Please list/mention Obama's Accomplishments

My Great uncle took an atypical whitetail out in the Black Hills near Rapid City. @ 600 yards with a Savage .300. It was either 14 points on one side and 13 on the other; or 17 on one side and 16 on the other. I've got a picture from the newspaper. he got close to $25000 for the head in the late 80s. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

A 600 yard kill with a Savage 300 was an excellent shot! I bet your uncle was smilin' from ear to ear! I do not recall ever shooting at a 600 yard target with a centerfire rifle, even while I was in the Army. With that said, the .300 Win Mag is one of the flattest shooting cartridges around. Couple that with excellent optics (my scope costs much more than the rifle) and a well placed distance shot would be a distinct possibility. If I had a trophy in my sights and a stable shooting position, I would take the shot in a heartbeat. And I would do so with a fairly high degree of confidence. Especially at a larger target like a 750 lb bull elk!

Who do you think really has your best interests at heart? The somewhat incompetent government? Or the much supposedly more competent profit generating corporation? A corporation that cares only about profits for it's share holders. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Currently neither do and the cost of malpractice insurance is part of cost of doctors doing business. A doctor can get sued even if they do nothing wrong and have been cleared by a medical board and still can lose. So the insurance company will settle. That in turn raises the rates on the doctor which in turn has the doctor run more tests to try and keep from being sued which runs up people with insurance rates because more tests are being run.

I am all for health reform and it would be cheaper if some of the litagation ascpect of it could be removed. But I am also against when the government tells I have to do something (this is why I never joined the military).

Car insurance is for the privilige to driver. Driving is not a right and is regulated by the states and if I want to drive I need to carry car insurance. It says no where in the constitution that to be a citizen I need to carry health insurance. It is my right not to carry it if I don't want to for whatever reason and still be a citizen and punished by the government for not carrying it.

Currently neither do and the cost of malpractice insurance is part of cost of doctors doing business. A doctor can get sued even if they do nothing wrong and have been cleared by a medical board and still can lose. So the insurance company will settle. That in turn raises the rates on the doctor which in turn has the doctor run more tests to try and keep from being sued which runs up people with insurance rates because more tests are being run. Originally Posted by mgohara

Again, this is a completely false. Malpractice as a percentage of healthcare costs are less than 1%, and that cost has actually decreased in the last 30 years. All you're doing us regurgitating some Fox news soundbyte that is nothing more than Republican propaganda. Stop saying it, you simply don't know what you're talking about.

http://insurance-reform.org/pr/AIRhealthcosts.pdf

http://www.slate.com/id/2145400/

Car insurance is for the privilige to driver. Driving is not a right and is regulated by the states and if I want to drive I need to carry car insurance. It says no where in the constitution that to be a citizen I need to carry health insurance. It is my right not to carry it if I don't want to for whatever reason and still be a citizen and punished by the government for not carrying it. Originally Posted by mgohara

Another false argument. Having a car this day in age is essential for most, and 95% of American households own a car. Some policies also require you to register ANYONE in your household that is of driving age, whether they drive the insured car or not. This includes not only family members, but anyone living in your household.

Additionally, the Constitution may not specifically require you to carry insurance, but it does specifically grant power to the government to "...provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States." Given the state of healthcare costs and the burden it's placed on the tax payer, a healthcare mandate certainly qualifies. Mandating healthcare also falls under the Commerce Clause, which allows Congress to regulate activities that have a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce. An individual mandate in this case is certainly commercial in nature as it requires a commercial exchange.

Now stop making shit up and start thinking a little about the things you type before you type them.

Since the passage of Proposition 13, Texas' malpractice tort reform amendment, doctors' liability is capped at $200,000 for non economic damages. Insurance rates have dropped, as have lawsuits.

As more and more docs become hospital employees, look for that cost factor to diminish even more.

To my knowledge, tort laws are not national but state by state; and there is no national standard of medical malpractice insurance.

Perry has authored some rather sophisticated lies about this, but the fact is, Texas is a place to come if you're a doctor who wants to game the system.

