From gdavis.fg at verizon.net  Sat Aug  1 08:12:52 2009
From: gdavis.fg at verizon.net (Dan & Gerry Davis)
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 08:12:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] what was the cause of the sirens?
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKENAMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <7789A75614C649B5A65A812A77D1DEFB@gerryscomputer>

WCCCA has Implementing a New Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) System
At 0500 on June 30th, 2009 this site will not receive updated incidents. We 
hope to have the site up and running by the end of July. We apologize for 
the inconvenience.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] what was the cause of the sirens?


> What happened to the Fire Log?
> http://mail.wccca.com/48hrFireLog/
> Seems to be quite private these days.
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet 


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Sun Aug  2 08:14:27 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 08:14:27 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] computer repair needed
References: <FE9A2954-9630-4967-B90D-95C84D22C66A@verizon.net><F2063C0E86694FFC945E34F7449405F1@welch><B44D76EA-A0E4-429D-837A-CC7561B893D2@verizon.net>
	<4FB25260-E81C-48DA-8829-970320BC01B8@grovenet.net>
Message-ID: <9D46F1A035D345C0845EEBF431FC799E@gerianehzkfhvy>

This is great to know, Chuck!

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck" <chuck at grovenet.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] computer repair needed


> Just so you all know, even though my shop is closed, I still do  
> repairs on the side. Do to my work schedule I am limited to Mondays  
> and Tuesdays only. If that works for you , give me a call. 503.359.8939
> 
> Chuck
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jul 31, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Martha Khoury <khourym at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> Thank you! Garry is going to install a new hard drive tomorrow. What a
>> relief! --Martha K.
>>
>>
>> On Jul 31, 2009, at 5:56 PM, John Welch wrote:
>>
>>> We have had good luck calling Garry Poff (799-4695).  He is in
>>> Hillsboro and
>>> used to, at least, make house calls.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>>> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 5:32 PM
>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>> Subject: [Grovenet] computer repair needed
>>>
>>> My other computer (PC) is making a strange noise and acting up. Whom
>>> should I call?
>>>
>>> --Martha K.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From nuzriter at aol.com  Sun Aug  2 21:13:37 2009
From: nuzriter at aol.com (nuzriter at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:13:37 -0400
Subject: [Grovenet] ac needing something
Message-ID: <8CBE207E896CC3A-F68-16E0@webmail-dh11.sysops.aol.com>

I have a portable Frigidaire air conditioner that's been sitting in a storage unit for two years. It was used about a dozen times. Now it will blow air but not cold air.

Any ideas where I can take it to look at getting it fixed? I'm willing to sell it as I don't need it but I hesitate to sell a non-working thing.

Linda

From obrzl at verizon.net  Sun Aug  2 23:20:42 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 23:20:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] H-O
Message-ID: <126294.88565.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I've no idea what H-O stuff costs or if it wears out but there's a bunch of track for free?on 12th near Cedar.

?

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug  3 08:46:29 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:46:29 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Re-sizing ring
In-Reply-To: <126294.88565.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <126294.88565.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1369B9E2-1F6B-40ED-8948-D0F3E1E863A1@teleport.com>

Question for Mark:
Can you, or do you know anyone who can re-size a silver ring for my  
son, Zack? He'll only be here a few days.
Thanks,
Walt
On Aug 2, 2009, at 11:20 PM, mark oberzil wrote:

> I've no idea what H-O stuff costs or if it wears out but there's a  
> bunch of track for free on 12th near Cedar.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From rab at jurislex.com  Mon Aug  3 16:37:07 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 16:37:07 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
Message-ID: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090803/371f0022/attachment.html 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug  3 16:54:07 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:54:07 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <3E471E30A6A343CCBA4E02C49A423CE5@gerianehzkfhvy>

The most twisted part of these hoaxes (I believe) about President Obama not being a natural U.S. citizen is that they are merely *masquerading* as a legitimate issue to cover up the real issue some racists have with our president being only half-white.

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bob Browning 
To: Grovenet 
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:37 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet 

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug  3 17:33:02 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:33:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <3E471E30A6A343CCBA4E02C49A423CE5@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
	<3E471E30A6A343CCBA4E02C49A423CE5@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <615CB0EB-2F79-45B6-BF1E-7AB6CFDB6894@teleport.com>

Indeed... Methinks these frantic repetitions of the same old oft- 
debunked hoaxes are merely a symptom of the "true believer's" attempt  
to convince himself that he is not, in fact, just another shabby  
little racist masquerading as a patriot... Now, if Arnold  
Swartzenegger, admittedly foreign-born, were to suddenly annoucne his  
intention to run for the Presidency, these same "patriots" would  
suddenly all be chorusing that the "natural-born" law was outmoded  
and narrow-minded for this modern pluralistic world, and  ought to be  
revoked... But of course, the Governator is both conservative and  
white...
Walt
On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Geri wrote:

> The most twisted part of these hoaxes (I believe) about President  
> Obama not being a natural U.S. citizen is that they are merely  
> *masquerading* as a legitimate issue to cover up the real issue  
> some racists have with our president being only half-white.
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob Browning
> To: Grovenet
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:37 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ----------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From khourym at verizon.net  Mon Aug  3 17:41:26 2009
From: khourym at verizon.net (Martha Khoury)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 17:41:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <615CB0EB-2F79-45B6-BF1E-7AB6CFDB6894@teleport.com>
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
	<3E471E30A6A343CCBA4E02C49A423CE5@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<615CB0EB-2F79-45B6-BF1E-7AB6CFDB6894@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <0B4292E5-4DEE-4E27-A497-AC77A1488BF8@verizon.net>


Whether this document is "authentic"  is irrelevant.
 From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an  
authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even  
if you were not born there.
Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe  
that is all that is required by law.

--Martha K.

From obrzl at verizon.net  Mon Aug  3 18:35:15 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 18:35:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
Message-ID: <317402.50908.qm@web84201.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I think the point is that?some will believe it; divide and conquer.? Remember the scam about if you have outstanding traffic warrents you will be arrested if you try to vote?
Mark
?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-22-2009/the-born-identity

--- On Tue, 8/4/09, Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com> wrote:


From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 12:33 AM


Indeed... Methinks these frantic repetitions of the same old oft- 
debunked hoaxes are merely a symptom of the "true believer's" attempt? 
to convince himself that he is not, in fact, just another shabby? 
little racist masquerading as a patriot... Now, if Arnold? 
Swartzenegger, admittedly foreign-born, were to suddenly annoucne his? 
intention to run for the Presidency, these same "patriots" would? 
suddenly all be chorusing that the "natural-born" law was outmoded? 
and narrow-minded for this modern pluralistic world, and? ought to be? 
revoked... But of course, the Governator is both conservative and? 
white...
Walt
On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Geri wrote:

> The most twisted part of these hoaxes (I believe) about President? 
> Obama not being a natural U.S. citizen is that they are merely? 
> *masquerading* as a legitimate issue to cover up the real issue? 
> some racists have with our president being only half-white.
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob Browning
> To: Grovenet
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:37 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ----------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug  3 20:40:42 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:40:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com><3E471E30A6A343CCBA4E02C49A423CE5@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<615CB0EB-2F79-45B6-BF1E-7AB6CFDB6894@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <38CD0366594E463CA2A0F8AAA0CFD246@gerianehzkfhvy>

Bob, wouldn't faking a legal document with the expectation of it causing a legal action be a crime of some sort?!

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walt Wentz" <waltw at teleport.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .


> Indeed... Methinks these frantic repetitions of the same old oft- 
> debunked hoaxes are merely a symptom of the "true believer's" attempt  
> to convince himself that he is not, in fact, just another shabby  
> little racist masquerading as a patriot... Now, if Arnold  
> Swartzenegger, admittedly foreign-born, were to suddenly annoucne his  
> intention to run for the Presidency, these same "patriots" would  
> suddenly all be chorusing that the "natural-born" law was outmoded  
> and narrow-minded for this modern pluralistic world, and  ought to be  
> revoked... But of course, the Governator is both conservative and  
> white...
> Walt
> On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Geri wrote:
> 
>> The most twisted part of these hoaxes (I believe) about President  
>> Obama not being a natural U.S. citizen is that they are merely  
>> *masquerading* as a legitimate issue to cover up the real issue  
>> some racists have with our president being only half-white.
>>
>> Geri
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Bob Browning
>> To: Grovenet
>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:37 PM
>> Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ----------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug  3 20:52:25 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 20:52:25 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <317402.50908.qm@web84201.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3573BC5870DF4A2583F306B33522A912@gerianehzkfhvy>

Thanks for the clip, Mark.  :-)  Stewart always makes
his points!


  Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "mark oberzil" <obrzl at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .


I think the point is that some will believe it; divide and conquer. Remember the scam about if you have outstanding traffic warrents you will be arrested if you try to vote?
Mark

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-22-2009/the-born-identity

--- On Tue, 8/4/09, Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com> wrote:


From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 12:33 AM


Indeed... Methinks these frantic repetitions of the same old oft- 
debunked hoaxes are merely a symptom of the "true believer's" attempt 
to convince himself that he is not, in fact, just another shabby 
little racist masquerading as a patriot... Now, if Arnold 
Swartzenegger, admittedly foreign-born, were to suddenly annoucne his 
intention to run for the Presidency, these same "patriots" would 
suddenly all be chorusing that the "natural-born" law was outmoded 
and narrow-minded for this modern pluralistic world, and ought to be 
revoked... But of course, the Governator is both conservative and 
white...
Walt
On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Geri wrote:

> The most twisted part of these hoaxes (I believe) about President 
> Obama not being a natural U.S. citizen is that they are merely 
> *masquerading* as a legitimate issue to cover up the real issue 
> some racists have with our president being only half-white.
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob Browning
> To: Grovenet
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:37 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ----------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug  3 21:34:06 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 21:34:06 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much later. My
only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.

I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate to shut
all this stuff up.

> -----Original Message-----

> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On

> Behalf Of Martha Khoury

> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM

> To: Forest Grove local interests list

> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .

>

>

>

> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.

> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an

> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even

> if you were not born there.

> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.

> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe

> that is all that is required by law.

>

> --Martha K.

> _______________________________________________

> GroveNet mailing list

> GroveNet at rdrop.com

> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

>

From jo.david at verizon.net  Mon Aug  3 22:09:00 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:09:00 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <6DBC117A-537A-4568-B5A1-4EA13F51D881@verizon.net>

Funny thing, his father already had a wife in Kenya.  That would make  
the marriage in the US void, perhaps?

A child born out of wedlock to an American woman of who had lived in  
the US for at least a year before the birth qualifies as natural  
born, even if the birth is outside of the US.

So, what do you want to say, bigamy doesn't make Obama "out of  
wedlock", no matter where he was born?

David

On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Bob Browning wrote:

> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jo.david at verizon.net  Mon Aug  3 22:09:16 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:09:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
References: <4A7774A3.5080908@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <F5140872-2FAC-43AE-94F5-C2A8F7DDA106@verizon.net>

I would hope that since this is part of a legal action that the rules  
of perjury will apply.  I would love to see the person passing this  
off gets their reward.

David

On Aug 3, 2009, at 4:37 PM, Bob Browning wrote:

> http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 04:55:00 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 04:55:00 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <EC830FE6584644ACB73E0462C0EE8C21@gerianehzkfhvy>

Well, Obama *has* put out his real certificate. But it
doesn't shut up those determined not to "believe" it:
One source still showing it is the Chicago Tribune ... 
http://tinyurl.com/6pv6kv .

The State of Hawaii has confirmed it, plus shown the
newspaper announcements of his birth from a couple
Hawaiian newspapers from back then.

Heck, even the whole Senate voted it in unanimously
last week when it was Hawaii's 50th anniversary as a
state.  See http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r111query.html 
to look it up; put in "S. Res. 225." (the site doesn't retain
specific searches, or I'd send the exact link).

There was a lot faked on the forged certificate --
including using place names and official names that
didn't exist at the time. For example, no one, not even
Obama, was born in Mumbasa, Kenya in 1961 (like the
forged birth cert shows) since Mumbasa was part of
Zanzibar until 1963.

In all his life, including as a U.S. Senator, suddenly his
citizenship is being denied?  How ridiculous it sounds
when those deniers spout off.   :-( 

---

Happy Birthday, Pres. Barack Obama!

(And to one of my sons, too!)


Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .


>I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much later. My
> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> 
> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate to shut
> all this stuff up.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
> 
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> 
>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> 
>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> 
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> 
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
>>
> 
>>
> 
>>
> 
>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> 
>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> 
>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
> 
>> if you were not born there.
> 
>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> 
>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> 
>> that is all that is required by law.
> 
>>
> 
>> --Martha K.
> 
>> _______________________________________________
> 
>> GroveNet mailing list
> 
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> 
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From waltw at teleport.com  Tue Aug  4 08:48:59 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 08:48:59 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>

Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to  
examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.  
But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is  
examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to  
patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited  
to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence  
that contradicts his pet obsession.
The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font  
designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were  
to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,  
would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would  
merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of  
suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and  
uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How  
much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems  
factng the country?
Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this  
drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept  
simmering with such obsessive devotion.

On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:

> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much  
> later. My
> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>
> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate  
> to shut
> all this stuff up.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>
>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>
>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>
>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
>
>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
>
>> if you were not born there.
>
>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>
>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
>
>> that is all that is required by law.
>
>>
>
>> --Martha K.
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> GroveNet mailing list
>
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 09:14:23 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:14:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <16E54373-BBE5-4874-A124-9A726313604B@verizon.net>

How many scientists does it take to 'prove' that the earth is shaped  
more like a round ball than a flat pancake?
Since the world is round/flat debate has not been 'settled' yet  
either we should be prepared for the controversy over the president's  
birth certificate to continue all the way to the end of his term and  
beyond.
Some people will not be satisfied regardless of the number of experts  
who look at his birth certificate.

But all is not lost. We can use this to judge the reasonableness of  
elected leaders who continue to pander to the lowest denominator. It  
is not a question of whether Obama was born in Hawaii. There is  
overwhelming evidence that he was. The question is how much time and  
energy are people willing to waste on the issue. Obama is right to  
totally ignore it. He has real problems to deal with and he should  
spend his time trying to address them.

Katie


On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Walt Wentz wrote:

> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> factng the country?
> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>
> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>
>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
>> later. My
>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>>
>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
>> to shut
>> all this stuff up.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>
>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>>
>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>>
>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>
>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>>
>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
>>
>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin  
>>> even
>>
>>> if you were not born there.
>>
>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>>
>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
>>
>>> that is all that is required by law.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> --Martha K.
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 09:53:59 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENNMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a backlog of
conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead air on
the Nixon tapes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> factng the country?
> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>
> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>
> > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > later. My
> > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> >
> > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > to shut
> > all this stuff up.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >
> >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> >
> >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> >
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> >
> >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> >
> >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
> >
> >> if you were not born there.
> >
> >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> >
> >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> >
> >> that is all that is required by law.
> >
> >>>


From steelem at pacificu.edu  Tue Aug  4 10:27:10 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:27:10 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOENKMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C3E7F6F7@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

I have always liked the bumper sticker that says, "I brake for hallucinations!"

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Walt Wentz
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .

Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to  
examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.  
But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is  
examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to  
patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited  
to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence  
that contradicts his pet obsession.
The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font  
designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were  
to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,  
would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would  
merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of  
suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and  
uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How  
much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems  
factng the country?
Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this  
drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept  
simmering with such obsessive devotion.

On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:

> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much  
> later. My
> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>
> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate  
> to shut
> all this stuff up.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>
>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>
>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>
>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
>
>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
>
>> if you were not born there.
>
>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>
>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
>
>> that is all that is required by law.
>
>>
>
>> --Martha K.
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> GroveNet mailing list
>
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From braketimecoffee at hotmail.com  Tue Aug  4 10:31:08 2009
From: braketimecoffee at hotmail.com (Glenn Berkheimer)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:31:08 -0600
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENNMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <AFF2C96F-D124-405D-8C31-3248493751D2@teleport.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENNMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <SNT116-W46DFF61536D591222DC39BA90C0@phx.gbl>


What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his race this is getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a member of the white race.

> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a backlog of
> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead air on
> the Nixon tapes.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> >
> > Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> > But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> > examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> > to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> > factng the country?
> > Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> >
> > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> >
> > > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > > later. My
> > > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > >
> > > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > > to shut
> > > all this stuff up.
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > >
> > >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > >
> > >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > >
> > >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > >
> > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > >
> > >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> > >
> > >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
> > >
> > >> if you were not born there.
> > >
> > >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > >
> > >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> > >
> > >> that is all that is required by law.
> > >
> > >>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 10:54:00 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:54:00 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <SNT116-W46DFF61536D591222DC39BA90C0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENOMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Not true. Race isn't the issue.
McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
All races are born.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
>
> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> race this is
> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a member of
> the white race.
>
> > From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> > We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> backlog of
> > conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead air
> on
> > the Nixon tapes.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >
> > >
> > > Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > > examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> > > But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> > > examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > > patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> > > to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > > that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > > The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > > designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > > to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > > would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > > merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > > suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > > How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > > uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > > much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> > > factng the country?
> > > Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > > drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > > simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> > >
> > > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > > > later. My
> > > > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > > > to shut
> > > > all this stuff up.
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > >
> > > >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > > >
> > > >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > > >
> > > >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > >
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> > > >
> > > >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> origin even
> > > >
> > > >> if you were not born there.
> > > >
> > > >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > > >
> > > >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> > > >
> > > >> that is all that is required by law.
> > > >
> > > >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
HYCB_BackT
oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug  4 11:14:52 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 11:14:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] At last - a supplement that seems to help ! ! !
Message-ID: <4A787A9C.1030509@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090804/daa96633/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: minithologo_white.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3282 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090804/daa96633/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: quote_end.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 337 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090804/daa96633/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: quote_begin.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 338 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090804/daa96633/attachment-0001.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: minithologo.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3200 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090804/daa96633/attachment-0001.jpg 

From obrzl at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 11:37:16 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
Message-ID: <78501.85431.qm@web84206.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

--- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steele, Mike <steelem at pacificu.edu> wrote:


From: Steele, Mike <steelem at pacificu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:27 PM


I have always liked the bumper sticker that says, "I brake for hallucinations!"

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Walt Wentz
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .

Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to? 
examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.? 
But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is? 
examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to? 
patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited? 
to the examination), stubbornly? denounce as "faked" any evidence? 
that contradicts his pet obsession.
The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font? 
designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were? 
to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,? 
would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would? 
merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of? 
suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and? 
uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How? 
much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems? 
factng the country?
Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this? 
drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept? 
simmering with such obsessive devotion.

On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:

> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much? 
> later. My
> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>
> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate? 
> to shut
> all this stuff up.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>
>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>
>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>
>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
>
>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin even
>
>> if you were not born there.
>
>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>
>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
>
>> that is all that is required by law.
>
>>
>
>> --Martha K.
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> GroveNet mailing list
>
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From obrzl at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 11:43:57 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] change, eh?
Message-ID: <833709.97508.qm@web84204.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Somebody paid me in Canadian and the bank wants twelve bucks to send it to Beaverton.? Any suggestions?? Anybody heading north?

From obrzl at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 11:39:13 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
Message-ID: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship was passed?

--- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM


Not true. Race isn't the issue.
McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
All races are born.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
>
> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> race this is
> getting even the slightest notice.? Makes me embarrassed to be a member of
> the white race.
>
> > From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> > We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> backlog of
> > conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead air
> on
> > the Nixon tapes.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >
> > >
> > > Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > > examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> > > But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> > > examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > > patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> > > to the examination), stubbornly? denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > > that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > > The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > > designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > > to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > > would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > > merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > > suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > > How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > > uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > > much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> > > factng the country?
> > > Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > > drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > > simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> > >
> > > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > > > later. My
> > > > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > > > to shut
> > > > all this stuff up.
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > >
> > > >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > > >
> > > >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > > >
> > > >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > >
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> > > >
> > > >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> origin even
> > > >
> > > >> if you were not born there.
> > > >
> > > >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > > >
> > > >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> > > >
> > > >> that is all that is required by law.
> > > >
> > > >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
HYCB_BackT
oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From phoenixacup at gmail.com  Tue Aug  4 12:29:45 2009
From: phoenixacup at gmail.com (Jane Burch-Pesses)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:29:45 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] At last - a supplement that seems to help ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A787A9C.1030509@jurislex.com>
References: <4A787A9C.1030509@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <d6eeab3d0908041229h33dfdafcq462d67389349ebb9@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, lots of good data on the benefits of fish oil.  Good solid data on the
benefits of Vitamin D, too.
Jane B-P

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com> wrote:

>   [image: tho]
>
>   *New review endorses CV benefits of fish oil*
> August 3, 2009 | Lisa Nainggolan<http://www.theheart.org/viewAuthorBio.do?primaryKey=121557>
>
> *New Orleans, LA *- A new review concludes that there is extensive
> evidence from three decades of research that fish oils, or more specifically
> the omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) contained in them, are
> beneficial for everyone [*1*<http://www.theheart.org/article/989749.do#bib_1>].
>
>
> This includes healthy people as well as those with heart disease?including
> post-MI patients and those with heart failure, atherosclerosis, or atrial
> fibrillation?say *Dr Carl J Lavie* (Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans,
> LA) and colleagues in their paper published online August 3, 2009 in the *
> J**ournal of the** Am**erican** Coll**ege of **Cardiol**ogy*.
>
> "We reviewed everything that was published on omega-3 that was clinically
> important, and the major finding is that there are a tremendous amount of
> data to support the benefits of omega-3, not just as a nutritional
> supplement?people have known that for years?but evidence that it prevents
> and treats many aspects of cardiovascular disease," Lavie told *heart**
> wire*.
>  *The omega-3 data may not be as impressive or as plentiful as [statin
> data] but it should be 'promoted' to clinicians.*
>
> Lavie said he believes physicians are not as familiar with the omega-3
> studies as they should be: "Clinicians know the findings of many statin
> trials even if they do not know all the details?they know that there are a
> ton of statin data. The omega-3 data may not be as impressive or as
> plentiful as this, but it should be 'promoted' to clinicians."
>
> Omega-3 PUFA, says Lavie, "is a therapy that clinicians should be
> considering prescribing to their patients. Not just as something healthy but
> as something that may actually prevent the next event. In HF, it may prevent
> death or hospitalization and the same thing post-MI." He and his colleagues
> reiterate the advice of the *AHA*: that those with known CHD or HF eat
> four or five oily-fish meals per week or take the equivalent in omega-3
> supplements; healthy people should consume around two fatty-fish meals per
> week or the same in supplements.
>
> *Most data on EPA and DHA*
>
> In their review, Lavie and colleagues explain that most of the data on
> omega-3 have been obtained in trials using docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and
> eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), the long-chain fatty acids in this family. The
> most compelling evidence for cardiovascular benefits comes from four
> controlled trials of almost 40 000 participants randomized to receive EPA
> with or without DHA in studies of primary prevention, after MI, and most
> recently with HF, they note.
>  *[Omega-3 PUFA] is a therapy that clinicians should be considering
> prescribing to their patients, as something that may actually prevent* *the
> next event.*
>
> They discuss the results for each specific cardiovascular condition in
> turn. For CHF, three large randomized trials?the *Diet and Reinfarction
> Trial *(DART), the *Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza
> nell' Infarto Miocardico* (GISSI)*-**Prevenzione*, and the *Japan EPA
> Lipid Intervention Study* (JELIS)?have indicated that omega-3 PUFAs lower
> CV risk in both the primary- and secondary-prevention settings, they note.
>
> Lavie elaborated to *heart**wire*: "The benefit is different in different
> studies but can be as much as 30%." The effects are seen on total mortality,
> sudden death, CHD mortality, and cardiovascular mortality.
>
> But there are some studies that have not shown favorable results, although
> there are generally methodological reasons for this, they say. However, they
> do flag the most recent study of post-MI patients, *OMEGA*, which suggests
> there may not be additional short-term benefit of omega-3 PUFAs in low-risk
> patients already receiving optimal modern therapy.
>
> There is also evidence of benefit in atherosclerosis and in a wide range of
> arrhythmias, with the most significant effect and potential benefit seen in
> "the current epidemic" of AF, note the researchers. But more studies are
> needed to explore the effects of various doses of omega-3 PUFAs on the
> primary and secondary reduction of AF and to determine whether the benefits
> are caused by antiarrhythmic effects, benefits on autonomic tone, or even
> anti-inflammatory effects, they observe.
>
> *Benefit of fish oils also extend to HF *
>
> Recently, the potential benefits of omega-3 PUFAs "have been extended to
> the prevention and treatment of HF," say Lavie et al. Although the reduction
> in events was "only 8% to 9% in the recent *GISSI-HF* trial, which is not
> huge," Lavie admits, "when you think of HF, it's a very serious disorder,
> and in GISSI-HF, those patients were treated vigorously for their HF, so
> they were on good therapy, and adding just one [omega-3 PUFA] pill a day
> reduced deaths by between 8% and 9%, which is a pretty nice additional
> benefit."
>
> But he and his colleagues say further studies are needed to determine the
> optimal dosing of omega-3 PUFA for different stages of HF and to investigate
> the underlying mechanisms for the benefits. However, in the meantime,
> omega-3 PUFA supplements "should join the short list of evidence-based
> life-prolonging therapies for HF."
>  *[Omega-3 PUFA sup**plements] should join the short **list of
> evidence-based li**fe**-**prolonging therapies for HF.*
>
> They also discuss the data on omega-3 PUFAs in hyperlipidemia, noting that
> the FDA has approved one such supplement for the treatment of very high
> triglyceride levels.
>
> And they note that more studies are needed to determine the optimal mix of
> DHA relative to EPA in various populations.
>
> Finally, they state that this review does not focus on the plant-based
> precursor of EPA, alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), which is found in abundance in
> flaxseed and to a lesser extent in other plants. But they observe "the
> overall evidence is much weaker for ALA than for EPA and DHA."
>
> *Recommendations for omega-3 consumption *
>
> Mirroring recommendations from the AHA, *E**uropean **S**ociety of **C**
> ardiology*, and *WHO*, Lavie and colleagues recommend that healthy people
> consume at least 500 mg per day of EPA/DHA?equal to around two fatty-fish
> meals per week?and that those with known CHD or HF get 800 to 1000 mg per
> day EPA/DHA.
>
> Asked by *heartwire* whether people should try to consume more fish or
> alternatively take supplements, Lavie says: "If somebody really were eating
> salmon and tuna and mackerel and sardines, and they were doing that several
> times a week, then they wouldn't need to be taking a supplement. But in the
> US, at least, very few people are going to eat the therapeutic doses of
> fatty fish."
>
> Other good reasons to take supplements include the fact that they have
> usually had impurities, such as mercury, removed, he notes.
>
> If people are trying to improve their consumption of oily fish, they could
> take supplements only on the days they were not eating such fish or every
> other day to try to get up to the recommended amount of omega-3 PUFAs, Lavie
> says.
>
> But he warns that regimens that are too complex might result in
> underconsumption: "I would tend to think that most people are getting very
> little omega-3 PUFAs in the diet. There's no harm in taking extra?the only
> negative of extra is the calories. I don't think anyone thinks now that fish
> oil is doing any harm."
>   *Lavie has been a consultant and speaker for Reliant, Pfizer,
> Bristol-Myers Squibb**,** and Sanofi**-Aventis** and is a speaker
> receiving honorari**a** from and on the speaker**'**s bureau of
> GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott**,** and Solvay. **Disclosures **for **the co**authors
> are listed in the **paper**.*
>    *Source*
>
>    1. Lavie CJ, Milani RV, Mehra MR, et al. Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty
>    acids and cardiovascular disease. *J Am Coll Cardiol* 2009; 54: 585-594
>    *.* <http://www.theheart.org/article/989749.do#bib_.>* Available at: *<http://www.theheart.org/article/989749.do#bib_%20Available%20at:>
>    http://content.onlinejacc.org<http://www.theheart.org/viewDocument.do?document=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.onlinejacc.org>
>    *.* <http://www.theheart.org/article/989749.do#bib_.>
>
>
>  *Related links*
>
>    - Oily fish eaten once a week associated with lower rates of HF<http://www.theheart.org/article/965267.do>
>    [*Prevention > Prevention*; Apr 29, 2009]
>     - Optimal MI care eliminates OMEGA-3 benefits<http://www.theheart.org/article/957205.do>
>    [*Acute Coronary Syndromes > Acute coronary syndromes*; Apr 03, 2009]
>     - No antiarrhythmic protection with fish oil, new meta-analysis shows<http://www.theheart.org/article/931669.do>
>    [*Arrhythmia/EP > Arrhythmia/EP*; Jan 05, 2009]
>     - Omega-3 fatty acids, but not statin therapy, cuts mortality and
>    hospitalizations in heart failure<http://www.theheart.org/article/898959.do>
>    [*Heart failure > Heart failure*; Aug 31, 2008]
>     - Alpha-linolenic acid reduces risk of nonfatal MI<http://www.theheart.org/article/881117.do>
>    [*Prevention > Prevention*; Jul 09, 2008]
>
>
>    [image: tho]
> Copyright ?1999-2009 theheart.org by WebMD. All rights reserved.
> Privacy policy <http://www.medscape.com/pjsp/public/privacy.html>
> info at theheart.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>


-- 
Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
www.phoenix-acupuncture.net

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 12:38:49 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 12:38:49 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <510220DF2DA14B4BA2606889A67DF6A7@gerianehzkfhvy>

And when the (bogus) issue came up for McCain during
the primaries (in response to the Obama "birthers"
starting up), Obama & Clinton jumped right in and said
plainly and clearly on McCain's behalf that it was not
a true issue.

Race IS one issue with these folks ... (Sanity may be
an issue, too!!) And they've listened to so many lies by
now that I doubt they have enough truth in their mental
data banks to be able to recognize it when it jumps up
in front of them.

Why, there are some in the extreme right wing who have
not even curbed their racist talk -- but again, those who
have ingested this kind of talk ad nauseum wouldn't
recognize this either ...

Glad Obama knows this is crazy stuff he doesn't need
to spend his valuable time & energy on. He knows even
though he's put out his birth certificate, it won't stop it,
and why give any credibility to people who think the
way the "birthers" say they think? One doesn't try to
have a rational conversation with someone who doesn't
have the ability to believe their own senses.

Guess I won't bother with this stuff any more either. ;-)


Geri


--- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM


Not true. Race isn't the issue.
McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
All races are born.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
>
> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> race this is
> getting even the slightest notice. Makes me embarrassed to be a member of
> the white race.
>
> > From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> > We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> backlog of
> > conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead air
> on
> > the Nixon tapes.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >
> > >
> > > Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > > examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
> > > But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> > > examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > > patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> > > to the examination), stubbornly denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > > that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > > The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > > designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > > to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > > would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > > merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > > suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > > How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > > uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > > much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
> > > factng the country?
> > > Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > > drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > > simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> > >
> > > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > > > later. My
> > > > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > > > to shut
> > > > all this stuff up.
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >
> > > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > >
> > > >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > > >
> > > >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > > >
> > > >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > >
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > > >
> > > >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
> > > >
> > > >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> origin even
> > > >
> > > >> if you were not born there.
> > > >
> > > >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > > >
> > > >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
> > > >
> > > >> that is all that is required by law.
> > > >
> > > >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
HYCB_BackT
oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug  4 13:48:21 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 13:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Is this REALLY a fairly accurate representation?
Message-ID: <747594.40383.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Some friends of mine sent the following example.  I'm just wondering . . . how accurate is this comparison?  Is is close to the truth?  Mostly true?  Mostly NOT true?  A totally fabricated story created to stir up resentment towards illegal aliens?


Joe Legal vs. Joe
Illegal
Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is
not economically productive for the State of Arizona ...
You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and
"Jose Illegal". 
Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live
in Arizona. 
"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a
Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll taxes deducted. 
"Jose Illegal" also works in
construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00
cash "under the table". 
Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours $1000.00 per
week, $52,000 per year 
Now take 30% away for state federal tax 
Joe Legal now has $31,231..00 
Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00
/week, $31,200.00 /year 
Jose Illegal pays no taxes... 
Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00 
Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with
limited coverage, $1000.00 per month, $12,000.00 per year 
Joe Legal now has $19,231..00 
Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage
through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year 
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00 
Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for
Food Stamps or welfare 
Joe Legal pays for food, $1,000.00 per month,
$12,000.00 per year 
Joe Legal now has $ 7,231..00 
Jose Illegal has no documented income and is
eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare 
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00 
Joe Legal pays rent of $1,000.00 per month,
$12,000.00 per year 
Joe Legal is now in the hole, minus (-) $4,769.00 
Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent
subsidy 
Jose Illegal pays rent, $500.00 per month,
$6,000.00 per year 
Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00 
Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a
part time job after work. 
Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy
with his family. 
Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend
the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's
children get a government sponsored lunch. 
Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL
program. Joe Legal's children go home. 
Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same
Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay. 

Allen Warren



      

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 14:59:34 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:59:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>

Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details  
and looked at the language of the law.
Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born  
citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would  
be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008  
he was eligible to run for president.
Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the  
then president with my own eyes to believe that it was retroactive. I  
have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running  
against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and  
studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.

People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some  
how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's  
birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it for  
themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a  
forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But  
they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth  
certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.


Katie
PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that  
there is ample evidence to suggest it is.


On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain  
> born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship  
> was passed?
>
> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
>
>
> Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> All races are born.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>
>>
>> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
>> race this is
>> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a  
>> member of
>> the white race.
>>
>>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
>>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>
>>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
>> backlog of
>>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of  
>>> dead air
>> on
>>> the Nixon tapes.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
>>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven  
>>>> times.
>>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original  
>>>> document is
>>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
>>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't  
>>>> invited
>>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
>>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
>>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
>>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
>>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
>>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
>>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
>>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
>>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
>>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
>>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL  
>>>> problems
>>>> factng the country?
>>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
>>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
>>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
>>>>> later. My
>>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
>>>>> to shut
>>>>> all this stuff up.
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>>>
>>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>>>>>
>>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to  
>>>>>> get an
>>>>>
>>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
>> origin even
>>>>>
>>>>>> if you were not born there.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I  
>>>>>> believe
>>>>>
>>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
>> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> HYCB_BackT
> oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From phoenixacup at gmail.com  Tue Aug  4 15:54:23 2009
From: phoenixacup at gmail.com (Jane Burch-Pesses)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:54:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <d6eeab3d0908041554m24da7cb7h4b198b39798becf0@mail.gmail.com>

I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth certificate on
the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't bothered
to look it up for myself.
Jane B-P

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:

> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
> and looked at the language of the law.
> Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
> citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
> be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
> he was eligible to run for president.
> Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
> then president with my own eyes to believe that it was retroactive. I
> have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
> against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
> studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
>
> People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
> how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it for
> themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
> they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
>
>
> Katie
> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>
>
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
>
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
> > born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
> > was passed?
> >
> > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
> >
> >
> > Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> > McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> > All races are born.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> >> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> >> race this is
> >> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
> >> member of
> >> the white race.
> >>
> >>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> >>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> >>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>
> >>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> >> backlog of
> >>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
> >>> dead air
> >> on
> >>> the Nixon tapes.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> >>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
> >>>> times.
> >>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
> >>>> document is
> >>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> >>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
> >>>> invited
> >>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> >>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> >>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> >>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> >>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> >>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> >>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> >>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> >>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> >>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> >>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
> >>>> problems
> >>>> factng the country?
> >>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> >>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> >>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> >>>>> later. My
> >>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> >>>>> to shut
> >>>>> all this stuff up.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
> >>>>>> get an
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> >> origin even
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> if you were not born there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
> >>>>>> believe
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> >> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> > HYCB_BackT
> > oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



-- 
Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
www.phoenix-acupuncture.net

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 16:32:04 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:32:04 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Is this REALLY a fairly accurate representation?
In-Reply-To: <747594.40383.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <747594.40383.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <EBB39EFD-64AF-4E08-AFAB-F0EB10E79B90@verizon.net>

I googled on applications for free school lunches and food stamps and  
they both require social security numbers.
According to HUD website, housing subsidies are only open to legal  
residents.
The writer forgot to take the standard deduction for Joe Legals  
income and his exemptions. He would only pay income tax on about  
$26,000 and at that level the federal tax is only 15% and Arizona  
income tax is only 3%, so those numbers are way off.
As far as insurance goes this might be one area where there is a  
smidgen of truth. Joe Legal probably has a high deductible so he  
probably does pay through the nose for health care but Jose Illegal  
likely doesn't get much of deal either. The folks that I know who  
work in these clinics would not describe the health and dental care  
as 'comprehensive' and they are usually based on a sliding scale.  At  
Joe Legals income he would likely be eligible for health care at the  
clinics too or possibly reduced rates as well as Jose Illegal.
The writer is pretty generous to think that Jose illegal works full  
time. Most people paid under the table have long periods of no work  
because there aren't that many bosses willing to take the risk to  
hire them for more than short term.

And then of course at the end the writer confuses fire and police  
services with income taxes.  Most fire and police services are paid  
through property taxes and sales taxes. Property taxes are built into  
rent rates and since Jose Illegal isn't eligible for the housing  
subsidy he is going to pay property taxes through his rent and  
everybody will pay sales taxes.

There are enough errors in this to say it is mostly not true.   
Somehow people think that if you are illegal you just walk up and ask  
for handouts from the feds and the state and they think it is just  
given to you, no questions asked.  But illegal aliens are not  
eligible for services that require income verification which is most  
stuff.  Sure, you do not have to prove your income to register your  
kids for school but even the kids of illegal aliens are likely to be  
US citizens themselves.  And people are turned away from emergency  
rooms all the time because they are merely sick and not at death's door.

Every story like this has a tiny grain of truth to it. Yes, some  
people fake SS #s and get services they would not otherwise be  
eligible for. But very few of us would voluntarily take on the role  
of being 'poor' just so we could get 'free' services. I know I  
wouldn't because the 'free' services you get aren't that 'free' and  
they aren't that good either.

Katie



On Aug 4, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Allen Warren wrote:

> Some friends of mine sent the following example.  I'm just  
> wondering . . . how accurate is this comparison?  Is is close to  
> the truth?  Mostly true?  Mostly NOT true?  A totally fabricated  
> story created to stir up resentment towards illegal aliens?
>
>
> Joe Legal vs. Joe
> Illegal
> Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is
> not economically productive for the State of Arizona ...
> You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and
> "Jose Illegal".
> Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live
> in Arizona.
> "Joe Legal" works in construction, has a
> Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll  
> taxes deducted.
> "Jose Illegal" also works in
> construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00
> cash "under the table".
> Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours $1000.00 per
> week, $52,000 per year
> Now take 30% away for state federal tax
> Joe Legal now has $31,231..00
> Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00
> /week, $31,200.00 /year
> Jose Illegal pays no taxes...
> Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00
> Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with
> limited coverage, $1000.00 per month, $12,000.00 per year
> Joe Legal now has $19,231..00
> Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage
> through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year
> Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00
> Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for
> Food Stamps or welfare
> Joe Legal pays for food, $1,000.00 per month,
> $12,000.00 per year
> Joe Legal now has $ 7,231..00
> Jose Illegal has no documented income and is
> eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare
> Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00
> Joe Legal pays rent of $1,000.00 per month,
> $12,000.00 per year
> Joe Legal is now in the hole, minus (-) $4,769.00
> Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent
> subsidy
> Jose Illegal pays rent, $500.00 per month,
> $6,000.00 per year
> Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00
> Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a
> part time job after work.
> Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy
> with his family.
> Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend
> the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while  
> Jose Illegal's
> children get a government sponsored lunch.
> Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL
> program. Joe Legal's children go home.
> Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same
> Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.
>
> Allen Warren
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 16:39:44 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:39:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com><E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
	<d6eeab3d0908041554m24da7cb7h4b198b39798becf0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <08FB833EB3364D57838BA7D8A1617792@gerianehzkfhvy>

Jane, I sent the link to one site still showing it (the Chicago Tribune)
early this morning ... Here it is again, in case you want to look:

http://tinyurl.com/6pv6kv 


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jane Burch-Pesses" <phoenixacup at gmail.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .


>I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth certificate on
> the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't bothered
> to look it up for myself.
> Jane B-P
> 
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
>> and looked at the language of the law.
>> Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
>> citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
>> be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
>> he was eligible to run for president.
>> Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
>> then president with my own eyes to believe that it was retroactive. I
>> have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
>> against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
>> studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
>>
>> People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
>> how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
>> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it for
>> themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
>> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
>> they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
>> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
>>
>>
>> Katie
>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>>
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
>>
>> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
>> > born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
>> > was passed?
>> >
>> > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
>> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
>> >
>> >
>> > Not true. Race isn't the issue.
>> > McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
>> > All races are born.
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> >> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
>> >> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
>> >> race this is
>> >> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
>> >> member of
>> >> the white race.
>> >>
>> >>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
>> >>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>> >>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
>> >>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>> >>>
>> >>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
>> >> backlog of
>> >>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
>> >>> dead air
>> >> on
>> >>> the Nixon tapes.
>> >>>
>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>> >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
>> >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
>> >>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
>> >>>> times.
>> >>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
>> >>>> document is
>> >>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
>> >>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
>> >>>> invited
>> >>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
>> >>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
>> >>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
>> >>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
>> >>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
>> >>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
>> >>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
>> >>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
>> >>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
>> >>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
>> >>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
>> >>>> problems
>> >>>> factng the country?
>> >>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
>> >>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
>> >>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
>> >>>>> later. My
>> >>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
>> >>>>> to shut
>> >>>>> all this stuff up.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>> >>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
>> >>>>>> get an
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
>> >> origin even
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> if you were not born there.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
>> >>>>>> believe
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> GroveNet mailing list
>> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >>
>> >> _________________________________________________________________
>> >> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
>> >> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
>> > HYCB_BackT
>> > oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
> Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
> www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From phoenixacup at gmail.com  Tue Aug  4 16:54:23 2009
From: phoenixacup at gmail.com (Jane Burch-Pesses)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 16:54:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <08FB833EB3364D57838BA7D8A1617792@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
	<d6eeab3d0908041554m24da7cb7h4b198b39798becf0@mail.gmail.com>
	<08FB833EB3364D57838BA7D8A1617792@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <d6eeab3d0908041654w237499bau7052a31e8aa21f08@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the info, Geri!
Jane

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net> wrote:

> Jane, I sent the link to one site still showing it (the Chicago Tribune)
> early this morning ... Here it is again, in case you want to look:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6pv6kv
>
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jane Burch-Pesses" <phoenixacup at gmail.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> >I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth certificate
> on
> > the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't
> bothered
> > to look it up for myself.
> > Jane B-P
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
> >> and looked at the language of the law.
> >> Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
> >> citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
> >> be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
> >> he was eligible to run for president.
> >> Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
> >> then president with my own eyes to believe that it was retroactive. I
> >> have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
> >> against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
> >> studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
> >>
> >> People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
> >> how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
> >> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it for
> >> themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
> >> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
> >> they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
> >> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
> >>
> >>
> >> Katie
> >> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
> >> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
> >>
> >> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
> >> > born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
> >> > was passed?
> >> >
> >> > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> >> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> >> > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> >> > McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> >> > All races are born.
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> >> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> >> >> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> >> >> race this is
> >> >> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
> >> >> member of
> >> >> the white race.
> >> >>
> >> >>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> >> >>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >> >>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> >> >>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> >> >> backlog of
> >> >>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
> >> >>> dead air
> >> >> on
> >> >>> the Nixon tapes.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >> >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> >> >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> >> >>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
> >> >>>> times.
> >> >>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
> >> >>>> document is
> >> >>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> >> >>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
> >> >>>> invited
> >> >>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> >> >>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> >> >>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> >> >>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> >> >>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> >> >>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> >> >>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> >> >>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> >> >>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> >> >>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> >> >>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
> >> >>>> problems
> >> >>>> factng the country?
> >> >>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> >> >>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> >> >>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> >> >>>>> later. My
> >> >>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> >> >>>>> to shut
> >> >>>>> all this stuff up.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> >>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
> >> >>>>>> get an
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> >> >> origin even
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> if you were not born there.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
> >> >>>>>> believe
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> >>
> >> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> >> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> >> >> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> >> > HYCB_BackT
> >> > oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > GroveNet mailing list
> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > GroveNet mailing list
> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > GroveNet mailing list
> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
> > Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
> > www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



-- 
Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
www.phoenix-acupuncture.net

From edavie at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 16:54:44 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:54:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com><E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
	<d6eeab3d0908041554m24da7cb7h4b198b39798becf0@mail.gmail.com>
	<08FB833EB3364D57838BA7D8A1617792@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <BE10D379976F4D4A9128BF3A9862F2CE@EDavie>

So he's a Junior!
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Geri
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:39 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never 
give up . . . .


  Jane, I sent the link to one site still showing 
it (the Chicago Tribune)
  early this morning ... Here it is again, in case 
you want to look:

  http://tinyurl.com/6pv6kv


  Geri

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Jane Burch-Pesses" 
<phoenixacup at gmail.com>
  To: "Forest Grove local interests list" 
<grovenet at rdrop.com>
  Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never 
give up . . . .


  >I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had 
put his birth certificate on
  > the web for anyone to see because of the 
ongoing flap.  I haven't bothered
  > to look it up for myself.
  > Jane B-P
  >
  > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt 
<allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:
  >
  >> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have 
listened to the details
  >> and looked at the language of the law.
  >> Even though at the time McCain was born he 
was not a natural born
  >> citizen of the US, a law was written the next 
year so that it would
  >> be retroactive for several years so he was 
covered by it and in 2008
  >> he was eligible to run for president.
  >> Now, I did not have to actually see the 
original law, signed by the
  >> then president with my own eyes to believe 
that it was retroactive. I
  >> have some faith in the elected officials and 
the democrats running
  >> against McCain at the time to know that it 
has been investigated and
  >> studied to the point that it is useless to 
worry about it.
  >>
  >> People who have an issue about Obama being 
born in Hawaii are some
  >> how not satisfied that many many republicans 
have looked at Obama's
  >> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. 
They want to see it for
  >> themselves I guess. How they think they would 
be qualified to know a
  >> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth 
certificate is not obvious. But
  >> they seem to be able to merely hear about a 
supposed Kenyan birth
  >> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is 
real, no proof needed.
  >>
  >>
  >> Katie
  >> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not 
the issue? It seems that
  >> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
  >>
  >>
  >> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil 
wrote:
  >>
  >> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you 
mention it, wasn't McCain
  >> > born about a year before the law that 
guaranteed his citizenship
  >> > was passed?
  >> >
  >> > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven 
<NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
  >> >
  >> >
  >> > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
  >> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will 
never give up . . . .
  >> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" 
<grovenet at rdrop.com>
  >> > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
  >> >
  >> >
  >> > Not true. Race isn't the issue.
  >> > McCain was put in to the same issue as he 
was born in Panama.
  >> > All races are born.
  >> >
  >> >> -----Original Message-----
  >> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com 
[mailto:grovenet-
  >> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
  >> >> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
  >> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
  >> >> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
  >> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will 
never give up . . . .
  >> >>
  >> >>
  >> >>
  >> >> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is 
only because of his
  >> >> race this is
  >> >> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes 
me embarrassed to be a
  >> >> member of
  >> >> the white race.
  >> >>
  >> >>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
  >> >>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
  >> >>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
  >> >>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will 
never give up . . . .
  >> >>>
  >> >>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 
election. We are getting a
  >> >> backlog of
  >> >>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is 
reconstructing the 16 minutes of
  >> >>> dead air
  >> >> on
  >> >>> the Nixon tapes.
  >> >>>
  >> >>>> -----Original Message-----
  >> >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com 
[mailto:grovenet-
  >> >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
  >> >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
  >> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
  >> >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
  >> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will 
never give up . . . .
  >> >>>>
  >> >>>>
  >> >>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had 
already allowed experts to
  >> >>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or 
three times. Or seven
  >> >>>> times.
  >> >>>> But the point is, no matter how m any 
times the original
  >> >>>> document is
  >> >>>> examined, some monomaniac will always 
dredge up another fantasy to
  >> >>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the 
grounds that HE wasn't
  >> >>>> invited
  >> >>>> to the examination), stubbornly 
denounce as "faked" any evidence
  >> >>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
  >> >>>> The font had not been invented? Highly 
doubtful. If some aged font
  >> >>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos 
Type Foundry for 75 years were
  >> >>>> to testify that he had "invented" the 
font in question back in '47,
  >> >>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not 
by a snootful. They would
  >> >>>> merely scramble around until they 
"discovered" another "point of
  >> >>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the 
RNC's "stink tanks."
  >> >>>> How many thousands of man-hours, 
hundreds of planted spams and
  >> >>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted 
to this racist fantasy? How
  >> >>>> much time has been wasted from the 
consideration of the REAL
  >> >>>> problems
  >> >>>> factng the country?
  >> >>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather 
than half-white), NONE of this
  >> >>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the 
first place, or been kept
  >> >>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
  >> >>>>
  >> >>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven 
wrote:
  >> >>>>
  >> >>>>> I think I heard that the font in this 
was not created until much
  >> >>>>> later. My
  >> >>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't 
stop Dan Rather.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama 
putting out his real certificate
  >> >>>>> to shut
  >> >>>>> all this stuff up.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com 
[mailto:grovenet-
  >> >>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people 
will never give up . . . .
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>>
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>>
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>>
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" 
is irrelevant.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is 
not very difficult to
  >> >>>>>> get an
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your 
father's country of
  >> >> origin even
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> if you were not born there.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is 
running for president either.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US 
birth certificate and I
  >> >>>>>> believe
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
  >> >>>>>
  >> >>>>>>>
  >> >>>
  >> >>> 
_______________________________________________
  >> >>> GroveNet mailing list
  >> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
  >> >>> 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >> >>
  >> >> 
_________________________________________________________________
  >> >> Get back to school stuff for them and 
cashback for you.
  >> >> 
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
  >> > HYCB_BackT
  >> > oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
  >> > 
_______________________________________________
  >> > GroveNet mailing list
  >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
  >> > 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >> >
  >> > 
_______________________________________________
  >> > GroveNet mailing list
  >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
  >> > 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >> > 
_______________________________________________
  >> > GroveNet mailing list
  >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
  >> > 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >>
  >> 
_______________________________________________
  >> GroveNet mailing list
  >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
  >> 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >>
  >
  >
  >
  > -- 
  > Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
  > Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
  > www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
  > 
_______________________________________________
  > GroveNet mailing list
  > GroveNet at rdrop.com
  > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >

  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From waltw at teleport.com  Tue Aug  4 17:15:42 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 17:15:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENNMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGENNMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <1D5592DA-4E95-4DA6-943D-8B252AD5A93B@teleport.com>

Hey, for that matter, the "Fake Moon Landing" conspirationists have  
gotten a new lease on life with the revelation the original Apollo  
mission tapes were recycled, and Hollywood had to restore them off  
old broadcasts for the 40th anniversary of the landing.

On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Steven wrote:

> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a  
> backlog of
> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of  
> dead air on
> the Nixon tapes.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>
>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven times.
>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL problems
>> factng the country?
>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
>>> later. My
>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>>>
>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
>>> to shut
>>> all this stuff up.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>
>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>>>
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>>>
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>>>
>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get an
>>>
>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of origin  
>>>> even
>>>
>>>> if you were not born there.
>>>
>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
>>>
>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I believe
>>>
>>>> that is all that is required by law.
>>>
>>>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 20:30:42 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:30:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] change, eh?
In-Reply-To: <833709.97508.qm@web84204.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Can you hold for a month? College students from Canada will be coming back
by then.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of mark oberzil
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 11:44 AM
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: [Grovenet] change, eh?
>
>
> Somebody paid me in Canadian and the bank wants twelve bucks to send it to
> Beaverton.? Any suggestions?? Anybody heading north?
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 20:30:43 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:30:43 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <20769.85944.qm@web84208.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Somewhere along the line there was a bill in congress that fixed his issue.
I don't remember this problem exactly but heard something about a
congressional act fixing his problem.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of mark overfill
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 11:39 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain born
> about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship was passed?
>
> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
>
>
> Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> All races are born.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >
> >
> >
> > What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> > race this is
> > getting even the slightest notice.? Makes me embarrassed to be a member
> of
> > the white race.
> >
> > > From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> > > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > > Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >
> > > We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> > backlog of
> > > conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of dead
> air
> > on
> > > the Nixon tapes.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com
> [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > > Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > > > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > > > examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
> times.
> > > > But the point is, no matter how m any times the original document is
> > > > examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > > > patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't invited
> > > > to the examination), stubbornly? denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > > > that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > > > The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > > > designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > > > to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > > > would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > > > merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > > > suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > > > How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > > > uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > > > much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
> problems
> > > > factng the country?
> > > > Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > > > drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > > > simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > > > > later. My
> > > > > only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > > > > to shut
> > > > > all this stuff up.
> > > > >
> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >
> > > > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > > > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > > > >
> > > > >> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > > > >
> > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > > > >
> > > > >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > > > >
> > > > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > > > >
> > > > >> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to get
> an
> > > > >
> > > > >> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> > origin even
> > > > >
> > > > >> if you were not born there.
> > > > >
> > > > >> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > > > >
> > > > >> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
> believe
> > > > >
> > > > >> that is all that is required by law.
> > > > >
> > > > >>>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> > http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> HYCB_BackT
> oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 20:30:44 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:30:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <d6eeab3d0908041554m24da7cb7h4b198b39798becf0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I found the picture and documentation. But other people born in Hawaii at
that time have different looking birth certificates. Thus more questions.
It is becoming quite interesting. Could this be a Rove? A back story to kill
discussions of the health bill?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Jane Burch-Pesses
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth certificate
> on
> the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't bothered
> to look it up for myself.
> Jane B-P
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
> > and looked at the language of the law.
> > Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
> > citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
> > be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
> > he was eligible to run for president.
> > Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
> > then president with my own eyes to believe that it was retroactive. I
> > have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
> > against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
> > studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
> >
> > People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
> > how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
> > birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it for
> > themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
> > forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
> > they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
> > certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
> >
> >
> > Katie
> > PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
> > there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >
> >
> > On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
> >
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
> > > born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
> > > was passed?
> > >
> > > --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > > Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> > > McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> > > All races are born.
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > >> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> > >> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> > >> race this is
> > >> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
> > >> member of
> > >> the white race.
> > >>
> > >>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> > >>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > >>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> > >>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >>>
> > >>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> > >> backlog of
> > >>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
> > >>> dead air
> > >> on
> > >>> the Nixon tapes.
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> > >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> > >>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
> > >>>> times.
> > >>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
> > >>>> document is
> > >>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another fantasy to
> > >>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
> > >>>> invited
> > >>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any evidence
> > >>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> > >>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged font
> > >>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75 years were
> > >>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back in '47,
> > >>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They would
> > >>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> > >>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> > >>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> > >>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist fantasy? How
> > >>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
> > >>>> problems
> > >>>> factng the country?
> > >>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE of this
> > >>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been kept
> > >>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until much
> > >>>>> later. My
> > >>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real certificate
> > >>>>> to shut
> > >>>>> all this stuff up.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> > >>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
> > >>>>>> get an
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> > >> origin even
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> if you were not born there.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president either.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
> > >>>>>> believe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> GroveNet mailing list
> > >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > >>
> > >> _________________________________________________________________
> > >> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> > >> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> > > HYCB_BackT
> > > oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
> Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
> www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 20:30:43 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 20:30:43 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <E1D4F1D0-61A2-431F-B591-DB49D5649B41@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of them are
racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
Prove me wrong.

> -----Origin>
> Katie
> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >


From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 21:08:43 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:08:43 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <BD49F12C-138C-4665-B432-0186049D816B@verizon.net>

Oh no! One of my children born here in FG might not be a US citizen...

The first one has a birth certificate that is rather short and plain.  
And lo and behold, when my second one was born the state figured they  
would make more money if they fancied up the birth certificates  
because they could sell more copies for framing and parents could put  
them into baby albums that were all the rage. (And they doubled the  
price.)

But by the 'birther' logic, now I know merely having a different  
looking birth certificate than others born in the same state means  
that one of them is not a citizen. What am I to do?    Sigh. Oh never  
mind. The US state department accepts both of my kids because they  
know that at any point in time the document division of a state  
records keeper might just change their mind about what paper to use,  
they might get a new seal or they might change personnel and have  
different signatures so that a kid born one day might have a  
different looking birth certificate than the kid born just one day  
later.

Having variations in Obama's certificate versus someone else's  
doesn't raise any more questions about his citizenship than my two  
children having variations in theirs.


Katie



On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:

> I found the picture and documentation. But other people born in  
> Hawaii at
> that time have different looking birth certificates. Thus more  
> questions.
> It is becoming quite interesting. Could this be a Rove? A back  
> story to kill
> discussions of the health bill?
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Jane Burch-Pesses
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>
>> I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth  
>> certificate
>> on
>> the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't  
>> bothered
>> to look it up for myself.
>> Jane B-P
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt  
>> <allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
>>> and looked at the language of the law.
>>> Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
>>> citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
>>> be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
>>> he was eligible to run for president.
>>> Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
>>> then president with my own eyes to believe that it was  
>>> retroactive. I
>>> have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
>>> against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
>>> studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
>>>
>>> People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
>>> how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
>>> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it  
>>> for
>>> themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
>>> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
>>> they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
>>> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
>>>
>>>
>>> Katie
>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems  
>>> that
>>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
>>>
>>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
>>>> born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
>>>> was passed?
>>>>
>>>> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>>>> Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not true. Race isn't the issue.
>>>> McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
>>>> All races are born.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>>> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
>>>>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
>>>>> race this is
>>>>> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
>>>>> member of
>>>>> the white race.
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
>>>>>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>>>>>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
>>>>> backlog of
>>>>>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
>>>>>> dead air
>>>>> on
>>>>>> the Nixon tapes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
>>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
>>>>>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
>>>>>>> times.
>>>>>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
>>>>>>> document is
>>>>>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another  
>>>>>>> fantasy to
>>>>>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
>>>>>>> invited
>>>>>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any  
>>>>>>> evidence
>>>>>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
>>>>>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged  
>>>>>>> font
>>>>>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75  
>>>>>>> years were
>>>>>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back  
>>>>>>> in '47,
>>>>>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They  
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
>>>>>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
>>>>>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
>>>>>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist  
>>>>>>> fantasy? How
>>>>>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
>>>>>>> problems
>>>>>>> factng the country?
>>>>>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE  
>>>>>>> of this
>>>>>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been  
>>>>>>> kept
>>>>>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until  
>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>> later. My
>>>>>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real  
>>>>>>>> certificate
>>>>>>>> to shut
>>>>>>>> all this stuff up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
>>>>>>>>> get an
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
>>>>> origin even
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> if you were not born there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president  
>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
>>>>>>>>> believe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
>>>>> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
>>>> HYCB_BackT
>>>> oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
>> Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
>> www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From redhead854 at msn.com  Tue Aug  4 21:51:57 2009
From: redhead854 at msn.com (Holly Di)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 21:51:57 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <BD49F12C-138C-4665-B432-0186049D816B@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<BD49F12C-138C-4665-B432-0186049D816B@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <BAY108-W13A54F746890A67016B63F870D0@phx.gbl>


I  am not part of any movement, but I followed the first link about this.

I found an interesting article that described how you could apply for a 
birth certificate in Hawaii back in the 60's.  It described 3 ways, 
One way was a hospital or registered midwife would turn it in, and it would
look like the long form. 2nd way was the parent would bring the baby in for 
a home birth with evidence that the mom had been residing IN Hawaii.  The
3rd way was any person in the family "or had knowledge" of a birth could 
report a birth, and that person would describe where the child was born and
reported address.

Apparently all 3 of these ways would get you the short form birth certificate
that Obama produced.  But If the long form was produced, it would have the 
hospital name on it as well as doctors signatures as Obama has claimed.  If
the birth was reported any other way the long form would indicate that.  

The premise for the debate is that if Obama has nothing to hide about his 
long form birth certificate, why don't her release that one and be done with 
this debate. The Birther movement thinks that his long form would show that 
grandma, or someone else reported the birth, because it happened out of the 
country.  

Also...... enlighten me if I am wrong, but unless you renounce your US Citizenship
while you are in Kenya, or anywhere in the world and give birth isnt your baby a 
Natural born US citizen?  

Holly 






> From: allnutt at verizon.net
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 21:08:43 -0700
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
> Oh no! One of my children born here in FG might not be a US citizen...
> 
> The first one has a birth certificate that is rather short and plain.  
> And lo and behold, when my second one was born the state figured they  
> would make more money if they fancied up the birth certificates  
> because they could sell more copies for framing and parents could put  
> them into baby albums that were all the rage. (And they doubled the  
> price.)
> 
> But by the 'birther' logic, now I know merely having a different  
> looking birth certificate than others born in the same state means  
> that one of them is not a citizen. What am I to do?    Sigh. Oh never  
> mind. The US state department accepts both of my kids because they  
> know that at any point in time the document division of a state  
> records keeper might just change their mind about what paper to use,  
> they might get a new seal or they might change personnel and have  
> different signatures so that a kid born one day might have a  
> different looking birth certificate than the kid born just one day  
> later.
> 
> Having variations in Obama's certificate versus someone else's  
> doesn't raise any more questions about his citizenship than my two  
> children having variations in theirs.
> 
> 
> Katie
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > I found the picture and documentation. But other people born in  
> > Hawaii at
> > that time have different looking birth certificates. Thus more  
> > questions.
> > It is becoming quite interesting. Could this be a Rove? A back  
> > story to kill
> > discussions of the health bill?
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Jane Burch-Pesses
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 3:54 PM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>
> >>
> >> I recently read in Time magazine that Obama had put his birth  
> >> certificate
> >> on
> >> the web for anyone to see because of the ongoing flap.  I haven't  
> >> bothered
> >> to look it up for myself.
> >> Jane B-P
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Katie Allnutt  
> >> <allnutt at verizon.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes that is true. But reasonable people have listened to the details
> >>> and looked at the language of the law.
> >>> Even though at the time McCain was born he was not a natural born
> >>> citizen of the US, a law was written the next year so that it would
> >>> be retroactive for several years so he was covered by it and in 2008
> >>> he was eligible to run for president.
> >>> Now, I did not have to actually see the original law, signed by the
> >>> then president with my own eyes to believe that it was  
> >>> retroactive. I
> >>> have some faith in the elected officials and the democrats running
> >>> against McCain at the time to know that it has been investigated and
> >>> studied to the point that it is useless to worry about it.
> >>>
> >>> People who have an issue about Obama being born in Hawaii are some
> >>> how not satisfied that many many republicans have looked at Obama's
> >>> birth certificate and found it to be genuine. They want to see it  
> >>> for
> >>> themselves I guess. How they think they would be qualified to know a
> >>> forgery from a true Hawaiian birth certificate is not obvious. But
> >>> they seem to be able to merely hear about a supposed Kenyan birth
> >>> certificate and know that the Kenyan one is real, no proof needed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Katie
> >>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems  
> >>> that
> >>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:39 AM, mark oberzil wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but since you mention it, wasn't McCain
> >>>> born about a year before the law that guaranteed his citizenship
> >>>> was passed?
> >>>>
> >>>> --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> >>>> Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:54 PM
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Not true. Race isn't the issue.
> >>>> McCain was put in to the same issue as he was born in Panama.
> >>>> All races are born.
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>>> Behalf Of Glenn Berkheimer
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:31 AM
> >>>>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What a STUPID waist of time and YES, it is only because of his
> >>>>> race this is
> >>>>> getting even the slightest notice.  Makes me embarrassed to be a
> >>>>> member of
> >>>>> the white race.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net
> >>>>>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> >>>>>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:53:59 -0700
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We still haven't cleared up the 2000 election. We are getting a
> >>>>> backlog of
> >>>>>> conspiracies. Oh, and a guy is reconstructing the 16 minutes of
> >>>>>> dead air
> >>>>> on
> >>>>>> the Nixon tapes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
> >>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Last I heard, his birth hospital had already allowed experts to
> >>>>>>> examine the original document. Twice. Or three times. Or seven
> >>>>>>> times.
> >>>>>>> But the point is, no matter how m any times the original
> >>>>>>> document is
> >>>>>>> examined, some monomaniac will always dredge up another  
> >>>>>>> fantasy to
> >>>>>>> patch around the evidence, or (on the grounds that HE wasn't
> >>>>>>> invited
> >>>>>>> to the examination), stubbornly  denounce as "faked" any  
> >>>>>>> evidence
> >>>>>>> that contradicts his pet obsession.
> >>>>>>> The font had not been invented? Highly doubtful. If some aged  
> >>>>>>> font
> >>>>>>> designer who worked for the Sigafoos Type Foundry for 75  
> >>>>>>> years were
> >>>>>>> to testify that he had "invented" the font in question back  
> >>>>>>> in '47,
> >>>>>>> would that convince the "birthers?" Not by a snootful. They  
> >>>>>>> would
> >>>>>>> merely scramble around until they "discovered" another "point of
> >>>>>>> suspicion" (or were handed one by the RNC's "stink tanks."
> >>>>>>> How many thousands of man-hours, hundreds of planted spams and
> >>>>>>> uncountable blathering has been devoted to this racist  
> >>>>>>> fantasy? How
> >>>>>>> much time has been wasted from the consideration of the REAL
> >>>>>>> problems
> >>>>>>> factng the country?
> >>>>>>> Now, if Obama had been white (rather than half-white), NONE  
> >>>>>>> of this
> >>>>>>> drivel would have been cooked up in the first place, or been  
> >>>>>>> kept
> >>>>>>> simmering with such obsessive devotion.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:34 PM, Steven wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think I heard that the font in this was not created until  
> >>>>>>>> much
> >>>>>>>> later. My
> >>>>>>>> only quip was that kind of stuff didn't stop Dan Rather.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I wonder what is wrong with Obama putting out his real  
> >>>>>>>> certificate
> >>>>>>>> to shut
> >>>>>>>> all this stuff up.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Behalf Of Martha Khoury
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 5:41 PM
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Whether this document is "authentic" is irrelevant.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> From personal experience, I know it is not very difficult to
> >>>>>>>>> get an
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> authentic birth certificate from your father's country of
> >>>>> origin even
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> if you were not born there.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Of course, no one in my family is running for president  
> >>>>>>>>> either.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I assume Obama has an authentic US birth certificate and I
> >>>>>>>>> believe
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> that is all that is required by law.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>>>> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> >>>>> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
> >>>> HYCB_BackT
> >>>> oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
> >> Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
> >> www.phoenix-acupuncture.net
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 22:03:53 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:03:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <207F321E-267C-445E-8B25-9595EC5A5707@verizon.net>

Why are they making up birth certificates for an African country?

Why not Mexico or Canada?  At least they are easy traveling distance  
for a 9 month pregnant college student, of modest means.  Especially  
since the father was in school in Hawaii on a scholarship.

And there is a certain logical absurdity to the whole thing, why  
would a man who had not informed his new wife of the existence of an  
existing wife in Kenya, bring the new one on a rush visit to Africa?   
No, it makes more sense that they went to Seattle to hide her  
pregnancy and then to Vancouver BC for the birth.  Start looking for  
a Canadian birth certificate.

OH!!!  Wait!  Halle Selassie issued an edict that all Africans had to  
return to the city of their birth for a census, and B. H. Obama and  
his wife, who was with child, traveled to Kenya.  And while there the  
time for the birth arrived.  How silly of me to forget.

OMG, that means... he is the anointed one!  It is the second coming,  
and only a decade late.

Get a grip.  Hawaii registered the birth because the birth paperwork  
was turned in Hawaii.  And it was passed to the newspapers.  All of  
this in less time than a DC-6 could carry air mail from Kenya to Hawaii.

Which hospital?   Maybe Obama as born in a taxi.  Maybe the poor  
college students didn't have medical insurance, so they had the birth  
without medical supervision, or with a mid wife.  BTW, Carter, was  
the first American President born in a hospital.  And Reagan wasn't  
born in NO hospital either, so maybe someone can prove that he wasn't  
a Canadian!  Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush were born in hospitals,  
and you can see where that got us.

David



On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:

> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of  
> them are racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> Prove me wrong.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 22:18:18 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:18:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <207F321E-267C-445E-8B25-9595EC5A5707@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Texas has been it's own country AND part of Mexico. Better check in to Bush.

You throw a bunch of what ifs David. Since the issue is one of
qualifications, shouldn't it be clear? Pull out the long form and be done
with it.

I go back to the Backroom idea. Smoke for the big debates this month.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:04 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> Why are they making up birth certificates for an African country?
>
> Why not Mexico or Canada?  At least they are easy traveling distance
> for a 9 month pregnant college student, of modest means.  Especially
> since the father was in school in Hawaii on a scholarship.
>
> And there is a certain logical absurdity to the whole thing, why
> would a man who had not informed his new wife of the existence of an
> existing wife in Kenya, bring the new one on a rush visit to Africa?
> No, it makes more sense that they went to Seattle to hide her
> pregnancy and then to Vancouver BC for the birth.  Start looking for
> a Canadian birth certificate.
>
> OH!!!  Wait!  Halle Selassie issued an edict that all Africans had to
> return to the city of their birth for a census, and B. H. Obama and
> his wife, who was with child, traveled to Kenya.  And while there the
> time for the birth arrived.  How silly of me to forget.
>
> OMG, that means... he is the anointed one!  It is the second coming,
> and only a decade late.
>
> Get a grip.  Hawaii registered the birth because the birth paperwork
> was turned in Hawaii.  And it was passed to the newspapers.  All of
> this in less time than a DC-6 could carry air mail from Kenya to Hawaii.
>
> Which hospital?   Maybe Obama as born in a taxi.  Maybe the poor
> college students didn't have medical insurance, so they had the birth
> without medical supervision, or with a mid wife.  BTW, Carter, was
> the first American President born in a hospital.  And Reagan wasn't
> born in NO hospital either, so maybe someone can prove that he wasn't
> a Canadian!  Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush were born in hospitals,
> and you can see where that got us.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
>
> > Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> > As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
> > them are racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> > Prove me wrong.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From waltw at teleport.com  Tue Aug  4 22:22:54 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:22:54 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <3678E841-8331-4985-B7C5-9EBEC953E618@teleport.com>

Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a little  
too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"  
spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist  
denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.  
etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so  
enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--  
could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And  
some members of the Base can be very base indeed.

On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:

> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of  
> them are
> racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> Prove me wrong.
>
>> -----Origin>
>> Katie
>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 22:31:06 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:31:06 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-W13A54F746890A67016B63F870D0@phx.gbl>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEOIMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<BD49F12C-138C-4665-B432-0186049D816B@verizon.net>
	<BAY108-W13A54F746890A67016B63F870D0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <B1C5886D-AB53-4FAF-AD07-5E660335A729@verizon.net>


On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:51 PM, Holly Di wrote:

>
> I  am not part of any movement, but I followed the first link about  
> this.
>
nice to know:
> I found an interesting article that described how you could apply  
> for a birth certificate in Hawaii back in the 60's.  It described 3  
> ways,  One way was a hospital or registered midwife would turn it  
> in, and it would look like the long form. 2nd way was the parent  
> would bring the baby in for a home birth with evidence that the mom  
> had been residing IN Hawaii.  The 3rd way was any person in the  
> family "or had knowledge" of a birth could report a birth, and that  
> person would describe where the child was born and reported address.

> ...

> Also...... enlighten me if I am wrong, but unless you renounce your  
> US Citizenship while you are in Kenya, or anywhere in the world and  
> give birth isnt your baby a  Natural born US citizen?
>
> Holly

According to one source:
All persons born in the United States are citizens of the U.S. (with  
the minor exception of certain children of diplomatic personnel).  
This is perhaps the only simple rule of U.S. citizenship.

Persons born abroad before May 24, 1934, to a U.S. citizen father who  
had resided in the U.S. at any point before the birth are considered  
U.S. citizens at birth. The status of the mother did not matter  
unless the child was born out of wedlock.

In 1940, Congress passed a law making illegitimate children born  
abroad to U.S. citizen women citizens if the mother had resided in  
the U.S. However, under this law, if the child was legitimated by the  
foreign national father before his or her eighteenth birthday, the  
child would not be considered a citizen. The U.S. citizen parent must  
have resided in the U.S. prior to the birth. This residence could  
have been in the U.S. itself, or in certain U.S. territories.

The rules changed for people born between May 24, 1934, and January  
13, 1941. In 1934, Congress passed a law allowing U.S. citizen  
parents, regardless of their gender, to pass citizenship to their  
children born abroad. If both parents were citizens, only one was  
required to have resided in the U.S., and as with the previous law,  
there was no required length of time that the parent must have  
resided in the U.S. Illegitimate children born aboard between 1934  
and 1941 became citizens under the general provision.

The rules changed again for people born between January 14, 1941, and  
December 23, 1952. When one parent was a citizen and the other a  
foreign national, the rules changed substantially. To pass on  
citizenship, the citizen parent must have resided in the U.S. for at  
least 10 years before the birth of the child, and at least five of  
those years had to be after the parent turned 16. Children born out  
of wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother who met the residence  
requirements were automatically citizens. For a child born out of  
wedlock to a U.S. citizen father, to obtain U.S. citizenship the  
child must have been legitimated before the age of 21.

The rules changed again for people born between December 23, 1952,  
and November 13, 1986. When one parent was a U.S. citizen and the  
other a foreign national, the U.S. citizen parent must have resided  
in the U.S. for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child,  
with five of the years after the age of 14. Children born out of  
wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother were U.S. citizens if the mother was  
a resident in the U.S. for a period of one year prior to the birth of  
the child. Children born out of wedlock to a U.S. citizen father  
acquired U.S. citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.

For those born on or after November 14, 1986, children born to one  
citizen parent and one foreign national obtain citizenship at birth  
if the citizen parent resided in the U.S. for five years before the  
birth, with two of those years after the age of 14. Children born out  
of wedlock to a U.S. citizen mother will be U.S. citizens if the  
mother resided in the U.S. for one year prior to the birth of the  
child. Children born out of wedlock to a U.S. citizen father will  
acquire U.S. citizenship if the following conditions are met: There  
is an established blood relationship between the father and the  
child. The father was a U.S. citizen at the time of the birth. The  
father has agreed to financially support the child until he or she is  
18. Before the child is 18 he or she is legitimated, or the father  
acknowledges paternity in a document signed under oath. While these  
are general rules, Congress has continually amended and revised many  
laws relating to citizenship, particularly those dealing with the  
requirements for retention of citizenship. If a person believes that  
he or she has a claim to U.S. citizenship, the person should consult  
with an attorney for a full examination of that possibility.





From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug  4 22:42:07 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:42:07 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <5AB5BF2A-3EF6-414E-9745-121C60D28A0C@verizon.net>


On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:18 PM, Steven wrote:

> Texas has been it's own country AND part of Mexico. Better check in  
> to Bush.
>
> You throw a bunch of what ifs David. Since the issue is one of  
> qualifications, shouldn't it be clear? Pull out the long form and  
> be done with it.
>
> I go back to the Backroom idea. Smoke for the big debates this month.

Texas?  Why?  Lyndon Johnson and G W Bush both came from there.  What  
is the value of that?  Bush was the CinC who dodged the draft by  
getting a cut to the head of the Texas ANG, couldn't produce his  
fitness reports from when he was dismissed from flying status, and  
appeared to be AWOL prior to his discharge.  No one could find the  
paperwork for his cocaine bust, either.  But, since he was rich and  
white, none of that mattered to the birther crowd.

As Holly has indicated, there may not be a long form.  The birth may  
not have been doctor assisted.  Poor people have been having home  
births for years.

Carl Rove and back room smoke?  I can believe that.

David


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug  4 22:58:08 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:58:08 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <3678E841-8331-4985-B7C5-9EBEC953E618@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPAMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Cool off. That is just bigotry on your part.

Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a bunch of bigots is
out there too.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a little
> too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"
> spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist
> denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
> etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so
> enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
> could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
> The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And
> some members of the Base can be very base indeed.
>
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
>
> > Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> > As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
> > them are
> > racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> > Prove me wrong.
> >
> >> -----Origin>
> >> Katie
> >> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems that
> >> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From redhead854 at msn.com  Tue Aug  4 23:22:11 2009
From: redhead854 at msn.com (Holly Di)
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 23:22:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <5AB5BF2A-3EF6-414E-9745-121C60D28A0C@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<5AB5BF2A-3EF6-414E-9745-121C60D28A0C@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <BAY108-W25C3A1C4A12582D680262A870D0@phx.gbl>


I am sorry, I didn't mean to imply that a long form wasn't available, only that
if he showed the long form, it would indicate which way and by who the 
birth was reported.

He claimed he was born in the hospital.  If the long form would  indicate that.. 
The long form would show in all cases how the birth was reported.  For some reason
only known to him (because the state can only release birth documents to authorized
people")  He has chosen to only produce the short form.

I was born at home in Oregon in 65, I have a long form birth certificate that we got 
when I was about 13 on shiny paper with a seal and the signature from the state.  
My husband was born in a Hospital in Portland 2 years earlier when we got a copy of 
his last year it came as a short form,  on fancy paper with current type font.

I don't like it when things don't make sense.  I also am slightly suspicious,  It is so 
easy to think that there is NO reason why he shouldn't ask the Vital records dept of Hawaii 
to produce the long form birth certificate if its all in order.  So my suspicious nature
says, the long form probably doesn't support his claim to have been born in an Hawaiian 
hospital as he has claimed.

I can tell you if My child ran off with a foreigner no matter what country he was from
I would do my best within the law to make sure the baby was a citizen, entitled to all 
the benefits that US citizens are entitled too.

Will he ever show the long form, probably not.  Will the Birther movment ever prove
he was born in Kenya, probably not.  Mr Obama has made a place in history, the powers 
that be will never let the evidence surface that would prove he wasnt eligable to be 
the president.  It would be like, someone joked about,  Florida recounted the 2000 vote 
last month, and instead of Bush, it was Gore that won, what would we do?








