[quote=BondGuy]

[quote=lovindaindy]

Democrats are not the party of the people.  How do you figure that?

Democrats are the party of a beneficial society.  Republicans are the party of personal responsibility.  We need both.

They are not mutually exlusive.

I take exception to your take on the wars being wasteful.  As a veteran of those wars, I can tell you that more good was done than evil and that the protections of the citizens of this country actually occurred because we had those wars.

Unless you have seen with your own eyes, you are only guessing and using what the media tells you (it's not as wonderful as FoxNews makes it out to be, but neither is it as horrible and UNNECESSARY as MSNBC makes it out to be). 

[/quote]

Lowest common denominator - repubs = money  and dems = people.

Right now we are polarized.

As for the war, no question the media wisted things to their POV. That's not the issue. The issue is, why were we there? Lot of blood spilled and money spent. For what?

[/quote]

For safety of our citizens.  If terrorists are attacking troops (who are trained to fight), they tend to be less focused on our citizenry.  Make no mistake, when our troops are out of Afghanistan and Iraq, we WILL be attacked again. 

[quote=BondGuy]

 To tell the truth he's been dealt a tough hand. In admins past the prez has been able to come to consensus with the opposing party for the good of the nation. Not so these days! The repubs stand as a rock in the road regardless of the human cost. They've, in my opinion, absolutely polarized the country.

[/quote]

You need to put the meth pipe down.  

Owebama et al has taken EVERYTHING they possible could without reguard for the other side beginning with Judd Gregg (R) bailing from a cabinet position when he reliezed what kind of mission these gusy were on.

I have NEVER seen an admin. so incredible closed to outside views or opinion

The hieght of his MF arrogance was basically cheating on healthcare using reconcilliation which was NEVER intended for a bill of thise scope AND to trump that the GD american people did not want it (fact)

remember  "we won"

how about fukcing the bondholders and teh constitution with GM commie motors?

how about cheating the system with that bihct idiot elizabeth warren?  forget fair   forget years of convention.......i want it so I will gd do it.

how about after mass loss coming out like a spoiled 12 year old kid and preading out volker and geithner and talking about ramming through the Volker rule.    Even Tim geitner was uncomforably with this arrogant small minded move.

this dude is as shallow as they come.

You dems can use your jedi mind trick spin to make it look like teh right has been the ones putting the road blocks up but its total bullshti.

this guy is the great divider

and you know what is really, really cool?    Im very proud of the american people because they see right through this guy.   he got away with his slick bullsti a number of time but, eventually people have figured out that this dude is full of crap

and thats why nov 2nd is going to be monumental

take your medcine bond.

its over

owebama is a lame duck at best.

bush tax cuts staying, pal.   new sherriffs in town.

bubba was smart in 1994.   he listened to the people and accepted his need to change

this arrogant punk has dug his feet in and it is going to cost him BIG time.

record turnout

house blowout and senate majority

thanks for playing

drive safely

owebama couldnt pass gas

his fall is trully incredible

from 73% to 43%

the greatest degree of "disapprove" ever

owebama getting his a^% ripped out in these town meetings?

PRICELESS

i wont even comment on your feelings that govt works.

how stupid

(ps  ok one commet   HELLOOOOOO.  the post office is chap 11.  negative net worth-zero   yes it works copericui because it have UNLIMITED taxing power to piss away OUR money.   helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllo)

how the fukc can u have such great insights into out business and be so totally freakin retarted on this stuff.

[quote=BondGuy]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal healthcare, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

[/quote]

Not the rich guy that allocated half his capital via estate planning to the Mayo Clinic so the IRS and Big Govie cannot allocate it for him. It went STRAIGHT to the charity of choice because EVERYONE KNOWS the private sector will help her 1000x more than any government health care plan.

Come on dude, you make this too easy. What is your REAL problem?

REP = Individualism           DEMS = Collectivism

[quote=N.D.]

