"Suspending a campaign has a different meaning depending on the party.
On the Republican side, decisions on how to allocate delegates is left to the state parties.
On the Democratic side, a candidate who "suspends" is technically still a candidate so he or she keeps both district and statewide delegates won through primaries and caucuses. Superdelegates are always free to support any candidate at any time, whether the candidate drops out, suspends or stays in."
There are millions in America with no real economic power, and no judgement if they had money. They are called children. Why, if we can purchase as a society an education for all, or a killing machine for all, should we not as a society purchase health care for all? Why shouldn't the owners of NY property and the survivors of 9/11 and their families, and the airlines be responsible for dealing with Al Qaeda? Let them purchase justice and security like everything else?
Our nation, tang? The World Trade Center is our nation, but the children are not? The old are not? The poor are not? I think that nearly all parents would love to purchase health care for their children, but many cannot. Is that their fault? Your answer proves my logic more clearly than anything I could say. Thank you.
The French, the Swiss, the Belgians have no problem with this, and my French friend is HIV , so he has lots of experience. The brits seem to, but what do you expect. We have LOTS of examples to learn from to make ours the best.
WOW thats a scary thought. So millions of poor and middle class Americans who have health insurance will have less money bc theyll be forced to pay for other peoples health insurance. The rich wont suffer from this only the poor and middle class.
I have very good (not excellent)health care benefits that I pay only a portion of, as a Virginia state employee. I would be delighted to pay more for everyone to have what I do.
I am convinced that a properly done national health care system would benefit my nation, at a lower over-all cost and with improved service for most. I think it is the right thing for us as a nation to do. You're gonna have to do a lot better than a bunch of pat generalities and a handful of horror stories (which also abound in OUR system) to convince me that most of us, or even a substantial portion would be hurt. The wealthy can always pay for additional care if they wish. But wealth, like every other gift, carries with it responsibility for the moral individual, which I think most of us are. We are the most privileged nation on Earth, and people die here for the want of health care.
Tangalang's glib response about buying health care - what about the children of those parents who cannot afford it? What about those children? You would deny them with your glib responses - well their parents should be working and pay for it - what about the children? What about those children who were born into poverty stricken families? What about those children whose parents have to work two jobs and still cannot afford affordable health insurance? What about those children? How could you deny health care to any child or adult for that matter? How could you deny?
Parents need to be responsible for their own children its that simple. Whos to blame for their irresponsibility is it the govt, big corportations, or the taxpayer? NO! Why should I, a responsible American, go into debt to suppport irresponsible people.
Rudy would have beaten Hillary during he initial run for the Senate if he had run for office then. He missed his moment in history and was literally a day late and a dollar short this time.
He didn't ditch his wife over a piece of tail, and run to his gay friends for help while he changed mares, then fail to support THEIR rights and privileges. Rudy is a snake.
"Just a heads up neither is Bush but people keep referring to him also."
Just a heads up: Bush is the current administration against whose disastrous legacy BOTH Democratic AND Republican candidates are running and promising "change." Your oversimplistic analysis fails to account that Bush remains relevant to the election due to the fact that so many are running on a platform of "change" from the policies of the Bush administration. NOBODY however is running on or against Kerry's policies, which makes Kerry irrelevant to this discussion.
Besides, Romney has been a far bigger flip-flopper (pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control to pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-gun lobbby) than Kerry ever was.
It only took Joey a couple of second Scrimshaw - how long did it take you to private message me and call me a bitch? Then on the thread where I called you out - you asked me what part of bitch didn't fit? I've had my comments removed before for stating a truth such as what a crook Ghouliani is, etc., etc. - I want to know why you could openly call me a bitch on a thread and your comments haven't been removed.
I did not2needy - I did! Thanks for the advice. I believe they will do something - I see how they quickly removed the insults to neophile on this thread. Yes!
"Suspending a campaign has a different meaning depending on the party.
On the Republican side, decisions on how to allocate delegates is left to the state parties.
On the Democratic side, a candidate who "suspends" is technically still a candidate so he or she keeps both district and statewide delegates won through primaries and caucuses. Superdelegates are always free to support any candidate at any time, whether the candidate drops out, suspends or stays in."
"Suspend" means he has suspended spending.
Non-commital to the bitter end.
He still has the option to flip back to his flop position and get back in the race in the event of a Later Day miracle.
You mean like Kerry?
Just a heads up: Kerry isn't running in this election.
Just a heads up neither is Bush but people keep referring to him also.
But the specter of his record of his record is.
Cons are toast.
another Clinton or Obamma is not the end of life as we know it.
a few more taxes, a little less security, we'll survive
a little less security>>>>>
We don't have "security" now.
who? where? what?
I'd say a lot more of both and AR don't get the butter out yet.
it's looking like a step towards socialism in '09
One sincerely prays so for health care in America.
All they need to do is purchase it. Just like everything else.
There are millions in America with no real economic power, and no judgement if they had money. They are called children. Why, if we can purchase as a society an education for all, or a killing machine for all, should we not as a society purchase health care for all? Why shouldn't the owners of NY property and the survivors of 9/11 and their families, and the airlines be responsible for dealing with Al Qaeda? Let them purchase justice and security like everything else?
Well said.
If you do not want to purchase health care for your children you are not fit to havce them. Bottom line.
Your logic is out there to say the least.
"Yeah uh sorry our nation was attacked by a foreign terrorist organization, but since they attacked your property, it's your problem."
Our nation, tang? The World Trade Center is our nation, but the children are not? The old are not? The poor are not? I think that nearly all parents would love to purchase health care for their children, but many cannot. Is that their fault? Your answer proves my logic more clearly than anything I could say. Thank you.
Why? Are you tired of getting in to see a doctor in less than a year? You'll have long waits with Euro style socialized medicine.
The French, the Swiss, the Belgians have no problem with this, and my French friend is HIV , so he has lots of experience. The brits seem to, but what do you expect. We have LOTS of examples to learn from to make ours the best.
WOW thats a scary thought. So millions of poor and middle class Americans who have health insurance will have less money bc theyll be forced to pay for other peoples health insurance. The rich wont suffer from this only the poor and middle class.
I have very good (not excellent)health care benefits that I pay only a portion of, as a Virginia state employee. I would be delighted to pay more for everyone to have what I do.
I am convinced that a properly done national health care system would benefit my nation, at a lower over-all cost and with improved service for most. I think it is the right thing for us as a nation to do. You're gonna have to do a lot better than a bunch of pat generalities and a handful of horror stories (which also abound in OUR system) to convince me that most of us, or even a substantial portion would be hurt. The wealthy can always pay for additional care if they wish. But wealth, like every other gift, carries with it responsibility for the moral individual, which I think most of us are. We are the most privileged nation on Earth, and people die here for the want of health care.
Acceptance! You arrived at that level fairly quickly. I'm proud of you. Can you convince the rest of your buddies to reach this milestone as well?
Tangalang's glib response about buying health care - what about the children of those parents who cannot afford it? What about those children? You would deny them with your glib responses - well their parents should be working and pay for it - what about the children? What about those children who were born into poverty stricken families? What about those children whose parents have to work two jobs and still cannot afford affordable health insurance? What about those children? How could you deny health care to any child or adult for that matter? How could you deny?
Have you heard of the CHIP Program? Insurance is available for poor children. It doesn't require a huge, mismanaged soicalized medicine scheme.
Parents need to be responsible for their own children its that simple. Whos to blame for their irresponsibility is it the govt, big corportations, or the taxpayer? NO! Why should I, a responsible American, go into debt to suppport irresponsible people.
Tessy, If you are taking issue with somehting I said, please don't be scared to address me personally.
Don't be so ignorant Tess, those kids are already covered.
A little more terrorism, a great deal more in taxes!
Good one Rudy.
Ahhhh but we barely knew ye.
Rudy would have beaten Hillary during he initial run for the Senate if he had run for office then. He missed his moment in history and was literally a day late and a dollar short this time.
Rudy missed his moment and went on to strike gold on 9/11. And he sucked that gold mine dry.
He'll be fine.
RUDY was already doing a great job turning NYC around.
and he rose to the challenges of 9-11
Rudy didn't miss anything. He is a dolt who screwed himself. The problem is you need more than "(/11". He didn't have it.
Or even that, according to NY emergency personnel. And the sexual morality of a caged monkey.
Sounds like Willy Clinton.
slick willy isn't a liberal either.
He didn't ditch his wife over a piece of tail, and run to his gay friends for help while he changed mares, then fail to support THEIR rights and privileges. Rudy is a snake.
Forgive the above comment. Upon re-reading it is uncharitable to reptiles.
The republican idea of send spend spend and pass the bill on to the next generation is a good one?
Just say no to more welfare programs for the ultra-rich
ABNTV:
"Just a heads up neither is Bush but people keep referring to him also."
Just a heads up: Bush is the current administration against whose disastrous legacy BOTH Democratic AND Republican candidates are running and promising "change." Your oversimplistic analysis fails to account that Bush remains relevant to the election due to the fact that so many are running on a platform of "change" from the policies of the Bush administration. NOBODY however is running on or against Kerry's policies, which makes Kerry irrelevant to this discussion.
Besides, Romney has been a far bigger flip-flopper (pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control to pro-life, anti-gay marriage, pro-gun lobbby) than Kerry ever was.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
Just a heads up.
lol!
:p
ybdogsct,
Ouch! that's going to leave a mark on Abby's sloped noggin.
JOEY EVANS
Check the avitar again.
How long did it take you to come up with that "profound" comment? Two hours?
Get back in the sack with Tess and the Blue______Texan. Just don't come crying to me wanting antibiotics.
It only took Joey a couple of second Scrimshaw - how long did it take you to private message me and call me a bitch? Then on the thread where I called you out - you asked me what part of bitch didn't fit? I've had my comments removed before for stating a truth such as what a crook Ghouliani is, etc., etc. - I want to know why you could openly call me a bitch on a thread and your comments haven't been removed.
Report him Tess, copy and paste the message and report him. Eventually they will do something.
I did not2needy - I did! Thanks for the advice. I believe they will do something - I see how they quickly removed the insults to neophile on this thread. Yes!
Unfortunately, they leave neo's insults.
I thought the same thing.
true that, so is that nepotism or narcolepsy in this instance