Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
VOTE FOR BARACK!
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
TPS wrote:
>
> Rich Koerner wrote:
> > TPS wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> >> You're the one who made the claims, don't ask me to prove them for
> >> you.
> >
> >
> > What, your gun went CLICK.
> >
> >
> >> If you have evidence that this has happened, bring it on.
> >
> > Personal experience is all I need junior.
> >
> >
> > But, if an internet link is what you are looking for,.... watch out
> > this one doesn't get your shorts tied in a knot.
> >
> >
> > The USA and Their Presidential Candidates Have No Balls!!!!!
> >
> > http :// www .snopes,com /politics/religion/australia.asp
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rich Koerner,
> > Time Electronics.
> > http :// www .timeelect,com
>
> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few surer
> signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss that
> "information" about minorities and med school standards into the "stuff Rich
> made up" pile.
Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became an issue during Clinton's first
term. He was in favor of changing the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field
though med school. FACT.
In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time GP family doctor in my area, he
confirms the problem. His son got into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who also had their comments on my
past experiences over the medical mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
It's all about the lowering of standards.
When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life threatening situation where you
end up needing a translator to know what the doctor is saying.
Guess what?
That happened to me.
I demanded to see a doctor who spoke ENGLISH clearly enough for me to understand.
Now, continue your BS debate with someone else.
> You could teach a hell of a lot about luthiery, but key-riste you make some
> foolish assumptions about politics.
No assumptions.
Just living through a medical emergency in my life experience.
I really wish it were a dream.
But, it wasn't.
But, you're going to tell me, it was my imagination.
Get the duck out of here with your crap.
Regards,
Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http :// www .timeelect,com
Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers
TPS wrote:
>
> Rich Koerner wrote:
> > TPS wrote:
> >>
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> >> You're the one who made the claims, don't ask me to prove them for
> >> you.
> >
> >
> > What, your gun went CLICK.
> >
> >
> >> If you have evidence that this has happened, bring it on.
> >
> > Personal experience is all I need junior.
> >
> >
> > But, if an internet link is what you are looking for,.... watch out
> > this one doesn't get your shorts tied in a knot.
> >
> >
> > The USA and Their Presidential Candidates Have No Balls!!!!!
> >
> > http :// www .snopes,com /politics/religion/australia.asp
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rich Koerner,
> > Time Electronics.
> > http :// www .timeelect,com
>
> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few surer
> signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss that
> "information" about minorities and med school standards into the "stuff Rich
> made up" pile.
Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became an issue during Clinton's first
term. He was in favor of changing the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field
though med school. FACT.
In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time GP family doctor in my area, he
confirms the problem. His son got into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who also had their comments on my
past experiences over the medical mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
It's all about the lowering of standards.
When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life threatening situation where you
end up needing a translator to know what the doctor is saying.
Guess what?
That happened to me.
I demanded to see a doctor who spoke ENGLISH clearly enough for me to understand.
Now, continue your BS debate with someone else.
> You could teach a hell of a lot about luthiery, but key-riste you make some
> foolish assumptions about politics.
No assumptions.
Just living through a medical emergency in my life experience.
I really wish it were a dream.
But, it wasn't.
But, you're going to tell me, it was my imagination.
Get the duck out of here with your crap.
Regards,
Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http :// www .timeelect,com
Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> TPS wrote:
>> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few
>> surer signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss
>> that "information" about minorities and med school standards into
>> the "stuff Rich made up" pile.
>
>
> Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became
> an issue during Clinton's first term. He was in favor of changing
> the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field though
> med school. FACT.
Did the med schools actually change their standards as a result? I
don't think so, but if they actually did, post something that proves it.
Otherwise you're just making up crap.
> In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time
> GP family doctor in my area, he confirms the problem. His son got
> into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
Which proves nothing other than one guy thinks that the standards were
relaxed. It may be true, but there's nothing in what you say that
proves it has anything to do with minorities. Jeez, in physics I've
seen standards dropping ever since I got my degree, but the white guys
show a drop in knowledge just the same as everyone else.
> There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who
> also had their comments on my past experiences over the medical
> mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
>
> It's all about the lowering of standards.
Possibly, but again having nothing to do with minorities.
> When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
>
> Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life
> threatening situation where you end up needing a translator to know
> what the doctor is saying.
Non-sequitur, having nothing to do with actual "evidence" you presented.
Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> TPS wrote:
>> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few
>> surer signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss
>> that "information" about minorities and med school standards into
>> the "stuff Rich made up" pile.
>
>
> Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became
> an issue during Clinton's first term. He was in favor of changing
> the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field though
> med school. FACT.
Did the med schools actually change their standards as a result? I
don't think so, but if they actually did, post something that proves it.
Otherwise you're just making up crap.
> In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time
> GP family doctor in my area, he confirms the problem. His son got
> into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
Which proves nothing other than one guy thinks that the standards were
relaxed. It may be true, but there's nothing in what you say that
proves it has anything to do with minorities. Jeez, in physics I've
seen standards dropping ever since I got my degree, but the white guys
show a drop in knowledge just the same as everyone else.
> There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who
> also had their comments on my past experiences over the medical
> mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
>
> It's all about the lowering of standards.
Possibly, but again having nothing to do with minorities.
> When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
>
> Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life
> threatening situation where you end up needing a translator to know
> what the doctor is saying.
Non-sequitur, having nothing to do with actual "evidence" you presented.
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
RichL wrote:
>
> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> > TPS wrote:
>
> >> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few
> >> surer signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss
> >> that "information" about minorities and med school standards into
> >> the "stuff Rich made up" pile.
> >
> >
> > Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became
> > an issue during Clinton's first term. He was in favor of changing
> > the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field though
> > med school. FACT.
>
> Did the med schools actually change their standards as a result? I
> don't think so, but if they actually did, post something that proves it.
> Otherwise you're just making up crap.
>
> > In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time
> > GP family doctor in my area, he confirms the problem. His son got
> > into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
>
> Which proves nothing other than one guy thinks that the standards were
> relaxed. It may be true, but there's nothing in what you say that
> proves it has anything to do with minorities. Jeez, in physics I've
> seen standards dropping ever since I got my degree, but the white guys
> show a drop in knowledge just the same as everyone else.
