 |
|
|
|
 |
NYCTrancefan
Destination Everywhere!

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: New York City in a Café del Mar mood
|
|
|
Jul-30-2004 13:49
|
|
|
 |
 |
imokruok
Lawyers, guns, and money

Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA / Milwaukee, WI
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I'd like to say he did an ok job, but like Kerry typically does--he put me to sleep, so I missed a lot here and there.
|
I don't think I've heard one pundit say that they rate his speech as the best, which is sort of a bad thing. Obama, Clinton, and Edwards all had far more charisma, and it appeared to overshadow Kerry's moment in the sun. Now, of course everyone here's entitled to their own opinion on how good his speech was or wasn't, but Zogby's reporting today that polling during the convention shows no bounce whatsoever for the campaign. If Clinton didn't perk up the voters, monotone John didn't either.
What absolutely floors me is how people can say the convention did nothing but preach for unity among Americans. "Oh, they will bring us all together!" Apparently, those people missed John Edwards' speech, which was 1960's class warfare to the core. There's two Americas? Really? Sorry...it just so happens that the US has the world's wealthiest middle class, that's far better off than Edwards wanted it to appear. And if there really are two Americas, and they are trying to unify the country, what are they doing to secure the votes of both Americas? It was the most divisive address I've heard at a convention in my lifetime, except perhaps for Buchanan's in 1992, which I enjoyed, but was quite a bit too conservative for the entire country to digest.
| quote: |
Nice photoshop, Imokurok! |
Can't take credit for this one, but I love it.
___________________
FLUSHED THE JOHNS!
|
|
Jul-30-2004 15:01
|
|
|
 |
 |
NYCTrancefan
Destination Everywhere!

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: New York City in a Café del Mar mood
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
What absolutely floors me is how people can say the convention did nothing but preach for unity among Americans. "Oh, they will bring us all together!" Apparently, those people missed John Edwards' speech, which was 1960's class warfare to the core. There's two Americas? Really? Sorry...it just so happens that the US has the world's wealthiest middle class, that's far better off than Edwards wanted it to appear. And if there really are two Americas, and they are trying to unify the country, what are they doing to secure the votes of both Americas? It was the most divisive address I've heard at a convention in my lifetime, except perhaps for Buchanan's in 1992, which I enjoyed, but was quite a bit too conservative for the entire country to digest. |
I find it rather ironic that you ask what the Democrats are doing to unify the "two Americas" can't the same question be asked of the Republicans, or do you believe that there is no such concept as two America's. Moreover the most divisive address, you cannot be serious. In the world's richest nation, with one of the best healthcare systems why is it that so many Americans are uninsured and have to go to emergency rooms just for a doctor visit, why are so many senior citizens having to order their prescriptions from Canada if they are able to do so, why is it that we are still discussing the issue of education when Bush said "No Child Left Behind" his philosophy should be "No Corportation Left Behind"
Whether you realize it or not these are core issues to many Americans and taken seriously, not just "War on Terror" I am still waiting for one Bush supporter to state his policies that have improved this country and brought us closer together, or is it a philosophy that is not to be too concerned with. How suited that would be for such a divisive administration. Its just a reflection of their overall attitude since coming to office in dealing with others.
___________________
Trance = Heart, Mind, Body and Soul all in 1
Current fav. Global Experience = Madras
|
|
Jul-30-2004 15:46
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Shakka
Supreme tranceaddict

Registered: Feb 2003
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by NYCTrancefan
Well if they are the working poor, living on every paycheck, still pays their taxes should they not have decent healthcare in their own nation. You make it sound like its a bunch of welfare crackheads that are knocking at the doctors door for free healthcare. I'm sure you are smarter than that to realize that many Americans are hardworking and still cannot get a decent healthcare coverage through their jobs and certainly on what they make. I remember a few years ago my mom had surgery for fibrosis and they couldn't wait to kick her out of the hospital bed, the insurance company kept calling and inquiring when she was leaving. Never mind that she was covered through her job at St. Johns University as a custodian or that such a surgery was taxing on her. Thankfully she is okay but it just demonstrates where the priorities lie.
If you can't pay for it then rot for all we care is the impression that I am left with from your statement. Not every American is blessed with a high wage job and access to top notch healthcare. Frankly there are animals in America that get better healthcare than some tax paying citizens, what a shame. I think that most Americans can care less about socialism if that's what you are suggesting. The first thing you are asked when you step into the emergency room or see a doctor, What insurance do you have, they can care less what is wrong with you short of you dying. I guess its all wrong to expect decent care when you pay taxes, spoken like a true Bush fan. |
You're making a lot of conclusions based on my comment. True or false: The typical mindset in this country now feels that free healthcare is a right? Somebody has to pay for these things--but is it the implicit obligation of the wealthy to be the babysitters for those less fortunate than them? Sure, it's nice if they voluntarily help, but you can't demand such things at the point of a gun--that's a violation of another person's freedom. Just because someone has more money than you doesn't give you the right to treat them as a punching bag.
And if a person is really sick, they can still go to a hospital and recieve some basic level of healthcare even if they don't have insurance. Doctors adhere to the Hippocratic Oath, which means that their primary duty is to help the sick, not worry about whether they are insured or not. I'm sure a lot of doctors would be more willing to help out for less if they knew they wouldn't have the John Edwards of the world hunting them down after they perform a life saving operation to collect a lottery verdict which in turn raises the cost to all for insurance. Last I checked my homeowners insurance wasn't paid for by the government, why should health insurance be so different?
Charity is fine. Charity at the point of a gun is not fine. I give lots of money to charity, but not because I'm told to, but because I want to. If someone tried to mandate charity, I'd laugh at them and swear to never give their organization money as long as I live.
|
|
Jul-30-2004 16:27
|
|
|
 |
 |
xKaoSx
I need more cow bell !!

Registered: Jul 2002
Location: San Diego, Ca.
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
You're making a lot of conclusions based on my comment. True or false: The typical mindset in this country now feels that free healthcare is a right? Somebody has to pay for these things--but is it the implicit obligation of the wealthy to be the babysitters for those less fortunate than them? Sure, it's nice if they voluntarily help, but you can't demand such things at the point of a gun--that's a violation of another person's freedom. Just because someone has more money than you doesn't give you the right to treat them as a punching bag.
And if a person is really sick, they can still go to a hospital and recieve some basic level of healthcare even if they don't have insurance. Doctors adhere to the Hippocratic Oath, which means that their primary duty is to help the sick, not worry about whether they are insured or not. I'm sure a lot of doctors would be more willing to help out for less if they knew they wouldn't have the John Edwards of the world hunting them down after they perform a life saving operation to collect a lottery verdict which in turn raises the cost to all for insurance. Last I checked my homeowners insurance wasn't paid for by the government, why should health insurance be so different?
Charity is fine. Charity at the point of a gun is not fine. I give lots of money to charity, but not because I'm told to, but because I want to. If someone tried to mandate charity, I'd laugh at them and swear to never give their organization money as long as I live. |
Who made these people wealthy in the first place?
Probably people who couldnt afford health insurance and spent
the money instead on their goods or services.
|
|
Jul-30-2004 16:41
|
|
|
 |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:13.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|