is not more funding for ovarian cancer screening. The lady doc on the Today show this am said it is all because of economics. The research money is going elsewhere. Early screening could prevent so many deaths from this disease. It's usually diagnosed in later stages, which accounts for 15,000 deaths out of 23,000 cases being diagnosed in the US anually. There needs to be a test to detect this early, like a mammogram. :roll: :angry:

Kristi, here is some data from the CDC for 2004 regarding causes of death:
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

Heart disease: 654,092

Cancer: 550,270 (Note this is ALL cancers)
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,147

Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 123,884

Accidents (unintentional injuries): 108,694

Diabetes: 72,815

Alzheimer's disease: 65,829

Influenza/Pneumonia: 61,472

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 42,762

Septicemia: 33,464

I try to reassure women regarding ovarian cancer that statistically it is a fairly rare disease, as well as a rare cause of death, compromising only a small fraction of cancer related mortality. I know from experience it scares the living heck out of some women, but realistically, if the risk factors are not there, a woman is far more likely to die in a traffic accident, from a stroke, heart attack or pneumonia. I don't know if a screening test for ovarian cancer can be developed...many, many, many more women die of lung cancer, and there is no acceptable screening for that, either. Don't smoke, eat your veggies and live clean(just like your mama told you!) and you will be a healthy lady

I appreciate your research and statistics skunkape. I'm not scared of it but would rather see medicine focused in a procative rather than a reactive mode especially when hearing how so many women who died could've lived if it had not been for so many being diagnosed too late for successful treatment. Are you suggesting just forget about it or don't speak of it or just don't worry, or ...? Hey, I think I have just successfuly hijacked my own thread. Can I get a Hail yeah?