[quote=BondGuy]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal healthcare, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

[/quote]

this does not happen in the USA.   duh duh duh duh 

it does happen in your perfect world (ie canada, sweden,france etc)

duh.    those systems SUCKS.    she would wait in line while she dies

 man   you cant be this freakin stupid

the PM of canada went to cleveland clinic for a bypass.  duh

you got money anywhere on this planet?

you come to USA for healthcare

duh duh duh

[quote=lovindaindy]

[quote=BondGuy]

[quote=lovindaindy]

Democrats are not the party of the people.  How do you figure that?

Democrats are the party of a beneficial society.  Republicans are the party of personal responsibility.  We need both.

They are not mutually exlusive.

I take exception to your take on the wars being wasteful.  As a veteran of those wars, I can tell you that more good was done than evil and that the protections of the citizens of this country actually occurred because we had those wars.

Unless you have seen with your own eyes, you are only guessing and using what the media tells you (it's not as wonderful as FoxNews makes it out to be, but neither is it as horrible and UNNECESSARY as MSNBC makes it out to be). 

[/quote]

Lowest common denominator - repubs = money  and dems = people.

Right now we are polarized.

As for the war, no question the media wisted things to their POV. That's not the issue. The issue is, why were we there? Lot of blood spilled and money spent. For what?

[/quote]

For safety of our citizens.  If terrorists are attacking troops (who are trained to fight), they tend to be less focused on our citizenry.  Make no mistake, when our troops are out of Afghanistan and Iraq, we WILL be attacked again. 

[/quote]

Lovin, are you serious with this take? I ask because while you are factually correct that the our citizenry in the United Staes hasn't been attacked since 2001, the "too busy to attack civillians" terrorist have committed major attacks in Russia, Britain, Spain. Turkey, Indonesia, India, tunisia, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Morroco, and Egypt. What, we didn't tie up enough of their resources? Or, were they getting enough satisfaction killing Americans in iraq that they figured they's cut the mainland a break? Not to mention the close call in we just had in Times Square! The reason we went to war with iraq was WMDs. Remember Colin Powell making our case for invasion to the UN? But, as you've written your own reasons, the failure in Iraq has caused several re-writes of our reasoning for war. I wonder which lie the history books will tell 100 years from now?

I was aganst the war at first because i thought, "This is bullshit!" Anyone who had read Bush knew that attacking Iraq was on his first term agenda six months before 9/11. He just need justification. Butttt, I changed my mind when Colin Powell made his case for war to the U.N. Though there was no terrorist connection I agreed that iraq was too dangerous to leave alone. We needed to rid the world of the WMDs. Of course we all know what happened next. A seven year quagmire where, if anything, the terrorist used our occupation as a training ground.

If, 30 years from now iraq emerges as a true democracy instead of the puppet government now in place, and if tribal warfare doesn't return and Iraq turns that corner, OK, at least something was accomplished and i could support the effort. So you know, the experts believe the odds are against that outcome.

All that said, doesn't reflect poorly on the military that was asked to do the dirty work and put in harm's way. As always our military kicked ass and acted with the highest levels of honor.

Sorry we disagree.

[quote=BondGuy]

[/quote]

Lovin, are you serious with this take? I ask because while you are factually correct that the our citizenry in the United Staes hasn't been attacked since 2001, the "too busy to attack civillians" terrorist have committed major attacks in Russia, Britain, Spain. Turkey, Indonesia, India, tunisia, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Morroco, and Egypt. What, we didn't tie up enough of their resources? Or, were they getting enough satisfaction killing Americans in iraq that they figured they's cut the mainland a break? Not to mention the close call in we just had in Times Square! The reason we went to war with iraq was WMDs. Remember Colin Powell making our case for invasion to the UN? But, as you've written your own reasons, the failure in Iraq has caused several re-writes of our reasoning for war. I wonder which lie the history books will tell 100 years from now?

I was aganst the war at first because i thought, "This is bullshit!" Anyone who had read Bush knew that attacking Iraq was on his first term agenda six months before 9/11. He just need justification. Butttt, I changed my mind when Colin Powell made his case for war to the U.N. Though there was no terrorist connection I agreed that iraq was too dangerous to leave alone. We needed to rid the world of the WMDs. Of course we all know what happened next. A seven year quagmire where, if anything, the terrorist used our occupation as a training ground.