>
> > There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who
> > also had their comments on my past experiences over the medical
> > mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
> >
> > It's all about the lowering of standards.
>
> Possibly, but again having nothing to do with minorities.
>
> > When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
> >
> > Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life
> > threatening situation where you end up needing a translator to know
> > what the doctor is saying.
>
> Non-sequitur, having nothing to do with actual "evidence" you presented.
Nice try.
I've been there, and lived it.
Have you?
> Our health care system was once second to none. The politicians forced the lowering of standards to
> enter med school for the minorities to the point to where there are now statistics kept on death by
> medical mistakes now. Which, has out numbered the deaths by handguns. 750,000 deaths by medical
> mistake in one year I remember reading on the internet was that case in point.
You all have the option to find something on the internet that says the opposite.
You all can find something that proves med school standards have NOT been lowered, but actually
RAISED!
You all can find something the has lower numbers than 750,000 deaths related to medical mistakes.
You can find something that proves your point.
Post the links.
All I get from you guys is BS... it's possible, you're making up stories, etc.....
Look, I've been the one who found myself in two medical situations in four years that make you wake
up, and start asking questions of people in the field.
A good friend of my wife died from stupid mistakes made during a standard straight up everyday
surgical procedure performed by a doctor who should never be allowed in feet of a sick person with a
cold.
The family won in court their battle with the doctor and the hospital.
But, they lost a family member due to the lowering of standards for what reason?
So, you all can call this yet another one of Rich's made up stories if you want to.
But, this is a piece of the real world your lefty bent won't let you see as a reality.
No where has the lowering of standards ever raised the bar.
Case Closed.
Regards,
Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http :// www .timeelect,com
Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers
RichL wrote:
>
> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> > TPS wrote:
>
> >> Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few
> >> surer signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss
> >> that "information" about minorities and med school standards into
> >> the "stuff Rich made up" pile.
> >
> >
> > Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became
> > an issue during Clinton's first term. He was in favor of changing
> > the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field though
> > med school. FACT.
>
> Did the med schools actually change their standards as a result? I
> don't think so, but if they actually did, post something that proves it.
> Otherwise you're just making up crap.
>
> > In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time
> > GP family doctor in my area, he confirms the problem. His son got
> > into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
>
> Which proves nothing other than one guy thinks that the standards were
> relaxed. It may be true, but there's nothing in what you say that
> proves it has anything to do with minorities. Jeez, in physics I've
> seen standards dropping ever since I got my degree, but the white guys
> show a drop in knowledge just the same as everyone else.
>
> > There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who
> > also had their comments on my past experiences over the medical
> > mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
> >
> > It's all about the lowering of standards.
>
> Possibly, but again having nothing to do with minorities.
>
> > When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
> >
> > Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life
> > threatening situation where you end up needing a translator to know
> > what the doctor is saying.
>
> Non-sequitur, having nothing to do with actual "evidence" you presented.
Nice try.
I've been there, and lived it.
Have you?
> Our health care system was once second to none. The politicians forced the lowering of standards to
> enter med school for the minorities to the point to where there are now statistics kept on death by
> medical mistakes now. Which, has out numbered the deaths by handguns. 750,000 deaths by medical
> mistake in one year I remember reading on the internet was that case in point.
You all have the option to find something on the internet that says the opposite.
You all can find something that proves med school standards have NOT been lowered, but actually
RAISED!
You all can find something the has lower numbers than 750,000 deaths related to medical mistakes.
You can find something that proves your point.
Post the links.
All I get from you guys is BS... it's possible, you're making up stories, etc.....
Look, I've been the one who found myself in two medical situations in four years that make you wake
up, and start asking questions of people in the field.
A good friend of my wife died from stupid mistakes made during a standard straight up everyday
surgical procedure performed by a doctor who should never be allowed in feet of a sick person with a
cold.
The family won in court their battle with the doctor and the hospital.
But, they lost a family member due to the lowering of standards for what reason?
So, you all can call this yet another one of Rich's made up stories if you want to.
But, this is a piece of the real world your lefty bent won't let you see as a reality.
No where has the lowering of standards ever raised the bar.
Case Closed.
Regards,
Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http :// www .timeelect,com
Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers
Re: Hospital Reality 2008
Rich Koerner wrote:
>
> RichL wrote:
>> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
>>> TPS wrote:
The biggest threat by far is nosocomial infections:
http :// tinyurl,com /5wzrsa
If you or a loved one are going to have to go to the hospital for
anything, particularly surgery of any kind, then simply man up at
the outset press the question as high as you have to go:
WHAT IS YOUR NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION RATE?
WHEN WAS YOUR LAST JOINT COMMISSION ACCREDITATION?
WHEN IS YOUR NEXT JOINT COMMISSION INSPECTION?
Most people are either too ignorant or too sheepish with medical people.
The JCAHO http :// tinyurl,com /6k3pp9 or "Joint Commission" certifies
hospitals and does routine inspections.
YOUR responsibility is to RESEARCH and ASK questions about when their
last inspection was, when is the next one and what can you be told or
dig up about nosocomial infection rates THERE!
http :// www .cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00017800.htm <--OLD
Fact is, THESE RATES ARE OFF THE SCALE HIGH ALL OVER AMERICA RIGHT NOW.
Most it seems, prefer to bitch and whine after the fact, vs. be
intensely scrutinizing before the fact...at their own peril. And
it's particularly amusing in these ng's because those same people
go ass-aholic anal when considering the purchase of music gear.
;-) Truth. mvm
Rich Koerner wrote:
>
> RichL wrote:
>> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
>>> TPS wrote:
The biggest threat by far is nosocomial infections:
http :// tinyurl,com /5wzrsa
If you or a loved one are going to have to go to the hospital for
anything, particularly surgery of any kind, then simply man up at
the outset press the question as high as you have to go:
WHAT IS YOUR NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION RATE?
WHEN WAS YOUR LAST JOINT COMMISSION ACCREDITATION?
WHEN IS YOUR NEXT JOINT COMMISSION INSPECTION?
Most people are either too ignorant or too sheepish with medical people.
The JCAHO http :// tinyurl,com /6k3pp9 or "Joint Commission" certifies
hospitals and does routine inspections.
YOUR responsibility is to RESEARCH and ASK questions about when their
last inspection was, when is the next one and what can you be told or
dig up about nosocomial infection rates THERE!
http :// www .cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00017800.htm <--OLD
Fact is, THESE RATES ARE OFF THE SCALE HIGH ALL OVER AMERICA RIGHT NOW.
Most it seems, prefer to bitch and whine after the fact, vs. be
intensely scrutinizing before the fact...at their own peril. And
it's particularly amusing in these ng's because those same people
go ass-aholic anal when considering the purchase of music gear.
;-) Truth. mvm
Re: Hospital Reality 2008
PositronicVibe wrote:
> Rich Koerner wrote:
>>
>> RichL wrote:
>>> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
>>>> TPS wrote:
>
> The biggest threat by far is nosocomial infections:
>
> http :// tinyurl,com /5wzrsa
>
> If you or a loved one are going to have to go to the hospital for
> anything, particularly surgery of any kind, then simply man up at
> the outset press the question as high as you have to go:
>
> WHAT IS YOUR NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION RATE?
>
> WHEN WAS YOUR LAST JOINT COMMISSION ACCREDITATION?
>
> WHEN IS YOUR NEXT JOINT COMMISSION INSPECTION?
>
> Most people are either too ignorant or too sheepish with medical people.
>
> The JCAHO http :// tinyurl,com /6k3pp9 or "Joint Commission" certifies
> hospitals and does routine inspections.
>
> YOUR responsibility is to RESEARCH and ASK questions about when their
> last inspection was, when is the next one and what can you be told or
> dig up about nosocomial infection rates THERE!
>
> http :// www .cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00017800.htm <--OLD
>
> Fact is, THESE RATES ARE OFF THE SCALE HIGH ALL OVER AMERICA RIGHT NOW.
>
> Most it seems, prefer to bitch and whine after the fact, vs. be
> intensely scrutinizing before the fact...at their own peril. And
> it's particularly amusing in these ng's because those same people
> go ass-aholic anal when considering the purchase of music gear.
>
> ;-) Truth. mvm
>
1.] http :// www .cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/nnis.html
2.] http :// www .cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/nnis/characteristics accessible.pdf
PositronicVibe wrote:
> Rich Koerner wrote:
>>
>> RichL wrote:
>>> Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
>>>> TPS wrote:
>
> The biggest threat by far is nosocomial infections:
>
> http :// tinyurl,com /5wzrsa
>
> If you or a loved one are going to have to go to the hospital for
> anything, particularly surgery of any kind, then simply man up at
> the outset press the question as high as you have to go:
>
> WHAT IS YOUR NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION RATE?
>
> WHEN WAS YOUR LAST JOINT COMMISSION ACCREDITATION?
>
> WHEN IS YOUR NEXT JOINT COMMISSION INSPECTION?
>
> Most people are either too ignorant or too sheepish with medical people.
>
> The JCAHO http :// tinyurl,com /6k3pp9 or "Joint Commission" certifies
> hospitals and does routine inspections.
>
> YOUR responsibility is to RESEARCH and ASK questions about when their
> last inspection was, when is the next one and what can you be told or
> dig up about nosocomial infection rates THERE!
>
> http :// www .cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/00017800.htm <--OLD
>
> Fact is, THESE RATES ARE OFF THE SCALE HIGH ALL OVER AMERICA RIGHT NOW.
>
> Most it seems, prefer to bitch and whine after the fact, vs. be
> intensely scrutinizing before the fact...at their own peril. And
> it's particularly amusing in these ng's because those same people
> go ass-aholic anal when considering the purchase of music gear.
>
> ;-) Truth. mvm
>
1.] http :// www .cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/nnis.html
2.] http :// www .cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/nnis/characteristics accessible.pdf
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> You all have the option to find something on the internet that says
> the opposite.
>
> You all can find something that proves med school standards have NOT
> been lowered, but actually RAISED!
>
> You all can find something the has lower numbers than 750,000 deaths
> related to medical mistakes.
>
> You can find something that proves your point.
>
> Post the links.
>
> All I get from you guys is BS... it's possible, you're making up
> stories, etc.....
>
> Look, I've been the one who found myself in two medical situations in
> four years that make you wake up, and start asking questions of
> people in the field.
>
> A good friend of my wife died from stupid mistakes made during a
> standard straight up everyday surgical procedure performed by a
> doctor who should never be allowed in feet of a sick person with a
> cold.
>
> The family won in court their battle with the doctor and the hospital.
>
> But, they lost a family member due to the lowering of standards for
> what reason?
>
> So, you all can call this yet another one of Rich's made up stories
> if you want to.
>
> But, this is a piece of the real world your lefty bent won't let you
> see as a reality.
>
> No where has the lowering of standards ever raised the bar.
I'm not disagreeing with that, only with the connection with minorities.
Rich Koerner <richk@timeelect,com > wrote:
> You all have the option to find something on the internet that says
> the opposite.
>
> You all can find something that proves med school standards have NOT
> been lowered, but actually RAISED!
>
> You all can find something the has lower numbers than 750,000 deaths
> related to medical mistakes.
>
> You can find something that proves your point.
>
> Post the links.
>
> All I get from you guys is BS... it's possible, you're making up
> stories, etc.....
>
> Look, I've been the one who found myself in two medical situations in
> four years that make you wake up, and start asking questions of
> people in the field.
>
> A good friend of my wife died from stupid mistakes made during a
> standard straight up everyday surgical procedure performed by a
> doctor who should never be allowed in feet of a sick person with a
> cold.
>
> The family won in court their battle with the doctor and the hospital.
>
> But, they lost a family member due to the lowering of standards for
> what reason?
>
> So, you all can call this yet another one of Rich's made up stories
> if you want to.
>
> But, this is a piece of the real world your lefty bent won't let you
> see as a reality.
>
> No where has the lowering of standards ever raised the bar.
I'm not disagreeing with that, only with the connection with minorities.
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
On May 19, 11:43 pm, Rich Koerner <ri...@timeelect,com > wrote:
> TPS wrote:
>
> > Rich Koerner wrote:
> > > TPS wrote:
>
> > > <SNIP>
>
> > >> You're the one who made the claims, don't ask me to prove them for
> > >> you.
>
> > > What, your gun went CLICK.
>
> > >> If you have evidence that this has happened, bring it on.
>
> > > Personal experience is all I need junior.
