Help me out, tenguy. Tell me finally how many people come to the United States from Canada because the Canadian single payer system works so badly.

Quote some experts who knew more about the situation at the end of the Second War than generals Eisenhower and MacArthur, and who said the atomic bomb was necessary.

If you can't do that, and it has been obvious for awhile that you cannot, stop pretending that you are talking over my head.

Oh yes, and since you know so much more than I do, take these tests and see how well you do:

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=106856

https://forum.xnxx.com/showthread.php?t=106816

 

DL, I don't think he's going to respond... I don't think he likes you.

 

I don't care whether President Obama should have won the Nobel Peace Prize. He didn't seek it. When he won, he donated the money to charity. What would his opponents prefer that he had done?

The first post of twofeathers--regarding Republicans opposing their country's current president for any or no reason--is DEAD ON.

 

Believe it or not, I used to respect tenguy. He makes preposterous assertions he cannot back up, and then he says that I am to dense to debate with. He has been a disappointment.

His ignorance is only matched by his abusiveness.

stumbler can be abusive, but he knows what he is talking about.

 

Just stating my opinion. I don't think he's seeking anyone's respect or approval.

All of us in this forum state our own truths. Whether or not anyone can agree on what truth is the actual Truth is what causes problems.

PS, I don't think he's an ignorant man. You shouldn't judge him, DL.

 

Oh Waaaaa Waaaaa I swear roadtoad get a hold of yourself and stop this hysterical ranting. Buck up man. Try to have some pride for God's sake. You have got to be one of the biggest fraidy cats I've ever seen. The enemy is all around you, its all one big cospiracy, the sky is falling the sky is falling. Its us against them and I ain't so sure about you.

Do you really thing running around in circles jacking off and babbling is really going to convince anyone or forewarn them? Damn roadtoad I'd say the odds of that are pretty slim.

Damn man stop running around all hysterical and shit its unbecoming.

 

It is difficult for me to contain my contempt for someone who is unable to debate logically, and then claims that I am. I back up my assertions with facts that I document. He backs up his with hot air and name calling.

There are two kinds of opinions: normative opinions, and empirical opinions. Normative opinions are value judgments. These cannot be proven or disproven. One either feels a certain way about something or one does not. "Everyone deserves decent health care regardless of income," is a normative opinion. "Hundreds of thousands of Canadians come to the United States every year for health care," is an empirical opinion. It can be tested against facts that can be documented. I have proven that it is not true.

 

First things first, my opinion of Dl is my opinion. Opinions are formed by experiences and from mentally processing a complex combination of information gleaned from available sources.

Those who constantly cite a few bits of information obtained from a small sampling of what is available, does not demonstrate superior knowledge or intelligence. To judge ones intelligence or knowledge by taking internet pop quizs is hardly a measure of ones true capabilities.

If these folks would only accept the fact that others have opinions which have been derived from a broad field of experiences, they might actually begin to learn something.

Since he insists on demanding the exact count of those Canadians who seek health care in the US, perhaps he can answer this question.

"How many US citizens have sought a MRI in Canada?"

His respect for the forums biggest bully shows how shallow the roots of his intelligence run. His blatant attempts to paint the US wrong in everything since Lincoln, demonstrates how weak his patriotism is.

As he stated his respect for me has changed, the feeling is mutual.

 

Republicans for Rape

Why doesn't the Republican Party find it despicable?

So.......donations from the defense and aerospace industries means more to the 30 Republican members then protecting women from getting Gang Raped. and Due Process?

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) arguing that it's not the government's place to decide who the government does business with and juxtaposed that with Republican sentiment on how the government should deal with ACORN. "I guess it's an efficiency thing. You don't want to waste tax-payer money giving it to someone who advises fake prostitutes how to commit imaginary crimes, you want to give it to Halliburton because they're committing real gang rape."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/jon-stewart-takes-on-30-r_n_321985.html

Sen. Al Franken pushed through an amendment Tuesday that would withhold defense contracts from companies like Halliburton if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who maintained that Franken's amendment overreached into the private sector and suggested that it violated the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution


"Article 1 Section 8 of our Constitution gives Congress the right to spend money for the welfare of our citizens. Because of this,
Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote,'Congress may attach conditions on the receipt of federal funds and has repeatedly employed that power to further broad policy objectives,'" Franken said.
"That is why Congress could pass laws cutting off highway funds to states that didn't raise their drinking age to 21. That's why this whole bill [the Defense Appropriations bill] is full of limitations on contractors —
what bonuses they can give and what kind of health care they can offer. The spending power is a broad power and my amendment is well within it."

http://www.minnpost.com/stories/200...ranken_amendment_aimed_at_defense_contractors

This is Anti-American

 

Apples and oranges.

