Sad day for America
in [Toyota]
|
From: Mike Hunter on 22 Mar 2010 12:54 It appears the American people were smart for all those years because they knew allowing the government sneak into the healthcare business would eventually lead to Nationalization of our healthcare then they got stupid in the last election on allow us to start down that slippery slope with this bill. Our last hope is the 29 states that are willing fight BO and the Dims in the Supreme Court "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly(a)my-deja.com> wrote in message news:9e0c5df7-151b-432d-982e-cdac47a37be3(a)t32g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > > > Mike Hunter wrote: >> >> FDR said, This day will live in infamy," after the Japs attacked Pearl >> Harbor. Like December 7,1941 and September 11, 2001, March 21 2010 will >> also live in infamy as the most devastating attack on America. >> >> In 1941 and 2001 we were attacked by our enemies. Today were will be >> attacked by the worst possible enemy a county can have, the enemy within. >> We spent billions to fight our foreign enemies, but we will fight the >> enemy >> within with the strongest weapon in our arsenal, the ballot. >> >> In 1941 I left school early to fight in WWII. I will be 84 on March >> 22nd. >> Years ago when I sold my fleet service business I set up trust funds for >> all >> of my grand children and great grand children. Since then I have been >> endowing Hospitals and Colleges with my wealth. >> >> From now on I will us my considerable wealth to help see the Supreme >> Court >> declare this law Un-Constitutional before I die. > > There's no fool like an old fool, and for you to think the Obama > health plan is the worst thing to happen domestically to the US proves > that you're not only an old fool but a senile, drunk old fool. > > Long ago, you mentioned having private health insurance that was > better and cheaper than Medicare, but you never named it, and I've > never been able to find anything like that, especially for senior > citizens. I know you don't mean Medicare Advantage because it's > neither a private system (tax dollars pay for it) nor cheaper (15% > more than Medicare). So what is your coverage? > > BTW FDR wanted universal health care, too. Truman pushed hard for it, > Eisenhower introduced tax breaks for employee health plans, JFK wanted > to implement something, Johnson did, for seniors and somewhat for the > poor, Nixon pushed coverage for all, as did Clinton. That proves > Obama a freak among US presidents. >
From: Mike Hunter on 22 Mar 2010 13:02 You can bet the first thing that BO and the Dims will cut is Nation Defense, as did Clinton. If we do that we will be at risk for a generation. It was Clinton who stopped making the Brady Armored Troop Carrier that left us with the ill equipped Hummer, that led to the deaths of so many of our troop, until they could get enough of the Hummers armored for use in the war. "ACAR" <dimndsonmywndshld(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:fc7aa3fd-0eba-437d-a5ca-3d12f6d8dd5b(a)33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... On Mar 21, 6:04 pm, "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> wrote: This debate over health care is exactly like the one FDR fought over Social Security. This is all about taxes; all the other stuff is just a smoke screen. And just like Social Security the Nation will discover long term benefits from making all its people more financially secure with health insurance. Ya know, if we eliminated military-oriented earmarks the DoD says are not needed, we could pay for health care without raising your taxes.
From: Mike Hunter on 22 Mar 2010 13:16 Ever notice when the BO and the Dims talked about "healthcare" they always were careful NOT to use the term "healthcare," but rather to use the words "people without HEALTH INSURANCE?" The reason is they knew that under the "Hill-Burton Act," any American can walk into ANY hospital or Doctors office, that accepts Medicare reimbursements, and receive WHATEVER "HEALTHCARE" they needed, whether they had heath insurance or could afford to pay or not. NOBODY could legally be turned down, period. "hls" <hls(a)nospam.nix> wrote in message news:nP-dnRCLHZpnCTrWnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "dr_jeff" <utz(a)msu.edu> wrote in message > news:5_adnYjbW8A6KjvWnZ2dnUVZ_oudnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> lil abner wrote: >> >> <...> >> >>> higher taxes..mandated force participation or fines and jail...16,500 >>> more IRS Agents....Death Panels and mandatory end of life counciling >>> every 5 years....cut Medicare coverage....make everyone pay an >>> additional several thousand dollars a year....coverage for Illegal >>> Aliens... >> >> Death panels? When were this ever on the table? >> >> >> This idea was made up by the Republicans. >> >> Don't believe every you read. >> >> Jeff >> > > It wasnt "made up" by anyone, but it was very badly interpreted by > a lot of people. There was a call of end of life counseling. Taken to > extremes, it was called a "death panel". > > Is there any precedent? Yes. The medical industry can, (has and will > probably go further), a concept called "denial of services". If you dont > have the insurance coverage, and if you dont have the cash in hand, you > may be denied services which would have kept you alive. In contra to > some of the heroics of the past, this will be "pay as you go, or go > earlier"
