 January 27, 2012 - 4:11pm | I do not even want to try to tell any Americans (I am one too) who to vote for but the Newt has promised if elected he will make sure we have an American Moonbase by the end of his second term. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
 January 30, 2012 - 5:06pm | My real issue with universal health care is that I don't smoke, use drugs, or abuse alcohol but I'll be paying for those who do and it irks me. Seeing as how the government has managed social security so well (not) I expect them to do the same with health care. So when I hit 80 and really need social security and health care I expect I'll be left hanging in the breeze or suddenly someone in the government will say, "You know, that Soilent Green movie may have had something." I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
 January 30, 2012 - 7:27pm | I don't mind universal health care in general but as with everything there is a give and take. Real freedom of choice should mean you have options but there has to be a balance. I was in the military and for the soldiers and dependants you had universal healthcare for a long time. But in the mid 90's they started going away from that and contracting out to other services and basically had an insurance plan. Then you had a copay. That was when I noticed now there were limits to what was available or not. There will always be someone who is not satisfied with the system or someone the system does not work for. But finding a balanced system is what is needed. We should look at all of the systems out there and design a better system, but there is too much, as said before about lobbyists, in the way. |
January 30, 2012 - 9:06pm | Yes give my freedom of choice. No I don't want to pay for the dumb kid doing the header. Give me choice. Wait sorry some drunk driver without insurance just hit me. My good health insurance isn't covering even half the bills and no lawyer is getting any money out of the drunk. No problem the kids just won't go to college so I can walk around without too much pain. Since I can't handle the romantic side of life anymore it's OK the wife has two jobs to try and cover some of the bills. It's a little boring since we can't afford cable or Internet anymore but the weekly trips to the library help even if it takes me 30 minutes just to get into the building. Yeah my family's finances are set back three generations but I had a choice. That's right everyone is one drunk away from seeing this argument in a very different light. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
 January 30, 2012 - 9:50pm | Yes give my freedom of choice. No I don't want to pay for the dumb kid doing the header. Give me choice. Wait sorry some drunk driver without insurance just hit me. My good health insurance isn't covering even half the bills and no lawyer is getting any money out of the drunk. No problem the kids just won't go to college so I can walk around without too much pain. Since I can't handle the romantic side of life anymore it's OK the wife has two jobs to try and cover some of the bills. It's a little boring since we can't afford cable or Internet anymore but the weekly trips to the library help even if it takes me 30 minutes just to get into the building. Yeah my family's finances are set back three generations but I had a choice.
That's right everyone is one drunk away from seeing this argument in a very different light. Ratt, The two arguments are not connected. Mandatory Car Insurance is a matter of public safety and public trust. All law abiding citizens participate in maintaining mandatory car insurance because the act of driving a car places financial and physical risk to everyother person on the road the driver could come in contact with. Health insurance, while a good idea, should never be mandatory or forced. Under the Obama plan if you do not purchase private insurance then you must participate in the government plan. If you do not participate in the plan you will be fined. I never voted for this, none of us did. It was promised to be "transparent" and it wasn't. I was promised to have televised debate on C-span..and it wasn't. I choose not to have health insurance so my daughter can have health insurance because a individuals insurance is more affordable then adding dependents to a plan and because we all work we don't qualify as improvrished. When Obama Care goes into effect I won't have this choice I will have to pay for my insurance, get the gov insurance which I dont qualify for, or pay for the gov. insurance or be fined. In the last five years I have had to go to the hospital or urgent care several times and without the benefit of insurance have had to pay those bills out of pocket. But I do pay them and they get taken care of. Now in the argument for car insurance if I don't pay my car insurance I will either be imprisoned or if I am involved in an accident that hurts someone I will end up paying for that crime to society as long as society deems necesary. The two arguments really don't meet. We are all one drunk away from free ticket to heaven and no amount of health insurance in the world will change that, regardless if it is forced on us or not. |