If, 30 years from now iraq emerges as a true democracy instead of the puppet government now in place, and if tribal warfare doesn't return and Iraq turns that corner, OK, at least something was accomplished and i could support the effort. So you know, the experts believe the odds are against that outcome.

All that said, doesn't reflect poorly on the military that was asked to do the dirty work and put in harm's way. As always our military kicked ass and acted with the highest levels of honor.

Sorry we disagree.

[/quote]

bond

you're correct.

i was wrong

Iraq was insane.   war is insane.    

wolkowitz, pearl et al are dead wrong.

western europe has it right here.   war ends badly. 

[quote=Jennifer Nettles]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal healthcare, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

this does not happen in the USA.   duh duh duh duh 

it does happen in your perfect world (ie canada, sweden,france etc)

duh.    those systems SUCKS.    she would wait in line while she dies

 man   you cant be this freakin stupid

the PM of canada went to cleveland clinic for a bypass.  duh

you got money anywhere on this planet?

you come to USA for healthcare

duh duh duh

[quote]

jen, your ignorance really is astounding! Only to be surpassed by your selfishness. You don't care who pays for treatment for the poor as long as it's not you. You are deluding yourself. No surprise for the average tea bagger!

How delusional are you or would this be stupidity? Just look at this answer: "This does not happen in the USA duh  duh duh duh!"  you go on to say "if you've got money anywhere on the planet you come to the USA for healthcare. duh duh duh."

Your point that the USA has the best health care system and treatment in the world is well expressed by you telling me how freakin stupid i must be not to realize it.

Mensa candidate Jen, here's a news flash for you: The USA does not have the world's best healthcare or healthcare system. No doubt, if you live near a major medical center you are going to get first class treatment. But, turns out most of don't. And turns out that the treatment given isn't the best. Who knew?

According to the World Health Organzation's latest rankings the USA ranks, are you ready, 37th in the world in healthcare. OUCH!!!! 37th, how the eff is that possible? In another study the highly respected Commonwealth Fund ranked the USA last out of the five major nations in the delivery of healthcare. WE ranked behind Austrailia, Canada, New Zealand, The United Kingdom, and Germany in delivery of and access to quality health care. Interestingly, the report cites the disparity in access to quality healthcare between rich and poor in the USA as one reason for the poor showing. it also points to the waiting time to see specialist, and the disparty in quality medical treatment determined by location.

Jen, look up the term "Drank the Kool-Aid" and then look in a mirror. You are apparently easily an led individual. That doesn't bode well for the IQ.

As for my example, the woman without insurance denied treatment for breast cancer? She's real, and this did happen in this country. How do i know? I got her treatment.  She's the sister of a good friend. A waitress without health insurance. Turns out one of my good clients is one of the top oncologist in the country. You know, the type of guy people with money fly to our country to see. But, he's no miracle worker. This woman went too long without treatment. We're hopeful, but to tell you the truth, it doesn't look good. The good news for you, ND, and the rest of you self centered bastards, is her treatment didn't cost you a dime! just the way you like it! that she will probably die, no skin off you back, but more importantly no money out of your wallet!

By the way, the doctor who treated this woman is disgusted that in this country this could happen to any woman. I told him, you need to meet some of the people on the RR forum. it will open your eyes!

I noted that neither you or ND answered my question about fault.

[quote=Jennifer Nettles]

[quote=BondGuy]

[/quote]

Lovin, are you serious with this take? I ask because while you are factually correct that the our citizenry in the United Staes hasn't been attacked since 2001, the "too busy to attack civillians" terrorist have committed major attacks in Russia, Britain, Spain. Turkey, Indonesia, India, tunisia, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Morroco, and Egypt. What, we didn't tie up enough of their resources? Or, were they getting enough satisfaction killing Americans in iraq that they figured they's cut the mainland a break? Not to mention the close call in we just had in Times Square! The reason we went to war with iraq was WMDs. Remember Colin Powell making our case for invasion to the UN? But, as you've written your own reasons, the failure in Iraq has caused several re-writes of our reasoning for war. I wonder which lie the history books will tell 100 years from now?