>
> > > But, if an internet link is what you are looking for,.... watch out
> > > this one doesn't get your shorts tied in a knot.
>
> > > The USA and Their Presidential Candidates Have No Balls!!!!!
>
> > > http :// www .snopes,com /politics/religion/australia.asp
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Rich Koerner,
> > > Time Electronics.
> > > http :// www .timeelect,com
>
> > Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few surer
> > signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss that
> > "information" about minorities and med school standards into the "stuff Rich
> > made up" pile.
>
> Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became an issue during Clinton's first
> term. He was in favor of changing the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field
> though med school. FACT.
That rings a bell. I don't know if the entrance standards ever
actually changed. Do you? More importantly, did the standards for
passing the classes, certification boards and continuing medical
education change? You know, the stuff they have to do before they can
actually practice medicine?
> In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time GP family doctor in my area, he
> confirms the problem. His son got into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
>
> There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who also had their comments on my
> past experiences over the medical mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
Nursing is a tough, tough gig. I commend the people who do it well,
often better than doctors. I do not, however, take a couple of
anecdotes as proof that "lower standards" due to minorities are
turning out poorly trained docs. I know some medical doctors very
well, and I'm sure they can provide me some anecdotes that contradict
yours.
> It's all about the lowering of standards.
>
> When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
>
> Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life threatening situation where you
> end up needing a translator to know what the doctor is saying.
>
> Guess what?
>
> That happened to me.
>
> I demanded to see a doctor who spoke ENGLISH clearly enough for me to understand.
A doctor should definitely be able to communicate with his/her
patients. That said, if I'm going in for brain surgery, I don't so
much care what language the doctor speaks, as long as he/she has the
knowledge and the skill with a knife.
> Now, continue your BS debate with someone else.
>
> > You could teach a hell of a lot about luthiery, but key-riste you make some
> > foolish assumptions about politics.
>
> No assumptions.
>
> Just living through a medical emergency in my life experience.
>
> I really wish it were a dream.
>
> But, it wasn't.
>
> But, you're going to tell me, it was my imagination.
>
> Get the duck out of here with your crap.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rich Koerner,
Just because you had a medical emergency, and you had a doctor with
poor English skills, you'll make this sweeping judgement that entry
requirements designed to accommodate minorities have ruined the level
of health care. That's called an assumption, my friend. If you want
to make a definitive statement, you'd better have evidence - not
anecdotes - that medical schools are graduating doctors at a lower
skill level, and that this is done to accommodate minorities.
Otherwise, you're blowing smoke.
On May 19, 11:43 pm, Rich Koerner <ri...@timeelect,com > wrote:
> TPS wrote:
>
> > Rich Koerner wrote:
> > > TPS wrote:
>
> > > <SNIP>
>
> > >> You're the one who made the claims, don't ask me to prove them for
> > >> you.
>
> > > What, your gun went CLICK.
>
> > >> If you have evidence that this has happened, bring it on.
>
> > > Personal experience is all I need junior.
>
> > > But, if an internet link is what you are looking for,.... watch out
> > > this one doesn't get your shorts tied in a knot.
>
> > > The USA and Their Presidential Candidates Have No Balls!!!!!
>
> > > http :// www .snopes,com /politics/religion/australia.asp
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Rich Koerner,
> > > Time Electronics.
> > > http :// www .timeelect,com
>
> > Ahhh. Nice dodge-and-change-the-subject move there. There are few surer
> > signs that a guy's been talking out his ass. I'll just toss that
> > "information" about minorities and med school standards into the "stuff Rich
> > made up" pile.
>
> Not quite. It is a fact that minorities in the medical field became an issue during Clinton's first
> term. He was in favor of changing the entrance standards to get more minorities into the field
> though med school. FACT.
That rings a bell. I don't know if the entrance standards ever
actually changed. Do you? More importantly, did the standards for
passing the classes, certification boards and continuing medical
education change? You know, the stuff they have to do before they can
actually practice medicine?
> In talking to people in the field, my conversation with an old time GP family doctor in my area, he
> confirms the problem. His son got into med school with lesser grades than what was require of him.
>
> There are two nurses, who are long time friends of the family, who also had their comments on my
> past experiences over the medical mistakes made in my case. Guess what they said too.
Nursing is a tough, tough gig. I commend the people who do it well,
often better than doctors. I do not, however, take a couple of
anecdotes as proof that "lower standards" due to minorities are
turning out poorly trained docs. I know some medical doctors very
well, and I'm sure they can provide me some anecdotes that contradict
yours.
> It's all about the lowering of standards.
>
> When your life is on the line, then you may remember my word here.
>
> Good luck in the future, and may you never find yourself in a life threatening situation where you
> end up needing a translator to know what the doctor is saying.
>
> Guess what?
>
> That happened to me.
>
> I demanded to see a doctor who spoke ENGLISH clearly enough for me to understand.
A doctor should definitely be able to communicate with his/her
patients. That said, if I'm going in for brain surgery, I don't so
much care what language the doctor speaks, as long as he/she has the
knowledge and the skill with a knife.
> Now, continue your BS debate with someone else.
>
> > You could teach a hell of a lot about luthiery, but key-riste you make some
> > foolish assumptions about politics.
>
> No assumptions.
>
> Just living through a medical emergency in my life experience.
>
> I really wish it were a dream.
>
> But, it wasn't.
>
> But, you're going to tell me, it was my imagination.
>
> Get the duck out of here with your crap.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rich Koerner,
Just because you had a medical emergency, and you had a doctor with
poor English skills, you'll make this sweeping judgement that entry
requirements designed to accommodate minorities have ruined the level
of health care. That's called an assumption, my friend. If you want
to make a definitive statement, you'd better have evidence - not
anecdotes - that medical schools are graduating doctors at a lower
skill level, and that this is done to accommodate minorities.
Otherwise, you're blowing smoke.
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
On Mon, 12 May 2008 21:48:58 -0500, "Stephen Cowell"
<scowell@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>
>"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote in message
>news:4828f8f6$0$7056$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
>> Stephen Cowell wrote:
>...
>
>>> you want a good read, read
>>> about when McKinley passed on and TR was
>>> on top of a mountain... and had to tear ass all
>>> the way down to be President.
>>
>> heh.
