Right Wing 2016 Ticket. Vote Here Today. Explain Why.

Who Would You Vote For Today?

  • Rand Paul

    Votes: 3 37.5%

  • Paul Ryan

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Chris Christie

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • Marco Rubio

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • Jeb Bush

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Condoleezza Rice

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    8
  • Poll closed .
Threedee said:
It's Apple. You can never expect much from Mac users...
Click to expand...

Apple is not in reference to a Mac. Way back when I got my first computer I came across chat programs and ALL THE WOMEN that were there. I needed a "handle", a "nickname", in a hurry!! I was like a kid in a candy store frantically searching for a coin to buy candy. So, I looked at a picture on the wall and it was an enlarged photo, taken from a plane, of where I grew up with all the apple trees in bloom.

Apple. Yes! Apple, it is! And the rest is history. :)
 
apple0154 said:
Apple is not in reference to a Mac. Way back when I got my first computer I came across chat programs and ALL THE WOMEN that were there. I needed a "handle", a "nickname", in a hurry!! I was like a kid in a candy store frantically searching for a coin to buy candy. So, I looked at a picture on the wall and it was an enlarged photo, taken from a plane, of where I grew up with all the apple trees in bloom.

Apple. Yes! Apple, it is! And the rest is history. :)
Click to expand...

I figured it wasn't, but it's always on my mind whenever I come accross your name.
 
IVAN THINK IS HILARIOUS THAT YOU THINK CHOICE MATTERS. IN YEAR 2008 ALL AMERICA SAY THEY WANT NO MORE BUSH NO MORE BUSH. THEN THEY GO AND VOTE FOR BUSH BUT BLACK. AND THEN THEY GO AND DO IT AGAIN. AND SAY IS DEMOCRACY. IF IS NO REAL CHOICE, IS NO REAL DEMOCRACY.
 
apple0154 said:
What support do you have? Can you offer something better than a Harvard study?

I won't wait for it.
Click to expand...

You've been asked to prove your 45,000 assertion before and have failed to do so; so that's my "something better".
But since you're not waiting, what's the hurry. :D
 
Grecian said:
I chose Marco Rubio because he makes the most sense to me when he's speaking. He's smart, articulate and I think he truly loves this country.
Click to expand...

Rubio's got a lot of baggage he's gotta make sure is hidden before he does anything. And that doesn't look possible right now.

SuperstringTheory said:
Marco Rubio is 41 now and was born in Miami. Why wouldn't he be constitutionally eligible?
Click to expand...

There's a bit of illegal immigrant issue going on...

Anti-Party said:
Did someone ask me why I was banned from the other forum? I repeatedly called former President Bush bad names and I was probably too abrasive with some, ban. :)
Click to expand...

Ahh...I figured. I'm NTG.

USFREEDOM911 said:
Or like those that continue to throw out a mythical number of 45,000, with absolutely no backing.
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
Your "Harvard study" was debunked and you backed off, just long enough to hope everyone forgot about how badly you were pwnd.
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
Still nothing to support your assertion. :D
Click to expand...

I wish Apple would have come to me for help on this one.

First, I don't see anywhere on here where you posted a link that debunked that number. Where is it?

Second, Apple's number is very, very true.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/dying-from-lack-of-insurance/
The Harvard report, finding 45,000 excess deaths linked to uninsurance, made news partly because it was so much larger than past estimates. Why the big difference between the Urban Institute/IOM numbers and the latest report? Dr. Woolhandler explains that the Harvard researchers aimed to replicate what IOM had done back in 2002 but with more recent data. Where IOM cited a 25 percent increase in mortality for the uninsured, the Harvard researches found a 40 percent increase. IOM based its examination on the Franks study’s 1971 through 1987 data on 25- to 74-year-olds from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The Harvard report looked at National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (collected by the National Center for Health Statistics) from 1988 through 1994, with a follow-up on whether participants lived or died through 2000.

She gives a few reasons for why uninsured deaths would have gone up over the years. She says that "relative to the insured, [being] uninsured has become more lethal." What that 40 percent figure shows is the difference between the death rate for the insured and the death rate for the uninsured. "We think medical care has gotten more effective, so that going without it puts you at a relative disadvantage," she says citing advances in care for leading causes of death including cardiovascular disease, cancer and stroke.

Also, the population and the number of uninsured have gone up in that time period. The study explains that researchers "controlled for tobacco and alcohol use, along with obesity and exercise habits." It also notes that this study has limitations. The data from the National Center for Health Statistics "assessed health insurance at a single point in time and did not validate self-reported insurance status. We were unable to measure the effect of gaining or losing coverage after the interview."
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top