I was aganst the war at first because i thought, "This is bullshit!" Anyone who had read Bush knew that attacking Iraq was on his first term agenda six months before 9/11. He just need justification. Butttt, I changed my mind when Colin Powell made his case for war to the U.N. Though there was no terrorist connection I agreed that iraq was too dangerous to leave alone. We needed to rid the world of the WMDs. Of course we all know what happened next. A seven year quagmire where, if anything, the terrorist used our occupation as a training ground.

If, 30 years from now iraq emerges as a true democracy instead of the puppet government now in place, and if tribal warfare doesn't return and Iraq turns that corner, OK, at least something was accomplished and i could support the effort. So you know, the experts believe the odds are against that outcome.

All that said, doesn't reflect poorly on the military that was asked to do the dirty work and put in harm's way. As always our military kicked ass and acted with the highest levels of honor.

Sorry we disagree.

[/quote]

bond

you're correct.

i was wrong

Iraq was insane.   war is insane.    

wolkowitz, pearl et al are dead wrong.

western europe has it right here.   war ends badly. 

[/quote]

Did you mean Paul Wolfowitz? If you did, our failure to achieve the goals of the Wolfowitz Doctrine in Iraq proves in fact he was wrong.

[quote=BondGuy]

[Did you mean Paul Wolfowitz? If you did, our failure to achieve the goals of the Wolfowitz Doctrine in Iraq proves in fact he was wrong.

[/quote]

paul w  neo con

 yes

(the peeps who wrote document for bush 1 saying iraq HAD to be taken out)

dude  im agreeing with you

im eating crow

sucking up

admitting being wrong

you're still trying to fight

first, I am not saying our system is not without major flaws.  

it has many

the answer is not the MF govt

the answer is creating a system with the proper INCENTIVES.

free market incentives

The WHO

thats funny

same amount of credibility as the UN or the Noble Prize freak shows.

The USA healthcare system ahs one huge flaw

its very expensive.

besides that, there is NO ONE on the planet even close to the quality of care of the US system

bio-tech, new drugs,docs, educations, technology etc etc etc

no one close 

the world health organization

thats funny

DIDNT THAT FAT ASS MIKE MOORE SAY CUBA WAS BETTER?

ok   go get your GD bypass in havana

thats funny

please answer this question:

its a simple question

lasik eye care works.     why?

plastics work    why?

costs go down every year

quality of product and care goes up every year

its delivered perfectly

free markets are work

people can shop the product

they can compare and contrast

they have incentives to get it cheaper 

FREE MF MARKETS  BOND, MY BROTHER

competition

its a wonderful MF thing and it works

THIS IS THE ANSWER

not govt bullshti

GET FREE MARKET INCENTIVES INTO HEALTHCARE

DUH    DUH   DUH    DUH   DUH

can u shop and mri?

how much does crap cost when u go to teh hospital?

its a clusterfuke

u think govt will fix this?

please   bond  ANSWER THIS QUESTION

WHY DOES LASIKS AND PLASTICS WORK?    

bond

healthcare is very complex.

there are some things we agree on:

no preventative care and then using the ER when youre really sick is dumb

everyone should have good healthcare in america

we need the correct incentives

incentives on cost

incentives fro preventive care

smoke?  pay more

fat ass  pay more

high BP  pay more

the "death panel" are great!

its insane keeping people alive and speading all that money near the end when they are toast

owebams answer is have govt fix this

right  that will work well

[quote=BondGuy]

As for my example, the woman without insurance denied treatment for breast cancer? She's real, and this did happen in this country. How do i know? I got her treatment.  She's the sister of a good friend. A waitress without health insurance. Turns out one of my good clients is one of the top oncologist in the country. You know, the type of guy people with money fly to our country to see. But, he's no miracle worker. This woman went too long without treatment. We're hopeful, but to tell you the truth, it doesn't look good. The good news for you, ND, and the rest of you self centered bastards, is her treatment didn't cost you a dime! just the way you like it! that she will probably die, no skin off you back, but more importantly no money out of your wallet!