>>
>>> Sarah Vowell
>>> has the best take... Assassination Vacation is
>>> a super-good book, and she was one of the
>>> Incredibles as well.
>>
>> *KEwl*. It's on the list now....
>
>Right now finishing up "Stealing God's Thunder", about
>Ben Franklin and the lightning rod. That is also one hell
>of a book... ties it all up together real neat. Now I need to
>go back and read the Autobiography again... been a few
>decades. BF was one hell of a guy... the philosophe's
>philosophe. Put it on the list too... along with _1491_,
>that book blew my mind. Hell, give me one of your
>recommendations! You sound like a reader...
>__
>Steve
>.
>
>
If you try that key thing will you get it on video please?
On Mon, 12 May 2008 21:48:58 -0500, "Stephen Cowell"
<scowell@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>
>"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote in message
>news:4828f8f6$0$7056$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
>> Stephen Cowell wrote:
>...
>
>>> you want a good read, read
>>> about when McKinley passed on and TR was
>>> on top of a mountain... and had to tear ass all
>>> the way down to be President.
>>
>> heh.
>>
>>> Sarah Vowell
>>> has the best take... Assassination Vacation is
>>> a super-good book, and she was one of the
>>> Incredibles as well.
>>
>> *KEwl*. It's on the list now....
>
>Right now finishing up "Stealing God's Thunder", about
>Ben Franklin and the lightning rod. That is also one hell
>of a book... ties it all up together real neat. Now I need to
>go back and read the Autobiography again... been a few
>decades. BF was one hell of a guy... the philosophe's
>philosophe. Put it on the list too... along with _1491_,
>that book blew my mind. Hell, give me one of your
>recommendations! You sound like a reader...
>__
>Steve
>.
>
>
If you try that key thing will you get it on video please?
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Stephen Cowell wrote:
> "Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote in message
> news:4828f8f6$0$7056$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
>> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> ...
>
>>> you want a good read, read
>>> about when McKinley passed on and TR was
>>> on top of a mountain... and had to tear ass all
>>> the way down to be President.
>> heh.
>>
>>> Sarah Vowell
>>> has the best take... Assassination Vacation is
>>> a super-good book, and she was one of the
>>> Incredibles as well.
>> *KEwl*. It's on the list now....
>
> Right now finishing up "Stealing God's Thunder", about
> Ben Franklin and the lightning rod. That is also one hell
> of a book... ties it all up together real neat. Now I need to
> go back and read the Autobiography again... been a few
> decades. BF was one hell of a guy... the philosophe's
> philosophe. Put it on the list too... along with 1491 ,
> that book blew my mind. Hell, give me one of your
> recommendations! You sound like a reader...
>
> Steve
> .
>
>
I'm in a lull. Finally finished Graham Greene's "The Honorary Consul".
Read a bunch of strange and depressing later Larry McMurtry after that.
If I were Ralph Wiggum, I would say "Graham Greene smells like
drinking." Good stuff, just a bit too much gin.
--
Les Cargill
Stephen Cowell wrote:
> "Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr,com > wrote in message
> news:4828f8f6$0$7056$4c368faf@roadrunner,com ...
>> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> ...
>
>>> you want a good read, read
>>> about when McKinley passed on and TR was
>>> on top of a mountain... and had to tear ass all
>>> the way down to be President.
>> heh.
>>
>>> Sarah Vowell
>>> has the best take... Assassination Vacation is
>>> a super-good book, and she was one of the
>>> Incredibles as well.
>> *KEwl*. It's on the list now....
>
> Right now finishing up "Stealing God's Thunder", about
> Ben Franklin and the lightning rod. That is also one hell
> of a book... ties it all up together real neat. Now I need to
> go back and read the Autobiography again... been a few
> decades. BF was one hell of a guy... the philosophe's
> philosophe. Put it on the list too... along with 1491 ,
> that book blew my mind. Hell, give me one of your
> recommendations! You sound like a reader...
>
> Steve
> .
>
>
I'm in a lull. Finally finished Graham Greene's "The Honorary Consul".
Read a bunch of strange and depressing later Larry McMurtry after that.
If I were Ralph Wiggum, I would say "Graham Greene smells like
drinking." Good stuff, just a bit too much gin.
--
Les Cargill
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
> So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
Of course, the way you've framed this question is totally false, but
I'd prefer 4 more years of the Carter admin. Many of the things that
Carter warned us about are finally coming to roost with energy
dependence being one of them. Carter started ethanol & it's back.
And gas wasn't this expensive under Carter.
Keep used to it Slick - the Dem's are going to win big this fall.
Mr Soul
> So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
Of course, the way you've framed this question is totally false, but
I'd prefer 4 more years of the Carter admin. Many of the things that
Carter warned us about are finally coming to roost with energy
dependence being one of them. Carter started ethanol & it's back.
And gas wasn't this expensive under Carter.
Keep used to it Slick - the Dem's are going to win big this fall.
Mr Soul
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Lord Valve wrote:
> Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
> new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I gotta
>
> admit:
>
> http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
>
> So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
>
> Help us out, Jimmuh!
>
> Lord Valve
> BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates a
touch of racism. Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
leaving out the "chocolate" designation. There's no need to go there...
As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive 4
more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote for
darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack up the
moving van and leave....
Mike
Lord Valve wrote:
> Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
> new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I gotta
>
> admit:
>
> http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
>
> So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
>
> Help us out, Jimmuh!
>
> Lord Valve
> BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates a
touch of racism. Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
leaving out the "chocolate" designation. There's no need to go there...
As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive 4
more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote for
darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack up the
moving van and leave....
Mike
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Mike Pritchard wrote:
> Lord Valve wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
> > new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I gotta
> >
> > admit:
> >
> > http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
> >
> > So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> > administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
> >
> > Help us out, Jimmuh!
> >
> > Lord Valve
> > BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
>
> Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates a
> touch of racism.
Now Mike, I know what's up with that:
Liberals apply the term "racist" to opponents to
dismiss their arguments, and to paint them as
unworthy of further debate.
In fact, in the liberal lexicon, the term can be (and usually is)
applied to anyone who says anything negative about anyone
who is "a person of color" (jeez, is that lame - glad your side
invented it...), no matter how benignly it may be couched, as
long as the person making the statement is white. "People
of color" (ROFLMAO!) who make negative statements about
white people are, of course, exempt from the rule, for - as
we all know - they're just pointing out the obvious. "Racist"
is the leftoid all-purpose shutter-upper and debate ender.