> From: jo.david at verizon.net
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 22:42:07 -0700
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
> 
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:18 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > Texas has been it's own country AND part of Mexico. Better check in  
> > to Bush.
> >
> > You throw a bunch of what ifs David. Since the issue is one of  
> > qualifications, shouldn't it be clear? Pull out the long form and  
> > be done with it.
> >
> > I go back to the Backroom idea. Smoke for the big debates this month.
> 
> Texas?  Why?  Lyndon Johnson and G W Bush both came from there.  What  
> is the value of that?  Bush was the CinC who dodged the draft by  
> getting a cut to the head of the Texas ANG, couldn't produce his  
> fitness reports from when he was dismissed from flying status, and  
> appeared to be AWOL prior to his discharge.  No one could find the  
> paperwork for his cocaine bust, either.  But, since he was rich and  
> white, none of that mattered to the birther crowd.
> 
> As Holly has indicated, there may not be a long form.  The birth may  
> not have been doctor assisted.  Poor people have been having home  
> births for years.
> 
> Carl Rove and back room smoke?  I can believe that.
> 
> David
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug  5 08:34:02 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 08:34:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPAMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPAMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <FE59220B-53C5-4633-97E7-5D809AD5CA68@teleport.com>

Does a PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be  
designed to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective  
campaign will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial  
backing and a deep understanding of the target audience's  
psychology-- and bigots generally do not understand their own  
psychology. They react to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood  
conditioning, not analytical thought, which makes them easy to  
manipulate--  and many people will believe that which is reassuring,  
flattering or profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many  
"birthers" eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far- 
fetched, suspect or easily disproved, is evidence of their own  
bigotry, not necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.

On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:

> Cool off. That is just bigotry on your part.
>
> Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a bunch of  
> bigots is
> out there too.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>
>> Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a little
>> too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"
>> spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist
>> denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
>> etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so
>> enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
>> could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
>> The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And
>> some members of the Base can be very base indeed.
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
>>> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
>>> them are
>>> racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
>>> Prove me wrong.
>>>
>>>> -----Origin>
>>>> Katie
>>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems  
>>>> that
>>>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug  5 09:01:42 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:01:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FE59220B-53C5-4633-97E7-5D809AD5CA68@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEPBMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

bigot (big?et) noun
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, 
race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 8:34 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
> 
> Does a PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be  
> designed to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective  
> campaign will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial  
> backing and a deep understanding of the target audience's  
> psychology-- and bigots generally do not understand their own  
> psychology. They react to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood  
> conditioning, not analytical thought, which makes them easy to  
> manipulate--  and many people will believe that which is reassuring,  
> flattering or profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many  
> "birthers" eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far- 
> fetched, suspect or easily disproved, is evidence of their own  
> bigotry, not necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.
> 
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > Cool off. That is just bigotry on your part.
> >
> > Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a bunch of  
> > bigots is
> > out there too.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>
> >>
> >> Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a little
> >> too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"
> >> spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist
> >> denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
> >> etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so
> >> enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
> >> could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
> >> The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And
> >> some members of the Base can be very base indeed.
> >>
> >> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> >>> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
> >>> them are
> >>> racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> >>> Prove me wrong.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Origin>
> >>>> Katie
> >>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems  
> >>>> that
> >>>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug  5 09:17:16 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:17:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FE59220B-53C5-4633-97E7-5D809AD5CA68@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEPCMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

http://nalert.blogspot.com/2009/07/white-folks-will-riot-pastor-manning.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 8:34 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> 
> 
> Does a PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be  
> designed to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective  
> campaign will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial  
> backing and a deep understanding of the target audience's  
> psychology-- and bigots generally do not understand their own  
> psychology. They react to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood  
> conditioning, not analytical thought, which makes them easy to  
> manipulate--  and many people will believe that which is reassuring,  
> flattering or profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many  
> "birthers" eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far- 
> fetched, suspect or easily disproved, is evidence of their own  
> bigotry, not necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.
> 
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > Cool off. That is just bigotry on your part.
> >
> > Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a bunch of  
> > bigots is
> > out there too.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
> >>
> >>
> >> Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a little
> >> too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"
> >> spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist
> >> denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
> >> etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so
> >> enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
> >> could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
> >> The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And
> >> some members of the Base can be very base indeed.
> >>
> >> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
> >>> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
> >>> them are
> >>> racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
> >>> Prove me wrong.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Origin>
> >>>> Katie
> >>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems  
> >>>> that
> >>>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug  5 09:57:15 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 09:57:15 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEPBMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEPBMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <0A2FC745-3EE2-4CD7-9EC0-9294F6583573@teleport.com>

Bingo, Steve!
Having no automatic, knee-jerk allegiance to any recognized,  
"official" religion, race  or politics, I guess that means I AM  
bigoted--  I'm bigoted  against bigots.
On Aug 5, 2009, at 9:01 AM, Steven wrote:

> bigot (big?et) noun
> One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion,
> race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 8:34 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>
>>
>> Does a PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be
>> designed to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective
>> campaign will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial
>> backing and a deep understanding of the target audience's
>> psychology-- and bigots generally do not understand their own
>> psychology. They react to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood
>> conditioning, not analytical thought, which makes them easy to
>> manipulate--  and many people will believe that which is reassuring,
>> flattering or profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many
>> "birthers" eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far-
>> fetched, suspect or easily disproved, is evidence of their own
>> bigotry, not necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Cool off. That is just bigotry on your part.
>>>
>>> Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a bunch of
>>> bigots is
>>> out there too.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course they don't "mention his race!" That would be just a  
>>>> little
>>>> too obvious. But the same people who keep sending me the "birther"
>>>> spams also are the same people sending me blatantly racist
>>>> denunciations of the Katrina survivors, illegal immigrants, etc.  
>>>> etc.
>>>> etc. ad nauseam. If race isn't a factor, then why are racists so
>>>> enamored of the whole "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
>>>> could it possibly be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
>>>> The entire campaign is artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base."  
>>>> And
>>>> some members of the Base can be very base indeed.
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30 PM, Steven wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just that no one questioning the birth brings up his race.
>>>>> As articles and videos pop up, there are reader comments. Some of
>>>>> them are
>>>>> racist. But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
>>>>> Prove me wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Origin>
>>>>>> Katie
>>>>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the issue? It seems
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> there is ample evidence to suggest it is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From Jamsm at aol.com  Wed Aug  5 12:57:41 2009
From: Jamsm at aol.com (Jamsm at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 15:57:41 EDT
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
Message-ID: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>

Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the so called progressive liberal 
 left represent today.  Also, look at all the name calling and  assumptions 
of people that has been occurring with just this boards  subject line 
recently!  Many more examples of the liberal bigotry can be  found in past posts 
or elsewhere on the web.
MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) than all  those 
conservatives!  LOL
 
>From what I am reading in these posts there are bigots that are making many 
 assumptions and imposing what they 'think' are the reasons for questioning 
 Obama's birth certificate.  Is his birth certificate - as presented  real? 
  I have no idea.  Is there reason to believe it to be  true? Yes.  Is 
there reason to question it? Yes.  There  are many  types of birth certificates 
created by different people - some are State  / government created others 
are created by hospitals and other 3rd party  companies.  Some of these birth 
certificates are legal documents;  others are not!  Has Obama been honest in 
his campaign and time  in office? I would say no; but others may differ 
with my opinion as that is what  it is - an opinion!  Do I trust politicians 
today - NO!  They all  tend to lie to us!  Is Obama making change for the 
better of our country -  again I would say, NO!  Is Obama keeping his campaign 
promises - again,  NO!  Of the data I  have seen, Obama has something to 
prove. Will he  or anyone prove it one way or the other, I doubt it.  Does it 
make a  difference today - No.   Many statements above are opinions, but that  
does not make me a racist, you may not agree with them but don't judge me  
and  call me names just because I don't agree with you!  You do  not know 
me!  With the few posts I have made on this board, you  have very little 
insight into my beliefs. 
 
The liberals have been using slanted 'statistics' [you can make statistics  
say anything you want - is just a matter of what data you wish to include 
and  how you pull the 'strings'] and have used the "If I say it often enough 
it  becomes a fact" tactic far too long.   They like to re-write history  
and claim things happened or didn't as it suits them.  When  they claim 
history went a certain way or the dead said this or that enough;  people will 
accept it as fact!
 
As one liberal I was talking to questioned me, "Why has 'liberal'  and  
'progressive' become dirty words?"  
It is because that group wants everyone to conform to their beliefs and  
life style and if you don't want to conform, first they try to argue with you, 
 when that fails they call you names or scream racism, then they  will try 
to pass laws to make you conform to what they want you to be. [ It  is 
interesting to be in the silent majority watching the extremists go at  each 
other.  I rarely voice my opinion publicly and come to my own  conclusions based 
on observations of what I see and hear. ]
An example:  The liberals will be the first to readily accept the New World 
Order  "for the better of society!"  I think of it as the "Star Trek"  
mentality.
 
 
I am old fashioned in many beliefs  and I do think for  myself. I disagree 
with many things the Republican party stands for.  I disagree with the hippy 
utopian movement/mentality which is now  called liberalism or progressive 
(some call themselves socialist) or  whatever new name they decide to rename 
themselves as they use other  words I do not want our country to be 
associated with.  The liberal  progressive socialists  also tend to be the most 
vocal and adamant about  changing our country in ways I disagree with!  Every 
year we slide  further in the direction of a socialist country to the disdain 
of the  silent many.
 

(Not intending that the poster of the post I replied to is a  liberal, I 
just feel the comment better reflects the liberals  actions for a long time. ) 
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 8/5/2009 11:35:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
waltw at teleport.com writes:

Does a  PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be  
designed  to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective  
campaign  will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial  
backing  and a deep understanding of the target audience's  
psychology-- and  bigots generally do not understand their own  
psychology. They react  to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood  
conditioning, not  analytical thought, which makes them easy to  
manipulate--  and  many people will believe that which is reassuring,  
flattering or  profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many  
"birthers"  eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far- 
fetched, suspect  or easily disproved, is evidence of their own  
bigotry, not  necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.

On Aug 4, 2009,  at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:

> Cool off. That is just bigotry on your  part.
>
> Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a  bunch of  
> bigots is
> out there  too.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:  grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>>  bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent:  Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests  list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . .  .
>>
>>
>> Of course they don't "mention his race!"  That would be just a little
>> too obvious. But the same people who  keep sending me the "birther"
>> spams also are the same people  sending me blatantly racist
>> denunciations of the Katrina  survivors, illegal immigrants, etc. etc.
>> etc. ad nauseam. If race  isn't a factor, then why are racists so
>> enamored of the whole  "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
>> could it possibly  be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
>> The entire campaign is  artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base." And
>> some members of the  Base can be very base indeed.
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30  PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Just that no one questioning the  birth brings up his race.
>>> As articles and videos pop up, there  are reader comments. Some of
>>> them are
>>> racist.  But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
>>> Prove me  wrong.
>>>
>>>> -----Origin>
>>>>  Katie
>>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the  issue? It seems  
>>>> that
>>>> there is  ample evidence to suggest it  is.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet  mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing  list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing  list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet  mailing  list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From edavie at verizon.net  Wed Aug  5 13:01:31 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:01:31 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
Message-ID: <8208CFC81F9C4C37A23C85726D6FE7AE@EDavie>

You, whoever you might be, have no idea what you 
are talking about!
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jamsm at aol.com
  To: grovenet at rdrop.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 12:57 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never 
give up . . . .


  Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the so 
called progressive liberal
   left represent today.  Also, look at all the 
name calling and  assumptions
  of people that has been occurring with just this 
boards  subject line
  recently!  Many more examples of the liberal 
bigotry can be  found in past posts
  or elsewhere on the web.
  MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) 
than all  those
  conservatives!  LOL


From phoenixacup at gmail.com  Wed Aug  5 13:25:22 2009
From: phoenixacup at gmail.com (Jane Burch-Pesses)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 13:25:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Wu & toxics on Saturday
Message-ID: <d6eeab3d0908051325s282c516fke6c672873b615c8@mail.gmail.com>

If you don't already have a commitment for Saturday afternoon, this should
be interesting!
Jane B-P

-- 
Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
www.phoenix-acupuncture.net

Representative Wu, who represents Oregon's 1st Congressional district, has
invited EWG and local environmental health experts to provide room-by-room
guidance on how to create an eco-healthy home.

*What:* Creating an Eco-Healthy Home and Family

*You'll learn:*

   - About the potential health impacts of the chemicals used in everyday
   products
   - Tips on how to reduce your child's exposure to dangerous substances
   - What Congressman Wu is doing to make children's products safer

*When:* Saturday, August 8, 2009 from 1 to 3 PM

*Where:* The Natural Capital Center at 721 NW 9 Avenue in downtown Portland,
OR (see a map<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Ie16OYW1mUCV3ocQ9HZxzFocegjgrCRh>
)

*RSVP:* Email Kelly Brooks in Representative Wu's office:
kelly.brooks at mail.house.gov

*Kids are very welcome!*

If you can't make it, check out our *Healthy Home
Tips<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Qs47%2FDVmcBhK5DKr%2FIfsq2ikVb3zkGiC>
* where you'll get our tips on creating an eco-healthy home.

Hope to see you there,

Lisa Frack
EWG Online Organizer (and Oregonian!)

From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug  5 18:18:55 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 18:18:55 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
References: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
Message-ID: <B4D472B8-568B-4094-B3C0-6D65A38449AF@teleport.com>

Hmmmm. Try substituting ""reactionary" for "liberal" in your comments  
below, and you will have a fairly accurate account of what many  
people--not merely "liberals--" are now saying about the more  
doctrinaire rightists now running the Republican Party into the ground.
How has "liberal" become a dirty word? I modestly submit that it has  
been carefully and deliberately "re-framed" in that fashion for more  
than 50 years, cf. George Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant." The  
original meaning of the word was "generous, sympathetic, tolerant."  
Over the years it has been carefully re-framed with such phrases as  
"tax-and-spend" "bleeding heart" "comsymp" (very popular during the  
1950s), and by now the continued campaign to subvert the word has  
progressed to accusations of terrorism, treason and eating babies  
(no, only kidding about that last one, but I expect that development  
any day now from Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheny, et al (especially Al).)
On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Jamsm at aol.com wrote:

> Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the so called progressive  
> liberal
>  left represent today.  Also, look at all the name calling and   
> assumptions
> of people that has been occurring with just this boards  subject line
> recently!  Many more examples of the liberal bigotry can be  found  
> in past posts
> or elsewhere on the web.
> MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) than all  those
> conservatives!  LOL
>
>> From what I am reading in these posts there are bigots that are  
>> making many
>  assumptions and imposing what they 'think' are the reasons for  
> questioning
>  Obama's birth certificate.  Is his birth certificate - as  
> presented  real?
>   I have no idea.  Is there reason to believe it to be  true? Yes.  Is
> there reason to question it? Yes.  There  are many  types of birth  
> certificates
> created by different people - some are State  / government created  
> others
> are created by hospitals and other 3rd party  companies.  Some of  
> these birth
> certificates are legal documents;  others are not!  Has Obama been  
> honest in
> his campaign and time  in office? I would say no; but others may  
> differ
> with my opinion as that is what  it is - an opinion!  Do I trust  
> politicians
> today - NO!  They all  tend to lie to us!  Is Obama making change  
> for the
> better of our country -  again I would say, NO!  Is Obama keeping  
> his campaign
> promises - again,  NO!  Of the data I  have seen, Obama has  
> something to
> prove. Will he  or anyone prove it one way or the other, I doubt  
> it.  Does it
> make a  difference today - No.   Many statements above are  
> opinions, but that
> does not make me a racist, you may not agree with them but don't  
> judge me
> and  call me names just because I don't agree with you!  You do   
> not know
> me!  With the few posts I have made on this board, you  have very  
> little
> insight into my beliefs.
>
> The liberals have been using slanted 'statistics' [you can make  
> statistics
> say anything you want - is just a matter of what data you wish to  
> include
> and  how you pull the 'strings'] and have used the "If I say it  
> often enough
> it  becomes a fact" tactic far too long.   They like to re-write  
> history
> and claim things happened or didn't as it suits them.  When  they  
> claim
> history went a certain way or the dead said this or that enough;   
> people will
> accept it as fact!
>
> As one liberal I was talking to questioned me, "Why has 'liberal'  and
> 'progressive' become dirty words?"
> It is because that group wants everyone to conform to their beliefs  
> and
> life style and if you don't want to conform, first they try to  
> argue with you,
>  when that fails they call you names or scream racism, then they   
> will try
> to pass laws to make you conform to what they want you to be. [ It  is
> interesting to be in the silent majority watching the extremists go  
> at  each
> other.  I rarely voice my opinion publicly and come to my own   
> conclusions based
> on observations of what I see and hear. ]
> An example:  The liberals will be the first to readily accept the  
> New World
> Order  "for the better of society!"  I think of it as the "Star Trek"
> mentality.
>
>
> I am old fashioned in many beliefs  and I do think for  myself. I  
> disagree
> with many things the Republican party stands for.  I disagree with  
> the hippy
> utopian movement/mentality which is now  called liberalism or  
> progressive
> (some call themselves socialist) or  whatever new name they decide  
> to rename
> themselves as they use other  words I do not want our country to be
> associated with.  The liberal  progressive socialists  also tend to  
> be the most
> vocal and adamant about  changing our country in ways I disagree  
> with!  Every
> year we slide  further in the direction of a socialist country to  
> the disdain
> of the  silent many.
>
>
> (Not intending that the poster of the post I replied to is a   
> liberal, I
> just feel the comment better reflects the liberals  actions for a  
> long time. )
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 8/5/2009 11:35:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> waltw at teleport.com writes:
>
> Does a  PR/dirty tricks campaign have to be created by bigots to be
> designed  to appeal to bigots? Not at all. In fact, a truly effective
> campaign  will require intelligence, much research, hefty financial
> backing  and a deep understanding of the target audience's
> psychology-- and  bigots generally do not understand their own
> psychology. They react  to emotion, ingrained prejudices and childhood
> conditioning, not  analytical thought, which makes them easy to
> manipulate--  and  many people will believe that which is reassuring,
> flattering or  profitable for them to believe. The fact that so many
> "birthers"  eagerly accept every spammed "proof," no matter how far-
> fetched, suspect  or easily disproved, is evidence of their own
> bigotry, not  necessarily that of the people who craft the campaign.
>
> On Aug 4, 2009,  at 10:58 PM, Steven wrote:
>
>> Cool off. That is just bigotry on your  part.
>>
>> Can't believe a backroom deal, but believing it is all a  bunch of
>> bigots is
>> out there  too.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From:  grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>  bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>> Sent:  Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:23 PM
>>> To: Forest Grove local interests  list
>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . .  .
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course they don't "mention his race!"  That would be just a  
>>> little
>>> too obvious. But the same people who  keep sending me the "birther"
>>> spams also are the same people  sending me blatantly racist
>>> denunciations of the Katrina  survivors, illegal immigrants, etc.  
>>> etc.
>>> etc. ad nauseam. If race  isn't a factor, then why are racists so
>>> enamored of the whole  "birther" melange of mendacity? Could it be--
>>> could it possibly  be-- because Obama is (gasp) BLACK?
>>> The entire campaign is  artfully crafted to appeal to the "Base."  
>>> And
>>> some members of the  Base can be very base indeed.
>>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 8:30  PM, Steven wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just that no one questioning the  birth brings up his race.
>>>> As articles and videos pop up, there  are reader comments. Some of
>>>> them are
>>>> racist.  But they are liberals trying to stir things up.
>>>> Prove me  wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Origin>
>>>>>  Katie
>>>>> PS to Steven. Can you prove that race is not the  issue? It seems
>>>>> that
>>>>> there is  ample evidence to suggest it  is.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet  mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing  list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing  list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet  mailing  list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From edavie at verizon.net  Wed Aug  5 21:08:14 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:08:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
References: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
	<B4D472B8-568B-4094-B3C0-6D65A38449AF@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <6D933ABB544A431F9C053A2A22B06971@EDavie>

This post has gotten way too long. Please delete a 
major portion when replying.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Walt Wentz
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 6:18 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never 
give up . . . .


  Hmmmm. Try substituting ""reactionary" for 
"liberal" in your comments
  below, and you will have a fairly accurate 
account of what many
  people--not merely "liberals--" are now saying 
about the more
  doctrinaire rightists now running the Republican 
Party into the ground.
  How has "liberal" become a dirty word? I 
modestly submit that it has
  been carefully and deliberately "re-framed" in 
that fashion for more
  than 50 years, cf. George Lakoff's "Don't Think 
of an Elephant." The
  original meaning of the word was "generous, 
sympathetic, tolerant."
  Over the years it has been carefully re-framed 
with such phrases as
  "tax-and-spend" "bleeding heart" "comsymp" (very 
popular during the
  1950s), and by now the continued campaign to 
subvert the word has
  progressed to accusations of terrorism, treason 
and eating babies
  (no, only kidding about that last one, but I 
expect that development
  any day now from Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheny, et 
al (especially Al).)
  On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Jamsm at aol.com 
wrote:

  > Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the 
so called progressive
  > liberal
  >  left represent today.  Also, look at all the 
name calling and
  > assumptions
  > of people that has been occurring with just 
this boards  subject line
  > recently!  Many more examples of the liberal 
bigotry can be  found
  > in past posts
  > or elsewhere on the web.
  > MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) 
than all  those
  > conservatives!  LOL
  > 

From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug  5 23:00:12 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:00:12 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-W25C3A1C4A12582D680262A870D0@phx.gbl>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEOPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<5AB5BF2A-3EF6-414E-9745-121C60D28A0C@verizon.net>
	<BAY108-W25C3A1C4A12582D680262A870D0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <E0259CDB-9138-4FD5-80C9-04EB4AD99FE3@verizon.net>

 From the information you posted about the distinction between long  
form and short form, there are situations where the short form is the  
only form.

We did not have universal health care or extensive public health  
programs in 1961.  Having a baby was a big expense.  And for those  
living in poverty, having a doctor assisted birth at a hospital may  
have been a luxury that they could not afford.  Especially if there  
are no complications that require the expense.   Or, there may be  
other reasons.  In the early 1970's, we had a neighbor couple, whose  
child had been born unassisted in the teen age mother's bedroom,  
because she did not want to disclose that she was unwed and  
pregnant.  Those sort of situations would lead to a short form birth  
certificate.

Of course, "living in poverty" might not be a source of pride to  
someone who wanted to improve their lot in life, or the lot of their  
child.  A mother might tell their child that they were born in a  
hospital.  Would you believe your mother?  I was told where I was  
born, and I believe it.  Even though I have never checked to see if  
it was true.

And I have never had a DNA test to determine paternity either,  
because like most people, I believe that my parents really are my  
parents.

David

On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:22 PM, Holly Di wrote:

>
> I am sorry, I didn't mean to imply that a long form wasn't  
> available, only that if he showed the long form, it would indicate  
> which way and by who the birth was reported.
> ...
>
>> ...
>> As Holly has indicated, there may not be a long form.  The birth  
>> may not have been doctor assisted.  Poor people have been having  
>> home births for years.

From jo.david at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 01:01:41 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 01:01:41 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
References: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
Message-ID: <58EF3114-BF4E-4900-A999-9A8ED7913E28@verizon.net>

Jamsm,

While I may disagree with some of your perspective, I can accept that  
you have put thought into your opinions.  And I realize that I only  
know what you express, and even that comes through the filters of my  
experience.

I was alive and awake in the 1960's.  Conservative Southern Democrats  
were lynching those people who disagreed with them.  Liberal Northern  
Democrats were traveling to the American South to stand beside  
natural born Americans who suffered under segregation.  What we have  
on Grovenet isn't bigotry.  Unless someone here wants to go back to  
the Jim Crow system.

President Barack Obama is a Chicago politician, and a pretty good  
one.  He is intelligent and smart.  Someone with those traits should  
do a better job of international politics than our "good ol' boy"  
from Texas.  Will he deliver on the campaign rhetoric?  That depends  
upon Congress, doesn't it?  Unlike some people, I think that the  
Constitutional division of powers is still the law of the land, and  
that the President should execute the laws passed by Congress, not  
invent his own or change the law through signing statements.

Statistics?
The world's population was 2.5 Billion in 1950.
Today,  China and India alone have 2.4 Billion.  The rest of the  
world has another 4.3 Billion.  There are consequences associated  
with the current demographics of the world's population, and they are  
not that good.

In 1942-1945 the US built two atomic bombs, and we used them to end  
our war with Japan.  In 1950 we went to war with North Korea, and we  
are still officially at war.  In 2002-2008 North Korea built six to  
eight atomic bombs.

Today, CO2 levels are the highest that they have been during the  
history of mammals on the earth, and it continues to rise.

The US started this year with $13.6 of External (International) debt,  
which is double the level in 2003.   http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/ 
debta309.html

America spends 15% of our Gross Domestic Product on health care.   
Socialist systems like France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden  
and UK spend 8.3% - 11.6%.
America has a life expectancy of 78.11 years.  Socialist systems like  
France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden and UK have 79 - 81.23  
years.
America has an infant mortality rate of 6.5/1000.  Socialist systems  
like France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden and UK have  
2.8/1000 - 4.9/1000.

The body of Marine pilot, Capt. Michael Scott Speicher was  
discovered, buried were he had died 18 years ago.  No chemical  
weapons have been located.  No biological weapons have been located.   
No nuclear weapons have been located.  The High Explosives stolen  
after they were left unguarded have never been recovered.

So, what should we do about those statistics?

David


On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Jamsm at aol.com wrote:

> Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the so called progressive  
> liberal
>  left represent today.  Also, look at all the name calling and   
> assumptions
> of people that has been occurring with just this boards  subject line
> recently!  Many more examples of the liberal bigotry can be  found  
> in past posts
> or elsewhere on the web.
> MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) than all  those
> conservatives!  LOL
>
>> From what I am reading in these posts there are bigots that are  
>> making many
>  assumptions and imposing what they 'think' are the reasons for  
> questioning
>  Obama's birth certificate.  Is his birth certificate - as  
> presented  real?
>   I have no idea.  Is there reason to believe it to be  true? Yes.  Is
> there reason to question it? Yes.  There  are many  types of birth  
> certificates
> created by different people - some are State  / government created  
> others
> are created by hospitals and other 3rd party  companies.  Some of  
> these birth
> certificates are legal documents;  others are not!  Has Obama been  
> honest in
> his campaign and time  in office? I would say no; but others may  
> differ
> with my opinion as that is what  it is - an opinion!  Do I trust  
> politicians
> today - NO!  They all  tend to lie to us!  Is Obama making change  
> for the
> better of our country -  again I would say, NO!  Is Obama keeping  
> his campaign
> promises - again,  NO!  Of the data I  have seen, Obama has  
> something to
> prove. Will he  or anyone prove it one way or the other, I doubt  
> it.  Does it
> make a  difference today - No.   Many statements above are  
> opinions, but that
> does not make me a racist, you may not agree with them but don't  
> judge me
> and  call me names just because I don't agree with you!  You do   
> not know
> me!  With the few posts I have made on this board, you  have very  
> little
> insight into my beliefs.
>
> The liberals have been using slanted 'statistics' [you can make  
> statistics
> say anything you want - is just a matter of what data you wish to  
> include
> and  how you pull the 'strings'] and have used the "If I say it  
> often enough
> it  becomes a fact" tactic far too long.   They like to re-write  
> history
> and claim things happened or didn't as it suits them.  When  they  
> claim
> history went a certain way or the dead said this or that enough;   
> people will
> accept it as fact!
>
> As one liberal I was talking to questioned me, "Why has 'liberal'  and
> 'progressive' become dirty words?"
> It is because that group wants everyone to conform to their beliefs  
> and
> life style and if you don't want to conform, first they try to  
> argue with you,
>  when that fails they call you names or scream racism, then they   
> will try
> to pass laws to make you conform to what they want you to be. [ It  is
> interesting to be in the silent majority watching the extremists go  
> at  each
> other.  I rarely voice my opinion publicly and come to my own   
> conclusions based
> on observations of what I see and hear. ]
> An example:  The liberals will be the first to readily accept the  
> New World
> Order  "for the better of society!"  I think of it as the "Star Trek"
> mentality.
>
>
> I am old fashioned in many beliefs  and I do think for  myself. I  
> disagree
> with many things the Republican party stands for.  I disagree with  
> the hippy
> utopian movement/mentality which is now  called liberalism or  
> progressive
> (some call themselves socialist) or  whatever new name they decide  
> to rename
> themselves as they use other  words I do not want our country to be
> associated with.  The liberal  progressive socialists  also tend to  
> be the most
> vocal and adamant about  changing our country in ways I disagree  
> with!  Every
> year we slide  further in the direction of a socialist country to  
> the disdain
> of the  silent many.
>
>
> (Not intending that the poster of the post I replied to is a   
> liberal, I
> just feel the comment better reflects the liberals  actions for a  
> long time. )

From waltw at teleport.com  Thu Aug  6 07:11:53 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 07:11:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <58EF3114-BF4E-4900-A999-9A8ED7913E28@verizon.net>
References: <c81.56e31a51.37ab3e35@aol.com>
	<58EF3114-BF4E-4900-A999-9A8ED7913E28@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <3A391F8E-6C2A-4591-B452-707B95BA29AD@teleport.com>

Well put, David.
Excellent evidence that the world is far less simple and the  
"answers" far less clear-cut than we would like to believe.
WW

On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:01 AM, David Morelli wrote:

> Jamsm,
>
> While I may disagree with some of your perspective, I can accept that
> you have put thought into your opinions.  And I realize that I only
> know what you express, and even that comes through the filters of my
> experience.
>
> I was alive and awake in the 1960's.  Conservative Southern Democrats
> were lynching those people who disagreed with them.  Liberal Northern
> Democrats were traveling to the American South to stand beside
> natural born Americans who suffered under segregation.  What we have
> on Grovenet isn't bigotry.  Unless someone here wants to go back to
> the Jim Crow system.
>
> President Barack Obama is a Chicago politician, and a pretty good
> one.  He is intelligent and smart.  Someone with those traits should
> do a better job of international politics than our "good ol' boy"
> from Texas.  Will he deliver on the campaign rhetoric?  That depends
> upon Congress, doesn't it?  Unlike some people, I think that the
> Constitutional division of powers is still the law of the land, and
> that the President should execute the laws passed by Congress, not
> invent his own or change the law through signing statements.
>
> Statistics?
> The world's population was 2.5 Billion in 1950.
> Today,  China and India alone have 2.4 Billion.  The rest of the
> world has another 4.3 Billion.  There are consequences associated
> with the current demographics of the world's population, and they are
> not that good.
>
> In 1942-1945 the US built two atomic bombs, and we used them to end
> our war with Japan.  In 1950 we went to war with North Korea, and we
> are still officially at war.  In 2002-2008 North Korea built six to
> eight atomic bombs.
>
> Today, CO2 levels are the highest that they have been during the
> history of mammals on the earth, and it continues to rise.
>
> The US started this year with $13.6 of External (International) debt,
> which is double the level in 2003.   http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/
> debta309.html
>
> America spends 15% of our Gross Domestic Product on health care.
> Socialist systems like France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden
> and UK spend 8.3% - 11.6%.
> America has a life expectancy of 78.11 years.  Socialist systems like
> France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden and UK have 79 - 81.23
> years.
> America has an infant mortality rate of 6.5/1000.  Socialist systems
> like France, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden and UK have
> 2.8/1000 - 4.9/1000.
>
> The body of Marine pilot, Capt. Michael Scott Speicher was
> discovered, buried were he had died 18 years ago.  No chemical
> weapons have been located.  No biological weapons have been located.
> No nuclear weapons have been located.  The High Explosives stolen
> after they were left unguarded have never been recovered.
>
> So, what should we do about those statistics?
>
> David
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:57 PM, Jamsm at aol.com wrote:
>
>> Bigot TRUELY reflects in all matters that the so called progressive
>> liberal
>>  left represent today.  Also, look at all the name calling and
>> assumptions
>> of people that has been occurring with just this boards  subject line
>> recently!  Many more examples of the liberal bigotry can be  found
>> in past posts
>> or elsewhere on the web.
>> MY!  Aren't we (liberals) smarter (and better) than all  those
>> conservatives!  LOL
>>
>>> From what I am reading in these posts there are bigots that are
>>> making many
>>  assumptions and imposing what they 'think' are the reasons for
>> questioning
>>  Obama's birth certificate.  Is his birth certificate - as
>> presented  real?
>>   I have no idea.  Is there reason to believe it to be  true?  
>> Yes.  Is
>> there reason to question it? Yes.  There  are many  types of birth
>> certificates
>> created by different people - some are State  / government created
>> others
>> are created by hospitals and other 3rd party  companies.  Some of
>> these birth
>> certificates are legal documents;  others are not!  Has Obama been
>> honest in
>> his campaign and time  in office? I would say no; but others may
>> differ
>> with my opinion as that is what  it is - an opinion!  Do I trust
>> politicians
>> today - NO!  They all  tend to lie to us!  Is Obama making change
>> for the
>> better of our country -  again I would say, NO!  Is Obama keeping
>> his campaign
>> promises - again,  NO!  Of the data I  have seen, Obama has
>> something to
>> prove. Will he  or anyone prove it one way or the other, I doubt
>> it.  Does it
>> make a  difference today - No.   Many statements above are
>> opinions, but that
>> does not make me a racist, you may not agree with them but don't
>> judge me
>> and  call me names just because I don't agree with you!  You do
>> not know
>> me!  With the few posts I have made on this board, you  have very
>> little
>> insight into my beliefs.
>>
>> The liberals have been using slanted 'statistics' [you can make
>> statistics
>> say anything you want - is just a matter of what data you wish to
>> include
>> and  how you pull the 'strings'] and have used the "If I say it
>> often enough
>> it  becomes a fact" tactic far too long.   They like to re-write
>> history
>> and claim things happened or didn't as it suits them.  When  they
>> claim
>> history went a certain way or the dead said this or that enough;
>> people will
>> accept it as fact!
>>
>> As one liberal I was talking to questioned me, "Why has 'liberal'   
>> and
>> 'progressive' become dirty words?"
>> It is because that group wants everyone to conform to their beliefs
>> and
>> life style and if you don't want to conform, first they try to
>> argue with you,
>>  when that fails they call you names or scream racism, then they
>> will try
>> to pass laws to make you conform to what they want you to be.  
>> [ It  is
>> interesting to be in the silent majority watching the extremists go
>> at  each
>> other.  I rarely voice my opinion publicly and come to my own
>> conclusions based
>> on observations of what I see and hear. ]
>> An example:  The liberals will be the first to readily accept the
>> New World
>> Order  "for the better of society!"  I think of it as the "Star Trek"
>> mentality.
>>
>>
>> I am old fashioned in many beliefs  and I do think for  myself. I
>> disagree
>> with many things the Republican party stands for.  I disagree with
>> the hippy
>> utopian movement/mentality which is now  called liberalism or
>> progressive
>> (some call themselves socialist) or  whatever new name they decide
>> to rename
>> themselves as they use other  words I do not want our country to be
>> associated with.  The liberal  progressive socialists  also tend to
>> be the most
>> vocal and adamant about  changing our country in ways I disagree
>> with!  Every
>> year we slide  further in the direction of a socialist country to
>> the disdain
>> of the  silent many.
>>
>>
>> (Not intending that the poster of the post I replied to is a
>> liberal, I
>> just feel the comment better reflects the liberals  actions for a
>> long time. )
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug  6 08:09:15 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 08:09:15 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <3A391F8E-6C2A-4591-B452-707B95BA29AD@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEPHMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Much better than your hate filled editorial.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 7:12 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
> Well put, David.
> Excellent evidence that the world is far less simple and the
> "answers" far less clear-cut than we would like to believe.
> WW
>
>

Inasmuch as the "birther" movement was hatched in the station wagon of
MSNBC's favorite left-wing fantasist, Larry Johnson, maybe the mainstream
media can stop acting as if it's a creation of the Republican National
Committee.

Which party contains 99 percent of the people who believe (or believed):

 -- O.J. is innocent;

 -- Bush shirked his National Guard duty;

 -- Sarah Palin's infant child, Trig, was actually the child of her
daughter;

 -- Justice Antonin Scalia threw the 2000 election to Bush so that his son
could get a legal job with the Labor Department;

 -- The spectacularly guilty Mumia Abu-Jamal was framed;

 -- The Diebold Corp. secretly stole thousands of Kerry votes in 2004;

 -- Duke lacrosse players gang-raped a stripper;

 -- Bill Clinton did not have sex with "that woman";

 -- Heterosexuals are just as likely to contract AIDS as gays;

 -- John Edwards didn't have an affair with Rielle Hunter;

 -- John Edwards' campaign aide Andrew Young is the father of Rielle
Hunter's child.

And as has been recently noted, a 2007 Rasmussen poll showed that 35 percent
of Democrats believe Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance, while 26
percent aren't sure ...

Holy mackerel.

Another favorite MSNBC guest, Janeane Garofalo, believes Enron's Ken Lay
faked his own death. It's weird that Keith Olbermann didn't ask her about
that when she was on his show a couple of months ago, given his sudden
interest in stamping out conspiracy theories.

Also trying to revive his failing TV show, MSNBC'S Chris Matthews has been
denouncing the birthers on "Hardball" nightly and demanding that every
elected Republican who appears on his show do the same.

How many times has Matthews forced Democratic officeholders to denounce Al
Sharpton for the Tawana Brawley hoax? Or for that matter, how many times has
he forced Sharpton -- a frequent guest on his show -- to admit the case was
a fraud?

Sharpton has veto power over all Democratic presidential candidates. Even Al
Gore, a former vice president of the United States, was required to kiss
Sharpton's ring.

If there ever comes a time when Republican presidential candidates have to
get the blessing of the head of the birther movement to run, I'll say: I'm
wrong -- Republicans do have as many conspiracy nuts as the Democrats.

Not content with merely humoring their nuts, Democratic officeholders
promote conspiracy theories themselves.

In 2003, Democratic presidential candidate and future Democratic National
Committee Chairman Howard Dean approvingly cited the left-wing lunacy that
Saudi Arabia had warned Bush in advance about the 9/11 attacks. He promised
a caller to National Public Radio that, if elected, he would investigate.

In the fall of 2004, Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said
she believed Bush was holding Osama bin Laden and planned to release him
just before the election. (She later claimed she was joking -- a surprise to
all three witnesses who heard her say it.)

Sen. Barbara Boxer officially objected to the certification of Ohio's votes
in the 2004 election -- on the Senate floor -- and demanded an investigation
into the "Diebold stole Kerry votes" conspiracy theory.

And, of course, a Democratic House and Senate actually used official
government proceedings to investigate the original nut-job conspiracy
theory, the "October Surprise," maintaining that Reagan struck a secret deal
with the Iranians not to release the hostages until after the 1980 election.

Now, the only October surprise will come under ObamaCare: Order an MRI in
April and get it by ... October -- surprise!

Rosie O'Donnell -- who has headlined many a Democratic fundraiser -- is a
prominent 9/11 "truther." She believes the World Trade Center was blown up
with explosives, not taken down by terrorists in airplanes.

Most shockingly, the Democrats have a hand-in-glove relationship with
Michael Moore, crackpot documentarian, whose "Fahrenheit 9/11" is
chock-a-block with demented conspiracy theories, including:

 -- the 2000 election was stolen;

 -- the Bush family clandestinely spirited the bin Laden family out of the
U.S. after the 9/11 attacks; and

 -- Bush went to war in Afghanistan, not to avenge the 9/11 terrorist
attack, but to help the Unocal Corp. obtain a natural gas pipeline in
Afghanistan.

Terry McAuliffe, then chairman of the Democratic National Committee attended
the glittering Washington, D.C., premiere of "Fahrenheit 9/11" and emerged
endorsing Moore's wacko Unocal conspiracy theory. "I believe it after seeing
that," McAuliffe said.

Show me RNC Chairman Michael Steele saying "I believe the birthers" and I'll
give 10 percent of my book profits to Air America, raising their profits
to -- let's see ... about 10 percent of my book profits.

Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark proudly accepted Moore's
endorsement in 2004, and Moore was an honored guest at the 2004 Democratic
National Convention, sitting with former President Carter.

What is the likelihood that a birther will be sitting with former President
Bush at the 2012 Republican National Convention?

Other Democrats who attended Moore's movie screening included Sens. Tom
Daschle, Tom Harkin, Max Baucus, Ernest Hollings, Debbie Stabenow, Bill
Nelson, and representatives Charles Rangel and Jim McDermott.

Show me a half-dozen Republican senators attending a birther movie premiere,
and I'll pretend to believe that Olbermann went to the Ivy League Cornell.

Obama Birth Certificate Spotted In Bogus Moon Landing Footage
by  Ann Coulter

08/05/2009


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug  6 08:09:46 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 08:09:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <E0259CDB-9138-4FD5-80C9-04EB4AD99FE3@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEPHMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

You don't have to spin it so hard.
There were many people who wanted to have their kids at home. Barrack's mom
was a free spirit person who may well have opted for a simple birthing
experience.
If his mother lived in poverty, it was her choice. Her parents were not
without means.
Obama has come out with two different birth records so far. There was one
that was an old paper I remember from the election and now this one that is
a new copy dated in 2007. I assume they are both copies of the same record.
The mystery seems to revolve around the possibility that there is a
"complete" birth certificate that can not be released by the state, only by
the individual. If it does exist, then releasing it will make all the noise
look quite stupid. So I'd love to see it come out.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 11:00 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
>
>
>  From the information you posted about the distinction between long
> form and short form, there are situations where the short form is the
> only form.
>
> We did not have universal health care or extensive public health
> programs in 1961.  Having a baby was a big expense.  And for those
> living in poverty, having a doctor assisted birth at a hospital may
> have been a luxury that they could not afford.  Especially if there
> are no complications that require the expense.   Or, there may be
> other reasons.  In the early 1970's, we had a neighbor couple, whose
> child had been born unassisted in the teen age mother's bedroom,
> because she did not want to disclose that she was unwed and
> pregnant.  Those sort of situations would lead to a short form birth
> certificate.
>
> Of course, "living in poverty" might not be a source of pride to
> someone who wanted to improve their lot in life, or the lot of their
> child.  A mother might tell their child that they were born in a
> hospital.  Would you believe your mother?  I was told where I was
> born, and I believe it.  Even though I have never checked to see if
> it was true.
>
> And I have never had a DNA test to determine paternity either,
> because like most people, I believe that my parents really are my
> parents.
>
> David
>
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 11:22 PM, Holly Di wrote:
>
> >
> > I am sorry, I didn't mean to imply that a long form wasn't
> > available, only that if he showed the long form, it would indicate
> > which way and by who the birth was reported.
> > ...
> >
> >> ...
> >> As Holly has indicated, there may not be a long form.  The birth
> >> may not have been doctor assisted.  Poor people have been having
> >> home births for years.
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From allnutt at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 09:20:55 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 09:20:55 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Some people will never give up . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEPHMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEPHMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <7A02492E-D807-4C9C-9F18-95FA38BDDA4E@verizon.net>




On Aug 6, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Steven wrote:

> ......
> The mystery seems to revolve around the possibility that there is a
> "complete" birth certificate that can not be released by the state,  
> only by
> the individual. If it does exist, then releasing it will make all  
> the noise
> look quite stupid. .....


The 'mystery' is predicated on a 'possibility'.   If you consider all  
the 'possibilities' the noise already looks quite stupid.


Katie


From rab at jurislex.com  Thu Aug  6 11:47:35 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:47:35 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
Message-ID: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090806/e6619b78/attachment.html 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug  6 11:57:37 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:57:37 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEPJMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Bullshit web site.
Got anything real?
  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:48 AM
  To: Grovenet
  Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .


  Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to do your
own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those who want to see
Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with him . . .

  http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv

  bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning



From rab at jurislex.com  Thu Aug  6 12:56:32 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:56:32 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEPJMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEPJMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4A7B3570.5060303@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090806/d092dc91/attachment.html 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 13:07:55 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:07:55 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>
References: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <619DD492-02F4-49AA-97BD-9967D5D16A6E@verizon.net>

It is amazing what the insurance companies can buy with 1.4 million  
dollars a day to lobby congress and put out false and misleading claims.
I doubt that any group will be able to fact check the lies fast  
enough to keep up.  But I'm glad that someone is trying.  Thanks for  
the link.

Katie



On Aug 6, 2009, at 11:47 AM, Bob Browning wrote:

> Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to do  
> your own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those  
> who want to see Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with  
> him . . .
>
> http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv
>
> bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jschrag at fgnewstimes.com  Thu Aug  6 14:01:20 2009
From: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com (John Schrag)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:01:20 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] News from the Grove
In-Reply-To: <619DD492-02F4-49AA-97BD-9967D5D16A6E@verizon.net>
References: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>
	<619DD492-02F4-49AA-97BD-9967D5D16A6E@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <12CCAAED6A8A480A8290E8B31F3F0598@pmg.pamplincom.com>

 

Richard Kidd is closing one political door in hopes that he can open
another. The longtime Forest Grove mayor told the News-Times on Wednesday
that he will step down from his city post in October and plans to run for
the Washington County Board of Commissioners...

 

http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/index.php

 

 

John 


From jo.david at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 14:40:16 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:40:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] News from the Grove - but wait, there is more
In-Reply-To: <12CCAAED6A8A480A8290E8B31F3F0598@pmg.pamplincom.com>
References: <4A7B2547.8080009@jurislex.com>
	<619DD492-02F4-49AA-97BD-9967D5D16A6E@verizon.net>
	<12CCAAED6A8A480A8290E8B31F3F0598@pmg.pamplincom.com>
Message-ID: <C0C273C2-724C-4D92-A82F-C5B383AEC55F@verizon.net>

On the same page.

Get ready to put up about $1 Billion to subsidize the home building  
industry in Washington County.

http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/story.php? 
story_id=124945263602588400

I wonder if the promoters of the "free market" will jump on this  
project, and push for the cost to be passed to the new development  
alone.  Or will they ask the existing water rate payers to socialize  
the project and put up half or more?

David

On Aug 6, 2009, at 2:01 PM, John Schrag wrote:

>
>
> Richard Kidd is closing one political door in hopes that he can open
> another. The longtime Forest Grove mayor told the News-Times on  
> Wednesday
> that he will step down from his city post in October and plans to  
> run for
> the Washington County Board of Commissioners...
>
>
>
> http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/index.php
>
>
>
>
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From whatsupy2k at yahoo.com  Thu Aug  6 14:42:49 2009
From: whatsupy2k at yahoo.com (Vickie Madeoneup)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEPJMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <413149.40764.qm@web112414.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

why do you say that?

It is very difficult to know how to investigate anything when it is so multi-faceted... and it seems as if everyone has their own agenda and so they don't want to provide the true facts, or at least all the facts, not wanting to provide the arguments for the opposing view I suppose.
It makes it frustrating for those who want to make informed intelligent decisions but don't have the time or expertise to run down every fact plus make sure you have all the facts.

So, in an effort to be well informed, why do you say "Bullshit web site"?

Vickie




    What can you do? Check out these ideas:
click to help these organizations, it's quick, easy & free
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=4&link=ctg_trs_home_from_lit_home_sitenav

  http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/whatyoucando/index2.html
  
  U.S. oil companies are reporting record profits even as motorists  struggle to deal with the rising prices. Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips  Ltd. and ExxonMobil Corp. combined to earn more than $15.5 billion in  the first three months of 2006.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12531620/
        
        
        
        
   

--- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:

From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 11:57 AM

Bullshit web site.
Got anything real?
? -----Original Message-----
? From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
? Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:48 AM
? To: Grovenet
? Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .


? Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to do your
own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those who want to see
Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with him . . .

? http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv

? bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From obrzl at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 15:18:22 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEPJMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <405846.49365.qm@web84207.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Here's and article that takes a pretty good look at health care costs:
?
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande
?
Mark

--- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 6:57 PM


Bullshit web site.
Got anything real?
? -----Original Message-----
? From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
? Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:48 AM
? To: Grovenet
? Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .


? Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to do your
own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those who want to see
Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with him . . .

? http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv

? bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From jo.david at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 15:42:19 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:42:19 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <405846.49365.qm@web84207.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <405846.49365.qm@web84207.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <06AA7129-FBD6-4436-A226-4D7DC329735D@verizon.net>

If you want a more "local" review from Oregon.

http://insurance.oregon.gov/health_report/3458-health_report-2009.pdf

http://www.insurance.oregon.gov/insurer/rates_forms/health-benefit- 
plan-reports.html

Eight companies provide 91% of the health insurance in Oregon.

They pay 82-95% of their premiums back as claims.  (except that  
Kaiser includes some administrative costs against their percentage)

They pay 1-7% of the premium to handle claims.

They pay 4-12% of the premium to general administrative expenses  
(except that Kaiser puts some administrative costs against claims)

They account profits between 0-5% (4 are non-profits, 4 are for- 
profits; 2 of the for-profits are owned by non-profits)

Administrative expenses include advertising and commissions.

And you can review the general data that has been filed the companies  
with the state at the above sites.

David


On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:18 PM, mark oberzil wrote:

> Here's and article that takes a pretty good look at health care costs:
>
> http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande
>
> Mark
>
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 6:57 PM
>
>
> Bullshit web site.
> Got anything real?
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Bob Browning
>   Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:48 AM
>   To: Grovenet
>   Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
>
>
>   Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to  
> do your
> own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those who  
> want to see
> Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with him . . .
>
>   http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv
>
>   bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jo.david at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 16:54:27 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 16:54:27 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Walking to Town
References: <EA8FD94AA649D349A82A409E2A54217A03AADA26@FKIMLKI01.Enterprise.afmc.ds.af.mil>
Message-ID: <2D19C1CF-A155-4B77-8348-5CC26F0E8BF5@verizon.net>

Walking to Town

A fellow was walking along a country road when he came upon a farmer  
working in his field.

The man called out to the farmer, "How long will it take me to get to  
the next town?"

The farmer didn't answer. The guy waited a bit and then started  
walking again.

After the man had gone about a hundred yards, the farmer yelled out,  
"About 20 minutes."

"Thank you. But why didn't you tell me that when I asked you?"

"Didn't know how fast you could walk."



From allnutt at verizon.net  Thu Aug  6 17:00:30 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:00:30 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
In-Reply-To: <405846.49365.qm@web84207.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <405846.49365.qm@web84207.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00386B65-FBEB-4B70-8D20-085628F7110F@verizon.net>

Wow. That is an eye opener.  I was surprised to read that the single  
payer/public option/health saving account/for profit/non profit/etc  
arguments are not the ones that should be driving the changes.  This  
guys lays it on the line at the most basic level. And my guess is  
that what he considers the real issue will not be addressed  
regardless of whether health care passes this year or not.

To sum it up for those who don't want to read it. You get the best  
health care at the lowest cost if you have access to a health  
facility that puts patient care first.  And those facilities are rare  
in this country.


Katie
PS Be forewarned - it is a loooonnnnngggggg article



On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:18 PM, mark oberzil wrote:

> Here's and article that takes a pretty good look at health care costs:
>
> http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande
>
> Mark
>
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 6:57 PM
>
>
> Bullshit web site.
> Got anything real?
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Bob Browning
>   Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:48 AM
>   To: Grovenet
>   Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .
>
>
>   Then here is a site you may find interesting. I encourage you to  
> do your
> own research and don't be swayed by Big Insurance and those who  
> want to see
> Obama fail, even if it brings the country down with him . . .
>
>   http://www.healthcarefactcheck.com/?source=080609_jv
>
>   bob "just the facts, ma'am" browning
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Thu Aug  6 17:41:46 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:41:46 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Statistics
Message-ID: <20090806.174146.23229.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>


 David,
The static tics you quoted are very impressive. As I hear all the discussion about our health care problems and what can be done to resolve them some missing parts of the problem are obvious to me but are hardly ever talked about is that of tort reform. As I understand it our health care system is much more affected by the threat of being sued compared with most of the western world. Risk management is a huge expense here in the USA. Do you have any statistics about that relationship?
____________________________________________________________
You're never too old to date. Senior Dating. Click Here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTQbQWUZ50HHkSvNujd0ZS1C9c9t2bG4tBKOcloqxnlDEv7iaWpoGU/

From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Thu Aug  6 17:54:39 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 00:54:39 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Statistics
Message-ID: <20090806.175439.23229.1@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>

Opps. I forgot to sign my posting about staic tics.
Tom Alexander
 
 David,
The static tics you quoted are very impressive. As I hear all the discussion about our health care problems and what can be done to resolve them some missing parts of the problem are obvious to me but are hardly ever talked about is that of tort reform. As I understand it our health care system is much more affected by the threat of being sued compared with most of the western world. Risk management is a huge expense here in the USA. Do you have any statistics about that relationship?
____________________________________________________________
You're never too old to date. Senior Dating. Click Here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTQbQWUZ50HHkSvNujd0ZS1C9c9t2bG4tBKOcloqxnlDEv7iaWpoGU/
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug  6 22:24:50 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 22:24:50 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Statistics
In-Reply-To: <20090806.175439.23229.1@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEPMMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Speaking of health care. Our own Ron Wyden has brought up a health plan that
would not break the country and had a good review from the Budget office.
Why is it getting no coverage or comment?
Removes the tax benefits for employer insurance and gives it to the
individuals.
http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm


From theresacus at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  7 04:04:57 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 6
In-Reply-To: <mailman.19.1249585208.45312.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <536482.982.qm@web34507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Thanks Katie, glad someone said something about possibilities...? anything is possible if you click your shoes together...? :)? 
?
If you are looking for some family fun, Forest Grove's Music in the Park is at 1PM this coming Sunday, at Roger's Park, on Elm St.? 
?
Open mic is at 1PM.? If interested in signing up to sing, play a song or two or read poetry.? It starts at 12:30.? At 2PM "Suckers for Lights" will play.? They are a young couple that Keith and I met at an open mic.? I brought the CD home and told Nick that he might like it and haven't seen it since.?Suckers for Lights plays Indie Rock and the harmonies are incredible.? Definitely something for everyone to enjoy.? At 3PM we will have a circle jam session, where we all play and sing together accoustically.? Grindels Pub is handling the beer and wine garden and the concessions are done by the parents and students who believe in the arts, in our schools.? This is a community event and all are welcome.? 
?
?


      

From isis23ra at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  7 08:47:23 2009
From: isis23ra at yahoo.com (Alana Graham)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 08:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEPMMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <921434.85940.qm@web55602.mail.re4.yahoo.com>


I read in The Oregonian a while back that Obama said Ron Wyden's plan was too radical!

AG

--- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:

> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Statistics
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 10:24 PM
> Speaking of health care. Our own Ron
> Wyden has brought up a health plan that
> would not break the country and had a good review from the
> Budget office.
> Why is it getting no coverage or comment?
> Removes the tax benefits for employer insurance and gives
> it to the
> individuals.
> http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 


      

From isis23ra at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  7 09:19:36 2009
From: isis23ra at yahoo.com (Alana Graham)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Interested in health care reform . . .do something!
In-Reply-To: <00386B65-FBEB-4B70-8D20-085628F7110F@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <246633.50069.qm@web55603.mail.re4.yahoo.com>


TWO UPCOMING FAIRLY LOCAL TOWNHALLS

1. MCMINNVILLE ? MONDAY, Aug. 10, 5:00-6:00 PM at the McMinnville Police   
   Station, 121 SW Adams Street, McMinnville.

To CAR POOL to this one from Forest Grove:

Meet at the PARKING LOT at 2339 Pacific Avenue (one way street)? Strip mall next to Pacific University ? between Cedar and Douglas.  (Look for a Chevron Station, LaSierra Mexican Restaurant, FG Health & Fitness)

Be there 3:45 p.m. ? leave at 4:00 ? allow 1 hr. to drive to McMinnville, park, etc. etc.

********************************************************

2. ST. HELENS ? FRIDAY ? Aug. 14, 4:00-6:00 PM, Columbia Learning Center
   375 S. 18th Street, St. Helen's.

To CAR POOL to this one from Forest Grove:

Meet at the PARKING LOT at 2339 Pacific Avenue (one way street)? Strip mall next to Pacific University ? between Cedar and Douglas.  (Look for a Chevron Station, LaSierra Mexican Restaurant, FG Health & Fitness).

Be there at 2:15 p.m. ? leave at 2:30 ? allow 1.5 hr. to drive to St. Helens , park, etc. etc. 

***************************************************************

These Town Halls are very politically important - something the anti-single payer health care people are very aware of, as they are already mobilizing to attend townhalls here in Oregon.  It will be critical to have a large, visible presence clearly highlighting the need for single-payer healthcare and support for strong local economies.  

Email me off the list if any questions.

Like the bumper sticker says on my car:  US health Care: Don't Get Sick!

Alana




      


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Fri Aug  7 09:25:28 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:25:28 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
In-Reply-To: <921434.85940.qm@web55602.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPOMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Did you read up on it or just take their word for it.
It is a good idea.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Alana Graham
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 8:47 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
> 
> 
> 
> I read in The Oregonian a while back that Obama said Ron Wyden's plan was
> too radical!
> 
> AG
> 
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Statistics
> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 10:24 PM
> > Speaking of health care. Our own Ron
> > Wyden has brought up a health plan that
> > would not break the country and had a good review from the
> > Budget office.
> > Why is it getting no coverage or comment?
> > Removes the tax benefits for employer insurance and gives
> > it to the
> > individuals.
> > http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Fri Aug  7 10:53:39 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 10:53:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Statistics
In-Reply-To: <20090806.174146.23229.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090806.174146.23229.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <A8206E92-6F89-4993-B987-63ED40763DC4@verizon.net>

The article that Mark Oberzil linked touched on this a bit.
Texas has implemented the tort reform policies that many believed  
would do the trick (low cap on pain and suffering, high proof  
standard, etc). And yet Texas did not see any reduction in health  
care costs.
The article explains it better than I could.

Here is the link again
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande


Katie

On Aug 6, 2009, at 5:41 PM, a_tom_51 at juno.com wrote:

>
>  David,
> The static tics you quoted are very impressive. As I hear all the  
> discussion about our health care problems and what can be done to  
> resolve them some missing parts of the problem are obvious to me  
> but are hardly ever talked about is that of tort reform. As I  
> understand it our health care system is much more affected by the  
> threat of being sued compared with most of the western world. Risk  
> management is a huge expense here in the USA. Do you have any  
> statistics about that relationship?
> ____________________________________________________________
> You're never too old to date. Senior Dating. Click Here.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/ 
> BLSrjpTQbQWUZ50HHkSvNujd0ZS1C9c9t2bG4tBKOcloqxnlDEv7iaWpoGU/
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Fri Aug  7 11:19:24 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:19:24 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I got this email about all the things wrong with the Healthcare bill. I
posted the pages they described so all can see exactly what is going on.
Hope it helps.

Did you know that this bill puts your healthcare in the hands of the office
of the President. It changes IRS tax codes, Social Security and Medicare as
well as many other existing laws and statutes.

Well, here it is.

48 Important Things to Know About Obama's Healthcare Plan
* Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
23 (1) STUDY.?The Commissioner, in coordina24

tion with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of
Labor, shall conduct a

26 study of the large group insured and self-insured

1 employer health care markets. Such study shall ex

2 amine the following:

3 (A) The types of employers by key charac

4teristics, including size, that purchase insured

5 products versus those that self-insure.

6 (B) The similarities and differences be7

tween typical insured and self-insured health

8 plans.

9 (C) The financial solvency and capital re10

serve levels of employers that self-insure by em11

ployer size.

12 (D) The risk of self-insured employers not

13 being able to pay obligations or otherwise be14

coming financially insolvent.

15 (E) The extent to which rating rules are

16 likely to cause adverse selection in the large

17 group market or to encourage small and mid

18 size employers to self-insure


 * Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
3 (2) ANNUAL LIMITATION.?

4 (A) ANNUAL LIMITATION.?The cost-shar5

ing incurred under the essential benefits pack6

age with respect to an individual (or family) for

7 a year does not exceed the applicable level spec8

ified in subparagraph (B).

9 (B) APPLICABLE LEVEL.?The applicable

10 level specified in this subparagraph for Y1 is

11 $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a

12 family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded

13 to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year

14 by the annual percentage increase in the Con15

sumer Price Index (United States city average)

16 applicable to such year.


 * Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits
you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

12 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.?

13 (1) IN GENERAL.?There is established a pri14

vate-public advisory committee which shall be a

15 panel of medical and other experts to be known as

16 the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to rec17

ommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced,

18 and premium plans.

19 (2) CHAIR.?The Surgeon General shall be a

20 member and the chair of the Health Benefits Advi21

sory Committee.

22 (3) MEMBERSHIP.?The Health Benefits Advi23

sory Committee shall be composed of the following

24 members, in addition to the Surgeon General:

1 (A) 9 members who are not Federal em2

ployees or officers and who are appointed by

3 the President.

4 (B) 9 members who are not Federal em5

ployees or officers and who are appointed by

6 the Comptroller General of the United States in

7 a manner similar to the manner in which the

8 Comptroller General appoints members to the

9 Medicare Payment Advisory Commission under

10 section 1805(c) of the Social Security Act.

11 (C) Such even number of members (not to

12 exceed 8) who are Federal employees and offi13

cers, as the President may appoint.


 * Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits
for you. You will have no choice. None.
I couldn't find this reference but did find this on Page 41.
7 Subtitle E?Governance

8 SEC. 141. HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH

9 CHOICES COMMISSIONER.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.?There is hereby established, as an

11 independent agency in the executive branch of the Govern12

ment, a Health Choices Administration (in this division

13 referred to as the ??Administration??).




 * Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free
healthcare services.

Can not find anything relating to this in pages 48 - 52

 * Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.

Page 57

10 ??SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE

11 TRANSACTIONS.

It goes one for many pages describing electronic record keeping.


 * Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all
individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

21 ??(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in

22 order to allow automated reconciliation with the

23 related health care payment and remittance advice;


 * Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)

14 (1) IN GENERAL.?Not later than 90 days after

15 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary

16 of Health and Human Services shall establish a tem17

porary reinsurance program (in this section referred

18 to as the ??reinsurance program??) to provide reim19

bursement to assist participating employment-based

20 plans with the cost of providing health benefits to

21 retirees and to eligible spouses, surviving spouses

22 and dependents of such retirees.



 * Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to
participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

15 (b) OUTLINE OF DUTIES OF COMMISSIONER.?In ac

16 cordance with this subtitle and in coordination with appro

17 priate Federal and State officials as provided under sec18

tion 143(b), the Commissioner shall?

19 (1) under section 204 establish standards for,

20 accept bids from, and negotiate and enter into con

21 tracts with, QHBP offering entities for the offering

22 of health benefits plans through the Health Insur

23 ance Exchange, with different levels of benefits re

24 quired under section 203, and including with respect

25 to oversight and enforcement;


 * Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare
Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)

5 (a) IN GENERAL.?The Commissioner shall specify

6 the benefits to be made available under Exchange-partici7

pating health benefits plans during each plan year, con8

sistent with subtitle C of title I and this section.


 * Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services;
translation: illegal aliens

4 (7) CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY APPRO

5 PRIATE SERVICES AND COMMUNICATIONS.?The en

6 tity shall provide for culturally and linguistically ap

7 propriate communication and health services.

Doesn't mention religion here.



 * Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.

8 (1) OUTREACH.?The Commissioner shall con9

duct outreach activities consistent with subsection

10 (c), including through use of appropriate entities as

11 described in paragraph (4) of such subsection, to in

12 form and educate individuals and employers about

13 the Health Insurance Exchange and Exchange-par

14 ticipating health benefits plan options. Such out

15 reach shall include outreach specific to vulnerable

16 populations, such as children, individuals with dis

17 abilities, individuals with mental illness, and



 * Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you
have no choice in the matter.

12 (3) AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT OF MEDICAID EL

13 IGIBLE INDIVIDUALS INTO MEDICAID.?The Com

14 missioner shall provide for a process under which an

15 individual who is described in section 202(d)(3) and

16 has not elected to enroll in an Exchange-partici

17 pating health benefits plan is automatically enrolled

18 under Medicaid.

So is this an end of medicare?


 * Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
"judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply,
private insurers will be crushed.
12 (d) CONSTRUCTION.?Nothing in this subtitle shall

13 be construed as limiting the Secretary?s authority to cor

14 rect for payments that are excessive or deficient, taking

15 into account the provisions of section 221(a) and the

16 amounts paid for similar health care providers and serv

17 ices under other Exchange-participating health benefits

18 plans.

19 (e) CONSTRUCTION.?Nothing in this subtitle shall be

20 construed as affecting the authority of the Secretary to

21 establish payment rates, including payments to provide for

22 the more efficient delivery of services, such as the initia

23 tives provided for under section 224.

24 (f) LIMITATIONS ON REVIEW.?There shall be no ad

25 ministrative or judicial review of a payment rate or meth-HOLCP

1 odology established under this section or under section


 * Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will20set wages.
1 (1) PHYSICIANS.?The Secretary shall provide

2 for the annual participation of physicians under the

3 public health insurance option, for which payment

4 may be made for services furnished during the year,

5 in one of 2 classes:

6 (A) PREFERRED PHYSICIANS.?Those phy

7 sicians who agree to accept the payment rate

8 established under section 223 (without regard

9 to cost-sharing) as the payment in full.

10 (B) PARTICIPATING, NON-PREFERRED

11 PHYSICIANS.?Those physicians who agree not

12 to impose charges (in relation to the payment

13 rate described in section 223 for such physi

14 cians) that exceed the ratio permitted under

15 section 1848(g)(2)(C) of the Social Security

16 Act.


 * Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run
public plan. No alternatives.

21 (a) IN GENERAL.?An employer meets the require

22 ments of this section with respect to an employee if the

23 following requirements are met:

24 (1) OFFERING OF COVERAGE.?The employer

25 offers the coverage described in section 311(1) either

1 through an Exchange-participating health benefits

2 plan or other than through such a plan.

3 (2) EMPLOYER REQUIRED CONTRIBUTION.?

4 The employer timely pays to the issuer of such cov

5 erage an amount not less than the employer required

6 contribution specified in subsection (b) for such cov

7 erage.

8 (3) PROVISION OF INFORMATION.?The em9

ployer provides the Health Choices Commissioner,

10 the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and

11 Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury,

12 as applicable, with such information as the Commis

13 sioner may require to ascertain compliance with the

14 requirements of this section.

15 (4) AUTOENROLLMENT OF EMPLOYEES.?The

16 employer provides for autoenrollment of the em

17 ployee in accordance with subsection (c).



 * Page 146: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND
their families.

22 (3) MINIMUM EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FOR

23 EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN FULL-TIME EMPLOY

24 EES.?In the case of coverage for an employee who

25 is not a full-time employee, the amount of the min-

1 imum employer contribution under this subsection

2 shall be a proportion (as determined in accordance

3 with rules of the Health Choices Commissioner, the

4 Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and

5 Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury,

6 as applicable) of the minimum employer contribution

7 under this subsection with respect to a full-time em8

ployee that reflects the proportion of?

9 (A) the average weekly hours of employ

10 ment of the employee by the employer, to

11 (B) the minimum weekly hours specified

12 by the Commissioner for an employee to be a

13 full-time employee.


 * Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not
offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll

16 (a) IN GENERAK.?A contribution is made in accord17

ance with this section with respect to an employee if such

18 contribution is equal to an amount equal to 8 percent of

19 the average wages paid by the employer during the period

20 of enrollment (determined by taking into account all em

21 ployees of the employer and in such manner as the Com

22 missioner provides, including rules providing for the appropriate
aggregation of related employers). Any such contribution?

1 (1) shall be paid to the Health Choices Com

2 missioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund, and

4 (2) shall not be applied against the premium of

5 the employee under the Exchange-participating

6 health benefits plan in which the employee is enrolled.

Later it says that payrolls under $250,000 pay 0%.

 * Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not
offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll

If the annual payroll of such employer forthe preceding calendar year:

The applicable percentage is:

Does not exceed $250,000 ..................................... 0 percent

Exceeds $250,000, but does not exceed $300,000 2 percent

Exceeds $300,000, but does not exceed $350,000 4 percent

Exceeds $350,000, but does not exceed $400,000 6 percent



 * Page 167: Any individual who doesn?t have acceptable healthcare
(according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.

12 (a) IN GENERAL.?Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the

13 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at

14 the end the following new part:

15 ??PART VIII?HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES

??SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE

COVERAGE.

16 ??Subpart A?Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable

17 Health Care Coverage

??Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

18 ??SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE

19 HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

20 ??(a) TAX IMPOSED.?In the case of any individual

21 who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at

22 any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed

23 a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of?

1 ??(1) the taxpayer?s modified adjusted gross in

2 come for the taxable year, over

3 ??(2) the amount of gross income specified in

4 section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

5 ??(b) LIMITATIONS.?

6 ??(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.?

7 ??(A) IN GENERAL.?The tax imposed

8 under subsection (a) with respect to any tax9

payer for any taxable year shall not exceed the

10 applicable national average premium for such

11 taxable year.

12 ??(B) APPLICABLE NATIONAL AVERAGE

13 PREMIUM.?

14 ??(i) IN GENERAL.?For purposes of

15 subparagraph (A), the ?applicable national

16 average premium? means, with respect to

17 any taxable year, the average premium (as

18 determined by the Secretary, in coordina

19 tion with the Health Choices Commis

20 sioner) for self-only coverage under a basic

21 plan which is offered in a Health Insur

22 ance Exchange for the calendar year in

23 which such taxable year begins.

24 ??(ii) FAILURE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE

25 FOR MORE THAN ONE INDIVIDUAL.?In the

1 case of any taxpayer who fails to meet the

2 requirements of subsection (e) with respect

3 to more than one individual during the tax4

able year, clause (i) shall be applied by

5 substituting ?family coverage? for ?self-only

6 coverage?.



 * Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
(Americans will pay for them).

1 ??(2) NONRESIDENT ALIENS.?Subsection (a)

2 shall not apply to any individual who is a non

3 resident alien



 * Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy
will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.

1 Health Choices Act of 2009, shall disclose to of

2 ficers and employees of the Health Choices Ad

3 ministration or such State-based health insur

4 ance exchange, as the case may be, return in

5 formation of any taxpayer whose income is rel

6 evant in determining any affordability credit de

7 scribed in subtitle C of title II of the America?s

8 Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. Such

9 return information shall be limited to?

10 ??(i) taxpayer identity information

11 with respect to such taxpayer,

12 ??(ii) the filing status of such tax

13 payer,

14 ??(iii) the modified adjusted gross in

15come of such taxpayer (as defined in sec

16 tion 59B(e)(5)),

17 ??(iv) the number of dependents of the

18 taxpayer,

19 ??(v) such other information as is pre

20 scribed by the Secretary by regulation as

21 might indicate whether the taxpayer is eli

22 gible for such affordability credits (and the

23 amount thereof), and

24 ??(vi) the taxable year with respect to

25 which the preceding information relates or,

1 if applicable, the fact that such informa

2 tion is not available.



 * Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as
tax." Yes, it really says that.

13 ??(4) NOT TREATED AS TAX IMPOSED BY THIS

14 CHAPTER FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.?The tax im

15 posed under this section shall not be treated as tax

16 imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining

17 the amount of any credit under this chapter or for

18 purposes of section 55.??.



 * Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and
the poor most affected."

14 (c) LIMITATION ON PHYSICIANS? SERVICES IN

15 CLUDED IN TARGET GROWTH RATE COMPUTATION TO

16 SERVICES COVERED UNDER PHYSICIAN FEE SCHED

17 ULE.?Effective for services furnished on or after January

18 1, 2009, section 1848(f)(4)(A) of such Act is amended

19 striking ??(such as clinical?? and all that follows through

20 ??in a physician?s office?? and inserting ??for which payment

21 under this part is made under the fee schedule under this

22 section, for services for practitioners described in section

23 1842(b)(18)(C) on a basis related to such fee schedule,

24 or for services described in section 1861(p) (other than

1 such services when furnished in the facility of a provider

2 of services)??.


 * Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid
the same (thanks, AMA!)

5 (1) ESTABLISHMENT OF SERVICE CAT

6EGORIES.?Subsection (j) of section 1848 of the So

7 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w?4) is amended

8 by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

9 ??(5) SERVICE CATEGORIES.?For services fur

10 nished on or after January 1, 2009, each of the fol

11 lowing categories of physicians? services (as defined

12 in paragraph (3)) shall be treated as a separate

13 ?service category?:

14 ??(A) Evaluation and management services

15 that are procedure codes (for services covered

16 under this title) for?

17 ??(i) services in the category des

18 ignated Evaluation and Management in the

19 Health Care Common Procedure Coding

20 System (established by the Secretary under

21 subsection (c)(5) as of December 31, 2009,

22 and as subsequently modified by the Sec

23 retary); and

1 ??(ii) preventive services (as defined in

2 section 1861(iii)) for which payment is

3 made under this section.

4 ??(B) All other services not described in

5 subparagraph (A).

6 Service categories established under this paragraph

7 shall apply without regard to the specialty of the

8 physician furnishing the service.??.



 * Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional
judgment, etc.

4 ??(L) VALIDATING RELATIVE VALUE

5 UNITS.?

6 ??(i) IN GENERAL.?The Secretary

7 shall establish a process to validate relative

8 value units under the fee schedule under

9 subsection (b).

10 ??(ii) COMPONENTS AND ELEMENTS

11 OF WORK.?The process described in

12 clause (i) may include validation of work

13 elements (such as time, mental effort and

14 professional judgment, technical skill and

15 physical effort, and stress due to risk) in

16 volved with furnishing a service and may

17 include validation of the pre, post, and

18 intra-service components of work.



 * Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
healthcare industries.

2 SEC. 1131. INCORPORATING PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVE

3 MENTS INTO MARKET BASKET UPDATES

4 THAT DO NOT ALREADY INCORPORATE SUCH

5 IMPROVEMENTS.



 * Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
wheelchairs.

2 SEC. 1141. RENTAL AND PURCHASE OF POWER-DRIVEN

3 WHEELCHAIRS.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.?Section 1834(a)(7)(A)(iii) of the

5 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395m(a)(7)(A)(iii)) is

6 amended?

7 (1) in the heading, by inserting ??CERTAIN COM8

PLEX REHABILITATIVE?? after ??OPTION FOR??; and

9 (2) by striking ??power-driven wheelchair?? and

10 inserting ??complex rehabilitative power-driven wheel

11 chair recognized by the Secretary as classified within

12 group 3 or higher??.

13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.?The amendments made by

14 subsection (a) shall take effect on January 1, 2011, and

15 shall apply to power-driven wheelchairs furnished on or

16 after such date. Such amendments shall not apply to con17

tracts entered into under section 1847 of the Social Secu18

rity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w?3) pursuant to a bid submitted

19 under such section before October 1, 2010, under sub20

section (a)(1)(B)(i)(I) of such section.


 * Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!

8 ??(18) AUTHORIZATION OF ADJUSTMENT FOR

9 CANCER HOSPITALS.?

10 ??(A) STUDY.?The Secretary shall conduct

11 a study to determine if, under the system under

12 this subsection, costs incurred by hospitals de

13 scribed in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) with respect

14 to ambulatory payment classification groups ex

15 ceed those costs incurred by other hospitals fur

16 nishing services under this subsection (as deter

17 mined appropriate by the Secretary).

18 ??(B) AUTHORIZATION OF ADJUSTMENT.?

19 Insofar as the Secretary determines under sub20

paragraph (A) that costs incurred by hospitals

21 described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) exceed

22 those costs incurred by other hospitals fur

23 nishing services under this subsection, the Sec

24 retary shall provide for an appropriate adjust

25 ment under paragraph (2)(E) to reflect those

1 higher costs effective for services furnished on

2 or after January 1, 2011.??.



 * Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
preventable re-admissions.

1 Subtitle C?Provisions Related to

2 Medicare Parts A and B

3 SEC. 1151. REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOS

4 PITAL READMISSIONS.

5 (a) HOSPITALS.?

6 (1) IN GENERAL.?Section 1886 of the Social

7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww), as amended by

8 section 1103(a), is amended by adding at the end

9 the following new subsection:

10 ??(p) ADJUSTMENT TO HOSPITAL PAYMENTS FOR

11 EXCESS READMISSIONS.?


 * Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission
that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.

9 (C) applying a payment reduction for phy

10 sicians who treat the patient during the initial

11 admission that results in a readmission; and

12 (D) methods for attributing payments or

13 payment reductions to the appropriate physi

14 cian or physicians.


 * Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in
healthcare companies!

1 ??(i) REQUIREMENTS TO QUALIFY FOR RURAL PRO

2 VIDER AND HOSPITAL OWNERSHIP EXCEPTIONS TO

3 SELF-REFERRAL PROHIBITION.?

4 ??(1) REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED.?For pur

5 poses of subsection (d)(3)(D), the requirements de

6 scribed in this paragraph are as follows:

7 ??(A) PROVIDER AGREEMENT.?The hos

8 pital had?

9 ??(i) physician ownership or invest

10 ment on January 1, 2009; and

11 ??(ii) a provider agreement under sec

12 tion 1866 in effect on such date.

13 ??(B) PROHIBITION ON PHYSICIAN OWNER

14 SHIP OR INVESTMENT.?The percentage of the

15 total value of the ownership or investment in

16 terests held in the hospital, or in an entity

17 whose assets include the hospital, by physician

18 owners or investors in the aggregate does not

19 exceed such percentage as of the date of enact

20 ment of this subsection.


 * Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand
without government approval.

21 ??(C) PROHIBITION ON EXPANSION OF FA

22 CILITY CAPACITY.?Except as provided in para

23 graph (2), the number of operating rooms, pro

24 cedure rooms, or beds of the hospital at any

25 time on or after the date of the enactment of

1 this subsection are no greater than the number

2 of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds,

3 respectively, as of such date.


 * Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words,
yet another payoff for ACORN.

This relates to Hospital Expansion
7 ??(ii) OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMUNITY

8 INPUT.?The process under clause (i) shall

9 provide persons and entities in the commu

10 nity in which the hospital applying for an

11 exception is located with the opportunity to

12 provide input with respect to the application.



 * Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
i.e., rationing.

16 ??(ii) ESTABLISHMENT OF OUTCOME BASED MEASURES.?By not later than for

18 2013 the Secretary shall implement report

19 ing requirements for quality under this

20 section on measures selected under clause

21 (iii) that reflect the outcomes of care expe

22 rienced by individuals enrolled in Medicare

23 Advantage plans (in addition to measures

24 described in clause (i)). Such measures

25 may include?