By the way, the doctor who treated this woman is disgusted that in this country this could happen to any woman. I told him, you need to meet some of the people on the RR forum. it will open your eyes!

I noted that neither you or ND answered my question about fault.

[/quote]

Nice, "self centered bastards" huh? You are really a piece of work.

As for your question... 

[quote=BondGuy]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal health care, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

[/quote]

I will not point figures like you have chosen to do post after post. If you choose to blame the lack of health care or her passing on one political party or even worse yet blame the "rich" then I would have to completely disagree. But as far as options go for someone in this situation, I would suggest:  

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/financial-resources

http://www.thewellnesscommunity.org/hc/Initiatives/Cancer-Costs/Cost-Information/No-Health-Insurance.aspx

http://blog.cincovidas.com/managing-the-costs-of-treatment

Cancer Care, a non-profit org., offers free support and counseling for cancer patients by oncology social workers. They have face-to-face counseling and counseling on the phone. Support groups on the phone are available too and are moderated by an oncology social worker. Call 800-813-HOPE. They can also give you info about financial resources. http://www.cancercare.org/

Gilda's Club - www.gildasclub.org - they offer free social and emotional support. Not sure if they may have financial information but check it out just in case.

Live Strong - www.livestrong.org - offers one-on-one support.

American Cancer Society - can also give you financial, support, etc. information available in different cities.

Hill-Burton Hospital Program - ever heard of it?

National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland?

Our church sponsors fund raisers for people in our community that have been diagnosed with all types of illnesses or just fell on hard times.

It can feel overwhelming to face cancer without health insurance. Many without insurance are able to obtain excellent care, but it usually takes persistence and creativity.  

From what I can tell BG, you think it is ok for the government to stick its hands into my pocket and pull out whatever it wants, keeping part of it for its self and allocating the rest as they see fit. I on the other hand prefer to keep their hands out of my pockets and I will dip into when and for what amount that I choose.

The rich use charitable contributions to avoid paying taxes. Not because they want to spend the money on a fancy new boat that sails the blue water so elegantly (like the one you bought). They avoid paying taxes so they can determine who, when and how much money to donate or not.

The great thing about this country is having the freedom of choice.

Everyday people like you take away a little bit more of our “choice” to help those that cannot help them self.

Bondguy - I'm sorry we disagree too.  Except that I'm right.

When you capture someone and they specifically tell you that they came from Syria or Iran or Palestine because they knew going to Iraq they could "kill Americans", and that is the consensus for ALL of the people you capture on raids, it's called statistically significant. 

Western Europe and the rest of the world has shown their weakness.  Bending knee to radicalism thinking that they won't, with the sweep of a sword, cut your head off.

This is one of those situations, that, unless you have been there (actually on the ground running missions - NOT in the TOC or back at the FOB like a good little Fobbit), you CAN'T know what you are talking about.

Not to mention, that when I wasn't running missions I was helping the Iraqi people.  You aren't going to make Iraq a democracy overnight.  They are not going to be able to sustain their own military overnight.  It takes a LOT of time. 

Further, the Iraq War as people try to call it, is actually the Persian Gulf War.  It was a resumption of hostilities.  Bush didn't need an excuse.  He didn't START that war.  HIs father did.  The problem was that, as much as I love Clinton, he didn't have the balls to attack after Saddam REPEATEDLY violated the cease-fire agreement. 

So basically, Bush did his job.  I am proud to have served in that conflict.  The good done FAR outweighs any perceptions that people here got from watching the news.

[quote=lovindaindy]

So basically, Bush did his job.  I am proud to have served in that conflict.  The good done FAR outweighs any perceptions that people here got from watching the news.

[/quote]

I completely agree and thank you for your service sir.

Difference Between Republicans and Democrats

The rich choose to cut out the administration fees and make tax deductible charitable contributions to the organization of their choice. Sometimes it is done during the persons life and sometimes it is done thru estate planning. Either way, you bet your sweet ass it is given to those that need it...

[quote=N.D.]

