I actually feel sorry for those who believe they are gonna get a diffrent result from the Dems. If they care so much about Healthcare why doesnt the Democratic Controlled congress put forward a bill outlining thier plan for national healthcare now. Even if Bush Vetoed it they would be on record as to what they intended to do. But alas all these years into Democrat rule and no results. Such a shame. Or is it a sham? Also heres an intresting story that would have made headlines had it been a Republican issue. I geuss the only way we will get any more news on this is if we lower our selves to watching that onesided media devil AKA Fox News. Note the money was recieved and excepted long after his crimes were made public. Wonder if he'll get any last minute pardons if Hill gets elected? He should for all the money he has given her and Barrack Hussien.
2007-08-31 20:03:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Michael J 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both are not the President and never will be. And for your vote I do not think you would know how to pull a lever or touch a screen as you need some one that can read and understand.
It is not the Governments job to wipe your asss, that is for you to do so grow up and get a education and a job and work for a living instead of thinking you are entitled to any thing. As you are not but to die one day.
Thank God under Clinton he signed the welfare reform act to get lazy bums off their dead asss.
We who work are not giving you one more thing and you and your kind will make sure we win in 08 so as you own defest say good by.
2007-09-01 01:11:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
To all the people who say poor people are only poor because they are to lazy to get a job, YOU ALL NEED A REALITY CHECK. People who are born poor go to bad high schools, and usually can't pay for college, and thus can't get a good job. So the government needs to provide health care for the poor, but they should get most of the money from the rich.
Oh, and my choice is Hillary, but you might want to take a speed course in reading before you vote.
2007-09-01 03:28:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Allen Carlson 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Your question is a joke, right?
This country is basically SCREWED if either of those two get elected. I'm a female, but I'll be the first to say that the US is not ready for the decline that I believe is inevitable if we elect a female president. And as for Obama.... well, I won't even go there. I think I'd prefer to take my chances in a foreign country for a while than live under the "leadership" of either of these two.
2007-08-31 20:04:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by baguzman_1 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Her speech is on my Tivo. replaced into I the only one which replaced into struck by her habit while she went in the process the record of issues she replaced into happy with? while she reported "And a proud supporter of Barack Obama" she grew to become as some distance from the digital camera as achievable. I rewound and watched a pair circumstances. perhaps it is not something, despite the fact that it struck me as atypical. when you consider that Hillary is long previous, i'm leaning in the direction of McCain. What bill Clinton reported the day beforehand in the present day replaced into interesting. If candidate A helps all your themes yet won't get them achieved, and candidate B helps 0.5 your themes yet gets the activity finished, which one are you going to go with? for sure, that replaced right into a thinly veiled description of Obama and McCain.
2016-10-17 09:11:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Chuck Norris
2007-08-31 20:05:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, we do not need more government benefits. Only those to lazy to make a real living for themselves want government benefits. First of all, nit, if we have more government benefits, we give the control of our lives over to the government. For myself, absolutely no way. The government has enough control already, we do not need more. What we the people do need is to be more responsible for our own selves, and to stop looking for someone to be responsible for us. If you need a government to be your care taker, go live in China. The Canadian health system may look good, but if it is, why do so many Canadians come to America for surgery? Answer, it's their ???wonderful??? health care system. If the surgery is not immediately life threatening, and especially so if it is only elective, then that person has to wait. Know all of the facts before running your mouth about how great it will be for a national health care system. I for one do not want my tax dollars going to pay for health care for someone who WILL NOT take responsibility for their health, and control their life such as to live as healthy as they can. While this may sound mean, it isn't my fault if their baby is deformed, or needs special care that mom and dad won't educate themselves enough to have a good job where they can care for that child themselves. We don't need a nation wide government health care system, we need people to be responsible for themselves. 50 years ago, we did not have the medical care system that we have now. The people were a lot more healthy, although a good many died because of a lack of health care. That said, I shouldn't have to pay for your health care because "you" decide that it is your right not only to medical care, but to live in as an unhealthy way of life that "you" want to. I earn my health insurance with a good job, and the education that I have acquired. "You" have the same opportunities that I have had, use them.
2007-08-31 20:09:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Sir, what you are doing is so freaking obvious. Coming on this site and pretending you are the typical government gravy train rider. It's sickening and dishonest. You are a neocon pansy and your attempt to stereotype democrats is a farce. You should be ashamed. Most persons on public assistance absolutely hate it and can't wait to have the opportunity to get their life squared away so they can actually go make a livable wage. The person you are caricaturing here represents a tiny fraction of government benefit recipients although neocons like yourself would have everyone believe their are tens of millions of them. Shame on you. By the way, if anyone doubts that this guy is a neocon pretending to be a "gravy train" liberal to strike fear in the hearts of hard working Americans, check out his percentage of best answers. Yeah, 33%. Hardly in line with someone who misspells words and uses improper grammar. Yes, you've been exposed. Liar.
2007-08-31 20:06:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by LRP 1
·
0⤊
2⤋
Hillary promised to basically banish Bill from the country. She might not bomb our allies.
I personally don't want my health care to work with the speed and efficiency of the DMV, the USPS, and airport security.
2007-08-31 19:56:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by DOOM 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Since their agendas a so very close, either would make a good President. But my personal preference is Obama because he pushes for stem cell research really hard.
2007-09-01 02:53:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