1 ??(I) measures of rates of admis

2 sion and readmission to a hospital;

3 ??(II) measures of prevention

4 quality, such as those established by

5 the Agency for Healthcare Research

6 and Quality (that include hospital ad

7 mission rates for specified conditions);

8 ??(III) measures of patient mor

9 tality and morbidity following surgery;

10 ??(IV) measures of health func

11 tioning (such as limitations on activi

12 ties of daily living) and survival for

13 patients with chronic diseases;

14 ??(V) measures of patient safety;

15 and

16 ??(VI) other measure of outcomes

17 and patient quality of life as deter

18 mined by the Secretary.

19 Such measures shall be risk-adjusted as

20 the Secretary deems appropriate. In deter

21 mining the quality measures to be used

22 under this clause, the Secretary shall take

23 into consideration the recommendations of

24 the Medicare Payment Advisory Commis

25 sion in its report to Congress under section

1 168 of the Medicare Improvements for Pa

2 tients and Providers Act of 2008 (Public

3 Law 110?275) and shall provide pref

4 erence to measures collected on and com

5 parable to measures used in measuring

6 quality under parts A and B.



 * Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
Plans, HMOs, etc.

3 ??(iv) AUTHORITY TO DISQUALIFY

4 CERTAIN PLANS.?In applying clauses (ii)

5 and (iii), the Secretary may determine not

6 to identify a Medicare Advantage plan if

7 the Secretary has identified deficiencies in

8 the plan?s compliance with rules for such

9 plans under this part.


 * Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
individuals.

20 (2) ANALYSIS; REPORT.?The Secretary of

21 Health and Human Services shall provide, through

22 a contract with an independent health services eval

23 uation organization, for an analysis of the plans de

24 scribed in paragraph (1) with regard to the impact

25 of such plans on cost, quality of care, patient satis-

1 faction, and other subjects as specified by the Sec

2 retary. Not later than December 31, 2011, the Sec

3 retary shall submit to Congress a report on such

4 analysis and shall include in such report such rec

5 ommendations with regard to the treatment of such

6 plans as the Secretary deems appropriate.


 * Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by
phone).

8 Subtitle F?Medicare Rural Access

9 Protections

10 SEC. 1191. TELEHEALTH EXPANSION AND ENHANCEMENTS.

11 .

12 (a) ADDITIONAL TELEHEALTH SITE.??

13 (1) IN GENERAL.?Paragraph (4)(C)(ii) of sec

14 tion 1834(m) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

15 1395m(m)) is amended by adding at the end the fol

16 lowing new subclause:

17 ??(IX) A renal dialysis facility.??

18 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.?The amendment made

19 by paragraph (1) shall apply to services furnished on

20 or after January 1, 2011.

21 (b) TELEHEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE.?

22 (1) ESTABLISHMENT.?Section 1868 of the So

23 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ee) is amended?


 * Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

5 ??Advance Care Planning Consultation

6 ??(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the

7 term ?advance care planning consultation? means a con

8 sultation between the individual and a practitioner de

9 scribed in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning,

10 if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has

11 not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such

12 consultation shall include the following:

13 ??(A) An explanation by the practitioner of ad

14vance care planning, including key questions and

15 considerations, important steps, and suggested peo

16 ple to talk to.

17 ??(B) An explanation by the practitioner of ad

18 vance directives, including living wills and durable

19 powers of attorney, and their uses.

20 ??(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the

21 role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.

22 ??(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list

23 of national and State-specific resources to assist con

24 sumers and their families with advance care plan

25 ning, including the national toll-free hotline, the ad-

1 vance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal

2 service organizations (including those funded

3 through the Older Americans Act of 1965).

4 ??(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the

5 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail

6 able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene

7 fits for such services and supports that are available

8 under this title.


 * Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills,
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes
ahead of time.


See the one above. Same page

 * Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources,
guiding you in death.

See the one above. Same page


 * Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment;
government dictates how your life ends.

Actually it says the opposite. It limits this to state law.
5 ??(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement

6 for explanations under clause (i) to consultations

7 furnished in a State?

8 ??(I) in which all legal barriers have been

9 addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining

10 treatment to constitute a set of medical orders

11 respected across all care settings; and

12 ??(II) that has in effect a program for or13

ders for life sustaining treatment described in

14 clause (iii).

15 ??(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining

16 treatment for a States described in this clause is a

17 program that?




 * Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment
as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life
plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.

Yes, it says exactly that.

1 ??(B) An advance care planning consultation with re2

spect to an individual may be conducted more frequently

3 than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant

4 change in the health condition of the individual, including

5 diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a

6 life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening

7 injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a

8 long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or

9 a hospice program.

10 ??(4) A consultation under this subsection may in11

clude the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining

12 treatment or a similar order.

13 ??(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ?order

14 regarding life sustaining treatment? means, with respect

15 to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to

16 the treatment of that individual that?



 * Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at
end-of-life.

11 ??(B) The level of treatment indicated under subpara

12 graph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treat

13 ment to an indication to limit some or all or specified

14 interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may in

15 clude indications respecting, among other items?


 * Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.

1 ??(B) COMMUNITY-BASED MEDICAL HOME

2 DEFINED.?In this section, the term ?commu3

nity-based medical home? means a nonprofit

4 community-based or State-based organization

5 that is certified under paragraph (2) as meeting

6 the following requirements:

7 ??(i) The organization provides bene8

ficiaries with medical home services.

9 ??(ii) The organization provides med10

ical home services under the supervision of

11 and in close collaboration with the primary

12 care or principal care physician or nurse

13 practitioner designated by the beneficiary

14 as his or her community-based medical

15 home provider.



 * Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for
ACORN.

14 ??(i) PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED

15 ORGANIZATION.?One monthly payment to

16 a community-based or State-based organi

17 zation.



 * Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government
intervenes in your marriage.

19 SEC. 1308. COVERAGE OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERA

20 PIST SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH COUN

21 SELOR SERVICES.

22 (a) COVERAGE OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERA

23 PIST SERVICES.?

24 (1) COVERAGE OF SERVICES.?Section

25 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

1 1395x(s)(2)), as amended by section 1235, is

2 amended?

3 (A) in subparagraph (EE), by striking

4 ??and?? at the end;

5 (B) in subparagraph (FF), by adding

6 ??and?? at the end; and

7 (C) by adding at the end the following new

8 subparagraph:

9 ??(GG) marriage and family therapist serv

10ices (as defined in subsection (jjj));??.

11 (2) DEFINITION.?Section 1861 of the Social

12 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x), as amended by sec

13 tions 1235 and 1305, is amended by adding at the

14 end the following new subsection:

15 ??Marriage and Family Therapist Services

16 ??(jjj)(1) The term ?marriage and family therapist

17 services? means services performed by a marriage and

18 family therapist (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the diag

19nosis and treatment of mental illnesses, which the mar

20 riage and family therapist is legally authorized to perform

21 under State law (or the State regulatory mechanism pro

22 vided by State law) of the State in which such services

23 are performed, as would otherwise be covered if furnished

24 by a physician or as incident to a physician?s professional

25 service, but only if no facility or other provider charges


 * Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
creating and rationing those services
19 ??Mental Health Counselor Services

20 ??(kkk)(1) The term ?mental health counselor services?

21 means services performed by a mental health counselor (as

22 defined in paragraph (2)) for the diagnosis and treatment

23 of mental illnesses which the mental health counselor is

24 legally authorized to perform under State law (or the

25 State regulatory mechanism provided by the State law) of

1 the State in which such services are performed, as would

2 otherwise be covered if furnished by a physician or as inci

3 dent to a physician?s professional service, but only if no

4 facility or other provider charges or is paid any amounts

5 with respect to the furnishing of such services.

6 ??(2) The term ?mental health counselor? means an

7 individual who?

8 ??(A) possesses a master?s or doctor?s degree

9 which qualifies the individual for licensure or certifi

10 cation for the practice of mental health counseling in

11 the State in which the services are performed;

12 ??(B) after obtaining such a degree has per

13 formed at least 2 years of supervised mental health

14 counselor practice; and

15 ??(C) is licensed or certified as a mental health

16 counselor or professional counselor by the State in

17 which the services are performed.??.

18 (3) PROVISION FOR PAYMENT UNDER PART

19 B.?Section 1832(a)(2)(B) of the Social Security

20 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395k(a)(2)(B)), as amended by

21 subsection (a)(3), is further amended?

22 (A) by striking ??and?? at the end of clause

23 (iv);

24 (B) by adding ??and?? at the end of clause

25 (v); and

1 (C) by adding at the end the following new

2 clause:

3 ??(vi) mental health counselor serv

4 ices;??.

5 (4) AMOUNT OF PAYMENT.?

6 (A) IN GENERAL.?Section 1833(a)(1) of

7 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

8 1395l(a)(1)), as amended by subsection (a), is

9 further amended?

10 (i) by striking ??and??before ??(X)??;

11 and

12 (ii) by inserting before the semicolon

13 at the end the following: ??, and (Y), with

14 respect to mental health counselor services

15 under section 1861(s)(2)(HH), the

16 amounts paid shall be 80 percent of the

17 lesser of the actual charge for the services

18 or 75 percent of the amount determined

19 for payment of a psychologist under clause

20 (L)??.

21 (B) DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA WITH RE

22 SPECT TO CONSULTATION WITH A PHYSICIAN.?

23 The Secretary of Health and Human Services

24 shall, taking into consideration concerns for pa

25 tient confidentiality, develop criteria with re-

1 spect to payment for mental health counselor

2 services for which payment may be made di

3 rectly to the mental health counselor under part

4 B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42

5 U.S.C. 1395j et seq.) under which such a coun

6 selor must agree to consult with a patient?s at

7 tending or primary care physician in accordance

8 with such criteria.


From rab at jurislex.com  Fri Aug  7 11:27:57 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 11:27:57 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4A7C722D.4020802@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090807/53354adf/attachment.html 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Fri Aug  7 11:44:46 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:44:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <4A7C722D.4020802@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEABMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf


  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 11:28 AM
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare


  Steven, can you give us a link so we can read it without the computer
presenting it all chopped up? I like fact, as you know, and I want to read
this, but in a more concise fashion.

  bob "I scan slow" browning
  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Steven wrote:
I got this email about all the things wrong with the Healthcare bill. I
posted the pages they described so all can see exactly what is going on.
Hope it helps.

Did you know that this bill puts your healthcare in the hands of the office
of the President. It changes IRS tax codes, Social Security and Medicare as
well as many other existing laws and statutes.

Well, here it is.

48 Important Things to Know About Obama's Healthcare Plan
* Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
23 (1) STUDY.?The Commissioner, in coordina24

tion with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of
Labor, shall conduct a

26 study of the large group insured and self-insured

1 employer health care markets. Such study shall ex

2 amine the following:

3 (A) The types of employers by key charac

4teristics, including size, that purchase insured

5 products versus those that self-insure.

6 (B) The similarities and differences be7

tween typical insured and self-insured health

8 plans.

9 (C) The financial solvency and capital re10

serve levels of employers that self-insure by em11

ployer size.

12 (D) The risk of self-insured employers not

13 being able to pay obligations or otherwise be14

coming financially insolvent.<snip>

From allnutt at verizon.net  Fri Aug  7 13:44:22 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:44:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPPMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <EA93D8FE-AC8D-4CCB-907C-3AF4291F8943@verizon.net>

Here is a link to a point by point counter argument.
The site is called 'Please...Cut the Crap' because what you read in  
the original post is misleading for the most part, wrong on some  
parts and fabrications on a few.

http://tinyurl.com/m9sl9s



Katie

On Aug 7, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Steven wrote:

> I got this email about all the things wrong with the Healthcare  
> bill. I
> posted the pages they described so all can see exactly what is  
> going on.
> Hope it helps.
>
> Did you know that this bill puts your healthcare in the hands of  
> the office
> of the President. It changes IRS tax codes, Social Security and  
> Medicare as
> well as many other existing laws and statutes.
>
> Well, here it is.
>
> 48 Important Things to Know About Obama's Healthcare Plan
> * Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> 23 (1) STUDY.?The Commissioner, in coordina24
>
> tion with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the  
> Secretary of
> Labor, shall conduct a
>
> 26 study of the large group insured and self-insured
>
> 1 employer health care markets. Such study shall ex
>
> 2 amine the following:
>
> 3 (A) The types of employers by key charac
>
> 4teristics, including size, that purchase insured
>
> 5 products versus those that self-insure.
>
> 6 (B) The similarities and differences be7
>
> tween typical insured and self-insured health
>
> 8 plans.
>
> 9 (C) The financial solvency and capital re10
>
> serve levels of employers that self-insure by em11
>
> ployer size.
>
> 12 (D) The risk of self-insured employers not
>
> 13 being able to pay obligations or otherwise be14
>
> coming financially insolvent.
>
> 15 (E) The extent to which rating rules are
>
> 16 likely to cause adverse selection in the large
>
> 17 group market or to encourage small and mid
>
> 18 size employers to self-insure
>
>
>  * Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
> 3 (2) ANNUAL LIMITATION.?
>
> 4 (A) ANNUAL LIMITATION.?The cost-shar5
>
> ing incurred under the essential benefits pack6
>
> age with respect to an individual (or family) for
>
> 7 a year does not exceed the applicable level spec8
>
> ified in subparagraph (B).
>
> 9 (B) APPLICABLE LEVEL.?The applicable
>
> 10 level specified in this subparagraph for Y1 is
>
> 11 $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a
>
> 12 family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded
>
> 13 to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year
>
> 14 by the annual percentage increase in the Con15
>
> sumer Price Index (United States city average)
>
> 16 applicable to such year.
>
>
>  * Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and  
> benefits
> you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
>
> 12 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.?
>
> 13 (1) IN GENERAL.?There is established a pri14
>
> vate-public advisory committee which shall be a
>
> 15 panel of medical and other experts to be known as
>
> 16 the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to rec17
>
> ommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced,
>
> 18 and premium plans.
>
> 19 (2) CHAIR.?The Surgeon General shall be a
>
> 20 member and the chair of the Health Benefits Advi21
>
> sory Committee.
>
> 22 (3) MEMBERSHIP.?The Health Benefits Advi23
>
> sory Committee shall be composed of the following
>
> 24 members, in addition to the Surgeon General:
>
> 1 (A) 9 members who are not Federal em2
>
> ployees or officers and who are appointed by
>
> 3 the President.
>
> 4 (B) 9 members who are not Federal em5
>
> ployees or officers and who are appointed by
>
> 6 the Comptroller General of the United States in
>
> 7 a manner similar to the manner in which the
>
> 8 Comptroller General appoints members to the
>
> 9 Medicare Payment Advisory Commission under
>
> 10 section 1805(c) of the Social Security Act.
>
> 11 (C) Such even number of members (not to
>
> 12 exceed 8) who are Federal employees and offi13
>
> cers, as the President may appoint.
>
>
>  * Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health  
> benefits
> for you. You will have no choice. None.
> I couldn't find this reference but did find this on Page 41.
> 7 Subtitle E?Governance
>
> 8 SEC. 141. HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH
>
> 9 CHOICES COMMISSIONER.
>
> 10 (a) IN GENERAL.?There is hereby established, as an
>
> 11 independent agency in the executive branch of the Govern12
>
> ment, a Health Choices Administration (in this division
>
> 13 referred to as the ??Administration??).
>
>
>
>
>  * Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided  
> with free
> healthcare services.
>
> Can not find anything relating to this in pages 48 - 52
>
>  * Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
>
> Page 57
>
> 10 ??SEC. 1173A. STANDARDIZE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATIVE
>
> 11 TRANSACTIONS.
>
> It goes one for many pages describing electronic record keeping.
>
>
>  * Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time  
> access to all
> individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
>
> 21 ??(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in
>
> 22 order to allow automated reconciliation with the
>
> 23 related health care payment and remittance advice;
>
>
>  * Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
> organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
>
> 14 (1) IN GENERAL.?Not later than 90 days after
>
> 15 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
>
> 16 of Health and Human Services shall establish a tem17
>
> porary reinsurance program (in this section referred
>
> 18 to as the ??reinsurance program??) to provide reim19
>
> bursement to assist participating employment-based
>
> 20 plans with the cost of providing health benefits to
>
> 21 retirees and to eligible spouses, surviving spouses
>
> 22 and dependents of such retirees.
>
>
>
>  * Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government  
> rules to
> participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
>
> 15 (b) OUTLINE OF DUTIES OF COMMISSIONER.?In ac
>
> 16 cordance with this subtitle and in coordination with appro
>
> 17 priate Federal and State officials as provided under sec18
>
> tion 143(b), the Commissioner shall?
>
> 19 (1) under section 204 establish standards for,
>
> 20 accept bids from, and negotiate and enter into con
>
> 21 tracts with, QHBP offering entities for the offering
>
> 22 of health benefits plans through the Health Insur
>
> 23 ance Exchange, with different levels of benefits re
>
> 24 quired under section 203, and including with respect
>
> 25 to oversight and enforcement;
>
>
>  * Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the  
> Healthcare
> Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
>
> 5 (a) IN GENERAL.?The Commissioner shall specify
>
> 6 the benefits to be made available under Exchange-partici7
>
> pating health benefits plans during each plan year, con8
>
> sistent with subtitle C of title I and this section.
>
>
>  * Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for  
> services;
> translation: illegal aliens
>
> 4 (7) CULTURALLY AND LINGUISTICALLY APPRO
>
> 5 PRIATE SERVICES AND COMMUNICATIONS.?The en
>
> 6 tity shall provide for culturally and linguistically ap
>
> 7 propriate communication and health services.
>
> Doesn't mention religion here.
>
>
>
>  * Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
> individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
>
> 8 (1) OUTREACH.?The Commissioner shall con9
>
> duct outreach activities consistent with subsection
>
> 10 (c), including through use of appropriate entities as
>
> 11 described in paragraph (4) of such subsection, to in
>
> 12 form and educate individuals and employers about
>
> 13 the Health Insurance Exchange and Exchange-par
>
> 14 ticipating health benefits plan options. Such out
>
> 15 reach shall include outreach specific to vulnerable
>
> 16 populations, such as children, individuals with dis
>
> 17 abilities, individuals with mental illness, and
>
>
>
>  * Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically  
> enrolled: you
> have no choice in the matter.
>
> 12 (3) AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT OF MEDICAID EL
>
> 13 IGIBLE INDIVIDUALS INTO MEDICAID.?The Com
>
> 14 missioner shall provide for a process under which an
>
> 15 individual who is described in section 202(d)(3) and
>
> 16 has not elected to enroll in an Exchange-partici
>
> 17 pating health benefits plan is automatically enrolled
>
> 18 under Medicaid.
>
> So is this an end of medicare?
>
>
>  * Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
> "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put  
> simply,
> private insurers will be crushed.
> 12 (d) CONSTRUCTION.?Nothing in this subtitle shall
>
> 13 be construed as limiting the Secretary?s authority to cor
>
> 14 rect for payments that are excessive or deficient, taking
>
> 15 into account the provisions of section 221(a) and the
>
> 16 amounts paid for similar health care providers and serv
>
> 17 ices under other Exchange-participating health benefits
>
> 18 plans.
>
> 19 (e) CONSTRUCTION.?Nothing in this subtitle shall be
>
> 20 construed as affecting the authority of the Secretary to
>
> 21 establish payment rates, including payments to provide for
>
> 22 the more efficient delivery of services, such as the initia
>
> 23 tives provided for under section 224.
>
> 24 (f) LIMITATIONS ON REVIEW.?There shall be no ad
>
> 25 ministrative or judicial review of a payment rate or meth-HOLCP
>
> 1 odology established under this section or under section
>
>
>  * Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will20set wages.
> 1 (1) PHYSICIANS.?The Secretary shall provide
>
> 2 for the annual participation of physicians under the
>
> 3 public health insurance option, for which payment
>
> 4 may be made for services furnished during the year,
>
> 5 in one of 2 classes:
>
> 6 (A) PREFERRED PHYSICIANS.?Those phy
>
> 7 sicians who agree to accept the payment rate
>
> 8 established under section 223 (without regard
>
> 9 to cost-sharing) as the payment in full.
>
> 10 (B) PARTICIPATING, NON-PREFERRED
>
> 11 PHYSICIANS.?Those physicians who agree not
>
> 12 to impose charges (in relation to the payment
>
> 13 rate described in section 223 for such physi
>
> 14 cians) that exceed the ratio permitted under
>
> 15 section 1848(g)(2)(C) of the Social Security
>
> 16 Act.
>
>
>  * Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the  
> government-run
> public plan. No alternatives.
>
> 21 (a) IN GENERAL.?An employer meets the require
>
> 22 ments of this section with respect to an employee if the
>
> 23 following requirements are met:
>
> 24 (1) OFFERING OF COVERAGE.?The employer
>
> 25 offers the coverage described in section 311(1) either
>
> 1 through an Exchange-participating health benefits
>
> 2 plan or other than through such a plan.
>
> 3 (2) EMPLOYER REQUIRED CONTRIBUTION.?
>
> 4 The employer timely pays to the issuer of such cov
>
> 5 erage an amount not less than the employer required
>
> 6 contribution specified in subsection (b) for such cov
>
> 7 erage.
>
> 8 (3) PROVISION OF INFORMATION.?The em9
>
> ployer provides the Health Choices Commissioner,
>
> 10 the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and
>
> 11 Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury,
>
> 12 as applicable, with such information as the Commis
>
> 13 sioner may require to ascertain compliance with the
>
> 14 requirements of this section.
>
> 15 (4) AUTOENROLLMENT OF EMPLOYEES.?The
>
> 16 employer provides for autoenrollment of the em
>
> 17 ployee in accordance with subsection (c).
>
>
>
>  * Page 146: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time  
> employees AND
> their families.
>
> 22 (3) MINIMUM EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FOR
>
> 23 EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN FULL-TIME EMPLOY
>
> 24 EES.?In the case of coverage for an employee who
>
> 25 is not a full-time employee, the amount of the min-
>
> 1 imum employer contribution under this subsection
>
> 2 shall be a proportion (as determined in accordance
>
> 3 with rules of the Health Choices Commissioner, the
>
> 4 Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and
>
> 5 Human Services, and the Secretary of the Treasury,
>
> 6 as applicable) of the minimum employer contribution
>
> 7 under this subsection with respect to a full-time em8
>
> ployee that reflects the proportion of?
>
> 9 (A) the average weekly hours of employ
>
> 10 ment of the employee by the employer, to
>
> 11 (B) the minimum weekly hours specified
>
> 12 by the Commissioner for an employee to be a
>
> 13 full-time employee.
>
>
>  * Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does  
> not
> offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
>
> 16 (a) IN GENERAK.?A contribution is made in accord17
>
> ance with this section with respect to an employee if such
>
> 18 contribution is equal to an amount equal to 8 percent of
>
> 19 the average wages paid by the employer during the period
>
> 20 of enrollment (determined by taking into account all em
>
> 21 ployees of the employer and in such manner as the Com
>
> 22 missioner provides, including rules providing for the appropriate
> aggregation of related employers). Any such contribution?
>
> 1 (1) shall be paid to the Health Choices Com
>
> 2 missioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust  
> Fund, and
>
> 4 (2) shall not be applied against the premium of
>
> 5 the employee under the Exchange-participating
>
> 6 health benefits plan in which the employee is enrolled.
>
> Later it says that payrolls under $250,000 pay 0%.
>
>  * Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who  
> does not
> offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
>
> If the annual payroll of such employer forthe preceding calendar year:
>
> The applicable percentage is:
>
> Does not exceed $250,000 ..................................... 0  
> percent
>
> Exceeds $250,000, but does not exceed $300,000 2 percent
>
> Exceeds $300,000, but does not exceed $350,000 4 percent
>
> Exceeds $350,000, but does not exceed $400,000 6 percent
>
>
>
>  * Page 167: Any individual who doesn?t have acceptable healthcare
> (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
>
> 12 (a) IN GENERAL.?Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the
>
> 13 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at
>
> 14 the end the following new part:
>
> 15 ??PART VIII?HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES
>
> ??SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE
>
> COVERAGE.
>
> 16 ??Subpart A?Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable
>
> 17 Health Care Coverage
>
> ??Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care  
> coverage.
>
> 18 ??SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE
>
> 19 HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
>
> 20 ??(a) TAX IMPOSED.?In the case of any individual
>
> 21 who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at
>
> 22 any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed
>
> 23 a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of?
>
> 1 ??(1) the taxpayer?s modified adjusted gross in
>
> 2 come for the taxable year, over
>
> 3 ??(2) the amount of gross income specified in
>
> 4 section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
>
> 5 ??(b) LIMITATIONS.?
>
> 6 ??(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.?
>
> 7 ??(A) IN GENERAL.?The tax imposed
>
> 8 under subsection (a) with respect to any tax9
>
> payer for any taxable year shall not exceed the
>
> 10 applicable national average premium for such
>
> 11 taxable year.
>
> 12 ??(B) APPLICABLE NATIONAL AVERAGE
>
> 13 PREMIUM.?
>
> 14 ??(i) IN GENERAL.?For purposes of
>
> 15 subparagraph (A), the ?applicable national
>
> 16 average premium? means, with respect to
>
> 17 any taxable year, the average premium (as
>
> 18 determined by the Secretary, in coordina
>
> 19 tion with the Health Choices Commis
>
> 20 sioner) for self-only coverage under a basic
>
> 21 plan which is offered in a Health Insur
>
> 22 ance Exchange for the calendar year in
>
> 23 which such taxable year begins.
>
> 24 ??(ii) FAILURE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE
>
> 25 FOR MORE THAN ONE INDIVIDUAL.?In the
>
> 1 case of any taxpayer who fails to meet the
>
> 2 requirements of subsection (e) with respect
>
> 3 to more than one individual during the tax4
>
> able year, clause (i) shall be applied by
>
> 5 substituting ?family coverage? for ?self-only
>
> 6 coverage?.
>
>
>
>  * Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
> (Americans will pay for them).
>
> 1 ??(2) NONRESIDENT ALIENS.?Subsection (a)
>
> 2 shall not apply to any individual who is a non
>
> 3 resident alien
>
>
>
>  * Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare  
> Bureaucracy
> will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
>
> 1 Health Choices Act of 2009, shall disclose to of
>
> 2 ficers and employees of the Health Choices Ad
>
> 3 ministration or such State-based health insur
>
> 4 ance exchange, as the case may be, return in
>
> 5 formation of any taxpayer whose income is rel
>
> 6 evant in determining any affordability credit de
>
> 7 scribed in subtitle C of title II of the America?s
>
> 8 Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. Such
>
> 9 return information shall be limited to?
>
> 10 ??(i) taxpayer identity information
>
> 11 with respect to such taxpayer,
>
> 12 ??(ii) the filing status of such tax
>
> 13 payer,
>
> 14 ??(iii) the modified adjusted gross in
>
> 15come of such taxpayer (as defined in sec
>
> 16 tion 59B(e)(5)),
>
> 17 ??(iv) the number of dependents of the
>
> 18 taxpayer,
>
> 19 ??(v) such other information as is pre
>
> 20 scribed by the Secretary by regulation as
>
> 21 might indicate whether the taxpayer is eli
>
> 22 gible for such affordability credits (and the
>
> 23 amount thereof), and
>
> 24 ??(vi) the taxable year with respect to
>
> 25 which the preceding information relates or,
>
> 1 if applicable, the fact that such informa
>
> 2 tion is not available.
>
>
>
>  * Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be  
> treated as
> tax." Yes, it really says that.
>
> 13 ??(4) NOT TREATED AS TAX IMPOSED BY THIS
>
> 14 CHAPTER FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.?The tax im
>
> 15 posed under this section shall not be treated as tax
>
> 16 imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining
>
> 17 the amount of any credit under this chapter or for
>
> 18 purposes of section 55.??.
>
>
>
>  * Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid.  
> Seniors and
> the poor most affected."
>
> 14 (c) LIMITATION ON PHYSICIANS? SERVICES IN
>
> 15 CLUDED IN TARGET GROWTH RATE COMPUTATION TO
>
> 16 SERVICES COVERED UNDER PHYSICIAN FEE SCHED
>
> 17 ULE.?Effective for services furnished on or after January
>
> 18 1, 2009, section 1848(f)(4)(A) of such Act is amended
>
> 19 striking ??(such as clinical?? and all that follows through
>
> 20 ??in a physician?s office?? and inserting ??for which payment
>
> 21 under this part is made under the fee schedule under this
>
> 22 section, for services for practitioners described in section
>
> 23 1842(b)(18)(C) on a basis related to such fee schedule,
>
> 24 or for services described in section 1861(p) (other than
>
> 1 such services when furnished in the facility of a provider
>
> 2 of services)??.
>
>
>  * Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all  
> be paid
> the same (thanks, AMA!)
>
> 5 (1) ESTABLISHMENT OF SERVICE CAT
>
> 6EGORIES.?Subsection (j) of section 1848 of the So
>
> 7 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w?4) is amended
>
> 8 by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
>
> 9 ??(5) SERVICE CATEGORIES.?For services fur
>
> 10 nished on or after January 1, 2009, each of the fol
>
> 11 lowing categories of physicians? services (as defined
>
> 12 in paragraph (3)) shall be treated as a separate
>
> 13 ?service category?:
>
> 14 ??(A) Evaluation and management services
>
> 15 that are procedure codes (for services covered
>
> 16 under this title) for?
>
> 17 ??(i) services in the category des
>
> 18 ignated Evaluation and Management in the
>
> 19 Health Care Common Procedure Coding
>
> 20 System (established by the Secretary under
>
> 21 subsection (c)(5) as of December 31, 2009,
>
> 22 and as subsequently modified by the Sec
>
> 23 retary); and
>
> 1 ??(ii) preventive services (as defined in
>
> 2 section 1861(iii)) for which payment is
>
> 3 made under this section.
>
> 4 ??(B) All other services not described in
>
> 5 subparagraph (A).
>
> 6 Service categories established under this paragraph
>
> 7 shall apply without regard to the specialty of the
>
> 8 physician furnishing the service.??.
>
>
>
>  * Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their  
> professional
> judgment, etc.
>
> 4 ??(L) VALIDATING RELATIVE VALUE
>
> 5 UNITS.?
>
> 6 ??(i) IN GENERAL.?The Secretary
>
> 7 shall establish a process to validate relative
>
> 8 value units under the fee schedule under
>
> 9 subsection (b).
>
> 10 ??(ii) COMPONENTS AND ELEMENTS
>
> 11 OF WORK.?The process described in
>
> 12 clause (i) may include validation of work
>
> 13 elements (such as time, mental effort and
>
> 14 professional judgment, technical skill and
>
> 15 physical effort, and stress due to risk) in
>
> 16 volved with furnishing a service and may
>
> 17 include validation of the pre, post, and
>
> 18 intra-service components of work.
>
>
>
>  * Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
> healthcare industries.
>
> 2 SEC. 1131. INCORPORATING PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVE
>
> 3 MENTS INTO MARKET BASKET UPDATES
>
> 4 THAT DO NOT ALREADY INCORPORATE SUCH
>
> 5 IMPROVEMENTS.
>
>
>
>  * Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
> wheelchairs.
>
> 2 SEC. 1141. RENTAL AND PURCHASE OF POWER-DRIVEN
>
> 3 WHEELCHAIRS.
>
> 4 (a) IN GENERAL.?Section 1834(a)(7)(A)(iii) of the
>
> 5 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395m(a)(7)(A)(iii)) is
>
> 6 amended?
>
> 7 (1) in the heading, by inserting ??CERTAIN COM8
>
> PLEX REHABILITATIVE?? after ??OPTION FOR??; and
>
> 9 (2) by striking ??power-driven wheelchair?? and
>
> 10 inserting ??complex rehabilitative power-driven wheel
>
> 11 chair recognized by the Secretary as classified within
>
> 12 group 3 or higher??.
>
> 13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.?The amendments made by
>
> 14 subsection (a) shall take effect on January 1, 2011, and
>
> 15 shall apply to power-driven wheelchairs furnished on or
>
> 16 after such date. Such amendments shall not apply to con17
>
> tracts entered into under section 1847 of the Social Secu18
>
> rity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w?3) pursuant to a bid submitted
>
> 19 under such section before October 1, 2010, under sub20
>
> section (a)(1)(B)(i)(I) of such section.
>
>
>  * Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of  
> rationing!
>
> 8 ??(18) AUTHORIZATION OF ADJUSTMENT FOR
>
> 9 CANCER HOSPITALS.?
>
> 10 ??(A) STUDY.?The Secretary shall conduct
>
> 11 a study to determine if, under the system under
>
> 12 this subsection, costs incurred by hospitals de
>
> 13 scribed in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) with respect
>
> 14 to ambulatory payment classification groups ex
>
> 15 ceed those costs incurred by other hospitals fur
>
> 16 nishing services under this subsection (as deter
>
> 17 mined appropriate by the Secretary).
>
> 18 ??(B) AUTHORIZATION OF ADJUSTMENT.?
>
> 19 Insofar as the Secretary determines under sub20
>
> paragraph (A) that costs incurred by hospitals
>
> 21 described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) exceed
>
> 22 those costs incurred by other hospitals fur
>
> 23 nishing services under this subsection, the Sec
>
> 24 retary shall provide for an appropriate adjust
>
> 25 ment under paragraph (2)(E) to reflect those
>
> 1 higher costs effective for services furnished on
>
> 2 or after January 1, 2011.??.
>
>
>
>  * Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
> preventable re-admissions.
>
> 1 Subtitle C?Provisions Related to
>
> 2 Medicare Parts A and B
>
> 3 SEC. 1151. REDUCING POTENTIALLY PREVENTABLE HOS
>
> 4 PITAL READMISSIONS.
>
> 5 (a) HOSPITALS.?
>
> 6 (1) IN GENERAL.?Section 1886 of the Social
>
> 7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww), as amended by
>
> 8 section 1103(a), is amended by adding at the end
>
> 9 the following new subsection:
>
> 10 ??(p) ADJUSTMENT TO HOSPITAL PAYMENTS FOR
>
> 11 EXCESS READMISSIONS.?
>
>
>  * Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial  
> admission
> that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the  
> government.
>
> 9 (C) applying a payment reduction for phy
>
> 10 sicians who treat the patient during the initial
>
> 11 admission that results in a readmission; and
>
> 12 (D) methods for attributing payments or
>
> 13 payment reductions to the appropriate physi
>
> 14 cian or physicians.
>
>
>  * Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and  
> investing in
> healthcare companies!
>
> 1 ??(i) REQUIREMENTS TO QUALIFY FOR RURAL PRO
>
> 2 VIDER AND HOSPITAL OWNERSHIP EXCEPTIONS TO
>
> 3 SELF-REFERRAL PROHIBITION.?
>
> 4 ??(1) REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED.?For pur
>
> 5 poses of subsection (d)(3)(D), the requirements de
>
> 6 scribed in this paragraph are as follows:
>
> 7 ??(A) PROVIDER AGREEMENT.?The hos
>
> 8 pital had?
>
> 9 ??(i) physician ownership or invest
>
> 10 ment on January 1, 2009; and
>
> 11 ??(ii) a provider agreement under sec
>
> 12 tion 1866 in effect on such date.
>
> 13 ??(B) PROHIBITION ON PHYSICIAN OWNER
>
> 14 SHIP OR INVESTMENT.?The percentage of the
>
> 15 total value of the ownership or investment in
>
> 16 terests held in the hospital, or in an entity
>
> 17 whose assets include the hospital, by physician
>
> 18 owners or investors in the aggregate does not
>
> 19 exceed such percentage as of the date of enact
>
> 20 ment of this subsection.
>
>
>  * Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot  
> expand
> without government approval.
>
> 21 ??(C) PROHIBITION ON EXPANSION OF FA
>
> 22 CILITY CAPACITY.?Except as provided in para
>
> 23 graph (2), the number of operating rooms, pro
>
> 24 cedure rooms, or beds of the hospital at any
>
> 25 time on or after the date of the enactment of
>
> 1 this subsection are no greater than the number
>
> 2 of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds,
>
> 3 respectively, as of such date.
>
>
>  * Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in  
> other words,
> yet another payoff for ACORN.
>
> This relates to Hospital Expansion
> 7 ??(ii) OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMUNITY
>
> 8 INPUT.?The process under clause (i) shall
>
> 9 provide persons and entities in the commu
>
> 10 nity in which the hospital applying for an
>
> 11 exception is located with the opportunity to
>
> 12 provide input with respect to the application.
>
>
>
>  * Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based  
> measures:
> i.e., rationing.
>
> 16 ??(ii) ESTABLISHMENT OF OUTCOME BASED MEASURES.?By not later  
> than for
>
> 18 2013 the Secretary shall implement report
>
> 19 ing requirements for quality under this
>
> 20 section on measures selected under clause
>
> 21 (iii) that reflect the outcomes of care expe
>
> 22 rienced by individuals enrolled in Medicare
>
> 23 Advantage plans (in addition to measures
>
> 24 described in clause (i)). Such measures
>
> 25 may include?
>
> 1 ??(I) measures of rates of admis
>
> 2 sion and readmission to a hospital;
>
> 3 ??(II) measures of prevention
>
> 4 quality, such as those established by
>
> 5 the Agency for Healthcare Research
>
> 6 and Quality (that include hospital ad
>
> 7 mission rates for specified conditions);
>
> 8 ??(III) measures of patient mor
>
> 9 tality and morbidity following surgery;
>
> 10 ??(IV) measures of health func
>
> 11 tioning (such as limitations on activi
>
> 12 ties of daily living) and survival for
>
> 13 patients with chronic diseases;
>
> 14 ??(V) measures of patient safety;
>
> 15 and
>
> 16 ??(VI) other measure of outcomes
>
> 17 and patient quality of life as deter
>
> 18 mined by the Secretary.
>
> 19 Such measures shall be risk-adjusted as
>
> 20 the Secretary deems appropriate. In deter
>
> 21 mining the quality measures to be used
>
> 22 under this clause, the Secretary shall take
>
> 23 into consideration the recommendations of
>
> 24 the Medicare Payment Advisory Commis
>
> 25 sion in its report to Congress under section
>
> 1 168 of the Medicare Improvements for Pa
>
> 2 tients and Providers Act of 2008 (Public
>
> 3 Law 110?275) and shall provide pref
>
> 4 erence to measures collected on and com
>
> 5 parable to measures used in measuring
>
> 6 quality under parts A and B.
>
>
>
>  * Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
> Plans, HMOs, etc.
>
> 3 ??(iv) AUTHORITY TO DISQUALIFY
>
> 4 CERTAIN PLANS.?In applying clauses (ii)
>
> 5 and (iii), the Secretary may determine not
>
> 6 to identify a Medicare Advantage plan if
>
> 7 the Secretary has identified deficiencies in
>
> 8 the plan?s compliance with rules for such
>
> 9 plans under this part.
>
>
>  * Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
> individuals.
>
> 20 (2) ANALYSIS; REPORT.?The Secretary of
>
> 21 Health and Human Services shall provide, through
>
> 22 a contract with an independent health services eval
>
> 23 uation organization, for an analysis of the plans de
>
> 24 scribed in paragraph (1) with regard to the impact
>
> 25 of such plans on cost, quality of care, patient satis-
>
> 1 faction, and other subjects as specified by the Sec
>
> 2 retary. Not later than December 31, 2011, the Sec
>
> 3 retary shall submit to Congress a report on such
>
> 4 analysis and shall include in such report such rec
>
> 5 ommendations with regard to the treatment of such
>
> 6 plans as the Secretary deems appropriate.
>
>
>  * Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee  
> (healthcare by
> phone).
>
> 8 Subtitle F?Medicare Rural Access
>
> 9 Protections
>
> 10 SEC. 1191. TELEHEALTH EXPANSION AND ENHANCEMENTS.
>
> 11 .
>
> 12 (a) ADDITIONAL TELEHEALTH SITE.??
>
> 13 (1) IN GENERAL.?Paragraph (4)(C)(ii) of sec
>
> 14 tion 1834(m) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
>
> 15 1395m(m)) is amended by adding at the end the fol
>
> 16 lowing new subclause:
>
> 17 ??(IX) A renal dialysis facility.??
>
> 18 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.?The amendment made
>
> 19 by paragraph (1) shall apply to services furnished on
>
> 20 or after January 1, 2011.
>
> 21 (b) TELEHEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE.?
>
> 22 (1) ESTABLISHMENT.?Section 1868 of the So
>
> 23 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ee) is amended?
>
>
>  * Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
> Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
>
> 5 ??Advance Care Planning Consultation
>
> 6 ??(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the
>
> 7 term ?advance care planning consultation? means a con
>
> 8 sultation between the individual and a practitioner de
>
> 9 scribed in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning,
>
> 10 if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has
>
> 11 not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such
>
> 12 consultation shall include the following:
>
> 13 ??(A) An explanation by the practitioner of ad
>
> 14vance care planning, including key questions and
>
> 15 considerations, important steps, and suggested peo
>
> 16 ple to talk to.
>
> 17 ??(B) An explanation by the practitioner of ad
>
> 18 vance directives, including living wills and durable
>
> 19 powers of attorney, and their uses.
>
> 20 ??(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the
>
> 21 role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
>
> 22 ??(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list
>
> 23 of national and State-specific resources to assist con
>
> 24 sumers and their families with advance care plan
>
> 25 ning, including the national toll-free hotline, the ad-
>
> 1 vance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal
>
> 2 service organizations (including those funded
>
> 3 through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
>
> 4 ??(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the
>
> 5 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail
>
> 6 able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene
>
> 7 fits for such services and supports that are available
>
> 8 under this title.
>
>
>  * Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living  
> wills,
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in  
> estate taxes
> ahead of time.
>
>
> See the one above. Same page
>
>  * Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life  
> resources,
> guiding you in death.
>
> See the one above. Same page
>
>
>  * Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life  
> treatment;
> government dictates how your life ends.
>
> Actually it says the opposite. It limits this to state law.
> 5 ??(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement
>
> 6 for explanations under clause (i) to consultations
>
> 7 furnished in a State?
>
> 8 ??(I) in which all legal barriers have been
>
> 9 addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining
>
> 10 treatment to constitute a set of medical orders
>
> 11 respected across all care settings; and
>
> 12 ??(II) that has in effect a program for or13
>
> ders for life sustaining treatment described in
>
> 14 clause (iii).
>
> 15 ??(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining
>
> 16 treatment for a States described in this clause is a
>
> 17 program that?
>
>
>
>
>  * Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate  
> treatment
> as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end- 
> of-life
> plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
>
> Yes, it says exactly that.
>
> 1 ??(B) An advance care planning consultation with re2
>
> spect to an individual may be conducted more frequently
>
> 3 than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant
>
> 4 change in the health condition of the individual, including
>
> 5 diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a
>
> 6 life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening
>
> 7 injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a
>
> 8 long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or
>
> 9 a hospice program.
>
> 10 ??(4) A consultation under this subsection may in11
>
> clude the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining
>
> 12 treatment or a similar order.
>
> 13 ??(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ?order
>
> 14 regarding life sustaining treatment? means, with respect
>
> 15 to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to
>
> 16 the treatment of that individual that?
>
>
>
>  * Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you  
> may have at
> end-of-life.
>
> 11 ??(B) The level of treatment indicated under subpara
>
> 12 graph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treat
>
> 13 ment to an indication to limit some or all or specified
>
> 14 interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may in
>
> 15 clude indications respecting, among other items?
>
>
>  * Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs  
> for ACORN.
>
> 1 ??(B) COMMUNITY-BASED MEDICAL HOME
>
> 2 DEFINED.?In this section, the term ?commu3
>
> nity-based medical home? means a nonprofit
>
> 4 community-based or State-based organization
>
> 5 that is certified under paragraph (2) as meeting
>
> 6 the following requirements:
>
> 7 ??(i) The organization provides bene8
>
> ficiaries with medical home services.
>
> 9 ??(ii) The organization provides med10
>
> ical home services under the supervision of
>
> 11 and in close collaboration with the primary
>
> 12 care or principal care physician or nurse
>
> 13 practitioner designated by the beneficiary
>
> 14 as his or her community-based medical
>
> 15 home provider.
>
>
>
>  * Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more  
> payoffs for
> ACORN.
>
> 14 ??(i) PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED
>
> 15 ORGANIZATION.?One monthly payment to
>
> 16 a community-based or State-based organi
>
> 17 zation.
>
>
>
>  * Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.  
> Government
> intervenes in your marriage.
>
> 19 SEC. 1308. COVERAGE OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERA
>
> 20 PIST SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH COUN
>
> 21 SELOR SERVICES.
>
> 22 (a) COVERAGE OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERA
>
> 23 PIST SERVICES.?
>
> 24 (1) COVERAGE OF SERVICES.?Section
>
> 25 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
>
> 1 1395x(s)(2)), as amended by section 1235, is
>
> 2 amended?
>
> 3 (A) in subparagraph (EE), by striking
>
> 4 ??and?? at the end;
>
> 5 (B) in subparagraph (FF), by adding
>
> 6 ??and?? at the end; and
>
> 7 (C) by adding at the end the following new
>
> 8 subparagraph:
>
> 9 ??(GG) marriage and family therapist serv
>
> 10ices (as defined in subsection (jjj));??.
>
> 11 (2) DEFINITION.?Section 1861 of the Social
>
> 12 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x), as amended by sec
>
> 13 tions 1235 and 1305, is amended by adding at the
>
> 14 end the following new subsection:
>
> 15 ??Marriage and Family Therapist Services
>
> 16 ??(jjj)(1) The term ?marriage and family therapist
>
> 17 services? means services performed by a marriage and
>
> 18 family therapist (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the diag
>
> 19nosis and treatment of mental illnesses, which the mar
>
> 20 riage and family therapist is legally authorized to perform
>
> 21 under State law (or the State regulatory mechanism pro
>
> 22 vided by State law) of the State in which such services
>
> 23 are performed, as would otherwise be covered if furnished
>
> 24 by a physician or as incident to a physician?s professional
>
> 25 service, but only if no facility or other provider charges
>
>
>  * Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
> creating and rationing those services
> 19 ??Mental Health Counselor Services
>
> 20 ??(kkk)(1) The term ?mental health counselor services?
>
> 21 means services performed by a mental health counselor (as
>
> 22 defined in paragraph (2)) for the diagnosis and treatment
>
> 23 of mental illnesses which the mental health counselor is
>
> 24 legally authorized to perform under State law (or the
>
> 25 State regulatory mechanism provided by the State law) of
>
> 1 the State in which such services are performed, as would
>
> 2 otherwise be covered if furnished by a physician or as inci
>
> 3 dent to a physician?s professional service, but only if no
>
> 4 facility or other provider charges or is paid any amounts
>
> 5 with respect to the furnishing of such services.
>
> 6 ??(2) The term ?mental health counselor? means an
>
> 7 individual who?
>
> 8 ??(A) possesses a master?s or doctor?s degree
>
> 9 which qualifies the individual for licensure or certifi
>
> 10 cation for the practice of mental health counseling in
>
> 11 the State in which the services are performed;
>
> 12 ??(B) after obtaining such a degree has per
>
> 13 formed at least 2 years of supervised mental health
>
> 14 counselor practice; and
>
> 15 ??(C) is licensed or certified as a mental health
>
> 16 counselor or professional counselor by the State in
>
> 17 which the services are performed.??.
>
> 18 (3) PROVISION FOR PAYMENT UNDER PART
>
> 19 B.?Section 1832(a)(2)(B) of the Social Security
>
> 20 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395k(a)(2)(B)), as amended by
>
> 21 subsection (a)(3), is further amended?
>
> 22 (A) by striking ??and?? at the end of clause
>
> 23 (iv);
>
> 24 (B) by adding ??and?? at the end of clause
>
> 25 (v); and
>
> 1 (C) by adding at the end the following new
>
> 2 clause:
>
> 3 ??(vi) mental health counselor serv
>
> 4 ices;??.
>
> 5 (4) AMOUNT OF PAYMENT.?
>
> 6 (A) IN GENERAL.?Section 1833(a)(1) of
>
> 7 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
>
> 8 1395l(a)(1)), as amended by subsection (a), is
>
> 9 further amended?
>
> 10 (i) by striking ??and??before ??(X)??;
>
> 11 and
>
> 12 (ii) by inserting before the semicolon
>
> 13 at the end the following: ??, and (Y), with
>
> 14 respect to mental health counselor services
>
> 15 under section 1861(s)(2)(HH), the
>
> 16 amounts paid shall be 80 percent of the
>
> 17 lesser of the actual charge for the services
>
> 18 or 75 percent of the amount determined
>
> 19 for payment of a psychologist under clause
>
> 20 (L)??.
>
> 21 (B) DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA WITH RE
>
> 22 SPECT TO CONSULTATION WITH A PHYSICIAN.?
>
> 23 The Secretary of Health and Human Services
>
> 24 shall, taking into consideration concerns for pa
>
> 25 tient confidentiality, develop criteria with re-
>
> 1 spect to payment for mental health counselor
>
> 2 services for which payment may be made di
>
> 3 rectly to the mental health counselor under part
>
> 4 B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42
>
> 5 U.S.C. 1395j et seq.) under which such a coun
>
> 6 selor must agree to consult with a patient?s at
>
> 7 tending or primary care physician in accordance
>
> 8 with such criteria.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From rab at jurislex.com  Fri Aug  7 13:45:24 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:45:24 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEABMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEABMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4A7C9264.9000204@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090807/cc8263d6/attachment.html 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Fri Aug  7 17:24:21 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:24:21 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <4A7C9264.9000204@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEADMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Yea, I was trying to put the actual claims from one side and putting it
against the actual text.
So there is no misleading or choosing of which questions to ask or skip. The
original email had forty complaints. Some I couldn't find. Some had been
misunderstood. Some were accusatory without much merit. But some were right
on.
I posted one of my personal concerns in the opening paragraph. This list was
not just something I copied off a web site.

A question that came to me was what of the non employed folks. Where do you
get coverage? It is all tied to employment.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 1:45 PM
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare


  Steven, 1018 pages of very large, widely spaced type ! ! !  Wow!!!

  But, thanks anyway!

  bob
  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Steven wrote:
docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
  -----Original Message-----

  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 11:28 AM
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare

  Steven, can you give us a link so we can read it without the computer
presenting it all chopped up? I like fact, as you know, and I want to read
this, but in a more concise fashion.

  bob "I scan slow" browning
  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From isis23ra at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  7 17:31:46 2009
From: isis23ra at yahoo.com (Alana Graham)
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPOMHAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <868323.76297.qm@web55604.mail.re4.yahoo.com>


I read the article and read Ron Wyden's version of the health care plan but as a single payer health care advocate I thought Wyden's was too conservative.  I find it interesting that on the whole, family practice providers (like I work for) are much in favor of single payer but specialists like the system the way it is.  Guess who's making the most money?

AG


--- On Fri, 8/7/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:

> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Date: Friday, August 7, 2009, 9:25 AM
> Did you read up on it or just take
> their word for it.
> It is a good idea.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com
> [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > Behalf Of Alana Graham
> > Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 8:47 AM
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > Subject: [Grovenet] Ron Wyden's Health Plan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I read in The Oregonian a while back that Obama said
> Ron Wyden's plan was
> > too radical!
> > 
> > AG
> > 
> > --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Statistics
> > > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 10:24 PM
> > > Speaking of health care. Our own Ron
> > > Wyden has brought up a health plan that
> > > would not break the country and had a good review
> from the
> > > Budget office.
> > > Why is it getting no coverage or comment?
> > > Removes the tax benefits for employer insurance
> and gives
> > > it to the
> > > individuals.
> > > http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 


      

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Sat Aug  8 08:26:29 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 08:26:29 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
Message-ID: <27013-4A7D9925-3345@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>

Before you read to the end, does anybody know what the main?ingredient
of WD-40 is?? Don't lie and don't cheat.? WD-40.? Who knew?
?I had a neighbor who had bought a new pickup.? I got up very early
one?Sunday morning and saw that someone had spray painted red all
around the?sides of this beige truck (for some unknown reason).? I
went over, woke?him up, and told him the bad news.? He was very
upset and was trying to?figure out what to do probably nothing until
Monday morning, since?nothing was open.? Another neighbor came out
and told him to get his?WD-40 and clean it off.? It removed the
unwanted paint beautifully and?did not harm his paint job that was on
the truck.? I'm impressed!? WD-40, ?who knew?
?'Water Displacement #40' The product began from?a search for a rust
preventative solvent and degreaser to protect?missile parts.? WD-40
was created in 1953 by three technicians at the?San Diego Rocket
Chemical Company.? Its name comes from the project that?was to find
a 'water displacement' compound..? They were successful with?the
fortieth formulation, thus WD-40.? The Convair Company bought it
in?bulk to protect their atlas missile parts.? Ken East (one of
the?original founders) says there is nothing in?WD-40 that would
hurt you.
?When you read the 'shower door' part, try it.? It's the first thing
that?has ever cleaned that spotty shower?door..? If yours is
plastic, it works just as well as glass.? It's a?miracle!? Then
try it on your stove top ...? Viola!? It's now shinier?than it's
ever been.? You'll be amazed.? Here are some other uses:
?1. Protects silver from tarnishing.
?2.? Removes road tar and grime from? cars.
?3.? Cleans and lubricates guitar strings.
?4.? Gives floors that? 'just-waxed' sheen without making them
slippery.
?5.? Keeps flies off cows.
?6.? Restores and cleans chalkboards.
?7.? Removes lipstick stains.
?8.? Loosens stubborn zippers.
9.? Untangles? jewelry chains.
10.? Removes stains from stainless steel sinks.
?11.? Removes dirt and grime from the barbecue grill.
?12.? Keeps ceramic/terra? cotta garden pots from oxidizing.
?13.? Removes tomato stains from? clothing.
?14.? Keeps glass shower doors free of water spots.
?15.? Camouflages scratches in ceramic and marble floors.
?16.? Keeps scissors? working smoothly.
?17.? Lubricates noisy door hinges on vehicles and? doors in
homes.
?18.? It removes black scuff marks from the kitchen floor!? Use
WD-40 for?those nasty tar and scuff marks on flooring.? It doesn't
seem???????to harm the finish and you won't have to scrub
nearly as hard to?get them off.? Just? remember to open some
windows???????if you have a lot of marks.
?19.? Bug guts will eat away the finish on? your car if not
removed?quickly! Use WD-40!
?20.? Gives a children's playground gym? slide a shine for a super
fast?slide.
?21.? Lubricates gear shift and mower deck lever for ease of
handling on?riding mowers.
?22.? Rids kids rocking chairs and swings of? squeaky noises.
?23.? Lubricates tracks in sticking home windows and? makes them
easier? to?open.
?24.? Spraying an umbrella stem makes it easier to open? and
close.
?25.? Restores and cleans padded leather dashboards in vehicles, as
well?as vinyl bumpers.
?26.? Restores and cleans roof racks on? vehicles.
?27.? Lubricates and stops squeaks in electric fans
?28.? Lubricates wheel sprockets on tricycles, wagons, and bicycles
for?easy handling.
?29.? Lubricates fan belts on washers and? dryers and keeps them
running?smoothly.
?30.? Keeps rust from forming on saws and saw blades,? and other
tools.
?31.? Removes splattered grease on stove.
?
?32.? Keeps bathroom? mirror? from?fogging.
?33.? Lubricates prosthetic limbs.
?34.? Keeps? pigeons off the balcony (they hate the smell).
?35.? Removes all traces? of duct tape.
?36.? Folks even spray it on their arms, hands, and knees? to
relieve?arthritis pain.
37.? Florida 's favorite use is: 'cleans and? removes love bugs
from?grills and bumpers.'
?38.? The favorite use in the state of New York? , WD-40
protects???????the Statue of Liberty from the elements.
?39.? WD-40 attracts fish.? Spray a little on live bait or lures
and you?will be catching the big one in no? time.? Also, it's a
lot cheaper than the chemical attractants?that are made for just that
purpose.? Keep in mind though,???????using some chemical
laced baits or lures for fishing are not?allowed in some states.
?40.? Use it for fire? ant bites.? It takes the sting away
immediately? and?stops the itch.
?41.? WD-40 is great for removing crayon? from walls.? Spray
on??the mark and wipe with a clean rag.
?42.? Also, if you've discovered that? your teenage
daughter??washed and dried a tube of lipstick with a load of
laundry,?saturate the??lipstick spots with WD-40 and rewash.?
Presto!? The lipstick is?gone!
?43.? If you sprayed? WD-40 on the distributor cap, it would
displace the?moisture and allow the car to start.
?P.? S.? The basic???ingredient is FISH OIL.
______________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.46/2145 - Release Date:
05/31/09 
05:53:00

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090808/7bb94ccc/attachment.html 

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Sat Aug  8 08:43:42 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 08:43:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Questions to ponder during the night
Message-ID: <27016-4A7D9D2E-1818@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>

 
How important does a person have to be before they are considered
assassinated instead of?murdered? 

Why do you have to "put your two cents in"... but it's only a "penny for
your thoughts"? ?Where's that extra penny going to and where did it
come from? 

Once you're in heaven, do you get stuck wearing the clothes you were
buried in for eternity? 

Why does a round pizza come in a square box? 

What disease did cured ham actually have? 

How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be
a good idea to put wheels on luggage? 

Why is it that people say they "slept like a baby" when babies wake up
like every two hours? 

If a deaf person has to go to court, is it still called a hearing? 

Why are you IN a movie, but you're ON TV? 

Why do people pay to go up tall buildings and then put money in
binoculars to look at things on the ground? 

Why do doctors leave the room while you change?? They're going to see
you naked anyway. 

Why is "bra" singular and "panties" plural? 
Why do toasters always have a setting that burns the toast to a horrible
crisp, which no decent human being would eat? 

If Jimmy cracks corn and no one cares, why is there a stupid song about
him? 

Can a hearse carrying a corpse drive in the car-pool lane ? 

If the professor on?Gilligan's Island?can make a radio out of a
coconut, why can't he fix a hole in a boat? 

Why does Goofy stand erect while?Pluto?remains on all fours?
They're both dogs! 

If Wile E. Coyote had enough money to buy all that ACME crap, why didn't
he just buy dinner? 

If corn oil is made from corn, and?vegetable oil?is made from
vegetables, what is baby oil made from? 

If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons? 

Does the?Alphabet song?Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star have the same
tune? 
Why did you just try singing the two songs above? 

Why do they call it an asteroid when it's outside the hemisphere, but
call it a hemorrhoid when it's in your butt? 

Did you ever notice that when you blow in a dog's face, he gets mad at
you, but when you take him for a car ride, he sticks his head out the
window?
?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090808/8b57a5fc/attachment.html 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Sat Aug  8 15:35:13 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417@gerianehzkfhvy>

Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
of these before?)

Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."

Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.

Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.

Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.

It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
has been restricted. Please enter your card number
now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
I hung up.


Geri

From allnutt at verizon.net  Sat Aug  8 20:38:46 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
In-Reply-To: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D@verizon.net>

Thanks Geri,
   The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people  
are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and  
enter their card #.
   We got a similar  phone call not long ago, but it was an actual  
person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been  
stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's  
which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
    I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly  
after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.

Better to be informed.


Katie

On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:

> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> of these before?)
>
> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>
> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>
> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>
> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>
> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> I hung up.
>
>
> Geri
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Sun Aug  9 10:12:39 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
References: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8@gerianehzkfhvy>

Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
and for online gambling.

Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!

:-)
Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt


> Thanks Geri,
>   The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people  
> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and  
> enter their card #.
>   We got a similar  phone call not long ago, but it was an actual  
> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been  
> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's  
> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
>    I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly  
> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
> 
> Better to be informed.
> 
> 
> Katie
> 
> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
> 
>> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> of these before?)
>>
>> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>>
>> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>>
>> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>>
>> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>>
>> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> I hung up.
>>
>>
>> Geri
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From JJSAW at aol.com  Sun Aug  9 11:37:12 2009
From: JJSAW at aol.com (JJSAW at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158@aol.com>

 
Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  plan. If that is 
not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments and benefits 
you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free 
healthcare  services.
? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare 
Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
translation: illegal  aliens 
? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
you have no choice in the  matter. 
? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
"judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, 
private insurers will be  crushed.
? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run 
public plan. No  alternatives. 
? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
AND their  families. 
? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who does 
not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
(according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
(Americans will pay for  them). 
? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and  
the poor most affected." 
? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
paid the same  
? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
judgment, etc. 
? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
healthcare industries. 
? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
wheelchairs. 
? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! 
? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
preventable re-admissions. 
? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial admission 
that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the government. 
? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
healthcare companies! 
? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
without government approval. 
? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
i.e.,  rationing. 
? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
individuals. 
? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by 
phone). 
? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living  wills, 
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate  taxes 
ahead of time. 
? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
guiding you in death. 
? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; 
government  dictates how your life ends. 
? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for 
end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
at  end-of-life. 
? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government  
intervenes in your marriage.
? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
creating and rationing those services. 


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  9 13:28:11 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 13:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
In-Reply-To: <27013-4A7D9925-3345@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
References: <27013-4A7D9925-3345@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <47852.49298.qm@web56101.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Awesome, Alan!  I am running out right now to buy a can of WD-40 to get that pesky road tar off the side of my van. And, I'm using it to polish up my handmade, broken-china-and-stained-glass stepping stones once they've been sealed. And, I'm gonna place it on my carriage house shelf right next to my duct tape. Fish oil. Who'da thunk?!

Many thanks!

Holly




________________________________
From: Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss <OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net>
To: GroveNet at rdrop.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2009 8:26:29 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40

Before you read to the end, does anybody know what the main ingredient
of WD-40 is?  Don't lie and don't cheat.  WD-40.  Who knew?
 I had a neighbor who had bought a new pickup.  I got up very early
one Sunday morning and saw that someone had spray painted red all
around the sides of this beige truck (for some unknown reason).  I
went over, woke him up, and told him the bad news.  He was very
upset and was trying to figure out what to do probably nothing until
Monday morning, since nothing was open.  Another neighbor came out
and told him to get his WD-40 and clean it off.  It removed the
unwanted paint beautifully and did not harm his paint job that was on
the truck.  I'm impressed!  WD-40,  who knew?
 'Water Displacement #40' The product began from a search for a rust
preventative solvent and degreaser to protect missile parts.  WD-40
was created in 1953 by three technicians at the San Diego Rocket
Chemical Company.  Its name comes from the project that was to find
a 'water displacement' compound..  They were successful with the
fortieth formulation, thus WD-40.  The Convair Company bought it
in bulk to protect their atlas missile parts.  Ken East (one of
the original founders) says there is nothing in WD-40 that would
hurt you.
 When you read the 'shower door' part, try it.  It's the first thing
that has ever cleaned that spotty shower door..  If yours is
plastic, it works just as well as glass.  It's a miracle!  Then
try it on your stove top ...  Viola!  It's now shinier than it's
ever been.  You'll be amazed.  Here are some other uses:
 1. Protects silver from tarnishing.
 2.  Removes road tar and grime from  cars.
 3.  Cleans and lubricates guitar strings.
 4.  Gives floors that  'just-waxed' sheen without making them
slippery.
 5.  Keeps flies off cows.
 6.  Restores and cleans chalkboards.
 7.  Removes lipstick stains.
 8.  Loosens stubborn zippers.
9.  Untangles  jewelry chains.
10.  Removes stains from stainless steel sinks.
 11.  Removes dirt and grime from the barbecue grill.
 12.  Keeps ceramic/terra  cotta garden pots from oxidizing.
 13.  Removes tomato stains from  clothing.
 14.  Keeps glass shower doors free of water spots.
 15.  Camouflages scratches in ceramic and marble floors.
 16.  Keeps scissors  working smoothly.
 17.  Lubricates noisy door hinges on vehicles and  doors in
homes.
 18.  It removes black scuff marks from the kitchen floor!  Use
WD-40 for those nasty tar and scuff marks on flooring.  It doesn't
seem       to harm the finish and you won't have to scrub
nearly as hard to get them off.  Just  remember to open some
windows       if you have a lot of marks.
 19.  Bug guts will eat away the finish on  your car if not
removed quickly! Use WD-40!
 20.  Gives a children's playground gym  slide a shine for a super
fast slide.
 21.  Lubricates gear shift and mower deck lever for ease of
handling on riding mowers.
 22.  Rids kids rocking chairs and swings of  squeaky noises.
 23.  Lubricates tracks in sticking home windows and  makes them
easier  to open.
 24.  Spraying an umbrella stem makes it easier to open  and
close.
 25.  Restores and cleans padded leather dashboards in vehicles, as
well as vinyl bumpers.
 26.  Restores and cleans roof racks on  vehicles.
 27.  Lubricates and stops squeaks in electric fans
 28.  Lubricates wheel sprockets on tricycles, wagons, and bicycles
for easy handling.
 29.  Lubricates fan belts on washers and  dryers and keeps them
running smoothly.
 30.  Keeps rust from forming on saws and saw blades,  and other
tools.
 31.  Removes splattered grease on stove.
 
 32.  Keeps bathroom  mirror  from fogging.
 33.  Lubricates prosthetic limbs.
 34.  Keeps  pigeons off the balcony (they hate the smell).
 35.  Removes all traces  of duct tape.
 36.  Folks even spray it on their arms, hands, and knees  to
relieve arthritis pain.
37.  Florida 's favorite use is: 'cleans and  removes love bugs
from grills and bumpers.'
 38.  The favorite use in the state of New York  , WD-40
protects       the Statue of Liberty from the elements.
 39.  WD-40 attracts fish.  Spray a little on live bait or lures
and you will be catching the big one in no  time.  Also, it's a
lot cheaper than the chemical attractants that are made for just that
purpose.  Keep in mind though,       using some chemical
laced baits or lures for fishing are not allowed in some states.
 40.  Use it for fire  ant bites.  It takes the sting away
immediately  and stops the itch.
 41.  WD-40 is great for removing crayon  from walls.  Spray
on  the mark and wipe with a clean rag.
 42.  Also, if you've discovered that  your teenage
daughter  washed and dried a tube of lipstick with a load of
laundry, saturate the  lipstick spots with WD-40 and rewash. 
Presto!  The lipstick is gone!
 43.  If you sprayed  WD-40 on the distributor cap, it would
displace the moisture and allow the car to start.
 P.  S.  The basic   ingredient is FISH OIL.
______________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.46/2145 - Release Date:
05/31/09
05:53:00




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


 
Alan's
Place 


      

From allnutt at verizon.net  Sun Aug  9 13:45:04 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 13:45:04 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158@aol.com>
References: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158@aol.com>
Message-ID: <9DF9526B-E4CC-4D6D-AE36-310EB8DEA006@verizon.net>

I'll just pick one to counter argue....
How about the one on page 22.  Mandates audits of all employers that  
self-insure!

How is that bad? Would you rather that they not be audited?
Lets see what is at stake.  Your employer is going to collect  
insurance payment from you as the worker. (That is what it means to  
self insure. You give your insurance dollars to your employer.)  Now  
would you rather have your employer then be free to spend those  
dollars on anything (CEO trips to Vegas perhaps) or would you rather  
that there be some checks and balances to make sure the premiums go  
into some kind of investment that will reasonably be able to pay an  
insurance claim when you get sick.


I don't see much difference between insurance companies now saying -  
oops we won't pay your medical claim because  we don't cover that and  
your self insured but not audited employer saying oops we won't pay  
your medical claim because we invested the insurance money on the  
Vegas trip and now we don't have any funds to cover it.

Who ever wrote this list even put an exclamation point on it.  This  
tells me that they want to force all the risk to the lowest level  
individual.    It is similar to asking you to check your hamburger  
for e-coli before the barbeque. Why shouldn't you carry all the risk  
for food borne illnesses and not make the meat processors responsible  
for making sure the cow can stand up before it is slaughtered.


Auditing requirements for self insured companies is not unreasonable.

The other provisions of health care reform have similar logic behind  
them if you care to investigate the truth behind them.


Katie





On Aug 9, 2009, at 11:37 AM, JJSAW at aol.com wrote:

>
> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill
> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar   
> plan. If that is
> not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
> ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments and  
> benefits
> you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health  
> benefits
> for you. You will have no choice.  None.
> ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided  
> with free
> healthcare  services.
> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard.
> ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time  
> access to
> all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
> ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government  
> rules
> to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange.
> ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the  
> Healthcare
> Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans)
> ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for  
> services;
> translation: illegal  aliens
> ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
> individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan.
> ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically  
> enrolled:
> you have no choice in the  matter.
> ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
> "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly.  
> Put simply,
> private insurers will be  crushed.
> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages.
> ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the  
> government-run
> public plan. No  alternatives.
> ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time  
> employees
> AND their  families.
> ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does  
> not
> offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who  
> does
> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
> ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
> (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income.
> ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
> (Americans will pay for  them).
> ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare  
> Bureaucracy
> will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records.
> ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be  
> treated as
> tax." Yes, it  really says that.
> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid.  
> Seniors and
> the poor most affected."
> ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll  
> all be
> paid the same
> ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their  
> professional
> judgment, etc.
> ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private
> healthcare industries.
> ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
> wheelchairs.
> ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of  
> rationing!
> ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems
> preventable re-admissions.
> ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial  
> admission
> that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the  
> government.
> ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and  
> investing in
> healthcare companies!
> ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot  
> expand
> without government approval.
> ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
> words, yet another payoff for  ACORN.
> ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based  
> measures:
> i.e.,  rationing.
> ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
> Plans, HMOs,  etc.
> ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
> individuals.
> ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee  
> (healthcare by
> phone).
> ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
> Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living   
> wills,
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in  
> estate  taxes
> ahead of time.
> ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life  
> resources,
> guiding you in death.
> ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life  
> treatment;
> government  dictates how your life ends.
> ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate
> treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an  
> ORDER for
> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT.
> ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you  
> may have
> at  end-of-life.
> ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.  
> Government
> intervenes in your marriage.
> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining,
> creating and rationing those services.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  9 14:33:37 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:33:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158@aol.com>
References: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158@aol.com>
Message-ID: <26574.70083.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Starting at the top of the tidbits below, I delved into the Healthcare Insurance Bill details.

Whoever wrote the tidbits below has taken the liberty to paraphrase what is written to support their view the Bill is bad.

1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a cost-sharing plan.

In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.

The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.

Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under President Obama.

 
Allen Warren

From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare


Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  plan. If that is 
not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments and benefits 
you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free 
healthcare  services.
? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare 
Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
translation: illegal  aliens 
? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
you have no choice in the  matter. 
? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
"judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, 
private insurers will be  crushed.
? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run 
public plan. No  alternatives. 
? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
AND their  families. 
? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who does 
not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
(according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
(Americans will pay for  them). 
? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and  
the poor most affected." 
? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
paid the same  
? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
judgment, etc. 
? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
healthcare industries. 
? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
wheelchairs. 
? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! 
? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
preventable re-admissions. 
? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial admission 
that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the government. 
? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
healthcare companies! 
? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
without government approval. 
? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
i.e.,  rationing. 
? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
individuals. 
? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by 
phone). 
? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living  wills, 
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate  taxes 
ahead of time. 
? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
guiding you in death. 
? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; 
government  dictates how your life ends. 
? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for 
end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
at  end-of-life. 
? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government  
intervenes in your marriage.
? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
creating and rationing those services. 

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jim at benchmarkinspections.com  Sun Aug  9 16:11:06 2009
From: jim at benchmarkinspections.com (Jim Katen)
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:11:06 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
In-Reply-To: <27013-4A7D9925-3345@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
References: <27013-4A7D9925-3345@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <8F5DAB9FE28B4EE7B85E3A36FD695025@JimDell>

Am I the only one who uses WD-40 as starter fluid in a pinch? 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:26 AM
To: GroveNet at rdrop.com
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40

Before you read to the end, does anybody know what the main?ingredient
of WD-40 is?? Don't lie and don't cheat.? WD-40.? Who knew?
?I had a neighbor who had bought a new pickup.? I got up very early
one?Sunday morning and saw that someone had spray painted red all
around the?sides of this beige truck (for some unknown reason).? I
went over, woke?him up, and told him the bad news.? He was very
upset and was trying to?figure out what to do probably nothing until
Monday morning, since?nothing was open.? Another neighbor came out
and told him to get his?WD-40 and clean it off.? It removed the
unwanted paint beautifully and?did not harm his paint job that was on
the truck.? I'm impressed!? WD-40, ?who knew?
?'Water Displacement #40' The product began from?a search for a rust
preventative solvent and degreaser to protect?missile parts.? WD-40
was created in 1953 by three technicians at the?San Diego Rocket
Chemical Company.? Its name comes from the project that?was to find
a 'water displacement' compound..? They were successful with?the
fortieth formulation, thus WD-40.? The Convair Company bought it
in?bulk to protect their atlas missile parts.? Ken East (one of
the?original founders) says there is nothing in?WD-40 that would
hurt you.
?When you read the 'shower door' part, try it.? It's the first thing
that?has ever cleaned that spotty shower?door..? If yours is
plastic, it works just as well as glass.? It's a?miracle!? Then
try it on your stove top ...? Viola!? It's now shinier?than it's
ever been.? You'll be amazed.? Here are some other uses:
?1. Protects silver from tarnishing.
?2.? Removes road tar and grime from? cars.
?3.? Cleans and lubricates guitar strings.
?4.? Gives floors that? 'just-waxed' sheen without making them
slippery.
?5.? Keeps flies off cows.
?6.? Restores and cleans chalkboards.
?7.? Removes lipstick stains.
?8.? Loosens stubborn zippers.
9.? Untangles? jewelry chains.
10.? Removes stains from stainless steel sinks.
?11.? Removes dirt and grime from the barbecue grill.
?12.? Keeps ceramic/terra? cotta garden pots from oxidizing.
?13.? Removes tomato stains from? clothing.
?14.? Keeps glass shower doors free of water spots.
?15.? Camouflages scratches in ceramic and marble floors.
?16.? Keeps scissors? working smoothly.
?17.? Lubricates noisy door hinges on vehicles and? doors in
homes.
?18.? It removes black scuff marks from the kitchen floor!? Use
WD-40 for?those nasty tar and scuff marks on flooring.? It doesn't
seem???????to harm the finish and you won't have to scrub
nearly as hard to?get them off.? Just? remember to open some
windows???????if you have a lot of marks.
?19.? Bug guts will eat away the finish on? your car if not
removed?quickly! Use WD-40!
?20.? Gives a children's playground gym? slide a shine for a super
fast?slide.
?21.? Lubricates gear shift and mower deck lever for ease of
handling on?riding mowers.
?22.? Rids kids rocking chairs and swings of? squeaky noises.
?23.? Lubricates tracks in sticking home windows and? makes them
easier? to?open.
?24.? Spraying an umbrella stem makes it easier to open? and
close.
?25.? Restores and cleans padded leather dashboards in vehicles, as
well?as vinyl bumpers.
?26.? Restores and cleans roof racks on? vehicles.
?27.? Lubricates and stops squeaks in electric fans
?28.? Lubricates wheel sprockets on tricycles, wagons, and bicycles
for?easy handling.
?29.? Lubricates fan belts on washers and? dryers and keeps them
running?smoothly.
?30.? Keeps rust from forming on saws and saw blades,? and other
tools.
?31.? Removes splattered grease on stove.
?
?32.? Keeps bathroom? mirror? from?fogging.
?33.? Lubricates prosthetic limbs.
?34.? Keeps? pigeons off the balcony (they hate the smell).
?35.? Removes all traces? of duct tape.
?36.? Folks even spray it on their arms, hands, and knees? to
relieve?arthritis pain.
37.? Florida 's favorite use is: 'cleans and? removes love bugs
from?grills and bumpers.'
?38.? The favorite use in the state of New York? , WD-40
protects???????the Statue of Liberty from the elements.
?39.? WD-40 attracts fish.? Spray a little on live bait or lures
and you?will be catching the big one in no? time.? Also, it's a
lot cheaper than the chemical attractants?that are made for just that
purpose.? Keep in mind though,???????using some chemical
laced baits or lures for fishing are not?allowed in some states.
?40.? Use it for fire? ant bites.? It takes the sting away
immediately? and?stops the itch.
?41.? WD-40 is great for removing crayon? from walls.? Spray
on??the mark and wipe with a clean rag.
?42.? Also, if you've discovered that? your teenage
daughter??washed and dried a tube of lipstick with a load of
laundry,?saturate the??lipstick spots with WD-40 and rewash.?
Presto!? The lipstick is?gone!
?43.? If you sprayed? WD-40 on the distributor cap, it would
displace the?moisture and allow the car to start.
?P.? S.? The basic???ingredient is FISH OIL.
______________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.46/2145 - Release Date:
05/31/09 
05:53:00




From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Sun Aug  9 16:12:37 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:12:37 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
In-Reply-To: "Holly T." <feralcattamer@yahoo.com>'s message of Sun,
	9 Aug 2009 13:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <12261-4A7F57E5-595@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net>

Your very welcome Holly....
I spray it inside all of my outside light and power boxes as well as the
sides of all of my turn signal, and stop light light-blubs.
Even made money during the rainy season, because a lot of folks thought
it was fun to splash through water puddles.
 However, when the spray got into their cars distributors the engine
would die, so all I  did was pop off the top and put WD-40 inside to
displace the water, and away they went.

Holly wrote....
Awesome, Alan! I am running out right now to buy a can of WD-40 to get
that pesky road tar off the side of my van. And, I'm using it to polish
up my handmade, broken-china-and-stained-glass stepping stones once
they've been sealed. And, I'm gonna place it on my carriage house shelf
right next to my duct tape. Fish oil. Who'da thunk?! 
Many thanks! 
Holly 


From obrzl at verizon.net  Sun Aug  9 16:40:13 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 16:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
In-Reply-To: <8F5DAB9FE28B4EE7B85E3A36FD695025@JimDell>
Message-ID: <787849.86944.qm@web84202.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

It's also good for cleaning and speeding up the fret boards of guitars and probably all string instruments.