[quote=BondGuy]

As for my example, the woman without insurance denied treatment for breast cancer? She's real, and this did happen in this country. How do i know? I got her treatment.  She's the sister of a good friend. A waitress without health insurance. Turns out one of my good clients is one of the top oncologist in the country. You know, the type of guy people with money fly to our country to see. But, he's no miracle worker. This woman went too long without treatment. We're hopeful, but to tell you the truth, it doesn't look good. The good news for you, ND, and the rest of you self centered bastards, is her treatment didn't cost you a dime! just the way you like it! that she will probably die, no skin off you back, but more importantly no money out of your wallet!

By the way, the doctor who treated this woman is disgusted that in this country this could happen to any woman. I told him, you need to meet some of the people on the RR forum. it will open your eyes!

I noted that neither you or ND answered my question about fault.

[/quote]

Nice, "self centered bastards" huh? You are really a piece of work.

As for your question... 

[quote=BondGuy]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal health care, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

[/quote]

I will not point figures like you have chosen to do post after post. If you choose to blame the lack of health care or her passing on one political party or even worse yet blame the "rich" then I would have to completely disagree. But as far as options go for someone in this situation, I would suggest:  

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/financial-resources

http://www.thewellnesscommunity.org/hc/Initiatives/Cancer-Costs/Cost-Information/No-Health-Insurance.aspx

http://blog.cincovidas.com/managing-the-costs-of-treatment

Cancer Care, a non-profit org., offers free support and counseling for cancer patients by oncology social workers. They have face-to-face counseling and counseling on the phone. Support groups on the phone are available too and are moderated by an oncology social worker. Call 800-813-HOPE. They can also give you info about financial resources. http://www.cancercare.org/

Gilda's Club - www.gildasclub.org - they offer free social and emotional support. Not sure if they may have financial information but check it out just in case.

Live Strong - www.livestrong.org - offers one-on-one support.

American Cancer Society - can also give you financial, support, etc. information available in different cities.

Hill-Burton Hospital Program - ever heard of it?

National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland?

Our church sponsors fund raisers for people in our community that have been diagnosed with all types of illnesses or just fell on hard times.

It can feel overwhelming to face cancer without health insurance. Many without insurance are able to obtain excellent care, but it usually takes persistence and creativity.  

From what I can tell BG, you think it is ok for the government to stick its hands into my pocket and pull out whatever it wants, keeping part of it for its self and allocating the rest as they see fit. I on the other hand prefer to keep their hands out of my pockets and I will dip into when and for what amount that I choose.

The rich use charitable contributions to avoid paying taxes. Not because they want to spend the money on a fancy new boat that sails the blue water so elegantly (like the one you bought). They avoid paying taxes so they can determine who, when and how much money to donate or not.

The great thing about this country is having the freedom of choice.

Everyday people like you take away a little bit more of our “choice” to help those that cannot help them self.

[/quote]

wow

N.D.   what an awesome post.

excellent

[quote=N.D.]

[quote=BondGuy]

As for my example, the woman without insurance denied treatment for breast cancer? She's real, and this did happen in this country. How do i know? I got her treatment.  She's the sister of a good friend. A waitress without health insurance. Turns out one of my good clients is one of the top oncologist in the country. You know, the type of guy people with money fly to our country to see. But, he's no miracle worker. This woman went too long without treatment. We're hopeful, but to tell you the truth, it doesn't look good. The good news for you, ND, and the rest of you self centered bastards, is her treatment didn't cost you a dime! just the way you like it! that she will probably die, no skin off you back, but more importantly no money out of your wallet!

By the way, the doctor who treated this woman is disgusted that in this country this could happen to any woman. I told him, you need to meet some of the people on the RR forum. it will open your eyes!

I noted that neither you or ND answered my question about fault.

[/quote]

Nice, "self centered bastards" huh? You are really a piece of work.

As for your question... 

[quote=BondGuy]

My question for you: Regarding the woman with breast cancer who is refused treatment because she has no insurance, if we repeal health care, and she dies for lack of treatment, who's fault is that? 

