WWW.RIDESIDE.NET

Posted by tgl on 2004-10-17 21:08:58 +0000

Well, I'm big on gin soaked raisins myself. What about the part where she states that Americans should be able to use market forces to procure prescription drugs?

Posted by rladew on 2004-10-18 01:30:03 +0000

Thats fine to use the market to procure prescription drugs: but wont getting them in the US market be precluded if we try to set up most of America under a governmental plan? the message I hear Kerry sending is one where we are not to trust Pfizer et al. b/c of their greediness, corruption etc. b/c he and the gov't can "provide" for the people so much better. Did you guys read all the stuff where John and Theresa have publicly talked about setting up a whole new area in the gov't called the dept of wellness? (I dont have a direct source, but google it. its out there.) Didn't you, Terry, tell me a while ago that you didn't think Kerry's plan would add more bureacracy and glut than we already have?

Posted by tgl on 2004-10-18 13:17:11 +0000

Kerry's plan is to enroll more people in the plans already run by the government. This is what is driving me crazy about Bush's and rladew's accusations. There are no new health care plans, the plan is to encourage enrollment for people already eligible for Medicare and expand eligibility for the plan already in use by legislators and federal employees. I have health care through my employer, I won't be effected. Enlarging enrollment will cost more money, that's a point worth considering. I happen to believe that getting access to preventive care will keep overall costs down and be beneficial to our society's health in general and mine in particular. For instance: when I get in that motorcycle accident, I don't want the emergency room clogged with single mothers and their measle ridden children. I don't understand how getting more people into health care will lower quality for everyone else. So, to answer your question: no, buying drugs at fair market prices would not be precluded . I'm just now googling for Dept. of Wellness and getting some information from all those impartial 'blogs rladew likes to sling around to prove a point. ;)

Posted by tendiamonds on 2004-10-18 14:02:52 +0000

Ha ha ha, terryg, so farcical! Your motorcycle doesn't work! Is your "accident" going to be discovering where you last parked it? That shouldn't require a trip to the ER.

Posted by tgl on 2004-10-18 14:15:59 +0000

I touched my motorcycle yesterday. ...and my pumpkin.

Posted by rladew on 2004-10-18 14:44:10 +0000

We are all guilty as far as citing media sources to support our arguments. As far "impartial blogs" are concerned - touche ! Guilty as charged! I do use these blogs but local yokel affiliates (even slate and NYT) usually have some degree of slant to them too IMHO. I feel like all of us, even if the news source is impartial, will bring a slant to how we interpret the news...

Posted by uncle on 2004-10-18 16:20:31 +0000

Wow, Terry G coming to the defense of the dems. Not voting for ol' Nadie this time around? In all seriousness, I am surprised to jump on here, my first time up, and find such a hard core debate occurring. I thought this site was all licorice and cotton candy. And I’m surprised to see that people are actual buying the rhetoric that Rush and Fox are slinging around. I have to back G Lorber here. There is no new health care plan, despite what they are telling you. Everything is an offering that can either be taken or left. The two major parts are 1) Covering kids on behalf of the states (and only if the state wants), and in turn the states has to pick up adults up to 300% of poverty and 2) If you want, you can buy into the government plan- and pay for it yourself- the same one that the senators buy into. That’s it. Nothing is forced down your throat. No choices are removed. People need to stop believing the crap on TV and the opinions stated in blogs and chat room- like this one.

Posted by frame609 on 2004-10-18 17:09:56 +0000

Uncle J!

Posted by tgl on 2004-10-19 05:40:29 +0000

I feel like I've been spanked.

Posted by rladew on 2004-10-19 10:22:49 +0000

Hey Uncle J! Welcome! For the record: I guess I stand corrected If its true it can be taken or left, that might be a point I would have to consider... I need to read up on this more. you are correct in assuming I thought that this was foisted on us with no choice... As far as Rush / Fox goes though: 1. I have never caught a Rush show in my entire life 2. If I watch TV news at all its usually McNeil Lehrer. Throughout the course of the election I think I have had Foxnews on like once. If its an argument that the American people are being duped by right wing propaganda, fair enough. However, I would like to believe that my own feelings / personal sentiments have not been entirely cemented by these textbook examples of right wing non-partisan news sources... Again, good to see you on the net Mr. J!!!

Posted by dawnbixtler on 2004-10-19 17:17:41 +0000

I watch Fox news all the time. Seriously.

Posted by tendiamonds on 2004-10-19 17:27:25 +0000

I've been to several Rush shows.

Posted by rladew on 2004-10-21 14:36:49 +0000

I should've clarified: Canadian Rush shows have been attended and appreciated. Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, no thanks...

Posted by rladew on 2004-10-21 14:54:59 +0000

oops. [url]http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/20/theresa.apologizes.laura/index.html[/url] I know we are voting for the president and not the president's spouse, but I would add just about everything concerning TH Kerry to KH4K website out there. First she calls me an idiot for questioning / having an adverse reaction to Kerry's Health Care Plan, then she drags out her crystal ball to tell people we'll have Osama before the elections (Where is he? clock's running down...), suggests a department of wellness, whatever the hell that is, and then gives the hefty and substantial medical advice of soaking gin in rasins. All while paying a SWEET 12% in income taxes its fair to say our peer group is paying closer to 20% (Heck GW and Laura paid 30% for 2003) apparently the rules dont apply to her.

Posted by tgl on 2004-10-21 15:32:42 +0000

It's your perogative to dislike someone, but some of your criticism is a little over blown. Are you really steamed that she offered people advice about gin soaked raisins? Loosen up! She didn't predict Osama's capture, she said it wouldn't surprise her if he showed up. (I think that's the quote...) Your overall point that candidate's spouses have too much exposure is good one. Maybe it's good for everyone to see what a brash speaker she is, it's less likely she'll be given any "weighty" policy issues as First Lady. Bring me Judith Stein! Here's a laffer: the rules don't apply to the Kerry-Heinz's, implying that they do for the Bush's. Can we agree that people this wealthy don't have rules?

Posted by G lib on 2004-10-21 15:42:26 +0000

TGLII, of course they have rules! What are you nuts? Those are the thing that the handlers worry about. Duh!