Rubes

Regardless of whether or not you think it's a right, as I've said, there are plenty of countries out there who provide universal coverage with a system that is NOT socialized medicine, and they do a pretty good job of it. People really need to understand that universal coverage DOES NOT EQUAL socialized medicine. At least, most Americans' idea of what socialized medicine is. Once we get past the knee-jerk responses, maybe this country can have a real dialogue.

Many medical device and pharmaceutical companies are not U.S. companies. Many studies demonstrating the efficacy of these devices and drugs are performed in other countries. I'm pretty sure it's to just take care of whatever problem they have, and no matter what, don't even think of making a mistake.

Count de Money! de MoNAY, de MoNAY!

AKC, I know you're a very strong-minded individual, and you have very firm opinions about many things, particularly this country. I don't expect I will have much luck convincing you otherwise. All that I ask is that you try to look at the huge problem we have with an open mind rather than strong emotions. I don't fully understand why you mix the concepts of universal coverage and high quality care. The fact that your friend went to a relatively poor country and got poor quality healthcare is entirely unrelated to the fact that the country has universal coverage. I have no illusions that, if I were in a relatively poor country, the quality of care I would receive there is necessarily any good, regardless of whether it's free. But the conclusion that the lousy quality care she received is somehow related to the fact that they have universal coverage is dubious at best, as is the notion that if this country adopted universal healthcare, the quality would somehow drop. If you truly believe our nation's healthcare system is second to none, I ask only that you look at the information out there that suggests this is far from reality. Regardless, there is no possible way we can sustain the current model. We can't go on keeping our heads in the sand. Universal coverage does not equal socialized medicine, nor does it necessarily spell the end of high quality healthcare. Michael Moore's crap aside, there was an excellent program on Frontline recently which looked at five different nations around the world that offer universal coverage, excellent quality healthcare, short wait times, high patient satisfaction, and much much lower expenditures than the US. No system is without its issues, of course, but these are systems that work, and they work well. You can watch the whole thing online if you like, just click the "Watch Online" link. I'll leave you with the final words of the program. You can decide for yourself if you just want to continue to ignore the problem.

Not to hijack this thread, but it should be pointed out that universal health care does not automatically equate to waiting months for your procedure. There are a number of countries that have universal health care with little to no waiting times, or waiting times that equal that we see in this country.

Seems he forgot about that little pre-season spat against Pittsburgh in August. Regardless, I hope it's right. And I think Promo's probably got it...if the Bills don't relocate, I would expect probably a 50-50 split of games at some point in the future.

Nevertheless, as I posted in OTW... HGH and Athletic Performance: the data

Well played, sir. Well played.

Talk about a day late and a dollar short...

If that don't make it worthwhile, I don't know what would.

I would be, too. I was being generous.

The Browns really need another CB, so it might be worthwhile. I doubt we get much more than a 5th for him at this point, though.

Because I have no interest in discussing it with you.

From the latest issue of "Annals of Internal Medicine", a study out of Stanford and the Palo Alto VA. Discuss amongst yourselves.

I like that he's often shown starting to look in one direction and then throwing to a different receiver. It would be nice to have a QB who can look off a safety once in a while.

There's no tackling. What's he supposed to do to get attention? Move fast?

It's a bison, not a buffalo!

That's a sales pitch? Oy. I'm with ya on this one, but it's not really a tough choice between cementing your husband's legend and $850 million dollars, minus taxes.

I've never watched the show, but I guess that Archuletta kid is from a high school right near where I live. The local media is going apesh!t about it.

Damn, I guess I do have a pretty good memory after all. Thanks.

It was actually called a number of years ago in a Bills game. I don't remember the year -- I think probably 1988 or 1989, and I don't remember but it might have been against the Dolphins. If I recall correctly, Jim Kelly was hit and fumbled the ball, but the defender was penalized when he grabbed Kelly and prevented him from going after the ball. It's a little hazy now, but I remember hearing the call and I couldn't believe it. It's the only time I've ever heard that call made.

One thing to note is that, in today's roundup by Chris Brown, it was noted that Stroud and McCargo rotated at the nose tackle spot, while Spencer Johnson and Kyle Williams rotated at the other tackle position. I thought Stroud and McCargo would line up together, but perhaps they're just experimenting right now.

What, no abortion rights?

As Pyrite mentioned, I would give TMQ's special article a read. I think he does a good job summarizing the whole situation.