[/quote]

I will not point figures like you have chosen to do post after post. If you choose to blame the lack of health care or her passing on one political party or even worse yet blame the "rich" then I would have to completely disagree. But as far as options go for someone in this situation, I would suggest:  

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/financial-resources

http://www.thewellnesscommunity.org/hc/Initiatives/Cancer-Costs/Cost-Information/No-Health-Insurance.aspx

http://blog.cincovidas.com/managing-the-costs-of-treatment

Cancer Care, a non-profit org., offers free support and counseling for cancer patients by oncology social workers. They have face-to-face counseling and counseling on the phone. Support groups on the phone are available too and are moderated by an oncology social worker. Call 800-813-HOPE. They can also give you info about financial resources. http://www.cancercare.org/

Gilda's Club - www.gildasclub.org - they offer free social and emotional support. Not sure if they may have financial information but check it out just in case.

Live Strong - www.livestrong.org - offers one-on-one support.

American Cancer Society - can also give you financial, support, etc. information available in different cities.

Hill-Burton Hospital Program - ever heard of it?

National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland?

Our church sponsors fund raisers for people in our community that have been diagnosed with all types of illnesses or just fell on hard times.

It can feel overwhelming to face cancer without health insurance. Many without insurance are able to obtain excellent care, but it usually takes persistence and creativity.  

From what I can tell BG, you think it is ok for the government to stick its hands into my pocket and pull out whatever it wants, keeping part of it for its self and allocating the rest as they see fit. I on the other hand prefer to keep their hands out of my pockets and I will dip into when and for what amount that I choose.

The rich use charitable contributions to avoid paying taxes. Not because they want to spend the money on a fancy new boat that sails the blue water so elegantly (like the one you bought). They avoid paying taxes so they can determine who, when and how much money to donate or not.

The great thing about this country is having the freedom of choice.

Everyday people like you take away a little bit more of our “choice” to help those that cannot help them self.

[/quote]

ND, you've out done yourself here! That's quite the list! If only my friend's sister had known you her outcome would have been so much better! You are the man!

Obviously, there are a couple problem's here, well, more than a couple. You continue to show just how disconnected from reality you really are.

Let me explain:

I note that your list does  not include any oncologist, surgery centers or treatment centers. The list does include a lot of organizations that can point the way to the highway, but not one that will give a ride to the destination. So it goes in cancer treatment. And, just so we cover the base, the woman in my example went to Livestrong, Susan G. Komen and the ACS and got lot's of "we're rooting for you" type support, but no treatment or treatment options. She also went to a couple of local organzations and got nowhere. So as not to mislead anyone, Komen did come through in the end with some help, after my oncologist pushed a lot of buttons. But, on her own, this woman got nada !!!! And, as i said the designated treatment center stonewalled her. On her own, this woman would probably already be dead. if you had any actual experience with helping people in this situation you would know that for as well meaning as some of these organizations are, they aren't overly effective in getting uninsured people treated. 

I note your list was constructed with the use of a computer with web access. How much did that computer cost you? What's the monthly charge from Comcast, or Verizon? Do you think a poor person could afford that fee? I know, how ridiculous, right? In the past others on this very forum told me it was ridiculous to  say that a person has no web access. Hmm, kinda arrogant attitude don'tchathink?

Even if these organizations did treat cancer patients, how would a poor person find them? Luck?

I note that all of these organzitions fulfill your requirement for helping those who you refuse to help. Again, you are off the hook.

Do you support any of these organizations in a meaningful way?

Let's talk about your church. Fund raisers eh? Wow, that's nice. I mean that sincerely. But, again I have a problem with this.

There is an ethical dilemma with churches filled with right wing republicans helping poor people. That is; help them on Sunday, vote against them on Tuesday.  ND, you've demonstrated on this thread that you are against every social program ever invented to help the poor. So, you deny thousand of poor help, and in fact, vote for things that hurt the poor, but then help a few of the families you've hurt? And, somehow this evens the score? All good with ND's christians? The ethics problem is, if highest ethical standard is doing the right thing 100% of the time how do you justify voting against these people? help'em on Sunday, Hurt'em on Tuesday.