--- On Sun, 8/9/09, Jim Katen <jim at benchmarkinspections.com> wrote:


From: Jim Katen <jim at benchmarkinspections.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] WD-40
To: "'Forest Grove local interests list'" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 11:11 PM


Am I the only one who uses WD-40 as starter fluid in a pinch? 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:26 AM
To: GroveNet at rdrop.com
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40

Before you read to the end, does anybody know what the main?ingredient
of WD-40 is?? Don't lie and don't cheat.? WD-40.? Who knew?
?I had a neighbor who had bought a new pickup.? I got up very early
one?Sunday morning and saw that someone had spray painted red all
around the?sides of this beige truck (for some unknown reason).? I
went over, woke?him up, and told him the bad news.? He was very
upset and was trying to?figure out what to do probably nothing until
Monday morning, since?nothing was open.? Another neighbor came out
and told him to get his?WD-40 and clean it off.? It removed the
unwanted paint beautifully and?did not harm his paint job that was on
the truck.? I'm impressed!? WD-40, ?who knew?
?'Water Displacement #40' The product began from?a search for a rust
preventative solvent and degreaser to protect?missile parts.? WD-40
was created in 1953 by three technicians at the?San Diego Rocket
Chemical Company.? Its name comes from the project that?was to find
a 'water displacement' compound..? They were successful with?the
fortieth formulation, thus WD-40.? The Convair Company bought it
in?bulk to protect their atlas missile parts.? Ken East (one of
the?original founders) says there is nothing in?WD-40 that would
hurt you.
?When you read the 'shower door' part, try it.? It's the first thing
that?has ever cleaned that spotty shower?door..? If yours is
plastic, it works just as well as glass.? It's a?miracle!? Then
try it on your stove top ...? Viola!? It's now shinier?than it's
ever been.? You'll be amazed.? Here are some other uses:
?1. Protects silver from tarnishing.
?2.? Removes road tar and grime from? cars.
?3.? Cleans and lubricates guitar strings.
?4.? Gives floors that? 'just-waxed' sheen without making them
slippery.
?5.? Keeps flies off cows.
?6.? Restores and cleans chalkboards.
?7.? Removes lipstick stains.
?8.? Loosens stubborn zippers.
9.? Untangles? jewelry chains.
10.? Removes stains from stainless steel sinks.
?11.? Removes dirt and grime from the barbecue grill.
?12.? Keeps ceramic/terra? cotta garden pots from oxidizing.
?13.? Removes tomato stains from? clothing.
?14.? Keeps glass shower doors free of water spots.
?15.? Camouflages scratches in ceramic and marble floors.
?16.? Keeps scissors? working smoothly.
?17.? Lubricates noisy door hinges on vehicles and? doors in
homes.
?18.? It removes black scuff marks from the kitchen floor!? Use
WD-40 for?those nasty tar and scuff marks on flooring.? It doesn't
seem???????to harm the finish and you won't have to scrub
nearly as hard to?get them off.? Just? remember to open some
windows???????if you have a lot of marks.
?19.? Bug guts will eat away the finish on? your car if not
removed?quickly! Use WD-40!
?20.? Gives a children's playground gym? slide a shine for a super
fast?slide.
?21.? Lubricates gear shift and mower deck lever for ease of
handling on?riding mowers.
?22.? Rids kids rocking chairs and swings of? squeaky noises.
?23.? Lubricates tracks in sticking home windows and? makes them
easier? to?open.
?24.? Spraying an umbrella stem makes it easier to open? and
close.
?25.? Restores and cleans padded leather dashboards in vehicles, as
well?as vinyl bumpers.
?26.? Restores and cleans roof racks on? vehicles.
?27.? Lubricates and stops squeaks in electric fans
?28.? Lubricates wheel sprockets on tricycles, wagons, and bicycles
for?easy handling.
?29.? Lubricates fan belts on washers and? dryers and keeps them
running?smoothly.
?30.? Keeps rust from forming on saws and saw blades,? and other
tools.
?31.? Removes splattered grease on stove.
?
?32.? Keeps bathroom? mirror? from?fogging.
?33.? Lubricates prosthetic limbs.
?34.? Keeps? pigeons off the balcony (they hate the smell).
?35.? Removes all traces? of duct tape.
?36.? Folks even spray it on their arms, hands, and knees? to
relieve?arthritis pain.
37.? Florida 's favorite use is: 'cleans and? removes love bugs
from?grills and bumpers.'
?38.? The favorite use in the state of New York? , WD-40
protects???????the Statue of Liberty from the elements.
?39.? WD-40 attracts fish.? Spray a little on live bait or lures
and you?will be catching the big one in no? time.? Also, it's a
lot cheaper than the chemical attractants?that are made for just that
purpose.? Keep in mind though,???????using some chemical
laced baits or lures for fishing are not?allowed in some states.
?40.? Use it for fire? ant bites.? It takes the sting away
immediately? and?stops the itch.
?41.? WD-40 is great for removing crayon? from walls.? Spray
on??the mark and wipe with a clean rag.
?42.? Also, if you've discovered that? your teenage
daughter??washed and dried a tube of lipstick with a load of
laundry,?saturate the??lipstick spots with WD-40 and rewash.?
Presto!? The lipstick is?gone!
?43.? If you sprayed? WD-40 on the distributor cap, it would
displace the?moisture and allow the car to start.
?P.? S.? The basic???ingredient is FISH OIL.
______________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.46/2145 - Release Date:
05/31/09 
05:53:00



_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From jo.david at verizon.net  Sun Aug  9 22:44:58 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:44:58 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Statistics
In-Reply-To: <20090806.175439.23229.1@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090806.175439.23229.1@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <03118A20-C5BE-4A7B-BDD0-3F70BFD999A5@verizon.net>

The article posted by Mark did a better job of responding to your  
question than I would have, if I had access to a computer this past  
week end.  (camping + no internet = severe withdrawal)
There may be many factors that contribute to the cost of health  
care.  Taking a business like approach to the provision of medicine,  
may be part of the high cost.  After all, the business of business is  
investing and maximizing their return on their investments.

So  long as economics is the religion of this nation, we can expect  
economic decisions to moral questions.

David

On Aug 6, 2009, at 5:54 PM, a_tom_51 at juno.com wrote:

> Opps. I forgot to sign my posting about staic tics.
> Tom Alexander
>
>  David,
> The static tics you quoted are very impressive. As I hear all the  
> discussion about our health care problems and what can be done to  
> resolve them some missing parts of the problem are obvious to me  
> but are hardly ever talked about is that of tort reform. As I  
> understand it our health care system is much more affected by the  
> threat of being sued compared with most of the western world. Risk  
> management is a huge expense here in the USA. Do you have any  
> statistics about that relationship?

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sun Aug  9 22:46:46 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 22:46:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <9DF9526B-E4CC-4D6D-AE36-310EB8DEA006@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Sorry kate, you have it wrong. Self insure is that you have enough money in
reserve that you don't need to buy insurance.

An audit without reason is a form of punishment.

One thing I don't like about the bill is that it uses the IRS as the
enforcement arm. If you don't buy healthcare, you personally are fined 2.5%
of your income. It becomes an IRS debt. I don't remember what page that is.
I have read the bill.
I also don't like tying healthcare to employment. If you're going to make
single payer, why tie it to employment. What is a non employed person to do?

Another issue os there are a couple of trust funds to have money ($375
Million/year) beyond congressional budget authority.

And it requires a yearly report to congress. Year one it authorizes $50
Million to creat the report. This amount goes up $50 Million a year so that
by year five it is costing $250 MILLION for the yearly report.

I can go on and on without even touching the crazy list.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 1:45 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
>
>
> I'll just pick one to counter argue....
> How about the one on page 22.  Mandates audits of all employers that
> self-insure!
>
> How is that bad? Would you rather that they not be audited?
> Lets see what is at stake.  Your employer is going to collect
> insurance payment from you as the worker. (That is what it means to
> self insure. You give your insurance dollars to your employer.)  Now
> would you rather have your employer then be free to spend those
> dollars on anything (CEO trips to Vegas perhaps) or would you rather
> that there be some checks and balances to make sure the premiums go
> into some kind of investment that will reasonably be able to pay an
> insurance claim when you get sick.
>
>
> I don't see much difference between insurance companies now saying -
> oops we won't pay your medical claim because  we don't cover that and
> your self insured but not audited employer saying oops we won't pay
> your medical claim because we invested the insurance money on the
> Vegas trip and now we don't have any funds to cover it.
>
> Who ever wrote this list even put an exclamation point on it.  This
> tells me that they want to force all the risk to the lowest level
> individual.    It is similar to asking you to check your hamburger
> for e-coli before the barbeque. Why shouldn't you carry all the risk
> for food borne illnesses and not make the meat processors responsible
> for making sure the cow can stand up before it is slaughtered.
>
>
> Auditing requirements for self insured companies is not unreasonable.
>
> The other provisions of health care reform have similar logic behind
> them if you care to investigate the truth behind them.
>
>
> Katie
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 9, 2009, at 11:37 AM, JJSAW at aol.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> > ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill
> > becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar
> > plan. If that is
> > not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> > ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> > ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
> > ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments and
> > benefits
> > you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> > ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health
> > benefits
> > for you. You will have no choice.  None.
> > ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided
> > with free
> > healthcare  services.
> > ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard.
> > ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time
> > access to
> > all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
> > ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
> > organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
> > ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government
> > rules
> > to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange.
> > ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the
> > Healthcare
> > Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans)
> > ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for
> > services;
> > translation: illegal  aliens
> > ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
> > individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan.
> > ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically
> > enrolled:
> > you have no choice in the  matter.
> > ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
> > "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly.
> > Put simply,
> > private insurers will be  crushed.
> > ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages.
> > ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the
> > government-run
> > public plan. No  alternatives.
> > ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time
> > employees
> > AND their  families.
> > ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does
> > not
> > offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> > ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who
> > does
> > not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
> > ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
> > (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income.
> > ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
> > (Americans will pay for  them).
> > ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare
> > Bureaucracy
> > will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records.
> > ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be
> > treated as
> > tax." Yes, it  really says that.
> > ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid.
> > Seniors and
> > the poor most affected."
> > ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll
> > all be
> > paid the same
> > ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their
> > professional
> > judgment, etc.
> > ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private
> > healthcare industries.
> > ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
> > wheelchairs.
> > ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of
> > rationing!
> > ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems
> > preventable re-admissions.
> > ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial
> > admission
> > that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the
> > government.
> > ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and
> > investing in
> > healthcare companies!
> > ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot
> > expand
> > without government approval.
> > ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
> > words, yet another payoff for  ACORN.
> > ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based
> > measures:
> > i.e.,  rationing.
> > ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
> > Plans, HMOs,  etc.
> > ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
> > individuals.
> > ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee
> > (healthcare by
> > phone).
> > ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
> > Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> > ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living
> > wills,
> > durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in
> > estate  taxes
> > ahead of time.
> > ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life
> > resources,
> > guiding you in death.
> > ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life
> > treatment;
> > government  dictates how your life ends.
> > ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate
> > treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an
> > ORDER for
> > end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT.
> > ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you
> > may have
> > at  end-of-life.
> > ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> > ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> > ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.
> > Government
> > intervenes in your marriage.
> > ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining,
> > creating and rationing those services.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sun Aug  9 22:46:47 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 22:46:47 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <26574.70083.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

A agree. I hate the paraphrasing to complain and to placate. They are both
wrong. 
I took three days to read the whole thing. There is a lot to dislike.
The first I noticed is that the Health Commission is chosen by the
president. It will change with every political whim.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 2:34 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Starting at the top of the tidbits below, I delved into the 
> Healthcare Insurance Bill details.
> 
> Whoever wrote the tidbits below has taken the liberty to 
> paraphrase what is written to support their view the Bill is bad.
> 
> 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you 
> are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help 
> protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And 
> why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The 
> entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including 
> search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only 
> logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> cost-sharing plan.
> 
> In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> 
> The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party 
> will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> 
> Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> President Obama.
> 
>  
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  
> plan. If that is 
> not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments 
> and benefits 
> you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
> for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
> ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> with free 
> healthcare  services.
> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
> ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
> all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
> to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
> ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> Healthcare 
> Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
> ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
> translation: illegal  aliens 
> ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
> ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
> you have no choice in the  matter. 
> ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. 
> Put simply, 
> private insurers will be  crushed.
> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
> ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> government-run 
> public plan. No  alternatives. 
> ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
> AND their  families. 
> ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
> offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who does 
> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
> ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> (Americans will pay for  them). 
> ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
> will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
> ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
> tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> Seniors and  
> the poor most affected." 
> ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
> paid the same  
> ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
> judgment, etc. 
> ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
> healthcare industries. 
> ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> wheelchairs. 
> ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> rationing! 
> ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
> preventable re-admissions. 
> ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial admission 
> that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the government. 
> ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
> healthcare companies! 
> ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
> without government approval. 
> ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
> ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
> i.e.,  rationing. 
> ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
> Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
> ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> individuals. 
> ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> (healthcare by 
> phone). 
> ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living  wills, 
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> estate  taxes 
> ahead of time. 
> ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
> guiding you in death. 
> ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> treatment; 
> government  dictates how your life ends. 
> ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an 
> ORDER for 
> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
> ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
> at  end-of-life. 
> ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> Government  
> intervenes in your marriage.
> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
> creating and rationing those services. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  9 23:48:27 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 23:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <222102.14558.qm@web35205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Steven,

I agree there is much in the Bill to dislike.  But there's also much I liked.  But again, I fear lobbying money + bipartisanship will insure no plan ever gets approved.  Pharma and insurance carriers will gladly spend as much as they can to keep the money rolling into their coffers.

I would like to see Congress working with the intent to hammer out a Plan that Congress will approve and the President will sign into law.  And as much as I'm a "glass half full" person, this is one time I'm thinking the other way.  I simply don't have faith in our Congress on this one.

And yes, Steven, I also don't like the idea of the Health Commission chosen by the President.  The position cannot be like a Cabinet post.

 
Allen Warren

From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 10:46:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare

A agree. I hate the paraphrasing to complain and to placate. They are both
wrong. 
I took three days to read the whole thing. There is a lot to dislike.
The first I noticed is that the Health Commission is chosen by the
president. It will change with every political whim.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 2:34 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Starting at the top of the tidbits below, I delved into the 
> Healthcare Insurance Bill details.
> 
> Whoever wrote the tidbits below has taken the liberty to 
> paraphrase what is written to support their view the Bill is bad.
> 
> 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you 
> are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help 
> protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And 
> why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The 
> entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including 
> search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only 
> logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> cost-sharing plan.
> 
> In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> 
> The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party 
> will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> 
> Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> President Obama.
> 
>  
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  
> plan. If that is 
> not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments 
> and benefits 
> you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
> for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
> ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> with free 
> healthcare  services.
> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
> ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
> all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
> to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
> ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> Healthcare 
> Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
> ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
> translation: illegal  aliens 
> ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
> ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
> you have no choice in the  matter. 
> ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. 
> Put simply, 
> private insurers will be  crushed.
> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
> ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> government-run 
> public plan. No  alternatives. 
> ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
> AND their  families. 
> ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
> offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who does 
> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
> ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> (Americans will pay for  them). 
> ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
> will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
> ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
> tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> Seniors and  
> the poor most affected." 
> ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
> paid the same  
> ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
> judgment, etc. 
> ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
> healthcare industries. 
> ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> wheelchairs. 
> ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> rationing! 
> ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
> preventable re-admissions. 
> ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial admission 
> that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the government. 
> ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
> healthcare companies! 
> ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
> without government approval. 
> ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
> ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
> i.e.,  rationing. 
> ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
> Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
> ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> individuals. 
> ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> (healthcare by 
> phone). 
> ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living  wills, 
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> estate  taxes 
> ahead of time. 
> ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
> guiding you in death. 
> ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> treatment; 
> government  dictates how your life ends. 
> ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an 
> ORDER for 
> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
> ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
> at  end-of-life. 
> ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> Government  
> intervenes in your marriage.
> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
> creating and rationing those services. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 00:25:38 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:25:38 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <222102.14558.qm@web35205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPDMAAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.

I read where big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of the health
bill. Also that congress has discussed about $80 Billion in cuts to these
pharmaceuticals. Why? The ~50 million uninsured. 
I did the math and that comes to over $1600 per uninsured that the
pharmaceuticals would have to get to break even out of this deal. Unless
there is some other pay back.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:48 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Steven,
> 
> I agree there is much in the Bill to dislike.  But there's also 
> much I liked.  But again, I fear lobbying money + bipartisanship 
> will insure no plan ever gets approved.  Pharma and insurance 
> carriers will gladly spend as much as they can to keep the money 
> rolling into their coffers.
> 
> I would like to see Congress working with the intent to hammer 
> out a Plan that Congress will approve and the President will sign 
> into law.  And as much as I'm a "glass half full" person, this is bad.
> > 
> > 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> > insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> > required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you 
> > are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> > continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help 
> > protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> > at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> > Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And 
> > why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> > plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> > more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> > money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> > enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> > Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The 
> > entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including 
> > search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> > find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only 
> > logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> > state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> > the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> > without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> > yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> > the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> > money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> > cost-sharing plan.
> > 
> > In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> > outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> > language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> > through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> > 
> > The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> > could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> > fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> > healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party 
> > will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> > pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> > 
> > Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> > Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> > most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> > not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> > President Obama.
> > 
> >  
> > Allen Warren
> > 
> > From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > 
> > 
> > Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> > ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
> > becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  
> > plan. If that is 
> > not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> > ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> > ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> > ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments 
> > and benefits 
> > you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> > ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide 
> health benefits 
> > for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
> > ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> > with free 
> > healthcare  services.
> > ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
> > ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time 
> access to 
> > all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> > ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
> > organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> > ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to 
> government rules 
> > to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
> > ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> > Healthcare 
> > Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
> > ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
> > translation: illegal  aliens 
> > ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> > individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
> > ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically 
> enrolled: 
> > you have no choice in the  matter. 
> > ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> > "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. 
> > Put simply, 
> > private insurers will be  crushed.
> > ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
> > ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> > government-run 
> > public plan. No  alternatives. 
> > ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time 
> employees 
> > AND their  families. 
> > ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
> > offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> > ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, 
> who does 
> > not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> > ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> > (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
> > ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> > (Americans will pay for  them). 
> > ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare 
> Bureaucracy 
> > will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
> > ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be 
> treated as 
> > tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
> > ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> > Seniors and  
> > the poor most affected." 
> > ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
> > paid the same  
> > ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
> > judgment, etc. 
> > ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
> > healthcare industries. 
> > ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> > wheelchairs. 
> > ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> > rationing! 
> > ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
> > preventable re-admissions. 
> > ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial 
> admission 
> > that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the 
> government. 
> > ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and 
> investing in 
> > healthcare companies! 
> > ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
> > without government approval. 
> > ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> > words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
> > ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based 
> measures: 
> > i.e.,  rationing. 
> > ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
> > Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
> > ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> > individuals. 
> > ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> > (healthcare by 
> > phone). 
> > ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> > Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> > ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding 
> living  wills, 
> > durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> > estate  taxes 
> > ahead of time. 
> > ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life 
> resources, 
> > guiding you in death. 
> > ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> > treatment; 
> > government  dictates how your life ends. 
> > ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> > treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an 
> > ORDER for 
> > end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
> > ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments 
> you may have 
> > at  end-of-life. 
> > ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> > ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> > ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> > Government  
> > intervenes in your marriage.
> > ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
> > creating and rationing those services. 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >      
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From theresacus at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 10 03:02:01 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 03:02:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
In-Reply-To: <mailman.17.1249844406.97274.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <991636.63151.qm@web34505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are you refering to and could you site your source.?? I really am trying to sort this out and want reliable sources and blanket statements like this are very misleading and this where propoganda starts.? 
?
Thanks Theresa


--- On Sun, 8/9/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com> wrote:


From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM


Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
??? grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
??? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
??? grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
??? grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

???1. Scam attempt (Geri)
???2. Re: Scam attempt (Katie Allnutt)
???3. Re: Scam attempt (Geri)
???4. Re: Healthcare (JJSAW at aol.com)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: "GroveNet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="Windows-1252"

Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
of these before?)

Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."

Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.

Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.

Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.

It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
has been restricted. Please enter your card number
now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
I hung up.


Geri

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D at verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

Thanks Geri,
???The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people? 
are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and? 
enter their card #.
???We got a similar? phone call not long ago, but it was an actual? 
person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been? 
stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's? 
which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
? ? I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly? 
after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.

Better to be informed.


Katie

On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:

> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> of these before?)
>
> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>
> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>
> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>
> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>
> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> I hung up.
>
>
> Geri
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
and for online gambling.

Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!

:-)
Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt


> Thanks Geri,
>???The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people? 
> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and? 
> enter their card #.
>???We got a similar? phone call not long ago, but it was an actual? 
> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been? 
> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's? 
> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
>? ? I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly? 
> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
> 
> Better to be informed.
> 
> 
> Katie
> 
> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
> 
>> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> of these before?)
>>
>> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>>
>> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>>
>> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>>
>> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>>
>> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> I hung up.
>>
>>
>> Geri
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
From: JJSAW at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"


Tidbits from the world of Healthcare? Reform
? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time? of the bill 
becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar? plan. If that is 
not available, you will be required to take the gov? option!
? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
?? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
? Page 30: A government? committee will decide what treatments and benefits 
you get (and, unlike an? insurer, there will be no appeals process)
? Page 42: The "Health Choices? Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
for you. You will have no choice.? None. 
? Page 50: All? non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free 
healthcare? services.
? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID? Healthcard. 
? Page? 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
all individual? bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community? 
organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
? Page 72: All private? healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
to participate in a Healthcare? Exchange. 
? Page 84:? All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare 
Exchange (i.e.,? total government control of private plans) 
? Page 91: Government? mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
translation: illegal? aliens 
? Page 95: The? Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
individuals for? Government-run Health Care plan. 
? Page 102: Those eligible? for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
you have no choice in the? matter. 
? Page 124:? No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
"judicial review" is? permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, 
private insurers will be? crushed.
? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set? wages. 
? Page 145: An? employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run 
public plan. No? alternatives. 
? Page? 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
AND their? families. 
? Page 149:? Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
offer the public? option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or? more, who does 
not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
? Page 167: Any individual? who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
(according to the government) will be? taxed 2.5% of income. 
? Page 170: Any? NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
(Americans will pay for? them). 
? Page 195:? Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
will have access to? ALL American financial and personal records. 
? Page? 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
tax." Yes, it? really says that. 
? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and? 
the poor most affected." 
? Page 241: Doctors: no? matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
paid the same? 
? Page 253: Government? sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
judgment, etc. 
? Page 265: Government? mandates and controls productivity for private 
healthcare industries. 
? Page 268: Government? regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
wheelchairs. 
? Page 272: Cancer? patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! 
? Page 280: Hospitals will? be penalized for what the government deems 
preventable re-admissions. 
? Page 298: Doctors: if? you treat a patient during an initial admission 
that results in a readmission,? you will be penalized by the government. 
? Page 317: Doctors: you? are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
healthcare companies! 
? Page 318: Prohibition on? hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
without government approval. 
? Page 321: Hospital? expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
words, yet another payoff for? ACORN. 
? Page 335:? Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
i.e.,? rationing. 
? Page? 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
Plans, HMOs,? etc. 
? Page 354:? Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
individuals. 
? Page 379: More? bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by 
phone). 
? Page 425: More? bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
Citizens, assisted suicide,? euthanasia?
? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living? wills, 
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate? taxes 
ahead of time. 
? Page 425: Government? provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
guiding you in death. 
? Page? 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; 
government? dictates how your life ends. 
? Page 429: Advance Care? Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
treatment as patient's health? deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for 
end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the? GOVERNMENT. 
? Page? 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
at? end-of-life. 
? Page? 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government? 
intervenes in your marriage.
? Page 494: Government will cover mental health? services: defining, 
creating and rationing those services. 



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
***************************************



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 07:40:11 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 07:40:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
In-Reply-To: <991636.63151.qm@web34505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEBCMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

The House bill by Waxman.
http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
is the one I don't like.
I prefer Wyden's.
http://wyden.senate.gov/issues/Legislation/Healthy_Americans_Act.cfm
Which I believe has already been voted down.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Theresa Carter
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:02 AM
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>
>
> JJ,
> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are you refering to
> and could you site your source.?? I really am trying to sort this out and
> want reliable sources and blanket statements like this are very misleading
> and this where propoganda starts.?
> ?
> Thanks Theresa
>
>
> --- On Sun, 8/9/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com
> <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
> Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM
>
>
> Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
> ??? grovenet at rdrop.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> ??? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ??? grovenet-request at rdrop.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ??? grovenet-owner at rdrop.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> ???1. Scam attempt (Geri)
> ???2. Re: Scam attempt (Katie Allnutt)
> ???3. Re: Scam attempt (Geri)
> ???4. Re: Healthcare (JJSAW at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: "GroveNet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417 at gerianehzkfhvy>
> Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> of these before?)
>
> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>
> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>
> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>
> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>
> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> I hung up.
>
>
> Geri
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
> From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Thanks Geri,
> ???The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people?
> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and?
> enter their card #.
> ???We got a similar? phone call not long ago, but it was an actual?
> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been?
> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's?
> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
> ? ? I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly?
> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
>
> Better to be informed.
>
>
> Katie
>
> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
>
> > Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> > of these before?)
> >
> > Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
> >
> > Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
> >
> > Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> > came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
> >
> > Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> > VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> > restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> > number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> > back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
> >
> > It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> > has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> > now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> > I hung up.
> >
> >
> > Geri
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8 at gerianehzkfhvy>
> Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
> past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
> their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
> you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
> you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
> Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
> attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
> and for online gambling.
>
> Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!
>
> :-)
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>
>
> > Thanks Geri,
> >???The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people?
> > are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and?
> > enter their card #.
> >???We got a similar? phone call not long ago, but it was an actual?
> > person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been?
> > stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's?
> > which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
> >? ? I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly?
> > after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
> >
> > Better to be informed.
> >
> >
> > Katie
> >
> > On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
> >
> >> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> >> of these before?)
> >>
> >> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
> >>
> >> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
> >>
> >> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> >> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
> >>
> >> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> >> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> >> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> >> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> >> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
> >>
> >> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> >> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> >> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> >> I hung up.
> >>
> >>
> >> Geri
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
> From: JJSAW at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare? Reform
> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time? of the bill
> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar? plan. If
> that is
> not available, you will be required to take the gov? option!
> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> ?? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
> ? Page 30: A government? committee will decide what treatments
> and benefits
> you get (and, unlike an? insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices? Commissioner" will decide health benefits
> for you. You will have no choice.? None.
> ? Page 50: All? non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided
> with free
> healthcare? services.
> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID? Healthcard.
> ? Page? 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to
> all individual? bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community?
> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
> ? Page 72: All private? healthcare plans must conform to government rules
> to participate in a Healthcare? Exchange.
> ? Page 84:? All private healthcare plans must participate in the
> Healthcare
> Exchange (i.e.,? total government control of private plans)
> ? Page 91: Government? mandates linguistic infrastructure for services;
> translation: illegal? aliens
> ? Page 95: The? Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
> individuals for? Government-run Health Care plan.
> ? Page 102: Those eligible? for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled:
> you have no choice in the? matter.
> ? Page 124:? No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
> "judicial review" is? permitted against the government monopoly.
> Put simply,
> private insurers will be? crushed.
> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set? wages.
> ? Page 145: An? employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the
> government-run
> public plan. No? alternatives.
> ? Page? 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees
> AND their? families.
> ? Page 149:? Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not
> offer the public? option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or? more, who does
> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
> ? Page 167: Any individual? who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
> (according to the government) will be? taxed 2.5% of income.
> ? Page 170: Any? NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
> (Americans will pay for? them).
> ? Page 195:? Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy
> will have access to? ALL American financial and personal records.
> ? Page? 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as
> tax." Yes, it? really says that.
> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and?
> the poor most affected."
> ? Page 241: Doctors: no? matter what speciality you have, you'll all be
> paid the same?
> ? Page 253: Government? sets value of doctors' time, their professional
> judgment, etc.
> ? Page 265: Government? mandates and controls productivity for private
> healthcare industries.
> ? Page 268: Government? regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
> wheelchairs.
> ? Page 272: Cancer? patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
> ? Page 280: Hospitals will? be penalized for what the government deems
> preventable re-admissions.
> ? Page 298: Doctors: if? you treat a patient during an initial admission
> that results in a readmission,? you will be penalized by the government.
> ? Page 317: Doctors: you? are now prohibited for owning and investing in
> healthcare companies!
> ? Page 318: Prohibition on? hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand
> without government approval.
> ? Page 321: Hospital? expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
> words, yet another payoff for? ACORN.
> ? Page 335:? Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
> i.e.,? rationing.
> ? Page? 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
> Plans, HMOs,? etc.
> ? Page 354:? Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
> individuals.
> ? Page 379: More? bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee
> (healthcare by
> phone).
> ? Page 425: More? bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
> Citizens, assisted suicide,? euthanasia?
> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living? wills,
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in
> estate? taxes
> ahead of time.
> ? Page 425: Government? provides approved list of end-of-life resources,
> guiding you in death.
> ? Page? 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life
> treatment;
> government? dictates how your life ends.
> ? Page 429: Advance Care? Planning Consult will be used to dictate
> treatment as patient's health? deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for
> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the? GOVERNMENT.
> ? Page? 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have
> at? end-of-life.
> ? Page? 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government?
> intervenes in your marriage.
> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health? services: defining,
> creating and rationing those services.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> ***************************************
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 08:31:55 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:31:55 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
References: <991636.63151.qm@web34505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C8A35B4403B44B8781D73E9E293ABDFC@gerianehzkfhvy>

I see the White House has come out with a Reality Check page:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/?e=10&ref=text


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Theresa Carter" <theresacus at yahoo.com>
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9


JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are you refering to and could you site your source. I really am trying to sort this out and want reliable sources and blanket statements like this are very misleading and this where propoganda starts. 

Thanks Theresa


--- On Sun, 8/9/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com> wrote:


From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM


Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Scam attempt (Geri)
2. Re: Scam attempt (Katie Allnutt)
3. Re: Scam attempt (Geri)
4. Re: Healthcare (JJSAW at aol.com)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: "GroveNet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
of these before?)

Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."

Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.

Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.

Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.

It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
has been restricted. Please enter your card number
now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
I hung up.


Geri

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D at verizon.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

Thanks Geri,
The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people 
are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and 
enter their card #.
We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual 
person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been 
stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's 
which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly 
after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.

Better to be informed.


Katie

On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:

> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> of these before?)
>
> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>
> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>
> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>
> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>
> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> I hung up.
>
>
> Geri
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
and for online gambling.

Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!

:-)
Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt


> Thanks Geri,
> The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people 
> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and 
> enter their card #.
> We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual 
> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been 
> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's 
> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
> I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly 
> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
> 
> Better to be informed.
> 
> 
> Katie
> 
> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
> 
>> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> of these before?)
>>
>> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>>
>> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>>
>> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>>
>> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>>
>> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> I hung up.
>>
>>
>> Geri
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
From: JJSAW at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"


Tidbits from the world of Healthcare Reform
? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill 
becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is 
not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
? Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits 
you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
? Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits 
for you. You will have no choice. None. 
? Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free 
healthcare services.
? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard. 
? Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to 
all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community 
organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
? Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules 
to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. 
? Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare 
Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans) 
? Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
translation: illegal aliens 
? Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
individuals for Government-run Health Care plan. 
? Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: 
you have no choice in the matter. 
? Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
"judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, 
private insurers will be crushed.
? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages. 
? Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run 
public plan. No alternatives. 
? Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees 
AND their families. 
? Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does 
not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
? Page 167: Any individual who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
(according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income. 
? Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
(Americans will pay for them). 
? Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy 
will have access to ALL American financial and personal records. 
? Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as 
tax." Yes, it really says that. 
? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and 
the poor most affected." 
? Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
paid the same 
? Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
judgment, etc. 
? Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private 
healthcare industries. 
? Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
wheelchairs. 
? Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing! 
? Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems 
preventable re-admissions. 
? Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission 
that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government. 
? Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in 
healthcare companies! 
? Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
without government approval. 
? Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
words, yet another payoff for ACORN. 
? Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: 
i.e., rationing. 
? Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
Plans, HMOs, etc. 
? Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
individuals. 
? Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by 
phone). 
? Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, 
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes 
ahead of time. 
? Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, 
guiding you in death. 
? Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; 
government dictates how your life ends. 
? Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for 
end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT. 
? Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have 
at end-of-life. 
? Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government 
intervenes in your marriage.
? Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, 
creating and rationing those services. 



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
***************************************



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Mon Aug 10 08:36:33 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:36:33 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
Message-ID: <20090810.083633.12364.0@webmail06.vgs.untd.com>

I have used it to lube high speed handpieces (drills that do about 450,000 rpm) in my dental practice BEFORE they go into the sterilizer. Are you guys really sure it's a fish oil? I thought it was a type of kerosene.
Tom Alexander
 
Am I the only one who uses WD-40 as starter fluid in a pinch? 

- Jim Katen

 
____________________________________________________________
Information Tech Degrees
Earn an Online Associates in Information Technology. Get info now.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=qv1T_0SKqTIdt_S6hDXnegAAJ1CORKrrSABr_kse746cCp3FAAUAAAAAAAAAACo68j4_OsV6aS8x_XgKwRrbhqCBAAAAAA==

From admin at jeffhowden.com  Mon Aug 10 08:43:32 2009
From: admin at jeffhowden.com (Jeff Howden)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:43:32 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] WD-40
In-Reply-To: <20090810.083633.12364.0@webmail06.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090810.083633.12364.0@webmail06.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <003701ca19d1$51a24a10$f4e6de30$@com>

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/wd-40.asp


> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of a_tom_51 at juno.com
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 8:37 AM
> To: jim at benchmarkinspections.com; grovenet at rdrop.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] WD-40
> 
> I have used it to lube high speed handpieces (drills that do about
> 450,000 rpm) in my dental practice BEFORE they go into the sterilizer.
> Are you guys really sure it's a fish oil? I thought it was a type of
> kerosene.
> Tom Alexander
> 
> Am I the only one who uses WD-40 as starter fluid in a pinch?
> 
> - Jim Katen
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> Information Tech Degrees
> Earn an Online Associates in Information Technology. Get info now.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=qv1T_0SKqTIdt_S6hDXnegAAJ
> 1CORKrrSABr_kse746cCp3FAAUAAAAAAAAAACo68j4_OsV6aS8x_XgKwRrbhqCBAAAAAA==
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.49/2293 - Release Date:
> 08/09/09 18:10:00


From allnutt at verizon.net  Mon Aug 10 08:49:13 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:49:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEBAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <2A8EA906-18DD-4A90-A358-64F68394F034@verizon.net>

I'll try again.
I"m not sure how you think the self insurance pool of money will  
magically appear without employees having to put money into it or how  
the money will be replenished as health care claims are processed  
over the years. I was not aware that businesses are now sitting on  
large reserves of cash so that they are covered and I would be  
shocked if the company puts the money aside without taking it from  
employees. Perhaps we are talking about different points in time. You  
are talking about a point in the future when the reserves have been  
built and I am talking about the time frame where employees will  
contribute to the reserves to build it up and keep it going.  But in  
either case I still  think that an audit is reasonable.

You are assuming that the audit is to punish the company while it  
sits on the reserves.  I am assuming that an audit will keep honest  
fund managers honest. What is to stop the company from investing the  
reserve in the CEO's brother-in-law's cement business? Not that the  
cement business would be automatically bad. However consider two  
scenarios. A) you are an employee and with no audit you have no clue  
that the boss is investing your health insurance money with his  
brother in law  and B) you are an employee and with an audit you do  
know the boss is investing the money with his brother in law.   Which  
scenario gives the employee more information to decide whether he  
should go out and get private insurance because he thinks the cement  
business is too risky?
Is letting the employees know how their self insured company is  
investing health insurance money a punishment for the company or a  
protection for the employees who could one day need a gall stone  
removed and is counting on the reserve remaining sufficient?  I guess  
it depends on your perspective but since there are more employees  
than there are bosses I tend to believe that the employees have a  
right to know how the money is invested if they are going to have a  
chance of keeping their health care insurance for the long run.

Another point that you make is confusing to me.  You claim to dislike  
the idea of tying health care to employment. Isn't that one of the  
shortcomings of the current system? What do non employed persons do  
today that would be different than what they would do under the  
provisions that you don't like?

And as a further point of clarification. None of the bills being  
considered in either the House or the Senate have a single payer  
option which is one of the reasons that progressives are unhappy with  
all the bills too. So I'm having difficulty understanding how you can  
claim that you read it in the bill.

Lastly - Instead of the IRS, who would you rather be the enforcement  
arm for people who don't buy health care insurance?  Would it be  
better to create a whole new government entity not called the IRS to  
do this function?  That seems like an inefficient duplication of  
effort and I'd rather not have all my personal data stored in yet  
another government agency.  I'm guessing that your preference would  
be to have no personal mandate to carry health insurance. Again, that  
would be the current system.

I do however agree with you about trust funds beyond congressional  
budget authority. The secret covert operations budget is way out of  
control too. And we don't even know the size of it because that is  
secret.

Katie


On Aug 9, 2009, at 10:46 PM, Steven wrote:

> Sorry kate, you have it wrong. Self insure is that you have enough  
> money in
> reserve that you don't need to buy insurance.
>
> An audit without reason is a form of punishment.
>
> One thing I don't like about the bill is that it uses the IRS as the
> enforcement arm. If you don't buy healthcare, you personally are  
> fined 2.5%
> of your income. It becomes an IRS debt. I don't remember what page  
> that is.
> I have read the bill.
> I also don't like tying healthcare to employment. If you're going  
> to make
> single payer, why tie it to employment. What is a non employed  
> person to do?
>
> Another issue os there are a couple of trust funds to have money ($375
> Million/year) beyond congressional budget authority.
>
> And it requires a yearly report to congress. Year one it authorizes  
> $50
> Million to creat the report. This amount goes up $50 Million a year  
> so that
> by year five it is costing $250 MILLION for the yearly report.
>
> I can go on and on without even touching the crazy list.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
>> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 1:45 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
>>
>>
>> I'll just pick one to counter argue....
>> How about the one on page 22.  Mandates audits of all employers that
>> self-insure!
>>
>> How is that bad? Would you rather that they not be audited?
>> Lets see what is at stake.  Your employer is going to collect
>> insurance payment from you as the worker. (That is what it means to
>> self insure. You give your insurance dollars to your employer.)  Now
>> would you rather have your employer then be free to spend those
>> dollars on anything (CEO trips to Vegas perhaps) or would you rather
>> that there be some checks and balances to make sure the premiums go
>> into some kind of investment that will reasonably be able to pay an
>> insurance claim when you get sick.
>>
>>
>> I don't see much difference between insurance companies now saying -
>> oops we won't pay your medical claim because  we don't cover that and
>> your self insured but not audited employer saying oops we won't pay
>> your medical claim because we invested the insurance money on the
>> Vegas trip and now we don't have any funds to cover it.
>>
>> Who ever wrote this list even put an exclamation point on it.  This
>> tells me that they want to force all the risk to the lowest level
>> individual.    It is similar to asking you to check your hamburger
>> for e-coli before the barbeque. Why shouldn't you carry all the risk
>> for food borne illnesses and not make the meat processors responsible
>> for making sure the cow can stand up before it is slaughtered.
>>
>>
>> Auditing requirements for self insured companies is not unreasonable.
>>
>> The other provisions of health care reform have similar logic behind
>> them if you care to investigate the truth behind them.
>>
>>
>> Katie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 9, 2009, at 11:37 AM, JJSAW at aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
>>> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the  
>>> bill
>>> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar
>>> plan. If that is
>>> not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
>>> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
>>> ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
>>> ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments and
>>> benefits
>>> you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
>>> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide health
>>> benefits
>>> for you. You will have no choice.  None.
>>> ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided
>>> with free
>>> healthcare  services.
>>> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard.
>>> ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time
>>> access to
>>> all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
>>> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
>>> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
>>> ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to government
>>> rules
>>> to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange.
>>> ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the
>>> Healthcare
>>> Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans)
>>> ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for
>>> services;
>>> translation: illegal  aliens
>>> ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
>>> individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan.
>>> ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically
>>> enrolled:
>>> you have no choice in the  matter.
>>> ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
>>> "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly.
>>> Put simply,
>>> private insurers will be  crushed.
>>> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set   
>>> wages.
>>> ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the
>>> government-run
>>> public plan. No  alternatives.
>>> ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time
>>> employees
>>> AND their  families.
>>> ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does
>>> not
>>> offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
>>> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, who
>>> does
>>> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
>>> ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
>>> (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income.
>>> ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
>>> (Americans will pay for  them).
>>> ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare
>>> Bureaucracy
>>> will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records.
>>> ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be
>>> treated as
>>> tax." Yes, it  really says that.
>>> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid.
>>> Seniors and
>>> the poor most affected."
>>> ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll
>>> all be
>>> paid the same
>>> ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their
>>> professional
>>> judgment, etc.
>>> ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for  
>>> private
>>> healthcare industries.
>>> ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power- 
>>> driven
>>> wheelchairs.
>>> ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of
>>> rationing!
>>> ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government  
>>> deems
>>> preventable re-admissions.
>>> ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial
>>> admission
>>> that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the
>>> government.
>>> ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and
>>> investing in
>>> healthcare companies!
>>> ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot
>>> expand
>>> without government approval.
>>> ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in  
>>> other
>>> words, yet another payoff for  ACORN.
>>> ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based
>>> measures:
>>> i.e.,  rationing.
>>> ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare  
>>> Advantage
>>> Plans, HMOs,  etc.
>>> ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
>>> individuals.
>>> ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee
>>> (healthcare by
>>> phone).
>>> ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
>>> Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
>>> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living
>>> wills,
>>> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in
>>> estate  taxes
>>> ahead of time.
>>> ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life
>>> resources,
>>> guiding you in death.
>>> ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life
>>> treatment;
>>> government  dictates how your life ends.
>>> ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate
>>> treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an
>>> ORDER for
>>> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT.
>>> ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments you
>>> may have
>>> at  end-of-life.
>>> ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
>>> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
>>> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.
>>> Government
>>> intervenes in your marriage.
>>> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining,
>>> creating and rationing those services.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 09:19:34 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:19:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
In-Reply-To: <C8A35B4403B44B8781D73E9E293ABDFC@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEBEMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

More spin. I recomend reading the actual bill. Get from it what you can.
There are hundreds of pages of adjustments to other bills that become almost
impossible to track.

I read the bill and there are some things that are good. But there is also a
lot for me to dislike. These sites pick on the easy to disclaim vague
guesses as to how things would be implimented. They make no retort to the
big issues with the bill.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>
>
> I see the White House has come out with a Reality Check page:
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/?e=10&ref=text
>
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Theresa Carter" <theresacus at yahoo.com>
> To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>
>
> JJ,
> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are you refering to
> and could you site your source. I really am trying to sort this
> out and want
> reliable sources and blanket statements like this are very misleading and
> this where propoganda starts.
>
> Thanks Theresa
>
>
> --- On Sun, 8/9/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com
> <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
> Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM
>
>
> Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
> grovenet at rdrop.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> grovenet-request at rdrop.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> grovenet-owner at rdrop.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Scam attempt (Geri)
> 2. Re: Scam attempt (Katie Allnutt)
> 3. Re: Scam attempt (Geri)
> 4. Re: Healthcare (JJSAW at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: "GroveNet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417 at gerianehzkfhvy>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> of these before?)
>
> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>
> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>
> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>
> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>
> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> I hung up.
>
>
> Geri
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
> From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> Thanks Geri,
> The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people
> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and
> enter their card #.
> We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual
> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been
> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's
> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
> I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly
> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
>
> Better to be informed.
>
>
> Katie
>
> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
>
> > Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> > of these before?)
> >
> > Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
> >
> > Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
> >
> > Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> > came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
> >
> > Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> > VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> > restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> > number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> > back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
> >
> > It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> > has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> > now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> > I hung up.
> >
> >
> > Geri
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8 at gerianehzkfhvy>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
> past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
> their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
> you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
> you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
> Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
> attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
> and for online gambling.
>
> Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!
>
> :-)
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>
>
> > Thanks Geri,
> > The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people
> > are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and
> > enter their card #.
> > We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual
> > person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been
> > stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's
> > which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
> > I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly
> > after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
> >
> > Better to be informed.
> >
> >
> > Katie
> >
> > On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
> >
> >> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
> >> of these before?)
> >>
> >> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
> >>
> >> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
> >>
> >> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
> >> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
> >>
> >> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
> >> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
> >> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
> >> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
> >> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
> >>
> >> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
> >> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
> >> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
> >> I hung up.
> >>
> >>
> >> Geri
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
> From: JJSAW at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare Reform
> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill
> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If
> that is
> not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> ? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
> ? Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits
> you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits
> for you. You will have no choice. None.
> ? Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free
> healthcare services.
> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
> ? Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to
> all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
> ? Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules
> to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
> ? Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare
> Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
> ? Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services;
> translation: illegal aliens
> ? Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
> individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
> ? Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled:
> you have no choice in the matter.
> ? Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
> "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly.
> Put simply,
> private insurers will be crushed.
> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
> ? Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run
> public plan. No alternatives.
> ? Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees
> AND their families.
> ? Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not
> offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does
> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
> ? Page 167: Any individual who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
> (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
> ? Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
> (Americans will pay for them).
> ? Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy
> will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
> ? Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as
> tax." Yes, it really says that.
> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and
> the poor most affected."
> ? Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you'll all be
> paid the same
> ? Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional
> judgment, etc.
> ? Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
> healthcare industries.
> ? Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
> wheelchairs.
> ? Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
> ? Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
> preventable re-admissions.
> ? Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission
> that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
> ? Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in
> healthcare companies!
> ? Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand
> without government approval.
> ? Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
> words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
> ? Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
> i.e., rationing.
> ? Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
> Plans, HMOs, etc.
> ? Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
> individuals.
> ? Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by
> phone).
> ? Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
> Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills,
> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in
> estate taxes
> ahead of time.
> ? Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources,
> guiding you in death.
> ? Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment;
> government dictates how your life ends.
> ? Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate
> treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for
> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
> ? Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have
> at end-of-life.
> ? Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government
> intervenes in your marriage.
> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
> creating and rationing those services.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> ***************************************
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 10:11:48 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:11:48 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEBEMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <785D1B1679E241E89DC64121897C0A88@gerianehzkfhvy>

Read more than one actual bill. There isn't just one bill ... yet.
The House has versions, the Senate has versions ... etc.
Then there is what the Executive Branch wants ... and so on.

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9


> More spin. I recomend reading the actual bill. Get from it what you can.
> There are hundreds of pages of adjustments to other bills that become almost
> impossible to track.
> 
> I read the bill and there are some things that are good. But there is also a
> lot for me to dislike. These sites pick on the easy to disclaim vague
> guesses as to how things would be implimented. They make no retort to the
> big issues with the bill.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Geri
>> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 8:32 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>>
>>
>> I see the White House has come out with a Reality Check page:
>> http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/?e=10&ref=text
>>
>>
>> Geri
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Theresa Carter" <theresacus at yahoo.com>
>> To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 3:02 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>>
>>
>> JJ,
>> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are you refering to
>> and could you site your source. I really am trying to sort this
>> out and want
>> reliable sources and blanket statements like this are very misleading and
>> this where propoganda starts.
>>
>> Thanks Theresa
>>
>>
>> --- On Sun, 8/9/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com
>> <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
>> Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>> Date: Sunday, August 9, 2009, 12:00 PM
>>
>>
>> Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
>> grovenet at rdrop.com
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> grovenet-request at rdrop.com
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> grovenet-owner at rdrop.com
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Scam attempt (Geri)
>> 2. Re: Scam attempt (Katie Allnutt)
>> 3. Re: Scam attempt (Geri)
>> 4. Re: Healthcare (JJSAW at aol.com)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 15:35:13 -0700
>> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
>> Subject: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>> To: "GroveNet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Message-ID: <0521130941734BADAB759F96F013F417 at gerianehzkfhvy>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>>
>> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> of these before?)
>>
>> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>>
>> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>>
>> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>>
>> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>>
>> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> I hung up.
>>
>>
>> Geri
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:38:46 -0700
>> From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Message-ID: <7BD97F61-36ED-40FC-A78A-17FB7055BF2D at verizon.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>>
>> Thanks Geri,
>> The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people
>> are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and
>> enter their card #.
>> We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual
>> person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been
>> stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's
>> which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
>> I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly
>> after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
>>
>> Better to be informed.
>>
>>
>> Katie
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
>>
>> > Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> > of these before?)
>> >
>> > Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>> >
>> > Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>> >
>> > Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> > came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>> >
>> > Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> > VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> > restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> > number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> > back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>> >
>> > It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> > has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> > now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> > I hung up.
>> >
>> >
>> > Geri
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 10:12:39 -0700
>> From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Message-ID: <4B2746FB61C44B14AA07EFBFBC1ECBF8 at gerianehzkfhvy>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Exactly, Katie. Mike & I have both had cards stolen in the
>> past, and it's a live person who calls (and doesn't block
>> their #), and they already know you by name and will ask
>> you about your specific card # (last 4-8 digits) & whether
>> you yourself used it at specific places for specific purchases!
>> Mike's was being used all over McMinnville, and mine had
>> attempts at being used on the coast for a hospital there
>> and for online gambling.
>>
>> Hope your husband's gotten his all straightened out!
>>
>> :-)
>> Geri
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
>> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 8:38 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Scam attempt
>>
>>
>> > Thanks Geri,
>> > The scammers are getting pretty good at this, knowing that people
>> > are busy and will likely not stop to think before they call back and
>> > enter their card #.
>> > We got a similar phone call not long ago, but it was an actual
>> > person on the phone and my husband's physical card actually had been
>> > stolen. (The scoundrel was buying lots of expensive stuff at Freddy's
>> > which was outside of his normal use pattern.)
>> > I'm guessing if we had gotten one of these scam calls shortly
>> > after that we might have not stopped to think much about it either.
>> >
>> > Better to be informed.
>> >
>> >
>> > Katie
>> >
>> > On Aug 8, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Geri wrote:
>> >
>> >> Just had a scam attempt ... (Anyone have one
>> >> of these before?)
>> >>
>> >> Received a call on my cell, showing as "Private."
>> >>
>> >> Usually I ignore them, but happened to pick up.
>> >>
>> >> Took a few seconds, but when a robo-voice
>> >> came on, I didn't even listen -- just hung up.
>> >>
>> >> Immediately after that, got a text on my cell from
>> >> VISA at VISA.COM, saying my card has been
>> >> restricted -- and to call back a certain 1-877-
>> >> number. Since VISA is not a card I have, I called
>> >> back out of curiosity. Again there was a robo-voice.
>> >>
>> >> It said: "Your card (didn't even identify what card)
>> >> has been restricted. Please enter your card number
>> >> now, followed by the pound sign." So of course
>> >> I hung up.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Geri
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 14:37:12 EDT
>> From: JJSAW at aol.com
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
>> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
>> Message-ID: <c4f.4ce17358.37b07158 at aol.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>>
>> Tidbits from the world of Healthcare Reform
>> ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill
>> becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If
>> that is
>> not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
>> ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
>> ? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
>> ? Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits
>> you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
>> ? Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits
>> for you. You will have no choice. None.
>> ? Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free
>> healthcare services.
>> ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
>> ? Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to
>> all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
>> ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
>> organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
>> ? Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules
>> to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
>> ? Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare
>> Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
>> ? Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services;
>> translation: illegal aliens
>> ? Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
>> individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
>> ? Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled:
>> you have no choice in the matter.
>> ? Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
>> "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly.
>> Put simply,
>> private insurers will be crushed.
>> ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
>> ? Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run
>> public plan. No alternatives.
>> ? Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees
>> AND their families.
>> ? Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not
>> offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
>> ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does
>> not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
>> ? Page 167: Any individual who doesn't have acceptable healthcare
>> (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
>> ? Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
>> (Americans will pay for them).
>> ? Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy
>> will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
>> ? Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as
>> tax." Yes, it really says that.
>> ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and
>> the poor most affected."
>> ? Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you'll all be
>> paid the same
>> ? Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional
>> judgment, etc.
>> ? Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
>> healthcare industries.
>> ? Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
>> wheelchairs.
>> ? Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
>> ? Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
>> preventable re-admissions.
>> ? Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission
>> that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
>> ? Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in
>> healthcare companies!
>> ? Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand
>> without government approval.
>> ? Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
>> words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
>> ? Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
>> i.e., rationing.
>> ? Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
>> Plans, HMOs, etc.
>> ? Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
>> individuals.
>> ? Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by
>> phone).
>> ? Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
>> Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
>> ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills,
>> durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in
>> estate taxes
>> ahead of time.
>> ? Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources,
>> guiding you in death.
>> ? Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment;
>> government dictates how your life ends.
>> ? Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate
>> treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for
>> end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
>> ? Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have
>> at end-of-life.
>> ? Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
>> ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
>> ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government
>> intervenes in your marriage.
>> ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
>> creating and rationing those services.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>> End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
>> ***************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 10 10:33:36 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPDMAAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEPDMAAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <290066.51113.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I also like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.  It makes sense, even to me, which also means it'll never be considered.  God forbid lay people understanding and agreeing with government action.

Steven, if you don't mind, can you please explain to my feeble brain why big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of one of the bills (which one?) being considered?  I really and truly don't understand what's at play here.

thanks!

 
Allen Warren

From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:25:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare

I like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.

I read where big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of the health
bill. Also that congress has discussed about $80 Billion in cuts to these
pharmaceuticals. Why? The ~50 million uninsured. 
I did the math and that comes to over $1600 per uninsured that the
pharmaceuticals would have to get to break even out of this deal. Unless
there is some other pay back.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:48 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> Steven,
> 
> I agree there is much in the Bill to dislike.  But there's also 
> much I liked.  But again, I fear lobbying money + bipartisanship 
> will insure no plan ever gets approved.  Pharma and insurance 
> carriers will gladly spend as much as they can to keep the money 
> rolling into their coffers.
> 
> I would like to see Congress working with the intent to hammer 
> out a Plan that Congress will approve and the President will sign 
> into law.  And as much as I'm a "glass half full" person, this is bad.
> > 
> > 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> > insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> > required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you 
> > are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> > continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help 
> > protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> > at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> > Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And 
> > why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> > plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> > more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> > money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> > enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> > Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The 
> > entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including 
> > search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> > find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only 
> > logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> > state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> > the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> > without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> > yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> > the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> > money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> > cost-sharing plan.
> > 
> > In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> > outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> > language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> > through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> > 
> > The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> > could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> > fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> > healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party 
> > will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> > pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> > 
> > Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> > Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> > most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> > not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> > President Obama.
> > 
> >  
> > Allen Warren
> > 
> > From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > 
> > 
> > Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> > ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
> > becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  
> > plan. If that is 
> > not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> > ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> > ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> > ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments 
> > and benefits 
> > you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> > ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide 
> health benefits 
> > for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
> > ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> > with free 
> > healthcare  services.
> > ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
> > ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time 
> access to 
> > all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> > ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
> > organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> > ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to 
> government rules 
> > to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
> > ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> > Healthcare 
> > Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
> > ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; 
> > translation: illegal  aliens 
> > ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> > individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
> > ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically 
> enrolled: 
> > you have no choice in the  matter. 
> > ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> > "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. 
> > Put simply, 
> > private insurers will be  crushed.
> > ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
> > ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> > government-run 
> > public plan. No  alternatives. 
> > ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time 
> employees 
> > AND their  families. 
> > ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not 
> > offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> > ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, 
> who does 
> > not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> > ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> > (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
> > ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> > (Americans will pay for  them). 
> > ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare 
> Bureaucracy 
> > will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
> > ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be 
> treated as 
> > tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
> > ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> > Seniors and  
> > the poor most affected." 
> > ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, you'll all be 
> > paid the same  
> > ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their professional 
> > judgment, etc. 
> > ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity for private 
> > healthcare industries. 
> > ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> > wheelchairs. 
> > ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> > rationing! 
> > ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the government deems 
> > preventable re-admissions. 
> > ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial 
> admission 
> > that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the 
> government. 
> > ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and 
> investing in 
> > healthcare companies! 
> > ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand 
> > without government approval. 
> > ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> > words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
> > ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based 
> measures: 
> > i.e.,  rationing. 
> > ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage 
> > Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
> > ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> > individuals. 
> > ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> > (healthcare by 
> > phone). 
> > ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> > Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> > ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding 
> living  wills, 
> > durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> > estate  taxes 
> > ahead of time. 
> > ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life 
> resources, 
> > guiding you in death. 
> > ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> > treatment; 
> > government  dictates how your life ends. 
> > ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> > treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an 
> > ORDER for 
> > end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
> > ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments 
> you may have 
> > at  end-of-life. 
> > ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> > ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> > ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> > Government  
> > intervenes in your marriage.
> > ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
> > creating and rationing those services. 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >      
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 



      

From edavie at verizon.net  Mon Aug 10 12:36:10 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:36:10 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August Washington
	Newsletter
Message-ID: <C4310E1069EA4D1C88DDD6AB6721480F@EDavie>

FCNL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jim Cason, FCNL
To: Ed Davie
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:21 AM
Subject: Health Care for Everyone: July/August 
Washington Newsletter



                  Friends Committee on National 
Legislation
                  A Quaker Lobby in the Public 
Interest

                 Dear Ed Davie,

                  The Congressional debate about 
health care reform is heating up, yet much of the 
media and even some of the experts are getting the 
facts about health care reform wrong. Real health 
care reform could dramatically improve the lives 
of many people in this country, reduce the 
projected federal deficit, and improve all of our 
lives.

                  FCNL's July/August Washington 
Newsletter, "Health Care for Everyone," provides 
the facts, the background, and the tools you need 
to participate in this debate. We at FCNL hope 
that after you read this newsletter, you will


                    a.. forward this newsletter 
and other information to Friends, neighbors, and 
people in your community -- or better yet, invite 
them over for a conversation;


                    b.. talk to your 
representative and senators about health care 
form; and

                    c.. consider distributing this 
information or FCNL's new health care quiz to 
email lists that you're part of.

                  Here's a list of the articles in 
FCNL's "Health Care for Everyone" issue:

                  Health Care for Everyone: A 
carefully designed health care system can be built 
on what works well now, can create and enforce 
standards for private health care plans, can 
expand options for employers and individuals, and 
can make health insurance affordable.

                  Fast Facts on Health Care: The 
United States spends more on health care than any 
other country in the world, and, yet, we have 
poorer health status by many measures. Find out 
why.

                  Health Care Reform in Congress: 
By the summer of 2009, key committees in the House 
and Senate had developed three fairly detailed but 
different approaches to improve the health care 
system in the United States.

                  Paying for Health Care: The 
health care price tag in the United States is a 
shocker -- more than double the average spending 
of 30 peer nations in the OECD (Organization for 
Economic Cooperation and Development). Who picks 
up the tab?

                  The newsletter also includes two 
important articles about immigration reform:

                  Immigration: It's Our Community: 
The United States needs a workable solution to the 
immigration problem, one that upholds fundamental 
U.S. values of justice and equality.

                  Breaking Bread and Barriers - 
Can you Organize a Potluck?: Starting this summer, 
could you host a community potluck in support of 
just and humane immigration reform?

                  As always, find updates on these 
and other issues at www.fcnl.org.





                 You are subscribed to the FCNL 
Washington Newsletter notification list. Make sure 
you receive these email updates from FCNL. Add 
fcnl at fcnl.org to your address book.

                  Donate to FCNL.

                  This email was sent to: 
edavie at verizon.net
                  Update your email address, 
manage your FCNL email subscription, or 
unsubscribe from this list.

                  ? 2009 Friends Committee on 
National Legislation | 245 2nd Street NE 
Washington, DC 20002 | 800-630-1330. Powered by 
ARCOS.




 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 13:31:25 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:31:25 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August
	WashingtonNewsletter
References: <C4310E1069EA4D1C88DDD6AB6721480F@EDavie>
Message-ID: <E9B41203C6CF433A822D13AA9740342D@gerianehzkfhvy>

Thanks for passing it along, Ed.

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Grovenet, F.G." <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:36 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August WashingtonNewsletter


> FCNL
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Jim Cason, FCNL
> To: Ed Davie
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:21 AM
> Subject: Health Care for Everyone: July/August 
> Washington Newsletter
> 
> 
> 
>                  Friends Committee on National 
> Legislation
>                  A Quaker Lobby in the Public 
> Interest
> 
>                 Dear Ed Davie,
> 
>                  The Congressional debate about 
> health care reform is heating up, yet much of the 
> media and even some of the experts are getting the 
> facts about health care reform wrong. Real health 
> care reform could dramatically improve the lives 
> of many people in this country, reduce the 
> projected federal deficit, and improve all of our 
> lives.
> 
>                  FCNL's July/August Washington 
> Newsletter, "Health Care for Everyone," provides 
> the facts, the background, and the tools you need 
> to participate in this debate. We at FCNL hope 
> that after you read this newsletter, you will
> 
> 
>                    a.. forward this newsletter 
> and other information to Friends, neighbors, and 
> people in your community -- or better yet, invite 
> them over for a conversation;
> 
> 
>                    b.. talk to your 
> representative and senators about health care 
> form; and
> 
>                    c.. consider distributing this 
> information or FCNL's new health care quiz to 
> email lists that you're part of.
> 
>                  Here's a list of the articles in 
> FCNL's "Health Care for Everyone" issue:
> 
>                  Health Care for Everyone: A 
> carefully designed health care system can be built 
> on what works well now, can create and enforce 
> standards for private health care plans, can 
> expand options for employers and individuals, and 
> can make health insurance affordable.
> 
>                  Fast Facts on Health Care: The 
> United States spends more on health care than any 
> other country in the world, and, yet, we have 
> poorer health status by many measures. Find out 
> why.
> 
>                  Health Care Reform in Congress: 
> By the summer of 2009, key committees in the House 
> and Senate had developed three fairly detailed but 
> different approaches to improve the health care 
> system in the United States.
> 
>                  Paying for Health Care: The 
> health care price tag in the United States is a 
> shocker -- more than double the average spending 
> of 30 peer nations in the OECD (Organization for 
> Economic Cooperation and Development). Who picks 
> up the tab?
> 
>                  The newsletter also includes two 
> important articles about immigration reform:
> 
>                  Immigration: It's Our Community: 
> The United States needs a workable solution to the 
> immigration problem, one that upholds fundamental 
> U.S. values of justice and equality.
> 
>                  Breaking Bread and Barriers - 
> Can you Organize a Potluck?: Starting this summer, 
> could you host a community potluck in support of 
> just and humane immigration reform?
> 
>                  As always, find updates on these 
> and other issues at www.fcnl.org.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                 You are subscribed to the FCNL 
> Washington Newsletter notification list. Make sure 
> you receive these email updates from FCNL. Add 
> fcnl at fcnl.org to your address book.
> 
>                  Donate to FCNL.
> 
>                  This email was sent to: 
> edavie at verizon.net
>                  Update your email address, 
> manage your FCNL email subscription, or 
> unsubscribe from this list.
> 
>                  ? 2009 Friends Committee on 
> National Legislation | 245 2nd Street NE 
> Washington, DC 20002 | 800-630-1330. Powered by 
> ARCOS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From rab at jurislex.com  Mon Aug 10 17:28:34 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:28:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
Message-ID: <4A80BB32.2080508@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090810/dbf975de/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-21.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2506 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090810/dbf975de/attachment.jpg 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 18:18:46 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:18:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A80BB32.2080508@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBFMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

that is why I read the bill. So much spin from right and left wingnuts.
Would you like me to post some quotes from the bill that I dislike?

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 10 18:18:45 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:18:45 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Healthcare
In-Reply-To: <290066.51113.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBFMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

It was an article I read last week. The article floated the thought that
they hoped to sell stuff to the uninsured once they become covered.
The article sounded similar to these. I don't remember the exact source.

From:
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/08/white-houses-deal-with-big-pharma.ht
ml

In return, Big Pharma isn't just supporting universal health care. It's also
spending a lots of money on TV and radio advertising in support. Sunday's
New York Times reports that Big Pharma has budgeted $150 million for TV ads
promoting universal health insurance, starting this August (that's more
money than John McCain spent on TV advertising in last year's presidential
campaign), after having already spent a bundle through advocacy groups like
Healthy Economies Now and Families USA.

From:
http://wallstreetpit.com/9303-the-deal-between-big-pharma-and-the-white-hous
e

Let me remind you: Any bonanza for the drug industry means higher
health-care costs for the rest of us, which is one reason why critics of the
emerging healthcare plans, including the Congressional Budget Office, are so
worried about their failure to adequately stem future healthcare costs. To
be sure, as part of its deal with the White House, Big Pharma apparently has
promised to cut future drug costs by $80 billion. But neither the industry
nor the White House nor any congressional committee has announced exactly
where the $80 billion in savings will show up nor how this portion of the
deal will be enforced. In any event, you can bet that the bonanza Big Pharma
will reap far exceeds $80 billion. Otherwise, why would it have agreed?

From:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/white-house-confirms-deal_n_254408.
html

In closed-door negotiations with President Obama and his top aides
throughout the spring, Big Pharma offered its support for comprehensive
health care reform and pledged to cut $80 billion in costs over the next ten
years. Just exactly what Obama promised in return wasn't made public and was
the subject of intense debate on Capitol Hill Thursday, as senators wondered
aloud if the White House had tied their legislative hands.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 10:34 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> I also like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.  It makes sense, 
> even to me, which also means it'll never be considered.  God 
> forbid lay people understanding and agreeing with government action.
> 
> Steven, if you don't mind, can you please explain to my feeble 
> brain why big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of one 
> of the bills (which one?) being considered?  I really and truly 
> don't understand what's at play here.
> 
> thanks!
> 
>  
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:25:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> I like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.
> 
> I read where big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of the health
> bill. Also that congress has discussed about $80 Billion in cuts to these
> pharmaceuticals. Why? The ~50 million uninsured. 
> I did the math and that comes to over $1600 per uninsured that the
> pharmaceuticals would have to get to break even out of this deal. Unless
> there is some other pay back.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > Behalf Of Allen Warren
> > Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:48 PM
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > 
> > 
> > Steven,
> > 
> > I agree there is much in the Bill to dislike.  But there's also 
> > much I liked.  But again, I fear lobbying money + bipartisanship 
> > will insure no plan ever gets approved.  Pharma and insurance 
> > carriers will gladly spend as much as they can to keep the money 
> > rolling into their coffers.
> > 
> > I would like to see Congress working with the intent to hammer 
> > out a Plan that Congress will approve and the President will sign 
> > into law.  And as much as I'm a "glass half full" person, this is bad.
> > > 
> > > 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> > > insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> > > required to take a similar plan.  What it DOES state is if you 
> > > are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> > > continue in your current coverage.  In fact, the Bill would help 
> > > protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> > > at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> > > Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!  And 
> > > why is this bad?  What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> > > plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> > > more?  Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> > > money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> > > enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> > > Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!  The 
> > > entire section starts on Page 26.  And try as I might, including 
> > > search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> > > find the word "ration" used in the entire section.  The only 
> > > logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> > > state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> > > the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> > > without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> > > yearly.  Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> > > the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> > > money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> > > cost-sharing plan.
> > > 
> > > In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> > > outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> > > language.  As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> > > through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> > > 
> > > The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> > > could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> > > fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> > > healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.  Neither major party 
> > > will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> > > pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> > > 
> > > Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> > > Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> > > most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> > > not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> > > President Obama.
> > > 
> > >  
> > > Allen Warren
> > > 
> > > From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> > > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Tidbits from the world of Healthcare  Reform
> > > ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time  of the bill 
> > > becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar  
> > > plan. If that is 
> > > not available, you will be required to take the gov  option!
> > > ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> > > ?  Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> > > ? Page 30: A government  committee will decide what treatments 
> > > and benefits 
> > > you get (and, unlike an  insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> > > ? Page 42: The "Health Choices  Commissioner" will decide 
> > health benefits 
> > > for you. You will have no choice.  None. 
> > > ? Page 50: All  non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> > > with free 
> > > healthcare  services.
> > > ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID  Healthcard. 
> > > ? Page  59: The federal government will have direct, real-time 
> > access to 
> > > all individual  bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> > > ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community  
> > > organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> > > ? Page 72: All private  healthcare plans must conform to 
> > government rules 
> > > to participate in a Healthcare  Exchange. 
> > > ? Page 84:  All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> > > Healthcare 
> > > Exchange (i.e.,  total government control of private plans) 
> > > ? Page 91: Government  mandates linguistic infrastructure for 
> services; 
> > > translation: illegal  aliens 
> > > ? Page 95: The  Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> > > individuals for  Government-run Health Care plan. 
> > > ? Page 102: Those eligible  for Medicaid will be automatically 
> > enrolled: 
> > > you have no choice in the  matter. 
> > > ? Page 124:  No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> > > "judicial review" is  permitted against the government monopoly. 
> > > Put simply, 
> > > private insurers will be  crushed.
> > > ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set  wages. 
> > > ? Page 145: An  employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> > > government-run 
> > > public plan. No  alternatives. 
> > > ? Page  126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time 
> > employees 
> > > AND their  families. 
> > > ? Page 149:  Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, 
> who does not 
> > > offer the public  option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> > > ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or  more, 
> > who does 
> > > not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> > > ? Page 167: Any individual  who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> > > (according to the government) will be  taxed 2.5% of income. 
> > > ? Page 170: Any  NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> > > (Americans will pay for  them). 
> > > ? Page 195:  Officers and employees of Government Healthcare 
> > Bureaucracy 
> > > will have access to  ALL American financial and personal records. 
> > > ? Page  203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be 
> > treated as 
> > > tax." Yes, it  really says that. 
> > > ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> > > Seniors and  
> > > the poor most affected." 
> > > ? Page 241: Doctors: no  matter what speciality you have, 
> you'll all be 
> > > paid the same  
> > > ? Page 253: Government  sets value of doctors' time, their 
> professional 
> > > judgment, etc. 
> > > ? Page 265: Government  mandates and controls productivity 
> for private 
> > > healthcare industries. 
> > > ? Page 268: Government  regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> > > wheelchairs. 
> > > ? Page 272: Cancer  patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> > > rationing! 
> > > ? Page 280: Hospitals will  be penalized for what the 
> government deems 
> > > preventable re-admissions. 
> > > ? Page 298: Doctors: if  you treat a patient during an initial 
> > admission 
> > > that results in a readmission,  you will be penalized by the 
> > government. 
> > > ? Page 317: Doctors: you  are now prohibited for owning and 
> > investing in 
> > > healthcare companies! 
> > > ? Page 318: Prohibition on  hospital expansion. Hospitals 
> cannot expand 
> > > without government approval. 
> > > ? Page 321: Hospital  expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> > > words, yet another payoff for  ACORN. 
> > > ? Page 335:  Government mandates establishment of outcome-based 
> > measures: 
> > > i.e.,  rationing. 
> > > ? Page  341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare 
> Advantage 
> > > Plans, HMOs,  etc. 
> > > ? Page 354:  Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> > > individuals. 
> > > ? Page 379: More  bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> > > (healthcare by 
> > > phone). 
> > > ? Page 425: More  bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> > > Citizens, assisted suicide,  euthanasia?
> > > ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding 
> > living  wills, 
> > > durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> > > estate  taxes 
> > > ahead of time. 
> > > ? Page 425: Government  provides approved list of end-of-life 
> > resources, 
> > > guiding you in death. 
> > > ? Page  427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> > > treatment; 
> > > government  dictates how your life ends. 
> > > ? Page 429: Advance Care  Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> > > treatment as patient's health  deteriorates. This can include an 
> > > ORDER for 
> > > end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the  GOVERNMENT. 
> > > ? Page  430: Government will decide what level of treatments 
> > you may have 
> > > at  end-of-life. 
> > > ? Page  469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> > > ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> > > ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> > > Government  
> > > intervenes in your marriage.
> > > ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health  services: defining, 
> > > creating and rationing those services. 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >      
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >      
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From JJSAW at aol.com  Mon Aug 10 21:26:09 2009
From: JJSAW at aol.com (JJSAW at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:26:09 EDT
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
Message-ID: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
theresacus at yahoo.com writes:

JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are  you refering to 
and could you site your source.   I really am trying  to sort this out and 
want reliable sources and blanket statements like this  are very misleading 
and this where propoganda starts.   

Thanks Theresa


My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface  
the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
list  before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
validity of  the points made. 

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 11 07:18:21 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?

Gary




________________________________
From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9


In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
theresacus at yahoo.com writes:

JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are  you refering to 
and could you site your source.   I really am trying  to sort this out and 
want reliable sources and blanket statements like this  are very misleading 
and this where propoganda starts.  

Thanks Theresa


My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface  
the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
list  before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
validity of  the points made. 
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 11 10:59:16 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:59:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4A81B174.4060802@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/2c0826b3/attachment.html 

From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 11 11:14:09 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:14:09 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBFMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBFMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/f11c07d6/attachment.html 

From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 11 11:24:22 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:24:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific
	American Podcast
Message-ID: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/b0e46014/attachment.html 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 11:52:13 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:52:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>

I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in place (without the government interfering much in this very personal decision). Current health care reform bills being worked on cannot "change" abortion laws by themselves.


Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:18 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> 
> 
> In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
> theresacus at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> JJ,
> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are  you refering to 
> and could you site your source.   I really am trying  to sort this out and 
> want reliable sources and blanket statements like this  are very misleading 
> and this where propoganda starts.  
> 
> Thanks Theresa
> 
> 
> My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface  
> the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
> list  before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
> validity of  the points made. 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:53 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Look at these pay outs. This is in the section on Home Visitation for
families with small kids.

1 ??(m) APPROPRIATIONS.?Out of any money in the
2 Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated,
3 there is appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this
4 section?
5 ??(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
6 ??(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
7 ??(3) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
8 ??(4) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
9 ??(5) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.

Then on Page 864 there is this for medical clinics.

20 Public Health Investment Fund, the following:
21 ??(1) For fiscal year 2010, $1,000,000,000.
22 ??(2) For fiscal year 2011, $1,500,000,000.
23 ??(3) For fiscal year 2012, $2,500,000,000.
24 ??(4) For fiscal year 2013, $3,000,000,000.
25 ??(5) For fiscal year 2014, $4,000,000,000.
865
1 ??(6) For fiscal year 2015, $4,400,000,000.
2 ??(7) For fiscal year 2016, $4,800,000,000.
3 ??(8) For fiscal year 2017, $5,300,000,000.
4 ??(9) For fiscal year 2018, $5,900,000,000.
5 ??(10) For fiscal year 2019, $6,400,000,000.??.

Then it gets on to National Medical workforce. A good read.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:53 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Here is one I really dislike. They are going to use the IRS for enforcement.
If you don't have the insurance the Health Committee wants, you get the IRS
after you.

Page 167
5 TITLE IV?AMENDMENTS TO IN6
TERNAL REVENUE CODE OF
7 1986
8 Subtitle A?Shared Responsibility
9 PART 1?INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
10 SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE
11 HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
12 (a) IN GENERAL.?Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the
13 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at
14 the end the following new part:
15 ??PART VIII?HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES
??SUBPART A. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE
COVERAGE.
16 ??Subpart A?Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable
17 Health Care Coverage
??Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.
18 ??SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE
19 HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
20 ??(a) TAX IMPOSED.?In the case of any individual
21 who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at
22 any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed
23 a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of?
168
1 ??(1) the taxpayer?s modified adjusted gross in
2 come for the taxable year, over
3 ??(2) the amount of gross income specified in
4 section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
5 ??(b) LIMITATIONS.?
6 ??(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.?
7 ??(A) IN GENERAL.?The tax imposed
8 under subsection (a) with respect to any tax
9payer for any taxable year shall not exceed the
10 applicable national average premium for such
11 taxable year.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:54 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:54 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

This is just sitting on page 438.
Anyone figure out what it means?
I think it is related to the ways that folks try to escape the medicade trap
where they take you home to pay for your treatments.
Divorce the sick spouse, is a method that looks like they want to close.
Over the long term you won't take it with you and now you won't have it to
give to your kids either.

1 SEC. 1235. EXCEPTION FOR USE OF MORE RECENT TAX
2 YEAR IN CASE OF GAINS FROM SALE OF PRI
3 MARY RESIDENCE IN COMPUTING PART B IN
4 COME-RELATED PREMIUM.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.?Section 1839(i)(4)(C)(ii)(II) of
6 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395r(i)(4)(C)(ii)(II))
7 is amended by inserting ??sale of primary residence,?? after
8 ??divorce of such individual,??.
9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.?The amendment made by
10 subsection (a) shall apply to premiums and payments for
11 years beginning with 2011.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:54 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:54 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Sounds like they a doctor who diagnoses wrong will be considered fraud.
Page 801
4 Subtitle F?Waste, Fraud, and
5 Abuse
6 SEC. 1751. HEALTH-CARE ACQUIRED CONDITIONS.
7 (a) MEDICAID NON-PAYMENT FOR CERTAIN HEALTH
8 CARE-ACQUIRED CONDITIONS.?Section 1903(i) of the
9 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396b(i)) is amended?
10 (1) by striking ??or?? at the end of paragraph
11 (23);
12 (2) by striking the period at the end of para
13 graph (24) and inserting ??; or??; and
14 (3) by inserting after paragraph (24) the fol
15 lowing new paragraph:
16 ??(25) with respect to amounts expended for
17 services related to the presence of a condition that
18 could be identified by a secondary diagnostic code
19 described in section 1886(d)(4)(D)(iv) and for any
20 health care acquired condition determined as a non
21 covered service under title XVIII.??.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:52 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

This one creates a fund. Lots of money for whatever they want.

On page 859 the create The Fund. I won't bother to paste it all. But they
put $4,600,000,000 in it in 2010. By 2020 they will have $88,700,000,000.00
in this fund.
What is it used for?

IN GENERAL.?Amounts in the Fund are authorized to be appropriated by the
Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
for carrying out activities under designated public health provisions.

Just a general slush fund of stuff eh?

And just to make sure no one is accountable:
 Page 863

16 (3) BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS.?Amounts ap
17 propriated under this section, and outlays flowing
18 from such appropriations, shall not be taken into ac
19 count for purposes of any budget enforcement proce
20 dures including allocations under section 302(a) and
21 (b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
22 Control Act and budget resolutions for fiscal years
23 during which appropriations are made from the
24 Fund.

This is just one of the various funds that just float there sucking money
into the abyss.
One called the PUBLIC HEALTH INVESTMENT FUND on page 897 gets over
$100Million a year.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:52 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Here is one I don't like.

Page 829
9 ??Subchapter B?Insured and Self-Insured
10 Health Plans
??Sec. 4375. Health insurance.
??Sec. 4376. Self-insured health plans.
??Sec. 4377. Definitions and special rules.
11 ??SEC. 4375. HEALTH INSURANCE.
12 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?There is hereby imposed
13 on each specified health insurance policy for each policy
14 year a fee equal to the fair share per capita amount deter
15 mined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
16 number of lives covered under the policy.
17 ??(b) LIABILITY FOR FEE.?The fee imposed by sub
18 section (a) shall be paid by the issuer of the policy.
19 ??(c) SPECIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY.?For
20 purposes of this section:

But they throw a loophole on the next page. Must be where they define the
Congress' health plan.