Right?
Fortunately, I *do* know better, and that particular term rolls
off me like water off a duck's back, since leftoids use it the
same way nearly everybody uses "asshole" or "dipshit" - it's
for taking the piss out of your opponent, whether you believe
he is actually a racist or not. Of course, the "racist" label
is much more serious, for it implies weakness of character
and even lawbreaking, since there are many instances
where racism is illegal. As a debate-ending epithet, it is
almost without peer - unless you apply it to someone who
isn't scared of it, and recognizes it for the bullshit that it
is. Your crew is slowly removing the stigma from the term
by using it constantly on people who don't deserve it, and
in the next ten years or so (at the present rate of use) it
will decay into complete meaninglessness, like "dipshit"
or "fuckwit."
> Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
> leaving out the "chocolate" designation.
Au contraire - the "chocolate" is the best part.
"Royal Easter Bunny" doesn't mean a damn thing - it's a non
sequitur, and unfunny. *Chocolate* Easter Bunny is apropos,
and the humor is direct rather than implied, for a chocolate
Easter bunny is dark and sweet on the outside, but hollow
on the inside. And it does have large ears...sort of like your
cult leader. Calling him a "chocolate easter bunny" is a
humorous verbal device like calling someone an Oreo,
or an apple, a watermelon, a banana, a Fig Newton
and so forth - using a cookie, fruit, or vegetable to
point out that appearances can be deceiving is an
American tradition and I for one will not allow the
legions of shrieking leftist finger-pointers to force me to
eschew its use. If you don't think it's funny, you have
my permission not to laugh.
> There's no need to go there...
But go there you did - as a leftoid, you couldn't resist the opportunity.
I've been called far worse for far less - so piss on it. Next?
> As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive 4
> more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote for
> darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
> mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Including a committed radical socialist who hangs out with bomb-throwers and
America-haters.
Noted.
> Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack up the
> moving van and leave....
Hopefully, he won't leave the joint in a mess and steal the furniture like his
predecessor did.
When all the shit comes out on Obama, he won't
be able to get elected dogcatcher. And the best
part about *that* will be, Bogus Bill and Shrillary
will be the culprits, and the Democraps won't have
anyone to bitch at but themselves. Next up: video
of Barack dissing the Bible. It'll be on your screens
soon enough...
I'd vote for Condoleeza in a New York minute.
Go ahead, tell me she's not "black" by liberal
standards. After all, if Blowjob Billy can be
"the first black president" on what appears to
be his fondness for playing the saxophone (or
whatever the ridiculous leftoid reason was) I
reckon Condoleeza must be a weed-chewin'
redneck.
Besides, if gender is a state of mind, so is
race. If the fact that a person is packin' a
pecker and a set of nads doesn't preclude
said person from thinking of him/her/itself
as female, then skin color must also fall,
since it appears to be another reality that
can be conveniently ignored.
Therefore, I am now a Zulu warrior. ;-)
Lord Valve
BaaaaarrrrrAAAAACCCCCKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Mike Pritchard wrote:
> Lord Valve wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
> > new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I gotta
> >
> > admit:
> >
> > http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
> >
> > So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
> > administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
> >
> > Help us out, Jimmuh!
> >
> > Lord Valve
> > BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
>
> Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates a
> touch of racism.
Now Mike, I know what's up with that:
Liberals apply the term "racist" to opponents to
dismiss their arguments, and to paint them as
unworthy of further debate.
In fact, in the liberal lexicon, the term can be (and usually is)
applied to anyone who says anything negative about anyone
who is "a person of color" (jeez, is that lame - glad your side
invented it...), no matter how benignly it may be couched, as
long as the person making the statement is white. "People
of color" (ROFLMAO!) who make negative statements about
white people are, of course, exempt from the rule, for - as
we all know - they're just pointing out the obvious. "Racist"
is the leftoid all-purpose shutter-upper and debate ender.
Right?
Fortunately, I *do* know better, and that particular term rolls
off me like water off a duck's back, since leftoids use it the
same way nearly everybody uses "asshole" or "dipshit" - it's
for taking the piss out of your opponent, whether you believe
he is actually a racist or not. Of course, the "racist" label
is much more serious, for it implies weakness of character
and even lawbreaking, since there are many instances
where racism is illegal. As a debate-ending epithet, it is
almost without peer - unless you apply it to someone who
isn't scared of it, and recognizes it for the bullshit that it
is. Your crew is slowly removing the stigma from the term
by using it constantly on people who don't deserve it, and
in the next ten years or so (at the present rate of use) it
will decay into complete meaninglessness, like "dipshit"
or "fuckwit."
> Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
> leaving out the "chocolate" designation.
Au contraire - the "chocolate" is the best part.
"Royal Easter Bunny" doesn't mean a damn thing - it's a non
sequitur, and unfunny. *Chocolate* Easter Bunny is apropos,
and the humor is direct rather than implied, for a chocolate
Easter bunny is dark and sweet on the outside, but hollow
on the inside. And it does have large ears...sort of like your
cult leader. Calling him a "chocolate easter bunny" is a
humorous verbal device like calling someone an Oreo,
or an apple, a watermelon, a banana, a Fig Newton
and so forth - using a cookie, fruit, or vegetable to
point out that appearances can be deceiving is an
American tradition and I for one will not allow the
legions of shrieking leftist finger-pointers to force me to
eschew its use. If you don't think it's funny, you have
my permission not to laugh.
> There's no need to go there...
But go there you did - as a leftoid, you couldn't resist the opportunity.
I've been called far worse for far less - so piss on it. Next?
> As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive 4
> more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote for
> darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
> mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Including a committed radical socialist who hangs out with bomb-throwers and
America-haters.
Noted.
> Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack up the
> moving van and leave....
Hopefully, he won't leave the joint in a mess and steal the furniture like his
predecessor did.
When all the shit comes out on Obama, he won't
be able to get elected dogcatcher. And the best
part about *that* will be, Bogus Bill and Shrillary
will be the culprits, and the Democraps won't have
anyone to bitch at but themselves. Next up: video
of Barack dissing the Bible. It'll be on your screens
soon enough...
