Is this too mellow?
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:59:01 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

What I read you as saying is that you would like for the US to be jealous
over UK's allegedly universal health care.

There is no evidence that a majority of Americans feel that way. In fact
there is counter-evidence. The last time a political party in the US tried
to pass a UK-style universal health care program, it failed, and the party
that tried to pass it was kept out of all important national leadership
positions for about 14 years.

Isn't the "last time" that was tried now?

Presumably the churches were all for universal health care - healing
the sick and all that? Which pressure groups opposed it?

Is this too mellow?
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:48:48 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Good thinking, but I need to speak to someone about before I do anything - I
believe to open these things up you have to split 'em with a putty knifeor
summat similar! I got nothing to hide, but all my family photos are on there
and pix of my departed dogs - I'd hate to bump into any of them somewhere in
the future and my own picture of a badger did drop through the letterbox
once!!

When I was at college a photograph was taken (I'm admitting nothing)
of an accommodating young lady ... well ... accommodating ... a
trombone stand.

That picture pops up from time to time in most unexpected corners of
the globe :-)

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk
Arny Krueger wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk
Arny Krueger wrote:

What I read you as saying is that you would like for the
US to be jealous over UK's allegedly universal health
care. There is no evidence that a majority of Americans feel
that way.

Well that's very true and tells you a lot about American
standards.

Not really. It does say something about what their preferences are. Since
the vast majority of US citizens already have either private or government
medical coverage, universaal medical coverage not that much of an issue to
them.

No such thing as fringe hate groups in the UK?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber)

if you believe that...

That's comparing apples and pears and doesn't in any way
fly as an argument.


Dismissive attitude noted. The KKK is now practically dead as a serious
threat in the US. Citing them in a contemporary conversation shows how
little the actual situation in the US is understood by some. Not that I'm
defending the KKK or suggesting that legal action against them be throttled
down. Unfortunately, we have bigger fish to fry. And so does the UK.

Bringing up the KKK is as much of a thread-ender as bringing up the Nazis.
:-(

Is this too mellow?
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:38:51 GMT, (Don
Pearce) wrote:

I agree entirely. Our relative lack of religious
nutcases: creationists, Bible literalists and believers
in the "rapture", is a real plus not only for the UK
but for Europe as a whole.


But in turn we must envy Americans their constitutional
separation of church and state, while we are obliged to
fund the church of England and the inbred cretins of the
royal family who run it.

Does the conservative Christian lobby have no influence
in American politics?

Excluded middle argument based on a demand for total exclusion.

Of course all sorts of religious and non-religious organizations and
institutions have some influence in American politics including many Atheist
groups. Works for me.

Also, allowing lobbying is not nearly the same as tax money being used to
run religious activities.

Frankly, having the government support churches has proven to be an
effective means for eliminating or reducing their effectiveness.

If you want government to support some cause or function in the worst way,
that cause or function will end up being supported in the worst way. There's
only one reason for the government to support any cause or function, which
is that there is no other effective way.

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:38:51 GMT, (Don
Pearce) wrote:
I agree entirely. Our relative lack of religious
nutcases: creationists, Bible literalists and
believers in the "rapture", is a real plus not only
for the UK but for Europe as a whole.
But in turn we must envy Americans their constitutional
separation of church and state, while we are obliged to
fund the church of england and the inbred cretins of
the royal family who run it.

Does the conservative Christian lobby have no influence
in American politics?

Lol, thankfully a bit less since Dubya and his boys left
office.

Not so much.

The best way to cut funds to lobbyists and their activities is for their
cause to become part of the accepted mainstream.

Is this too mellow?
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:48:48 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Good thinking, but I need to speak to someone about before I do anything -
I
believe to open these things up you have to split 'em with a putty knifeor
summat similar! I got nothing to hide, but all my family photos are on
there
and pix of my departed dogs - I'd hate to bump into any of them somewhere
in
the future and my own picture of a badger did drop through the letterbox
once!!

When I was at college a photograph was taken (I'm admitting nothing)
of an accommodating young lady ... well ... accommodating ... a
trombone stand.

That picture pops up from time to time in most unexpected corners of
the globe :-)



OK, Laurence, that'll do....

Is this too mellow?
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:59:01 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

What I read you as saying is that you would like for the
US to be jealous over UK's allegedly universal health
care.

There is no evidence that a majority of Americans feel
that way. In fact there is counter-evidence. The last
time a political party in the US tried to pass a
UK-style universal health care program, it failed, and
the party that tried to pass it was kept out of all
important national leadership positions for about 14
years.

Isn't the "last time" that was tried now?

Point of order. The current effort is not over yet, so it can't be "the last
time".

Note that Ted Kennedy's Senate seat was just won by a relatively unknown
Republican surfing a wave of public discontent with Kennedy's pet project.

Presumably the churches were all for universal health
care - healing the sick and all that?

Many churches have no standard opinion on many issues. There are churches
where anything that smells like a social issue is totally avoided or even
criticized.

Which pressure groups opposed it?

Most opposition came from people who already have health care and are
concerned that the US government's increased involvement in it will not be a
good thing for them. Many examples from the UK and Canada are cited.

We see a surprising number of Canadians in US private hospitals, especially
in US border cities like mine, due to their distrust of the Canadian
government system. We also have a goodly number of Canadian doctors who work
here for similar reasons.

Is this too mellow?
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


Bingo,see pics here.
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Mac-m...el-A1283/659/1
Once it's open it's a piece of **** to extract the drive.


Pound to a pinch it's the power back anyway!

Yeah, that's where my money would be.

(The tiny little 5 pin connector is so damn tricky-looking I daren't put a
meter on it!)

Yup, I keep a pair of X4 glasses handy for when I'm poking around in
laptops.


Tbh, if this thing hadn't cost so much I'd chuck it in the cupboard and
forget about it!


Hmm, I do have such a cupboard too but I've never condemned anything as
expensive as that to it.



Me neither....

:-(

Is this too mellow?
 

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:13:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Not really. It does say something about what their preferences are. Since
the vast majority of US citizens already have either private or government
medical coverage, universaal medical coverage not that much of an issue to
them.

I sense a wriggle in that answer. Is there a fuller story to be told?
Obviously if coverage already WAS close to universal, there would be
little to dispute about making it completely universal.

Is this too mellow?
 

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:28:28 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

That picture pops up from time to time in most unexpected corners of
the globe :-)



OK, Laurence, that'll do....

Beats a badger or a dead dog, anyway.