??(2) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN POLICIES.?The
4 term ?specified health insurance policy? does not in
5clude any insurance if substantially all of its cov
6 erage is of excepted benefits described in section
7 9832(c).

Self insurance is a thing they don't want.
Page 831

1 ??SEC. 4376. SELF-INSURED HEALTH PLANS.
2 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?In the case of any appl
i3 cable self-insured health plan for each plan year, there is
4 hereby imposed a fee equal to the fair share per capita
5 amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by
6 the average number of lives covered under the plan.

They are charging a fee equal to the plan's share. Basically pay twice if
you want to self insure. But it does seem to cover unions as well.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 20:19:51 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:19:51 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <4A81B4F1.4080108@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Here is one I like. So the doc no longer has to fake up the code to get the
job done. Too bad there aren't more fixes like this.
from page 488

6 SEC. 1306. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE FOR COLORECTAL

7 CANCER SCREENING TESTS REGARDLESS OF

8 CODING, SUBSEQUENT DIAGNOSIS, OR ANCIL9

LARY TISSUE REMOVAL.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.?Section 1833(b) of the Social Se

11 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395l(b)), as amended by section

12 1305(b)(3), is amended by adding at the end the following

13 new sentence: ??Clause (1) of the first sentence of this sub

14 section shall apply with respect to a colorectal cancer

15 screening test regardless of the code that is billed for the

16 establishment of a diagnosis as a result of the test, or for

17 the removal of tissue or other matter or other procedure

18 that is furnished in connection with, as a result of, and

19 in the same clinical encounter as, the screening test.??.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:14 AM
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !


  How 'bout a few of each - some you dislike (with cites) and some you do
(ditto)?

  bob
  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Steven wrote:
that is why I read the bill. So much spin from right and left wingnuts.
Would you like me to post some quotes from the bill that I dislike?

From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 11 21:20:50 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:20:50 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <6C68E4D0-EB0B-46EF-A74E-9935F7A930A4@verizon.net>

Actually, I find the perspective interesting.  And I cannot help but  
wonder if the inverse is also true.

That those who what the government to outlaw abortions (which gets  
between a patient and a physician) , don't want the government in the  
position to make health care decisions that might come between a  
patient and a physician.

**********

Of course, if your medical insurance came with riders denying  
coverage for "pre-existing conditions", prohibitions on unusual or  
experimental procedures, or an annual or lifetime cap on payments,  
then you already experience have the payor coming between you and  
your physician.

And if someone happen to be in the health provider industry, perhaps  
they could provide a rough estimate of the office administrative cost  
associated with billing insurance and the percentage lost to  
"provider discounts".

I am looking at a recent claims report from one of our health providers.
Service: $124.54 less provider discount $59.68 = $64.86.

So, who do you suppose gets to pay $124.54 for the same level of  
service?
I would guess that it is the person who chooses to pay their own  
medical bills.  Self insurance, in this case, would roughly double  
the cost compared to the same service paid by insurance companies.

Oh, this plan has a $2 Million lifetime plan limit.

David




On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Geri wrote:

> I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in  
> place (without the government interfering much in this very  
> personal decision). Current health care reform bills being worked  
> on cannot "change" abortion laws by themselves.
>
>
> Geri

>> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all  
>> perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of  
>> restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare  
>> decisions over to that same government?
>>
>> Gary

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug 11 21:45:51 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:45:51 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEBKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <463396C3-4273-4883-8AA2-E94C5F79DC15@verizon.net>

If I read this one correctly. It is saying that there is a fee on  
insurance (equal to the fair share per capita ....)
And then it says that self insurance gets the same fee (equal to the  
fair share per capita.....)

Then it says that there is an exemption for those policies that are  
not really insurance but just coverage of for 'excepted benefits'.

It sounds like they are trying to apply the fee as even handedly as  
they can but they realize there are some policies where it doesn't  
make sense because it is just an 'exceptions' policy.

And it doesn't say to pay double at all. It doesn't say the fee is  
equal to the plan. The words "equal to the fair share per capita  
amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average  
number of lives covered under the' inserted between the word 'fee'  
and 'plan'.

What is the fee for?  Is it to level the playing field for those with  
insurance policies and those without? Does the context make a  
difference or is the problem just that there is a fee on most  
insurance policies?  I can't really tell what it is you don't like  
about this other than perhaps the fee applies to both insured and  
self insured policies.

Katie

On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Steven wrote:

> Here is one I don't like.
>
> Page 829
> 9 ??Subchapter B?Insured and Self-Insured
> 10 Health Plans
> ??Sec. 4375. Health insurance.
> ??Sec. 4376. Self-insured health plans.
> ??Sec. 4377. Definitions and special rules.
> 11 ??SEC. 4375. HEALTH INSURANCE.
> 12 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?There is hereby imposed
> 13 on each specified health insurance policy for each policy
> 14 year a fee equal to the fair share per capita amount deter
> 15 mined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
> 16 number of lives covered under the policy.
> 17 ??(b) LIABILITY FOR FEE.?The fee imposed by sub
> 18 section (a) shall be paid by the issuer of the policy.
> 19 ??(c) SPECIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY.?For
> 20 purposes of this section:
>
> But they throw a loophole on the next page. Must be where they  
> define the
> Congress' health plan.
>
> ??(2) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN POLICIES.?The
> 4 term ?specified health insurance policy? does not in
> 5clude any insurance if substantially all of its cov
> 6 erage is of excepted benefits described in section
> 7 9832(c).
>
> Self insurance is a thing they don't want.
> Page 831
>
> 1 ??SEC. 4376. SELF-INSURED HEALTH PLANS.
> 2 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?In the case of any appl
> i3 cable self-insured health plan for each plan year, there is
> 4 hereby imposed a fee equal to the fair share per capita
> 5 amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by
> 6 the average number of lives covered under the plan.
>
> They are charging a fee equal to the plan's share. Basically pay  
> twice if
> you want to self insure. But it does seem to cover unions as well.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug 11 21:54:31 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:54:31 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief :
	Scientific	American Podcast
In-Reply-To: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>
References: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>

Fascinating.
It makes one wonder if King George III  would seem more American than  
any black American.

Katie



On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:24 AM, Bob Browning wrote:

> Absolutely interesting take on the birther controversy!!
>
> bob
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=whats- 
> behind-birthers-obama-belief-09-08-10&sc=WR_20090811
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 11 23:32:18 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific
	American Podcast
In-Reply-To: <A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>
References: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>
	<A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <977231.3369.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Just as today there are still those who staunchly believe GW Bush "rigged" the election results in at least the State of Florida leading to his 1st tour of duty in the White House, there will be people believing for the rest of their lives on this Earth that President Obama is NOT a legal US-born citizen.

Assuming President Obama chooses to run for re-election, there will be a crescendo of renewed fervor on this issue leading up to the 2012 election.  But until at least 2012, this issue will continue living though right now it's taking a HUGE backseat to the Healthcare Reform town hall meetings.

 
Allen Warren

From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9:54:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific American Podcast

Fascinating.
It makes one wonder if King George III  would seem more American than  
any black American.

Katie



On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:24 AM, Bob Browning wrote:

> Absolutely interesting take on the birther controversy!!
>
> bob
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=whats- 
> behind-birthers-obama-belief-09-08-10&sc=WR_20090811
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 11 23:40:34 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:40:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <463396C3-4273-4883-8AA2-E94C5F79DC15@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

What is the fair share?
The fee would double the fair share amount. Since you pay the fair share and
then a fee equal to that amount. It doubles something.
Sounds to me that it is going to be a big hunk of change.
I think the exception might be the congressional plan. Exempting themselves
from fees.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9:46 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
>
>
> If I read this one correctly. It is saying that there is a fee on
> insurance (equal to the fair share per capita ....)
> And then it says that self insurance gets the same fee (equal to the
> fair share per capita.....)
>
> Then it says that there is an exemption for those policies that are
> not really insurance but just coverage of for 'excepted benefits'.
>
> It sounds like they are trying to apply the fee as even handedly as
> they can but they realize there are some policies where it doesn't
> make sense because it is just an 'exceptions' policy.
>
> And it doesn't say to pay double at all. It doesn't say the fee is
> equal to the plan. The words "equal to the fair share per capita
> amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
> number of lives covered under the' inserted between the word 'fee'
> and 'plan'.
>
> What is the fee for?  Is it to level the playing field for those with
> insurance policies and those without? Does the context make a
> difference or is the problem just that there is a fee on most
> insurance policies?  I can't really tell what it is you don't like
> about this other than perhaps the fee applies to both insured and
> self insured policies.
>
> Katie
>
> On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Steven wrote:
>
> > Here is one I don't like.
> >
> > Page 829
> > 9 ??Subchapter B?Insured and Self-Insured
> > 10 Health Plans
> > ??Sec. 4375. Health insurance.
> > ??Sec. 4376. Self-insured health plans.
> > ??Sec. 4377. Definitions and special rules.
> > 11 ??SEC. 4375. HEALTH INSURANCE.
> > 12 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?There is hereby imposed
> > 13 on each specified health insurance policy for each policy
> > 14 year a fee equal to the fair share per capita amount deter
> > 15 mined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
> > 16 number of lives covered under the policy.
> > 17 ??(b) LIABILITY FOR FEE.?The fee imposed by sub
> > 18 section (a) shall be paid by the issuer of the policy.
> > 19 ??(c) SPECIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY.?For
> > 20 purposes of this section:
> >
> > But they throw a loophole on the next page. Must be where they
> > define the
> > Congress' health plan.
> >
> > ??(2) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN POLICIES.?The
> > 4 term ?specified health insurance policy? does not in
> > 5clude any insurance if substantially all of its cov
> > 6 erage is of excepted benefits described in section
> > 7 9832(c).
> >
> > Self insurance is a thing they don't want.
> > Page 831
> >
> > 1 ??SEC. 4376. SELF-INSURED HEALTH PLANS.
> > 2 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?In the case of any appl
> > i3 cable self-insured health plan for each plan year, there is
> > 4 hereby imposed a fee equal to the fair share per capita
> > 5 amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by
> > 6 the average number of lives covered under the plan.
> >
> > They are charging a fee equal to the plan's share. Basically pay
> > twice if
> > you want to self insure. But it does seem to cover unions as well.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From allnutt at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 03:55:01 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:55:01 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <CF66D8F7-944A-4D6E-9DF1-0BA3EEA24570@verizon.net>



On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:40 PM, Steven wrote:

> What is the fair share?
Who knows? You only pulled out a portion of the text. What does the  
rest of the text say?

> The fee would double the fair share amount. Since you pay the fair  
> share and
> then a fee equal to that amount. It doubles something.
It does not say you pay a fair share and then a fee equal to that  
amount.  It simply says there is a fee and then goes on to define  
what the fee will be (a fair share per person). And it defines the  
fee for regular insurance with the same language as the definition of  
the fee under self insurance. Treating groups equal is good.  Nowhere  
does it say the 'fee' doubles the 'fair share' or that you have to  
pay it twice


> Sounds to me that it is going to be a big hunk of change.
Sounds to me like it could be a reasonable amount.  It depends on  
what the fee is for, because size is relative.


> I think the exception might be the congressional plan. Exempting  
> themselves
> from fees.
How about this for a guess.  Some insurance policies, like gap  
policies, cover things that your regular insurance does not cover.  
Say, your insurance covers hospitalizations except for child birth.   
If you go out and get an 'exceptions' policy to cover child birth  
they will not impose the fee on the child birth policy because it  
substantially covers things that are exceptions from your overall  
health insurance.  It sounds to me like the section is trying to be  
reasonable and not apply fees to gap insurance policies if people  
already have an insurance policy where the fees do apply. (They are  
trying to avoid doubling the fees.)  I don't think it applies to  
Congress trying to exempt themselves because that is not what it says.


I still don't understand what it is you don't like about this portion.


Katie

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9:46 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
>>
>>
>> If I read this one correctly. It is saying that there is a fee on
>> insurance (equal to the fair share per capita ....)
>> And then it says that self insurance gets the same fee (equal to the
>> fair share per capita.....)
>>
>> Then it says that there is an exemption for those policies that are
>> not really insurance but just coverage of for 'excepted benefits'.
>>
>> It sounds like they are trying to apply the fee as even handedly as
>> they can but they realize there are some policies where it doesn't
>> make sense because it is just an 'exceptions' policy.
>>
>> And it doesn't say to pay double at all. It doesn't say the fee is
>> equal to the plan. The words "equal to the fair share per capita
>> amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
>> number of lives covered under the' inserted between the word 'fee'
>> and 'plan'.
>>
>> What is the fee for?  Is it to level the playing field for those with
>> insurance policies and those without? Does the context make a
>> difference or is the problem just that there is a fee on most
>> insurance policies?  I can't really tell what it is you don't like
>> about this other than perhaps the fee applies to both insured and
>> self insured policies.
>>
>> Katie
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Here is one I don't like.
>>>
>>> Page 829
>>> 9 ??Subchapter B?Insured and Self-Insured
>>> 10 Health Plans
>>> ??Sec. 4375. Health insurance.
>>> ??Sec. 4376. Self-insured health plans.
>>> ??Sec. 4377. Definitions and special rules.
>>> 11 ??SEC. 4375. HEALTH INSURANCE.
>>> 12 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?There is hereby imposed
>>> 13 on each specified health insurance policy for each policy
>>> 14 year a fee equal to the fair share per capita amount deter
>>> 15 mined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by the average
>>> 16 number of lives covered under the policy.
>>> 17 ??(b) LIABILITY FOR FEE.?The fee imposed by sub
>>> 18 section (a) shall be paid by the issuer of the policy.
>>> 19 ??(c) SPECIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE POLICY.?For
>>> 20 purposes of this section:
>>>
>>> But they throw a loophole on the next page. Must be where they
>>> define the
>>> Congress' health plan.
>>>
>>> ??(2) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN POLICIES.?The
>>> 4 term ?specified health insurance policy? does not in
>>> 5clude any insurance if substantially all of its cov
>>> 6 erage is of excepted benefits described in section
>>> 7 9832(c).
>>>
>>> Self insurance is a thing they don't want.
>>> Page 831
>>>
>>> 1 ??SEC. 4376. SELF-INSURED HEALTH PLANS.
>>> 2 ??(a) IMPOSITION OF FEE.?In the case of any appl
>>> i3 cable self-insured health plan for each plan year, there is
>>> 4 hereby imposed a fee equal to the fair share per capita
>>> 5 amount determined under section 9511(c)(1) multiplied by
>>> 6 the average number of lives covered under the plan.
>>>
>>> They are charging a fee equal to the plan's share. Basically pay
>>> twice if
>>> you want to self insure. But it does seem to cover unions as well.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 07:03:23 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:03:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <4A81B174.4060802@jurislex.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<4A81B174.4060802@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <862728.30633.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

No, sir, I came up with that on my own.  Who spoon-fed your opinions to you?

Gary




________________________________
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 10:59:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

 Interesting comment. I wonder what the basis is for
your statement that anyone "wants to turn all of their
healthcare decisions over to that same government?" (Emphasis added.)
Where did that come from? Not from any of the proposed bills, nor from
any of the Democratic proponents. Perhaps from the fevered (fervid??)
mind of Rush Limbaugh or Newt Gingrich?? Or maybe even the gullible
mind of Sarah Pahlin?

Enquiring minds would like to know!!

bob
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gary Duncan-Gates wrote: 
Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?
>
>Gary


      

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 07:09:47 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

1.  It is not an objection, just an observation.
2.  I didn't say the proposed reform bills would change the abortion laws.
3.  I will attempt to explain my point again:

ProChoicers say it is inappropriate for government (typically they blame old white males in said government) to make laws regulating what women can do with their own bodies.

Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the government dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your insurance company regulate what procedures it will pay for?

Gary





________________________________
From: Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:52:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in place (without the government interfering much in this very personal decision). Current health care reform bills being worked on cannot "change" abortion laws by themselves.


Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:18 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> 
> 
> In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
> theresacus at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> JJ,
> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are  you refering to 
> and could you site your source.   I really am trying  to sort this out and 
> want reliable sources and blanket statements like this  are very misleading 
> and this where propoganda starts.  
> 
> Thanks Theresa
> 
> 
> My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface  
> the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
> list  before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
> validity of  the points made. 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 07:13:27 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <6C68E4D0-EB0B-46EF-A74E-9935F7A930A4@verizon.net>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<6C68E4D0-EB0B-46EF-A74E-9935F7A930A4@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <386051.37516.qm@web46301.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

"Actually, I find the perspective interesting.  And I cannot help but  
wonder if the inverse is also true.

That those who what the government to outlaw abortions (which gets  
between a patient and a physician) , don't want the government in the  
position to make health care decisions that might come between a  
patient and a physician."

Yes...the inverse is most certainly true in many cases.  And there are more than enough God-Fearing Republicans that oppose governmental meddling in people's lives that want to have finite control over your medical procedures and how you have sex.    

Gary




________________________________


      

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Wed Aug 12 07:22:32 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:22:32 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] rain?????
Message-ID: <22950-4A82D028-209@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>

as of 5pm yesterday till 0700 this morning .... .85 inches of rain up
here on my mountain


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 07:28:59 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:28:59 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com><944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7F25BD37C15745968755977099B7F7A3@gerianehzkfhvy>

Sorry I misunderstood; thought you were objecting!
Realize you didn't say in so many words that the bills would change the abortion laws, but you seemed to imply that that would be the result, which made me think the way I did.

No matter whether the administration of our health care is public or private, it's a job needing doing, and I think it's a fine thing that the intention of the reform is to give each person/family the choice!

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> 1.  It is not an objection, just an observation.
> 2.  I didn't say the proposed reform bills would change the abortion laws.
> 3.  I will attempt to explain my point again:
> 
> ProChoicers say it is inappropriate for government (typically they blame old white males in said government) to make laws regulating what women can do with their own bodies.
> 
> Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the government dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your insurance company regulate what procedures it will pay for?
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:52:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 
> I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in place (without the government interfering much in this very personal decision). Current health care reform bills being worked on cannot "change" abortion laws by themselves.
> 
> 
> Geri
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:18 AM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 
> 
>> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?
>> 
>> Gary
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From theresacus at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 07:46:04 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <mailman.15.1250017208.15742.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <331993.92468.qm@web34502.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

JJ,
You apoligize but do not site your sources.? I want to see the source in it's entirety and consider who is writing it any why.? There are 5 bills before congress and only one has passed the house.? I also keep track of the money.? I am also exploring the groups that are both for and against the bills and trying to follow the money/power that they may gain from the propoganda.? 
?
Theresa
--- On Tue, 8/11/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com> wrote:


From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 11
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 12:00 PM


Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
??? grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
??? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
??? grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
??? grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

???1. Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August Washington
? ? ? Newsletter (Ed Davie)
???2. Re: Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August
? ? ? WashingtonNewsletter (Geri)
???3. Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! ! (Bob Browning)
???4. Re: Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! ! (Steven)
???5. Re: Healthcare (Steven)
???6. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9 (JJSAW at aol.com)
???7. Another perspective (Gary Duncan-Gates)
???8. Re: Another perspective (Bob Browning)
???9. Re: Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! ! (Bob Browning)
? 10. What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific??? American
? ? ? Podcast (Bob Browning)
? 11. Re: Another perspective (Geri)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 12:36:10 -0700
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August
??? Washington??? Newsletter
To: "Grovenet, F.G." <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <C4310E1069EA4D1C88DDD6AB6721480F at EDavie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

FCNL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jim Cason, FCNL
To: Ed Davie
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:21 AM
Subject: Health Care for Everyone: July/August 
Washington Newsletter



? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Friends Committee on National 
Legislation
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? A Quaker Lobby in the Public 
Interest

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???Dear Ed Davie,

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The Congressional debate about 
health care reform is heating up, yet much of the 
media and even some of the experts are getting the 
facts about health care reform wrong. Real health 
care reform could dramatically improve the lives 
of many people in this country, reduce the 
projected federal deficit, and improve all of our 
lives.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? FCNL's July/August Washington 
Newsletter, "Health Care for Everyone," provides 
the facts, the background, and the tools you need 
to participate in this debate. We at FCNL hope 
that after you read this newsletter, you will


? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? a.. forward this newsletter 
and other information to Friends, neighbors, and 
people in your community -- or better yet, invite 
them over for a conversation;


? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? b.. talk to your 
representative and senators about health care 
form; and

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? c.. consider distributing this 
information or FCNL's new health care quiz to 
email lists that you're part of.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Here's a list of the articles in 
FCNL's "Health Care for Everyone" issue:

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Health Care for Everyone: A 
carefully designed health care system can be built 
on what works well now, can create and enforce 
standards for private health care plans, can 
expand options for employers and individuals, and 
can make health insurance affordable.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Fast Facts on Health Care: The 
United States spends more on health care than any 
other country in the world, and, yet, we have 
poorer health status by many measures. Find out 
why.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Health Care Reform in Congress: 
By the summer of 2009, key committees in the House 
and Senate had developed three fairly detailed but 
different approaches to improve the health care 
system in the United States.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Paying for Health Care: The 
health care price tag in the United States is a 
shocker -- more than double the average spending 
of 30 peer nations in the OECD (Organization for 
Economic Cooperation and Development). Who picks 
up the tab?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The newsletter also includes two 
important articles about immigration reform:

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Immigration: It's Our Community: 
The United States needs a workable solution to the 
immigration problem, one that upholds fundamental 
U.S. values of justice and equality.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Breaking Bread and Barriers - 
Can you Organize a Potluck?: Starting this summer, 
could you host a community potluck in support of 
just and humane immigration reform?

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? As always, find updates on these 
and other issues at www.fcnl.org.





? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???You are subscribed to the FCNL 
Washington Newsletter notification list. Make sure 
you receive these email updates from FCNL. Add 
fcnl at fcnl.org to your address book.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Donate to FCNL.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? This email was sent to: 
edavie at verizon.net
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Update your email address, 
manage your FCNL email subscription, or 
unsubscribe from this list.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2009 Friends Committee on 
National Legislation | 245 2nd Street NE 
Washington, DC 20002 | 800-630-1330. Powered by 
ARCOS.







------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:31:25 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August
??? WashingtonNewsletter
To: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>,??? "Forest Grove local interests
??? list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <E9B41203C6CF433A822D13AA9740342D at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="utf-8"

Thanks for passing it along, Ed.

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Grovenet, F.G." <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:36 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Health Care for Everyone: July/August WashingtonNewsletter


> FCNL
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Jim Cason, FCNL
> To: Ed Davie
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 11:21 AM
> Subject: Health Care for Everyone: July/August 
> Washington Newsletter
> 
> 
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Friends Committee on National 
> Legislation
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? A Quaker Lobby in the Public 
> Interest
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???Dear Ed Davie,
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The Congressional debate about 
> health care reform is heating up, yet much of the 
> media and even some of the experts are getting the 
> facts about health care reform wrong. Real health 
> care reform could dramatically improve the lives 
> of many people in this country, reduce the 
> projected federal deficit, and improve all of our 
> lives.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? FCNL's July/August Washington 
> Newsletter, "Health Care for Everyone," provides 
> the facts, the background, and the tools you need 
> to participate in this debate. We at FCNL hope 
> that after you read this newsletter, you will
> 
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? a.. forward this newsletter 
> and other information to Friends, neighbors, and 
> people in your community -- or better yet, invite 
> them over for a conversation;
> 
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? b.. talk to your 
> representative and senators about health care 
> form; and
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? c.. consider distributing this 
> information or FCNL's new health care quiz to 
> email lists that you're part of.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Here's a list of the articles in 
> FCNL's "Health Care for Everyone" issue:
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Health Care for Everyone: A 
> carefully designed health care system can be built 
> on what works well now, can create and enforce 
> standards for private health care plans, can 
> expand options for employers and individuals, and 
> can make health insurance affordable.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Fast Facts on Health Care: The 
> United States spends more on health care than any 
> other country in the world, and, yet, we have 
> poorer health status by many measures. Find out 
> why.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Health Care Reform in Congress: 
> By the summer of 2009, key committees in the House 
> and Senate had developed three fairly detailed but 
> different approaches to improve the health care 
> system in the United States.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Paying for Health Care: The 
> health care price tag in the United States is a 
> shocker -- more than double the average spending 
> of 30 peer nations in the OECD (Organization for 
> Economic Cooperation and Development). Who picks 
> up the tab?
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The newsletter also includes two 
> important articles about immigration reform:
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Immigration: It's Our Community: 
> The United States needs a workable solution to the 
> immigration problem, one that upholds fundamental 
> U.S. values of justice and equality.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Breaking Bread and Barriers - 
> Can you Organize a Potluck?: Starting this summer, 
> could you host a community potluck in support of 
> just and humane immigration reform?
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? As always, find updates on these 
> and other issues at www.fcnl.org.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???You are subscribed to the FCNL 
> Washington Newsletter notification list. Make sure 
> you receive these email updates from FCNL. Add 
> fcnl at fcnl.org to your address book.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Donate to FCNL.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? This email was sent to: 
> edavie at verizon.net
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Update your email address, 
> manage your FCNL email subscription, or 
> unsubscribe from this list.
> 
>? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2009 Friends Committee on 
> National Legislation | 245 2nd Street NE 
> Washington, DC 20002 | 800-630-1330. Powered by 
> ARCOS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:28:34 -0700
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
To: Grovenet <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4A80BB32.2080508 at jurislex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090810/dbf975de/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: moz-screenshot-21.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2506 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090810/dbf975de/attachment-0001.jpg 

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:18:46 -0700
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEBFMIAA.NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

that is why I read the bill. So much spin from right and left wingnuts.
Would you like me to post some quotes from the bill that I dislike?

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:18:45 -0700
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEBFMIAA.NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

It was an article I read last week. The article floated the thought that
they hoped to sell stuff to the uninsured once they become covered.
The article sounded similar to these. I don't remember the exact source.

From:
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/08/white-houses-deal-with-big-pharma.ht
ml

In return, Big Pharma isn't just supporting universal health care. It's also
spending a lots of money on TV and radio advertising in support. Sunday's
New York Times reports that Big Pharma has budgeted $150 million for TV ads
promoting universal health insurance, starting this August (that's more
money than John McCain spent on TV advertising in last year's presidential
campaign), after having already spent a bundle through advocacy groups like
Healthy Economies Now and Families USA.

From:
http://wallstreetpit.com/9303-the-deal-between-big-pharma-and-the-white-hous
e

Let me remind you: Any bonanza for the drug industry means higher
health-care costs for the rest of us, which is one reason why critics of the
emerging healthcare plans, including the Congressional Budget Office, are so
worried about their failure to adequately stem future healthcare costs. To
be sure, as part of its deal with the White House, Big Pharma apparently has
promised to cut future drug costs by $80 billion. But neither the industry
nor the White House nor any congressional committee has announced exactly
where the $80 billion in savings will show up nor how this portion of the
deal will be enforced. In any event, you can bet that the bonanza Big Pharma
will reap far exceeds $80 billion. Otherwise, why would it have agreed?

From:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/white-house-confirms-deal_n_254408.
html

In closed-door negotiations with President Obama and his top aides
throughout the spring, Big Pharma offered its support for comprehensive
health care reform and pledged to cut $80 billion in costs over the next ten
years. Just exactly what Obama promised in return wasn't made public and was
the subject of intense debate on Capitol Hill Thursday, as senators wondered
aloud if the White House had tied their legislative hands.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 10:34 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> 
> I also like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.? It makes sense, 
> even to me, which also means it'll never be considered.? God 
> forbid lay people understanding and agreeing with government action.
> 
> Steven, if you don't mind, can you please explain to my feeble 
> brain why big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of one 
> of the bills (which one?) being considered?? I really and truly 
> don't understand what's at play here.
> 
> thanks!
> 
>? 
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:25:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> 
> I like Ron Wyden's bill for health care.
> 
> I read where big pharma is spending $150 Million in support of the health
> bill. Also that congress has discussed about $80 Billion in cuts to these
> pharmaceuticals. Why? The ~50 million uninsured. 
> I did the math and that comes to over $1600 per uninsured that the
> pharmaceuticals would have to get to break even out of this deal. Unless
> there is some other pay back.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> > Behalf Of Allen Warren
> > Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:48 PM
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > 
> > 
> > Steven,
> > 
> > I agree there is much in the Bill to dislike.? But there's also 
> > much I liked.? But again, I fear lobbying money + bipartisanship 
> > will insure no plan ever gets approved.? Pharma and insurance 
> > carriers will gladly spend as much as they can to keep the money 
> > rolling into their coffers.
> > 
> > I would like to see Congress working with the intent to hammer 
> > out a Plan that Congress will approve and the President will sign 
> > into law.? And as much as I'm a "glass half full" person, this is bad.
> > > 
> > > 1st item listed (page 16): nowhere does it state if you have 
> > > insurance at the time of the Bill becoming law that you'll be 
> > > required to take a similar plan.? What it DOES state is if you 
> > > are enrolled in a plan at the time the Bill becomes law you can 
> > > continue in your current coverage.? In fact, the Bill would help 
> > > protect you in that the grandfathered coverage would need to be 
> > > at a minimum comparable to the government-supported plan.
> > > Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!? And 
> > > why is this bad?? What if an employer is self-insuring with a 
> > > plan that offers employees less than a government plan yet costs 
> > > more?? Or what if an employer authorizes a large chunk of pool 
> > > money to pay for a CEO's lap-band surgery yet then doesn't have 
> > > enough money to pay for the lung transplant of another employee?
> > > Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!? The 
> > > entire section starts on Page 26.? And try as I might, including 
> > > search a Search command on the word "ration", nowhere could I 
> > > find the word "ration" used in the entire section.? The only 
> > > logical explanation I can figure out as to why someone would 
> > > state the section details how "health care will be rationed" is 
> > > the person chose to interpret the section on "Annual Limitation", 
> > > without reading the section, as a limit on services rendered 
> > > yearly.? Had the person read the section they would have realized 
> > > the "Annual Limitation" is an upper limitation on the amount of 
> > > money an insured individual would have to pay each year in a 
> > > cost-sharing plan.
> > > 
> > > In the 1st three items below I found clear inaccuracies or 
> > > outright misleading misinterpretations of the actual Bill 
> > > language.? As such, I have a high percentage belief if I stepped 
> > > through each of the statements I'd find inaccurate interpretations.
> > > 
> > > The sad part in all this is a USA Universal Health Care system 
> > > could work yet it may never come to fruition given the partisan 
> > > fighting and well-paid lobbying opposition from both the 
> > > healthcare and pharmaceutical companies.? Neither major party 
> > > will accept the opposition party Plan, and the healthcare and 
> > > pharma companies don't want to see their empires crumble.
> > > 
> > > Should President Obama somehow push through a Universal 
> > > Healthcare Plan to be signed into Law, future generations would 
> > > most likely see such a singular event as THE most important, if 
> > > not one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted under 
> > > President Obama.
> > > 
> > >? 
> > > Allen Warren
> > > 
> > > From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> > > To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2009 11:37:12 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Healthcare
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Tidbits from the world of Healthcare? Reform
> > > ? Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time? of the bill 
> > > becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar? 
> > > plan. If that is 
> > > not available, you will be required to take the gov? option!
> > > ? Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
> > > ?? Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! 
> > > ? Page 30: A government? committee will decide what treatments 
> > > and benefits 
> > > you get (and, unlike an? insurer, there will be no appeals process)
> > > ? Page 42: The "Health Choices? Commissioner" will decide 
> > health benefits 
> > > for you. You will have no choice.? None. 
> > > ? Page 50: All? non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided 
> > > with free 
> > > healthcare? services.
> > > ? Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID? Healthcard. 
> > > ? Page? 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time 
> > access to 
> > > all individual? bank accounts for electronic funds transfer. 
> > > ? Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community? 
> > > organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN) 
> > > ? Page 72: All private? healthcare plans must conform to 
> > government rules 
> > > to participate in a Healthcare? Exchange. 
> > > ? Page 84:? All private healthcare plans must participate in the 
> > > Healthcare 
> > > Exchange (i.e.,? total government control of private plans) 
> > > ? Page 91: Government? mandates linguistic infrastructure for 
> services; 
> > > translation: illegal? aliens 
> > > ? Page 95: The? Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up 
> > > individuals for? Government-run Health Care plan. 
> > > ? Page 102: Those eligible? for Medicaid will be automatically 
> > enrolled: 
> > > you have no choice in the? matter. 
> > > ? Page 124:? No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No 
> > > "judicial review" is? permitted against the government monopoly. 
> > > Put simply, 
> > > private insurers will be? crushed.
> > > ? Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set? wages. 
> > > ? Page 145: An? employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the 
> > > government-run 
> > > public plan. No? alternatives. 
> > > ? Page? 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time 
> > employees 
> > > AND their? families. 
> > > ? Page 149:? Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, 
> who does not 
> > > offer the public? option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
> > > ? Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or? more, 
> > who does 
> > > not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll 
> > > ? Page 167: Any individual? who doesn't have acceptable healthcare 
> > > (according to the government) will be? taxed 2.5% of income. 
> > > ? Page 170: Any? NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes 
> > > (Americans will pay for? them). 
> > > ? Page 195:? Officers and employees of Government Healthcare 
> > Bureaucracy 
> > > will have access to? ALL American financial and personal records. 
> > > ? Page? 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be 
> > treated as 
> > > tax." Yes, it? really says that. 
> > > ? Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. 
> > > Seniors and? 
> > > the poor most affected." 
> > > ? Page 241: Doctors: no? matter what speciality you have, 
> you'll all be 
> > > paid the same? 
> > > ? Page 253: Government? sets value of doctors' time, their 
> professional 
> > > judgment, etc. 
> > > ? Page 265: Government? mandates and controls productivity 
> for private 
> > > healthcare industries. 
> > > ? Page 268: Government? regulates rental and purchase of power-driven 
> > > wheelchairs. 
> > > ? Page 272: Cancer? patients: welcome to the wonderful world of 
> > > rationing! 
> > > ? Page 280: Hospitals will? be penalized for what the 
> government deems 
> > > preventable re-admissions. 
> > > ? Page 298: Doctors: if? you treat a patient during an initial 
> > admission 
> > > that results in a readmission,? you will be penalized by the 
> > government. 
> > > ? Page 317: Doctors: you? are now prohibited for owning and 
> > investing in 
> > > healthcare companies! 
> > > ? Page 318: Prohibition on? hospital expansion. Hospitals 
> cannot expand 
> > > without government approval. 
> > > ? Page 321: Hospital? expansion hinges on "community" input: in other 
> > > words, yet another payoff for? ACORN. 
> > > ? Page 335:? Government mandates establishment of outcome-based 
> > measures: 
> > > i.e.,? rationing. 
> > > ? Page? 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare 
> Advantage 
> > > Plans, HMOs,? etc. 
> > > ? Page 354:? Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS 
> > > individuals. 
> > > ? Page 379: More? bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee 
> > > (healthcare by 
> > > phone). 
> > > ? Page 425: More? bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior 
> > > Citizens, assisted suicide,? euthanasia?
> > > ? Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding 
> > living? wills, 
> > > durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in 
> > > estate? taxes 
> > > ahead of time. 
> > > ? Page 425: Government? provides approved list of end-of-life 
> > resources, 
> > > guiding you in death. 
> > > ? Page? 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life 
> > > treatment; 
> > > government? dictates how your life ends. 
> > > ? Page 429: Advance Care? Planning Consult will be used to dictate 
> > > treatment as patient's health? deteriorates. This can include an 
> > > ORDER for 
> > > end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the? GOVERNMENT. 
> > > ? Page? 430: Government will decide what level of treatments 
> > you may have 
> > > at? end-of-life. 
> > > ? Page? 469: Community-based Home Medical Services
> > > ? Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations
> > > ? Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. 
> > > Government? 
> > > intervenes in your marriage.
> > > ? Page 494: Government will cover mental health? services: defining, 
> > > creating and rationing those services. 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >? ? ? 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GroveNet mailing list
> > > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >? ? ? 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>? ? ???
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:26:09 EDT
From: JJSAW at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Message-ID: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"


In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,? 
theresacus at yahoo.com writes:

JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are? you refering to 
and could you site your source.???I really am trying? to sort this out and 
want reliable sources and blanket statements like this? are very misleading 
and this where propoganda starts.???

Thanks Theresa


My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface? 
the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
list? before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
validity of? the points made. 


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gary Duncan-Gates <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <944001.65486.qm at web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?

Gary




________________________________
From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:26:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9


In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,? 
theresacus at yahoo.com writes:

JJ,
First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are? you refering to 
and could you site your source.???I really am trying? to sort this out and 
want reliable sources and blanket statements like this? are very misleading 
and this where propoganda starts.? 

Thanks Theresa


My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface? 
the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
list? before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
validity of? the points made. 
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



? ? ? 

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:59:16 -0700
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4A81B174.4060802 at jurislex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/2c0826b3/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:14:09 -0700
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Just the facts, Ma'am ! ! !
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4A81B4F1.4080108 at jurislex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/f11c07d6/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:24:22 -0700
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific
??? American Podcast
To: Grovenet <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4A81B756.7090906 at jurislex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/b0e46014/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:52:13 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in place (without the government interfering much in this very personal decision). Current health care reform bills being worked on cannot "change" abortion laws by themselves.


Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:18 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion, wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same government?
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: "JJSAW at aol.com" <JJSAW at aol.com>
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 9:26:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9
> 
> 
> In a message dated 8/10/2009 3:02:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,? 
> theresacus at yahoo.com writes:
> 
> JJ,
> First, I want to ask, which of the 5 healthcare bills are? you refering to 
> and could you site your source.???I really am trying? to sort this out and 
> want reliable sources and blanket statements like this? are very misleading 
> and this where propoganda starts.? 
> 
> Thanks Theresa
> 
> 
> My apologies Theresa, there was a paragraph that was supposed to preface? 
> the list I posted. In that paragraph I was asking if anyone had seen that 
> list? before, and if they had seen it, were they able to comment on the 
> validity of? the points made. 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>? ? ? 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 11
****************************************



      

From edavie at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 07:53:25 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:53:25 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] rain?????
References: <22950-4A82D028-209@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <BCE7192A919D448AA4FD820BE966F9AC@EDavie>

I have a full inch!
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss
  To: GroveNet at rdrop.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:22 AM
  Subject: [Grovenet] rain?????


  as of 5pm yesterday till 0700 this morning .... 
.85 inches of rain up
  here on my mountain

  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug 12 08:09:26 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:09:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] rain?????
In-Reply-To: <22950-4A82D028-209@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
References: <22950-4A82D028-209@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <B501F90C-CED3-40E3-BFEE-2A5B93A20D7B@teleport.com>

Oh well, it's good for the potatoes...
Walt (Ol' Farmer John) Wentz
On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:22 AM, Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss wrote:

> as of 5pm yesterday till 0700 this morning .... .85 inches of rain up
> here on my mountain
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 08:11:48 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:11:48 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <7F25BD37C15745968755977099B7F7A3@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEBPMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

The issue as I see it is that some folks don't have health INSURANCE. The
government's solution is to take over health CARE.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:29 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> Sorry I misunderstood; thought you were objecting!
> Realize you didn't say in so many words that the bills would change the
> abortion laws, but you seemed to imply that that would be the result,
> which made me think the way I did.
>
> No matter whether the administration of our health care is public or
> private, it's a job needing doing, and I think it's a fine thing that the
> intention of the reform is to give each person/family the choice!
>
> Geri
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> > 1.  It is not an objection, just an observation.
> > 2.  I didn't say the proposed reform bills would change the abortion
> laws.
> > 3.  I will attempt to explain my point again:
> >
> > ProChoicers say it is inappropriate for government (typically they blame
> old white males in said government) to make laws regulating what women can
> do with their own bodies.
> >
> > Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the government
> dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your insurance company
> regulate what procedures it will pay for?
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:52:13 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >
> > I don't see this as a valid objection. We have abortion laws in place
> (without the government interfering much in this very personal decision).
> Current health care reform bills being worked on cannot "change" abortion
> laws by themselves.
> >
> >
> > Geri
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Duncan-Gates" <gduncangates at yahoo.com>
> > To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:18 AM
> > Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >
> >
> >> Isn't it interesting, that the people most likely to get all perturbed
> when the government wants to impose any kind of restrictions on abortion,
> wants to turn all of their healthcare decisions over to that same
> government?
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 08:15:42 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:15:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <386051.37516.qm@web46301.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<6C68E4D0-EB0B-46EF-A74E-9935F7A930A4@verizon.net>
	<386051.37516.qm@web46301.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <279B2CA6-756F-48AE-9B91-38A2E62AFDCC@verizon.net>

Yes, I have seen that.  The "states rights" issue is repeatedly  
raised until some states want Doctor Assisted Suicide, Gay Marriages,  
Medical Marijuana, or increased Vehicle Emissions Standards.

Anyone who claims that humans are consistent, isn't paying attention.

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:13 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
> Yes...the inverse is most certainly true in many cases.  And there  
> are more than enough God-Fearing Republicans that oppose  
> governmental meddling in people's lives that want to have finite  
> control over your medical procedures and how you have sex.
>
> Gary

From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 08:20:30 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:20:30 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEBPMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEBPMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <55054F91-5A15-4584-88CD-80F8A1A0788F@verizon.net>

Almost agree.  Health Insurance is not Health Care, and too many  
speakers in this cacophony ignore that aspect.

The concept of decoupling health care from employment funded health  
insurance seems like a good idea.  The insurance industry wants  
publicly funded private health insurance.

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Steven wrote:

> The issue as I see it is that some folks don't have health  
> INSURANCE. The government's solution is to take over health CARE.


From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 08:43:02 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:43:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <55054F91-5A15-4584-88CD-80F8A1A0788F@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEBPMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<55054F91-5A15-4584-88CD-80F8A1A0788F@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <77E245FC-B9BA-41EF-BCA5-FBEBB669481C@verizon.net>

Just remembered, "rationing of health care" is offered as a downside  
of public health care.

I was reminded of that we needed to get "pre approval" for certain  
doctor prescribed tests and treatments.

And having a life-time cap on medical expenses is a "cut off of  
medical care to Grandma".

Insurance rationing?  Of course, that is a normal condition.

People raise the issue of euthanasia, and forget that every year old  
people die because they cannot afford to heat or cool their homes,  
purchase expensive prescription drugs, or afford preventive medical  
care.  Money is an issue in saying alive, and the profit motive is an  
issue in the cost of medical care.  That isn't a new or unique  
observation on the national medical condition.

David

> On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Steven wrote:
>
>> The issue as I see it is that some folks don't have health
>> INSURANCE. The government's solution is to take over health CARE.
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From steelem at pacificu.edu  Wed Aug 12 09:04:18 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:04:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief
	:	Scientific	American Podcast
In-Reply-To: <A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>
References: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>
	<A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C4317A18@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Hmmmm....speaking of kings, I'm reading Jeff Sharlet's book on the C Street Family...fascinating and alarming.  A "king" is what they have in mind.  Seems to me we settled the king matter a couple of centuries ago.

It's a good read.

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9:55 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific American Podcast

Fascinating.
It makes one wonder if King George III  would seem more American than  
any black American.

Katie



On Aug 11, 2009, at 11:24 AM, Bob Browning wrote:

> Absolutely interesting take on the birther controversy!!
>
> bob
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=whats- 
> behind-birthers-obama-belief-09-08-10&sc=WR_20090811
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 09:20:31 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:20:31 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <77E245FC-B9BA-41EF-BCA5-FBEBB669481C@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre approval.
Rationing is always there. Medicare doesn't cover prostate cancer treatment
after age 72. It takes 7 years to kill you on average and the average life
span is 78.
But currently, you have the option of paying for it anyway or alternative
treatments.

With the Health Committee being appointed by the president, rationing and
treatment plans can change with the whim of the office. They could decide
that the treatment for being beat by a night stick is to be put to sleep. Or
that shouting in a town hall meeting requires a lobotomy.
When you read of our history in this regard, it gets a bit frightening.
Sterilizing as a sentence in criminal cases. Lots of things in mental wards.
One flew over the Coo Coos nest was not fact, but things like that did
happen.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:43 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> Just remembered, "rationing of health care" is offered as a downside
> of public health care.
>
> I was reminded of that we needed to get "pre approval" for certain
> doctor prescribed tests and treatments.
>
> And having a life-time cap on medical expenses is a "cut off of
> medical care to Grandma".
>
> Insurance rationing?  Of course, that is a normal condition.
>
> People raise the issue of euthanasia, and forget that every year old
> people die because they cannot afford to heat or cool their homes,
> purchase expensive prescription drugs, or afford preventive medical
> care.  Money is an issue in saying alive, and the profit motive is an
> issue in the cost of medical care.  That isn't a new or unique
> observation on the national medical condition.
>
> David
>
> > On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Steven wrote:
> >
> >> The issue as I see it is that some folks don't have health
> >> INSURANCE. The government's solution is to take over health CARE.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 09:38:14 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:38:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
Message-ID: <2182C30CB93943ECAB970CEB82817029@gerianehzkfhvy>

Remember when our very health was not considered a major means to giant corporate profits!? I do.

Thought the post below was a pretty good post ...


Geri


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care For ALL
 http://itsyourtimes.com/?q=node/4519 

Tue, 2009-07-21 17:56 ? Wise Merlin

This country is going bankrupt because CORPORATIONS have a stranglehold on those essential parts of life. There is NO MORE ESSENTIAL part of life than one?s health.

Is health care a right? Only IF life is a right. One CANNOT live without health. What is wrong with health care? Two words, GREED AND PROFIT.

Many may not realize it, BUT, hospitals have only been ?FOR-PROFIT? in the last fifty years or so. Before that, hospitals were NON-PROFIT, NO HMO?S, NO FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATIONS, NO BIG PHARMA PROFITS.

DO NOT FORGET, the United States DOES NOT have the best health care in the world. THAT IS A MYTH. Statistics PROVE, WITHOUT QUESTION, the United States ranks LOWER THAN eighteenth in the western world overall. Many areas such as birth survival rates are MUCH WORSE. Medical mistakes are HIGHER in the United States.

Imagine what it would be like if a patient DID NOT have to pay SEVEN DOLLARS for an aspirin. Imagine if a patient DID NOT have to pay more than twenty-five dollars for a cholesterol pill. Imagine if a patient DID NOT have to pay SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AN HOUR for emergency room costs. Hospitals make MORE THAN THIRTY PERCENT PROFIT from each paying patient. Only ten percent of that profit is eaten up by non-paying patients.

The federal government pays MOST of the costs for ALL research and development of medical procedures, medical devices and treatments. YET, it is the CORPORATIONS who PROFIT from all of this research. The Pharmaceutical and medical devices corporate industries consistently make more than twenty percent profits EVERY QUARTER, higher than ANY OTHER industry sector on Wall Street.

The INSURANCE INDUSTRY ALREADY has a bureaucrat standing between YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR. The INSURANCE BUREAUCRAT decides your care, your treatment, and your medical outcome EACH AND EVERY TIME you get health care through insurance. The INSURANCE INDUSTRY BUREAUCRAT decides how much it will cost you, ALL THE WHILE, demanding a huge profit for themselves.

A NATIONAL Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care system WILL STOP ALL THIS PROFIT once and for all. We need to ELIMINATE Health Insurance, period. A ?Single Payer? system would do just that. A ?Single Payer? system would also ELIMINATE pre-existing conditions loopholes, ELIMINATE ?refusal to pay? due to insurance loopholes, and would GUARANTEE the best care possible for all.

The notion that other countries have waiting lines, procedure denials, and selective coverage and bad outcomes is ALSO A MYTH. ON TOP OF THAT, the United States could LEARN and make our ?Universal Health Care System? better. WE DO NOT HAVE TO REPEAT MISTAKES OTHER COUNTRIES MAY HAVE MADE. All we need do, is pinpoint problems and DO IT DIFFERENTLY.

The federal government should also BE REQUIRED to set the doctor/nurse population fifty percent higher than it is now. The AMA decides how many doctors there are each year, protecting and minimizing the number of doctors working within the USA to keep demand high. This act ALONE makes health care scarce and expensive. (you know, the waiting in line for treatment scare tactic of those opposing Universal Health Care) For-Profit hospitals REQUIRE minimal numbers of nurses and aides to make sure hospital overhead cost is choked to the limit, endangering each and every patient. The patient/nurse ratio has been cut by sixty percent in the last thirty years. Nurses are also commonly required to work sixty hour weeks or more.

Pharmaceutical companies should be REQUIRED to limit profits to something LESS than six percent PER YEAR. Their drug patents should END after seven years, no exceptions. That would put ?generic? brands on the market that much sooner. If the federal government puts money (LIKE THEY DO NOW) into the research of the particular drug, that amount should be deducted from the profit margin enjoyed by the Pharmaceutical company.

One of the WORST health care expenses that should STOP IMMEDIATELY AND BE BANNED are the advertisements of HOSPITALS, DOCTORS, TREATMENTS AND DRUGS. More than twenty percent of the expenses driving UP health care costs ARE DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADVERTISEMENTS that entice you to take these treatments or choose these hospitals. The federal government should REQUIRE ALL INFORMATION concerning drugs, treatments, doctors, hospitals  and effectivity of each to be public and readily available to EVERYONE at all times. The competition between hospitals, doctors and drug companies would be competition FOR QUALITY instead of competition for PROFITS.

A revamping of the health care system along these lines would REDUCE the costs by MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT. Further cost savings AND SAFETY of health care could EASILY come from a ?Universal? computer system that would be built around an individual ?credit card? style information system for each and every patient history from birth to death. The ?Universal? patient history system database would be ONE SYSTEM ONLY throughout the United States, your individual records would be in YOUR HANDS with a totally secure backup system accessible by hospitals if you are in need of emergency health care and do not have your individual ?card? with you, possibly ONLY ACCESSIBLE by your retina scan password. The technology for such a system ALREADY EXISTS. Just look at the internet CAPABILITY.

The ?Universal? database would save money, instantly give hospitals and doctors access to your ENTIRE health history, eliminate most medical mistakes and oversights, drug interactions, treatment reactions, THE WHOLE BALL OF WAX.

Each and EVERY corporation DOING BUSINESS IN THE United States, with employees in the United States, or sales in the United States should be taxed at whatever percentage that is required to pay for ?Universal Health Care.? Corporations and businesses who employ people in this country should BE REQUIRED to pay the highest portion of tax PER INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE. This REPLACES the cost of COMPANY PAID health care benefits provided now. Those corporations who DO NOT employ individual employees in the United States would be taxed at a lower rate according to the price of the product(s) they sell in the United States. This system would spread out the health care costs evenly and fairly (which probably would end up costing each corporation and business FAR LESS than they pay now for health care AND NO MIDDLEMAN FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATION) as ?Universal Single-Payer Health Care costs go down through savings, the corporations and businesses would realize a REDUCED tax burden each year until the system is FULLY IMPLIMENTED.

 This is the ?Universal Single Payer Health Care System? we all NEED to give the right of health care to everyone at a minimal cost and HIGHEST QUALITY.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Wed Aug 12 09:38:26 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:38:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] rain?????
In-Reply-To: "Ed Davie" <edavie@verizon.net>'s message of Wed,
	12 Aug 2009 07:53:25 -0700
Message-ID: <22940-4A82F002-3421@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>

Mr. ED wrote......
I have a full inch!
Ed

--------
Ed ... are sure your gizmo is working right now.


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 09:45:18 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:45:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
In-Reply-To: <2182C30CB93943ECAB970CEB82817029@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOECCMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

We've taken over banks, AIG and car companies. Why don't we just take over
the existing insurance companies? Their cash reserves would be needed to
continue to implement the insurances needed.

Is there a difference between one Big Government or several Big Corps
running health INSURANCE?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:38 AM
> To: GroveNet
> Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
>
>
> Remember when our very health was not considered a major means to giant
> corporate profits!? I do.
>
> Thought the post below was a pretty good post ...
>
>
> Geri
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> ----
>
> Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care For ALL
>  http://itsyourtimes.com/?q=node/4519
>
> Tue, 2009-07-21 17:56 ? Wise Merlin
>
> This country is going bankrupt because CORPORATIONS have a stranglehold on
> those essential parts of life. There is NO MORE ESSENTIAL part of
> life than
> one?s health.
>
> Is health care a right? Only IF life is a right. One CANNOT live without
> health. What is wrong with health care? Two words, GREED AND PROFIT.
>
> Many may not realize it, BUT, hospitals have only been ?FOR-PROFIT? in the
> last fifty years or so. Before that, hospitals were NON-PROFIT,
> NO HMO?S, NO
> FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATIONS, NO BIG PHARMA PROFITS.
>
> DO NOT FORGET, the United States DOES NOT have the best health care in the
> world. THAT IS A MYTH. Statistics PROVE, WITHOUT QUESTION, the
> United States
> ranks LOWER THAN eighteenth in the western world overall. Many
> areas such as
> birth survival rates are MUCH WORSE. Medical mistakes are HIGHER in the
> United States.
>
> Imagine what it would be like if a patient DID NOT have to pay
> SEVEN DOLLARS
> for an aspirin. Imagine if a patient DID NOT have to pay more than
> twenty-five dollars for a cholesterol pill. Imagine if a patient DID NOT
> have to pay SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AN HOUR for emergency room costs.
> Hospitals
> make MORE THAN THIRTY PERCENT PROFIT from each paying patient. Only ten
> percent of that profit is eaten up by non-paying patients.
>
> The federal government pays MOST of the costs for ALL research and
> development of medical procedures, medical devices and treatments. YET, it
> is the CORPORATIONS who PROFIT from all of this research. The
> Pharmaceutical
> and medical devices corporate industries consistently make more
> than twenty
> percent profits EVERY QUARTER, higher than ANY OTHER industry
> sector on Wall
> Street.
>
> The INSURANCE INDUSTRY ALREADY has a bureaucrat standing between YOU AND
> YOUR DOCTOR. The INSURANCE BUREAUCRAT decides your care, your
> treatment, and
> your medical outcome EACH AND EVERY TIME you get health care through
> insurance. The INSURANCE INDUSTRY BUREAUCRAT decides how much it will cost
> you, ALL THE WHILE, demanding a huge profit for themselves.
>
> A NATIONAL Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care system
> WILL STOP
> ALL THIS PROFIT once and for all. We need to ELIMINATE Health Insurance,
> period. A ?Single Payer? system would do just that. A ?Single
> Payer? system
> would also ELIMINATE pre-existing conditions loopholes, ELIMINATE ?refusal
> to pay? due to insurance loopholes, and would GUARANTEE the best care
> possible for all.
>
> The notion that other countries have waiting lines, procedure denials, and
> selective coverage and bad outcomes is ALSO A MYTH. ON TOP OF THAT, the
> United States could LEARN and make our ?Universal Health Care System?
> better. WE DO NOT HAVE TO REPEAT MISTAKES OTHER COUNTRIES MAY
> HAVE MADE. All
> we need do, is pinpoint problems and DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
>
> The federal government should also BE REQUIRED to set the doctor/nurse
> population fifty percent higher than it is now. The AMA decides how many
> doctors there are each year, protecting and minimizing the number
> of doctors
> working within the USA to keep demand high. This act ALONE makes
> health care
> scarce and expensive. (you know, the waiting in line for treatment scare
> tactic of those opposing Universal Health Care) For-Profit
> hospitals REQUIRE
> minimal numbers of nurses and aides to make sure hospital overhead cost is
> choked to the limit, endangering each and every patient. The patient/nurse
> ratio has been cut by sixty percent in the last thirty years. Nurses are
> also commonly required to work sixty hour weeks or more.
>
> Pharmaceutical companies should be REQUIRED to limit profits to something
> LESS than six percent PER YEAR. Their drug patents should END after seven
> years, no exceptions. That would put ?generic? brands on the market that
> much sooner. If the federal government puts money (LIKE THEY DO NOW) into
> the research of the particular drug, that amount should be
> deducted from the
> profit margin enjoyed by the Pharmaceutical company.
>
> One of the WORST health care expenses that should STOP IMMEDIATELY AND BE
> BANNED are the advertisements of HOSPITALS, DOCTORS, TREATMENTS AND DRUGS.
> More than twenty percent of the expenses driving UP health care costs ARE
> DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADVERTISEMENTS that entice you to take these
> treatments or choose these hospitals. The federal government
> should REQUIRE
> ALL INFORMATION concerning drugs, treatments, doctors, hospitals  and
> effectivity of each to be public and readily available to EVERYONE at all
> times. The competition between hospitals, doctors and drug companies would
> be competition FOR QUALITY instead of competition for PROFITS.
>
> A revamping of the health care system along these lines would REDUCE the
> costs by MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT. Further cost savings AND SAFETY
> of health
> care could EASILY come from a ?Universal? computer system that would be
> built around an individual ?credit card? style information system for each
> and every patient history from birth to death. The ?Universal? patient
> history system database would be ONE SYSTEM ONLY throughout the United
> States, your individual records would be in YOUR HANDS with a
> totally secure
> backup system accessible by hospitals if you are in need of
> emergency health
> care and do not have your individual ?card? with you, possibly ONLY
> ACCESSIBLE by your retina scan password. The technology for such a system
> ALREADY EXISTS. Just look at the internet CAPABILITY.
>
> The ?Universal? database would save money, instantly give hospitals and
> doctors access to your ENTIRE health history, eliminate most medical
> mistakes and oversights, drug interactions, treatment reactions, THE WHOLE
> BALL OF WAX.
>
> Each and EVERY corporation DOING BUSINESS IN THE United States, with
> employees in the United States, or sales in the United States should be
> taxed at whatever percentage that is required to pay for ?Universal Health
> Care.? Corporations and businesses who employ people in this
> country should
> BE REQUIRED to pay the highest portion of tax PER INDIVIDUAL
> EMPLOYEE. This
> REPLACES the cost of COMPANY PAID health care benefits provided now. Those
> corporations who DO NOT employ individual employees in the United States
> would be taxed at a lower rate according to the price of the
> product(s) they
> sell in the United States. This system would spread out the health care
> costs evenly and fairly (which probably would end up costing each
> corporation and business FAR LESS than they pay now for health care AND NO
> MIDDLEMAN FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATION) as ?Universal Single-Payer
> Health Care costs go down through savings, the corporations and businesses
> would realize a REDUCED tax burden each year until the system is FULLY
> IMPLIMENTED.
>
>  This is the ?Universal Single Payer Health Care System? we all
> NEED to give
> the right of health care to everyone at a minimal cost and
> HIGHEST QUALITY.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> ----
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 09:58:21 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:58:21 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOECCMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <C76B43A0B419443985528E91EF10E424@gerianehzkfhvy>

Yes. There is a difference between government and corps.


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?


We've taken over banks, AIG and car companies. Why don't we just take over
the existing insurance companies? Their cash reserves would be needed to
continue to implement the insurances needed.

Is there a difference between one Big Government or several Big Corps
running health INSURANCE?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:38 AM
> To: GroveNet
> Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
>
>
> Remember when our very health was not considered a major means to giant
> corporate profits!? I do.
>
> Thought the post below was a pretty good post ...
>
>
> Geri
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> ----
>
> Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care For ALL
>  http://itsyourtimes.com/?q=node/4519
>
> Tue, 2009-07-21 17:56 ? Wise Merlin
>
> This country is going bankrupt because CORPORATIONS have a stranglehold on
> those essential parts of life. There is NO MORE ESSENTIAL part of
> life than
> one?s health.
>
> Is health care a right? Only IF life is a right. One CANNOT live without
> health. What is wrong with health care? Two words, GREED AND PROFIT.
>
> Many may not realize it, BUT, hospitals have only been ?FOR-PROFIT? in the
> last fifty years or so. Before that, hospitals were NON-PROFIT,
> NO HMO?S, NO
> FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATIONS, NO BIG PHARMA PROFITS.
>
> DO NOT FORGET, the United States DOES NOT have the best health care in the
> world. THAT IS A MYTH. Statistics PROVE, WITHOUT QUESTION, the
> United States
> ranks LOWER THAN eighteenth in the western world overall. Many
> areas such as
> birth survival rates are MUCH WORSE. Medical mistakes are HIGHER in the
> United States.
>
> Imagine what it would be like if a patient DID NOT have to pay
> SEVEN DOLLARS
> for an aspirin. Imagine if a patient DID NOT have to pay more than
> twenty-five dollars for a cholesterol pill. Imagine if a patient DID NOT
> have to pay SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AN HOUR for emergency room costs.
> Hospitals
> make MORE THAN THIRTY PERCENT PROFIT from each paying patient. Only ten
> percent of that profit is eaten up by non-paying patients.
>
> The federal government pays MOST of the costs for ALL research and
> development of medical procedures, medical devices and treatments. YET, it
> is the CORPORATIONS who PROFIT from all of this research. The
> Pharmaceutical
> and medical devices corporate industries consistently make more
> than twenty
> percent profits EVERY QUARTER, higher than ANY OTHER industry
> sector on Wall
> Street.
>
> The INSURANCE INDUSTRY ALREADY has a bureaucrat standing between YOU AND
> YOUR DOCTOR. The INSURANCE BUREAUCRAT decides your care, your
> treatment, and
> your medical outcome EACH AND EVERY TIME you get health care through
> insurance. The INSURANCE INDUSTRY BUREAUCRAT decides how much it will cost
> you, ALL THE WHILE, demanding a huge profit for themselves.
>
> A NATIONAL Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care system
> WILL STOP
> ALL THIS PROFIT once and for all. We need to ELIMINATE Health Insurance,
> period. A ?Single Payer? system would do just that. A ?Single
> Payer? system
> would also ELIMINATE pre-existing conditions loopholes, ELIMINATE ?refusal
> to pay? due to insurance loopholes, and would GUARANTEE the best care
> possible for all.
>
> The notion that other countries have waiting lines, procedure denials, and
> selective coverage and bad outcomes is ALSO A MYTH. ON TOP OF THAT, the
> United States could LEARN and make our ?Universal Health Care System?
> better. WE DO NOT HAVE TO REPEAT MISTAKES OTHER COUNTRIES MAY
> HAVE MADE. All
> we need do, is pinpoint problems and DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
>
> The federal government should also BE REQUIRED to set the doctor/nurse
> population fifty percent higher than it is now. The AMA decides how many
> doctors there are each year, protecting and minimizing the number
> of doctors
> working within the USA to keep demand high. This act ALONE makes
> health care
> scarce and expensive. (you know, the waiting in line for treatment scare
> tactic of those opposing Universal Health Care) For-Profit
> hospitals REQUIRE
> minimal numbers of nurses and aides to make sure hospital overhead cost is
> choked to the limit, endangering each and every patient. The patient/nurse
> ratio has been cut by sixty percent in the last thirty years. Nurses are
> also commonly required to work sixty hour weeks or more.
>
> Pharmaceutical companies should be REQUIRED to limit profits to something
> LESS than six percent PER YEAR. Their drug patents should END after seven
> years, no exceptions. That would put ?generic? brands on the market that
> much sooner. If the federal government puts money (LIKE THEY DO NOW) into
> the research of the particular drug, that amount should be
> deducted from the
> profit margin enjoyed by the Pharmaceutical company.
>
> One of the WORST health care expenses that should STOP IMMEDIATELY AND BE
> BANNED are the advertisements of HOSPITALS, DOCTORS, TREATMENTS AND DRUGS.
> More than twenty percent of the expenses driving UP health care costs ARE
> DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADVERTISEMENTS that entice you to take these
> treatments or choose these hospitals. The federal government
> should REQUIRE
> ALL INFORMATION concerning drugs, treatments, doctors, hospitals  and
> effectivity of each to be public and readily available to EVERYONE at all
> times. The competition between hospitals, doctors and drug companies would
> be competition FOR QUALITY instead of competition for PROFITS.
>
> A revamping of the health care system along these lines would REDUCE the
> costs by MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT. Further cost savings AND SAFETY
> of health
> care could EASILY come from a ?Universal? computer system that would be
> built around an individual ?credit card? style information system for each
> and every patient history from birth to death. The ?Universal? patient
> history system database would be ONE SYSTEM ONLY throughout the United
> States, your individual records would be in YOUR HANDS with a
> totally secure
> backup system accessible by hospitals if you are in need of
> emergency health
> care and do not have your individual ?card? with you, possibly ONLY
> ACCESSIBLE by your retina scan password. The technology for such a system
> ALREADY EXISTS. Just look at the internet CAPABILITY.
>
> The ?Universal? database would save money, instantly give hospitals and
> doctors access to your ENTIRE health history, eliminate most medical
> mistakes and oversights, drug interactions, treatment reactions, THE WHOLE
> BALL OF WAX.
>
> Each and EVERY corporation DOING BUSINESS IN THE United States, with
> employees in the United States, or sales in the United States should be
> taxed at whatever percentage that is required to pay for ?Universal Health
> Care.? Corporations and businesses who employ people in this
> country should
> BE REQUIRED to pay the highest portion of tax PER INDIVIDUAL
> EMPLOYEE. This
> REPLACES the cost of COMPANY PAID health care benefits provided now. Those
> corporations who DO NOT employ individual employees in the United States
> would be taxed at a lower rate according to the price of the
> product(s) they
> sell in the United States. This system would spread out the health care
> costs evenly and fairly (which probably would end up costing each
> corporation and business FAR LESS than they pay now for health care AND NO
> MIDDLEMAN FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATION) as ?Universal Single-Payer
> Health Care costs go down through savings, the corporations and businesses
> would realize a REDUCED tax burden each year until the system is FULLY
> IMPLIMENTED.
>
>  This is the ?Universal Single Payer Health Care System? we all
> NEED to give
> the right of health care to everyone at a minimal cost and
> HIGHEST QUALITY.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> ----
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 12 10:29:26 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:29:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another view . . . .
Message-ID: <4A82FBF6.1000201@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090812/86f1dac2/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pixel.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090812/86f1dac2/attachment.gif 

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 12 10:41:09 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:41:09 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <862728.30633.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>	<4A81B174.4060802@jurislex.com>
	<862728.30633.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4A82FEB5.5030603@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090812/f68696dd/attachment.html 

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 12 10:48:19 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:48:19 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
Message-ID: <4A830063.9030504@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090812/62ca9772/attachment.html 

From whatsupy2k at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 11:00:08 2009
From: whatsupy2k at yahoo.com (Vickie Madeoneup)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A830063.9030504@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <303996.37050.qm@web112404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

speaking of celery

check this out

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ann_cooper_talks_school_lunches.html


the speaker, Ann Cooper, is very passionate about her topic, but she seems very well educated about it

it is all directly related to health care

Vickie

--- On Wed, 8/12/09, Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com> wrote:

From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
To: "Grovenet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 10:48 AM




Maybe? high prices of? health care won't be bad if it?
leads to? improvements? in physical condition!!



bob "pass the celery" browning? 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


  Elevated
cholesterol in midlife increases dementia risk
  August 11, 2009 | Janis Kelly
  
    
      
        
Adapted from Medscape Medical News?a professional news service
of WebMD

        
      
    
  
  
  
  Kuopio, Finland - Even moderately elevated cholesterol levels
in
midlife are strongly associated with later risk of Alzheimer's disease
(AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), new research suggests [1]. 
  Lead author Dr Alina Solomon (University of Kuopio,
Finland)
and colleagues used data from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California
Medical Group to investigate the relationship between midlife
cholesterol and dementia and found that even cholesterol levels of 200
to 239 mg/dL increase risk.
  "Both physicians and patients need to know that elevated
cholesterol
increases the risk not only for heart disease, but also for dementia,"
Solomon said. "The most important finding was that even
moderately elevated cholesterol at midlife can increase the risk of
both AD and VaD later in life."
  The study is published in the August 2008 issue of Dementia
and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.
  
  The study included 9844 subjects who had undergone detailed health
evaluations during 1964 to1973, when they were ages 40 to 45 years. 
  Data from 1994 showed that 469 had AD and 127 had VaD. The
researchers adjusted for age, education, race/ethnic group, sex,
midlife diabetes, hypertension, body-mass index, and late-life stroke.
They used cholesterol <200mg/dL as a reference point. 
  The analysis showed Alzheimer's disease hazard ratios of 1.23 for
midlife borderline cholesterol (200-239 mg/dL) and 1.57 for high
cholesterol (>240 mg/dL). Quartile analysis showed that
hazard ratios were 1.31 for cholesterol 221-238 mg/dL and 1.58 for
249-500 mg/dL.
  VaD hazard ratios were 1.50 for borderline cholesterol and 1.26
for high cholesterol. 
  
  Dr Robert Stewart (King's College London, UK) said that the
Solomon study data are "convincing." 
  "In general there is now a large body of evidence that?indicates
that what is bad for the heart is bad for the brain?that is, that the
well-known risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke are also
risk factors for dementia (whether this is classified as Alzheimer's
disease or vascular dementia)," Stewart said. 
  "So the real message for clinicians is not to do anything
differently, but to be aware that what they?should be?doing
already?identifying and treating high cholesterol, high blood pressure,
and diabetes and promoting healthy diet and?active lifestyles?is likely
to have more benefits than originally envisaged and should reduce risk
of dementia as well as reducing risk of cardiovascular disease." 
The complete contents of Medscape Medical News, a professional news
service of WebMD, can be found at www.medscape.com, a website for medical
professionals.

 

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 12 11:04:42 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:04:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A great article on teaching evolution in a meaningful
	way . . . .
Message-ID: <4A83043A.4060305@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090812/3a0d4c56/attachment.html 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 11:16:23 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:16:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com>
	<944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C1B64FF1-0B7E-4B9F-9E28-AD30912D7B2C@verizon.net>


On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:

>
> Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the  
> government dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your  
> insurance company regulate what procedures it will pay for?
>
> Gary
>


I think this boils down the argument fairly well.  On one side there  
are those who bought into the Reagan doctrine that all government is  
evil and having any government role in regulating health systems is  
scary.  Private for profit decision makers regulating what procedures  
it will pay for sounds much less scary.

On the other side there are those who feel that government is 'we the  
people' and we have the power to change the rules if the government  
gets too far out of bounds in regulating what procedures are covered  
and which ones you have to pay for out of pocket.  Having a corporate  
shill knowing that his bonus will be bigger the more people go  
without treatment sounds like a Dickens play in real life especially  
when it is your own treatment hanging in the balance.

It boils down to who do you trust more and who scares you more.
I know if I was sick or injured and had access to government run Dept  
of Defense hospitals like the ones that treat our active duty  
soldiers I would have the best shot possible.  The greatest hospitals  
on the planet are the ones run by the US government to keep our  
troops healthy.

Katie




From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 12 11:16:30 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:16:30 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] What's Behind Birthers' Obama Belief : Scientific
 American Podcast
In-Reply-To: <977231.3369.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <4A81B756.7090906@jurislex.com>	<A6CD8684-5420-4D5F-8B68-D9EB1323823F@verizon.net>
	<977231.3369.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4A8306FE.2060600@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090812/0e3d2426/attachment.html 

From shannon_carskadon at msn.com  Wed Aug 12 11:26:44 2009
From: shannon_carskadon at msn.com (Shannon Carskadon)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:26:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Forest Grove Community Garden?
Message-ID: <SNT121-W64D80DA3321444D3E47438D040@phx.gbl>


Can anyone tell me where this is?

Thanks in advance!

Shannon

From allnutt at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 11:38:16 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:38:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOECCMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOECCMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <9073D05B-DB53-4D47-96C4-8C6E3FB4C755@verizon.net>

I think there is a big difference between Big Government or several  
Big Corps running health insurance (or health care).
We as voters have much more control over the path that our government  
takes than we have control over what path the big corporations take.
The recent large crowds at representatives offices are a good example.
If a big corporation was having a meeting to discuss changes to their  
insurance policies what chance do you think a large number of  
concerned citizens would have to get to voice their concerns?
But when it is government that is considering changing policies on  
health care, people have the opportunity to present their arguments.
This tells me that collectively we have much more power to make  
adjustments in policies if they are government run than if they are  
corporate run.
Corporations are  modeled a lot like a kingdom where the peons do not  
have power.  In a constitutionally limited representative democratic  
republic like the US every voter has the power to work to change things.

So, yes I think there is a big difference and we would be a lot  
better off by going forward with health care reform.  I think we  
should go to single payer to get maximum benefits for us as people  
but that isn't going to happen in the near term.


Katie


On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:45 AM, Steven wrote:

> We've taken over banks, AIG and car companies. Why don't we just  
> take over
> the existing insurance companies? Their cash reserves would be  
> needed to
> continue to implement the insurances needed.
>
> Is there a difference between one Big Government or several Big Corps
> running health INSURANCE?
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Geri
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:38 AM
>> To: GroveNet
>> Subject: [Grovenet] Remember when ...?
>>
>>
>> Remember when our very health was not considered a major means to  
>> giant
>> corporate profits!? I do.
>>
>> Thought the post below was a pretty good post ...
>>
>>
>> Geri
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>> ----
>>
>> Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care For ALL
>>  http://itsyourtimes.com/?q=node/4519
>>
>> Tue, 2009-07-21 17:56 ? Wise Merlin
>>
>> This country is going bankrupt because CORPORATIONS have a  
>> stranglehold on
>> those essential parts of life. There is NO MORE ESSENTIAL part of
>> life than
>> one?s health.
>>
>> Is health care a right? Only IF life is a right. One CANNOT live  
>> without
>> health. What is wrong with health care? Two words, GREED AND PROFIT.
>>
>> Many may not realize it, BUT, hospitals have only been ?FOR- 
>> PROFIT? in the
>> last fifty years or so. Before that, hospitals were NON-PROFIT,
>> NO HMO?S, NO
>> FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATIONS, NO BIG PHARMA PROFITS.
>>
>> DO NOT FORGET, the United States DOES NOT have the best health  
>> care in the
>> world. THAT IS A MYTH. Statistics PROVE, WITHOUT QUESTION, the
>> United States
>> ranks LOWER THAN eighteenth in the western world overall. Many
>> areas such as
>> birth survival rates are MUCH WORSE. Medical mistakes are HIGHER  
>> in the
>> United States.
>>
>> Imagine what it would be like if a patient DID NOT have to pay
>> SEVEN DOLLARS
>> for an aspirin. Imagine if a patient DID NOT have to pay more than
>> twenty-five dollars for a cholesterol pill. Imagine if a patient  
>> DID NOT
>> have to pay SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS AN HOUR for emergency room costs.
>> Hospitals
>> make MORE THAN THIRTY PERCENT PROFIT from each paying patient.  
>> Only ten
>> percent of that profit is eaten up by non-paying patients.
>>
>> The federal government pays MOST of the costs for ALL research and
>> development of medical procedures, medical devices and treatments.  
>> YET, it
>> is the CORPORATIONS who PROFIT from all of this research. The
>> Pharmaceutical
>> and medical devices corporate industries consistently make more
>> than twenty
>> percent profits EVERY QUARTER, higher than ANY OTHER industry
>> sector on Wall
>> Street.
>>
>> The INSURANCE INDUSTRY ALREADY has a bureaucrat standing between  
>> YOU AND
>> YOUR DOCTOR. The INSURANCE BUREAUCRAT decides your care, your
>> treatment, and
>> your medical outcome EACH AND EVERY TIME you get health care through
>> insurance. The INSURANCE INDUSTRY BUREAUCRAT decides how much it  
>> will cost
>> you, ALL THE WHILE, demanding a huge profit for themselves.
>>
>> A NATIONAL Universal ?Single Payer? NON-PROFIT Health Care system
>> WILL STOP
>> ALL THIS PROFIT once and for all. We need to ELIMINATE Health  
>> Insurance,
>> period. A ?Single Payer? system would do just that. A ?Single
>> Payer? system
>> would also ELIMINATE pre-existing conditions loopholes, ELIMINATE  
>> ?refusal
>> to pay? due to insurance loopholes, and would GUARANTEE the best care
>> possible for all.
>>
>> The notion that other countries have waiting lines, procedure  
>> denials, and
>> selective coverage and bad outcomes is ALSO A MYTH. ON TOP OF  
>> THAT, the
>> United States could LEARN and make our ?Universal Health Care System?
>> better. WE DO NOT HAVE TO REPEAT MISTAKES OTHER COUNTRIES MAY
>> HAVE MADE. All
>> we need do, is pinpoint problems and DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
>>
>> The federal government should also BE REQUIRED to set the doctor/ 
>> nurse
>> population fifty percent higher than it is now. The AMA decides  
>> how many
>> doctors there are each year, protecting and minimizing the number
>> of doctors
>> working within the USA to keep demand high. This act ALONE makes
>> health care
>> scarce and expensive. (you know, the waiting in line for treatment  
>> scare
>> tactic of those opposing Universal Health Care) For-Profit
>> hospitals REQUIRE
>> minimal numbers of nurses and aides to make sure hospital overhead  
>> cost is
>> choked to the limit, endangering each and every patient. The  
>> patient/nurse
>> ratio has been cut by sixty percent in the last thirty years.  
>> Nurses are
>> also commonly required to work sixty hour weeks or more.
>>
>> Pharmaceutical companies should be REQUIRED to limit profits to  
>> something
>> LESS than six percent PER YEAR. Their drug patents should END  
>> after seven
>> years, no exceptions. That would put ?generic? brands on the  
>> market that
>> much sooner. If the federal government puts money (LIKE THEY DO  
>> NOW) into
>> the research of the particular drug, that amount should be
>> deducted from the
>> profit margin enjoyed by the Pharmaceutical company.
>>
>> One of the WORST health care expenses that should STOP IMMEDIATELY  
>> AND BE
>> BANNED are the advertisements of HOSPITALS, DOCTORS, TREATMENTS  
>> AND DRUGS.
>> More than twenty percent of the expenses driving UP health care  
>> costs ARE
>> DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE ADVERTISEMENTS that entice you to  
>> take these
>> treatments or choose these hospitals. The federal government
>> should REQUIRE
>> ALL INFORMATION concerning drugs, treatments, doctors, hospitals  and
>> effectivity of each to be public and readily available to EVERYONE  
>> at all
>> times. The competition between hospitals, doctors and drug  
>> companies would
>> be competition FOR QUALITY instead of competition for PROFITS.
>>
>> A revamping of the health care system along these lines would  
>> REDUCE the
>> costs by MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT. Further cost savings AND SAFETY
>> of health
>> care could EASILY come from a ?Universal? computer system that  
>> would be
>> built around an individual ?credit card? style information system  
>> for each
>> and every patient history from birth to death. The ?Universal?  
>> patient
>> history system database would be ONE SYSTEM ONLY throughout the  
>> United
>> States, your individual records would be in YOUR HANDS with a
>> totally secure
>> backup system accessible by hospitals if you are in need of
>> emergency health
>> care and do not have your individual ?card? with you, possibly ONLY
>> ACCESSIBLE by your retina scan password. The technology for such a  
>> system
>> ALREADY EXISTS. Just look at the internet CAPABILITY.
>>
>> The ?Universal? database would save money, instantly give  
>> hospitals and
>> doctors access to your ENTIRE health history, eliminate most medical
>> mistakes and oversights, drug interactions, treatment reactions,  
>> THE WHOLE
>> BALL OF WAX.
>>
>> Each and EVERY corporation DOING BUSINESS IN THE United States, with
>> employees in the United States, or sales in the United States  
>> should be
>> taxed at whatever percentage that is required to pay for  
>> ?Universal Health
>> Care.? Corporations and businesses who employ people in this
>> country should
>> BE REQUIRED to pay the highest portion of tax PER INDIVIDUAL
>> EMPLOYEE. This
>> REPLACES the cost of COMPANY PAID health care benefits provided  
>> now. Those
>> corporations who DO NOT employ individual employees in the United  
>> States
>> would be taxed at a lower rate according to the price of the
>> product(s) they
>> sell in the United States. This system would spread out the health  
>> care
>> costs evenly and fairly (which probably would end up costing each
>> corporation and business FAR LESS than they pay now for health  
>> care AND NO
>> MIDDLEMAN FOR-PROFIT INSURANCE CORPORATION) as ?Universal Single- 
>> Payer
>> Health Care costs go down through savings, the corporations and  
>> businesses
>> would realize a REDUCED tax burden each year until the system is  
>> FULLY
>> IMPLIMENTED.
>>
>>  This is the ?Universal Single Payer Health Care System? we all
>> NEED to give
>> the right of health care to everyone at a minimal cost and
>> HIGHEST QUALITY.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>> ----
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 11:41:20 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:41:20 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com><944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy><842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<C1B64FF1-0B7E-4B9F-9E28-AD30912D7B2C@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <76F5337951B049D58C0C344318BBC969@gerianehzkfhvy>

Katie said: "The greatest hospitals on the planet are the ones run by the US government to keep our troops healthy."