I'd vote for Condoleeza in a New York minute.
Go ahead, tell me she's not "black" by liberal
standards. After all, if Blowjob Billy can be
"the first black president" on what appears to
be his fondness for playing the saxophone (or
whatever the ridiculous leftoid reason was) I
reckon Condoleeza must be a weed-chewin'
redneck.
Besides, if gender is a state of mind, so is
race. If the fact that a person is packin' a
pecker and a set of nads doesn't preclude
said person from thinking of him/her/itself
as female, then skin color must also fall,
since it appears to be another reality that
can be conveniently ignored.
Therefore, I am now a Zulu warrior. ;-)
Lord Valve
BaaaaarrrrrAAAAACCCCCKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
"Lord Valve" <detritus@ix,net com,com > wrote in message
news:482A0043.8C8DA2AF@ix,net com,com ...
> Mike Pritchard wrote:
>
>> Lord Valve wrote:
>>
>> > Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
>> > new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I
>> > gotta
>> >
>> > admit:
>> >
>> > http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
>> >
>> > So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
>> > administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
>> >
>> > Help us out, Jimmuh!
>> >
>> > Lord Valve
>> > BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
>>
>> Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates
>> a
>> touch of racism.
>
> Now Mike, I know what's up with that:
>
> Liberals apply the term "racist" to opponents to
> dismiss their arguments, and to paint them as
> unworthy of further debate.
>
> In fact, in the liberal lexicon, the term can be (and usually is)
> applied to anyone who says anything negative about anyone
> who is "a person of color" (jeez, is that lame - glad your side
> invented it...), no matter how benignly it may be couched, as
> long as the person making the statement is white. "People
> of color" (ROFLMAO!) who make negative statements about
> white people are, of course, exempt from the rule, for - as
> we all know - they're just pointing out the obvious. "Racist"
> is the leftoid all-purpose shutter-upper and debate ender.
>
> Right?
>
> Fortunately, I *do* know better, and that particular term rolls
> off me like water off a duck's back, since leftoids use it the
> same way nearly everybody uses "asshole" or "dipshit" - it's
> for taking the piss out of your opponent, whether you believe
> he is actually a racist or not. Of course, the "racist" label
> is much more serious, for it implies weakness of character
> and even lawbreaking, since there are many instances
> where racism is illegal. As a debate-ending epithet, it is
> almost without peer - unless you apply it to someone who
> isn't scared of it, and recognizes it for the bullshit that it
> is. Your crew is slowly removing the stigma from the term
> by using it constantly on people who don't deserve it, and
> in the next ten years or so (at the present rate of use) it
> will decay into complete meaninglessness, like "dipshit"
> or "fuckwit."
>
>> Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
>> leaving out the "chocolate" designation.
>
> Au contraire - the "chocolate" is the best part.
>
> "Royal Easter Bunny" doesn't mean a damn thing - it's a non
> sequitur, and unfunny. *Chocolate* Easter Bunny is apropos,
> and the humor is direct rather than implied, for a chocolate
> Easter bunny is dark and sweet on the outside, but hollow
> on the inside. And it does have large ears...sort of like your
> cult leader. Calling him a "chocolate easter bunny" is a
> humorous verbal device like calling someone an Oreo,
> or an apple, a watermelon, a banana, a Fig Newton
> and so forth - using a cookie, fruit, or vegetable to
> point out that appearances can be deceiving is an
> American tradition and I for one will not allow the
> legions of shrieking leftist finger-pointers to force me to
> eschew its use. If you don't think it's funny, you have
> my permission not to laugh.
>
>> There's no need to go there...
>
> But go there you did - as a leftoid, you couldn't resist the opportunity.
>
> I've been called far worse for far less - so piss on it. Next?
>
>> As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive
>> 4
>> more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote
>> for
>> darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
>> mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Including a committed radical socialist who hangs out with bomb-throwers
> and
> America-haters.
>
> Noted.
>
>> Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack
>> up the
>> moving van and leave....
>
> Hopefully, he won't leave the joint in a mess and steal the furniture like
> his
> predecessor did.
>
> When all the shit comes out on Obama, he won't
> be able to get elected dogcatcher. And the best
> part about *that* will be, Bogus Bill and Shrillary
> will be the culprits, and the Democraps won't have
> anyone to bitch at but themselves. Next up: video
> of Barack dissing the Bible. It'll be on your screens
> soon enough...
>
> I'd vote for Condoleeza in a New York minute.
>
> Go ahead, tell me she's not "black" by liberal
> standards. After all, if Blowjob Billy can be
> "the first black president" on what appears to
> be his fondness for playing the saxophone (or
> whatever the ridiculous leftoid reason was) I
> reckon Condoleeza must be a weed-chewin'
> redneck.
>
> Besides, if gender is a state of mind, so is
> race. If the fact that a person is packin' a
> pecker and a set of nads doesn't preclude
> said person from thinking of him/her/itself
> as female, then skin color must also fall,
> since it appears to be another reality that
> can be conveniently ignored.
>
> Therefore, I am now a Zulu warrior. ;-)
>
> Lord Valve
> BaaaaarrrrrAAAAACCCCCKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Spoken like just another right wing kook with a warped
sense of stupidity and malfunctioning perceptive filters.
You stink, you fascist slut.
"Lord Valve" <detritus@ix,net com,com > wrote in message
news:482A0043.8C8DA2AF@ix,net com,com ...
> Mike Pritchard wrote:
>
>> Lord Valve wrote:
>>
>> > Hmmm, His Royal Chocolate Easterbunnyness seems to have added seven
>> > new states, and he isn't even elected yet! That's a helluva trick, I
>> > gotta
>> >
>> > admit:
>> >
>> > http :// latimesblogs.latimes,com /washington/2008/05/new-patriotic-o.html
>> >
>> > So - the decision now is, do we want four more years of the Bush
>> > administration, or four more years of the Carter administration?
>> >
>> > Help us out, Jimmuh!
>> >
>> > Lord Valve
>> > BaaaaaarrrrrAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
>>
>> Now LV...if I didn't know better, I'd have to suggest your post indicates
>> a
>> touch of racism.
>
> Now Mike, I know what's up with that:
>
> Liberals apply the term "racist" to opponents to
> dismiss their arguments, and to paint them as
> unworthy of further debate.