A 600 yard kill with a Savage 300 was an excellent shot! I bet your uncle was smilin' from ear to ear! I do not recall ever shooting at a 600 yard target with a centerfire rifle, even while I was in the Army. With that said, the .300 Win Mag is one of the flattest shooting cartridges around. Couple that with excellent optics (my scope costs much more than the rifle) and a well placed distance shot would be a distinct possibility. If I had a trophy in my sights and a stable shooting position, I would take the shot in a heartbeat. And I would do so with a fairly high degree of confidence. Especially at a larger target like a 750 lb bull elk! Originally Posted by bigtex

He hunted that deer for 4 years. He said 600 was by far the closest he got. Brownie was a long time pronghorn hunter. The range was never really the issue. 2 of the years he had clear longer shots but was carrying his Browning BAR .270. He said he have taken a 600 with that rifle but not a 750 or 800. I’ve shot that rifle a bunch and next to my old .220 Swift was the flattest shooting rifle I’ve ever fired. We would go visit all my grandparents in Sioux Falls. Brownie was the maint/caretaker/etc./etc at Crooks Gun Club. After a Saturday of shooting, we would go to the Elk’s Club. Someone would always ask to hear the story of the monster whitetail. He would always say at first he thought it was a big pronghorn, burst out laughing and add, and 300 yards closer than it was. Think of a 5’ 6” Chuck Yeager. He didn’t talk much if he had nothing to say. When he did talk everyone listened, a natural storyteller. He taught me how to shoot (I won the “Top Shot” trophy ,#1 out 690, in Basic training) rifles and pistols. My dad handled the shotgun. Neither could cure me of shooting “where they are” in pass shooting, instead of “where they’re going to be”. When we went duck hunting, they would grab 8-9 shells and bring back shells and 5 ducks. I carried 2 boxes (sometimes went back for more) and got 3 ducks…..once. On the other hand, 8 or 9 shells in my pocket for pheasants was good for 5-6 birds. I was great at Trap and sucked at Skeet shooting. That was because I react to trap and over-think skeet. Let me know if anyone wants to see the picture of the whitetail.

Since the passage of Proposition 13, Texas' malpractice tort reform amendment, doctors' liability is capped at $200,000 for non economic damages. Insurance rates have dropped, as have lawsuits.

As more and more docs become hospital employees, look for that cost factor to diminish even more.

To my knowledge, tort laws are not national but state by state; and there is no national standard of medical malpractice insurance.

Perry has authored some rather sophisticated lies about this, but the fact is, Texas is a place to come if you're a doctor who wants to game the system. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Ironic that Greg Abbott is one of the people leading the charge for capping amounts under tort reform. After he cleaned up big bucks from the incident that put him in a wheelchair.

Again, this is a completely false. Malpractice as a percentage of healthcare costs are less than 1%, and that cost has actually decreased in the last 30 years. All you're doing us regurgitating some Fox news soundbyte that is nothing more than Republican propaganda. Stop saying it, you simply don't know what you're talking about.

http://insurance-reform.org/pr/AIRhealthcosts.pdf

http://www.slate.com/id/2145400/




Another false argument. Having a car this day in age is essential for most, and 95% of American households own a car. Some policies also require you to register ANYONE in your household that is of driving age, whether they drive the insured car or not. This includes not only family members, but anyone living in your household.

Additionally, the Constitution may not specifically require you to carry insurance, but it does specifically grant power to the government to "...provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States." Given the state of healthcare costs and the burden it's placed on the tax payer, a healthcare mandate certainly qualifies. Mandating healthcare also falls under the Commerce Clause, which allows Congress to regulate activities that have a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce. An individual mandate in this case is certainly commercial in nature as it requires a commercial exchange.

Now stop making shit up and start thinking a little about the things you type before you type them. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Lets discuss this face to face.

Lets discuss this face to face. Originally Posted by mgohara

I have a better idea, learn to read so I won't have to waste my time explaining it to you in person. The links are right there in front of you, and some of you folks seriously need to stop thinking of Google as a liberally biased search engine.

Am I really so interesting, or is this some misplaced hostility from folks who don't like being proven wrong all the time? If that's the case, you could save yourself the public humiliation by simply doing a little research before running amok at the keyboard. Carefull or I will have to start calling you "D" soon.

FSharp,

I really could care less about politics on a whore board so I don't pay much attention to each post in this thread. I have read enough to notice that you are "right" all the time. Is this because you actually are right about everything or that you are able to spin things in a manner that makes it appear that you correct about everything?

Not trying to be a prick just wondering

FSharp,

I really could care less about politics on a whore board so I don't pay much attention to each post in this thread. I have read enough to notice that you are "right" all the time. Is this because you actually are right about everything or that you are able to spin things in a manner that makes it appear that you correct about everything?