Yes. And oddly enough, there are many folks who know this and would agree with that, and out of that group of people is a smaller group who become horrified at the words "socialized health care," yet that is what the VA care is.

And yes, some of was do prefer a government of we-the-people over a government of we-the-for-profit-corporations ... We are born with inalienable rights which a government of we-the-people watches over, but we derive no such watching over of our inalienable rights from big-for-profit corporations.

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> 
> On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
> 
>>
>> Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the  
>> government dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your  
>> insurance company regulate what procedures it will pay for?
>>
>> Gary
>>
> 
> 
> I think this boils down the argument fairly well.  On one side there  
> are those who bought into the Reagan doctrine that all government is  
> evil and having any government role in regulating health systems is  
> scary.  Private for profit decision makers regulating what procedures  
> it will pay for sounds much less scary.
> 
> On the other side there are those who feel that government is 'we the  
> people' and we have the power to change the rules if the government  
> gets too far out of bounds in regulating what procedures are covered  
> and which ones you have to pay for out of pocket.  Having a corporate  
> shill knowing that his bonus will be bigger the more people go  
> without treatment sounds like a Dickens play in real life especially  
> when it is your own treatment hanging in the balance.
> 
> It boils down to who do you trust more and who scares you more.
> I know if I was sick or injured and had access to government run Dept  
> of Defense hospitals like the ones that treat our active duty  
> soldiers I would have the best shot possible.  The greatest hospitals  
> on the planet are the ones run by the US government to keep our  
> troops healthy.
> 
> Katie
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug 12 14:38:29 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:38:29 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Forest Grove Community Garden?
In-Reply-To: <SNT121-W64D80DA3321444D3E47438D040@phx.gbl>
References: <SNT121-W64D80DA3321444D3E47438D040@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <B937D9FC-EAF7-4656-874A-6AD5C8D6EED3@teleport.com>

There are two community gardens: one, the oldest one,  over by the  
cannery in the industrial section, and the other  (larger and more  
recently organized) at the extreme north end of Maple Street, north  
of Bi-Mart.
Walt Wentz
Forest Grove Community Gardens
On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Shannon Carskadon wrote:

>
> Can anyone tell me where this is?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Shannon
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From JJSAW at aol.com  Wed Aug 12 19:16:27 2009
From: JJSAW at aol.com (JJSAW at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:16:27 EDT
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
Message-ID: <c9a.32f6016e.37b4d17b@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 8/12/2009 11:41:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
g-g-steele at comcast.net writes:

Yes. And  oddly enough, there are many folks who know this and would agree 
with that,  and out of that group of people is a smaller group who become 
horrified at the  words "socialized health care," yet that is what the VA care 
 is.


Have you ever been to a VA Hospital?

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 12 19:25:17 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:25:17 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <c9a.32f6016e.37b4d17b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <CA5609E6E2B44980A35704B3D11F805D@gerianehzkfhvy>

Yes. So have a few of my relatives with Purple Hearts.


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <JJSAW at aol.com>
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> 
> In a message dated 8/12/2009 11:41:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
> g-g-steele at comcast.net writes:
> 
> Yes. And  oddly enough, there are many folks who know this and would agree 
> with that,  and out of that group of people is a smaller group who become 
> horrified at the  words "socialized health care," yet that is what the VA care 
> is.
> 
> 
> Have you ever been to a VA Hospital?
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 19:53:21 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <CA5609E6E2B44980A35704B3D11F805D@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <c9a.32f6016e.37b4d17b@aol.com>
	<CA5609E6E2B44980A35704B3D11F805D@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <117793.95185.qm@web35203.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I have a brother-in-law who is an OB-GYN surgeon specialist in the Army.  His entire medical career has been while in the Army as they funded his education.  But in 2 years he'll be eligible for retirement, and he's been actively working his "network" in preparation to enter the private sector.  In a recent talk w/him he stated how he feels like he's had a great life being an Army physician, even with the 2 tours he spent in Iraq because of all the benefits provided to him and his family.  His biggest concerns about the private sector?  The high price of Overhead he'll endure joining an established practice, e.g. office staff to deal with all the insurance claims + malpractice insurance.  As a full-bird Colonel he'll get a nice retirement package.  But he does say he'll miss the relative simplicity of the Army system.

If our Armed Forces medical system, run by our Government, is this good, why can't we modify and expand to include the private sector?  I know I'm missing something here and I'm guessing it's because I'm not knowledgeable about all the variables.


Allen Warren




________________________________
From: Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:25:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

Yes. So have a few of my relatives with Purple Hearts.


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <JJSAW at aol.com>
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> 
> In a message dated 8/12/2009 11:41:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
> g-g-steele at comcast.net writes:
> 
> Yes. And  oddly enough, there are many folks who know this and would agree 
> with that,  and out of that group of people is a smaller group who become 
> horrified at the  words "socialized health care," yet that is what the VA care 
> is.
> 
> 
> Have you ever been to a VA Hospital?
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 21:45:30 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:45:30 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>

As someone who prefers the free market, in those rare situations  
where it really exists, I am more than a bit curious if the opponents  
of all of the proposed government systems really believe that the  
free market is really at work in the American health care system?

For example, can anyone call a hospital or medical care facility and  
get a price list, so they can comparison shop?
Can anyone get accurate information about the kick back system in  
their area?  i.e. what is paid by facilities to physicians to obtain  
referrals.
Who can you speak with, to dicker about pricing?
If the health plan offered by the city of Forest Grove has the best  
cost/benefit ratio

 From my perspective, there are four ways to compete in a market.
You can compete by providing the best quality product available in  
your price range ( traditional free market principle ),
or you can engage in collusion to hold prices away from a free market  
condition ( legislators & lobbyists, cartels, kick backs, unions,  
government fiat monopolies & patents, advertising/news agencies ),
or you can coerce people to use your services ( "protection  
rackets",  support private health insurance or Grandma will die ),
or you can engage in fraud ( tainted milk/dog food, ponzi schemes,  
bait & switch, misrepresentation  )

You only get the full advertised advantages of the free market when  
there is no fraud, coercion or collusion.  We don't get the  
advertised benefits of a free market, because we don't have one.

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Steven wrote:

> That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre  
> approval.



From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 22:02:30 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <460298.75165.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Good points, David.

Being a male over the age of 40 (okay, okay . . . I just hit 50), I engaged in my yearly visit to the doctor today (fortunately for me, it's the ONLY time I visit a doctor's office anymore).  In the span of a 15 minute wait in the Patient Waiting Room, 3 Pharmaceutical sales people came in and dropped off a box of free drug samples and the obligatory pens.  And as I was leaving, I saw another salesperson waiting with a box of drug samples.  Yet another indication, at least to me, that the insurance and pharmaceutical companies are truly in collusion when it comes to medical costs.

 
Allen Warren




________________________________
From: David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:45:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

As someone who prefers the free market, in those rare situations  
where it really exists, I am more than a bit curious if the opponents  
of all of the proposed government systems really believe that the  
free market is really at work in the American health care system?

For example, can anyone call a hospital or medical care facility and  
get a price list, so they can comparison shop?
Can anyone get accurate information about the kick back system in  
their area?  i.e. what is paid by facilities to physicians to obtain  
referrals.
Who can you speak with, to dicker about pricing?
If the health plan offered by the city of Forest Grove has the best  
cost/benefit ratio

>From my perspective, there are four ways to compete in a market.
You can compete by providing the best quality product available in  
your price range ( traditional free market principle ),
or you can engage in collusion to hold prices away from a free market  
condition ( legislators & lobbyists, cartels, kick backs, unions,  
government fiat monopolies & patents, advertising/news agencies ),
or you can coerce people to use your services ( "protection  
rackets",  support private health insurance or Grandma will die ),
or you can engage in fraud ( tainted milk/dog food, ponzi schemes,  
bait & switch, misrepresentation  )

You only get the full advertised advantages of the free market when  
there is no fraud, coercion or collusion.  We don't get the  
advertised benefits of a free market, because we don't have one.

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Steven wrote:

> That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre  
> approval.


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 12 22:09:33 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
Message-ID: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor Kidd is resigning his position as Mayor, effective in October, with the Council electing Pete Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
"On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it official. The longtime Forest
Grove mayor told his city council colleagues he will step down from his
city post in October to run for a seat on the Washington County Board
of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor Elena Uhing is also considering a county bid."


Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor soon.
 
Allen Warren



      

From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 23:08:58 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:08:58 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <460298.75165.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
	<460298.75165.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <227F0A73-BE51-4F9F-8EF4-E03016FA2DF1@verizon.net>

Since you are over 50, it is recommended that you have a colon cancer  
screening.  As I understand, it is very effective in reducing the  
likelihood of an expensive colon cancer experience.

There are several places that offer the service.  Accuracy, false  
positives, false negatives, complications, and side effects can vary  
between service providers.

As a consumer, where do you go to get the best screening at the best  
price?

Any proponent of the free market is free to jump in with answers on  
this one.

Most likely, the consumer will take the advise of their physician...  
AND the insurance company.

The service must be offered by an "approved" provider or the  
insurance coverage is very different.  That's because the insurance  
company is getting a monetary benefit from the "approved" provider in  
the form of a fee reduction.  The "approved" status is not a  
reflection on skill or quality.

And if that physician is getting a "finder's fee" for steering the  
referral, the customer will not know.

Perhaps this is like the sweetheart deals between auto insurance  
companies and auto-body repair shops.  Except it is your body.

So, how does a consumer make an informed decision?

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Allen Warren wrote:

> Good points, David.
>
> Being a male over the age of 40 (okay, okay . . . I just hit 50), I  
> engaged in my yearly visit to the doctor today (fortunately for me,  
> it's the ONLY time I visit a doctor's office anymore). ...
> Allen Warren

From jo.david at verizon.net  Wed Aug 12 23:14:14 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:14:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] mobility scooter
Message-ID: <6463E94F-F595-42D2-8220-EEF152907319@verizon.net>

Today I was asked if anyone has an electric mobility scooter  
available for short term borrowing?

The user has an injured foot and would appreciate getting around  
downtown sidewalks on a scooter rather than crutches.

David

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 13 07:12:08 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:12:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <826560.18857.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

David - You make some very good points.  I do not believe a true free market exists in health care, for many of the reasons you listed.  Medicare and other big insurers negotiate (or just plain mandate) prices that would force providers to operate at a loss.  This forces them to raise their prices in other areas to compensate.

Problem is, governmental manipulation can only make the situation worse.  

Gary


      

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 13 07:17:12 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <76F5337951B049D58C0C344318BBC969@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com><944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy><842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<C1B64FF1-0B7E-4B9F-9E28-AD30912D7B2C@verizon.net>
	<76F5337951B049D58C0C344318BBC969@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <510054.56019.qm@web46311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the heart of its decisions.

I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.

Gary




________________________________
From: Geri <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:41:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

Katie said: "The greatest hospitals on the planet are the ones run by the US government to keep our troops healthy."

Yes. And oddly enough, there are many folks who know this and would agree with that, and out of that group of people is a smaller group who become horrified at the words "socialized health care," yet that is what the VA care is.

And yes, some of was do prefer a government of we-the-people over a government of we-the-for-profit-corporations ... We are born with inalienable rights which a government of we-the-people watches over, but we derive no such watching over of our inalienable rights from big-for-profit corporations.

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> 
> On Aug 12, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
> 
>>
>> Sweeping HealthCare Reform, by definition, requires that the  
>> government dictate who gets what treatment and when.  Doesn't your  
>> insurance company regulate what procedures it will pay for?
>>
>> Gary
>>
> 
> 
> I think this boils down the argument fairly well.  On one side there  
> are those who bought into the Reagan doctrine that all government is  
> evil and having any government role in regulating health systems is  
> scary.  Private for profit decision makers regulating what procedures  
> it will pay for sounds much less scary.
> 
> On the other side there are those who feel that government is 'we the  
> people' and we have the power to change the rules if the government  
> gets too far out of bounds in regulating what procedures are covered  
> and which ones you have to pay for out of pocket.  Having a corporate  
> shill knowing that his bonus will be bigger the more people go  
> without treatment sounds like a Dickens play in real life especially  
> when it is your own treatment hanging in the balance.
> 
> It boils down to who do you trust more and who scares you more.
> I know if I was sick or injured and had access to government run Dept  
> of Defense hospitals like the ones that treat our active duty  
> soldiers I would have the best shot possible.  The greatest hospitals  
> on the planet are the ones run by the US government to keep our  
> troops healthy.
> 
> Katie
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 13 08:09:32 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:09:32 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

My wife called and got some prices on a surgery. But they break down the
costs. You pay the various people separate, so it isn't complete.
It isn't kickbacks. Doctors in Hillsboro are on Tuality's billing system.
They take a percentage to do paperwork. Then the insurance says they will
only pay XXX for a procedure, then many people don't pay their portion of a
bill. I heard that one billing company sold their non payments for $0.02 on
the dollar to a collection company.

Ask your friends. Referral is the best way to decide where to get a
colonoscopy or other procedures.

There is a free market in that we can choose to go to Tuality or St.
Vincent's or what ever hospital we want to go to. Same with doctors.

I guess if you have a HMO, you don't get to choose in that you can only go
by referral.
I have a PPO. Preferred provider. If I choose doctors on their list, they
pay 100%, only 80% on doctors not on their list. I do not need referrals. If
I want to go to the dermatologist, I ask friends why they use. I call around
and see how long appointment schedules are and where is their office.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:46 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> As someone who prefers the free market, in those rare situations
> where it really exists, I am more than a bit curious if the opponents
> of all of the proposed government systems really believe that the
> free market is really at work in the American health care system?
>
> For example, can anyone call a hospital or medical care facility and
> get a price list, so they can comparison shop?
> Can anyone get accurate information about the kick back system in
> their area?  i.e. what is paid by facilities to physicians to obtain
> referrals.
> Who can you speak with, to dicker about pricing?
> If the health plan offered by the city of Forest Grove has the best
> cost/benefit ratio
>
>  From my perspective, there are four ways to compete in a market.
> You can compete by providing the best quality product available in
> your price range ( traditional free market principle ),
> or you can engage in collusion to hold prices away from a free market
> condition ( legislators & lobbyists, cartels, kick backs, unions,
> government fiat monopolies & patents, advertising/news agencies ),
> or you can coerce people to use your services ( "protection
> rackets",  support private health insurance or Grandma will die ),
> or you can engage in fraud ( tainted milk/dog food, ponzi schemes,
> bait & switch, misrepresentation  )
>
> You only get the full advertised advantages of the free market when
> there is no fraud, coercion or collusion.  We don't get the
> advertised benefits of a free market, because we don't have one.
>
> David
>
> On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Steven wrote:
>
> > That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre
> > approval.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 13 08:09:42 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:09:42 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
In-Reply-To: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Maxed out their city retirement plan. Start building a county retirement
plan.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:10 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>
>
> Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor Kidd is resigning his
> position as Mayor, effective in October, with the Council electing Pete
> Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
> "On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it official. The longtime Forest
> Grove mayor told his city council colleagues he will step down from his
> city post in October to run for a seat on the Washington County Board
> of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor Elena Uhing is also
> considering a county bid."
>
>
> Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor soon.
>
> Allen Warren
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From jschrag at fgnewstimes.com  Thu Aug 13 08:58:11 2009
From: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com (John Schrag)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:58:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>

Steven

I don't think we've ever met, so I'm not sure whether your comment about
maxing out retirement plans was serious. In any case, as noted in this
week's News-Times, members of the Forest Grove City Council are volunteers.
As such, they do not receive any retirement benefits (though they can take
part in the city's health plan).



John Schrag
Editor & Publisher 
News-Times
Forest Grove, Oregon
503-357-3181
 
Voted the "best small newspaper in Oregon" 2006, 2007, 2008
 
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Steven
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:10 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .

Maxed out their city retirement plan. Start building a county retirement
plan.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:10 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>
>
> Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor Kidd is resigning his
> position as Mayor, effective in October, with the Council electing Pete
> Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
> "On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it official. The longtime Forest
> Grove mayor told his city council colleagues he will step down from his
> city post in October to run for a seat on the Washington County Board
> of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor Elena Uhing is also
> considering a county bid."
>
>
> Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor soon.
>
> Allen Warren
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet




From edavie at verizon.net  Thu Aug 13 09:30:54 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:30:54 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
References: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
Message-ID: <1B620E8C1A6D4116811EE4FAD32E1922@EDavie>

An opportunity!
For what it's worth, the current mayor has not 
been in office for over "two decades". I came here 
in 1990 and while I don't remember who was mayor 
then, I do remember that Michael O'Brian was mayor 
before the current mayor.
Ed Davie


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John Schrag
  To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
  Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:58 AM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are 
a-changing . . .


  Steven

  I don't think we've ever met, so I'm not sure 
whether your comment about
  maxing out retirement plans was serious. In any 
case, as noted in this
  week's News-Times, members of the Forest Grove 
City Council are volunteers.
  As such, they do not receive any retirement 
benefits (though they can take
  part in the city's health plan).



  John Schrag
  Editor & Publisher
  News-Times
  Forest Grove, Oregon
  503-357-3181

  Voted the "best small newspaper in Oregon" 2006, 
2007, 2008





  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com 
[mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
  Behalf Of Steven
  Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:10 AM
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are 
a-changing . . .

  Maxed out their city retirement plan. Start 
building a county retirement
  plan.

  > -----Original Message-----
  > From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com 
[mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
  > Behalf Of Allen Warren
  > Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:10 PM
  > To: Forest Grove local interests list
  > Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are 
a-changing . . .
  >
  >
  > Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor 
Kidd is resigning his
  > position as Mayor, effective in October, with 
the Council electing Pete
  > Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
  > "On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it 
official. The longtime Forest
  > Grove mayor told his city council colleagues 
he will step down from his
  > city post in October to run for a seat on the 
Washington County Board
  > of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor 
Elena Uhing is also
  > considering a county bid."
  >
  >
  > Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor 
soon.
  >
  > Allen Warren
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > 
_______________________________________________
  > GroveNet mailing list
  > GroveNet at rdrop.com
  > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
  >

  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 13 10:40:25 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
In-Reply-To: <1B620E8C1A6D4116811EE4FAD32E1922@EDavie>
References: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
	<1B620E8C1A6D4116811EE4FAD32E1922@EDavie>
Message-ID: <259357.42692.qm@web35204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

As noted in the News Times: "Kidd, who has served Forest Grove for 24 years as a member of the
planning commission, city council and as mayor . . ."

When I read the above words I realized he had not been mayor for 24 years, but I'm guessing he's been Mayor for at least 12 years because he was in the Post when we moved to FG 12 years ago.  :-)

 
Allen Warren

From: Ed Davie <edavie at verizon.net>
To: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com; Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 9:30:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .

An opportunity!
For what it's worth, the current mayor has not 
been in office for over "two decades". I came here 
in 1990 and while I don't remember who was mayor 
then, I do remember that Michael O'Brian was mayor 
before the current mayor.
Ed Davie


      

From allnutt at verizon.net  Thu Aug 13 12:52:39 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:52:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
In-Reply-To: <8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
References: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
Message-ID: <8C4AA4A0-5C3D-4C98-9325-01936B454E86@verizon.net>

Thank you for setting the record straight John.
Not everyone reads the whole article so that fact probably went  
unnoticed.

Katie
(And it would be equally unfair to assume that it was intentionally  
overlooked, so I'll try not to go there.)


On Aug 13, 2009, at 8:58 AM, John Schrag wrote:

> Steven
>
> I don't think we've ever met, so I'm not sure whether your comment  
> about
> maxing out retirement plans was serious. In any case, as noted in this
> week's News-Times, members of the Forest Grove City Council are  
> volunteers.
> As such, they do not receive any retirement benefits (though they  
> can take
> part in the city's health plan).
>
>
>
> John Schrag
> Editor & Publisher
> News-Times
> Forest Grove, Oregon
> 503-357-3181
>
> Voted the "best small newspaper in Oregon" 2006, 2007, 2008
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Steven
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:10 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>
> Maxed out their city retirement plan. Start building a county  
> retirement
> plan.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Allen Warren
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:10 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>>
>>
>> Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor Kidd is resigning his
>> position as Mayor, effective in October, with the Council electing  
>> Pete
>> Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
>> "On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it official. The longtime Forest
>> Grove mayor told his city council colleagues he will step down  
>> from his
>> city post in October to run for a seat on the Washington County Board
>> of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor Elena Uhing is also
>> considering a county bid."
>>
>>
>> Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor soon.
>>
>> Allen Warren
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From waltw at teleport.com  Thu Aug 13 13:38:44 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:38:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
In-Reply-To: <8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
References: <775692.87307.qm@web35206.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKECHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<8898298184AC4BEBB359679EBBA0A343@pmg.pamplincom.com>
Message-ID: <FE820688-41EF-4059-8EE9-4520B6FB1DDE@teleport.com>

Good response, John.
Your crisp but polite correction is sorely needed to offset the sort  
of facile cynicism and snide, blanket defamation of all officials,  
elected or otherwise, that seems to be a fixture of our time.
I always found Mayor Kidd to be  thoughtful, informed and even- 
handed. His replacement will have a hard time filling his shoes.
Walt Wentz

On Aug 13, 2009, at 8:58 AM, John Schrag wrote:

> Steven
>
> I don't think we've ever met, so I'm not sure whether your comment  
> about
> maxing out retirement plans was serious. In any case, as noted in this
> week's News-Times, members of the Forest Grove City Council are  
> volunteers.
> As such, they do not receive any retirement benefits (though they  
> can take
> part in the city's health plan).
>
>
>
> John Schrag
> Editor & Publisher
> News-Times
> Forest Grove, Oregon
> 503-357-3181
>
> Voted the "best small newspaper in Oregon" 2006, 2007, 2008
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Steven
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:10 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>
> Maxed out their city retirement plan. Start building a county  
> retirement
> plan.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Allen Warren
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:10 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: [Grovenet] the times they are a-changing . . .
>>
>>
>> Read in the News Times this evening that Mayor Kidd is resigning his
>> position as Mayor, effective in October, with the Council electing  
>> Pete
>> Truax to finish out Kidd's term (2010):
>> "On Monday night, Richard Kidd made it official. The longtime Forest
>> Grove mayor told his city council colleagues he will step down  
>> from his
>> city post in October to run for a seat on the Washington County Board
>> of Commissioners . . . Forest Grove Councilor Elena Uhing is also
>> considering a county bid."
>>
>>
>> Looks like we'll be getting a new Councilor soon.
>>
>> Allen Warren
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From redhead854 at msn.com  Thu Aug 13 13:47:46 2009
From: redhead854 at msn.com (Holly Di)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:47:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Martial Arts in Forest Grove, Aikido - Its Circular,
 less agressive Its what I was looking for.
Message-ID: <BAY108-W42D5026A1CB6A8747D175687050@phx.gbl>


I have always wanted my daughter to learn a Martial Art for her own safety, But personally I didn't want one with all the aggressive punching and kicking motions.
She just started last month and she is enjoying it, even though its physically demanding (she turned into a bit of a couch potato (computer)over the last year).  


What is Aikido?

Aikido is a Japaneses martial art developed early in this century by Morihei Uesiba (1883-1969)  Its a system of Self-defense, employing techniques based upon circular motions that blend the attack and energy of your apponent, rather than meeting the force of attack head on.  Aikido is a way of coordinating both body and mind through the training and discipline of learning technique, thereby energizing and integrating the body and increasing awareness.  



I want to spread the word of this class to others in Forest Grove
community  because this style of Karate is not very well known, the
Sensi is local to Forest Grove and he 

started the classes here because of the length of travel it took to go
to the Portland Classes. These classes are affiliated with  Aikido Multnomah Aikikai  http://www.multnomahaikikai.com/instructors.html  Dave Dewberry is there on the bottom of the instructors page.  His Forest Grove Classes are  located in the Grange on Wednesday nights
and Friday Nights

6-730.  He says if you want to see a demonstration of Aikido just drop by between 6:30 and 730pm.  The monthy cost for students (school age) is 35.00 per month and 45.00 per month 
for adults.  He has brochures outside of the Grange on 19th ave.

Message from the Sensi 

            
This Friday is the last class before we take
my son off to college next week.  Everyone please feel free to attend. 
It does not matter if you are a current student, family member or were
just thinking about trying Aikido.  Come join us





Practice will resume 6PM Wednesday September 2nd.

Sincerely,
Dave
http://aikido.home.dhs.org/


Its made a difference for my daughter, I think its such a healthy thing
Thanks for listening

Holly 




From admin at jeffhowden.com  Thu Aug 13 14:36:04 2009
From: admin at jeffhowden.com (Jeff Howden)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:36:04 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Martial Arts in Forest Grove, Aikido - Its Circular,
	less agressive Its what I was looking for.
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-W42D5026A1CB6A8747D175687050@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY108-W42D5026A1CB6A8747D175687050@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <001001ca1c5e$0fddad10$2f990730$@com>

Holly,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Holly Di
> 
> I have always wanted my daughter to learn a Martial Art for her own
> safety, But personally I didn't want one with all the aggressive
> punching and kicking motions.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

Do they also teach non-physical self-defense techniques as well?
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> I want to spread the word of this class to others in Forest Grove
> community because this style of Karate is not very well
> known, [...]
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

Actually, Aikido is not a style of Karate.  Rather, it is its own style that
is heavily influenced mainly by Aiki-jujutsu and to a much smaller degree,
Judo [1].  Where Karate is a blocking, punching, and kicking art,
Aiki-jujutsu and Judo focus on joint locks and throws; mainstays in the
Aikido style.

I suspect that more people know about Aikido, if only in presentation but
not by name, from some popular 80s and 90s movies starring Steven Seagal
[2].  If you think that Aikido is a less aggressive form, I invite you to
check out a couple of Youtube videos.  While the techniques may appear soft,
they do lots of damage to the victim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aicHsMC6rxM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqGDsX52m-Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0fRfdbYK58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbcnsTCfKFA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rusf7kdq8WY

Something to keep in mind is that the art may be soft, but many of the
techniques, if used on individuals that have not had any training can
actually cause much more severe damage than the situation warrants.
Specifically, if the individual gets put in a joint lock that's turned into
a throw, if they don't know how to roll through and out of that throw, they
will almost certainly end up with the joint becoming either dislocated or
broken.  That's hardly an appropriate response to a simple unwanted touch or
shove.

Please don't take this as an attempt to make you, the dojo, or the sensei
wrong.  I'm simply trying to shed more light on the subject and illuminate
some areas of misconception.

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aikido
[2] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_seagal

For those interested, I'd be willing to share my experience with the school
that I and my children (6 and 7) attend in Hillsboro that has served our
needs very well for over a year.

Jeff


From edavie at verizon.net  Thu Aug 13 20:07:57 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:07:57 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Something worth forwarding
Message-ID: <0472D1300AA04581887DA370A3F50FCF@EDavie>

Something worth forwarding
----- Original Message ----- 
From: David Axelrod, The White House
To: edavie at verizon.net
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:50 AM
Subject: Something worth forwarding










                 Dear Friend,

                  This is probably one of the 
longest emails I've ever sent, but it could be the 
most important.

                  Across the country we are seeing 
vigorous debate about health insurance reform. 
Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so 
well are back - even the viral emails that fly 
unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts 
of lies and distortions.

                  As President Obama said at the 
town hall in New Hampshire, "where we do disagree, 
let's disagree over things that are real, not 
these wild misrepresentations that bear no 
resemblance to anything that's actually been 
proposed."

                  So let's start a chain email of 
our own. At the end of my email, you'll find a lot 
of information about health insurance reform, 
distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and 
stability to those with or without coverage, 8 
common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need 
health insurance reform now.

                  Right now, someone you know 
probably has a question about reform that could be 
answered by what's below. So what are you waiting 
for? Forward this email.

                  Thanks,
                  David

                  David Axelrod
                  Senior Adviser to the President

                  P.S. We launched 
www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck this week to knock 
down the rumors and lies that are floating around 
the internet. You can find the information below, 
and much more, there. For example, we've just 
added a video of Nancy-Ann DeParle from our Health 
Reform Office tackling a viral email head on. 
Check it out:



                  8 ways reform provides security 
and stability to those with or without coverage

                    1.. Ends Discrimination for 
Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will 
be prohibited from refusing you coverage because 
of your medical history.
                    2.. Ends Exorbitant 
Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: 
Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly 
caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket 
expenses.
                    3.. Ends Cost-Sharing for 
Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully 
cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests 
that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms 
or eye and foot exams for diabetics.
                    4.. Ends Dropping of Coverage 
for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be 
prohibited from dropping or watering down 
insurance coverage for those who become seriously 
ill.
                    5.. Ends Gender 
Discrimination: Insurance companies will be 
prohibited from charging you more because of your 
gender.
                    6.. Ends Annual or Lifetime 
Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be 
prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on 
the coverage you receive.
                    7.. Extends Coverage for Young 
Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for 
family coverage through the age of 26.
                    8.. Guarantees Insurance 
Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to 
renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays 
their premium in full. Insurance companies won't 
be allowed to refuse renewal because someone 
became sick.
                  Learn more and get details: 
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/health-insurance-consumer-protections/

                  8 common myths about health 
insurance reform
                    1.. Reform will stop 
"rationing" - not increase it: It's a myth that 
reform will mean a "government takeover" of health 
care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, 
reform will forbid many forms of rationing that 
are currently being used by insurance companies.
                    2.. We can't afford reform: 
It's the status quo we can't afford. It's a myth 
that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, 
the President has identified ways to pay for the 
vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting 
waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government 
health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance 
companies; and increasing efficiency with such 
steps as coordinating care and streamlining 
paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring 
down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal 
crisis.
                    3.. Reform would encourage 
"euthanasia": It does not. It's a malicious myth 
that reform would encourage or even require 
euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to 
consult with their family and physicians about 
end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover 
these voluntary, private consultations for those 
who want help with these personal and difficult 
family decisions.
                    4.. Vets' health care is safe 
and sound: It's a myth that health insurance 
reform will affect veterans' access to the care 
they get now. To the contrary, the President's 
budget significantly expands coverage under the 
VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who 
were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system 
will continue to be available for all eligible 
veterans.
                    5.. Reform will benefit small 
business - not burden it: It's a myth that health 
insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To 
the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on 
small businesses, provide tax credits to help them 
pay for employee coverage and help level the 
playing field with big firms who pay much less to 
cover their employees on average.
                    6.. Your Medicare is safe, and 
stronger with reform: It's myth that Health 
Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting 
Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will 
improve the long-term financial health of 
Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate 
waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance 
companies, and help to close the Medicare 
"doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more 
affordable for seniors.
                    7.. You can keep your own 
insurance: It's myth that reform will force you 
out of your current insurance plan or force you to 
change doctors. To the contrary, reform will 
expand your choices, not eliminate them.
                    8.. No, government will not do 
anything with your bank account: It is an absurd 
myth that government will be in charge of your 
bank accounts.  Health insurance reform will 
simplify administration, making it easier and more 
convenient for you to pay bills in a method that 
you choose.  Just like paying a phone bill or a 
utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or 
by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be 
standardized so they will be easier to understand. 
The choice is up to you - and the same rules of 
privacy will apply as they do for all other 
electronic payments that people make.
                  Learn more and get details:
                  http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
                  http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq

                  8 Reasons We Need Health 
Insurance Reform Now

                    1.. Coverage Denied to 
Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 
12.6 million non-elderly adults - 36 percent of 
those who tried to purchase health insurance 
directly from an insurance company in the 
individual insurance market - were in fact 
discriminated against because of a pre-existing 
condition in the previous three years or dropped 
from coverage when they became seriously ill. 
Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html
                    2.. Less Care for More Costs: 
With each passing year, Americans are paying more 
for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored 
health insurance premiums have nearly doubled 
since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. 
In 2008, the average premium for a family plan 
purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly 
the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage 
job.  Americans pay more than ever for health 
insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html
                    3.. Roadblocks to Care for 
Women: Women's reproductive health requires more 
regular contact with health care providers, 
including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and 
obstetric care. Women are also more likely to 
report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 
9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as 
diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to 
men, women are twice as likely to suffer from 
headaches and are more likely to experience joint, 
back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often 
require regular and frequent treatment and 
follow-up care. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html
                    4.. Hard Times in the 
Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are 
nearly 50 million people who face challenges in 
accessing health care. The past several decades 
have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, 
mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a 
primary health care provider in rural areas. With 
the recent economic downturn, there is potential 
for an increase in many of the health disparities 
and access concerns that are already elevated in 
rural communities. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes
                    5.. Small Businesses Struggle 
to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of 
the uninsured - 13 million people - are employees 
of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 
2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans 
covered by employer-based health insurance fell 
from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from 
small business. The percentage of small businesses 
offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while 
large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of 
such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees 
obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline
                    6.. The Tragedies are 
Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at 
least partly the result of medical expenses. The 
typical elderly couple may have to save nearly 
$300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by 
Medicare alone. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction
                    7.. Diminishing Access to 
Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of 
non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based 
health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An 
estimated 87 million people - one in every three 
Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at 
some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the 
uninsured are in working families. Learn more: 
http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html
                    8.. The Trends are Troubling: 
Without reform, health care costs will continue to 
skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on 
families, businesses, and state and federal 
government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign 
of the need for health care reform is the 46 
million Americans currently without health 
insurance - projections suggest that this number 
will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the 
absence of reform. Learn more: 
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf







            This email was sent to 
edavie at verizon.net
            Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy
            Please do not reply to this email. 
Contact the White House

            The White House . 1600 Pennsylvania 
Ave NW . Washington, DC 20500 . 202-456-1111










From louise_rickard at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 13 21:36:46 2009
From: louise_rickard at hotmail.com (Louise Rickard)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 21:36:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Something worth forwarding
In-Reply-To: <0472D1300AA04581887DA370A3F50FCF@EDavie>
References: <0472D1300AA04581887DA370A3F50FCF@EDavie>
Message-ID: <BAY112-DAV237119478AE9CF11288B1FD020@phx.gbl>

THANK YOU !!! 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Ed Davie
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:08 PM
To: Grovenet, F.G.
Subject: [Grovenet] Fw: Something worth forwarding

 

Something worth forwarding

----- Original Message ----- 

From: David Axelrod, The White House

To: edavie at verizon.net

Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 11:50 AM

Subject: Something worth forwarding

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                 Dear Friend,

 

                  This is probably one of the 

longest emails I've ever sent, but it could be the 

most important.

 

                  Across the country we are seeing 

vigorous debate about health insurance reform. 

Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so 

well are back - even the viral emails that fly 

unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts 

of lies and distortions.

 

                  As President Obama said at the 

town hall in New Hampshire, "where we do disagree, 

let's disagree over things that are real, not 

these wild misrepresentations that bear no 

resemblance to anything that's actually been 

proposed."

 

                  So let's start a chain email of 

our own. At the end of my email, you'll find a lot 

of information about health insurance reform, 

distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and 

stability to those with or without coverage, 8 

common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need 

health insurance reform now.

 

                  Right now, someone you know 

probably has a question about reform that could be 

answered by what's below. So what are you waiting 

for? Forward this email.

 

                  Thanks,

                  David

 

                  David Axelrod

                  Senior Adviser to the President

 

                  P.S. We launched 

www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck this week to knock 

down the rumors and lies that are floating around 

the internet. You can find the information below, 

and much more, there. For example, we've just 

added a video of Nancy-Ann DeParle from our Health 

Reform Office tackling a viral email head on. 

Check it out:

 

 

 

                  8 ways reform provides security 

and stability to those with or without coverage

 

                    1.. Ends Discrimination for 

Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will 

be prohibited from refusing you coverage because 

of your medical history.

                    2.. Ends Exorbitant 

Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: 

Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly 

caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket 

expenses.

                    3.. Ends Cost-Sharing for 

Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully 

cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests 

that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms 

or eye and foot exams for diabetics.

                    4.. Ends Dropping of Coverage 

for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be 

prohibited from dropping or watering down 

insurance coverage for those who become seriously 

ill.

                    5.. Ends Gender 

Discrimination: Insurance companies will be 

prohibited from charging you more because of your 

gender.

                    6.. Ends Annual or Lifetime 

Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be 

prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on 

the coverage you receive.

                    7.. Extends Coverage for Young 

Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for 

family coverage through the age of 26.

                    8.. Guarantees Insurance 

Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to 

renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays 

their premium in full. Insurance companies won't 

be allowed to refuse renewal because someone 

became sick.

                  Learn more and get details: 

http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/health-insurance-consumer-protections/

 

                  8 common myths about health 

insurance reform

                    1.. Reform will stop 

"rationing" - not increase it: It's a myth that 

reform will mean a "government takeover" of health 

care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, 

reform will forbid many forms of rationing that 

are currently being used by insurance companies.

                    2.. We can't afford reform: 

It's the status quo we can't afford. It's a myth 

that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, 

the President has identified ways to pay for the 

vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting 

waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government 

health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance 

companies; and increasing efficiency with such 

steps as coordinating care and streamlining 

paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring 

down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal 

crisis.

                    3.. Reform would encourage 

"euthanasia": It does not. It's a malicious myth 

that reform would encourage or even require 

euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to 

consult with their family and physicians about 

end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover 

these voluntary, private consultations for those 

who want help with these personal and difficult 

family decisions.

                    4.. Vets' health care is safe 

and sound: It's a myth that health insurance 

reform will affect veterans' access to the care 

they get now. To the contrary, the President's 

budget significantly expands coverage under the 

VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who 

were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system 

will continue to be available for all eligible 

veterans.

                    5.. Reform will benefit small 

business - not burden it: It's a myth that health 

insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To 

the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on 

small businesses, provide tax credits to help them 

pay for employee coverage and help level the 

playing field with big firms who pay much less to 

cover their employees on average.

                    6.. Your Medicare is safe, and 

stronger with reform: It's myth that Health 

Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting 

Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will 

improve the long-term financial health of 

Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate 

waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance 

companies, and help to close the Medicare 

"doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more 

affordable for seniors.

                    7.. You can keep your own 

insurance: It's myth that reform will force you 

out of your current insurance plan or force you to 

change doctors. To the contrary, reform will 

expand your choices, not eliminate them.

                    8.. No, government will not do 

anything with your bank account: It is an absurd 

myth that government will be in charge of your 

bank accounts.  Health insurance reform will 

simplify administration, making it easier and more 

convenient for you to pay bills in a method that 

you choose.  Just like paying a phone bill or a 

utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or 

by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be 

standardized so they will be easier to understand. 

The choice is up to you - and the same rules of 

privacy will apply as they do for all other 

electronic payments that people make.

                  Learn more and get details:

                  http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck

                  http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq

 

                  8 Reasons We Need Health 

Insurance Reform Now

 

                    1.. Coverage Denied to 

Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 

12.6 million non-elderly adults - 36 percent of 

those who tried to purchase health insurance 

directly from an insurance company in the 

individual insurance market - were in fact 

discriminated against because of a pre-existing 

condition in the previous three years or dropped 

from coverage when they became seriously ill. 

Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html

                    2.. Less Care for More Costs: 

With each passing year, Americans are paying more 

for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored 

health insurance premiums have nearly doubled 

since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. 

In 2008, the average premium for a family plan 

purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly 

the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage 

job.  Americans pay more than ever for health 

insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html

                    3.. Roadblocks to Care for 

Women: Women's reproductive health requires more 

regular contact with health care providers, 

including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and 

obstetric care. Women are also more likely to 

report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 

9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as 

diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to 

men, women are twice as likely to suffer from 

headaches and are more likely to experience joint, 

back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often 

require regular and frequent treatment and 

follow-up care. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html

                    4.. Hard Times in the 

Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are 

nearly 50 million people who face challenges in 

accessing health care. The past several decades 

have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, 

mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a 

primary health care provider in rural areas. With 

the recent economic downturn, there is potential 

for an increase in many of the health disparities 

and access concerns that are already elevated in 

rural communities. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes

                    5.. Small Businesses Struggle 

to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of 

the uninsured - 13 million people - are employees 

of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 

2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans 

covered by employer-based health insurance fell 

from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from 

small business. The percentage of small businesses 

offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while 

large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of 

such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees 

obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline

                    6.. The Tragedies are 

Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at 

least partly the result of medical expenses. The 

typical elderly couple may have to save nearly 

$300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by 

Medicare alone. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction

                    7.. Diminishing Access to 

Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of 

non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based 

health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An 

estimated 87 million people - one in every three 

Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at 

some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the 

uninsured are in working families. Learn more: 

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html

                    8.. The Trends are Troubling: 

Without reform, health care costs will continue to 

skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on 

families, businesses, and state and federal 

government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign 

of the need for health care reform is the 46 

million Americans currently without health 

insurance - projections suggest that this number 

will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the 

absence of reform. Learn more: 

http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            This email was sent to 

edavie at verizon.net

            Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy

            Please do not reply to this email. 

Contact the White House

 

            The White House . 1600 Pennsylvania 

Ave NW . Washington, DC 20500 . 202-456-1111

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________

GroveNet mailing list

GroveNet at rdrop.com

http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 13 22:01:32 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <303996.37050.qm@web112404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <303996.37050.qm@web112404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <585501.85345.qm@web56106.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Thanks so much for sharing this, Vickie. How incredibly compelling and holistic this presentation is! This lady is spot on!!!

Holly Tsur




________________________________
From: Vickie Madeoneup <whatsupy2k at yahoo.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:00:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .

speaking of celery

check this out

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ann_cooper_talks_school_lunches.html


the speaker, Ann Cooper, is very passionate about her topic, but she seems very well educated about it

it is all directly related to health care

Vickie

--- On Wed, 8/12/09, Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com> wrote:

From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
To: "Grovenet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 10:48 AM




Maybe  high prices of  health care won't be bad if it 
leads to  improvements  in physical condition!!



bob "pass the celery" browning  

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


  Elevated
cholesterol in midlife increases dementia risk
  August 11, 2009 | Janis Kelly
  
    
      
        
Adapted from Medscape Medical News?a professional news service
of WebMD

        
      
    
  
  
  
  Kuopio, Finland - Even moderately elevated cholesterol levels
in
midlife are strongly associated with later risk of Alzheimer's disease
(AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), new research suggests [1]. 
  Lead author Dr Alina Solomon (University of Kuopio,
Finland)
and colleagues used data from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California
Medical Group to investigate the relationship between midlife
cholesterol and dementia and found that even cholesterol levels of 200
to 239 mg/dL increase risk.
  "Both physicians and patients need to know that elevated
cholesterol
increases the risk not only for heart disease, but also for dementia,"
Solomon said. "The most important finding was that even
moderately elevated cholesterol at midlife can increase the risk of
both AD and VaD later in life."
  The study is published in the August 2008 issue of Dementia
and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.
  
  The study included 9844 subjects who had undergone detailed health
evaluations during 1964 to1973, when they were ages 40 to 45 years. 
  Data from 1994 showed that 469 had AD and 127 had VaD. The
researchers adjusted for age, education, race/ethnic group, sex,
midlife diabetes, hypertension, body-mass index, and late-life stroke.
They used cholesterol <200mg/dL as a reference point. 
  The analysis showed Alzheimer's disease hazard ratios of 1.23 for
midlife borderline cholesterol (200-239 mg/dL) and 1.57 for high
cholesterol (>240 mg/dL). Quartile analysis showed that
hazard ratios were 1.31 for cholesterol 221-238 mg/dL and 1.58 for
249-500 mg/dL.
  VaD hazard ratios were 1.50 for borderline cholesterol and 1.26
for high cholesterol. 
  
  Dr Robert Stewart (King's College London, UK) said that the
Solomon study data are "convincing." 
  "In general there is now a large body of evidence that indicates
that what is bad for the heart is bad for the brain?that is, that the
well-known risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke are also
risk factors for dementia (whether this is classified as Alzheimer's
disease or vascular dementia)," Stewart said. 
  "So the real message for clinicians is not to do anything
differently, but to be aware that what they should be doing
already?identifying and treating high cholesterol, high blood pressure,
and diabetes and promoting healthy diet and active lifestyles?is likely
to have more benefits than originally envisaged and should reduce risk
of dementia as well as reducing risk of cardiovascular disease." 
The complete contents of Medscape Medical News, a professional news
service of WebMD, can be found at www.medscape.com, a website for medical
professionals.



-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 13 22:01:32 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <303996.37050.qm@web112404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <303996.37050.qm@web112404.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <585501.85345.qm@web56106.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Thanks so much for sharing this, Vickie. How incredibly compelling and holistic this presentation is! This lady is spot on!!!

Holly Tsur




________________________________
From: Vickie Madeoneup <whatsupy2k at yahoo.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:00:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .

speaking of celery

check this out

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ann_cooper_talks_school_lunches.html


the speaker, Ann Cooper, is very passionate about her topic, but she seems very well educated about it

it is all directly related to health care

Vickie

--- On Wed, 8/12/09, Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com> wrote:

From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] A slight change in focus . . . . .
To: "Grovenet" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 10:48 AM




Maybe  high prices of  health care won't be bad if it 
leads to  improvements  in physical condition!!



bob "pass the celery" browning  

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


  Elevated
cholesterol in midlife increases dementia risk
  August 11, 2009 | Janis Kelly
  
    
      
        
Adapted from Medscape Medical News?a professional news service
of WebMD

        
      
    
  
  
  
  Kuopio, Finland - Even moderately elevated cholesterol levels
in
midlife are strongly associated with later risk of Alzheimer's disease
(AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), new research suggests [1]. 
  Lead author Dr Alina Solomon (University of Kuopio,
Finland)
and colleagues used data from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California
Medical Group to investigate the relationship between midlife
cholesterol and dementia and found that even cholesterol levels of 200
to 239 mg/dL increase risk.
  "Both physicians and patients need to know that elevated
cholesterol
increases the risk not only for heart disease, but also for dementia,"
Solomon said. "The most important finding was that even
moderately elevated cholesterol at midlife can increase the risk of
both AD and VaD later in life."
  The study is published in the August 2008 issue of Dementia
and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.
  
  The study included 9844 subjects who had undergone detailed health
evaluations during 1964 to1973, when they were ages 40 to 45 years. 
  Data from 1994 showed that 469 had AD and 127 had VaD. The
researchers adjusted for age, education, race/ethnic group, sex,
midlife diabetes, hypertension, body-mass index, and late-life stroke.
They used cholesterol <200mg/dL as a reference point. 
  The analysis showed Alzheimer's disease hazard ratios of 1.23 for
midlife borderline cholesterol (200-239 mg/dL) and 1.57 for high
cholesterol (>240 mg/dL). Quartile analysis showed that
hazard ratios were 1.31 for cholesterol 221-238 mg/dL and 1.58 for
249-500 mg/dL.
  VaD hazard ratios were 1.50 for borderline cholesterol and 1.26
for high cholesterol. 
  
  Dr Robert Stewart (King's College London, UK) said that the
Solomon study data are "convincing." 
  "In general there is now a large body of evidence that indicates
that what is bad for the heart is bad for the brain?that is, that the
well-known risk factors for coronary heart disease and stroke are also
risk factors for dementia (whether this is classified as Alzheimer's
disease or vascular dementia)," Stewart said. 
  "So the real message for clinicians is not to do anything
differently, but to be aware that what they should be doing
already?identifying and treating high cholesterol, high blood pressure,
and diabetes and promoting healthy diet and active lifestyles?is likely
to have more benefits than originally envisaged and should reduce risk
of dementia as well as reducing risk of cardiovascular disease." 
The complete contents of Medscape Medical News, a professional news
service of WebMD, can be found at www.medscape.com, a website for medical
professionals.



-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 14 07:03:17 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 07:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <475811.81873.qm@web46310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Just a test...I sent a couple of responses yesterday that did not post for some reason.  Honest, I didn't swear or nothin'.

Gary




________________________________
From: David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:45:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

As someone who prefers the free market, in those rare situations  
where it really exists, I am more than a bit curious if the opponents  
of all of the proposed government systems really believe that the  
free market is really at work in the American health care system?

For example, can anyone call a hospital or medical care facility and  
get a price list, so they can comparison shop?
Can anyone get accurate information about the kick back system in  
their area?  i.e. what is paid by facilities to physicians to obtain  
referrals.
Who can you speak with, to dicker about pricing?
If the health plan offered by the city of Forest Grove has the best  
cost/benefit ratio

>From my perspective, there are four ways to compete in a market.
You can compete by providing the best quality product available in  
your price range ( traditional free market principle ),
or you can engage in collusion to hold prices away from a free market  
condition ( legislators & lobbyists, cartels, kick backs, unions,  
government fiat monopolies & patents, advertising/news agencies ),
or you can coerce people to use your services ( "protection  
rackets",  support private health insurance or Grandma will die ),
or you can engage in fraud ( tainted milk/dog food, ponzi schemes,  
bait & switch, misrepresentation  )

You only get the full advertised advantages of the free market when  
there is no fraud, coercion or collusion.  We don't get the  
advertised benefits of a free market, because we don't have one.

David

On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Steven wrote:

> That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre  
> approval.


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From allnutt at verizon.net  Fri Aug 14 08:37:11 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:37:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] late  posts
In-Reply-To: <475811.81873.qm@web46310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCECBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<07C3A9CD-A2F1-485C-94F2-0B99035995EE@verizon.net>
	<475811.81873.qm@web46310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2DF4377F-E219-47A0-BCBD-06482589B426@verizon.net>

That has happened occasionally.  I don't like it when it happens to  
me because it makes me wonder if I'm going crazy.
I hope that you keep posting because you have given us threads to  
think about, even if we don't see eye to eye.

A glimpse at grovenet history....
While nobody enhances their argument with swearing it takes a lot  
more than doing it now and then to be filtered.
I can only recall one person who seemed to be hot headed enough to be  
censored a long long time ago and I don't recall if he ever was.  He  
was a very scary guy and even the people who agreed with him  
philosophically thought he was crossing the line.  We are all mild  
mannered and polite in comparison.
What eventually happened was that so many people filtered him out,  
nobody would respond one way or the other, and he was basically  
shunned. It is worse to be ignored than to be argued with and he  
eventually went away.



Katie



On Aug 14, 2009, at 7:03 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:

> Just a test...I sent a couple of responses yesterday that did not  
> post for some reason.  Honest, I didn't swear or nothin'.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:45:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
> As someone who prefers the free market, in those rare situations
> where it really exists, I am more than a bit curious if the opponents
> of all of the proposed government systems really believe that the
> free market is really at work in the American health care system?
>
> For example, can anyone call a hospital or medical care facility and
> get a price list, so they can comparison shop?
> Can anyone get accurate information about the kick back system in
> their area?  i.e. what is paid by facilities to physicians to obtain
> referrals.
> Who can you speak with, to dicker about pricing?
> If the health plan offered by the city of Forest Grove has the best
> cost/benefit ratio
>
>> From my perspective, there are four ways to compete in a market.
> You can compete by providing the best quality product available in
> your price range ( traditional free market principle ),
> or you can engage in collusion to hold prices away from a free market
> condition ( legislators & lobbyists, cartels, kick backs, unions,
> government fiat monopolies & patents, advertising/news agencies ),
> or you can coerce people to use your services ( "protection
> rackets",  support private health insurance or Grandma will die ),
> or you can engage in fraud ( tainted milk/dog food, ponzi schemes,
> bait & switch, misrepresentation  )
>
> You only get the full advertised advantages of the free market when
> there is no fraud, coercion or collusion.  We don't get the
> advertised benefits of a free market, because we don't have one.
>
> David
>
> On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Steven wrote:
>
>> That is because you choose to have that health plan. I need no pre
>> approval.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From whatsupy2k at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 14 20:50:04 2009
From: whatsupy2k at yahoo.com (Vickie Madeoneup)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Martial Arts in Forest Grove, Aikido - Its Circular,
	less agressive Its what I was looking for.
In-Reply-To: <BAY108-W42D5026A1CB6A8747D175687050@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <185510.31214.qm@web112402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

is this the Aikido class on B Street taught by Dave Dewberry?

It is in the same building as the jazzercise

Vickie



--- On Thu, 8/13/09, Holly Di <redhead854 at msn.com> wrote:

From: Holly Di <redhead854 at msn.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] Martial Arts in Forest Grove, Aikido - Its Circular, less agressive Its what I was looking for.
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Thursday, August 13, 2009, 1:47 PM


I have always wanted my daughter to learn a Martial Art for her own safety, But personally I didn't want one with all the aggressive punching and kicking motions.
She just started last month and she is enjoying it, even though its physically demanding (she turned into a bit of a couch potato (computer)over the last year).? 


What is Aikido?

Aikido is a Japaneses martial art developed early in this century by Morihei Uesiba (1883-1969)? Its a system of Self-defense, employing techniques based upon circular motions that blend the attack and energy of your apponent, rather than meeting the force of attack head on.? Aikido is a way of coordinating both body and mind through the training and discipline of learning technique, thereby energizing and integrating the body and increasing awareness.? 



I want to spread the word of this class to others in Forest Grove
community? because this style of Karate is not very well known, the
Sensi is local to Forest Grove and he 

started the classes here because of the length of travel it took to go
to the Portland Classes. These classes are affiliated with? Aikido Multnomah Aikikai? http://www.multnomahaikikai.com/instructors.html? Dave Dewberry is there on the bottom of the instructors page.? His Forest Grove Classes are? located in the Grange on Wednesday nights
and Friday Nights

6-730.? He says if you want to see a demonstration of Aikido just drop by between 6:30 and 730pm.? The monthy cost for students (school age) is 35.00 per month and 45.00 per month 
for adults.? He has brochures outside of the Grange on 19th ave.

Message from the Sensi 

? ? ? ? ? ? 
This Friday is the last class before we take
my son off to college next week.? Everyone please feel free to attend. 
It does not matter if you are a current student, family member or were
just thinking about trying Aikido.? Come join us





Practice will resume 6PM Wednesday September 2nd.

Sincerely,
Dave
http://aikido.home.dhs.org/


Its made a difference for my daughter, I think its such a healthy thing
Thanks for listening

Holly 



_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jo.david at verizon.net  Fri Aug 14 23:30:56 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:30:56 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <510054.56019.qm@web46311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com><944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy><842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<C1B64FF1-0B7E-4B9F-9E28-AD30912D7B2C@verizon.net>
	<76F5337951B049D58C0C344318BBC969@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<510054.56019.qm@web46311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <AC959598-B621-45CD-8F6F-DF1F6738EDF6@verizon.net>

I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big  
Business, because government appears so much larger and much more  
powerful than businesses.

So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,  
compared to the revenue of American states.

California------------------$105 Billion,

United Health Care ------$84 Billion,

Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,

WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,

New York--------------------$56 Billion,

Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,

Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,

New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,

Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,

Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion

followed by the other 44 states.

Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.

Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a  
bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what  
I think?  Not in this lifetime.

David



On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:

> I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is  
> that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big  
> Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the  
> heart of its decisions.
>
> I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
>
> Gary

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 15 09:50:39 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:50:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <AC959598-B621-45CD-8F6F-DF1F6738EDF6@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGECOMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Which one has a military force?
Which one has a revenue department that can confiscate your bank accounts,
not just demand payment?
Which one can you not sue for recourse of issue?
Which one changes their game plan every 2 or 4 years entirely?
And which one is the ONLY one available?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 11:31 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> powerful than businesses.
>
> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> compared to the revenue of American states.
>
> California------------------$105 Billion,
>
> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
>
> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
>
> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
>
> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
>
> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
>
> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
>
> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
>
> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
>
> Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
>
> followed by the other 44 states.
>
> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
>
> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
> bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> I think?  Not in this lifetime.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
>
> > I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
> > that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
> > Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
> > heart of its decisions.
> >
> > I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
> >
> > Gary
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From obrzl at verizon.net  Sat Aug 15 10:03:08 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGECOMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <328832.92351.qm@web84201.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I remember hearing on the news last year that the majority of mortgage foreclosures were the result of health care costs.??My memory?could be wrong, or the news could have been wrong.? But, if there's any truth in this notion, then most of the people losing their homes are literally being driven out by health care costs.? FWIW

--- On Sat, 8/15/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 2009, 4:50 PM


Which one has a military force?
Which one has a revenue department that can confiscate your bank accounts,
not just demand payment?
Which one can you not sue for recourse of issue?
Which one changes their game plan every 2 or 4 years entirely?
And which one is the ONLY one available?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 11:31 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> powerful than businesses.
>
> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> compared to the revenue of American states.
>
> California------------------$105 Billion,
>
> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
>
> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
>
> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
>
> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
>
> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
>
> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
>
> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
>
> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
>
> Humana,? Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
>
> followed by the other 44 states.
>
> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
>
> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?? Yes, a
> bit.? Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> I think?? Not in this lifetime.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
>
> > I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
> > that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
> > Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
> > heart of its decisions.
> >
> > I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
> >
> > Gary
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From allnutt at verizon.net  Sat Aug 15 10:07:14 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:07:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <AC959598-B621-45CD-8F6F-DF1F6738EDF6@verizon.net>
References: <c0e.570700a1.37b24ce1@aol.com><944001.65486.qm@web46306.mail.sp1.yahoo.com><780126E0D69342AE86555FAFABFBA576@gerianehzkfhvy><842331.882.qm@web46312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<C1B64FF1-0B7E-4B9F-9E28-AD30912D7B2C@verizon.net>
	<76F5337951B049D58C0C344318BBC969@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<510054.56019.qm@web46311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<AC959598-B621-45CD-8F6F-DF1F6738EDF6@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <D81F431B-ED39-4B13-8353-8BB538DB5CFC@verizon.net>

On top of that, you have the right to yell and scream and gripe and  
make outlandish claims against the government.
But the corporate interests will fight you tooth and nail if you go  
around with a placard slamming them.

Nobody has fired folks for walking around with Obama's picture with a  
Hitler/death theme, but don't you dare equate doughnuts with death.

http://tinyurl.com/o3wp96



Katie


On Aug 14, 2009, at 11:30 PM, David Morelli wrote:

> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> powerful than businesses.
>
> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> compared to the revenue of American states.
>
> California------------------$105 Billion,
>
> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
>
> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
>
> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
>
> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
>
> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
>
> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
>
> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
>
> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
>
> Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
>
> followed by the other 44 states.
>
> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
>
> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
> bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> I think?  Not in this lifetime.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
>
>> I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
>> that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
>> Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
>> heart of its decisions.
>>
>> I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
>>
>> Gary
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From allnutt at verizon.net  Sat Aug 15 10:27:45 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:27:45 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGECOMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGECOMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <D9D83D55-37B6-42F6-95E8-27F555D6357B@verizon.net>

This presents some room for great political cartoons:
On Aug 15, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Steven wrote:

> Which one has a military force?
       How about an insurance agent in a suit and tie with an AK- 47  
defending freedom in Iraq?
> Which one has a revenue department that can confiscate your bank  
> accounts,
> not just demand payment?
        See David's post about medical bankruptcy. If you owe money  
to someone in the health care industry they get as much as they can  
out of your empty bank accounts with the support of the courts behind  
them.
> Which one can you not sue for recourse of issue?
        When the insurance company denies your treatment and you  
subsequently die, please call the Ghost Whisperer to        sue for  
denial of coverage from the grave.
> Which one changes their game plan every 2 or 4 years entirely?
    The insurance guys only change your coverage when you get sick.  
As long as you are healthy and making payments they are happy to keep  
things as they are. But you don't get to vote for it.
> And which one is the ONLY one available?
    Surely you are not suggesting we need two Californias, two NYs  
and two federal governments etc to compete with each other?

Katie


>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of David Morelli
>> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 11:31 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
>> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
>> powerful than businesses.
>>
>> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
>> compared to the revenue of American states.
>>
>> California------------------$105 Billion,
>>
>> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
>>
>> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
>>
>> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
>>
>> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
>>
>> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
>>
>> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
>>
>> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
>>
>> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
>>
>> Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
>>
>> followed by the other 44 states.
>>
>> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
>>
>> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
>> bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
>> I think?  Not in this lifetime.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
>>
>>> I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
>>> that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
>>> Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
>>> heart of its decisions.
>>>
>>> I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
>>>
>>> Gary
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 15 10:37:21 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 10:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <328832.92351.qm@web84201.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <328832.92351.qm@web84201.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <220297.76111.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I conducted a Search via Google on "home foerclosures due to medical costs".  At the following URL (http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/09/30/health-foreclosure/) dated Sept. 30th 2008  the headline is "Medical Crises Contribute to Half Of All Home Foreclosure Filings".  Furthermore,

"As middle class incomes remain stagnant,
health care costs continue to increase. The employee contribution to
health care insurance has more than doubled since 1999 and the total
cost for family coverage now averages $12,680 a year, up 5 percent from 2007.
?Annual deductibles ? the amount employees pay out of their own pockets
for medical care before their insurance coverage starts ? jumped an
average of 29%, to $1,344, for those with family coverage,? a recent Kaiser survey found. 
Unless the system is reformed, growing costs will continue to swallow paychecks. As Ezekiel Emanuel observes, ?economic, tax and health care policy are inextricably linked?:

Health care may no longer be the acute pain at the
>forefront of the public?s attention ? hence the short shrift so far.
>But it is a severe disease that will have to be cured to get the
>economy really going and to ensure we have money for all the other
>things we need to invest in, like education, alternative energy,
>infrastructure, defense, national parks and the rest. Let?s hope policy makers can rise above the immediate political agenda to solve the long-term problems."There are also 2 tables in the report showing that indeed medical costs are a major contributor in foreclosures.

As Insurance companies are businesses, health insurance costs could potentially continue to rise.  As Pharmaceutical companies are businesses, prescription drug costs could potentially continue to rise.  As health-related products like prosthetics or knee braces or the like are designed/manufactured/sold by companies that are businesses, those costs could potentially continue to rise.  I don't begrudge those businesses earning revenue to make Shareholders and company Execs happy.  That's what businesses do: maximize revenue.  And that's exactly why all of these businesses are funneling much $$ to lobbyists, as reported on the front page of today's Oregonian, in hopes of thwarting our government from potentially some day implementing a government-run single payer health insurance system.

Health-related businesses contend as one major argument that a government-run single payer system won't curb costs.  They could be right.  In a free market system, prices can indeed be reduced through competition, ala Wal-Mart vs. everybody else, or like Intel vs. AMD in computers, or airline industry ticket prices.  But health care is an industry with a product that everybody needs, some more acutely than others.  We don't all have to shop for new clothes at Nordstroms or Macy's.  We can find great bargains, even never-worn clothing with tags still attached at Goodwill.  But if we break a bone, what are our choices?  Or if we get a nasty infection producing a high fever and the potential of sepsis, what are our choices?

Government-run single payer systems are working today in numerous other countries, including our neighbor Canada.  And our own military has a pretty good medical system in use.  It's just that on one side is all the businesses standing to lose a lot of profit should the government take over and on another side are those who fear the government will royally screw it all up.

sigh . . .

 
Allen Warren

From: mark oberzil <obrzl at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:03:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

I remember hearing on the news last year that the majority of mortgage foreclosures were the result of health care costs.  My memory could be wrong, or the news could have been wrong.  But, if there's any truth in this notion, then most of the people losing their homes are literally being driven out by health care costs.  FWIW

--- On Sat, 8/15/09, Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net> wrote:


From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Saturday, August 15, 2009, 4:50 PM


Which one has a military force?
Which one has a revenue department that can confiscate your bank accounts,
not just demand payment?
Which one can you not sue for recourse of issue?
Which one changes their game plan every 2 or 4 years entirely?
And which one is the ONLY one available?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of David Morelli
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 11:31 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> powerful than businesses.
>
> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> compared to the revenue of American states.
>
> California------------------$105 Billion,
>
> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
>
> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
>
> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
>
> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
>
> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
>
> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
>
> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
>
> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
>
> Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
>
> followed by the other 44 states.
>
> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
>
> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
> bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> I think?  Not in this lifetime.
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
>
> > I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
> > that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
> > Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
> > heart of its decisions.
> >
> > I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
> >
> > Gary
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 15 11:24:26 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:24:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <D9D83D55-37B6-42F6-95E8-27F555D6357B@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

When it is the IRS, you have no redress with the court. The health plan puts
the IRS in as the collection agency.
And you think that government would not turn down procedures or medications?
That is just what Emanuel has been talking about. You get what they decide
you need based on your condition. You don't get what you want.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:28 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> This presents some room for great political cartoons:
> On Aug 15, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Steven wrote:
>
> > Which one has a military force?
>        How about an insurance agent in a suit and tie with an AK- 47
> defending freedom in Iraq?
> > Which one has a revenue department that can confiscate your bank
> > accounts,
> > not just demand payment?
>         See David's post about medical bankruptcy. If you owe money
> to someone in the health care industry they get as much as they can
> out of your empty bank accounts with the support of the courts behind
> them.
> > Which one can you not sue for recourse of issue?
>         When the insurance company denies your treatment and you
> subsequently die, please call the Ghost Whisperer to        sue for
> denial of coverage from the grave.
> > Which one changes their game plan every 2 or 4 years entirely?
>     The insurance guys only change your coverage when you get sick.
> As long as you are healthy and making payments they are happy to keep
> things as they are. But you don't get to vote for it.
> > And which one is the ONLY one available?
>     Surely you are not suggesting we need two Californias, two NYs
> and two federal governments etc to compete with each other?
>
> Katie
>
>
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of David Morelli
> >> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 11:31 PM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>
> >>
> >> I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> >> Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> >> powerful than businesses.
> >>
> >> So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> >> compared to the revenue of American states.
> >>
> >> California------------------$105 Billion,
> >>
> >> United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
> >>
> >> Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
> >>
> >> WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
> >>
> >> New York--------------------$56 Billion,
> >>
> >> Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
> >>
> >> Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
> >>
> >> New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
> >>
> >> Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
> >>
> >> Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
> >>
> >> followed by the other 44 states.
> >>
> >> Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
> >>
> >> Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
> >> bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> >> I think?  Not in this lifetime.
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
> >>> that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
> >>> Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
> >>> heart of its decisions.
> >>>
> >>> I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
> >>>
> >>> Gary
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 15 11:24:27 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:24:27 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <220297.76111.qm@web35202.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

The insurance companies have lots of money in reserve and as investments.
The government takes over the business without this reserve making it tough.
If the government takes over the insurance companies, we would have the
financial reserves to run the program. 
Take over the insurance companies, enroll every medical employee into the
Medical Corps. Then we have the tools to actually give good health care.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:37 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 

> 
> Government-run single payer systems are working today in numerous 
> other countries, including our neighbor Canada.  And our own 
> military has a pretty good medical system in use.  It's just that 
> on one side is all the businesses standing to lose a lot of 
> profit should the government take over and on another side are 
> those who fear the government will royally screw it all up.
> 
> sigh . . .
> 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 15 11:24:26 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:24:26 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <D81F431B-ED39-4B13-8353-8BB538DB5CFC@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Yell and scream all you want. They label you a bigot Astroturf and do as
they want anyway.

I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could not get
insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and he had
migraines and such.
Yet he was against this government plan.

He mentioned one good idea. We have life insurance where the premiums don't
go up. We buy in for 20 years or so on a contract. Our health insurance is
on a yearly contract. New terms every year. Rather than insurance through
your employer, buy a long term contract for health care. I thought it was
interesting.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:07 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> On top of that, you have the right to yell and scream and gripe and
> make outlandish claims against the government.
> But the corporate interests will fight you tooth and nail if you go
> around with a placard slamming them.
>
> Nobody has fired folks for walking around with Obama's picture with a
> Hitler/death theme, but don't you dare equate doughnuts with death.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/o3wp96
>
>
>
> Katie
>
>
> On Aug 14, 2009, at 11:30 PM, David Morelli wrote:
>
> > I suspect that sometimes we fear Big Government more than Big
> > Business, because government appears so much larger and much more
> > powerful than businesses.
> >
> > So, I looked at the revenue of some of the Health Industry giants,
> > compared to the revenue of American states.
> >
> > California------------------$105 Billion,
> >
> > United Health Care ------$84 Billion,
> >
> > Johnson&Johnson------- $61 Billion,
> >
> > WellPoint------------------- $60 Billion,
> >
> > New York--------------------$56 Billion,
> >
> > Texas-------------------------$50 Billion,
> >
> > Pfizer--------------------------$46 Billion,
> >
> > New Jersey------------------$35 Billion,
> >
> > Aetna------------------------$32.6 Billion,
> >
> > Humana,  Massachusetts and Illinois - $30 Billion
> >
> > followed by the other 44 states.
> >
> > Oregon has revenue of about $7 Billion.
> >
> > Do I think that I have some input to the Federal Congress?  Yes, a
> > bit.  Do I think that any of the health care giants care at all what
> > I think?  Not in this lifetime.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 13, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Gary Duncan-Gates wrote:
> >
> >> I think what you are trying to say (correct me if I am wrong), is
> >> that you feel you have more control over Big Government than Big
> >> Business, and that Big Government has your best interest at the
> >> heart of its decisions.
> >>
> >> I am sorry, but I just cannot swallow either of those ideas.
> >>
> >> Gary
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 15 12:08:21 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 12:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNEEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <668264.54916.qm@web35205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Steven, agree 100%.  I forgot to mention the insurance company reserves.  If our government would ever be able to really be brave enough to consider taking over these investments and reserves, unfortunately, lawyers would fight this to the bitter end, thereby draining many of those reserves in the process.

 
Allen Warren




________________________________
From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 11:24:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

The insurance companies have lots of money in reserve and as investments.
The government takes over the business without this reserve making it tough.
If the government takes over the insurance companies, we would have the
financial reserves to run the program. 
Take over the insurance companies, enroll every medical employee into the
Medical Corps. Then we have the tools to actually give good health care.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 10:37 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 

> 
> Government-run single payer systems are working today in numerous 
> other countries, including our neighbor Canada.  And our own 
> military has a pretty good medical system in use.  It's just that 
> on one side is all the businesses standing to lose a lot of 
> profit should the government take over and on another side are 
> those who fear the government will royally screw it all up.
> 
> sigh . . .
> 



      

From theresacus at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 15 14:33:36 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 15
In-Reply-To: <mailman.13.1250362807.90286.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <700651.69849.qm@web34507.mail.mud.yahoo.com>





One person mentioned that you only get the medical care that the government wants.? Well, the insurance companies do the same thing.? Some of you are aware that I had a third son.? He was very ill as an infant, with congestive heart failure, due to a congenital defect at birth, of which they did not diagnose.? Kaiser wanted us to just let him die.? I had to waste a ton of time with administrative BS to get Kaiser to approve a heart surgery.? (3 days that could have made a difference.)? 
?
Try asking your medical insurance company for a copy of the contract.? You will not get it because they want you to be blind.? I have done this a number of times and got no where.? At least with the government, ?you will not be in the dark about what is or isn't covered.? 
?
Theresa


      

From waltw at teleport.com  Sat Aug 15 18:30:14 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:30:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>

>
> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could  
> not get
> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and  
> he had
> migraines and such.
> Yet he was against this government plan.

You didn't mention his mental health...

From jo.david at verizon.net  Sat Aug 15 23:35:08 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 23:35:08 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <E89354CB-47FE-46B3-B8CE-64CC3B96AA17@verizon.net>

No.  Not an issue.

The guy will pay more for his health care, and likely receive less  
corrective care than someone with health coverage.  He may be heavy  
into preventive care as a means to avoid the cost of corrective care.

He is coping as best as he can.  Unfortunately, a bad episode in an  
emergency room could bankrupt him.  And bankruptcy pushes his debt  
unto the hospital/clinic, who will push it unto the government or the  
other paying customers.

David

On Aug 15, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Walt Wentz wrote:

>>
>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could  
>> not get insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with  
>> Asthma and he had migraines and such.
>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>
> You didn't mention his mental health...

From gduncangates at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 17 07:26:42 2009
From: gduncangates at yahoo.com (Gary Duncan-Gates)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 07:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <539128.82552.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with some folks.  

If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr. Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.

Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing opinion.

Gary




________________________________
From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

>
> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could  
> not get
> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and  
> he had
> migraines and such.
> Yet he was against this government plan.

You didn't mention his mental health...
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 08:18:39 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 08:18:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <539128.82552.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
	<539128.82552.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BA360F4C-2E9D-47AC-8503-E608CF3B94AC@teleport.com>

Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put  
a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality  
conflicts with anyone else's.

As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk  
his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give  
the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and  
able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.  
Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes  
that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for  
themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or  
inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually  
looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an  
agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is  
determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads  
out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval  
serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.  
Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than  
see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and  
critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that  
the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that  
any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the  
insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,  
comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd  
like to sell him.

The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he  
supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),  
yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick  
and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal  
fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no  
evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered  
individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential  
details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's  
father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
Walt (Somefolks) Wentz

> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with  
> some folks.
>
> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe  
> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been  
> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in  
> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.  
> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>
> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing  
> opinion.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>>
>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>> not get
>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>> he had
>> migraines and such.
>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>
> You didn't mention his mental health...
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 17 09:29:52 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <BA360F4C-2E9D-47AC-8503-E608CF3B94AC@teleport.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
	<539128.82552.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<BA360F4C-2E9D-47AC-8503-E608CF3B94AC@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <865820.10938.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or Democrats.

 
Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective

Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put  
a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality  
conflicts with anyone else's.

As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk  
his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give  
the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and  
able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.  
Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes  
that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for  
themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or  
inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually  
looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an  
agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is  
determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads  
out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval  
serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.  
Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than  
see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and  
critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that  
the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that  
any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the  
insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,  
comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd  
like to sell him.

The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he  
supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),  
yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick  
and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal  
fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no  
evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered  
individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential  
details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's  
father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
Walt (Somefolks) Wentz

> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with  
> some folks.
>
> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe  
> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been  
> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in  
> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.  
> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>
> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing  
> opinion.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>>
>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>> not get
>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>> he had
>> migraines and such.
>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>
> You didn't mention his mental health...
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 09:57:04 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:57:04 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <865820.10938.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEDAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<3D146F1D-2B9E-4268-A3F6-CCA644D431EE@teleport.com>
	<539128.82552.qm@web46313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<BA360F4C-2E9D-47AC-8503-E608CF3B94AC@teleport.com>
	<865820.10938.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4A293F64-99E0-4284-91AA-F7D944CBB8D9@teleport.com>

Good possibilities, Allen.
Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent  
(who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in  
LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a  
comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a  
deep-seated distrust of politicians):

...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people against
it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on  
purpose, but they all
sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
their own shoe laces!!

