Steve

A Greek Orthodox Archbishop just said a prayer at the presidential luncheon. I told you he was really a Greek Orthodox. I bet you he has plans to go open a diner after he leaves the White House.

I'm currently watching the Inauguration on TV and would be watching regardless of which candidate had won.

How many people who are not watching today, would be watching if Romney had won?

How many people who are watching today, would not be watching if Romney had won?

Just wondering.

In a business setting, suppose you absolutely have to leave a location.

Some people having a conversation do not realize that you have to leave, and you have waited 30 seconds for a break in their conversation to appear so that you can say goodbye, but no break seems to appear.

Is it better to just leave and not say goodbye, or do you interrupt, apologize for doing so, and mention that you must leave and offer a quick goodbye to allow them to get back to their conversation?

On one hand, I was taught it was impolite to interrupt, but I was also taught that you shouldn't leave a scene without saying goodbye.

In a business setting, suppose you absolutely have to leave a location, and either one or two people having a conversation do not realize that you have to leave, and you have waited 30 seconds for a break in their conversation to appear so that you can say goodbye, but no break seems to appear.

Is it better to just leave and not say goodbye, or do you interrupt, apologize for doing so, and mention that you must leave and offer a quick goodbye to allow them to get back to their conversation?

On one hand, I was taught it was impolite to interrupt, but I was also taught that you shouldn't leave a scene without saying goodbye.

Very often the topic of "bullying", especially amongst school children seems to be getting a lot of coverage on the news, on talk shows, at school meetings, etc.

But, when I've seen examples of what is being referred to as "bullying", it seems to have a different connotation than it did when I was in school (in the 1970s). Back then, at least where I lived, the term "bullying" generally implied that a person was physically harming someone or threatening to physically harm someone, in order to force a reaction or behavior.

Verbal abuse on a person such as repeatedly calling them a name, telling them things that were hurtful, laughing at a person, especially when the person didn't like it, or to evoke an emotional response from the person was viewed as either teasing, taunting, tormenting, but not bullying.

I'm not trying to play down verbal abuse in any way. Verbal abuse can be just as bad, or worse than physical abuse, especially since the scars they leave are invisible and the evidence that it occurs is often one student's word over another student's word.

I'm trying to see whether the definition of bullying to include verbal abuse is something that is regional, something that changed over time, or was verbal abuse always considered to be bullying.

Very often the topic of "bullying", especially amongst school children seems to be getting a lot of coverage on the news, on talk shows, at school meetings, etc.

But, when I've seen examples of what is being referred to as "bullying", it seems to have a different connotation than it did when I was in school (in the 1970s). Back then, at least where I lived, the term "bullying" generally implied forcing a reaction or behavior from a person by either threatening or actually carrying out some physical harm on that person.

Verbal abuse on a person such as calling them a name, telling them things that were hurtful, laughing at a person, was viewed as either teasing, taunting, tormenting, but not bullying.

I'm not trying to play down verbal abuse which can be just as bad, or worse than physical abuse, especially since the scars they leave are invisible and the evidence that it occurs is often one student's word over another student's word.

I'm trying to see whether the definition of bullying to include verbal abuse is something that is regional, something that changed over time, or was verbal abuse always considered to be bullying.

that have so far refused to more forward on creating their health insurance exchanges, request more time to create them? They're going to say that they didn't have enough time between the ruling, and the January 1, 2014 deadline to create the exchanges.

Should they be given extra time, or should they be told "too bad, so sad"?

or a voucher that would not be sufficient to buy the level of coverage equal to Medicare and that would continually require seniors to increasingly spend more of their income on coverage each year because the voucher's amount would be tied to inflation while the insurance rates would be tied to actual insurance payouts, which one would you choose. Medicare? Or Vouchercare - the Republican approved program that ends Medicare?

Charges for your services: $3,000

Charges for George Walsh’s services: $450

Total charges $3,450

You ask who George Walsh is, and you’re told that he’s someone who came to the ER six months ago with chest pains. He has unpaid charges so the hospital is adding $450 to the next 100 patients to help recover some of the money that George couldn’t pay.

You ask why George Walsh isn’t paying his charges himself and you’re told that he did not want to pay for health insurance, and he didn't have enough money saved, so he paid the hospital what he could and the hospital negotiated a bill with George that was $45,000 less than his actual charges. You and 99 other patients are being charged extra to make up for the money that George couldn’t afford to pay. The hospital also adds that they were required to stabilize George, and it required surgery, so they couldn’t turn him away and surgery is expensive.

You say that if George chose not to have health insurance, then he needs to be responsible for his life and pay his own bills. The hospital tells you, that George can’t be required to buy health insurance – that would take away his liberty – and to recover the charges from George, the hospital would have to either wait 10 years for him to pay off his bill or take him to court or send the bills to a collection agency, which would cost the hospital in interest, legal fees or collection fees, and there’s no guarantee that the hospital would get the money – charging you is easier and cheaper to do.

Now, you’re angry – You tell the hospital that you’re not going to pay someone else’s hospital bill, and you demand that George’s charges be removed from your bill. The hospital agrees, and says they’ll adjust your bill. The original bill said:

Charges for your services: $3,000

Charges for George Walsh’s services: $450

Total charges $3,450

The new bill says:

Charges for your services: $3,450

Total charges $3,450

What do you tell the hospital?

If you choose not to own a car you will NEVER have a car accident, guaranteed.. So there's no need to have car insurance if you don't own a car. People who own a car are required to have car insurance because they MIGHT have a car accident.

BUT, it is not possible to create a situation where you will NEVER get sick or NEVER need health care.

So, if people agree that mandatory car insurance is OK if you miqht have a car accident, then they should also agree that mandatory health insurance is OK if you might get sick.

Why not?

Calculate to what level FICA and Medicare taxes would have to be raised in order to keep those programs from going bankrupt, and then then raise the taxes to those rates.

Why are cutting the benefits or destroying the programs the only options, but raising the tax rates are not an option?

The Vouchercare that the Republicans overwhelmingly approved in the House only affects people who are under 55. Seniors will still get the same Medicare they always have. So, why do seniors oppose it?

that he wasn't killed because he wasn't there

or

that we have him alive somewhere, and we're only saying that he'd been buried at sea.

Did they figure it might cost them votes?

Current Medicare: You're guaranteed coverage

GOP's Medicare: Insurers can tell you they're not interested in covering you.

Current Medicare No lifetime caps

GOP's Medicare: They want to restore the ability for lifetime caps.

Current Medicare: No denial for pre-existing conditions - every senior is covered

GOP's Medicare: If you have a pre-existing condition, you might find coverage is unavailable or priced so high you can't afford it.

If Medicare needs more money to exist, then raise taxes.

But, I'm under 55, so KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OF MY MEDICARE!!!

She was a commoner

She was twice divorced

She was American

If you think it's more than one, put them in order of strongest to weakest reason.

I think it's because:

She was twice divorced - Church of England frowns on divorce

She was a commoner - Royalty only married Royalty or nobility, back then

She was American

Or were some of the invites just for the ceremony?

Just wait until the seniors who don't have medical insurance because the Republicans dismantled Medicare start going going to the ERs too.