As for charitable contributions i can only speak for myself. I give charitble contributions to organzations and people I believe in. That I get to deduct it from my taxes doesn't enter into the equation. If you understood what charity is, you would know it's not about saving tax dollars. it's about giving, not saving!  it's about the cause!!!!  For example, my grandson has Autism. It's heartbreaking!!! So, that gets a lot of dough right now. We work with a few good organizations, Elliott Sadler, and some others. You really need to get a clue.

There is one other person i can speak for with regard to charitable contributions, you. You don't give from the heart, you give from the pocketbook. You give to save paying taxes. At least that's what you've posted here. That's sad! my sinerest hope for you is that life doesn't test you to a degree that you find out just how sad.

Sorry the boat bothers you so much. We kinda like it.

[quote=N.D.]

Difference Between Republicans and Democrats

The rich choose to cut out the administration fees and make tax deductible charitable contributions to the organization of their choice. Sometimes it is done during the persons life and sometimes it is done thru estate planning. Either way, you bet your sweet ass it is given to those that need it...

[/quote]

ND, again with a post showing a serious disconnect with reality. The problem - you beleive this is truth.

Apparently you are not aware that prior to the 2008 financial debacle that 45% of the homeless were Mentally ill? And, today that number still stands between 25 and 35%? Your republican businessman give the mentally ill a job?

it gets worse for you - Guess who put the mentally ill on the streets? if you guessed dems you guessed wrong. Repubs all the way. Ronnie threw them out of the hospitals and onto the streets. Repubs have kept them there since.

Repubs own the businesses. Is it more likely that a repub would have fired or laid off that homeless person or offer him a job? Obvious answer there as well.

Have you ever seen a republican conservative give money to a street person? Dude, i work in a big city, as nettlesome would say, put down the meth pipe!

Your joke really is a joke, though not in the way you mean. You need to get another joke where you lose the homeless person. At least then you wouldn't be doing a dig on yourself. Again, the sad point is, your party put the mentally ill on the street and now you make jokes about it. Your self centered you is showing it's slip.

[quote=lovindaindy]

Bondguy - I'm sorry we disagree too.  Except that I'm right.

When you capture someone and they specifically tell you that they came from Syria or Iran or Palestine because they knew going to Iraq they could "kill Americans", and that is the consensus for ALL of the people you capture on raids, it's called statistically significant. 

Western Europe and the rest of the world has shown their weakness.  Bending knee to radicalism thinking that they won't, with the sweep of a sword, cut your head off.

This is one of those situations, that, unless you have been there (actually on the ground running missions - NOT in the TOC or back at the FOB like a good little Fobbit), you CAN'T know what you are talking about.

Not to mention, that when I wasn't running missions I was helping the Iraqi people.  You aren't going to make Iraq a democracy overnight.  They are not going to be able to sustain their own military overnight.  It takes a LOT of time. 

Further, the Iraq War as people try to call it, is actually the Persian Gulf War.  It was a resumption of hostilities.  Bush didn't need an excuse.  He didn't START that war.  HIs father did.  The problem was that, as much as I love Clinton, he didn't have the balls to attack after Saddam REPEATEDLY violated the cease-fire agreement. 

So basically, Bush did his job.  I am proud to have served in that conflict.  The good done FAR outweighs any perceptions that people here got from watching the news.

[/quote]

So were on the same page, my perceptions aren't media based.

Your argument that you had to be there to know what your talking about is far off base. Do i know what it's like to shoot someone in war? No! But i don't have to know that to know that the Vietnam war was a failure. Iraq is no different.

The latest casualty count for Iraq that i can find is 4424 American service men and woman dead. Over 31,000 wounded. If you have different numbers, by all means please share it.

That being the cost, question: What did we gain in exchange?

[quote=BondGuy]

ND, again with a post showing a serious disconnect with reality. The problem - you beleive this is truth.

[/quote]

Bond:

After you last 3 posts

you're disconnect with reality is monumental

what a total bunch of convoluted bullshti

you sound foolish

you are officially ND's little bicth

game,set, match

ps: where is all your guilt coming from.    I think we need to explore that.

are you catholic?