..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
>> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
>> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do almost
>> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
>> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them, like the
>> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
>> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
>>
>> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our Vets
>> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
>> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
>> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many  
>> people's
>> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can swallow --
>> More actually than I really want...
>>
>> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
>> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -  
>> to be
>> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health  
>> care
>> in an industrialized country...
>>

On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:

> Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition  
> to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the  
> opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes  
> he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another  
> possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government  
> and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or  
> Democrats.
>
>
> Allen Warren
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
> Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
> a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
> Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
> conflicts with anyone else's.
>
> As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
> his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
> the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
> able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
> Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
> that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
> themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
> inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
> looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
> agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
> determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
> out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
> serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
> Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
> see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
> critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
> the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
> any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
> insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
> comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
> If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
> like to sell him.
>
> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>
>> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
>> some folks.
>>
>> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
>> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
>> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
>> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
>> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>>
>> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
>> opinion.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>>
>>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>>> not get
>>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>>> he had
>>> migraines and such.
>>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>>
>> You didn't mention his mental health...
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 09:57:13 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:57:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <BA360F4C-2E9D-47AC-8503-E608CF3B94AC@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt the
best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group coverage)
was his solution.
I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old, sick, and so
forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what you want
covered.
I can agree with that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 09:57:14 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:57:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <865820.10938.qm@web35208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I was having lunch with a friend, this was a co-worker that I didn't catch
his name.
These guys are anti bush and likely voted for O.
They are just intelligent.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:30 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition to the
> Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the opportunity to
> read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes he's heard from those
> opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another possibility may be he simply doesn't
> trust anybody in government and therefore will oppose any plan put forth
> by Republicans and/or Democrats.
>
>
> Allen Warren
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
> Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
> a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
> Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
> conflicts with anyone else's.
>
> As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
> his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
> the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
> able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
> Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
> that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
> themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
> inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
> looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
> agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
> determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
> out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
> serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
> Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
> see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
> critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
> the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
> any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
> insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
> comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
> If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
> like to sell him.
>
> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>
> > See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
> > some folks.
> >
> > If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
> > he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
> > brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
> > this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
> > Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
> >
> > Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
> > opinion.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >
> >>
> >> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
> >> not get
> >> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
> >> he had
> >> migraines and such.
> >> Yet he was against this government plan.
> >
> > You didn't mention his mental health...
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 10:03:12 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:03:12 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <4A293F64-99E0-4284-91AA-F7D944CBB8D9@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

No one has even mentioned most of my issues with the bill. How about the
$250 Million a year for a report to congress? Or the Trust fund designed to
kick out $375 Billion in a manner that would bypass the congressional budget
office?
You guys just kind of let that slip away.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:57 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> Good possibilities, Allen.
> Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent
> (who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in
> LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a
> comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a
> deep-seated distrust of politicians):
>
> ...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
> supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people against
> it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on
> purpose, but they all
> sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
> their own shoe laces!!
>
> ..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
> >> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
> >> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do almost
> >> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
> >> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them, like the
> >> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
> >> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
> >>
> >> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our Vets
> >> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
> >> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
> >> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many
> >> people's
> >> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can swallow --
> >> More actually than I really want...
> >>
> >> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
> >> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -
> >> to be
> >> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health
> >> care
> >> in an industrialized country...
> >>
>
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:
>
> > Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition
> > to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the
> > opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes
> > he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another
> > possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government
> > and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or
> > Democrats.
> >
> >
> > Allen Warren
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >
> > Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
> > a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
> > Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
> > conflicts with anyone else's.
> >
> > As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
> > his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
> > the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
> > able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
> > Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
> > that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
> > themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
> > inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
> > looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
> > agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
> > determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
> > out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
> > serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
> > Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
> > see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
> > critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
> > the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
> > any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
> > insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
> > comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
> > If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
> > like to sell him.
> >
> > The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> > supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> > yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> > and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> > fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> > evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> > individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> > details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> > father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> > Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
> >
> >> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
> >> some folks.
> >>
> >> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
> >> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
> >> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
> >> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
> >> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
> >>
> >> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
> >> opinion.
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> >> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
> >>> not get
> >>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
> >>> he had
> >>> migraines and such.
> >>> Yet he was against this government plan.
> >>
> >> You didn't mention his mental health...
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 10:21:36 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:21:36 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <167248C3D9D441859FBD40A5A22F72DC@gerianehzkfhvy>

When you say "the bill," which version (or hypothetical version) are you talking about, Steven?

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> No one has even mentioned most of my issues with the bill. How about the
> $250 Million a year for a report to congress? Or the Trust fund designed to
> kick out $375 Billion in a manner that would bypass the congressional budget
> office?
> You guys just kind of let that slip away.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:57 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> Good possibilities, Allen.
>> Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent
>> (who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in
>> LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a
>> comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a
>> deep-seated distrust of politicians):
>>
>> ...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
>> supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people against
>> it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on
>> purpose, but they all
>> sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
>> their own shoe laces!!
>>
>> ..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
>> >> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
>> >> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do almost
>> >> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
>> >> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them, like the
>> >> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
>> >> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
>> >>
>> >> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our Vets
>> >> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
>> >> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
>> >> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many
>> >> people's
>> >> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can swallow --
>> >> More actually than I really want...
>> >>
>> >> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
>> >> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -
>> >> to be
>> >> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health
>> >> care
>> >> in an industrialized country...
>> >>
>>
>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:
>>
>> > Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition
>> > to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the
>> > opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes
>> > he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another
>> > possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government
>> > and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or
>> > Democrats.
>> >
>> >
>> > Allen Warren
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>> >
>> > Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
>> > a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
>> > Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
>> > conflicts with anyone else's.
>> >
>> > As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
>> > his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
>> > the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
>> > able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
>> > Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
>> > that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
>> > themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
>> > inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
>> > looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
>> > agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
>> > determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
>> > out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
>> > serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
>> > Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
>> > see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
>> > critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
>> > the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
>> > any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
>> > insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
>> > comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
>> > If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
>> > like to sell him.
>> >
>> > The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>> > supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>> > yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>> > and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>> > fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>> > evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>> > individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>> > details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>> > father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>> > Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>> >
>> >> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
>> >> some folks.
>> >>
>> >> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
>> >> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
>> >> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
>> >> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
>> >> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>> >>
>> >> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
>> >> opinion.
>> >>
>> >> Gary
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> >> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>> >>> not get
>> >>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>> >>> he had
>> >>> migraines and such.
>> >>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>> >>
>> >> You didn't mention his mental health...
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From rab at jurislex.com  Mon Aug 17 11:23:06 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:23:06 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Social Security: Little-Known Strategies Maximize Your
 Benefits - AARP Bulletin Today
Message-ID: <4A89A00A.30509@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090817/9ad58410/attachment.html 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Mon Aug 17 12:40:39 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 12:40:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <120A12C5-05B5-40DE-B4F5-1A786FF33190@verizon.net>

I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive idea of  
single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing  
by the way.
And coming from Steven blows me away.
But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I  
want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance  
provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little  
coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help make  
it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a  
referee be that would be answerable to the people?

Katie


On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:

> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt the
> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group  
> coverage)
> was his solution.
> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,  
> sick, and so
> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what  
> you want
> covered.
> I can agree with that.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 13:49:53 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:49:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Social Security: Little-Known Strategies Maximize
	Your Benefits - AARP Bulletin Today
References: <4A89A00A.30509@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <E18589A8A08D430D91B428F0FEAB66B8@gerianehzkfhvy>

Thanks, Bob!

;-)   Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bob Browning 
To: Grovenet 
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 11:23 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] Social Security: Little-Known Strategies Maximize Your Benefits - AARP Bulletin Today


For those of you who, like me, are getting closer to the big one, a few good tips (other than the best one, which is to get elected to the US Senate!!):

http://tinyurl.com/o8b3vm

bob "keep on workin'" browning



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 13:50:38 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:50:38 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <C84674AD-000C-49DE-87A2-89BF1A137C9A@teleport.com>

In other words, a big national health insurance co-op-- sounds  
reasonable, although "what you want to pay and what you want covered"  
would still land many people in a bind... if they wanted really low- 
cost insurance, covering only appendicitis and plantar warts,   
because they couldn't afford any more, and the wife then got cancer,  
they could still end up losing everything. Saw a note in the  
Oregonian the other day that roughly half of American families in  
bankruptcy got there because of a medical disaster wiping out their  
finances.
WW
On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:

> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt the
> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group  
> coverage)
> was his solution.
> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,  
> sick, and so
> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what  
> you want
> covered.
> I can agree with that.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 13:56:13 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:56:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNOEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <E0934EFF-EAAE-4843-9094-7E7E283F0872@teleport.com>


On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:

> I was having lunch with a friend, this was a co-worker that I  
> didn't catch
> his name.
> These guys are anti bush and likely voted for O.
> They are just intelligent.

Well, that follows naturally, doesn't it? (budda bing!)
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Allen Warren
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:30 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition  
>> to the
>> Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the  
>> opportunity to
>> read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes he's heard  
>> from those
>> opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another possibility may be he simply  
>> doesn't
>> trust anybody in government and therefore will oppose any plan put  
>> forth
>> by Republicans and/or Democrats.
>>
>>
>> Allen Warren
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>> Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
>> a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
>> Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
>> conflicts with anyone else's.
>>
>> As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
>> his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
>> the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
>> able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
>> Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
>> that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
>> themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
>> inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
>> looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
>> agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
>> determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
>> out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
>> serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
>> Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
>> see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
>> critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
>> the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
>> any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
>> insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
>> comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
>> If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
>> like to sell him.
>>
>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>
>>> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
>>> some folks.
>>>
>>> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
>>> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
>>> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
>>> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
>>> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>>>
>>> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
>>> opinion.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>>>> not get
>>>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>>>> he had
>>>> migraines and such.
>>>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>>>
>>> You didn't mention his mental health...
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From rab at jurislex.com  Mon Aug 17 13:58:07 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:58:07 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Social Security: Little-Known Strategies Maximize
 Your Benefits - AARP Bulletin Today
In-Reply-To: <E18589A8A08D430D91B428F0FEAB66B8@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <4A89A00A.30509@jurislex.com>
	<E18589A8A08D430D91B428F0FEAB66B8@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <4A89C45F.5090001@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090817/29aad8b5/attachment.html 

From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 14:06:58 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:06:58 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDHMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <51E0D419-5FAE-4C53-A38F-FCC1F5193A49@teleport.com>

$250 million a year seems a high cost for a Congressional report--  
unless it is part and parcel of the oversight and management of the  
health reform program.
Still, however, it's chicken feed compared to the TRILLIONS we have  
borrowed and pounded down a rat hole in Iraq, which has gotten us  
nothing except thousands of severely injured or permanently disabled  
vets for the VA to take care of, at public expense.
The difference, of course, is that we will have to "pay as we go" on  
national insurance, rather than borrowing the money from China and  
adding that debt to our children's already crushing obligations.
$375 billion is a good chunk of change too, yet might be a good  
investment if it kept thousands of Americans from going bankrupt,  
getting their homes foreclosed and dropping off the tax rolls due to  
a family medical disaster.
WW
On Aug 17, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Steven wrote:

> No one has even mentioned most of my issues with the bill. How  
> about the
> $250 Million a year for a report to congress? Or the Trust fund  
> designed to
> kick out $375 Billion in a manner that would bypass the  
> congressional budget
> office?
> You guys just kind of let that slip away.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:57 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> Good possibilities, Allen.
>> Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent
>> (who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in
>> LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a
>> comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a
>> deep-seated distrust of politicians):
>>
>> ...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
>> supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people  
>> against
>> it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on
>> purpose, but they all
>> sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
>> their own shoe laces!!
>>
>> ..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
>>>> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
>>>> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do  
>>>> almost
>>>> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
>>>> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them,  
>>>> like the
>>>> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
>>>> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
>>>>
>>>> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our  
>>>> Vets
>>>> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
>>>> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
>>>> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many
>>>> people's
>>>> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can  
>>>> swallow --
>>>> More actually than I really want...
>>>>
>>>> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
>>>> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -
>>>> to be
>>>> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health
>>>> care
>>>> in an industrialized country...
>>>>
>>
>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:
>>
>>> Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition
>>> to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the
>>> opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes
>>> he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another
>>> possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government
>>> and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or
>>> Democrats.
>>>
>>>
>>> Allen Warren
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>
>>> Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to  
>>> put
>>> a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
>>> Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
>>> conflicts with anyone else's.
>>>
>>> As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to  
>>> risk
>>> his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
>>> the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
>>> able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
>>> Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and  
>>> believes
>>> that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
>>> themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
>>> inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
>>> looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
>>> agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
>>> determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
>>> out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
>>> serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die  
>>> there.
>>> Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself  
>>> than
>>> see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
>>> critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE  
>>> that
>>> the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or  
>>> that
>>> any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
>>> insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
>>> comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
>>> If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
>>> like to sell him.
>>>
>>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>>
>>>> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
>>>> some folks.
>>>>
>>>> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
>>>> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
>>>> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
>>>> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
>>>> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>>>>
>>>> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
>>>> opinion.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>>>> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>>>>> not get
>>>>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma  
>>>>> and
>>>>> he had
>>>>> migraines and such.
>>>>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>>>>
>>>> You didn't mention his mental health...
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 15:32:11 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:32:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <120A12C5-05B5-40DE-B4F5-1A786FF33190@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I am seeking some solution here that makes more sense than congress.
We started down this road when a non smoker could get cheaper insurance than
a smoker. When we can see into everyone's DNA, then a picky insurance could
just nit pick the healthiest folks. That isn't really spreading the
liability.

I would love to see the DNA information used to treat our illnesses, not
just
to ID a perpetrator or decide who to let in to the insurance club.
I don't like insurance tied to the employer. If we see our bills, we are
better capable to shop and save. If someone else is paying for it, I'll have
the steak and lobster.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:41 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive idea of
> single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing
> by the way.
> And coming from Steven blows me away.
> But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I
> want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance
> provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little
> coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help make
> it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a
> referee be that would be answerable to the people?
>
> Katie
>
>
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:
>
> > Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt the
> > best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
> > Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group
> > coverage)
> > was his solution.
> > I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,
> > sick, and so
> > forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what
> > you want
> > covered.
> > I can agree with that.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>
> >>
> >> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> >> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> >> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> >> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> >> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> >> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> >> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> >> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> >> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> >> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 15:32:10 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:32:10 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <167248C3D9D441859FBD40A5A22F72DC@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I've mentioned many times, I read the house bill and gave a web link to it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:22 AM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> When you say "the bill," which version (or hypothetical version) are you
> talking about, Steven?
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>
>
> > No one has even mentioned most of my issues with the bill. How about the
> > $250 Million a year for a report to congress? Or the Trust fund designed
> to
> > kick out $375 Billion in a manner that would bypass the congressional
> budget
> > office?
> > You guys just kind of let that slip away.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:57 AM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>
> >>
> >> Good possibilities, Allen.
> >> Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent
> >> (who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in
> >> LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a
> >> comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a
> >> deep-seated distrust of politicians):
> >>
> >> ...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
> >> supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people against
> >> it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on
> >> purpose, but they all
> >> sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
> >> their own shoe laces!!
> >>
> >> ..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
> >> >> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
> >> >> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do almost
> >> >> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
> >> >> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them, like
> the
> >> >> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
> >> >> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
> >> >>
> >> >> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our
> Vets
> >> >> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
> >> >> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
> >> >> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many
> >> >> people's
> >> >> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can swallow --
> >> >> More actually than I really want...
> >> >>
> >> >> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
> >> >> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -
> >> >> to be
> >> >> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health
> >> >> care
> >> >> in an industrialized country...
> >> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:
> >>
> >> > Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition
> >> > to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the
> >> > opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes
> >> > he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another
> >> > possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government
> >> > and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or
> >> > Democrats.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Allen Warren
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ________________________________
> >> > From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> >> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> >> > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
> >> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >> >
> >> > Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
> >> > a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
> >> > Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
> >> > conflicts with anyone else's.
> >> >
> >> > As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
> >> > his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
> >> > the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
> >> > able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
> >> > Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
> >> > that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
> >> > themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
> >> > inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
> >> > looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
> >> > agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
> >> > determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
> >> > out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
> >> > serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
> >> > Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
> >> > see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
> >> > critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
> >> > the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
> >> > any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
> >> > insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
> >> > comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
> >> > If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
> >> > like to sell him.
> >> >
> >> > The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> >> > supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> >> > yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> >> > and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
> >> > fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> >> > evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> >> > individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> >> > details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> >> > father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> >> > Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
> >> >
> >> >> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
> >> >> some folks.
> >> >>
> >> >> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
> >> >> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
> >> >> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
> >> >> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
> >> >> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
> >> >>
> >> >> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
> >> >> opinion.
> >> >>
> >> >> Gary
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ________________________________
> >> >> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> >> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> >> >> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
> >> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
> >> >>> not get
> >> >>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
> >> >>> he had
> >> >>> migraines and such.
> >> >>> Yet he was against this government plan.
> >> >>
> >> >> You didn't mention his mental health...
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > GroveNet mailing list
> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > GroveNet mailing list
> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 15:50:12 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:50:12 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <567DF9C203404D5AA68FF6295BF25928@gerianehzkfhvy>

Thanks, the House bill ... Was out of town a few days; trying to catch up a bit.

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> I've mentioned many times, I read the house bill and gave a web link to it.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Geri
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:22 AM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> When you say "the bill," which version (or hypothetical version) are you
>> talking about, Steven?
>>
>> Geri
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
>> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> > No one has even mentioned most of my issues with the bill. How about the
>> > $250 Million a year for a report to congress? Or the Trust fund designed
>> to
>> > kick out $375 Billion in a manner that would bypass the congressional
>> budget
>> > office?
>> > You guys just kind of let that slip away.
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> >> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:57 AM
>> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Good possibilities, Allen.
>> >> Or, a few other possibilities, to quote from a longtime correspondent
>> >> (who is, to give more essential details, a Marines veteran, lives in
>> >> LA, has pre-existing conditions, is precariously self-employed as a
>> >> comic artist due to those conditions and his late-50s age, and has a
>> >> deep-seated distrust of politicians):
>> >>
>> >> ...  listening to Bill Handle on the Radio this AM - he's been
>> >> supporting the Heath care thing - took a few calls from people against
>> >> it - could be that the call screener picked these clowns out on
>> >> purpose, but they all
>> >> sounded incoherent-- you'd swear that they must have trouble tying
>> >> their own shoe laces!!
>> >>
>> >> ..Y'know, I honestly don't know why seemingly so many average people
>> >> >> should be against a health care plan... Though I can understand why
>> >> >> big Pharmaceuticals and the Health Care/Hospital Biz would do almost
>> >> >> anything to stop it...  I tend to feel that the stupid and loud are
>> >> >> getting much more airplay than they deserve -- many of them, like
>> the
>> >> >> lady who told Obama "Keep the Government Out of my Medicare" are
>> >> >> either senile - duped - stupid or all of the above...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As someone who relies on the VA - (Socialized Medicine) Yes, our
>> Vets
>> >> >> have Socialized Meds... And while the VA does have its foibles, I
>> >> >> could never otherwise afford the level of health care that I get -
>> >> >> some of which, like CT Scans, would never be included in many
>> >> >> people's
>> >> >> Paid-for health plans... and all the Free Meds that I can swallow --
>> >> >> More actually than I really want...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So I dunno... Seems possible that this whole thing will go down in
>> >> >> flames - if so, I guess Americans will get what they asked for -
>> >> >> to be
>> >> >> gouged by Pharmaceuticals and to receive some of the worst health
>> >> >> care
>> >> >> in an industrialized country...
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, Allen Warren wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Regarding Mr. Anonymous, yet another possibility on his opposition
>> >> > to the Health Plan could also be that perhaps he hasn't had the
>> >> > opportunity to read the Plan and is objecting based on sound bytes
>> >> > he's heard from those opposed to the Plan.  Or yet another
>> >> > possibility may be he simply doesn't trust anybody in government
>> >> > and therefore will oppose any plan put forth by Republicans and/or
>> >> > Democrats.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Allen Warren
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ________________________________
>> >> > From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> >> > To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> >> > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:18:39 AM
>> >> > Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>> >> >
>> >> > Geeze, Gary, it was a throwaway GAG, faw caw's sake! Do i have to put
>> >> > a "budda-bing!" at the end of every punch line?
>> >> > Conservatives are all about sober reality-- until their reality
>> >> > conflicts with anyone else's.
>> >> >
>> >> > As for Mr. Anonymous, I really have no idea why he is willing to risk
>> >> > his personal health and his family's financial ruin rather than give
>> >> > the government plan a chance. Maybe he is independently wealthy, and
>> >> > able to pay for the most expensive medical care out of petty cash.
>> >> > Maybe he is a devout Objectivist, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and believes
>> >> > that the unfortunate (including himself) ought to shift for
>> >> > themselves, and suffer all the consequences of their actions or
>> >> > inactions. Maybe he is suicidal or masochistic, and is actually
>> >> > looking forward to dying of some preventable disease, preferably an
>> >> > agonizing one. Maybe he is a staunch hard-right Republican, and is
>> >> > determined to rigidly follow the Party Line even if that line leads
>> >> > out a tenth-story window. Maybe he is a good old-fashioned Medieval
>> >> > serf, who believes the poor ought to keep their place, and die there.
>> >> > Maybe he is a closet racist, who would rather risk death himself than
>> >> > see a black man possibly succeed in attacking the country's real and
>> >> > critical problems. What the hell, maybe he honestly does BELIEVE that
>> >> > the government plan has deep flaws (which is admittedly does) or that
>> >> > any plan proposed by the Republicans, in conjunction with the
>> >> > insurance industry and the big pharmaceuticals, would be honest,
>> >> > comprehensive, economical, effective and fair to all (budda-bing!).
>> >> > If the latter is the case, I have title to some swampland which I'd
>> >> > like to sell him.
>> >> >
>> >> > The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>> >> > supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>> >> > yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>> >> > and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an anecdotal
>> >> > fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>> >> > evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>> >> > individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>> >> > details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>> >> > father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>> >> > Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>> >> >
>> >> >> See...this is the problem with trying to discuss these issues with
>> >> >> some folks.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If someone disagrees with you, he must be mentally ill.  Or, maybe
>> >> >> he works for the insurance or oil companies.  Or he has been
>> >> >> brainwashed by Rush and Fox News (as Browning stated earlier in
>> >> >> this thread).  Or, dog gone it, he just isn't as bright as Mr.
>> >> >> Wentz here, who apparently has it all figured out.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Liberals are all about diversity, until someone has a differing
>> >> >> opinion.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Gary
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ________________________________
>> >> >> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
>> >> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>> >> >> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2009 6:30:14 PM
>> >> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I talked with a guy yesterday that was quite healthy but he could
>> >> >>> not get
>> >> >>> insurance anywhere due to pre existing issues. Wife with Asthma and
>> >> >>> he had
>> >> >>> migraines and such.
>> >> >>> Yet he was against this government plan.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You didn't mention his mental health...
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > GroveNet mailing list
>> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > GroveNet mailing list
>> >> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> GroveNet mailing list
>> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > GroveNet mailing list
>> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From edavie at verizon.net  Mon Aug 17 16:12:43 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:12:43 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<567DF9C203404D5AA68FF6295BF25928@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <8FA1F3B744C34F92B40489C1F4FBC1BB@EDavie>

We'll see how my insurance works. I'm about to 
receive a pacemaker.
Ed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Geri
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:50 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


  Thanks, the House bill ... Was out of town a few 
days; trying to catch up a bit.

  Geri

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
  To: "Forest Grove local interests list" 
<grovenet at rdrop.com>
  Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective



From isis23ra at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 17 16:20:01 2009
From: isis23ra at yahoo.com (Alana Graham)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:20:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Fest.Music & Art: 9/11-9/12/09: U R invited!
In-Reply-To: <8FA1F3B744C34F92B40489C1F4FBC1BB@EDavie>
Message-ID: <983756.48343.qm@web55607.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

PACIFIC UNIVERSITY?S SECOND ANNUAL
MENSCH:  FESTIVAL OF MUSIC AND ART
Sustaining a Planet
www.pacificu.edu/academics/gender-equity/

September 11     6:00 to 10:00 pm
September 12     noon to 10:00 pm

Sponsored by: 

Center for Gender Equity (CGE)
ACE Board
Forest Grove Public Arts Commission

The MENSCH Festival of Music and Art is a two-day music and arts festival designed to promote civic awareness of various issues through music, art, displays, booths, installations, and demonstrations.  

This year?s focus for MENSCH is global and local sustainability.  

Mensch is a German word for a fundamentally decent, upright, caring and globally aware human being, and these are the qualities the festival fosters.  It is a positive, artistic expression of personal and communal responsibility and commitment to the life of the planet.

MENSCH provides a variety of Pacific and community groups, clubs, and organizations a platform to express their commitment to sustainability and a space for staff, students and community members to gather, mingle, have a good time, and gain awareness of ecological issues while listening to great music.  

Some of the groups performing are BLUE SCHOLARS, SNUBB FAM, THE CHENGS, TALKDEMONIC and WILLIAM ?LAMZ? HARRIS.  Open mic session, Saturday 1:00 ? 3:00, and Slam Poetry, Saturday 5:00 - 7:00.

Any organization or group that wishes to participate will be provided an outdoor 10? by 10? square.  The square may be used for a variety of purposes.   

A group can express itself artistically by installing, hanging, or performing art germane to the sustainability theme of the MENSCH Festival.  

The square can also be used to provide an interactive social or learning experience.  For example, a group might wish to organize a hands-on short lesson on canning fruit or planting vegetables.  

Local non-profit organizations that share the mission of CGE and the festival are encouraged to provide booths to distribute information and fund-raise if they wish.  Those who have a space must commit to staffing it the entire duration of the festival.   

Come, join us, have fun and be a MENSCH!

Participant Form 

Name ____________________________________________________
E-mail ____________________________________________________
Organization _______________________________________________
Relation to University (if applicable):  Undergraduate Student ________
Graduate Student _______ Staff ______ Faculty_______  Alumni ______

Address  ????_____________________________________________
Phone _______________________________________________


Proposed Participation:   Art Instillation __________  Musical Performance _________
                                        Theatrical Performance ____________   Sales Booth _________
                                         Informational Booth _________
Summary of Participation __________________________________________________
                                         __________________________________________________
                                         ___________________________________________________
                                         ___________________________________________________
                                         ___________________________________________________

Set up Times:  Friday, September 11:  4:00 to 6:00
                        Saturday, September 12:  10:00 to noon

There will be a ?Best MENSCH? contest.  $100.00 prize for the ?square? that best demonstrates the theme of the festival:  sustainability.

Cost of booth space for those selling products:  $35.00.  Send application and check (if applicable) made out to Pacific University to M. Rampton at 2043 College Way, Forest Grove, Oregon  97116, by September 4th.  Space is limited: first come first served.
For more information contact Celeste Goulding at celeste at pacificu.edu.
  
Dr. Martha Rampton
Professor of History
Director-Center for Gender Equity
Pacific University
2043 College Way
Forest Grove, Oregon  97116
Phone: 503 352 2772
Fax:     503 352 3195


      


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Mon Aug 17 16:24:22 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:24:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net><567DF9C203404D5AA68FF6295BF25928@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<8FA1F3B744C34F92B40489C1F4FBC1BB@EDavie>
Message-ID: <95B0CE3DDB58480690576814E77319B5@gerianehzkfhvy>

Ed, good wishes for the pacemaker ... and the insurance!

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective


> We'll see how my insurance works. I'm about to 
> receive a pacemaker.
> Ed
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Geri
>  To: Forest Grove local interests list
>  Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:50 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 
> 
>  Thanks, the House bill ... Was out of town a few 
> days; trying to catch up a bit.
> 
>  Geri
> 
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
>  To: "Forest Grove local interests list" 
> <grovenet at rdrop.com>
>  Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 3:32 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Mon Aug 17 16:54:33 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:54:33 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Can you speak Katt?
Message-ID: <13401-4A89EDB9-711@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32179095/ns/health-pet_health/


From allnutt at verizon.net  Mon Aug 17 16:55:16 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:55:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <8C4A20EA-BA96-4B1A-991E-A9D5E720BEA4@verizon.net>

Be still my heart. I am agreeing with Steven twice in one day.  If  
your pacemaker is a good one Ed, can I plug into it too the next time  
Steve and I agree? I'm not sure I could survive a third time...  ; )

The reason why the solution in congress doesn't make sense is because  
it is protecting the power of the powerful insurance conglomerates  
who want to use our DNA to cherry pick the healthiest.  And one of  
the original drivers of health care reform was to decouple it from  
employers.  And if it was a single payer system you would be paying  
for it with your premiums that were truly spreading the liability.

Katie
PS Of course now Steve and I will have to disagree on whether he has  
come around to agree with me or I have come around to agree with him  
but I already know the answer to that one....badabing!


On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Steven wrote:

> I am seeking some solution here that makes more sense than congress.
> We started down this road when a non smoker could get cheaper  
> insurance than
> a smoker. When we can see into everyone's DNA, then a picky  
> insurance could
> just nit pick the healthiest folks. That isn't really spreading the
> liability.
>
> I would love to see the DNA information used to treat our  
> illnesses, not
> just
> to ID a perpetrator or decide who to let in to the insurance club.
> I don't like insurance tied to the employer. If we see our bills,  
> we are
> better capable to shop and save. If someone else is paying for it,  
> I'll have
> the steak and lobster.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:41 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive idea of
>> single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing
>> by the way.
>> And coming from Steven blows me away.
>> But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I
>> want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance
>> provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little
>> coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help make
>> it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a
>> referee be that would be answerable to the people?
>>
>> Katie
>>
>>
>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt  
>>> the
>>> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
>>> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group
>>> coverage)
>>> was his solution.
>>> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,
>>> sick, and so
>>> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what
>>> you want
>>> covered.
>>> I can agree with that.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>>>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>>>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>>>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an  
>>>> anecdotal
>>>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>>>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>>>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>>>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>>>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>>>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 17 18:08:01 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:08:01 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNKEDKMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <EB4579CA-B7FB-4C46-8BFD-5B07FED20C6E@teleport.com>

Makes good sense. If we pick only the healthiest individuals to  
insure against high-cost medical care, then it amounts to a sort of  
de-facto eugenics. Only a small percentage of the population really  
has robust health, almost everyone has at least a few health issues,  
and many have "preexisting conditions," serious or trivial, that can  
presently be used as an pretext for refusing coverage.
At the very least, all persons who live a healthy lifestyle, within  
the limits of their preexisting conditions, should be encouraged by  
reasonable rates. Since nobody can choose his own DNA, it seems only  
just that DNA should never be allowed as a basis for deciding coverage.
Which leaves one serious question: should people who voluntarily lead  
unhealthy lifestyles--smokers, alcoholics or other drug abusers-- be  
encouraged to weigh down everyone else in the insurance pool with  
their own additional medical expenses? Or should they go into a  
higher-rate pool, to be rewarded by promotion to a lower-rate pool if  
they can improve their prospects by adopting a healthier lifestyle?
You see, the devil is in the details. Absolute fairness may in fact  
be unfair.
WW
On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Steven wrote:

> I am seeking some solution here that makes more sense than congress.
> We started down this road when a non smoker could get cheaper  
> insurance than
> a smoker. When we can see into everyone's DNA, then a picky  
> insurance could
> just nit pick the healthiest folks. That isn't really spreading the
> liability.
>
> I would love to see the DNA information used to treat our  
> illnesses, not
> just
> to ID a perpetrator or decide who to let in to the insurance club.
> I don't like insurance tied to the employer. If we see our bills,  
> we are
> better capable to shop and save. If someone else is paying for it,  
> I'll have
> the steak and lobster.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:41 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive idea of
>> single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing
>> by the way.
>> And coming from Steven blows me away.
>> But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I
>> want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance
>> provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little
>> coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help make
>> it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a
>> referee be that would be answerable to the people?
>>
>> Katie
>>
>>
>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt  
>>> the
>>> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
>>> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group
>>> coverage)
>>> was his solution.
>>> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,
>>> sick, and so
>>> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what
>>> you want
>>> covered.
>>> I can agree with that.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
>>>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
>>>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
>>>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an  
>>>> anecdotal
>>>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>>>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>>>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>>>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>>>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>>>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 06:13:44 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:13:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Can you speak Katt?
References: <13401-4A89EDB9-711@storefull-3172.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <FA5FE589CDC94620A0FE3BF6530995DE@gerianehzkfhvy>

;-) Alan, my cat already "told" me this!

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss" <OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net>
To: <GroveNet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 4:54 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Can you speak Katt?


> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32179095/ns/health-pet_health/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 08:37:06 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:37:06 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <EB4579CA-B7FB-4C46-8BFD-5B07FED20C6E@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEDMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Watch it Walt. You are treading on the Right wing zone.
Just what the seniors are thinking. Cost cutting with medical expenses
is choosing to do less care. Those that will need more care, seniors, will
be the ones cut short. To be cut short means early death for seniors.
Thus the whole End of Life consultation that has been shouted about.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:08 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> 
> 
> Makes good sense. If we pick only the healthiest individuals to  
> insure against high-cost medical care, then it amounts to a sort of  
> de-facto eugenics. Only a small percentage of the population really  
> has robust health, almost everyone has at least a few health issues,  
> and many have "preexisting conditions," serious or trivial, that can  
> presently be used as an pretext for refusing coverage.
> At the very least, all persons who live a healthy lifestyle, within  
> the limits of their preexisting conditions, should be encouraged by  
> reasonable rates. Since nobody can choose his own DNA, it seems only  
> just that DNA should never be allowed as a basis for deciding coverage.
> Which leaves one serious question: should people who voluntarily lead  
> unhealthy lifestyles--smokers, alcoholics or other drug abusers-- be  
> encouraged to weigh down everyone else in the insurance pool with  
> their own additional medical expenses? Or should they go into a  
> higher-rate pool, to be rewarded by promotion to a lower-rate pool if  
> they can improve their prospects by adopting a healthier lifestyle?
> You see, the devil is in the details. Absolute fairness may in fact  
> be unfair.
> WW
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > I am seeking some solution here that makes more sense than congress.
> > We started down this road when a non smoker could get cheaper  
> > insurance than
> > a smoker. When we can see into everyone's DNA, then a picky  
> > insurance could
> > just nit pick the healthiest folks. That isn't really spreading the
> > liability.
> >
> > I would love to see the DNA information used to treat our  
> > illnesses, not
> > just
> > to ID a perpetrator or decide who to let in to the insurance club.
> > I don't like insurance tied to the employer. If we see our bills,  
> > we are
> > better capable to shop and save. If someone else is paying for it,  
> > I'll have
> > the steak and lobster.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> >> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> >> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:41 PM
> >> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>
> >>
> >> I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive idea of
> >> single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing
> >> by the way.
> >> And coming from Steven blows me away.
> >> But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I
> >> want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance
> >> provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little
> >> coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help make
> >> it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a
> >> referee be that would be answerable to the people?
> >>
> >> Katie
> >>
> >>
> >> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:
> >>
> >>> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt  
> >>> the
> >>> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
> >>> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group
> >>> coverage)
> >>> was his solution.
> >>> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,
> >>> sick, and so
> >>> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what
> >>> you want
> >>> covered.
> >>> I can agree with that.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
> >>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
> >>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
> >>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
> >>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except that he
> >>>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and uninsurable),
> >>>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the sick
> >>>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an  
> >>>> anecdotal
> >>>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
> >>>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
> >>>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
> >>>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
> >>>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
> >>>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GroveNet mailing list
> >>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GroveNet mailing list
> >> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> >> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GroveNet mailing list
> > GroveNet at rdrop.com
> > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 

From waltw at teleport.com  Tue Aug 18 09:55:39 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:55:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEDMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEDMMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <D6E75E10-AC12-4BF7-A912-075A093B328C@teleport.com>

Rather a wide leap of assumption, Steven. In fact you'd have to flap  
your arms, squeeze your eyes shut  and think wonderful thoughts to  
get from one side to the other. People do not choose to get older.  
People DO choose to smoke/drink/use dope, despite generations of  
warnings and widely-demonstrated evidence of what it does to your  
health (and your personal finances).  Neither do insane people choose  
to be insane, widowed mothers choose to be widowed, nor orphans  
choose to be orphans. The benefits of good health care should be  
available at reasonable rates those who cannot fight tooth and nail  
for them, as is the ideal of the neo-Darwinian apologists of  
"unfettered capitalism," who declare that the poor or unfortunate are  
responsible for their own plight and it's just tough if they can't  
afford insurance.
To limit ourselves to one category:  most old people have spent their  
lives contributing to society and to the national economy. They have  
earned care, respect and consideration, even if they often don't  
receive them in this society.  Consequently, older people may be  
insecure, fearful of change and declining in mental clarity, and thus  
can be easily manipulated by demagogues like Rush Limbaugh and  
dimwits like Sarah Palin, who have only to cook up some fantasy like  
"death panels" to start an unthinking panic (cf. that elderly lady  
who screamed at the President, "Keep the government out of my  
Medicare," or the local Medicare recipients who booed Congressman Wu  
when he pointed out that Medicare is a government program). Show me  
any passage in any of the proposed bills that advocate, or even  
imply, those "death panels." Go ahead, I'll wait. Thanks to those  
persistent distortions (to speak charitably of them), the proposal  
for insurance-covered end-of-life counseling, an eminently kindly   
and practical measure, has been pulled out of the health-reform  
legislation.
Now-- back to my original question, as to people who risk health  
problems by their own chosen behavior. Should they go into the  
"general" insurance pool, to be carried on the backs of all those  
who, whether old or merely unfortunate, still are doing their best in  
spite of all their other burdens?
Or should people who voluntarily court addiction and death also risk  
higher insurance rates, by going into an insurance pool that reflects  
their increased health risks?
And yet-- and yet-- addiction is largely involuntary, once  
established. Like I say, the devil is in the details. When does  
fairness become unfair?

> Watch it Walt. You are treading on the Right wing zone.
> Just what the seniors are thinking. Cost cutting with medical expenses
> is choosing to do less care. Those that will need more care,  
> seniors, will
> be the ones cut short. To be cut short means early death for seniors.
> Thus the whole End of Life consultation that has been shouted about.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 6:08 PM
>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>
>>
>> Makes good sense. If we pick only the healthiest individuals to
>> insure against high-cost medical care, then it amounts to a sort of
>> de-facto eugenics. Only a small percentage of the population really
>> has robust health, almost everyone has at least a few health issues,
>> and many have "preexisting conditions," serious or trivial, that can
>> presently be used as an pretext for refusing coverage.
>> At the very least, all persons who live a healthy lifestyle, within
>> the limits of their preexisting conditions, should be encouraged by
>> reasonable rates. Since nobody can choose his own DNA, it seems only
>> just that DNA should never be allowed as a basis for deciding  
>> coverage.
>> Which leaves one serious question: should people who voluntarily lead
>> unhealthy lifestyles--smokers, alcoholics or other drug abusers-- be
>> encouraged to weigh down everyone else in the insurance pool with
>> their own additional medical expenses? Or should they go into a
>> higher-rate pool, to be rewarded by promotion to a lower-rate pool if
>> they can improve their prospects by adopting a healthier lifestyle?
>> You see, the devil is in the details. Absolute fairness may in fact
>> be unfair.
>> WW
>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:32 PM, Steven wrote:
>>
>>> I am seeking some solution here that makes more sense than congress.
>>> We started down this road when a non smoker could get cheaper
>>> insurance than
>>> a smoker. When we can see into everyone's DNA, then a picky
>>> insurance could
>>> just nit pick the healthiest folks. That isn't really spreading the
>>> liability.
>>>
>>> I would love to see the DNA information used to treat our
>>> illnesses, not
>>> just
>>> to ID a perpetrator or decide who to let in to the insurance club.
>>> I don't like insurance tied to the employer. If we see our bills,
>>> we are
>>> better capable to shop and save. If someone else is paying for it,
>>> I'll have
>>> the steak and lobster.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 12:41 PM
>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I can't believe my eyes.  This is so close to the progressive  
>>>> idea of
>>>> single payer that it reeks of liberalism.  Which is not a bad thing
>>>> by the way.
>>>> And coming from Steven blows me away.
>>>> But the catch to this might be that I want to pay very little and I
>>>> want just about everything covered.  And I'm sure the insurance
>>>> provider would want me to pay as much as possible for as little
>>>> coverage as possible so there might need to be a referee to help  
>>>> make
>>>> it fair, transparent, and not a ponzi scheme. Who could such a
>>>> referee be that would be answerable to the people?
>>>>
>>>> Katie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Didn't I say that he had healthcare through his employer? He felt
>>>>> the
>>>>> best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
>>>>> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group
>>>>> coverage)
>>>>> was his solution.
>>>>> I could see that. Dump the whole idea of filtering out the old,
>>>>> sick, and so
>>>>> forth. Make the coverage based on what you want to pay, and what
>>>>> you want
>>>>> covered.
>>>>> I can agree with that.
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-
>>>>>> bounces at rdrop.com]On
>>>>>> Behalf Of Walt Wentz
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:19 AM
>>>>>> To: Forest Grove local interests list
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Another perspective
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point is, we know NOTHING about this individual, except  
>>>>>> that he
>>>>>> supposedly is in an all-too-typical bind (sickly and  
>>>>>> uninsurable),
>>>>>> yet he opposes the government plan to provide coverage for the  
>>>>>> sick
>>>>>> and uninsurable. Nothing more is revealed... it is just an
>>>>>> anecdotal
>>>>>> fragment that is supposed to "prove" something, but offers no
>>>>>> evidence, no explanation of WHY this unfortunate and endangered
>>>>>> individual opposes the government plan. Absent these essential
>>>>>> details, it is no more useful to the discussion than "my uncle's
>>>>>> father's friend knows a guy who said his cousin's doctor says..."
>>>>>> Walt (Somefolks) Wentz
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GroveNet mailing list
>>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 10:12:44 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:12:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Darpa autonomous automobile grand challenge
Message-ID: <D3CCCC95-D9D0-492C-9E7E-ACDF063B68DF@verizon.net>

http://www.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/index.asp

Will we ever have robots driving on our streets?  And will it be safer?

After the challenge was over, there were less damage than a typical  
NASCAR race. <smile>

David



From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 11:21:34 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:21:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Another perspective
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNMEDGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <CE4F5A36-E779-4554-9851-AA0DA2979510@verizon.net>

Our competitors in the world economy do that.  Our manufacturing jobs  
are saddled with the health care cost as they try to compete.  That  
stands as an argument for something different.

The options would appear to be individual health care with individual  
costing based upon the conditions of the insured, or large group  
health care through some non-employer organization based upon the  
statistical conditions of the population.

If the coverage agency is allowed to dictate the conditions of the  
population they accept, we have the current private insurance situation.

It is possible to distinguish between client generated conditions  
( smoking, drinking, unprotected sex, voluntary drug consumption,  
etc.) and involuntary client conditions ( age, gender, genetic  
makeup, etc.).  It remains an issue on dealing with work related  
conditions ( asbestos, black lung, injury, combat stress, etc.).

If this was simple, the answer would not be open to question.

If everyone was capable of being a "good Samaritan" it might not be  
an issue.  But, we are more like the others in that story.  The same  
story today might present Rush Limbaugh and Ted Kennedy in the two  
main roles.

David

On Aug 17, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Steven wrote:

> ... He felt the best solution was to remove healthcare from jobs.
> Just put us all in one large 'group' (as in employer based group  
> coverage) was his solution.


From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 18 11:52:15 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:52:15 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] How 10 digits will end privacy as we know it
Message-ID: <4A8AF85F.5040008@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cnet_header.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2144 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: adclose-replay_top-bar12x120.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 185 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dotclear.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment-0001.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dotclear.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment-0002.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 080214_hiring.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 21359 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment-0001.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: blog_ari_juels_60x60.png
Type: image/png
Size: 7209 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090818/7bcb7788/attachment.png 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 13:12:47 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:12:47 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
Message-ID: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>

Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
Link to article follows.
Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who  
have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are  
innocent.
No empathy in Scalia for sure.

Katie




Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the  
innocent.

Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder  
and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him  
have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated  
Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the  
shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be  
innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court  
today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to  
challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in  
dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues  
for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution  
of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is  
later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that  
question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any  
claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally  
cognizable.



http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw

From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 18 13:35:33 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:35:33 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
References: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <4A8B1095.4010506@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090818/a572d6fa/attachment.html 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 13:41:02 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:41:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
References: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <C563946E4975487FAD5F37494141C614@gerianehzkfhvy>

And a few still cried out against the "empathy" that
was attributed to Sotomayor, or that the Prez
wanted that attribute in a Supreme.

Plus our justice system is *supposed* to be set up
with many protections and rights for the accused, the
prosecution has the burden of proof, guilt must be found
beyond a reasonable doubt, etc., so that the innocent
are not convicted!


Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katie Allnutt" <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:12 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect


Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
Link to article follows.
Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who  
have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are  
innocent.
No empathy in Scalia for sure.

Katie




Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the  
innocent.

Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder  
and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him  
have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated  
Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the  
shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be  
innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court  
today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to  
challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in  
dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues  
for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution  
of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is  
later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that  
question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any  
claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally  
cognizable.



http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 18 13:40:51 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
References: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <103365.9900.qm@web112106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Statements such as Scalia's make me wonder if Justice Scalia, possibly even Justice Thomas, is/are simply out of touch with common sense.  As just witnessed in Justice Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, so many legislators stated they want Justice's who make judgments based on the Constitution and Rule of Law.

If someone attempted to write the Constitution today, I have every belief it would be at least 100x longer than the Original.  Can you imagine the conversation Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams might have had on this subject?
    Adams: "Tom, I think we should be more explicit and note that if a legally convicted person while serving their sentence is later found to be irrefutably innocent with clear and sound evidence, then that person is forbidden from being executed and must be immediately released from imprisonment."
    Jefferson: "John, we do not have to explicitly state EVERYTHING.  Have faith in our fair citizens being able to use their common sense and make the right decision without us having to spell out every little detail in this document".

 
Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:12:47 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect

Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
Link to article follows.
Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who  
have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are  
innocent.
No empathy in Scalia for sure.

Katie




Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the  
innocent.

Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder  
and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him  
have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated  
Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the  
shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be  
innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court  
today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to  
challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in  
dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues  
for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution  
of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is  
later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that  
question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any  
claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally  
cognizable.



http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 14:16:37 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:16:37 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
References: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
	<103365.9900.qm@web112106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <339EB8AFE4F44019BC1F255FCB27F8C6@gerianehzkfhvy>

:-D  Too true, Allen!

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Allen Warren" <osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect


> Statements such as Scalia's make me wonder if Justice Scalia, possibly even Justice Thomas, is/are simply out of touch with common sense.  As just witnessed in Justice Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, so many legislators stated they want Justice's who make judgments based on the Constitution and Rule of Law.
> 
> If someone attempted to write the Constitution today, I have every belief it would be at least 100x longer than the Original.  Can you imagine the conversation Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams might have had on this subject?
>    Adams: "Tom, I think we should be more explicit and note that if a legally convicted person while serving their sentence is later found to be irrefutably innocent with clear and sound evidence, then that person is forbidden from being executed and must be immediately released from imprisonment."
>    Jefferson: "John, we do not have to explicitly state EVERYTHING.  Have faith in our fair citizens being able to use their common sense and make the right decision without us having to spell out every little detail in this document".
> 
> 
> Allen Warren
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Katie Allnutt <allnutt at verizon.net>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:12:47 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
> 
> Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
> Link to article follows.
> Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who  
> have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are  
> innocent.
> No empathy in Scalia for sure.
> 
> Katie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the  
> innocent.
> 
> Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder  
> and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him  
> have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated  
> Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the  
> shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be  
> innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court  
> today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to  
> challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in  
> dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues  
> for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:
> 
> This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution  
> of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is  
> later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
> innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that  
> question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any  
> claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally  
> cognizable.
> 
> 
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 18 14:47:03 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:47:03 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
Message-ID: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090818/bf7d8e5c/attachment.html 

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 15:15:47 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:15:47 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
In-Reply-To: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
References: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <AAA9DC03-565E-4ABB-A11C-353C8DCFECB6@verizon.net>

Nice looking group of soldiers there Bob.
And the guy 7th from the left in the front row looks good too.

All our best to the families of those who serve.  It is a tough job.

Like W. T. Sherman said, "War is Hell" and I'll add that it never  
ends soon enough.

We will pray that they have some cool weather in the rest of August.  
I can't imagine how hot it must be for those guys and how gritty and  
dusty.  The relentlessness of the whole situation is mind boggling to  
me.

Katie



On Aug 18, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Bob Browning wrote:

> Here's a picture with my son Stefan (Forest Grove High Class of  
> 1990). He is a Captain in the US Marine Corps. He has been in the  
> Corps since February of 1992 (17 years!!) and is currently  
> stationed in Virginia Beach, Virginia. However, he is currently  
> deployed to Iraq with the 4th Marine Air Wing, 48th Marine Air  
> Command Group, 24th Marine Air Command Squadron. He will be there  
> until March or April 2010. By then, all of the Marines are supposed  
> to be out of Iraq (though they are being redeployed to Afghanistan  
> as fast as they become available). The only advantage he has now is  
> that there are very few Marine air elements in Afghanistan!!
>
> http://www.mfr.usmc.mil/4thmaw/macg48/macs24/
>
> Click on the photo twice to blow it up to face-readable  
> proportions. He is seventh from the left in the front row.
>
> Oh, well. Enough for now. Semper fi!!  Hoo-ah!!
>
> bob "pray that he and all his people get home safely" browning
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From k.wilke at mac.com  Tue Aug 18 16:57:39 2009
From: k.wilke at mac.com (Kurt Wilke)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:57:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
Message-ID: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com>

Hi all:

I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking  
for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.

Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to  
add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.

Thanks

Kurt

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 18 17:05:50 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] shrub trimming recommendation
Message-ID: <720182.62343.qm@web112119.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I have some shrubs in need of trimming.  Any recommendations?

 
Allen Warren



      

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 17:16:44 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:16:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
References: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com>
Message-ID: <58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>

Tree guy:  David Hunter 
              503-319-0380

Electrician? Could use one, too!


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kurt Wilke" <k.wilke at mac.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:57 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican


> Hi all:
> 
> I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking  
> for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.
> 
> Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to  
> add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From jim at benchmarkinspections.com  Tue Aug 18 17:22:50 2009
From: jim at benchmarkinspections.com (Jim Katen)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:22:50 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
In-Reply-To: <58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com>
	<58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <4A3EDFDFF93E440F85B55EBEA92E0EDF@JimDell>

Anyone who needs an electrician should call Jay Bentley at 503 985-9500. 
He's a good man who does good work. 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Geri
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:17 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican

Tree guy:  David Hunter 
              503-319-0380

Electrician? Could use one, too!


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kurt Wilke" <k.wilke at mac.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:57 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican


> Hi all:
> 
> I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking  
> for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.
> 
> Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to  
> add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 17:27:11 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:27:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
References: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com><58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<4A3EDFDFF93E440F85B55EBEA92E0EDF@JimDell>
Message-ID: <8729D6B4CE2C42DB89EF6AE3AAEEA79B@gerianehzkfhvy>

Thanks for the rec, Jim!


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Katen" <jim at benchmarkinspections.com>
To: "'Forest Grove local interests list'" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican


> Anyone who needs an electrician should call Jay Bentley at 503 985-9500. 
> He's a good man who does good work. 
> 
> - Jim Katen
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:17 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
> 
> Tree guy:  David Hunter 
>              503-319-0380
> 
> Electrician? Could use one, too!
> 
> 
> Geri
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kurt Wilke" <k.wilke at mac.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:57 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
> 
> 
>> Hi all:
>> 
>> I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking  
>> for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.
>> 
>> Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to  
>> add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Kurt
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From Leslie.Neyman at pobox.com  Tue Aug 18 17:30:39 2009
From: Leslie.Neyman at pobox.com (Leslie.Neyman)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:30:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrician
In-Reply-To: <58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
References: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com>
	<58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
Message-ID: <4BBF32EAA3B345F994C0BB99DF6EF443@Office>

Kurt & Allen,

I also recommend David Hunter. A&J Electric (I liked Sean the best-he's a
former next door neighbor. Great electrician and very nice guy, easy to work
with) 503-359-5891

Good luck!

Leslie


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Geri
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:17 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican

Tree guy:  David Hunter 
              503-319-0380

Electrician? Could use one, too!


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kurt Wilke" <k.wilke at mac.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:57 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican


> Hi all:
> 
> I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking  
> for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.
> 
> Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to  
> add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From edavie at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 17:35:05 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:35:05 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
References: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <BCDD70C2AF3C4A3D88A423C2CE4999D5@EDavie>

Amen!

Ed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Browning
  To: Grovenet
  Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 2:47 PM
  Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan


  Here's a picture with my son Stefan (Forest 
Grove High Class of 1990). He is a Captain in the 
US Marine Corps. He has been in the Corps since 
February of 1992 (17 years!!) and is currently 
stationed in Virginia Beach, Virginia. However, he 
is currently deployed to Iraq with the 4th Marine 
Air Wing, 48th Marine Air Command Group, 24th 
Marine Air Command Squadron. He will be there 
until March or April 2010. By then, all of the 
Marines are supposed to be out of Iraq (though 
they are being redeployed to Afghanistan as fast 
as they become available). The only advantage he 
has now is that there are very few Marine air 
elements in Afghanistan!!

  http://www.mfr.usmc.mil/4thmaw/macg48/macs24/

  Click on the photo twice to blow it up to 
face-readable proportions. He is seventh from the 
left in the front row.

  Oh, well. Enough for now. Semper fi!!  Hoo-ah!!

  bob "pray that he and all his people get home 
safely" browning





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From allnutt at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 17:48:31 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:48:31 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
In-Reply-To: <4A3EDFDFF93E440F85B55EBEA92E0EDF@JimDell>
References: <95177A4B-DEED-4D1B-9184-09CC1A33F767@mac.com>
	<58AA4B721CEC4C4C8924317E0C16A776@gerianehzkfhvy>
	<4A3EDFDFF93E440F85B55EBEA92E0EDF@JimDell>
Message-ID: <94E47BCE-074F-446D-B921-957751D7570B@verizon.net>

I was going to say Jay Bentley too.

I haven't had David Hunter do any work for us but lots of people have  
said they like him.

Katie



On Aug 18, 2009, at 5:22 PM, Jim Katen wrote:

> Anyone who needs an electrician should call Jay Bentley at 503  
> 985-9500.
> He's a good man who does good work.
>
> - Jim Katen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet- 
> bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Geri
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:17 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
>
> Tree guy:  David Hunter
>               503-319-0380
>
> Electrician? Could use one, too!
>
>
> Geri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kurt Wilke" <k.wilke at mac.com>
> To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:57 PM
> Subject: [Grovenet] Tree guy and Electrican
>
>
>> Hi all:
>>
>> I inadvertently deleted the post regarding the tree guy. I'm looking
>> for someone to do some trimming and stump removal.
>>
>> Also I'm looking for an electrician. Any recommendations?  I want to
>> add several outlets and redo some work that the previous owner's did.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Kurt
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 18:13:18 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:13:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
References: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
	<BCDD70C2AF3C4A3D88A423C2CE4999D5@EDavie>
Message-ID: <8B8BA3CEB81444FA8460DA82C9544E7C@gerianehzkfhvy>

I second that!

And thanks for sharing that, Bob.

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] My son Stefan


> Amen!
> 
> Ed
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Bob Browning
>  To: Grovenet
>  Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 2:47 PM
>  Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
> 
> 
>  Here's a picture with my son Stefan (Forest 
> Grove High Class of 1990). He is a Captain in the 
> US Marine Corps. He has been in the Corps since 
> February of 1992 (17 years!!) and is currently 
> stationed in Virginia Beach, Virginia. However, he 
> is currently deployed to Iraq with the 4th Marine 
> Air Wing, 48th Marine Air Command Group, 24th 
> Marine Air Command Squadron. He will be there 
> until March or April 2010. By then, all of the 
> Marines are supposed to be out of Iraq (though 
> they are being redeployed to Afghanistan as fast 
> as they become available). The only advantage he 
> has now is that there are very few Marine air 
> elements in Afghanistan!!
> 
>  http://www.mfr.usmc.mil/4thmaw/macg48/macs24/
> 
>  Click on the photo twice to blow it up to 
> face-readable proportions. He is seventh from the 
> left in the front row.
> 
>  Oh, well. Enough for now. Semper fi!!  Hoo-ah!!
> 
>  bob "pray that he and all his people get home 
> safely" browning
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  _______________________________________________
>  GroveNet mailing list
>  GroveNet at rdrop.com
>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 18 21:11:02 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:11:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <642AE85F-762D-4A54-AFC8-30148872F585@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

OK, I'm trying to understand this.
Could it be that you are innocent until proven guilty.
So once proven guilty, you would need to be proven innocent beyond a
reasonable doubt?
Or that our courts would require another trial process to change the
conviction.

We needed an amendment to state that slavery was abolished. We couldn't just
say it was and free the slaves by mere thought process alone.

In the opinion, I didn't see where Scalia said what Katie says. Could it
have been a
comment about euthanasia committees?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:13 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
>
>
> Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
> Link to article follows.
> Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who
> have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are
> innocent.
> No empathy in Scalia for sure.
>
> Katie
>
>
>
>
> Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the
> innocent.
>
> Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder
> and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him
> have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated
> Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the
> shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be
> innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court
> today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to
> challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in
> dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues
> for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:
>
> This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution
> of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is
> later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?
> innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that
> question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any
> claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally
> cognizable.
>
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 22:23:12 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:23:12 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <3B0DE5C4-EF7F-40CE-9F64-C5FC151421B7@verizon.net>

...This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the  
execution of a convicted de fendant who has had a full and fair trial  
but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that ques  
tion unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim  
based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitu tionally cognizable.   
page 2 last paragraph.



Amendment 6:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a  
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and  
district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district  
shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of  
the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the  
witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining  
witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his  
defence.

On Aug 18, 2009, at 9:11 PM, Steven wrote:

> ...
> In the opinion, I didn't see where Scalia said what Katie says.  
> Could it have been a comment about euthanasia committees?

Dissent, page 2, last paragraph.
"...This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the  
execution of a convicted de fendant who has had a full and fair trial  
but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?  
innocent. Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that ques  
tion unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim  
based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitu tionally cognizable.  "

Dissent, page 2, first new paragraph

"Federal courts may order the release of convicted state prisoners  
only in accordance with the restrictions imposed by the Antiterrorism  
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. See Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.  
S. 651, 662 (1996). Insofar as it applies to the present case, that  
statute bars the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ?with respect to  
any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court  
proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim . . . resulted in a  
decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable  
application of, clearly estab lished Federal law, as determined by  
the Supreme Court of the United States.? 28 U. S. C. ?2254(d)(1). "

I do not believe that the Supreme Court has ever overturned the 6th  
Amendment to the Constitution.

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a  
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and  
district wherein the crime shall have been committed, ... to be  
confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process  
for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of  
Counsel for his defence."

This may be a small point, but the testimony of witnesses is a  
significant part of court trials.  If the witness(es) have knowledge  
that would be in your favor, and they appear in court, and they  
choose to perjure themselves to obtain a conviction, then the process  
was insufficient to obtain witness(es) in his favor.

I understand that there is no statute of limitations on murder, so, I  
propose that this punishment should be delayed until the completion  
of the trial against the "actual shooter".  If they are convicted,  
then this individual should be retried for the appropriate crime ( if  
any ).

But, what do I know?

David





From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 22:27:18 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:27:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
In-Reply-To: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
References: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <C212E8A9-ECC4-4785-8F10-21E98C2ADAB2@verizon.net>


On Aug 18, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Bob Browning wrote:

> ...However, he is currently deployed to Iraq with the 4th Marine  
> Air Wing, 48th Marine Air Command Group, 24th Marine Air Command  
> Squadron. He will be there until March or April 2010. By then, all  
> of the Marines are supposed to be out of Iraq (though they are  
> being redeployed to Afghanistan as fast as they become available).  
> The only advantage he has now is that there are very few Marine air  
> elements in Afghanistan!!

As always, may all of his team come home complete and safe.

David

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 18 22:41:35 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <986590.49633.qm@web112114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I found the following Blog to explain all of this pretty well: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/hearing-on-innocence-claim-ordered/ 

 
Allen Warren

From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:11:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect

OK, I'm trying to understand this.
Could it be that you are innocent until proven guilty.
So once proven guilty, you would need to be proven innocent beyond a
reasonable doubt?
Or that our courts would require another trial process to change the
conviction.

We needed an amendment to state that slavery was abolished. We couldn't just
say it was and free the slaves by mere thought process alone.

In the opinion, I didn't see where Scalia said what Katie says. Could it
have been a
comment about euthanasia committees?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:13 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
>
>
> Here is one of many reasons why I am not a Scalia fan.
> Link to article follows.
> Since the constitution does not forbid killing innocent people who
> have had a trial, why don't we just ignore the fact that they are
> innocent.
> No empathy in Scalia for sure.
>
> Katie
>
>
>
>
> Scalia says there?s nothing unconstitutional about executing the
> innocent.
>
> Almost two decades ago, Troy Anthony Davis was convicted of murder
> and sentenced to die. Since then, seven of the witnesses against him
> have recanted their testimony, and some have even implicated
> Sylvester ?Redd? Coles, a witness who testified that Davis was the
> shooter. In light of the very real evidence that Davis could be
> innocent of the crime that placed him on death row, the Supreme Court
> today invoked a rarely used procedure giving Davis an opportunity to
> challenge his conviction. Joined by Justice Clarence Thomas in
> dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized his colleagues
> for thinking that mere innocence is grounds to overturn a conviction:
>
> This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution
> of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is
> later able to convince a habeas court that he is ?actually?
> innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that
> question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any
> claim based on alleged ?actual innocence? is constitutionally
> cognizable.
>
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/qwe6lw
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jo.david at verizon.net  Tue Aug 18 23:27:19 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:27:19 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <986590.49633.qm@web112114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<986590.49633.qm@web112114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4C76D164-BB02-4470-8527-C1F5BD8A9BE9@verizon.net>

In one point it says, "The Court order told the District Court to  
consider and rule upon ?whether evidence that could not have been  
obtained at the time of trial clearly established petitioner?s  
innocence.?

I stand by my observation that when someone with access to  
information that would identify the true killer, perjures  themselves  
under oath to identify an innocent person as the killer, then that  
evidence was willfully withheld by the witness, and it "could not  
have been obtained at the time of trial".

And the Supreme Court should act because the accused was not able to  
exercise his Constitutional right to "obtain witnesses in his favor".

David


On Aug 18, 2009, at 10:41 PM, Allen Warren wrote:

> I found the following Blog to explain all of this pretty well:  
> http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/hearing-on-innocence-claim-ordered/
>
>
> Allen Warren

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 19 07:20:23 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:20:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net><986590.49633.qm@web112114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<4C76D164-BB02-4470-8527-C1F5BD8A9BE9@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <FE512263907E4BB6A19AAD0F8B70411E@gerianehzkfhvy>

Well-said, David.

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Morelli" <jo.david at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect


In one point it says, "The Court order told the District Court to  
consider and rule upon ?whether evidence that could not have been  
obtained at the time of trial clearly established petitioner?s  
innocence.?

I stand by my observation that when someone with access to  
information that would identify the true killer, perjures  themselves  
under oath to identify an innocent person as the killer, then that  
evidence was willfully withheld by the witness, and it "could not  
have been obtained at the time of trial".

And the Supreme Court should act because the accused was not able to  
exercise his Constitutional right to "obtain witnesses in his favor".

David


On Aug 18, 2009, at 10:41 PM, Allen Warren wrote:

> I found the following Blog to explain all of this pretty well:  
> http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/hearing-on-innocence-claim-ordered/
>
>
> Allen Warren
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 19 07:56:07 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <4C76D164-BB02-4470-8527-C1F5BD8A9BE9@verizon.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEEBMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<986590.49633.qm@web112114.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<4C76D164-BB02-4470-8527-C1F5BD8A9BE9@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <956213.62255.qm@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

David, agreed.

Again, I "think" I understand Justice Scalia dissenting in that I "think" he believed he was following precedent and what he believes is the Rule of Law.  But as with any written document, no matter how well written, and the Constitution is amazingly well written, someone can read it and ask, "But what about this scenario?", and then folks look at the document and say, "well, it doesn't explicitly state yes or no on that subject . . .".

The Constitution, while an excellent document, was written by men influenced by events and history up to and including the year they wrote it.  They could not possibly comprehend and address all potential future events.  It was/is, IMHO, meant to be a guiding document.  And in the case of Monday's order, I sincerely believe that whereas Justice Scalia believed his dissent is justified, and even though I'm about as close to being a legal scholar as Jupiter is as close to our Sun, I think that Justice Scalia too narrowly interpreted this time.

Just my $0.02 worth (if it's even worth that much).  :-)

 
Allen Warren

From: David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:27:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect

In one point it says, "The Court order told the District Court to  
consider and rule upon ?whether evidence that could not have been  
obtained at the time of trial clearly established petitioner?s  
innocence.?

I stand by my observation that when someone with access to  
information that would identify the true killer, perjures  themselves  
under oath to identify an innocent person as the killer, then that  
evidence was willfully withheld by the witness, and it "could not  
have been obtained at the time of trial".

And the Supreme Court should act because the accused was not able to  
exercise his Constitutional right to "obtain witnesses in his favor".

David


On Aug 18, 2009, at 10:41 PM, Allen Warren wrote:

> I found the following Blog to explain all of this pretty well:  
> http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/hearing-on-innocence-claim-ordered/
>
>
> Allen Warren
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 19 08:43:45 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:43:45 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Let's just ignore the innocence aspect
In-Reply-To: <956213.62255.qm@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNIEEDMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Maybe the issue should be brought to a governor or president. It is the
judicial department to have a trial and decide if the guy is guilty or
innocent. 
Once found guilty, it is the responsibility of a governor or president to
pardon.
To set aside a decision would require another trial.
??

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 19 10:29:05 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:29:05 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Hungary remembers picnic that cracked Iron Curtain
Message-ID: <4A8C3661.1010703@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090819/fd1e74c0/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ma_nws_2.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2821 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090819/fd1e74c0/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ap_logo_106.png
Type: image/png
Size: 709 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090819/fd1e74c0/attachment.png 

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 19 11:05:16 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:05:16 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] My son Stefan
In-Reply-To: <BCDD70C2AF3C4A3D88A423C2CE4999D5@EDavie>
References: <4A8B2157.60807@jurislex.com>
	<BCDD70C2AF3C4A3D88A423C2CE4999D5@EDavie>
Message-ID: <4A8C3EDC.1040107@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090819/dafcc85d/attachment.html 

From rab at jurislex.com  Wed Aug 19 17:35:53 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:35:53 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just made 100 degrees in Forest Grove
Message-ID: <4A8C9A69.1040606@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090819/7e501987/attachment.html 

From edavie at verizon.net  Wed Aug 19 19:06:03 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:06:03 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Just made 100 degrees in Forest Grove
References: <4A8C9A69.1040606@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <14D68EF21DD946118573BB2841C4DACF@EDavie>

That's what I had here!
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Browning
  To: Grovenet
  Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 5:35 PM
  Subject: [Grovenet] Just made 100 degrees in 
Forest Grove


  According to WeatherBug, 100 degrees at 5:25 pm 
at Joseph Gale School here in Forest Grove ! ! !

  bob "whoo-whee" browning





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Thu Aug 20 11:45:36 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:45:36 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Five Surgeons
Message-ID: <909-4A8D99D0-3899@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>

Five Surgeons.
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Five surgeons from big cities are discussing who makes the Best patients
to operate on.
?????????????????????????????????????????????
The first surgeon, from New York , says, 'I like to see?accountants on
my operating table because when you open them up,everything inside is
numbered.'
?????????????????????????????????????????????????
The second, from Chicago , responds, 'Yeah, but you should
try?electricians! Everything inside them is color coded.'
??????
The third surgeon, from Dallas , says, 'No, I really think ?librarians
are the best, everything inside them is in alphabetical order.'
????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
The fourth surgeon, from Los Angeles  chimes in: 'You know, I?like
construction workers...Those guys always understand when you have a few
parts left over.'
??????????????????????????????????????????
But the fifth surgeon, from Washington , DC shut them all up when he
observed: 'You're all wrong. Politicians are the easiest to operate on.
There's no guts, no heart, no balls, no brains ,and no spine. Plus, the
head and the ass are
interchangeable.'??????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????



From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Thu Aug 20 12:06:18 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:06:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] For all the good cooks in the grove
Message-ID: <910-4A8D9EAA-3501@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>

http://www.diamondavid.com/bluejay/Sunrise/ucookin2.php


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 21 00:22:59 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:22:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Interesting NY Times Article About the Healthcare Debate
Message-ID: <623860.53593.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Interesting NY Times article below about the Swiss healthcare system and how similar to the Swiss system our US system could be.

Having grown up hearing about the evils of  "socialized medicine" from my Republican parents, I was surprised to learn, later in life, that I vastly preferred the Israeli medical system to that of the U.S. There, physicians are paid little more than teachers, and Israeli teachers are paid even less than their American counterparts. Even so, Jewish mothers still urge their sons (and daughters!) to become doctors. Just goes to show that you don't have to offer doctors exorbitant salaries to encourage people to enter the medical field. What you do have to offer, in my opinion, is subsidized schooling for physicians so that they don't come out of medical school with $100,000 in student loans. And, you put saner controls on all healthcare fees and amounts awarded for malpractice suits. And, you don't allow insurers to disqualify people because they have pre-existing conditions. And, you make sure that all Americans have access to quality healthcare,
 regardless of whether they can pay for it or not.

One other thing I learned while in Israel:  Their healthcare is not only cheaper than ours--it's better than ours. I had to go to the ER for a bladder infections once and I was shocked by how quickly and how expertly I was treated. I was also impressed when my kids got tonsillitis and had to go to a family doctor for care. Not only were the bills a fraction of the cost for comparable U.S. medical services, the medical care received in all cases was far superior.

I don't know about you, but I'll take that kind of "socialized medicine" over the American system any day.

Holly Tsur



--
August
17, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Swiss Menace 
By
PAUL KRUGMAN
It was the blooper heard round the world. In an editorial
denouncing Democratic health reform plans, Investor?s Business Daily tried to
frighten its readers by declaring that in Britain, where the government runs
health care, the handicapped physicist Stephen Hawking ?wouldn?t have a
chance,? because the National Health Service would consider his life
?essentially worthless.?
Professor Hawking, who was born in Britain, has lived there all
his life, and has been well cared for by the National Health Service, was not
amused.
Besides being vile and stupid, however, the editorial was beside the
point. Investor?s Business Daily would like you to believe that Obamacare would
turn America into Britain ? or, rather, a dystopian fantasy version of Britain.
The screamers on talk radio and Fox News would have you believe that the plan
is to turn America into the Soviet Union. But the truth is that the plans on
the table would, roughly speaking, turn America into Switzerland ? which may be
occupied by lederhosen-wearing holey-cheese eaters, but wasn?t a socialist
hellhole the last time I looked.
Let?s talk about health care around the advanced world.
Every wealthy country other than the United States guarantees
essential care to all its citizens. There are, however, wide variations in the
specifics, with three main approaches taken. 
In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs
the doctors. We?ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice;
these stories are false. Like every system, the National Health Service has
problems, but over all it appears to provide quite good care while spending
only about 40 percent as much per person as we do. By the way, our own Veterans
Health Administration, which is run somewhat like the British health service,
also manages to combine quality care with low costs.
The second route to universal coverage leaves the actual delivery
of health care in private hands, but the government pays most of the bills.
That?s how Canada and, in a more complex fashion, France do it. It?s also a
system familiar to most Americans, since even those of us not yet on Medicare
have parents and relatives who are.
Again, you hear a lot of horror stories about such systems, most
of them false. French health care is excellent. Canadians with chronic
conditions are more satisfied with their system than their U.S. counterparts.
And Medicare is highly popular, as evidenced by the tendency of town-hall
protesters to demand that the government keep its hands off the program.
Finally, the third route to universal coverage relies on private
insurance companies, using a combination of regulation and subsidies to ensure
that everyone is covered. Switzerland offers the clearest example: everyone is
required to buy insurance, insurers can?t discriminate based on medical history
or pre-existing conditions, and lower-income citizens get government help in
paying for their policies. 
In this country, the Massachusetts health reform more or less
follows the Swiss model; costs are running higher than expected, but the reform
has greatly reduced the number of uninsured. And the most common form of health
insurance in America, employment-based coverage, actually has some ?Swiss?
aspects: to avoid making benefits taxable, employers have to follow rules that
effectively rule out discrimination based on medical history and subsidize care
for lower-wage workers.
So where does Obamacare fit into all this? Basically, it?s a plan
to Swissify America, using regulation and subsidies to ensure universal
coverage..
If we were starting from scratch we probably wouldn?t have chosen
this route. True ?socialized medicine? would undoubtedly cost less, and a
straightforward extension of Medicare-type coverage to all Americans would
probably be cheaper than a Swiss-style system. That?s why I and others believe
that a true public option competing with private insurers is extremely
important: otherwise, rising costs could all too easily undermine the whole
effort. 
But a Swiss-style system of universal coverage would be a vast
improvement on what we have now. And we already know that such systems work. 
So we can do this. At this point, all that stands in the way of
universal health care in America are the greed of the medical-industrial
complex, the lies of the right-wing propaganda machine, and the gullibility of
voters who believe those lies.


      

From phoenixacup at gmail.com  Fri Aug 21 11:05:46 2009
From: phoenixacup at gmail.com (Jane Burch-Pesses)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 11:05:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Interesting NY Times Article About the Healthcare
	Debate
In-Reply-To: <623860.53593.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <623860.53593.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <d6eeab3d0908211105k3aa4f4a9r9871816e569831d9@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, Holly,
If you have seen the movie Sicko, it shows that many countries (Great
Britain, Canada, France and Cuba are included) have health care systems that
take care of their citizens' needs.  I know many people have a problem with
Michael Moore (It's the only movie of his I have seen) but as a health care
practitioner, it made me sad that we provide so little health care for our
citizens.  (And some parts of it are really funny to counteract the gloomier
parts.)

Jane B-P

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Holly T. <feralcattamer at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Interesting NY Times article below about the Swiss healthcare system and
> how similar to the Swiss system our US system could be.
>
> Having grown up hearing about the evils of  "socialized medicine" from my
> Republican parents, I was surprised to learn, later in life, that I vastly
> preferred the Israeli medical system to that of the U.S. There, physicians
> are paid little more than teachers, and Israeli teachers are paid even less
> than their American counterparts. Even so, Jewish mothers still urge their
> sons (and daughters!) to become doctors. Just goes to show that you don't
> have to offer doctors exorbitant salaries to encourage people to enter the
> medical field. What you do have to offer, in my opinion, is subsidized
> schooling for physicians so that they don't come out of medical school with
> $100,000 in student loans. And, you put saner controls on all healthcare
> fees and amounts awarded for malpractice suits. And, you don't allow
> insurers to disqualify people because they have pre-existing conditions.
> And, you make sure that all Americans have access to quality healthcare,
>  regardless of whether they can pay for it or not.
>
> One other thing I learned while in Israel:  Their healthcare is not only
> cheaper than ours--it's better than ours. I had to go to the ER for a
> bladder infections once and I was shocked by how quickly and how expertly I
> was treated. I was also impressed when my kids got tonsillitis and had to go
> to a family doctor for care. Not only were the bills a fraction of the cost
> for comparable U.S. medical services, the medical care received in all cases
> was far superior.
>
> I don't know about you, but I'll take that kind of "socialized medicine"
> over the American system any day.
>
> Holly Tsur
>
>
>
> --
> August
> 17, 2009
> Op-Ed Columnist
> The Swiss Menace
> By
> PAUL KRUGMAN
> It was the blooper heard round the world. In an editorial
> denouncing Democratic health reform plans, Investor?s Business Daily tried
> to
> frighten its readers by declaring that in Britain, where the government
> runs
> health care, the handicapped physicist Stephen Hawking ?wouldn?t have a
> chance,? because the National Health Service would consider his life
> ?essentially worthless.?
> Professor Hawking, who was born in Britain, has lived there all
> his life, and has been well cared for by the National Health Service, was
> not
> amused.
> Besides being vile and stupid, however, the editorial was beside the
> point. Investor?s Business Daily would like you to believe that Obamacare
> would
> turn America into Britain ? or, rather, a dystopian fantasy version of
> Britain.
> The screamers on talk radio and Fox News would have you believe that the
> plan
> is to turn America into the Soviet Union. But the truth is that the plans
> on
> the table would, roughly speaking, turn America into Switzerland ? which
> may be
> occupied by lederhosen-wearing holey-cheese eaters, but wasn?t a socialist
> hellhole the last time I looked.
> Let?s talk about health care around the advanced world.
> Every wealthy country other than the United States guarantees
> essential care to all its citizens. There are, however, wide variations in
> the
> specifics, with three main approaches taken.
> In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs
> the doctors. We?ve all heard scare stories about how that works in
> practice;
> these stories are false. Like every system, the National Health Service has
> problems, but over all it appears to provide quite good care while spending
> only about 40 percent as much per person as we do. By the way, our own
> Veterans
> Health Administration, which is run somewhat like the British health
> service,
> also manages to combine quality care with low costs.
> The second route to universal coverage leaves the actual delivery
> of health care in private hands, but the government pays most of the bills.
> That?s how Canada and, in a more complex fashion, France do it. It?s also a
> system familiar to most Americans, since even those of us not yet on
> Medicare
> have parents and relatives who are.
> Again, you hear a lot of horror stories about such systems, most
> of them false. French health care is excellent. Canadians with chronic
> conditions are more satisfied with their system than their U.S.
> counterparts.
> And Medicare is highly popular, as evidenced by the tendency of town-hall
> protesters to demand that the government keep its hands off the program.
> Finally, the third route to universal coverage relies on private
> insurance companies, using a combination of regulation and subsidies to
> ensure
> that everyone is covered. Switzerland offers the clearest example: everyone
> is
> required to buy insurance, insurers can?t discriminate based on medical
> history
> or pre-existing conditions, and lower-income citizens get government help
> in
> paying for their policies.
> In this country, the Massachusetts health reform more or less
> follows the Swiss model; costs are running higher than expected, but the
> reform
> has greatly reduced the number of uninsured. And the most common form of
> health
> insurance in America, employment-based coverage, actually has some ?Swiss?
> aspects: to avoid making benefits taxable, employers have to follow rules
> that
> effectively rule out discrimination based on medical history and subsidize
> care
> for lower-wage workers.
> So where does Obamacare fit into all this? Basically, it?s a plan
> to Swissify America, using regulation and subsidies to ensure universal
> coverage..
> If we were starting from scratch we probably wouldn?t have chosen
> this route. True ?socialized medicine? would undoubtedly cost less, and a
> straightforward extension of Medicare-type coverage to all Americans would
> probably be cheaper than a Swiss-style system. That?s why I and others
> believe
> that a true public option competing with private insurers is extremely
> important: otherwise, rising costs could all too easily undermine the whole
> effort.
> But a Swiss-style system of universal coverage would be a vast
> improvement on what we have now. And we already know that such systems
> work.
> So we can do this. At this point, all that stands in the way of
> universal health care in America are the greed of the medical-industrial
> complex, the lies of the right-wing propaganda machine, and the gullibility
> of
> voters who believe those lies.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



-- 
Phoenix Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine
Home of the TAO (Team Against Obesity)
www.phoenix-acupuncture.net

From jo.david at verizon.net  Fri Aug 21 22:08:22 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:08:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Where is the "greenest" city?  Maybe this is it.
Message-ID: <F063DA86-1C88-41E2-AF66-06799E9B04B4@verizon.net>

Can a city benefit from alternative energy industry?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/JustOneThing/Story?id=8327868&page=1

From julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com  Sat Aug 22 20:08:14 2009
From: julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com (Julie Ann Schmidlkofer)
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:08:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
Message-ID: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>

Is anyone interested in gathering a group for a local redworm composting
class? We're located off Hillside Road about 5 minutes north of Forest
Grove.  Total cost for group of up to 10 people would be about $85.
Instructor is Doug Knippel of Northwest Redworms in Camas.  You can check
out his website at http://northwestredworms.com.  


