Rachel Maddow is happy

[Stephanie]

Wow... another attack against Rachel's sexuality....

how original...

Thats all they ever have Seriously, they never comment on her educational background. She is a doctor. She has a doctorate in Politics. That doesn't matter, she is a lesbian...only.

Now, Hannity is a college drop out who did construction, be he is the authority on politics. lol

who give a rats ass what Madcows education is. she is as big as dingbat as Hannity can be.

 

[MarcATL]

You do Stephanie...you do.

LOL!!

 

[Stephanie]

You do Stephanie...you do.

LOL!!

mummmmk
I care about her education as much as I care for her. None

 

[sitarro]

Wow... another attack against Rachel's sexuality....

how original...

Thats all they ever have Seriously, they never comment on her educational background. She is a doctor. She has a doctorate in Politics. That doesn't matter, she is a lesbian...only.

Now, Hannity is a college drop out who did construction, be he is the authority on politics. lol

President George Bush has a Masters in Business from the Harvard Business School.

 

[jillian]

How soon before jilli reps you for this? Really Gump, why would I give a shit how an old faggot Kiwi sees me?

how would you know what i rep him for or why?

and he's neither old nor a faggot...not that anyone should care if he were.

you really should stop projecting.

It's obvious to everyone that has been on this board for more than a few months. How else would the 2 of you, that always follow each other from thread to thread, have amassed such a large amount of positive rep? There just aren't that many stupid people to give you that much positive feedback, neither of you ever have a worthwhile post that intelligent people could agree with......... therefore, you rep each other constantly in some bizarre attempt to get credibility.......... epic failure. So he's not old or a faggot, who gives a shit, that insult rolls off the tongue better than liberal, nonthinking, parrot, dumb ass.

poor, dear, demented sitty... out of my last 20 reps, grump repped me once and 11 of the others were from conservatives.

again, stop projecting...

 

[jillian]

Wow... another attack against Rachel's sexuality....

how original...

Thats all they ever have Seriously, they never comment on her educational background. She is a doctor. She has a doctorate in Politics. That doesn't matter, she is a lesbian...only.

Now, Hannity is a college drop out who did construction, be he is the authority on politics. lol

President George Bush has a Masters in Business from the Harvard Business School.

*yawn*

 

[sitarro]

how would you know what i rep him for or why?

and he's neither old nor a faggot...not that anyone should care if he were.

you really should stop projecting.

It's obvious to everyone that has been on this board for more than a few months. How else would the 2 of you, that always follow each other from thread to thread, have amassed such a large amount of positive rep? There just aren't that many stupid people to give you that much positive feedback, neither of you ever have a worthwhile post that intelligent people could agree with......... therefore, you rep each other constantly in some bizarre attempt to get credibility.......... epic failure. So he's not old or a faggot, who gives a shit, that insult rolls off the tongue better than liberal, nonthinking, parrot, dumb ass.

poor, dear, demented sitty... out of my last 20 reps, grump repped me once and 11 of the others were from conservatives.

again, stop projecting...

Sure...... and John MCain is a conservative.

 

[jillian]

It's obvious to everyone that has been on this board for more than a few months. How else would the 2 of you, that always follow each other from thread to thread, have amassed such a large amount of positive rep? There just aren't that many stupid people to give you that much positive feedback, neither of you ever have a worthwhile post that intelligent people could agree with......... therefore, you rep each other constantly in some bizarre attempt to get credibility.......... epic failure. So he's not old or a faggot, who gives a shit, that insult rolls off the tongue better than liberal, nonthinking, parrot, dumb ass.

poor, dear, demented sitty... out of my last 20 reps, grump repped me once and 11 of the others were from conservatives.

again, stop projecting...

Sure...... and John MCain is a conservative.

damn, you're dumb... feel free to pm gunny and ask him to look, genius.

 

[sitarro]

Thats all they ever have Seriously, they never comment on her educational background. She is a doctor. She has a doctorate in Politics. That doesn't matter, she is a lesbian...only.

Now, Hannity is a college drop out who did construction, be he is the authority on politics. lol

President George Bush has a Masters in Business from the Harvard Business School.

*yawn*

Get some sleep, you sound like that dimwit Springsteen.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Wow... another attack against Rachel's sexuality....

how original...

Thats all they ever have Seriously, they never comment on her educational background. She is a doctor. She has a doctorate in Politics. That doesn't matter, she is a lesbian...only.

Now, Hannity is a college drop out who did construction, be he is the authority on politics. lol

She should go to work for ACORN.
PHD in being a hack?
Please.

 

[Political Junky]

Rachel seems to be real happy that the Democrats want to use reconciliation to ram a health bill on America. I find this very strange that she would support a national public option, after all she must have great health care at NBC (state run media) so why?
Maybe she wants tax payers to pay for her addadictome.

Why wouldn't she want others to have good health care like she does?
Liberals care about others, as opposed to Cons, who say "I got mine, screw you", as you suggest in your post.

 

[Political Junky]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4]YouTube - "We're Number 37" - Paul Hipp[/ame]

 

[Stephanie]

LOL, liberals care for others. by using the Federal Government to FORCE others to pay for their CARE for others.

how big of em, eh.

 

[Sinatra]

It should be noted that the WHO rankings are weighted most heavily on "access". Because America does not have a nationalized healthcare system, it is penalized in the rankings.

The WHO ranking has much less to do with overal QUALITY of healthcare, which the United States is among the best in the world due to its competition-innovation based system.

That is why the world's wealthy so often come to America for medical treatment.

___

Another reason the U.S. didn't score high in the WHO rankings is that we are less socialistic than other nations. What has that got to do with the quality of health care? For the authors of the study, it's crucial. The WHO judged countries not on the absolute quality of health care, but on how "fairly" health care of any quality is "distributed." The problem here is obvious. By that criterion, a country with high-quality care overall but "unequal distribution" would rank below a country with lower quality care but equal distribution.

It's when this so-called "fairness," a highly subjective standard, is factored in that the U.S. scores go south.

The U.S. ranking is influenced heavily by the number of people -- 45 million -- without medical insurance. As I reported in previous columns, our government aggravates that problem by making insurance artificially expensive with, for example, mandates for coverage that many people would not choose and forbidding us to buy policies from companies in another state.

Even with these interventions, the 45 million figure is misleading. Thirty-seven percent of that group live in households making more than $50,000 a year, says the U.S. Census Bureau. Nineteen percent are in households making more than $75,000 a year; 20 percent are not citizens, and 33 percent are eligible for existing government programs but are not enrolled.

For all its problems, the U.S. ranks at the top for quality of care and innovation, including development of life-saving drugs. It "falters" only when the criterion is proximity to socialized medicine.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Why the U.S. Ranks Low on WHO's Health-Care Study

 

[Political Junky]

Of course it's based on access. Did you read the hundreds of Liberal posts who said that?
If you're rich in the US you get the best health care, but God help you if you're middle class.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

LOL, liberals care for others. by using the Federal Government to FORCE others to pay for their CARE for others.

how big of em, eh.

How is paying to help the poor via taxers any different than using the tithe collected from the people to help the poor?

Did it ever occur to you that if private charity was enough, these programs wouldn't exist? Private charity wasn't enough because only a small minority ever really put forth an effort to aid those not as well off as themselves. That's why there was a need for social aid programs in the first place.

 

[jillian]

How is paying to help the poor via taxers any different than using the tithe collected from the people to help the poor?

Did it ever occur to you that if private charity was enough, these programs wouldn't exist? Private charity wasn't enough because only a small minority ever really put forth an effort to aid those not as well off as themselves. That's why there was a need for social aid programs in the first place.

Leaving aside Social Security income, nearly one of every two elderly people — 46.8 percent — has income below the poverty line.[1]
Once Social Security benefits are taken into account, just one in twelve — 8.7 percent — is poor.

Social Security Lifts 13 Million Seniors Above the Poverty Line — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[The Rabbi]

How is paying to help the poor via taxers any different than using the tithe collected from the people to help the poor?

Did it ever occur to you that if private charity was enough, these programs wouldn't exist? Private charity wasn't enough because only a small minority ever really put forth an effort to aid those not as well off as themselves. That's why there was a need for social aid programs in the first place.

Leaving aside Social Security income, nearly one of every two elderly people — 46.8 percent — has income below the poverty line.[1]
Once Social Security benefits are taken into account, just one in twelve — 8.7 percent — is poor.

Social Security Lifts 13 Million Seniors Above the Poverty Line — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Typically unable to distinguish between "low income" and "poor."
Someone who owns his $250k house outright with no other debt and $150k in the bank but collecting only Social Security is "low income" in anybody's book. But I would hardly call them poor.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

So all or most seniors own a $250k home outright?


Source?

 

[MarcATL]

In the Rabbi's twisted mind it is.

What a piece of work.