Not trying to be a prick just wondering Originally Posted by sixxbach

I'm just the messenger and always post my sources. I've stated many times that I welcome a challenge to anything I post and I will be the first one to admit when I am wrong about something. Did mgohara post any such challenge? No. Could he even be bothered to share with us how he came to believe the things he posted? No. Did anyone even come to his defense? No. Why? Because his posts were nothing more than ramblings that have no basis in fact. If you or anyone else thinks I am just putting a "spin" on something, prove it. The information is easy to find and we all obviously have internet access. It's easy to dismiss something as a "spin" or being biased when it doesn't support your opinion, but if it's based in fact, any bias becomes instantly irrelevant. I only deal in facts.

I didn't invest all that time and money on my college education to have to listen to people like mgohara rambling about things he clearly knows absolutely nothing about. Go back and read the Supreme Court's decision on Roe v. Wade just as I was forced to in college, and tell me anything I stated was a spin, or biased in any way. mgohara's post on the matter is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has actually taken the time to drudge through the Supreme Court decision in the case and those that know better. The same goes for the completely false ramblings about malpractice insurance and it's effects on the cost of healthcare. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Go back and read the links I posted and tell me this is not true.

Let me ask you this. Do you think I should just ignore such statements that I know for certain are not true? Should I not call bullshit on folks like mgohara when I am absolutely certain he has no idea what he's talking about? Isn't disproving myths and conjecture exactly what healthy debate is all about? What if someone who doesn't know any better reads his post and then starts propagating this false information to others? Before you know it, we have large part of our voting population walking around blaming the high cost of healthcare on malpractice, and thinking one of the most important legal decision made in the last century was nothing more than a dispute over what a "persons right to do what they wanted with their body".

Ahem.



The notion of it makes me want to vomit. I don't think people realize just how brainwashed they've become. Not only brainwashed, but lazy to the point of believing everything they read and hear. Luckily, mindless sheep are easily slaughtered. Unfortunately, there's a lot of them out there.

That'ls quite a thoughtful answer to a pointed and tighly spun question, and it'll probably give the guy who asked you about it a headache trying to read it ... if he take the time. But all raging aside, I totally agree with you F-Sharp that the American masses are brainwashed, lazy and ignorant.

AND, THAT PHOTO IS FUCKING PRICELESS!

The notion of it makes me want to vomit. I don't think people realize just how brainwashed they've become. Not only brainwashed, but lazy to the point of believing everything they read and hear. Luckily, mindless sheep are easily slaughtered. Unfortunately, there's a lot of them out there. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Excellent post! And that photo is avatar worthy! Keep up the good work!

I'm just the messenger and always post my sources. I've stated many times that I welcome a challenge to anything I post and I will be the first one to admit when I am wrong about something. Did mgohara post any such challenge? No. Could he even be bothered to share with us how he came to believe the things he posted? No. Did anyone even come to his defense? No. Why? Because his posts were nothing more than ramblings that have no basis in fact. If you or anyone else thinks I am just putting a "spin" on something, prove it. The information is easy to find and we all obviously have internet access. It's easy to dismiss something as a "spin" or being biased when it doesn't support your opinion, but if it's based in fact, any bias becomes instantly irrelevant. I only deal in facts.

I didn't invest all that time and money on my college education to have to listen to people like mgohara rambling about things he clearly knows absolutely nothing about. Go back and read the Supreme Court's decision on Roe v. Wade just as I was forced to in college, and tell me anything I stated was a spin, or biased in any way. mgohara's post on the matter is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has actually taken the time to drudge through the Supreme Court decision in the case and those that know better. The same goes for the completely false ramblings about malpractice insurance and it's effects on the cost of healthcare. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Go back and read the links I posted and tell me this is not true.

Let me ask you this. Do you think I should just ignore such statements that I know for certain are not true? Should I not call bullshit on folks like mgohara when I am absolutely certain he has no idea what he's talking about? Isn't disproving myths and conjecture exactly what healthy debate is all about? What if someone who doesn't know any better reads his post and then starts propagating this false information to others? Before you know it, we have large part of our voting population walking around blaming the high cost of healthcare on malpractice, and thinking one of the most important legal decision made in the last century was nothing more than a dispute over what a "persons right to do what they wanted with their body".

Ahem.



The notion of it makes me want to vomit. I don't think people realize just how brainwashed they've become. Not only brainwashed, but lazy to the point of believing everything they read and hear. Luckily, mindless sheep are easily slaughtered. Unfortunately, there's a lot of them out there. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Where I got my information was from doctor's who left or retired because their premiums were that high and I did qualify it if you go back and read depending on the speciality. Second you say you are college educated so then you know from the Federalist Papers that it was not the intention of the founding Fathers that it was not the government's business to take care of us from craddle to grave.