From dafracks at hotmail.com  Sun Aug 23 08:46:19 2009
From: dafracks at hotmail.com (Tracy Irwin)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:46:19 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
In-Reply-To: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
Message-ID: <SNT119-W60423733423A5698516188C4FA0@phx.gbl>


Hi Julie,

Sorry, is that 85 split between all members of the group?  I am very interested.

> From: julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:08:14 -0700
> Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
> 
> Is anyone interested in gathering a group for a local redworm composting
> class? We're located off Hillside Road about 5 minutes north of Forest
> Grove.  Total cost for group of up to 10 people would be about $85.
> Instructor is Doug Knippel of Northwest Redworms in Camas.  You can check
> out his website at http://northwestredworms.com.  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

From julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com  Sun Aug 23 12:08:05 2009
From: julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com (Julie Ann Schmidlkofer)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:08:05 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
In-Reply-To: <mailman.13.1251054007.39854.grovenet@rdrop.com>
References: <mailman.13.1251054007.39854.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <01af01ca2425$0b618210$22248630$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>

Yes, $85 split between all who attend.

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of grovenet-request at rdrop.com
Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 12:00 PM
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 23

Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
	grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Vermicomposting (Julie Ann Schmidlkofer)
   2. Re: Vermicomposting (Tracy Irwin)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:08:14 -0700
From: "Julie Ann Schmidlkofer" <julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer at lynbee.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Is anyone interested in gathering a group for a local redworm composting
class? We're located off Hillside Road about 5 minutes north of Forest
Grove.  Total cost for group of up to 10 people would be about $85.
Instructor is Doug Knippel of Northwest Redworms in Camas.  You can check
out his website at http://northwestredworms.com.  



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:46:19 -0700
From: Tracy Irwin <dafracks at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
To: <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <SNT119-W60423733423A5698516188C4FA0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


Hi Julie,

Sorry, is that 85 split between all members of the group?  I am very
interested.

> From: julie.schmidlkofer at lynbee.com
> To: grovenet at rdrop.com
> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:08:14 -0700
> Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
> 
> Is anyone interested in gathering a group for a local redworm composting
> class? We're located off Hillside Road about 5 minutes north of Forest
> Grove.  Total cost for group of up to 10 people would be about $85.
> Instructor is Doug Knippel of Northwest Redworms in Camas.  You can check
> out his website at http://northwestredworms.com.  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackT
oSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 23
****************************************



From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Sun Aug 23 14:13:49 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:13:49 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking Social Security checks - MSNBC
	Articles
Message-ID: <20803-4A91B10D-1645@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>

http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090 

-------------- next part --------------
http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090

From edavie at verizon.net  Sun Aug 23 14:30:52 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:30:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking Social Security checks -
 MSNBCArticles
References: <20803-4A91B10D-1645@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <8A6E8931DAC44B34917FB972D85B2893@EDavie>

The title is misleading. If you actually read it 
the check won't go down, it just won't go up as it 
usually does due to inflation!
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss
  To: GroveNet at rdrop.com
  Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 2:13 PM
  Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking 
Social Security checks - MSNBCArticles


  http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Sun Aug 23 14:34:09 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:34:09 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking Social Security checks
	-	MSNBCArticles
In-Reply-To: "Ed Davie" <edavie@verizon.net>'s message of Sun,
	23 Aug 2009 14:30:52 -0700
Message-ID: <20805-4A91B5D1-1056@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>

yes Mr Ed ... I did know that

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090823/c55ed445/attachment.html 

From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 23 14:58:09 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking Social Security checks -
	MSNBC Articles
In-Reply-To: <20803-4A91B10D-1645@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
References: <20803-4A91B10D-1645@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <189469.32354.qm@web56104.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Interesting article about the fact that there'll be no Social Security increases for the next two years...

Holly




http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090 


      

From edavie at verizon.net  Sun Aug 23 15:05:19 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:05:19 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking Social Security checks
 -	MSNBC Articles
References: <20803-4A91B10D-1645@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
	<189469.32354.qm@web56104.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A8CA17602CC34F1B94B5DDD40F1D83EA@EDavie>

That's what Alan listed!
Ed

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Holly T.
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 2:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Millions face shrinking 
Social Security checks - MSNBC Articles


  Interesting article about the fact that there'll 
be no Social Security increases for the next two 
years...

  Holly




  http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?afid=1&aid=32528090



  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From stevedj at teleport.com  Sun Aug 23 16:22:02 2009
From: stevedj at teleport.com (Steve Jerrett)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 16:22:02 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Will it be covered?
References: <20805-4A91B5D1-1056@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
Message-ID: <627B6B1E786A4A4898E77D6C00490AE7@Maincomputer>


  I wonder if national healthcare will cover this?

  http://www.netaddictionrecovery.com/

From jo.david at verizon.net  Sun Aug 23 21:48:10 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:48:10 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Will it be covered?
In-Reply-To: <627B6B1E786A4A4898E77D6C00490AE7@Maincomputer>
References: <20805-4A91B5D1-1056@storefull-3171.bay.webtv.net>
	<627B6B1E786A4A4898E77D6C00490AE7@Maincomputer>
Message-ID: <8A76E6CC-EBE6-4887-873C-B2E688EA6BC1@verizon.net>

$14,500 for 45 days of treatment.

Whoa!  Do you realize how many months of Fios that is?

David

On Aug 23, 2009, at 4:22 PM, Steve Jerrett wrote:

>
>   I wonder if national healthcare will cover this?
>
>   http://www.netaddictionrecovery.com/
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Mon Aug 24 09:50:16 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:50:16 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
Message-ID: <20090824.095016.26929.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>

I have a nice worm composting bin that is about one yard cubed in size. We used it several years and have grown a little tired of it. The bin is offered free for anybody interested. Contact me and pick it up in Forest Gale Heights before I get busy and discombobulate it into recycling. All hail the conquering worm. Email me here or off site for pick up info.
Tom Alexander
 
____________________________________________________________
Need cash? Click to get a cash advance.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTFRJ8iDj2QEf8ByovgoQ9fKwWmb9RkCOU0w1u0sSCxirhZjfeC7L6/

From scott.richardz at verizon.net  Mon Aug 24 10:44:51 2009
From: scott.richardz at verizon.net (Scott Richards)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:44:51 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
In-Reply-To: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
Message-ID: <1251135891.5780.2.camel@Ginger>

Sure Julie,

I'd be interested within the next 3 weeks or so -- before school starts
up

Scott

From Palmy at comcast.net  Mon Aug 24 12:58:11 2009
From: Palmy at comcast.net (Palmy)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:58:11 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
In-Reply-To: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
Message-ID: <4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>

Hi Julie,

I would be interested in taking the class.

Thanks,

Palmy Garland

>
>  
>


From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 24 13:06:17 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:06:17 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike


From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 24 13:24:34 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:24:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <5164FAC6-99E0-4612-A31B-F0EB8097104B@teleport.com>

Mike:
Poison oak secretes an oil (which is the irritating agent) that coats  
its leaves. It is possible-- mind you, just possible-- that you could  
first spray the plant with a detergent solution to break down the oil  
protecting the leaves, then follow up with the combination of Roundup  
and Crossbow recommended for killing blackberries.
Walt

On Aug 24, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Steele, Mike wrote:

> Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work  
> before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that  
> has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the  
> midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the  
> poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The  
> plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.
>
> Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was  
> something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook  
> his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially  
> available.
>
> The plant sits there, smiling.
>
> Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something  
> more lethal.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks...
>
> --Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jschrag at fgnewstimes.com  Mon Aug 24 13:38:12 2009
From: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com (John Schrag)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:38:12 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <5164FAC6-99E0-4612-A31B-F0EB8097104B@teleport.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com><4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net><8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<5164FAC6-99E0-4612-A31B-F0EB8097104B@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <E63B9CA725E34905AE800E3F79CC4C29@pmg.pamplincom.com>


My son's class at the community school did some volunteer work at Hyla
Woods, a sustainable logging operation in the Coast Range. To kill
Scotchbroom without sterilizing the soil below, they cut the plant and then
immediately dab the exposed stalk with Crossbow, which the damaged plant
then sucks down to its roots.  I've also heard that the same process works
on blackberries.   Could work with your poison oak, though it will require
you to handle it.


John Schrag
?
?
?


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Walt Wentz
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:25 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Mike:
Poison oak secretes an oil (which is the irritating agent) that coats  
its leaves. It is possible-- mind you, just possible-- that you could  
first spray the plant with a detergent solution to break down the oil  
protecting the leaves, then follow up with the combination of Roundup  
and Crossbow recommended for killing blackberries.
Walt

On Aug 24, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Steele, Mike wrote:

> Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work  
> before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that  
> has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the  
> midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the  
> poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The  
> plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.
>
> Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was  
> something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook  
> his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially  
> available.
>
> The plant sits there, smiling.
>
> Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something  
> more lethal.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks...
>
> --Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet





From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 13:27:06 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <437811.19055.qm@web56107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I recommend pouring boiling water all over the Poison Oak. Lots of boiling water. It'll probably kill the other shrub that you want to keep though. But, the good news is that the Poison Oak won't spread to other things that you want to keep.

I always use boiling water rather than Round Up. It's a lot better for the environment and often works better and faster than the strongest herbicides. It's a no-brainer.

Just get your tea kettle boiling on the stove and then haul it on out there. If one kettle doesn't work, repeat until the plant shrivels to a sad-looking bunch of boiled spinach on the ground.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 14:36:20 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <437811.19055.qm@web56107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<437811.19055.qm@web56107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <523844.79824.qm@web112101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

One more option, though it really just transfers "Conqueror" status: plant a creosote bush right next to the Poison Oak.  :-)

Sorry, Mike . . . just couldn't help myself.

 
Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Holly T. <feralcattamer at yahoo.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:27:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I recommend pouring boiling water all over the Poison Oak. Lots of boiling water. It'll probably kill the other shrub that you want to keep though. But, the good news is that the Poison Oak won't spread to other things that you want to keep.

I always use boiling water rather than Round Up. It's a lot better for the environment and often works better and faster than the strongest herbicides. It's a no-brainer.

Just get your tea kettle boiling on the stove and then haul it on out there. If one kettle doesn't work, repeat until the plant shrivels to a sad-looking bunch of boiled spinach on the ground.

Holly
________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 24 14:47:55 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:47:55 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <523844.79824.qm@web112101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<437811.19055.qm@web56107.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<523844.79824.qm@web112101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5128@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Allen...I am getting some interesting responses.  The problem is that the darned culprit is growing right in the middle of a keeper...I suppose I could use a scorched earth policy and just start all over from scratch...

Humor is always acceptable...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Allen Warren
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 2:36 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

One more option, though it really just transfers "Conqueror" status: plant a creosote bush right next to the Poison Oak.  :-)

Sorry, Mike . . . just couldn't help myself.

 
Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Holly T. <feralcattamer at yahoo.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:27:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I recommend pouring boiling water all over the Poison Oak. Lots of boiling water. It'll probably kill the other shrub that you want to keep though. But, the good news is that the Poison Oak won't spread to other things that you want to keep.

I always use boiling water rather than Round Up. It's a lot better for the environment and often works better and faster than the strongest herbicides. It's a no-brainer.

Just get your tea kettle boiling on the stove and then haul it on out there. If one kettle doesn't work, repeat until the plant shrivels to a sad-looking bunch of boiled spinach on the ground.

Holly
________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 13:58:24 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jschrag at fgnewstimes.com  Mon Aug 24 14:55:33 2009
From: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com (John Schrag)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:55:33 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com><4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net><8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A7A3DA966FD04B948ED8BF2E3006597E@pmg.pamplincom.com>

I've used a propane torch on weeds, but would strongly advise against it on
the oak. My sister once burned a pile of cut oak and got a massive reaction
from the smoke. 

John 
?
?
?
?


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison
oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then
return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling
water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow
torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than
the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to
the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through
though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to
other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the
Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to
kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to
keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round
Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something
radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had
already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more
lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet





From Kathy.Ayala at nike.com  Mon Aug 24 15:03:52 2009
From: Kathy.Ayala at nike.com (Ayala, Kathy)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:03:52 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <A7A3DA966FD04B948ED8BF2E3006597E@pmg.pamplincom.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com><4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net><8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu><412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<A7A3DA966FD04B948ED8BF2E3006597E@pmg.pamplincom.com>
Message-ID: <200908242203.n7OM3rfX093879@barrierB241.nike.com>

Hi Mike, 

When you figure out what kills the Poison Oak let us all know it is something good to know incase any of us have the same problem. 

I do know that you can get a very bad rash inside your body and out side from burning the plant so do not do that. 

Have a good day

Kathy 

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of John Schrag
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 2:56 PM
To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I've used a propane torch on weeds, but would strongly advise against it on the oak. My sister once burned a pile of cut oak and got a massive reaction from the smoke. 

John 
?
?
?
?


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet




_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 15:17:42 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <200908242203.n7OM3rfX093879@barrierB241.nike.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com><4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net><8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu><412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<A7A3DA966FD04B948ED8BF2E3006597E@pmg.pamplincom.com>
	<200908242203.n7OM3rfX093879@barrierB241.nike.com>
Message-ID: <421932.50646.qm@web112110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Whoever knew Poison Oak could even hurt you as it's being burned to death?

I'm thinking Holly's suggestion of scalding the plant might prove to be the best one yet, unless it has some natural defense mechanism against boiling water as well.

And I'm starting to think it might be "Battle Royal" between Poison Oak and a Creosote Bush.

Unfortunately, I think the poor, innocent nice shrub is going to be the loser here no matter what.

 
Allen Warren

From: "Ayala, Kathy" <Kathy.Ayala at nike.com>
To: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com; Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:03:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Hi Mike, 

When you figure out what kills the Poison Oak let us all know it is something good to know incase any of us have the same problem. 

I do know that you can get a very bad rash inside your body and out side from burning the plant so do not do that. 

Have a good day

Kathy 

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of John Schrag
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 2:56 PM
To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I've used a propane torch on weeds, but would strongly advise against it on the oak. My sister once burned a pile of cut oak and got a massive reaction from the smoke. 

John 
 
 
 
 


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet




_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 24 15:34:04 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:34:04 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From obrzl at verizon.net  Mon Aug 24 15:37:00 2009
From: obrzl at verizon.net (mark oberzil)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5128@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <398561.73830.qm@web84203.mail.re3.yahoo.com>



--- On Mon, 8/24/09, Steele, Mike <steelem at pacificu.edu> wrote:


Humor is always acceptable...
?
Mike,
After years of struggling with blackberries I've decided to accept, even embrace them.? After all, they are very much like the early Christians; we burn them, crucify them, poison them, torture them, and yet they come back year after year with sweet, delicious gifts.? Forget grapes or climbing roses, from now on I'm growing blackberries on my trellises, pergolas,?and arbors.? 
?
I suggest you put away the boiling oil, embrace your inner itch and let the poison oak bloom!
?
Mark
?
?
?
?
?
?
?

From: Steele, Mike <steelem at pacificu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Date: Monday, August 24, 2009, 9:47 PM


Allen...I am getting some interesting responses.? The problem is that the darned culprit is growing right in the middle of a keeper...I suppose I could use a scorched earth policy and just start all over from scratch...

Humor is always acceptable...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Allen Warren
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 2:36 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

One more option, though it really just transfers "Conqueror" status: plant a creosote bush right next to the Poison Oak.? :-)

Sorry, Mike . . . just couldn't help myself.


Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Holly T. <feralcattamer at yahoo.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:27:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I recommend pouring boiling water all over the Poison Oak. Lots of boiling water. It'll probably kill the other shrub that you want to keep though. But, the good news is that the Poison Oak won't spread to other things that you want to keep.

I always use boiling water rather than Round Up. It's a lot better for the environment and often works better and faster than the strongest herbicides. It's a no-brainer.

Just get your tea kettle boiling on the stove and then haul it on out there. If one kettle doesn't work, repeat until the plant shrivels to a sad-looking bunch of boiled spinach on the ground.

Holly
________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.? I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.? The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.? 

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



? ? ? 
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



? ? ? 
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Mon Aug 24 15:46:39 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:46:39 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
Message-ID: <20090824.154639.772.0@webmail16.vgs.untd.com>

Mike, 
My wife uses a plastic jug that she removed the bottom out of. She will then place the smaller opening around the offending plant and be able to use smaller amounts of chemical killer and keep if off of the friendlies. She calls it her "funnel of death" 
 
Tom Alexander
____________________________________________________________
Earn an IT Degree Online
Earn your AS, BS, or Masters degree in IT from the top schools online.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=pzUidv9aYkNQARhBbBFIhwAAJ1CORKrrSABr_kse746cCp3FAAQAAAAFAAAAABKDQD4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABYY4AAAAAA==

From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Mon Aug 24 15:49:36 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:49:36 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
Message-ID: <20090824.154936.772.1@webmail16.vgs.untd.com>

Do not use the propane torch. I had some scouts burn poi sen oak vines early in the season and one ended up in the hospital because the smoke carried the poisen oak oils into his lungs.
 
Tom Alexander

  
 
____________________________________________________________
Free information - Learn about Criminal Lawyers. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTOVoMtpQ5CjSVWvBNlfmd1EFLq58Wfa5m6BgNj7MjozkY2td6QQAA/

From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 24 15:52:27 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:52:27 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <20090824.154639.772.0@webmail16.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090824.154639.772.0@webmail16.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C52EC@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Hi Tom...ha!

Thanks for this item....  

I am perhaps learning more about my fellow Grovers than anything else here!!

:-)

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of a_tom_51 at juno.com
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:47 PM
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Mike, 
My wife uses a plastic jug that she removed the bottom out of. She will then place the smaller opening around the offending plant and be able to use smaller amounts of chemical killer and keep if off of the friendlies. She calls it her "funnel of death" 
 
Tom Alexander
____________________________________________________________
Earn an IT Degree Online
Earn your AS, BS, or Masters degree in IT from the top schools online.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=pzUidv9aYkNQARhBbBFIhwAAJ1CORKrrSABr_kse746cCp3FAAQAAAAFAAAAABKDQD4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABYY4AAAAAA==
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 16:13:41 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

You're welcome, Mike, and do keep us posted as to whether my remedy works or not.

Honestly, I don't know why more people don't try the boiling water remedy. It works for getting rid of so many things. Unwanted plants, fruit stains, ex-husbands...

Good point about the blow torch. I'd forgotten that poison oak oil can spread via vapor when heated. Just for good measure, I'd wear protective clothing and a mask even when using the boiling water trick. 

My grandfather was a logger in his younger days. He used to bring home poison oak sap on his clothes and my grandmother used to get horrible rashes just from laundering his clothes several days after. My grandfather was immune to the stuff. Lucky him!

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:34:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jim at benchmarkinspections.com  Mon Aug 24 16:38:54 2009
From: jim at benchmarkinspections.com (Jim Katen)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:38:54 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>

If you really want to be green, don't boil fresh water just for this
purpose, reuse water that you've already used for cooking food. Boiling
water from pasta works great, just be sure not to salt the water first or
you'll be adding salt to the soil. 

The boiling-water thing will kill the above-ground portion of the poison oak
but it will do nothing to harm the roots. It will be just as if you clipped
the plant off a ground level, in a few weeks, new shoots will pop up. 

To really get rid of the plant you either need to dig up the roots or use
harsh chemicals. If you want to use the least amount of chemical, do what
John Schrag recommended. Cut the plant off at the stem and instantly apply
crossbow to the cut surface. One of those foam paint brushes from Ace
Hardware works well for this. If new shoots appear, just keep doing it. The
plant will eventually die. Don't bother with Round-up, it just makes poison
oak mad. 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

You're welcome, Mike, and do keep us posted as to whether my remedy works or
not.

Honestly, I don't know why more people don't try the boiling water remedy.
It works for getting rid of so many things. Unwanted plants, fruit stains,
ex-husbands...

Good point about the blow torch. I'd forgotten that poison oak oil can
spread via vapor when heated. Just for good measure, I'd wear protective
clothing and a mask even when using the boiling water trick. 

My grandfather was a logger in his younger days. He used to bring home
poison oak sap on his clothes and my grandmother used to get horrible rashes
just from laundering his clothes several days after. My grandfather was
immune to the stuff. Lucky him!

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:34:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut
back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right
and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison
oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then
return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling
water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow
torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than
the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to
the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through
though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to
other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the
Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to
kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to
keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round
Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something
radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had
already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more
lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 17:05:52 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:05:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>
Message-ID: <300746.24342.qm@web112107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I conducted a little sleuthing via the web.  Some results . . . 

	1. Vinegar.  Others have found undiluted vinegar sprayed on the plant leaves will work on poison oak.  One person suggested you attempt to find agricultural vinegar as it has 20-30% acetic acid vs. 6% in regular store-bought vinegar, but the folks at "Nature's Avenger" (see #2) state that agricultural vinegar is not produced naturally.  But vinegar evidently removes the oily leaf coating, essentially drying out the plant.  Others suggested soaking the roots in vinegar, though this makes the soil unusable for at least 6 months.
	2. Nature's Avenger Organic Herbicide.  A new patented, citrus-oil based weed killer.  Supposedly smells like oranges.  Website is naturesavenger.com.

	3. Hydrogen Peroxide.  The user stated they sprayed it daily on the leaves, causing them to fade and photosynthesis to stop.
	4. Cover the plant/leaves with an opaque covering.  Once again, it prevents photosynthesis and the plant supposedly dies within ~1 month.Sounds like the biggest problem with any work involving digging up the roots has the highest probability of leading to the rash due to the handling involved and the potential for the leaves to impart their residue on clothing.


Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Jim Katen <jim at benchmarkinspections.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:38:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

If you really want to be green, don't boil fresh water just for this
purpose, reuse water that you've already used for cooking food. Boiling
water from pasta works great, just be sure not to salt the water first or
you'll be adding salt to the soil. 

The boiling-water thing will kill the above-ground portion of the poison oak
but it will do nothing to harm the roots. It will be just as if you clipped
the plant off a ground level, in a few weeks, new shoots will pop up. 

To really get rid of the plant you either need to dig up the roots or use
harsh chemicals. If you want to use the least amount of chemical, do what
John Schrag recommended. Cut the plant off at the stem and instantly apply
crossbow to the cut surface. One of those foam paint brushes from Ace
Hardware works well for this. If new shoots appear, just keep doing it. The
plant will eventually die. Don't bother with Round-up, it just makes poison
oak mad. 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

You're welcome, Mike, and do keep us posted as to whether my remedy works or
not.

Honestly, I don't know why more people don't try the boiling water remedy.
It works for getting rid of so many things. Unwanted plants, fruit stains,
ex-husbands...

Good point about the blow torch. I'd forgotten that poison oak oil can
spread via vapor when heated. Just for good measure, I'd wear protective
clothing and a mask even when using the boiling water trick. 

My grandfather was a logger in his younger days. He used to bring home
poison oak sap on his clothes and my grandmother used to get horrible rashes
just from laundering his clothes several days after. My grandfather was
immune to the stuff. Lucky him!

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:34:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut
back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right
and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison
oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then
return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling
water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow
torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than
the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to
the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through
though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to
other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the
Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to
kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to
keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round
Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something
radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had
already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more
lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 24 18:44:13 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:44:13 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <300746.24342.qm@web112107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>
	<300746.24342.qm@web112107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5526@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Allen...thanks for going to the extra trouble here...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of Allen Warren
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 5:06 PM
To: jim at benchmarkinspections.com; Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

I conducted a little sleuthing via the web.  Some results . . . 

	1. Vinegar.  Others have found undiluted vinegar sprayed on the plant leaves will work on poison oak.  One person suggested you attempt to find agricultural vinegar as it has 20-30% acetic acid vs. 6% in regular store-bought vinegar, but the folks at "Nature's Avenger" (see #2) state that agricultural vinegar is not produced naturally.  But vinegar evidently removes the oily leaf coating, essentially drying out the plant.  Others suggested soaking the roots in vinegar, though this makes the soil unusable for at least 6 months.
	2. Nature's Avenger Organic Herbicide.  A new patented, citrus-oil based weed killer.  Supposedly smells like oranges.  Website is naturesavenger.com.

	3. Hydrogen Peroxide.  The user stated they sprayed it daily on the leaves, causing them to fade and photosynthesis to stop.
	4. Cover the plant/leaves with an opaque covering.  Once again, it prevents photosynthesis and the plant supposedly dies within ~1 month.Sounds like the biggest problem with any work involving digging up the roots has the highest probability of leading to the rash due to the handling involved and the potential for the leaves to impart their residue on clothing.


Allen Warren



________________________________
From: Jim Katen <jim at benchmarkinspections.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:38:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

If you really want to be green, don't boil fresh water just for this
purpose, reuse water that you've already used for cooking food. Boiling
water from pasta works great, just be sure not to salt the water first or
you'll be adding salt to the soil. 

The boiling-water thing will kill the above-ground portion of the poison oak
but it will do nothing to harm the roots. It will be just as if you clipped
the plant off a ground level, in a few weeks, new shoots will pop up. 

To really get rid of the plant you either need to dig up the roots or use
harsh chemicals. If you want to use the least amount of chemical, do what
John Schrag recommended. Cut the plant off at the stem and instantly apply
crossbow to the cut surface. One of those foam paint brushes from Ace
Hardware works well for this. If new shoots appear, just keep doing it. The
plant will eventually die. Don't bother with Round-up, it just makes poison
oak mad. 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

You're welcome, Mike, and do keep us posted as to whether my remedy works or
not.

Honestly, I don't know why more people don't try the boiling water remedy.
It works for getting rid of so many things. Unwanted plants, fruit stains,
ex-husbands...

Good point about the blow torch. I'd forgotten that poison oak oil can
spread via vapor when heated. Just for good measure, I'd wear protective
clothing and a mask even when using the boiling water trick. 

My grandfather was a logger in his younger days. He used to bring home
poison oak sap on his clothes and my grandmother used to get horrible rashes
just from laundering his clothes several days after. My grandfather was
immune to the stuff. Lucky him!

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:34:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut
back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right
and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison
oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then
return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling
water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow
torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than
the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to
the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through
though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to
other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the
Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to
kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to
keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round
Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something
radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had
already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more
lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From feralcattamer at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 24 19:52:08 2009
From: feralcattamer at yahoo.com (Holly T.)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<412806.45617.qm@web56105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C5253@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
	<338188.55651.qm@web56102.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
	<F68284A8BAC642E09789C9F10F850FAA@JimDell>
Message-ID: <259794.88456.qm@web56104.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

The roots issue most definitely depends on the invader. I've killed invasive plants (weeds mostly) by pouring boiling water on them many, many times. This works particularly well in places like gravel driveways or in between bricks or sidewalk cracks where it's next to impossible to dig up the weeds. I suspect, though, that poison oak might take stronger measures than most weeds. Before I dumped a bunch of pesticide on the poison oak, though, I'd definitely try pouring boiling water on it (spent pasta water sounds even better, btw). But, I'd dump A LOT of boiling water on so that the roots get a good scalding as well. Of course, that would likely scald the good plant that Mike wants to save. But, like I said, it might save other plants from being choked out by the poison oak later on down the line.

Don't forget to wear your boots, Mike. I wouldn't want you to get scalded in the process!

Holly




________________________________
From: Jim Katen <jim at benchmarkinspections.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:38:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

If you really want to be green, don't boil fresh water just for this
purpose, reuse water that you've already used for cooking food. Boiling
water from pasta works great, just be sure not to salt the water first or
you'll be adding salt to the soil. 

The boiling-water thing will kill the above-ground portion of the poison oak
but it will do nothing to harm the roots. It will be just as if you clipped
the plant off a ground level, in a few weeks, new shoots will pop up. 

To really get rid of the plant you either need to dig up the roots or use
harsh chemicals. If you want to use the least amount of chemical, do what
John Schrag recommended. Cut the plant off at the stem and instantly apply
crossbow to the cut surface. One of those foam paint brushes from Ace
Hardware works well for this. If new shoots appear, just keep doing it. The
plant will eventually die. Don't bother with Round-up, it just makes poison
oak mad. 

- Jim Katen

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

You're welcome, Mike, and do keep us posted as to whether my remedy works or
not.

Honestly, I don't know why more people don't try the boiling water remedy.
It works for getting rid of so many things. Unwanted plants, fruit stains,
ex-husbands...

Good point about the blow torch. I'd forgotten that poison oak oil can
spread via vapor when heated. Just for good measure, I'd wear protective
clothing and a mask even when using the boiling water trick. 

My grandfather was a logger in his younger days. He used to bring home
poison oak sap on his clothes and my grandmother used to get horrible rashes
just from laundering his clothes several days after. My grandfather was
immune to the stuff. Lucky him!

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:34:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Thanks Holly...this sounds like the most eco-friendly approach.  I may cut
back the other bush for better access; it's a hearty beast in its own right
and would recover well enough.

Take care...

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Holly T.
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:58 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Try pouring boiling water really fast from your tea kettle onto the poison
oak. If that doesn't turn that baby into a pile of boiled spinach, then
return to your kitchen and then haul out another kettle's worth of boiling
water. Keep dumping until you've cooked the thing.

I've used this method for the peskiest intruders. Works like a charm. A blow
torch might work well too, but you'd run the risk of burning a lot more than
the poison oak. Plus, the boiling water, if you pour enough on, gets down to
the "root of the problem".

It'll probably kill the shrub that the poison oak is coming up through
though. But, the good news is that the poison oak won't likely spread to
other things.

Greenest way I know to kill stuff.

Holly




________________________________
From: "Steele, Mike" <steelem at pacificu.edu>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 1:06:17 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak

Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work before the
Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that has been trying to
kill some poison oak that is growing in the midst of a shrub that I want to
keep.  I've carefully hit the poison oak with both Crossbow and Round
Up...to no avail.  The plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.

Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was something
radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook his head--I had
already used the most powerful stuff commercially available.

The plant sits there, smiling.

Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something more
lethal.  

Any suggestions?

Thanks...

--Mike

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From jo.david at verizon.net  Mon Aug 24 21:03:20 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:03:20 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Poison Oak
In-Reply-To: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
References: <019c01ca239e$f54f99c0$dfeecd40$@schmidlkofer@lynbee.com>
	<4A92F0D3.7020104@comcast.net>
	<8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C47C4E19@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>
Message-ID: <CF4190A8-87F1-4634-8E08-DE2F320EBE8E@verizon.net>

I am surprised that you did not have success.  I have been using the  
Lilly Miller Brush and Blackberry herbicide to kill the poison oak  
spread over a few acres of pasture and forest.  I mix the concentrate  
according to the instructions and sprayed it in droplet form ( not  
mist ), and it takes maybe a week for the leaves to die back.  I  
applied it with a single spritz to each leaf I could reach.  The ones  
I am fighting are as thick as blackberry bushes in places, and some  
of them go twenty feet up in to the trees, so I cannot get to all of  
it this season.

No matter what you do to kill the plant, be warned, the Ursunol is in  
the sap as well and it is reputed to be toxic for a year or longer in  
dead/dried plants and stalks, and it can ooze out of breaks or cuts.   
That means that I choose to wait until next year to remove the plants  
that die this summer.  And then I can start over on the bushes that I  
will be able to reach next summer after removing the ones that are in  
the way.

Oh, I did find a topical treatment for the rash, which usually hits  
me three or four days after exposure.  So, I try to be real throrough  
when I wash after working with it ( against it )

David



On Aug 24, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Steele, Mike wrote:

> Fellow G-nuts...I'm trying to get in some last-minute yard work  
> before the Pacific school year really gets rolling...part of that  
> has been trying to kill some poison oak that is growing in the  
> midst of a shrub that I want to keep.  I've carefully hit the  
> poison oak with both Crossbow and Round Up...to no avail.  The  
> plant seemed to enjoy the extra attention.
>
> Sooooo, I drifted by Ace Hardware today to see if there was  
> something radioactive that I could buy...but Dave Easton just shook  
> his head--I had already used the most powerful stuff commercially  
> available.
>
> The plant sits there, smiling.
>
> Dave recommended finding someone who is licensed to use something  
> more lethal.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Thanks...
>
> --Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From rab at jurislex.com  Tue Aug 25 13:08:47 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:08:47 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
Message-ID: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090825/5d5d8d36/attachment.html 

From edavie at verizon.net  Tue Aug 25 13:29:39 2009
From: edavie at verizon.net (Ed Davie)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:29:39 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
References: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <4E5DD740DCB447D6950074871203DFB3@EDavie>

4 out of 6
Ed

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Browning
  To: Grovenet
  Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:08 PM
  Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .


  PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!

  bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning

  http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Tue Aug 25 15:54:23 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:54:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
References: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com>
	<4E5DD740DCB447D6950074871203DFB3@EDavie>
Message-ID: <B864F726884E4360BD98DB84B085A283@gerianehzkfhvy>

Cool prizes. ;-)

6 of 6, but must say three were guesses (anywhere
            from "lucky" ones to "educated" ones)

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .


>4 out of 6
> Ed
> 
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Bob Browning
>  To: Grovenet
>  Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:08 PM
>  Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
> 
> 
>  PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!
> 
>  bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning
> 
>  http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  _______________________________________________
>  GroveNet mailing list
>  GroveNet at rdrop.com
>  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From theresacus at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 26 00:57:13 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
In-Reply-To: <mailman.13.1251226809.77025.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Good Morning All,
We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.? Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th and Birch vacinity.? 
?
By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.? 
?
I know "cheep" entertainment.? 
?
Theresa Carter
?


      

From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 26 06:44:58 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:44:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
In-Reply-To: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <627317.59804.qm@web112116.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

More "cheep" entertainment: we also have a flock of swifts in at least 2 of our chimneys.  We live on 12th between Cedar & Birch.

 
Allen Warren

From: Theresa Carter <theresacus at yahoo.com>
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:57:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25



Good Morning All,
We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.  Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.  Is anyone missing a chuckar?  We had one in our yard last night.  We live in the 17th and Birch vacinity.  
 
By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a flock of swifts in their chimney.  Go see them swirl in for yourself at dusk one evening.  Yellow house on 17th and Birch.  
 
I know "cheep" entertainment.  
 
Theresa Carter
 


      
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From AumaMarie at aol.com  Wed Aug 26 08:35:11 2009
From: AumaMarie at aol.com (AumaMarie at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:35:11 EDT
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
Message-ID: <c8a.43e6bb2b.37c6b02f@aol.com>

There was a chukar for quite awhile this spring Dutch Brothers, Miracle  
Sign.  It finally left left there.  You can buy baby chukars at  Coastal at 
times.  One of my grandsons has four of them.  

From waltw at teleport.com  Wed Aug 26 08:50:34 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 08:50:34 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
In-Reply-To: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <502B1A81-CDF0-4590-842D-96FD54C2CBB9@teleport.com>

Hi Theresa:
I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite  
a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of  
very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near  
the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until  
early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
Walt
On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:

>
>
> Good Morning All,
> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.   
> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.  Is anyone missing a  
> chuckar?  We had one in our yard last night.  We live in the 17th  
> and Birch vacinity.
>
> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a  
> flock of swifts in their chimney.  Go see them swirl in for  
> yourself at dusk one evening.  Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>
> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>
> Theresa Carter
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 26 09:11:18 2009
From: osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com (Allen Warren)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
In-Reply-To: <502B1A81-CDF0-4590-842D-96FD54C2CBB9@teleport.com>
References: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<502B1A81-CDF0-4590-842D-96FD54C2CBB9@teleport.com>
Message-ID: <580643.24875.qm@web112105.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

A neighbor adjoining the north portion of our property (their house faces 13th Ave.) has captive mourning doves so we get to hear their cooing pretty much 24x7.

 
Allen Warren

From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25

Hi Theresa:
I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite  
a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of  
very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near  
the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until  
early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
Walt
On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:

>
>
> Good Morning All,
> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.  
> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.  Is anyone missing a  
> chuckar?  We had one in our yard last night.  We live in the 17th  
> and Birch vacinity.
>
> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a  
> flock of swifts in their chimney.  Go see them swirl in for  
> yourself at dusk one evening.  Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>
> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>
> Theresa Carter
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



      

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 26 09:17:48 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:17:48 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Birds, was Re:  GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
References: <152951.59200.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com><502B1A81-CDF0-4590-842D-96FD54C2CBB9@teleport.com>
	<580643.24875.qm@web112105.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <B04615FF567F463B887C485B57EFDA01@gerianehzkfhvy>

Off and on we've had mourning doves on our property and/or nearby ... I enjoy their coos. :-)

Since early in the spring, this has been the most diverse season of birds where we live, in my opinion. Often found myself looking up ones I wasn't so familiar with.


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Allen Warren" <osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25


>A neighbor adjoining the north portion of our property (their house faces 13th Ave.) has captive mourning doves so we get to hear their cooing pretty much 24x7.
> 
> 
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
> 
> Hi Theresa:
> I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite  
> a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
> I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of  
> very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near  
> the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until  
> early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
> Walt
> On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Good Morning All,
>> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.  
>> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.  Is anyone missing a  
>> chuckar?  We had one in our yard last night.  We live in the 17th  
>> and Birch vacinity.
>>
>> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a  
>> flock of swifts in their chimney.  Go see them swirl in for  
>> yourself at dusk one evening.  Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>>
>> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>>
>> Theresa Carter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>      
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From Chuck at ChuckRiley.org  Wed Aug 26 12:00:40 2009
From: Chuck at ChuckRiley.org (Chuck Riley)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:00:40 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com>
References: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <003901ca267f$81a07880$84e16980$@org>

Thank goodness I got 6 of 6.  I have been working on the issue of what I
believe is a need for a major overhaul/rewrite of the Oregon Constitution
for about 6 years, and have studied it in detail.  The last question tells
it all 240 (actually 242) amendments by initiative!  I believe that the
constitution should be a statement of principles and lay out the structure
and function of government, not be another book of statutes.  

 

Chuck

 

From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:09 PM
To: Grovenet
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .

 

PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!

bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning

http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.67/2326 - Release Date: 08/25/09
18:07:00


From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Wed Aug 26 12:20:40 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 12:20:40 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
References: <4A9444CF.20109@jurislex.com> <003901ca267f$81a07880$84e16980$@org>
Message-ID: <81F314EBA76747E9AA248ED6D52AD55E@gerianehzkfhvy>

Well said, Chuck!

And thanks for doing your study of it ...


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Riley" <Chuck at ChuckRiley.org>
To: "'Forest Grove local interests list'" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .


> Thank goodness I got 6 of 6.  I have been working on the issue of what I
> believe is a need for a major overhaul/rewrite of the Oregon Constitution
> for about 6 years, and have studied it in detail.  The last question tells
> it all 240 (actually 242) amendments by initiative!  I believe that the
> constitution should be a statement of principles and lay out the structure
> and function of government, not be another book of statutes.  
> 
> 
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> 
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Bob Browning
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:09 PM
> To: Grovenet
> Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
> 
> 
> 
> PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!
> 
> bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.67/2326 - Release Date: 08/25/09
> 18:07:00
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Wed Aug 26 14:04:15 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:04:15 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Badass of the Week: The Complete List
Message-ID: <24463-4A95A34F-1199@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net>

Don't expect to see an OleHoss on this list, at least not yet!
http://tinyurl.com/n9mnvp

-------------- next part --------------
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/list.html

From theresacus at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 26 14:27:20 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 26
In-Reply-To: <mailman.19.1251313209.56350.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <772059.51211.qm@web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

The doves are not the indiginous mourning doves.? They are someones escapees.? We looked at them several times and finally got a closer look one day and they are not the mourning doves.? 
?
Chuckars were indroduced to Eastern Oregon as a game bird a long time ago.? You don't typically see them here in the valley unless someone is raising them.? None the less, if you here of anyone missing one, send them our direction.? ? 
?
Theresa
--- On Wed, 8/26/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com> wrote:


From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 26
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2009, 12:00 PM


Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
??? grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
??? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
??? grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
??? grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

???1. A little quiz for you . . . (Bob Browning)
???2. Re: A little quiz for you . . . (Ed Davie)
???3. Re: A little quiz for you . . . (Geri)
???4. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (Theresa Carter)
???5. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (Allen Warren)
???6. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (AumaMarie at aol.com)
???7. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (Walt Wentz)
???8. Re: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (Allen Warren)
???9. Birds, was Re:? GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25 (Geri)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:08:47 -0700
From: Bob Browning <rab at jurislex.com>
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
To: Grovenet <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4A9444CF.20109 at jurislex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090825/5d5d8d36/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:29:39 -0700
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <4E5DD740DCB447D6950074871203DFB3 at EDavie>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

4 out of 6
Ed

? ----- Original Message ----- 
? From: Bob Browning
? To: Grovenet
? Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:08 PM
? Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .


? PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!

? bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning

? http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


? _______________________________________________
? GroveNet mailing list
? GroveNet at rdrop.com
? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:54:23 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
To: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>,??? "Forest Grove local interests
??? list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <B864F726884E4360BD98DB84B085A283 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

Cool prizes. ;-)

6 of 6, but must say three were guesses (anywhere
? ? ? ? ? ? from "lucky" ones to "educated" ones)

Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Davie" <edavie at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .


>4 out of 6
> Ed
> 
>? ----- Original Message ----- 
>? From: Bob Browning
>? To: Grovenet
>? Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:08 PM
>? Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
> 
> 
>? PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!
> 
>? bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning
> 
>? http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>? _______________________________________________
>? GroveNet mailing list
>? GroveNet at rdrop.com
>? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Theresa Carter <theresacus at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Message-ID: <152951.59200.qm at web34501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1



Good Morning All,
We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.? Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th and Birch vacinity.? 
?
By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.? 
?
I know "cheep" entertainment.? 
?
Theresa Carter
?


? ? ? 

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:44:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Allen Warren <osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <627317.59804.qm at web112116.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

More "cheep" entertainment: we also have a flock of swifts in at least 2 of our chimneys.? We live on 12th between Cedar & Birch.


Allen Warren

From: Theresa Carter <theresacus at yahoo.com>
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:57:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25



Good Morning All,
We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.? Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th and Birch vacinity.? 

By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.? 

I know "cheep" entertainment.? 

Theresa Carter



? ? ? 
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



? ? ? 

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:35:11 EDT
From: AumaMarie at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Message-ID: <c8a.43e6bb2b.37c6b02f at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

There was a chukar for quite awhile this spring Dutch Brothers, Miracle? 
Sign.? It finally left left there.? You can buy baby chukars at? Coastal at 
times.? One of my grandsons has four of them.? 


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 08:50:34 -0700
From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <502B1A81-CDF0-4590-842D-96FD54C2CBB9 at teleport.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

Hi Theresa:
I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite? 
a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of? 
very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near? 
the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until? 
early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
Walt
On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:

>
>
> Good Morning All,
> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.???
> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a? 
> chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th? 
> and Birch vacinity.
>
> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a? 
> flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for? 
> yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>
> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>
> Theresa Carter
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Allen Warren <osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <580643.24875.qm at web112105.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

A neighbor adjoining the north portion of our property (their house faces 13th Ave.) has captive mourning doves so we get to hear their cooing pretty much 24x7.


Allen Warren

From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25

Hi Theresa:
I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite? 
a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of? 
very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near? 
the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until? 
early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
Walt
On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:

>
>
> Good Morning All,
> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.? 
> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a? 
> chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th? 
> and Birch vacinity.
>
> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a? 
> flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for? 
> yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>
> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>
> Theresa Carter
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet



? ? ? 

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:17:48 -0700
From: "Geri" <g-g-steele at comcast.net>
Subject: [Grovenet] Birds, was Re:? GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <B04615FF567F463B887C485B57EFDA01 at gerianehzkfhvy>
Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset="iso-8859-1"

Off and on we've had mourning doves on our property and/or nearby ... I enjoy their coos. :-)

Since early in the spring, this has been the most diverse season of birds where we live, in my opinion. Often found myself looking up ones I wasn't so familiar with.


Geri

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Allen Warren" <osubuckeye59 at yahoo.com>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25


>A neighbor adjoining the north portion of our property (their house faces 13th Ave.) has captive mourning doves so we get to hear their cooing pretty much 24x7.
> 
> 
> Allen Warren
> 
> From: Walt Wentz <waltw at teleport.com>
> To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 8:50:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 25
> 
> Hi Theresa:
> I met that chuckar a year ago. He has been living in that area quite? 
> a while, as have one or more escaped bunnies.
> I've noticed a great many mourning doves-- or maybe just a couple of? 
> very loudmouthed ones-- around the vicinity of 22nd and Maple, near? 
> the new Community Garden. They were calling there from April until? 
> early this month. A long mating season this year, apparently.
> Walt
> On Aug 26, 2009, at 12:57 AM, Theresa Carter wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> Good Morning All,
>> We have noticed a lot of non-indigenous birds around lately.? 
>> Doves, pidgins, and last night a chuckar.? Is anyone missing a? 
>> chuckar?? We had one in our yard last night.? We live in the 17th? 
>> and Birch vacinity.
>>
>> By the way for those who might be interested, the Genley's have a? 
>> flock of swifts in their chimney.? Go see them swirl in for? 
>> yourself at dusk one evening.? Yellow house on 17th and Birch.
>>
>> I know "cheep" entertainment.
>>
>> Theresa Carter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GroveNet mailing list
>> GroveNet at rdrop.com
>> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
> 
> 
> 
>? ? ? 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 26
****************************************



      

From OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net  Wed Aug 26 14:48:03 2009
From: OleHossTreeFarm at webtv.net (Alan Domenghini aka an OleHoss)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 14:48:03 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 26
In-Reply-To: Theresa Carter <theresacus@yahoo.com>'s message of Wed, 26 Aug
	2009 14:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <24477-4A95AD93-15@storefull-3173.bay.webtv.net>

That is one thing I like about living up here on my mountain..... I get
to see of all of the indigenous species of all makes and models.  And
all I got to do is to just step outside on my deck.   Sometimes Katt
will even try to sneak one kind of bird or another into into my home,
sometimes he tries to sneak anything he can in.

~alan~ 
 


From a_tom_51 at juno.com  Wed Aug 26 16:46:25 2009
From: a_tom_51 at juno.com (a_tom_51 at juno.com)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:46:25 GMT
Subject: [Grovenet] Vermicomposting
Message-ID: <20090826.164625.20836.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com>

Hey Palmy,
I deleted the email with your phone number. There is still the plastic tray for the worm composting bin that you need. It is under my utility trailer. I'll gladly bring it to you and show you how it works but I unfortunately do not no how to contact you other than grovenet.
Tom Alexander


 
____________________________________________________________
Easy-to-use, advanced features, flexible phone systems.  Click here for more info.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTQZan2u9ZMzhRyQ0HYzqQVnArMgkh6WedyYDaBqF8iA7yrbZmWh8k/

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 26 21:07:37 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:07:37 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
In-Reply-To: <003901ca267f$81a07880$84e16980$@org>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEGJMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

I guess you'll have to look at why they were written/voted in as amendments.
There was a reason the initiatives went to the constitution instead of
to statutes.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Chuck Riley
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:01 PM
> To: 'Forest Grove local interests list'
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
>
>
> Thank goodness I got 6 of 6.  I have been working on the issue of what I
> believe is a need for a major overhaul/rewrite of the Oregon Constitution
> for about 6 years, and have studied it in detail.  The last question tells
> it all 240 (actually 242) amendments by initiative!  I believe that the
> constitution should be a statement of principles and lay out the structure
> and function of government, not be another book of statutes.
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
> Behalf Of Bob Browning
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 1:09 PM
> To: Grovenet
> Subject: [Grovenet] A little quiz for you . . .
>
>
>
> PS: I got 5 out of 6 on the public side!!
>
> bob "don't know much about 'rithmatic" browning
>
> http://tinyurl.com/kwqemp
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.67/2326 - Release Date: 08/25/09
> 18:07:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>


From rab at jurislex.com  Thu Aug 27 15:51:29 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:51:29 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Failure to understand the concept . . . .
Message-ID: <4A970DF1.2000209@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090827/3f1a8810/attachment.html 

From isis23ra at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 28 08:46:25 2009
From: isis23ra at yahoo.com (Alana Graham)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:46:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Join in Komen Portland Race for the Cure on September
	20th
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEGJMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <334833.14184.qm@web55605.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

The Center for Gender Equity of Pacific University is participating in the Komen Portland Race for the Cure on September 20th, 2009 in the fight to save lives and end breast cancer forever.

Please join our team ?Gender Equity? in the 5K walk at 9:00 am.  Registration for the team ends on Aug. 31st.  Aug. 31st, you may register for the race as an individual and walk with the "Gender Equity" team.  

We will meet at the Orenco Station Max stop on Sunday morning, Sept. 20 at 7:00 and go to the race site together.  

When you join the team, please contact Erin Martin (emartin at pacficu.edu) and let her know so you can get information about our team's plans.   

If you can?t make the race, but would like to donate to this cause on behalf of our team you can do so online.  

To join or donate go to the following website: http://rfcp.convio.net/site/TR/Race/General/9978226?pg=team&fr_id=1110&team_id=49742

We look forward to seeing you at the race! Together we can save lives!


The Oregon and SW Washington Affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure? has one clear goal - saving lives.  They are committed to serving all 36 counties in Oregon as well as the three counties in SW Washington: Clark, Skamania, and Cowlitz.  75% of their funds provide the following services for local women:
- Education about breast cancer and early detection
- Information and support to breast cancer survivors and their
  families
- Mammograms for the uninsured or underinsured
- Transportation and treatment support for survivors
In addition, 25% of their revenue is combined with Komen Affiliates nationwide, making Komen the largest private funder of breast cancer research in the world!
Susan G. Komen for the Cure? awarded over $100 million for breast cancer research grants in 2008, and Komen funding has touched every medical advancement related to breast cancer to date!

PS - Did you know that Susan G. Komen for the Cure provided more than 8,500 screening mammograms for uninsured women in Oregon and SW Washington in 2008?  You probably don?t know that an additional 37,000 local women ages 40-64 are uninsured or underinsured and go without life saving breast cancer screenings every year.  That is why fundraising is more important than ever.

Dr. Martha Rampton
Professor of History
Director-Center for Gender Equity
Pacific University
2043 College Way
Forest Grove, Oregon  97116
Phone: 503 352 2772
Fax:     503 352 3195





      


From rab at jurislex.com  Fri Aug 28 17:07:33 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:07:33 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .
Message-ID: <4A987145.2040906@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090828/4b80e57d/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gop_hints_dems_would_deny_repu.html
Type: image/gif
Size: 0 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090828/4b80e57d/attachment.gif 

From rab at jurislex.com  Fri Aug 28 17:24:40 2009
From: rab at jurislex.com (Bob Browning)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:24:40 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Veellly intelesting . . . . . . . .
Message-ID: <4A987548.1010606@jurislex.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090828/609e7e98/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: large_hosp.enkinsstevenduchaine.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 75138 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090828/609e7e98/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: medium_hospitalspending.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 43491 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090828/609e7e98/attachment-0001.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: medium_hospstay.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 43892 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090828/609e7e98/attachment-0002.jpg 

From g-g-steele at comcast.net  Fri Aug 28 17:26:25 2009
From: g-g-steele at comcast.net (Geri)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:26:25 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .
References: <4A987145.2040906@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <C806C6A981664D9C99A26A8EC59AA4B0@gerianehzkfhvy>

Paranoia ... and projection!

Geri


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bob Browning 
To: Grovenet 
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 5:07 PM
Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .


GOP hints Dems would deny Republicans health care
by The Associated Press 
Friday August 28, 2009, 1:55 PM

WASHINGTON -- The Republican national party has mailed a fundraising appeal suggesting Democrats might use an overhaul of the health care system to deny medical treatment to Republicans. 
A questionnaire accompanying the appeal says the government could check voting registration records, "prompting fears that GOP voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health care rationing system." 
It asks, "Does this possibility concern you?" 
Katie Wright, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said the question was "inartfully worded." 
But she said people should worry because government officials would have access to personal financial and medical data. 
"The RNC doesn't try to scare people," said Wright. "We're just trying to get the facts out on health care. And that's what we do every day." 
Jon Vogel, executive director of the Democratic House campaign organization, called the GOP letter "shameless fear-mongering." 
In a fundraising e-mail of his own seeking to raise $100,000 by Aug. 31, Vogel wrote the Republican accusation was "just a preview of the falsehoods, fabrications and outright lies Republicans will be pushing when Congress returns in September." 
The allegation is the latest instance in which some critics of the health care effort have made inflammatory unfounded claims -- such as conservatives who claimed the legislation would create "death panels" that they said could lead to euthanizing elderly people. 
The suggestion that Republicans might not receive care is included in a "Future of American Health Care Survey" containing 13 questions, most of which are critical of the Democratic health care effort. The technique, referred to as a "push poll," is used often in political campaigns by both parties and is designed to spread negative information, not to sample public opinion. 
Another question asks, "Do you believe it is justified to ration health care regardless of whether an individual has contributed to the cost of the treatment?" 
The survey is accompanied by a two-page letter signed by Michael Steele, chairman of the national Republican party. The letter accuses Democrats of "moving swiftly to bring European-style socialized medicine here," but makes no mention of the possibility that Republicans might be denied coverage. 
Wright did not immediately respond when asked who had crafted the wording of the survey questions, and which GOP officials had signed off on it. She also said she did not initially know how many of the surveys were mailed or to whom. 
The question suggesting possible denial of care for Republicans was first reported by The Columbian newspaper of Vancouver, Wash. 
--The Associated Press 



_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com 
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 29 08:05:23 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Veellly intelesting . . . . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A987548.1010606@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEHAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Veterans is run by the defence department, not the executive branch as in
Obama's plan.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 5:25 PM
  To: Grovenet
  Subject: [Grovenet] Veellly intelesting . . . . . . . .


  Oregon spends less but achieves equal or better health results to states
that spend more on care
  by Joe Rojas-Burke, The Oregonian
  Wednesday August 26, 2009, 11:59 AM
     Bruce Ely, The Oregonian

  Steven Duchaine gets hospital-level health care at home from registered
nurse Kay Jenkins as part of a program administered by the Portland Veterans
Affairs Medical Center, an example of how Oregon has kept its
hospitalization rates below the national average.

  With a serious leg infection and complications from congestive heart
failure, Steven Duchaine feared he might have to spend weeks in the
hospital.
  The 62-year-old Beaverton man was delighted when a doctor at Portland's
Veterans Affairs Medical Center offered him the choice of receiving care at
home, including daily blood tests, intravenous infusions and assessments by
a registered nurse.


  "You're much better off at home," said Duchaine, who'd lost a lot of sleep
in the disruptive hospital environment.

  The Portland VA now routinely offers "hospital-at-home" care to selected
patients. Dr. Scott Mader, who developed the program, has co-authored
research showing that hospital care for some illnesses can be delivered
safely and effectively at home -- at a lower cost.


  Efforts to minimize hospitalizations have a long history in Oregon. For
decades, doctors here have been far less likely to put patients in the
hospital than in most other states, and hospital stays have been among the
shortest in the U.S.
  "We hospitalize people less often and we keep them for shorter periods of
time," said Kevin Earls, vice president of the Oregon Association of
Hospitals and Health Systems.

  Health policy researchers say the nation could learn much from Oregon and
a handful of other states that consistently spend less but achieve
comparable or better health results than those that spend more.

  "Avoiding unnecessary hospital stays is the most important way to reduce
spending while increasing quality," said Dr. Elliot Fisher, director of
Dartmouth Medical School's Center for Health Policy Research. Fisher and
colleagues at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical
Practice have documented striking regional differences in hospital use and
health spending.

  The evidence
  Oregon's rate of hospital use is less than half the rate in New York and
other high-use states, measured in days spent in the hospital per 1,000
residents. And the average hospital stay in Oregon -- about 4 days -- is
more than a day shorter than in the five highest-use states.

  During the last two years of life, a Portland resident dying of cancer,
diabetes or heart disease is likely to be hospitalized 16 times and spend
two to three days in intensive care. In Los Angeles, the same patient could
expect to be hospitalized 77 times and receive more than 11 days of
intensive care.

  Fewer and shorter stays produce significant savings. For example, in
Miami, Medicare spent $16,351 per enrollee in 2006, and costs rose at an
annual rate of 5 percent. That was twice as fast as in Salem, where Medicare
spent $5,877 per enrollee in 2006, and the growth rate was 2.3 percent.
Across much of Oregon, the annual growth rate was less than 3 percent.




  "To slow spending growth, we need policies that encourage high-growth (or
high-cost) regions to behave more like low-growth, low-cost regions," Fisher
and colleagues concluded in an influential report in The New England Journal
of Medicine earlier this year.

  How we got here

  In the Northwest, a thrifty style of medical care dates at least to World
War II, according to Mark Hornbrook, a health economist with the Kaiser
Permanente Center for Health Research in Portland. Shipbuilders and other
industries engaged in the war effort drew thousands of workers to the West
Coast, outstripping the capacity of hospitals.
  "We didn't build a bunch of hospitals during the war to keep up with the
population movement," Hornbrook said. Instead, health professionals learned
how to deliver needed care with fewer hospital beds. After the war, medical
groups such as Kaiser Permanente laid the groundwork for the HMO (health
maintenance organization) movement: group practices paid a set, monthly fee
to care for a population of patients.

  The HMO model didn't reward doctors and hospitals for doing more tests and
procedures. And HMOs gained a large foothold in Oregon. Hornbrook said that
pushed doctors and hospitals to maintain a lid on hospital use.

  When HMOs rose to national prominence in the 1990s, critics chastised them
for cutting hospital stays and discharging patients "quicker and sicker."
And it is clear that Oregon's health system falls short on some measures.

  For instance, older African Americans in Oregon are about one-third more
likely than whites to be hospitalized for problems that can be prevented by
good medical care, and elderly Oregonians are about 55 percent more likely
to undergo back surgery than the national average -- a sign of potentially
excessive use of surgery for back problems, according to a report by the
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

  But overall, Oregon medical caregivers excel at helping people avoid
unnecessary hospitalizations with coordinated preventive care, the
foundation concluded. Other studies have shown that heavy spending on
hospital care doesn't necessarily help people who are sick. Patients in
high-use Miami or Los Angeles don't seem to fare better than patients in
Portland with the same illnesses.

  Overuse of hospitals, on the other hand, may cause harm and worsen quality
of life.

  A study last year showed that less hospital care gives patients more
satisfying experiences. Researchers compared patients' ratings of quality
and the aggressiveness of treatment. In regions with the highest intensity
of hospital care, patients rated hospitals worse on each of the 10 measures
of satisfaction.

  "An avoided day in the hospital is a day you've avoided a shot at getting
sick from exposure to a hospital infection," Fisher said. "It's a day you've
avoided the opportunity for your physician to get you the wrong medication."

  Patient needs have surprisingly little to do with regional differences in
spending, according to Fisher and colleagues. They've found that the supply
of hospital beds and specialists in a given city can drive up demand for
hospital services. The existing payment system readily rewards caregivers
for performing more procedures whether they are needed or not.

  Compound savings
  In the New England Journal of Medicine report, Fisher and colleagues
showed that small differences in spending growth compound over time to make
a huge budget difference.

  They compared spending growth in San Francisco and the eastern half of
Long Island. Both regions spent nearly the same per Medicare enrollee in
1992. But San Francisco held annual spending growth to 2.4 percent annually
for 14 years while Long Island's climbed by 4 percent. By 2006, Long Island
spent $2,300 more per enrollee, or about $1billion in added Medicare costs.

  The researchers concluded that reform efforts should focus first on
cutting back on the overuse of hospitals and unnecessary doctor visits,
tests and procedures. If Medicare reduced its annual spending growth from
the national rate of 3.5 percent to 2.4 percent (the rate in San Francisco),
the researchers said the program could save about $1.4 trillion during the
next 14 years and avoid running into a deficit.

  Getting other regions to spend less on hospitals could be tough. States
and industries enjoying the high rate of spending are bound to resist.
High-spending states receive a lion's share of federal funding for health
programs such as Medicaid.

  "When you look at states that have the highest spending, it's not
surprising it's the states with highest political standing at the national
level," Earls said.

  Hospitals and specialist physicians in high-spending regions also stand to
lose income.

  "I don't know how we get past the confrontational politics," Hornbrook
said. "Everyone thinks they're the ones who are going to get gored."

  Fisher said one key will be changing the way medical providers get paid.

  "We have to build in incentives that reward physicians for providing
better care, not more care or less care."
  Joe Rojas-Burke: 503-412-7073; joerojas at news.oregonian.com

  Time on the mend

  Oregon's use of hospitals is among the lowest in the country. Here's a
comparison of the number of days per year people spend as hospital
inpatients, per 1,000 population. Numbers have been statistically adjusted
to account for differences in age between state populations.

  High
  New York, 816
  Tennessee, 783
  Louisiana, 767
  Mississippi, 718
  Alabama, 691
  U.S. average, 584

  Low
  Vermont, 383
  Oregon, 382
  Idaho, 375
  New Mexico, 372
  Wyoming, 357

  Source: American Hospital Association 2007 Annual Survey of Hospitals


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 75138 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090829/434e5400/attachment-0003.jpe 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 43491 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090829/434e5400/attachment-0004.jpe 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 43892 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090829/434e5400/attachment-0005.jpe 

From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 29 08:05:23 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <4A987145.2040906@jurislex.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEHAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

Do you guys get Democrat fundraising stuff? It is the same.
My father in law passed away a few months ago and we've gone through his
mail.
SAD. One guy who lost the election last November was already asking for
money for the next election.
A company was asking for hundreds of dollars to save your social security.
He paid $4 for an Obama coin and paid $19.95 shipping.
The Heritage Foundation even managed to scare him into donating to them.
Must have been a good letter.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
  Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 5:08 PM
  To: Grovenet
  Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .


  GOP hints Dems would deny Republicans health care
  by The Associated Press
  Friday August 28, 2009, 1:55 PM
  WASHINGTON -- The Republican national party has mailed a fundraising
appeal suggesting Democrats might use an overhaul of the health care system
to deny medical treatment to Republicans.

  A questionnaire accompanying the appeal says the government could check
voting registration records, "prompting fears that GOP voters might be
discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health
care rationing system."

  It asks, "Does this possibility concern you?"

  Katie Wright, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said
the question was "inartfully worded."

  But she said people should worry because government officials would have
access to personal financial and medical data.

  "The RNC doesn't try to scare people," said Wright. "We're just trying to
get the facts out on health care. And that's what we do every day."

  Jon Vogel, executive director of the Democratic House campaign
organization, called the GOP letter "shameless fear-mongering."

  In a fundraising e-mail of his own seeking to raise $100,000 by Aug. 31,
Vogel wrote the Republican accusation was "just a preview of the falsehoods,
fabrications and outright lies Republicans will be pushing when Congress
returns in September."

  The allegation is the latest instance in which some critics of the health
care effort have made inflammatory unfounded claims -- such as conservatives
who claimed the legislation would create "death panels" that they said could
lead to euthanizing elderly people.

  The suggestion that Republicans might not receive care is included in a
"Future of American Health Care Survey" containing 13 questions, most of
which are critical of the Democratic health care effort. The technique,
referred to as a "push poll," is used often in political campaigns by both
parties and is designed to spread negative information, not to sample public
opinion.

  Another question asks, "Do you believe it is justified to ration health
care regardless of whether an individual has contributed to the cost of the
treatment?"

  The survey is accompanied by a two-page letter signed by Michael Steele,
chairman of the national Republican party. The letter accuses Democrats of
"moving swiftly to bring European-style socialized medicine here," but makes
no mention of the possibility that Republicans might be denied coverage.

  Wright did not immediately respond when asked who had crafted the wording
of the survey questions, and which GOP officials had signed off on it. She
also said she did not initially know how many of the surveys were mailed or
to whom.

  The question suggesting possible denial of care for Republicans was first
reported by The Columbian newspaper of Vancouver, Wash.

  --The Associated Press
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 0 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090829/667bb247/attachment.gif 

From mbliss at agora.rdrop.com  Sun Aug 30 18:26:18 2009
From: mbliss at agora.rdrop.com (Meredith Bliss)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 18:26:18 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] [SPAM?] Don't Miss Chalk Art (including Bizarrt 2009)!
Message-ID: <200908301826.18265.mbliss@agora.rdrop.com>


September 19th marks the 19th annual Sidewalk Chalk Art Festival in ?
downtown Forest Grove.?There will be a pre-registration opportunity ?
on Sept. 16th at the Valley Art Gallery from 5-7:30 that evening. ? 
People can also register the day of the event. The fee is $7.00 per ?
square if you are a member of Valley Art or $10.00 a square if you are ?
not. This includes a tray of colorful pastel chalk. We hope you can ?
come out and enjoy a day of artistic fun and entertainment.

  Roylene Read, Chair
  Sidewalk Chalk Art Festival


Bizarrt 2009, September 19th - Bizarre Art in Forest Grove,
A Scarecrow/Sculpture Show. This year's theme is "Cobbled Together".
UCC Church is again letting us occupy the grass facing Main Street. The 
only requirement is that your entry be self-supporting.  We are allowed to 
pound stakes into the ground, onto which objects can be wired or taped.  
I will be at UCC Church at 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM.  It would be great if your 
piece could be there by 9:00 in the morning.  Everyone is welcome to 
participate, and all that is needed is imagination. There is no size 
restriction, and we will have a table for the really small sculptures. It is 
not necessary to go with the theme, some people need one to get themselves 
going. Political statements can also be made, whatever it is that you need to 
express. The street is filled with folks, it is a fun time, stop by and chat, 
we always bring extra chairs for friends. If you still have questions e-mail 
me, Mary Beth, The Queen of Bizarrt at mbrbliss at verizon.net 



-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
----------------------------------------
Just happy to be here, but speaking 
only for myself!
Meredith Bliss --- www.rdrop.com/~mbliss
----------------------------------------


From mbliss at agora.rdrop.com  Sun Aug 30 18:30:21 2009
From: mbliss at agora.rdrop.com (Meredith Bliss)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 18:30:21 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] [SPAM?]  Re:  Veellly intelesting . . . . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEHAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEHAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <200908301830.21247.mbliss@agora.rdrop.com>

On Saturday 29 August 2009 08:05:23 am Steven wrote:

> Veterans is run by the defence department, not the executive branch as in
> Obama's plan.

Very creative! A fourth branch of government: Executive, Legislative, 
Judicial, Defence ....

----------------------------------------
Just happy to be here, but speaking 
only for myself!
Meredith Bliss --- www.rdrop.com/~mbliss
----------------------------------------

From jo.david at verizon.net  Sun Aug 30 20:41:44 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 20:41:44 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Putting some teeth into the law
References: <EA8FD94AA649D349A82A409E2A54217A03C1B291@fkimlki01.enterprise.afmc.ds.af.mil>
Message-ID: <29D34E2B-CFB3-4085-ACE9-46C9A5C96C8E@verizon.net>


The story.

My boss is without peer when it comes to the rules and regulations  
that customs officials must follow. But when it comes to the law,  
well, that's a different story.

We were attending a court case in which we were prosecuting a  
smuggler. The judge asked the court, "Who is making these allegations?"

My boss stood up and proclaimed, "I am the alligator, your honor."
>


From jo.david at verizon.net  Sun Aug 30 21:03:07 2009
From: jo.david at verizon.net (David Morelli)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:03:07 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] [SPAM?]  Re:  Veellly intelesting . . . . . . . .
In-Reply-To: <200908301830.21247.mbliss@agora.rdrop.com>
References: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNCEHAMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>
	<200908301830.21247.mbliss@agora.rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <2F28DE6B-F012-4E7B-942B-BC0AC4BB48FC@verizon.net>


On Aug 30, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Meredith Bliss wrote:

> On Saturday 29 August 2009 08:05:23 am Steven wrote:
>
>> Veterans is run by the defence department, not the executive  
>> branch as in Obama's plan.
>
> Very creative! A fourth branch of government: Executive,  
> Legislative, Judicial, Defence ....

Just be glad that it isn't run by the Bush CIA.

Actually, Defense is located under the Commander in Chief, which was  
Rumsfeld under the prior administration, I recall.  No.  Cheney.   
Wait, it was the other guy.  Certainly that chain of command wasn't  
politicized at all.  <frown>

As I watch the progress of "Obama's plan", I can see how Congress is  
making all sorts of changes to the proposal.  Which is weird, since  
the Bush-Cheney-Gingrich model was to craft the legislation with the  
lobbyists before going to Congress and then passing it on a party  
line vote without any changes.

It is weird, because the Constitution actually suggests that Congress  
ought to write the laws, and <gasp> offer competing views and  
language for consideration.  And the current Administration seems to  
be following the separation of powers principle in this arena.  This  
is quite different from the Parliamentary system where the Prime  
Minister and the ruling coalition craft the laws before going for a  
vote along party lines without any changes.

Darn that Socialist President for the foolishness of using the  
Constitution as a model for ruling this country.  Next thing you  
know, he will be actually using the Bill of Rights as a model for  
dealing with personal liberties and rights, instead of the "ad-hoc" ,  
"seat of the pants", situational ethics favored by Dick Cheney and  
his crowd.

Does anyone remember when "situational ethics" was a badge of  
dishonor painted upon liberals by religious conservatives?  For the  
last eight years is was okay to do any action so long as "the end  
justifies the means", and Cheney is still pushing that situational  
morality.

Hmmm?

David

From theresacus at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 31 04:49:51 2009
From: theresacus at yahoo.com (Theresa Carter)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 04:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia
In-Reply-To: <mailman.15.1251572407.49629.grovenet@rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <149666.44019.qm@web34504.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


I too read this article by the AP.? I could not believe to what extent the RNC would go to create fear and paranoia.? Fear tends to mean fight or flight.? They are being fed the purple kool-aid and?are fighting to drink it first.??It amazes me how many sheeple (Sheep + people) there are.??
?
Theresa? 
?

--- On Sat, 8/29/09, grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com> wrote:


From: grovenet-request at rdrop.com <grovenet-request at rdrop.com>
Subject: GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 30
To: grovenet at rdrop.com
Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 12:00 PM


Send GroveNet mailing list submissions to
??? grovenet at rdrop.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
??? http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
??? grovenet-request at rdrop.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
??? grovenet-owner at rdrop.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GroveNet digest..."


Today's Topics:

???1. Re: Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . . (Steven)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:05:23 -0700
From: "Steven" <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNAEHAMIAA.NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Do you guys get Democrat fundraising stuff? It is the same.
My father in law passed away a few months ago and we've gone through his
mail.
SAD. One guy who lost the election last November was already asking for
money for the next election.
A company was asking for hundreds of dollars to save your social security.
He paid $4 for an Obama coin and paid $19.95 shipping.
The Heritage Foundation even managed to scare him into donating to them.
Must have been a good letter.
? -----Original Message-----
? From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Browning
? Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 5:08 PM
? To: Grovenet
? Subject: [Grovenet] Is there a limit to paranoia . . . . .


? GOP hints Dems would deny Republicans health care
? by The Associated Press
? Friday August 28, 2009, 1:55 PM
? WASHINGTON -- The Republican national party has mailed a fundraising
appeal suggesting Democrats might use an overhaul of the health care system
to deny medical treatment to Republicans.

? A questionnaire accompanying the appeal says the government could check
voting registration records, "prompting fears that GOP voters might be
discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health
care rationing system."

? It asks, "Does this possibility concern you?"

? Katie Wright, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said
the question was "inartfully worded."

? But she said people should worry because government officials would have
access to personal financial and medical data.

? "The RNC doesn't try to scare people," said Wright. "We're just trying to
get the facts out on health care. And that's what we do every day."

? Jon Vogel, executive director of the Democratic House campaign
organization, called the GOP letter "shameless fear-mongering."

? In a fundraising e-mail of his own seeking to raise $100,000 by Aug. 31,
Vogel wrote the Republican accusation was "just a preview of the falsehoods,
fabrications and outright lies Republicans will be pushing when Congress
returns in September."

? The allegation is the latest instance in which some critics of the health
care effort have made inflammatory unfounded claims -- such as conservatives
who claimed the legislation would create "death panels" that they said could
lead to euthanizing elderly people.

? The suggestion that Republicans might not receive care is included in a
"Future of American Health Care Survey" containing 13 questions, most of
which are critical of the Democratic health care effort. The technique,
referred to as a "push poll," is used often in political campaigns by both
parties and is designed to spread negative information, not to sample public
opinion.

? Another question asks, "Do you believe it is justified to ration health
care regardless of whether an individual has contributed to the cost of the
treatment?"

? The survey is accompanied by a two-page letter signed by Michael Steele,
chairman of the national Republican party. The letter accuses Democrats of
"moving swiftly to bring European-style socialized medicine here," but makes
no mention of the possibility that Republicans might be denied coverage.

? Wright did not immediately respond when asked who had crafted the wording
of the survey questions, and which GOP officials had signed off on it. She
also said she did not initially know how many of the surveys were mailed or
to whom.

? The question suggesting possible denial of care for Republicans was first
reported by The Columbian newspaper of Vancouver, Wash.

? --The Associated Press
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 0 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20090829/667bb247/attachment-0001.gif 

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


End of GroveNet Digest, Vol 57, Issue 30
****************************************



      

From allnutt at verizon.net  Mon Aug 31 06:56:43 2009
From: allnutt at verizon.net (Katie Allnutt)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 06:56:43 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Putting some teeth into the law
In-Reply-To: <29D34E2B-CFB3-4085-ACE9-46C9A5C96C8E@verizon.net>
References: <EA8FD94AA649D349A82A409E2A54217A03C1B291@fkimlki01.enterprise.afmc.ds.af.mil>
	<29D34E2B-CFB3-4085-ACE9-46C9A5C96C8E@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <8994D9FD-4C6D-4C56-8908-FA518494FDF8@verizon.net>

Too funny!
Katie

On Aug 30, 2009, at 8:41 PM, David Morelli wrote:

>
> The story.
>
> My boss is without peer when it comes to the rules and regulations
> that customs officials must follow. But when it comes to the law,
> well, that's a different story.
>
> We were attending a court case in which we were prosecuting a
> smuggler. The judge asked the court, "Who is making these  
> allegations?"
>
> My boss stood up and proclaimed, "I am the alligator, your honor."
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From jschrag at fgnewstimes.com  Mon Aug 31 07:49:46 2009
From: jschrag at fgnewstimes.com (John Schrag)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:49:46 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Putting some teeth into the law
In-Reply-To: <8994D9FD-4C6D-4C56-8908-FA518494FDF8@verizon.net>
References: <EA8FD94AA649D349A82A409E2A54217A03C1B291@fkimlki01.enterprise.afmc.ds.af.mil><29D34E2B-CFB3-4085-ACE9-46C9A5C96C8E@verizon.net>
	<8994D9FD-4C6D-4C56-8908-FA518494FDF8@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <AC9B474ECF994F6EA1242506871B9501@pmg.pamplincom.com>

Jesse Jackson is quoted as using the "allegator" line several years ago, but
when I once tried to confirm it, I could find little proof.

If he did say it, it would have most likely been intentional, as he has a
great vocabulary. 

John Schrag
Editor & Publisher 
News-Times
Forest Grove, Oregon
503-357-3181
?
Voted the "best small newspaper in Oregon" 2006, 2007, 2008
?
?
?
?
?


-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Katie Allnutt
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 6:57 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Putting some teeth into the law

Too funny!
Katie

On Aug 30, 2009, at 8:41 PM, David Morelli wrote:

>
> The story.
>
> My boss is without peer when it comes to the rules and regulations
> that customs officials must follow. But when it comes to the law,
> well, that's a different story.
>
> We were attending a court case in which we were prosecuting a
> smuggler. The judge asked the court, "Who is making these  
> allegations?"
>
> My boss stood up and proclaimed, "I am the alligator, your honor."
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet

_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet





From kb-ent at comcast.net  Mon Aug 31 17:50:14 2009
From: kb-ent at comcast.net (K. Bingham)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:50:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info
Message-ID: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>

Can anyone give me some advice or info about renting a room, I have two 
bedrooms that are empty and I could use a little more monthly income. I 
am thinking that some Pacific U. students would be a good bet.

From steelem at pacificu.edu  Mon Aug 31 18:06:22 2009
From: steelem at pacificu.edu (Steele, Mike)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:06:22 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info
In-Reply-To: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>
References: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <8D94A946E17E9941AE94FC3AE11CAB7E03C4A76A1D@everest.ad.pacificu.edu>

Try contacting our Housing Office.  The PU phone number is 503-352-6151...ask for this office.  Good luck!

--Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On Behalf Of K. Bingham
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:50 PM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info

Can anyone give me some advice or info about renting a room, I have two 
bedrooms that are empty and I could use a little more monthly income. I 
am thinking that some Pacific U. students would be a good bet.
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From waltw at teleport.com  Mon Aug 31 19:05:59 2009
From: waltw at teleport.com (Walt Wentz)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:05:59 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info
In-Reply-To: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>
References: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <E094EB27-6B1A-40E8-9E2D-7E8F384CFDB2@teleport.com>

If you can get an Op or PT senior or graduate student, those are the  
best. Too broke for partying, and too busy studying for fooling around.
Walt
On Aug 31, 2009, at 5:50 PM, K. Bingham wrote:

> Can anyone give me some advice or info about renting a room, I have  
> two
> bedrooms that are empty and I could use a little more monthly  
> income. I
> am thinking that some Pacific U. students would be a good bet.
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet


From NoSpam03 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 31 20:57:14 2009
From: NoSpam03 at comcast.net (Steven)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:57:14 -0700
Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info
In-Reply-To: <4A9C6FC6.8080900@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <FBEAKAJNIJPKEDCBPHFNGEHGMIAA.NoSpam03@comcast.net>

It is a little late now. The students are here now and have found places.
Advertise on the university web site.
http://classifieds.pacificu.edu/
You can advertise on craigslist, but you will get all kinds of calls.
The students was high speed internet and room enough for a desk. 
I'd think a room in the range of $375/month would be a fair price. 
Are you offering meals or the kitchen as well? Parking? 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of K. Bingham
> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:50 PM
> To: Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: [Grovenet] Rental info
> 
> 
> Can anyone give me some advice or info about renting a room, I have two 
> bedrooms that are empty and I could use a little more monthly income. I 
> am thinking that some Pacific U. students would be a good bet.
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>