Subject: Re: [Homestead] The future of eldercare in the US
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:24:41 -0800
~~jumping up and down, waving hand~~ I know the answer to this one <<eg>>
Ya see, this is how the campaign was run that got the Shiney Thing elected.
He said he wouldn't accept any money from any lobbyists. Well, he didn't
accept any *cash* from any lobbyist. However, he accepted money from their
wives, their family, their friends AND he accepted pro bono work from them
inlieu of payment. This is all payback. Time to pay the credit cards.
He owes, he owes and he owes. I will give him credit. He does pay his
debts. That's who's writing these things. All his little special interests
groups.
The "They" have put in things like the section that says that NO ONE shall
be denied health benefits based on "any characteristics." Citizenship is a
characteristic! Viva La Raza and MecHa.
Lynda
The press corp is fact-adverse but very fable friendly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leslie" <cayadopi AT yahoo.com>
I couldn't agree more on the major significance of those tiny words in
legaleze !
I've seen motions get denied based on one little word in the law in a case
I'm following, and of course the masses don't have reading comprehension
skills, therefore they believe that the judge was paid off, etc. because
they can't understand the law, and in fact, even use the very laws that
knock out their motions as the very reasons a judge should support them....
dumb....
You wrote, "This what they are counting on!"
WHO IS "THEY"................. Because "they", our elected slippery ones
haven't even read the bill, therefore, who is the "they" that wrote the
bill.... who stands to gain from this?
--- On Sun, 8/9/09, Lynda <lurine AT com-pair.net> wrote: