Thanks guys. I'm a little verklempft at all the support. I'll be alright in a few minutes...
Ha! I know what verklempt is, only I thought it was without the f.
Snood - the 8 - 12 year old group is delightful when you happen to be a grandmother to 5 of them, and can give them back to their mothers and fathers. In a social situation, there's still a distance to go. In my case, there's one eleven year old, two twelve year olds, and two older, so I speak with some close association to the age. But yes to Tartarin - please, we are not "you women."
Max - yep again. Among the ruling class of the Bush club, the only one different from the rest is the one they right now have no choice about, because he's the only acceptable one in most places. Aside from that, do take a look. Further, most of them, including many unseen ones, date back to Reagan days. And Laura Bush, as First Lady, certainly knows her place. Quite a few were and are members of the PNAC. The Carlyle group. When was the last time you saw or heard of Rod Paige, Norman Mineta, the women? They're not members, but they are window-dressing.
Oh, here I thought you were saying men basically were on the downhill slope (of what - usefulness? intelligence? virility?) before puberty, and women were basically hittin' on all eight cylinders well into their third decade. I just thought that was a load of sh_t. A thousand pardons and self flagellations.
The question in this forum is: which of the Democratic candidates (all male) have the intelligence, wit, and charm of the 8-12 group and which fall into the "Other" category? And a sidebar might be, Was W ever 8-12, or has he been the way he is his whole life?
thanks. I remembered the topic.
And I wasn't the one who took the detour originally.
Nope - the question actually has to do with the democratic platform on healthcare, and what positions are taken. And my goodness, detours are fine. The add another dimension. As for George - I wasn't aware that he had reached the age of eight yet, although I think Rumsfeld may have gotten to twelve.
Rumsfeld isn't human, so he doesn't count
Doesn't the healthcare issue bring us back and back and back to the matter of campaign financing and the influence of corporate money on the rotten healthcare system? Shouldn't we begin (yesterday) to de-demonize the concept of socialized healthcare which many countries have within the fold of democracy? Imagine you were, say, a recent arrival who has been invited to take a look at the American democracy [what's left of it], and create a full healthcare system within it. Start with nothing, describe what you (and you and you) want and what sort of entity would oversee it... Why don't we, in these pages, step off the party platforms and talk about what WE want, see if just this little group can reach some consensus. No pharma is paying US to say specific things, right? United HealthCare isn't breathing down OUR necks, is it?
We DO say these things. The problem is, we need persons in high places to listen to us. I think a national health is down the road. I don't see any other way, unless health care is taken off the table altogether, and we are all left to self-dose and die.
Sorry - these latter-day airplane pictures are making me dizzy.
Okay -- what sort of healthcare do you think should be available to you, personally (in a system in which we get to choose, as individuals, the kind of care we want)? To what extent should we "co-pay"? Where does the money come from to pay for what "co-pay" doesn't cover? Who administers the system -- the government, a separate, "transparent" commission...?
My quick answers to my own questions:
1. I want a full range of healthcare available with particularly emphasis on self-care and limited options on specialists and shiny machinery.
2. My annual co-pay (including medications) should not exceed a fixed, moderate average of the total amount I pay in taxes (excluding sales). Anything I pay in excess of that amount comes back to me in a refund.
3. The taxes paid by healthcare providers should directly fund the healthcare system and its administration. A portion of taxes paid by individuals goes into the system.
4. The system should be administered at federal level by an independent commission including Congressional appointees and a good percentage of consumer advocates. All meetings are open; all documents are open (excluding patient information); all finances are open.
Tartarin, if only. Do you think there would be a chance of that happening?
