Capt.Slog

The US is far from having the "best medical care in the world." It's only the most expensive. If that were true, the rich wouldn't be coming to the states for medical treatment. A large number of "the rich" go to London for treatment You mean, like this guy? Or maybe you mean this guy. Or, this guy? Hmm....maybe not. No, I meant THE RICH, just like YOU wrote. If you want to discuss poor people, the UK and Canada do a far better job than we do.

I suspect the underlying motivation behind such variable registration fees has much to do with the relative difference in wear and tear on the roads due to use of the different vehicle types, which seems reasonable. I seem to recall reading that road damage varies with the cube of the axle weight of a vehicle.

WASHINGTON - For the first time, some airline passengers will skip metal detectors and instead be screened by body scanning machines that look through clothing for hidden weapons, the Transportation Security Administration said Tuesday. An experimental program that begins today at Tulsa International Airport will test whether the $170,000 body scanners could replace $10,000 metal detectors that have screened airline passengers since 1973. Airports in San Francisco, Las Vegas, Miami, Albuquerque and Salt Lake City will join the test in the next two months, TSA spokesman Christopher White said. The scanners aim to close a loophole by finding non-metallic weapons such as plastic and liquid explosives, which the TSA considers a major threat. The machines raise privacy concerns because their images reveal outlines of private body parts. "We're getting closer and closer to a required strip-search to board an airplane," said Barry Steinhardt of the American Civil Liberties Union. Privacy advocate Melissa Ngo fears that passengers won't understand that the scanners take vivid images that screeners view.

According to the IRS, 21% of people in the $500k - $1M income range underpay their taxes. So maybe he should simply stop nominating high income people.

The US is far from having the "best medical care in the world." It's only the most expensive. If that were true, the rich wouldn't be coming to the states for medical treatment. A large number of "the rich" go to London for treatment

About time. And at the expense of how many trees and how much CO2 spewed into the air to produce, transport, and dispose of that dead tree waste called bulk mailing? Try this: Fascinating way you have of admitting that you were WRONG. Have you been taking lessons from mnealtx?

But the best care is here in the US. You just have to pay for it. You have PROOF of that statement? Our life expectancy is nowhere near the top, and our infant mortality rate sucks. So while some people are receiving excellent care, there seem to be millions who are not.

No, but it outlines the problem. Interesting way you have of confessing that you were wrong.

The USPS has averaged over $1Billion/yr in profits over the past 10 years. Don't tell the righties, though; facts contrary to their belief system might make their heads explode.

It's winter - something is needed to entertain the residents.

While I agree that Burris should have refused the appointment, I see no perjury or deceit in his answer to the impeachment committee. Watch the video: He was asked if he had any contact with X, Y, or Z... and he replied "Yes". He was NOT asked with whom he had contact, or what they talked about. When I've given depositions under oath, I've always been instructed only to answer the exact question asked. I can't see the Burris can be faulted for answering the way he did. I can, because I'm viewing his testimony from the perspective of a citizen, not as a lawyer. If he'd given that testimony while a cadet or midshipman at a military academy, it would have qualified as "quibbling", for which he'd have been expelled for violating the honor code. He was deceptive by deliberate omission: he should have made the disclosure to the citizenry and the Senate; and that he did not is an intolerable violation of ethics. In my opinion. Disagree - He was participating in a legal action under the rules of evidence. He was NOT at a military academy. However, I still think he's a sleaze, his appointment is fatally tainted, and he should resign. I just don;t see any perjury, since he wasn't required under oath to answer questions that he was not asked.

"Ineffective" != "best possible"

While I agree that Burris should have refused the appointment, I see no perjury or deceit in his answer to the impeachment committee. Watch the video: He was asked if he had any contact with X, Y, or Z... and he replied "Yes". He was NOT asked with whom he had contact, or what they talked about. When I've given depositions under oath, I've always been instructed only to answer the exact question asked. I can't see the Burris can be faulted for answering the way he did.

Still wrong Are you going to start backing up your assertion, or are you going to admit you were talking bollocks? It's a pretty straightforward choice, I'm surprised that you don't seem to even understand your options... Oh, I understand my options. That is why I am letting you show yours Mr. Rush, Just claiming that posts that clearly indicate your factual and logical errors prove you correct is not a very clever debating tactic. It is reminiscent of 3rd grade arguments.

RIGHT - MDs should retain the right to prescribe ineffective treatments for their patients. Who needs evidence of effectiveness anyway?

"Dog bites man".

"Mony a mickle maks a muckle." The boys' jets are coming under increasing scrutiny, and the factories are making stuff that YOU (and I) buy.

Then why aren't you demanding that the Goreacle® use it? Do you have proof that he doesn't???? No.. didn't think so...but never let facts get in the way of a good Gore Bash...right ??? Do you have proof that he does? No, didn't think so...but we all know that you never let facts get in the way of a good bash. Since you asked the question implying that he doesn't, the burden is on you to provide supporting facts, not on Amazon. Um - no. SHE implied that the execs were wasteful (for doing the same thing that Gore does) and that they needed to teleconference instead of flying (with no proof that they do not). Ummm - nice try at being a weasel, but YOU brought up Gore and his supposed failure to teleconference. So the burden IS on you to prove your assertion, not on Amazon to disprove it.

Story: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/14/AR2009021401757.html

Then why aren't you demanding that the Goreacle® use it? Do you have proof that he doesn't???? No.. didn't think so...but never let facts get in the way of a good Gore Bash...right ??? Do you have proof that he does? No, didn't think so...but we all know that you never let facts get in the way of a good bash. Since you asked the question implying that he doesn't, the burden is on you to provide supporting facts, not on Amazon.

I am warning people not whining . that thread of yours did not say anything relevant. when did Barney Frank become a republican? http://www.house.gov/frank/fanniefreddie091308.html Thank you for your whiny warning, but next time base it on some facts and not supposition. Lending to poor people did NOT cause the crisis. Mortgage brokers' and bankers' greed combined with deregulation did. And the lead deregulator was Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX). BTW, I don't have a thread on the topic - yet another factual error on your part.

Lance I think I see your point. A crime commited 200 years ago and a crime commited today have a pretty big thing in common. THEY ARE BOTH CRIMES. Rescuing a bunch of marble sculptures from destruction by Venetian cannon fire hardly constitutes a crime. Had Elgin not rescued them, they would no longer exist at all, since the Ottomans were using them for barricades.

fascinating reading. Thanks, BV.

WTF??? Wendy W. Some people can't deal with the facts Marg posts, I guess.