>
> In fact, in the liberal lexicon, the term can be (and usually is)
> applied to anyone who says anything negative about anyone
> who is "a person of color" (jeez, is that lame - glad your side
> invented it...), no matter how benignly it may be couched, as
> long as the person making the statement is white. "People
> of color" (ROFLMAO!) who make negative statements about
> white people are, of course, exempt from the rule, for - as
> we all know - they're just pointing out the obvious. "Racist"
> is the leftoid all-purpose shutter-upper and debate ender.
>
> Right?
>
> Fortunately, I *do* know better, and that particular term rolls
> off me like water off a duck's back, since leftoids use it the
> same way nearly everybody uses "asshole" or "dipshit" - it's
> for taking the piss out of your opponent, whether you believe
> he is actually a racist or not. Of course, the "racist" label
> is much more serious, for it implies weakness of character
> and even lawbreaking, since there are many instances
> where racism is illegal. As a debate-ending epithet, it is
> almost without peer - unless you apply it to someone who
> isn't scared of it, and recognizes it for the bullshit that it
> is. Your crew is slowly removing the stigma from the term
> by using it constantly on people who don't deserve it, and
> in the next ten years or so (at the present rate of use) it
> will decay into complete meaninglessness, like "dipshit"
> or "fuckwit."
>
>> Otherwise, you would have simply said "royal easter bunny",
>> leaving out the "chocolate" designation.
>
> Au contraire - the "chocolate" is the best part.
>
> "Royal Easter Bunny" doesn't mean a damn thing - it's a non
> sequitur, and unfunny. *Chocolate* Easter Bunny is apropos,
> and the humor is direct rather than implied, for a chocolate
> Easter bunny is dark and sweet on the outside, but hollow
> on the inside. And it does have large ears...sort of like your
> cult leader. Calling him a "chocolate easter bunny" is a
> humorous verbal device like calling someone an Oreo,
> or an apple, a watermelon, a banana, a Fig Newton
> and so forth - using a cookie, fruit, or vegetable to
> point out that appearances can be deceiving is an
> American tradition and I for one will not allow the
> legions of shrieking leftist finger-pointers to force me to
> eschew its use. If you don't think it's funny, you have
> my permission not to laugh.
>
>> There's no need to go there...
>
> But go there you did - as a leftoid, you couldn't resist the opportunity.
>
> I've been called far worse for far less - so piss on it. Next?
>
>> As for *my* decision....I don't see how this country can possibly survive
>> 4
>> more years of anything even resembling GW's administration. I'll vote
>> for
>> darned near *anything* that gets us clear from that
>> mess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Including a committed radical socialist who hangs out with bomb-throwers
> and
> America-haters.
>
> Noted.
>
>> Now...let's just hope the country can survive long enough for W to pack
>> up the
>> moving van and leave....
>
> Hopefully, he won't leave the joint in a mess and steal the furniture like
> his
> predecessor did.
>
> When all the shit comes out on Obama, he won't
> be able to get elected dogcatcher. And the best
> part about *that* will be, Bogus Bill and Shrillary
> will be the culprits, and the Democraps won't have
> anyone to bitch at but themselves. Next up: video
> of Barack dissing the Bible. It'll be on your screens
> soon enough...
>
> I'd vote for Condoleeza in a New York minute.
>
> Go ahead, tell me she's not "black" by liberal
> standards. After all, if Blowjob Billy can be
> "the first black president" on what appears to
> be his fondness for playing the saxophone (or
> whatever the ridiculous leftoid reason was) I
> reckon Condoleeza must be a weed-chewin'
> redneck.
>
> Besides, if gender is a state of mind, so is
> race. If the fact that a person is packin' a
> pecker and a set of nads doesn't preclude
> said person from thinking of him/her/itself
> as female, then skin color must also fall,
> since it appears to be another reality that
> can be conveniently ignored.
>
> Therefore, I am now a Zulu warrior. ;-)
>
> Lord Valve
> BaaaaarrrrrAAAAACCCCCKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Spoken like just another right wing kook with a warped
sense of stupidity and malfunctioning perceptive filters.
You stink, you fascist slut.
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
On May 13, 4:55 pm, Lord Valve <detri...@ix,net com,com > wrote:
*Major snip of the "uuh": Ununhexium-bush-cheney complex; where
forgetfulness *now* is just part of the psychosis:
You! And carbon-copy Americans like you s-h-o-u-l-d be, going forth,
tested on voting ability. It doesn't have to be much; something like a
5 minute, "stupid test", from what I can estimate. And at this point,
your political opinions do not / should not count either. Sit the fuck
down and shut up. Current events sets *this stage* for you having no
probative value upon any issue in this election. So, sock that stink
hole and live with being part and parcel to fucking things up. In the
end, you lost, and way-fucked things up. Get over it.
It's not a "jones". It's a fucking call out.
On May 13, 4:55 pm, Lord Valve <detri...@ix,net com,com > wrote:
*Major snip of the "uuh": Ununhexium-bush-cheney complex; where
forgetfulness *now* is just part of the psychosis:
You! And carbon-copy Americans like you s-h-o-u-l-d be, going forth,
tested on voting ability. It doesn't have to be much; something like a
5 minute, "stupid test", from what I can estimate. And at this point,
your political opinions do not / should not count either. Sit the fuck
down and shut up. Current events sets *this stage* for you having no
probative value upon any issue in this election. So, sock that stink
hole and live with being part and parcel to fucking things up. In the
end, you lost, and way-fucked things up. Get over it.
It's not a "jones". It's a fucking call out.
Re: VOTE FOR BARACK!
Premier Spigot dripped:
> Sit the fuck down and shut up.
Spoken like a true leftist.
> It's not a "jones".
Stop replying then, fuckwit...you can't do it.
> It's a fucking call out.
Fat lady ain't sung yet, son. Deal with it.
Lord Valve
BaaaaaarrrrrrAAAAAACCCCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
Premier Spigot dripped:
> Sit the fuck down and shut up.
Spoken like a true leftist.
> It's not a "jones".
Stop replying then, fuckwit...you can't do it.
> It's a fucking call out.
Fat lady ain't sung yet, son. Deal with it.
Lord Valve
BaaaaaarrrrrrAAAAAACCCCCCKKKKK!!!! <Safety!>
