Public option is dead. It's official.

[Danno 1,228]

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

All depends on what poor people we are talking about, some dont deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Your only dealing with one painting here, so how does painting them as all noble people who cant get a break help anything. You only addressed half of this issue I was making.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Generalizations nice!

Its a lot simpler than you're making out - since we have no way of telling who is lazy or dishonest and who isn't we operate on the basis that there is a genuine, honest need.

Thats Exactly why the Govt is not equiped to take from some... to give to others.

Private charities are much better at weeding out the scammers and undeserving.

Even with high taxes Those on the right contribute much more to these efforts than the libs who do all the flapping of lips about it.

Go to your local soup kitchen, homeless shelter, food pantry or pregnancy center.. see who most often runs these private groups and agencies.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

All depends on what poor people we are talking about, some dont deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Your only dealing with one painting here, so how does painting them as all noble people who cant get a break help anything. You only addressed half of this issue I was making.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Generalizations nice!

Its a lot simpler than you're making out - since we have no way of telling who is lazy or dishonest and who isn't we operate on the basis that there is a genuine, honest need.

Thats Exactly why the Govt is not equiped to take from some... to give to others.

Private charities are much better at weeding out the scammers and undeserving.

Even with high taxes Those on the right contribute much more to these efforts than the libs who do all the flapping of lips about it.

Go to your local soup kitchen, homeless shelter, food pantry or pregnancy center.. see who most often runs these private groups and agencies.

Will I be able to tell the political affiliations of these people on sight?

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

Will I be able to tell the political affiliations of these people on sight?

Most likely yes. Pony tails, bow ties, pee wee herman bicycles as chest pins all say libs.

[Peikko 1,575]

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Well surely its only polite to give people some benefit of the doubt, rather than write them off as leeches or parasites right off the bat.

All depends on what poor people we are talking about, some dont deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Painting them that way only has one purpose - to demonise people and to suggest that there are no ways a person can't be poor or fall on hard times without it being entirely their fault, and as a result - deserved.

Your only dealing with one painting here, so how does painting them as all noble people who cant get a break help anything. You only addressed half of this issue I was making.

Doesn't seem in tune with the Christian traditions this country supposedly exemplifies.

Generalizations nice!

Its a lot simpler than you're making out - since we have no way of telling who is lazy or dishonest and who isn't we operate on the basis that there is a genuine, honest need.

Thats Exactly why the Govt is not equiped to take from some... to give to others.

Private charities are much better at weeding out the scammers and undeserving.

Even with high taxes Those on the right contribute much more to these efforts than the libs who do all the flapping of lips about it.

Go to your local soup kitchen, homeless shelter, food pantry or pregnancy center.. see who most often runs these private groups and agencies.

Will I be able to tell the political affiliations of these people on sight?

Of course, everyone knows that it's the caring conservative who volunteers at the soup kitchen and the entitled liberal who is the beneficiary...stupid boy!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Will I be able to tell the political affiliations of these people on sight?

Most likely yes. Pony tails, bow ties, pee wee herman bicycles as chest pins all say libs.

The world inside your head must be very strange - like back to back episodes of Family Guy.

[Peikko 1,575]

Pony tails? I presume this is a 'men only' reference...weird as **...

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Pony tails? I presume this is a 'men only' reference...weird as **...

Yep. Momma's boys that read "Entrapped Magazine" under the covers at night.

[Peikko 1,575]

Looking up 'Entrapped' on google...

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Scratches head....

Democrats are in control of the congress and senate, are they not?

[SMOKE 1,426]

Scratches head....

Democrats are in control of the congress and senate, are they not?

yes sir. they also incharge of sniveling & whinning apparently...who's fault is it the healthcare reform bill is crashing & burning, due to partisan chest beating & neener neener..yes sir right again!..the dumbs

[Ban Hammer 13,677]

Scratches head....

Democrats are in control of the congress and senate, are they not?

yes sir. they also incharge of sniveling & whinning apparently...who's fault is it the healthcare reform bill is crashing & burning, due to partisan chest beating & neener neener..yes sir right again!..the dumbs

[rebeccajo 14]

Socialized means the government pays for it. Nationalized means the government owns it.

No it doesn't.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Socialized means the government pays for it. Nationalized means the government owns it.

No it doesn't.

so·cial·ized medicine (ssh-lzd)

n.

A system for providing medical and hospital care for all at a nominal cost by means of government regulation of health services and subsidies derived from taxation.

The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2007, 2004 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

socialized medicine

[sō′shəlīzd]

a system for the delivery of health care in which the expense of care is borne by a governmental agency supported by taxation rather than being paid directly by the client on a fee-for-service or contract basis. Also called state medicine.

Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier.

socialized medicine,

n a system for the delivery of health care in which the expense of care is borne by a governmental agency supported by taxation rather than being paid directly by the client on a fee-for-service or contract basis.

Mosby's Dental Dictionary, 2nd edition. © 2008 Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.

socialized medicine

A health care system in which 1. The entire population's health care needs are met without charge or at a nominal fee and 2. The organization and provision of all medical services are under direct governmental control. Cf Social medicine.

McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionar...onal+healthcare

nationalized industry

An industry whose ownership has been taken over by the state.

http://www.enotes.com/econ-encyclopedia/na...alized-industry

[rebeccajo 14]

Mister Bill -

You go find me a definition of 'nationalized medicine' - not industry.

My research tells me it's not out there because most persons use the words interchangeably.

[natty bumppo 297]

someones being social ...