From: Mike Hunter on 22 Mar 2010 13:43 I tuned 84 today, left school in April 1944, you do the math. I, or anyone else, can give money to the US or a State Treasury. I am however limited by law in what I can give to a particular candidate. As to the limited time a spend in any NG, I manage my investments, Company and Foundations online and have some free time between what I do, to drop in the NGs. I seldom debate, I try to educate or enlighten those that have an opinions that is obviously wrong or whose reasoning is simply convoluted, as I am doing at present. Not too worry I was educated in one of Americas finest Engineering schools, I am no fool. My Attorneys have set up the trust funds so the monies used are dedicated to specific uses. If someone becomes a drug user or an alcoholic they default the trust and the money then goes to drug and alcoholic clinics, for example ;) "Paul W. Schleck" <pschleck(a)novia.net> wrote in message news:4ba79ee9$0$246$540ea2cf(a)novia.net... > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > In <4ba697f8$0$10956$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net> "Mike Hunter" > <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> writes: > > [...] > >>In 1941 I left school early to fight in WWII. I will be 84 on March >>22nd. >>Years ago when I sold my fleet service business I set up trust funds for >>all >>of my grand children and great grand children. Since then I have been >>endowing Hospitals and Colleges with my wealth. > > I'm a long-time lurker, occasional poster, on some of these newsgroups > (mostly to read articles about automobiles, not necessarily political > debates about topics not reasonably related to the auto industry). I > couldn't help but reply to this one. > > You lied about your age and enlisted at age 15? Certainly history > confirms that that did occasionally happen, but it was relatively rare. > Rare enough for it to be unusual for any one individual to claim. At > what point in adulthood did the collision between your claimed age and > your real age occur? For example, you presently acknowledge your real > age, and presumably have made legal claims to your age in the past such > as for driver's licenses, Social Security and Medicare benefits, etc., > based on some kind of documentation. At some point you would have had > to stop relying on fabricated or non-existent evidence of your age and > identity, and return to the truth. How difficult was that? And thank > you for your service, at whatever age, by the way. > > Also, if you have so much wealth, why are you wasting time debating us > poor fools on such a low-rent venue like Usenet, and drawing attention > to that wealth in ways that are not necessarily in your best interests? > Without peeling back the curtain, it's hard to say whether you're > actually on the level, or one of many, many anonymous people making very > broad and grandiose claims about themselves that cannot be verified. > One of the most storied takedowns of someone's braggardry on their > alleged wealth, technical expertise, and business success on Usenet was > about one Mr. John de Armond, expertly critiqued by the late Larry > Lippman: > > > Perhaps you might assert that you don't care if we believe you. Fair > enough, but then why would you otherwise care what we think on other > topics? > > Not being rich, but being a sensible person who respects the real and > verified successes of identifiable individuals and their advice on > various subjects (including successful businessman and retired radio > talk show host Bruce Williams), I might suggest that if you want your > grandchildren and great-grandchildren to succeed in life, probably one > of the worst things that you can do is set up unconditional taps of free > money for them. Sure, pay for their college education, help them set up > a business or employ them in yours, but don't make their living so easy > that they might become unmotivated to try, succeed, fail, overcome > adversity, learn from their mistakes, and achieve like you have > supposedly done. I'm not sure that our country needs another set of > third and fourth generation Kennedys, Rockefellers, Waltons, Hiltons, > Schwinns, etc., and the various tabloid-worthy hijinks of some of their > more colorful members. > > One of the more interesting answers from Bruce Williams if you've every > listened to his radio talk show or attended his public appearances is to > the question of what he thinks about the original "Uniform Gift to > Minors Act". But then someone who was truly wealthy, had succeeded in > business, and was the patriarch of a large family including > fourth-generation descendents, would keenly understand all of these > issues already, wouldn't they? Perhaps your wealth is modest enough > that these are not issues. Perhaps you have already thought about these > issues, and have come up with good solutions for them. > >>From now on I will us my considerable wealth to help see the Supreme Court >>declare this law Un-Constitutional before I die. I intend to donate >>$500,000 to the Sate of Florida to aid the AG in the court fight he and 29 >>mother states will bring the day after BO signs it into law. > > Please clarify how it is possible to give such a large sum of money to > public officials with the condition that specific actions be done. That > sounds very close to unlawful influence peddling or bribery to me. Have > you consulted with your attorney(s) on this one? I'm not saying that it > can't be done, I'm just honestly curious how it can be done, legally > that is. > > Also, if you have that much disposable wealth, I would like to speak > with you off-line about some worthwhile favorite charities of mine that > I could suggest for you to make similarly large donations. > > (Ob-Toyota/Ob-Automobile: Owner of 1999 Toyota Solara SLE) > > - -- > Paul W. Schleck > pschleck(a)novia.net > http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/ > Finger pschleck(a)novia.net for PGP Public Key > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS) > > iD8DBQFLp56g6Pj0az779o4RAklyAJ91QFO55aL82BvQjdnxZp1IputS7QCglHJz > LDwPqZ0FXvQ/CBUNfp6hZUw= > =Y894 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Mike Hunter on 22 Mar 2010 13:50
Actually Ed I have noticed a change already. The cost of my Medicare Advantage Plan when up over 100% in anticipation by Blue Cross of the Billons of dollars reduction for Medicare Advantage Plan funds in the bill. Millions of us older American will be victimized by the $500,500,000 to be taken our of Medicare if this bill is not over turned by the Supreme Court. "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)mindspring.com> wrote in message news:ho8792$sae$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > Mike, > > Take a deep breath and relax. > > Life goes on, and you probably won't notice a change. > > Ed > |