Because the Republicans resisted changes in the laws regarding international business by US companies, it does not mean that they condone the conduct in this case.

You are using the tactic that 1 + 2 = 12

 

Thank you for your post

 

Republicans for Rape

I will let Sen. Sessions own words dispute your post......

On the Senate floor, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., called it “a political attack directed at Halliburton.”

Statement of Purpose:

To prohibit the use of funds for any Federal contract with Halliburton Company, KBR, Inc., any of their subsidiaries or affiliates, or any other contracting party if such contractor or a subcontractor at any tier under such contract requires that employees or independent contractors sign mandatory arbitration clauses regarding certain claims.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00308


Today, the Senate listened to her story before approving an amendment by a vote of 68-30 that would prohibit "the Defense Department from contracting with companies that require employees to resolve sexual assault allegations and other claims through arbitration."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/halli...testifies-senate-rape/Story?id=8775641&page=1

Republicans couldn't live with this change in the laws regarding international business by US companies....Why not?

 

Oh, I see! They're standing on principle!!

Really, tenguy, sometimes you amaze me.

 

Since the US courts, in 2007, struck down the employment clause and are allowing the case to continue in court, it is a political attack job. The whole idea is to bring down the international businesses being conducted by US firms. It has nothing to do with the victim of this heinous crime.

 

Uhhh, since when is it "bringing down the international businesses being conducted by U.S. firms to deny them U.S. defense contracts?

Your tin ear rivals that of Jeff Sessions.

 

Where are most of the companies employed? Overseas. Another word for overseas is international.

 

You missed the point, as usual. All the bill does is deny said companies U.S. defense contracts.

 

But why? What is the logic behind the bill, the courts already ruled that the restrictive clause was not enforceable. To attach this amendment was pure politics, make the public think that they are doing something when all it is, is another unnecessary restriction on businesses who primarily work internationally.

Maybe you didn't realize that the problem arose because the parties did not know that the Iraqi courts would not have jurisdiction, therefore the case was badly mishandled. But those questions were answered and the US courts moved on, Franks was using her as a tool to gain the sptlight.

 

Republicans for Rape

The whole idea is to protect the individual rights of American Workers.

So if the courts struck it down why did the 30 republicans have a problem backing the courts up and passing the bill?

So when an employee is a victim of crime he/she should be forced into a mandatory arbitration which is not subject to appeal. The arbitration proceeding is private and discrete and the outcome of arbitration cannot be disclosed to the public.....

How would holding a business or firm accountable for thier actions brings it down..unless they where conducting illegal practices?

Jones filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. It conducted an investigation and determined: she had been
sexually assaulted by one or more employees; physical trauma was apparent; and Halliburton/KBR’s investigation had been inadequate.​

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions\pub\08/08-20380-CV0.wpd.pdf

arbitration clauses
Arbitration is an alternative method of resolving disputes in which two parties present their individual sides of a complaint to an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The arbitrator, who is supposed to be neutral, then weighs the facts and arguments of both parties and decides the dispute.

What is binding mandatory arbitration?
In binding mandatory arbitration, a company requires a consumer to agree to submit any dispute that may arise to binding arbitration prior to completing a transaction with the company. The consumer is required to waive their right to sue, to participate in a class action lawsuit, or to appeal.​

Are these clauses easy to find in the paperwork?
Generally not! Some companies print them in boxes, and a few have you sign a separate sheet of paper which contains the clause. But many companies simply make the clauses an extra paragraph of fine print in their contracts.​

Many mandatory binding arbitration clauses are written to protect the company, not the individual.​

What are the differences between a judge and a private arbitrator hearing a case?

Accountability: A judge is accountable to higher courts and to the public. Arbitrators are not legally accountable for errors they make. Arbitrators are accountable only to the market, and the market for arbitrator services is dominated by "repeat players" – litigants that are likely to hire arbitrators in the future. This creates a subtle incentive to rule in favor of companies that impose mandatory arbitration clauses.
Awards: Judges follow the law, but arbitrators are free to act as "amiable compositeurs" and often split the difference between two parties’ positions. As a result, awards by arbitrators tend to be much lower than awards by judges or juries.

Bias is built into the system, not the result of conscious decisions to favor big business. First of all, a fee structure that imposes costs disproportionately on claimants rather than defendants will necessarily favor defendants, because it discourages claims.

Arbitrator panels that consist primarily of business executives and corporate lawyers are less likely to have sympathy for claimants.

 

Republicans for Rape

Show me where it covers more the Jamie Jones.....the court rulings...

Your triing to say that the court is making a ruling for everyone....

The Court of Appeals is allowing her case to go to court.

[FONT=CenturySchoolbook,Bold][FONT=CenturySchoolbook,Bold]

​

[/FONT][/FONT]