Yup, believing wild conspiracy theories about someone else writing Obama's book is dumb! There's no evidence, just crazy conspiracy theories.

It figures someone like jfNanceSgtRock would believe that stuff!

He doesn't think Palin uses a teleprompter. How silly!

He thinks Obama doesn't give interviews to Fox News. He just gave one last week! How silly!

"Obama won by 10 million votes (faulty--ksand99 of course--comparision because the population is constantly growing)."

That's not faulty logic, that's an indisputable fact. Obama won by nearly 10 million votes. Count 'em and weep!

He says it's faulty logic, then suddenly uses the numbers of votes for a candidate to compare/contrast. Silly!

"Obama has the biggest drop in poll numbers in a president's first 9 months in office ever."

SgtjfNance32Rock's own source disagrees with him!

"The highest is Truman's 19-point drop between his third and fourth quarters, followed by a 15-point drop for Gerald Ford between his first and second quarters. The largest for an elected president in his first year is Bill Clinton's 11-point slide between his first and second quarters."

LOL, and Larry thinks the Ayers conspiracy theory about writing books is "elitist!" LOL!

He denies that people were given the chance to choose between Obama's leadership and Palin's leadership. Deny, deny, deny!

The American people chose the right leader for our times. Larry's just a poor sport.

"She is working against the wishes of the people in her district."

Based on what, exactly? Some random poll that doesn't represent Titus' district?

More hot air from Sgt Nance.

Oh, man! You'd have to be as dumb as a Rock to believe some wacky conspiracy theory that someone else wrote Obama's books.

Oh, I forgot who I was talking to.

I like this compare/contrast game with Obama and Palin. Let's play!

Which one won the election by almost 10 million votes? Obama.

Which one lost the election by almost 10 million votes? Palin.

Which one quit her job after failing an interview with a lightweight anchor like Katic Couric? Palin.

Which one was promoted to President of the USA by the American people? Obama.

And considering you've been a Jim Gibbons cheerleader on these pages before, James F Nance, Jr, while I've criticized Biden... that dog just won't hunt, there, James, err, Sgt.

Turns out you're just full of hot air.

Don't be so obtuse, Larry.

Obama didn't make the poor judgment call to put us in Afghanistan. He didn't make the poor judgment call to put us in Iraq. That was your buddy, George W. Bush.

Bush dithered for nearly a decade, floundering and flailing... sacrificing soldiers in Afghanistan to try to revive his failed strategy in Iraq.

Afghanistan was and always will be Bush's failure.

Contrary to what you seem to think, Obama was very consistent during the campaign about his understanding that the war in Afghanistan is far more important to our national security than the war in Iraq.

Bush never got that memo. Bush needlessly sacrificed our troops due to his poor leadership.

Your criticism is hollow.

You know, Larry, I wouldn't be so proud of a book that Palin didn't even write herself. There's a heck of a lot more to being a great leader than selling a few books.

If that's your criteria, Jackie Collins is far more qualified than that less-than-one-term former governor from Alaska.

Her star-struck fan base is oblivious to Palin's shallow platitudes and backwards logic.

But no, it really doesn't surprise me that the quitter has a fan club. Some people think George W. Bush did a good job. Some people think Jim Gibbons is a great Governor.

You can count yourself amongst that group.

"Middle America relates to Sarah Palin in a way the Liberals relate to Barak [sic] Obama."

Palin has steadily tanked with independent voters. They don't respect her. Only the far-right and christian fundamentalists hold her up on a pedestal.

Middle America has seen through Palin's phony attempts to rehabilitate her image. The more the wingnuts try to make Martha Stewart and Katie Couric the enemy, the more desperate they look.

"We can debate how and why any war starts, but once our troops are in the fight, it is time to get behind them and get it done and get them home.
Define the mission and exit strategy and let the Generals take over. NOW!!!"

Of course the wingnuts on the right are saying this NOW!!! They reelected their buddy Dubya, who never had a plan or an exit strategy for Afghanistan, let alone Iraq.

Dubya started something he had no intention to finish. He just passed the buck along. His "leadership" in Iraq took us to the brink of losing, and his "leadership" in Afghanistan has us no further along than we were when Bush sent in the troops.

Just like Bush's failed economy, Obama has to clean up Bush's failed wars. The very people who couldn't clean up the Iraq and Afghanistan messes are trying to tell Obama what to do NOW!!!

They're the ones who don't want to acknowledge how we got here. They don't want to acknowledge their mistakes. They are common cowards.

"According to AMA's National Health Insurance Report Card, Medicare denies 6.85 percent of its claims, higher than any private insurer (Aetna was second, denying 6.80 percent of its claims), and more than double any private insurer's average. So to think the government option will offer more "compassionate" coverage to the uninsured than private insurance is laughable."

Oh Ken, tell me you read the next line down on the graph. I've seen misleading statistics before, but you give me a reason to chuckle, sir.

Metric 12 does give the percentage of claim lines denied. HOWEVER, Metric 13 gives the REASON CODES for the denial.

For Medicare, almost 1 in 3 denials are due to CARC 16. CARC 16 states, "Claim/service lacks information which is needed for adjudication. At least one Remark Code must be provided (may be comprised of either the Remittance Advice Remark Code or NCPDP Reject Reason Code.) "

For those who are completely ignorant of insurance policy, this is a denial due to a lack of information. Once the proper information is submitted, the claim can be approved. This CARC is commonly known as an error-check.

Let's look at some of the private insurance companies' most frequent CARC, shall we?

34.2% of Humana and 37.9% of United Healthcare's denials are listed with CARC 27. What is CARC 27? "Expenses incurred after coverage terminated."

Whoops! Go in for treatment and they cancel your insurance!

Thanks for the chuckle, Ken!

Cancer Death Rates
Among 50 Countries:

http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface...

United States is middle-of-the-pack in men, and a little better than average for women. Nowhere near the best, either way.

"Either way, people are more likely to survive the nasty stuff on private insurance than in the government care (that doesn't mean we should stick with our current system). (Look up the cancer stats - we survive at higher rates. The only correlation is this - we are the only industrialized nation without universal healthcare. That means the difference in results must be a cause of the difference in procedures. It could be private insurance, it could be the better med tech provided by our private sector, it could be both, it could be genetics (doubtful considering we are a far more diverse population) it could be something else like preventive care (maybe those European universal health care places don't allow for as many check ups as Americans get?) Something is causing the disparity."

Um, Patrick, is NPRI running loose with the statistics, AGAIN? The mortality statistics that I've found don't come to that conclusion.

You seem to be questioning the quality of care provided by private vs. universal health care systems, and the U.S. vs. Europe. Probably the best indicator of quality is mortality statistics. Which countries successfully treat cancer patients? The ones with low cancer mortality.

According to your wild guess, that should be the United States. Let's look at an actual source of statistics, rather than your crystal ball:

OECD
Causes of mortality, Cancer, Deaths per 100,000 population (standardised rates)
2004

Finland: 137.8
Switzerland: 142.3
Japan: 145.1
Sweden: 149.6
Greece: 153.7
Iceland: 154.8
Spain: 155.3
Luxembourg: 156.8
United States: 159.8

Japan's system is universal, and their per capita rate of cancer mortality is much lower per 100,000. Seems the facts don't agree with your argument.

Again.

Wasn't it you who tried to convince everyone that the excise tax was going to be on benefits, when it was actually levied on premiums? Did you ever get that "clarified?"

http://www.lvjournalreview.com/component...