I have read the Supreme Court's decision and I have read several opinion's on the decision and came to my own conclusion that this is what the reality of ROE V WADE was about but people having independent thoughts or process of thinking is not your concern just that no matter what you say is always right.

Just because you have a college education doesn't make you smart or have more intelligence than anyone and yes I do have a college education. See free thinking is where people are allowed to come to their own opinion's.

And insulting some one shows you are not able to argue facts because you have already lost when you throw the insult (it means you can't respond intelligently and must degrade someone to feel that you have a superior position).

Also I have read your links and still trying to make sure that I can see where you have come up with your points of view and make sure that I may not have missed something or I am misunderstanding something.

On the malpractice if I came accross blaming it all on that then I apologize, I was bringing up a point of cause and effect the reason that health care costs are so high is way more complicated than that.

Just so you understand facts are nothing more than data and how they are interpreted.

Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Is this little hottie a free-ranger or is she some of your private stock?

I once had a sheep named Molly,
She was given to me by my sister Polly
When her death came it was shear folly
Oh yes, coming as it did by golly
She was into public sex
while going down on an ibex
both run down, while on the road, by a speeding trolley.

Where I got my information was from doctor's who left or retired because their premiums were that high and I did qualify it if you go back and read depending on the speciality. Second you say you are college educated so then you know from the Federalist Papers that it was not the intention of the founding Fathers that it was not the government's business to take care of us from craddle to grave. Originally Posted by mgohara

A doctor told you his premium for malpractice insurance was $5 million dollars? I find that hard to believe. Not sure how the Federalists Papers have any bearing on your previous posts regarding abortion and malpractice insurance. Maybe you care to clarify? Sounds to me like you're just confusing the issue.

I have read the Supreme Court's decision and I have read several opinion's on the decision and came to my own conclusion that this is what the reality of ROE V WADE was about but people having independent thoughts or process of thinking is not your concern just that no matter what you say is always right. Originally Posted by mgohara

So you're basically conceeding that in fact you were just expressing an opinion? Fair enough. I am however curious that knowing the court's opinion on the matter along with the Constitutional Ammendments cited and interpretated in the case, how you managed to reduce it to a "persons right to do what they wanted with their body". Having studied this particular case in great depth over the years, I have a difficult time accepting that anyone with intimate knowledge of it would come to what appears to me as such a pedestrian and rather juvenile conclusion.

Just because you have a college education doesn't make you smart or have more intelligence than anyone. Originally Posted by mgohara

Actually it does. I have the degrees, test scores, and GPA to prove it. I don't say such things out of smugness or arrogance. Fact is I worked my ass off for many years for all three of those particular items and having done so feel I have every right to make such a statement.

See free thinking is where people are allowed to come to their own opinion's. Originally Posted by mgohara

Yes, and free thinking people such as yourself should expect to have those opinions challenged from time to time. Especially when free thinkers such as yourself fail to cite sources, or explain how or why they managed to come to any given conclusions. It's called debate, and this is a public forum.

And insulting some one shows you are not able to argue facts because you have already lost when you throw the insult (it means you can't respond intelligently and must degrade someone to feel that you have a superior position). Originally Posted by mgohara

Now which is it you're posting, opinions or facts? I do apologize if I somehow offended your sensitive nature, but your statements were an insult to anyone's intelligence that knows better. I have little patience for unfounded opinion these days, especially when it happens to be soundbytes from Fox News.

Also I have read your links and still trying to make sure that I can see where you have come up with your points of view and make sure that I may not have missed something or I am misunderstanding something. Originally Posted by mgohara

That's all that can be expected, and thanks for taking the time to read them. That's what I post them for.

On the malpractice if I came accross blaming it all on that then I apologize, I was bringing up a point of cause and effect the reason that health care costs are so high is way more complicated than that. Originally Posted by mgohara

Having heard your particular claim coming out of the mouths of Republicans in lobbiest's pockets who want nothing more than to obstruct change, I doubt you came to that conclusion on your own. It disturbs me that anyone with a browser can search that particular topic and come up with a few hundred pages stating quite the opposite of what you posted, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=malpractice+healthcare+costs

Just so you understand facts are nothing more than data and how they are interpreted. Originally Posted by mgohara

Actually they're not. A fact is something that actually exists and can be tested and proven to be true. What you're referring to is theory, which is a very different concept.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact