LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteNo we don't all know. What is your remark supposed to mean.Originally Posted by JPSartre12
Certified Bum
I thought I'd mix in a term or two that most would recognize.
Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan
“War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier
War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar
No we don't all know. What is your remark supposed to mean.
The track record of liberals and military spending has been dismal in the past. Carter decimated the military. Reagan had to make a deal with the devil, Tipp O'Neil to rebuild it. Clinton tried to do the same.
Registered User
You know that has to rate up there with the world's most dumb comments. The private sector has nothing to do with veteran's care and you should know it. As to the right ha ha good luck with proof. It is the left who despises the military. The chosen one ever tried to get combat wounded to pay for their own medical care after discharge. Too bad that got shot down.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Registered User
Gee I never heard of that film. Were you lying about it being made? Then again truth was never a strong point to the left.the closest old sarge got to see action was as an extra in the block buster : "We were never soldiers" starring Dick and Dubya
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Registered User
He's a tiny part of a massive army, veterans of a million battles, who never left their bedroom.the closest old sarge got to see action was as an extra in the block buster : "We were never soldiers" starring Dick and Dubya
" ... It's not as though he proved anything, he only refuted my evidence. ..." Archangel 04.01.09
"Obama is not a brown-skinned anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus."
“Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil.”
Registered User
Funny coming from one who never left mum's basement.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Registered User
TriCare for Life is a component of compensation for career length service that grew out of promises made by the military services as an inducement to serve. That inducement was used extensively following WW II and the entire Cold War but military members with career length service found that despite the promises, they were required to buy insurance or at the least supplemental insurance to cover health care costs that were provided outside the military health care system. That came to a head when Colonel “Bud” Day took the case to the Supreme Court and lost. To its credit however the Republican Congress enacted TriCare for Life which effectively fulfills the obligation.
Now, however, Obama, his Administration and the Democrat Congress are reported to be planning modifications to TriCare for Life that would levy taxes on that earned benefit to help pay for unearned universal health care. So, in additional to having earned health care incident to service, under the Obama/Democrat plan military members will be required to pay additional taxes to pay for those who have earned nothing. Sort of like the chosen one's wanting to have combat wounded pay for their injuries with civilian heath care, remember?
Despite their best effort to disguise this monstrosity as health care, it is not. No doubt there should be a safety net where appropriate, but the obscene piece of proposed legislation that Democrats and Obama are creating is worthy of a nothing less than feeding it into a shredder.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
And therein lies the clincher, doesn't it. You can't sit in a waiting room with the rest of your fellow Americans, can you. You have to have "the right kind of people" there.
Your kind of bigoted extremism on healthcare, your conditional Christian love, your caste system you can't part with, is probably more the cause of this monstrosity of legislation in Congress, at present, than anything else.
I don't believe you're a veteran either. I think you're another one of Ali's bizarre handles.
Registered User
Um not sure where you got off with the waiting room strawman but that dog don't hunt.
No I can see a load of jelly a mile off. Your resort to insult merely proves you lost the debate.
I don't believe you are full human either so that makes us even.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Oh no bigshot? Shoot this one: what's "appropriate"?
The only qualification I know for providing health care is a human being who needs a doctor.
I'm sure there are many people you would "appropriately" deny healthcare on that same basis.I don't believe you are full human either so that makes us even.
Registered User
More strawmen in flames baby.
You don't know much at all do you?
I'm not the bad guy here so your fiction of me denying any thing doesn't fly. On the flip side of the coin I don't see you slamming George Soros either. he could pay for all our health care and then some. Carefull there is some mud on your jackboots.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Answer the question, then. When is it "appropriate" in your book, big mouth, to deliver health care?
Registered User
There you go again with the insults subhuman. Answer where you got you 44,000 deaths first.
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.
Pot. Kettle. Black. LOL
Posting Permissions