 January 30, 2012 - 9:45pm | And you honestly believe that government run insurance will magically make that drunk driver scenario better? Have you ever dealt with a government run bereaucracy before? I'd say "business" but what the government does is not even remotely similar to the definition of the word, bereaucracy is a much better description of what they do...anyways compare the last time you filed a claim with your own insurance company to the last time you had to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles: which one was the easier task? Which one was staffed with more competent people? Which one, upon receiving one check for two bills, will process it properly and which one will return the two bills with the check and a piece of paper stating that the check is in excess of the first bill, which is stapled over the second bill? I'm in the process of sealing a 21 year old misdemeanor conviction, and for the past two months I've been jumping through hoops to get this done. All of it has been the process of obtaining the actual record. See, in order to get my own court documents I have to get fingerprinted, have a consent form notarized, acquire those documents at one specific office each (no, you can't process them at the same place), pay fees at a third & fourth office before returning to the first and second office...all to secure what is commonly referred to as "public information". This is how government works on the local level, and it doesn't get any more organized at the federal level. As such, I would expect at least a month to pass for a diagnosis after your drunk driver scenario, because I know for a fact that all the necessary tests can't be performed on the same day let alone at the same office. Need a CT Scan? There will be ONE place to do that, with a generous waiting list since they're handling the same workload that a dozen or so offices once held, with a less competent staff. Same thing for the X-Ray, gotta go to one specific location whereas numerous CT Scan centers in the past did the same work at their former numerous offices that had CT scan equipment in the same building as their X-Ray and MRI equipment. Need further convincing? Go to www.amtrak.com and compare travel routes and rates to any airline. They wanted $700 each for round trip fare from Vegas to Florida, with the initial train leaving Phoenix (no terminals in Vegas, gotta travel to another state to begin the journey) to Chicago, the second leg from Chicago to Pennsylvania, and the third leg from PA to Florida...total travel time being 5 days. I drove to Florida in three. But then again, Amtrak is being run by the government, whereas I was free to plot my own course. And at the 2008 $4+/gallon fuel prices, I paid about $700 for fuel round trip...the wife travelled free compared to Amtrak's rates. Even the airlines beat Amtrak's rates. I bet Greyhound could have gotten me there quicker as well. And THAT is how the federal government works. Like I said, the government is King Midas' evil twin...everything they touch instantly turns to crap. |
 January 31, 2012 - 1:37am | The only problem of universal health care is by it own very definition if precludes the vary basis of freedom. Okay, everybody gets heathcare from the government...yea (scarcastic). But what if you don't want the government healthcare. Well that's okay its universal you get it anway like it or not and you can even pay for other people's health care too through your taxes...and not just the folks who deserve some help with their sever ailments who can no longer work, you get to help pay for everyone. So that dumb @$$ down the road that has watched too many mountain dooo comercials and does a header off his bike with no helmet while jumping off the vending machine....yup you get to pay for his MRI and rehab too. If I don't get to choose then I want no part of it. When did we - John Q. Taxpayor - ever had a chose in where are federal tax dollars go, beyond some state and local initiatives? The government spent billions on a fleet of flying white elephants, unnecessary subsidies for this and that, and whatever politicians snort that makes them so stupid and out-of-touch. On the bigger scope of things, fixing Johnny Dumass's broken @$$ is not even a big issue, and at least he could get fixed enough to become a productive member of society - not limited to unproductive fields like a major league referee, an executive to a major entertainment industry, or a politician. |
January 31, 2012 - 4:58am | I see my example was taken too literally so two points of clarification. First mandatory car insurance does not work. Way too many drivers do not have insurance or even a license when they drive. Second forget the drunk. Any major accident or illness can set back even a well to do family. How many of you have contributed to a fund to help someone who has cancer? Parkinson's disease? Veteran's injuries from the recent wars? Heck the TV show Extreme Makeover Home Edition was built on helping people wiped out by these kinds of life changing events. Do I think the government can run these things any better? People they already run these things. Anyone ever heard of Medicare or the VA hospital system? So we already know how well this is going to go. Lack of places to go I agree with. This is why there are more MRI machines in LA county California than all of Canada. But is that right? Competition between them does not make them cheap since supposedly insurance and Medicare are covering them but also the payments to doctors and hospitals to recommend one company over another aren't illegal but does that make one MRI company better than another. Personally as a Volunteer Firefighter in which 80% of our calls are medical not fire I see plenty of people who called but then refuse not only the ambulance but going to the hospital at all because they do not have insurance and can't afford the bill so we literally give them a band-aid and go away. This is why you aren't waiting a month for a CT scan; too many people who need one aren't getting one until they are dying and now costly ten times as much to treat. Also the other side of the issue or who we call our "frequent fliers" like the one lady who called 911 ""87"" times last year because of "chest pains" or "Seizures" or a "rash" knowing either Medicare was going to cover her ambulance and visit or she wasn't going to bother to pay but by law the hospital could not refuse to see her. I am not crazy about the current system and do not know if socialized medicine will work in this country or if the billionaires and millionaires who own the insurance companies will ever allow the system to change. Do I think our government can run it better well the previously mention VA and Medicare show they can't . I just know we all agree what we have is not the greatest health care in the world despite supposedly being the greatest country in the world. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
January 31, 2012 - 12:17pm | Government has no business meddling in ANY business that isn't national defense related. I still stand behind the Constitution, sadly many of our elected officials refuse to do the same. They all swore an oath to do so but then turn around and quash it. |
 February 2, 2012 - 9:54am | They all suck. Vote for me! I can't give you the moon, but I promise that my first act as Dict...ahem...President of the United States will be to free up the IP for Star Frontiers and return it to the American people; where it rightfully belongs. How's that for Hope and Change? |
February 2, 2012 - 11:53am | Unfortunately "Hope & Change" translates to "I actually need another 4 years to do nothing and POSSIBLY address the issue."  But here's a thought on the medical issue, one I've actually heard people enact on their own. Have you ever disected the insurance form that shows how much a doctor gets paid? I just received one in the mail for an ER visit I had in December. The bill was for $13K of which I paid my deductible of $150. Turns out the insurance only covered $1900 (including my co-pay). The hospital takes a tax write off for the remaining $11K. Now I have heard of uninsured people making similar negotiations..."how much of this are you willing to write off, which would be exactly what happens if I DID have insurance?" Yes, they pay that $1900 up front and call it a day, otherwise the angle is "Fine, I'll pay $5/month for the rest of my life and I'll die of old age long before hitting $13K." See, they'll go for it because what they charge and what they receive are NEVER the same thing, unless you're gullible enough to pay what they charge. In fact one of my former primary care doctors did just that, he offered $40 visits for uninsured patients --- because that's about what insurance paid him for insured visits (backed up by my receipts from the insurance claims). It really does work, all it takes is a bit of negotiating...you know, the same thing that the insurance companies do with those very same bills. We don't need government intervention to help us out. All we need is common sense, something that is consequently not promoted in our government intervened public school system. |
February 3, 2012 - 6:18am | I recently saw an article about a community in the US in which people can perform volunteer work and bank hours which can than be turned into services including doctor visits. This isn't for major things but does get the preventive medicine and minor things taken care of. It also allows the community to get alot of work done which would require having permanent staff to do. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
February 3, 2012 - 11:58am | If I was running for office, I would run an a platform of increased broadband (more porn speed for the people!), legalized cabanas (if you think about it... it could actually lower the crime rates - everyone is too backed), a loosing of FCC regulations (more televised boobies for the people!), expand on research for FTL travel and extraterrestrial contact (we will not stop until we find sexy green-skin alien chicks!), fast-food restaurants would require an attractive topless waitress (because our darling little ladies need more positive role-models!), all politicians would be required to undergo a colonoscopy (so voters know the face of those who they are voting for) with video-feed of the outside world (so they know what is going on around them), campaign funds by big business lobbies must be earned by running through a televised obstacle course (after answering some pop-culture by Mark Summers), and - as President - I would regularly snort coke off the naked flesh of expensive hookers - regardless of illegality - on CSPN (so tho public can see where their tax-dollars are going). My running-mate will be Jeff "The Dude" Bridges, and my Majority Whip will be Henry "****ing" Rollins (armed with an actual whip, and a license to skull-****!  ). Yeah, that is how I roll.A vote for Malcadon, is a vote for crazy drug-fouled awesome!  I am Malcadon, and I approve of this massage. |
February 3, 2012 - 5:41pm | I have to say that I loved the Ashley Madison gag on Leno last night. Leno ran a copy of the AM ad (AM is a dating website like eharmony but for people looking to cheat) then at the end it suddenly switched to the Newt saying "I'm Newt Gingrich and I approved this message." I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
 February 3, 2012 - 6:47pm | What I want in a candidate - some one like John Wayne (rough, tough, and don't take sh*t off of anybody), Bruce Willis (Yippie-Ki-Ay!), and the persistance of Rocky. Sadly, she isn't running.... Just ONCE, I would like SOMEBODY to tell the Leftists amonst us to STFU, sit down, shut up, and let us clean-up all your F-up's from over the many years, and get back to the basics, since all your 'advanced rules' ain't working. The ship of State needs righted, 'cause its listing heavily to port... "If we knew what we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" -A Einstein |
 February 4, 2012 - 9:05am | I think that 'listing heavily to port' is not quite an apt description unfortunately. I think the entire ship of state has capsized due in very large part (mostly in fact) to the machinations of the leftists in the democrat party. That is not to say that everyone in the democrat party is a scumbag. But lets face it, the democrat party has been overrun with progressive radicals (of which, Obama, Clinton - both of them, Reid and Pelosi have all claimed they were). The view of a progressive is closely aligned with Marxism and completely destructive to our Representative Republic. In short, the country is on the verge of being destroyed from within. Of course I'll not lay 100% of the blame at the feet of the democrats - maybe 75% or so. The Republicans get a share in the blame. Largely for 'reaching across the isle'. When you do that with someone out to destroy your way of life all you've accomplished is to allow them to destroy your way of life a little more slowly which is why it has taken us a few generations to get to the point we are at today. Similarly, there are progressives in the Republican party as well, just not nearly so many of them. Call them, establishment Republicans, big government Republicans or simply, progressive Republicans; whatever. The results are the same. There are very few politicians on either side of the political fence that actually have the best interests of America at heart - the rest are out to destroy us from within and completely change our way of governance into something that no one here will like and they're doing a splendid job of it. Unfortunately (in my opinion), Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich both fall into that category (progressive Republican) and it saddens me greatly that they are the front runners in the Republican primary. It simply means more of the same. So though 'listing heavily to port' certainly comes close to describing our condition, I think it's actually much more grave than that. I don't have to outrun that nasty beast my friend...I just have to outrun you!  |
 February 7, 2012 - 6:10pm | Judging from most of the views here you're clearly not Democrats, but I'm guessing you're not Republicans either. More like Independants and Libertarians. I'd almost think you'd all vote for Ron Paul. Because Newt is a man with more wives than the Mormon he's running against. In every age, in every place, the deeds of men remain the same. |
February 7, 2012 - 8:34pm | I am a proud representative of the anti-incumbent party. Every career politician needs to go. Term limits for all of 'em. Iron that out and I'll pick a party... |
February 8, 2012 - 12:00am | I'm an independent voter with a saturated view-point (going with ideas that work), but I tend to lean towards the left. By the way, it seems that there are changing attitudes towards gay-marriage and even polygamy. I wounder if the Frontier is that progressive? WILL THAT DARILASITE EVER BE ABLE TO MARRY HIS/HER/ITS(?) ROBOT LOVER?!? (you know their names  ) |
February 8, 2012 - 8:27am | Since Dralasites are asexual reproducers it would have to be a seriously dysfunctional Dralasite to have even another Dralasite as a lover much less a robot lover. On polygamy this is something that has existed and is generally ignored. I mean really they have TV series about this so the question is really are they just going to allow it and than take the next step of multiple marriages (think Dr. Flox on Star Trek Enterprise) which people do have just don't mention it. Oh on homosexual marriage: Congrats, good luck, hope you can do better than the 50% divorce rate among heterosexuals. In the Frontier? Seriously this was a kid's game from the 80's. Everyone from the two sex races is married to a member of the opposite sex. Period. Of course how you handle your version of the Frontier is up to you. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
February 8, 2012 - 5:56pm | Since Dralasites are asexual reproducers it would have to be a seriously dysfunctional Dralasite to have even another Dralasite as a lover much less a robot lover. Well, they might love each other in ways beyond our human understanding, and if they have a complex emotional attachment that goes beyond spawning blobby microchips, who are we to judge. On polygamy this is something that has existed and is generally ignored. I mean really they have TV series about this so the question is really are they just going to allow it and than take the next step of multiple marriages (think Dr. Flox on Star Trek Enterprise) which people do have just don't mention it. I have been hearing that this is a common debate on collage campuses - mostly from the issue of gay-marriage and the controversy over that large polygamous family and religious freedom - and I have seen it debated on a popular Nevadan political TV program, Face-to-Face. These are good debates, and its a shame it not usually addressed an a national forum. Oh on homosexual marriage: Congrats, good luck, hope you can do better than the 50% divorce rate among heterosexuals. The funny thing with California Proposition 8 - which is a constitutional amendment that states "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." - is that it was passed after a whole lot of gay couples got hitched. While the issue of gay marriage is tied in court, gay marriages in that legal time-frame is still binding, but gay marriages since Prop-8 passed are not. The legally-binding marriage certificates are held with much reverence by their holders, and are seen as symbols of a hard-earned civil-right. So important the right to be in an institution of marriage, they tend to maintain a marriage regardless of how loveless or dysfunctional it might get - they cant get remarried until things clear-up in court. For those marriages that get that way, they have the opportunity to experience marriage in the most social-conservative way possible: trapped in a '50s-styled marriage. =P |
February 9, 2012 - 12:36am | The funny thing with California Proposition 8 - which is a constitutional amendment that states "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." - is that it was passed after a whole lot of gay couples got hitched. While the issue of gay marriage is tied in court, gay marriages in that legal time-frame is still binding, but gay marriages since Prop-8 passed are not. The legally-binding marriage certificates are held with much reverence by their holders, and are seen as symbols of a hard-earned civil-right. So important the right to be in an institution of marriage, they tend to maintain a marriage regardless of how loveless or dysfunctional it might get - they cant get remarried until things clear-up in court. For those marriages that get that way, they have the opportunity to experience marriage in the most social-conservative way possible: trapped in a '50s-styled marriage. =P Err, nevermind...  Wow, after 18 years (mostly common-law)! In CA, that is considered "the long hual." Actuality, there was a weird complication with gay divorce do to Prop-8, but the new ruling by the 9th District Court striking it down as "unconstitutional" allows for gay divorce because “getting a divorce requires a recognition of the marriage”, although gay couples still cant get married until the Prop-8 supporters drop their case or they opt to push the case to the Supreme Court.  |
February 9, 2012 - 7:30am | Frankly this mess won't be settled any time soon. Mainly because the Defense of Marriage Act (Federal Law) also states only a man and woman can get married. Which is why when I do taxes for homosexual couples I have to file their state as married but their federal as single unless they have kids in which case one of them is head of household. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
February 11, 2012 - 6:29pm | Since this has been a very political thread, I found something very interesting on Yahoo today. If you haven't read it you should. I found it very thought provoking adn not what I was expecting from the title of the article. http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html One has to wonder how much of our entertainment actually reflects current historical events. |
February 11, 2012 - 7:38pm | Ah that would be his take. Mine. Chapter IV, V & VI were a simple fantasy story plopped into a Sci-Fi setting. They are bad. Chapter I, II & III not only did not explain things but added many levels of confusion as it did not connect well with the originals. The story line is not that deep. A psychotic wants to take over the world and takes on an apprentice who is brillant and gifted but emotionally stunted. Frankly the third season of Bones handled that story line much better. Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
February 12, 2012 - 1:22am | Actually, it was the fairytale-within-a-science-fiction that made Star Wars so unique and enjoyable. The story was simplistic because it was based on old movie serials, like Flash Gordon and Radar Men. Fans got annoyed with Phantom Menace because of the slow pace, stiff dialog, mildly uninteresting characters, and overt political message. It had some good action scenes, but you had to slave through all the boring bits. The rest of the movie were about the fall of the Republic and the origins of Darth Vader. It would have not been bad if one had any sympathy for Aniken, but he goes from a little boy, to a boy-bitch, to a baby-killing boy-bitch, then somehow becomes the most bad-ass pimp in the galaxy. It was meant to be tragic, but without the Aniken that people could identify with, folks could not wait for him to become the bass-ass Vader we all know and love, so we no longer had to hear him moan and bitch! With the rest of the story, it felt like the movies tries to take themselves too seriously. Folks dont go to a Star Wars movie for the heavy-handed political drama, or the not-so-overt metaphors that gets forced down your throat, or how the Force works - they go to watch the flashy light-show! I'm not saying the prequels should be dumb-downed of its deeper content. I'm saying that it should be fun, with characters you feel for, and without all the shameless canonical shoehorning or the hard sci-fi explanations. |
February 12, 2012 - 3:05am |
That one lost me at the title Oddly enough, a lot of that political backstory had been penned long ago and leaked into the gaming world and such (re: Star Wars Source Books and what not) in the late 80s/early 90s...well before the current political statements people equate it to. Remember, George wrote "the Star Wars" in its entirety back in 1973, all those plots were drummed up long ago in a galaxy relatively close to home. No, he didn't write Phantom Menace in 1999, all that was done in 1973...he merely rewrote it for screen production in 1999. Much like V for Vendetta, people watched that 2005 movie and immediately connected it to George Bush as the "obvious inspiration", yet it was originally written & published during the Reagan administration. And no...the movie did not drift far from the book, it was actually rather spot on. |
February 12, 2012 - 7:34am | .....long ago in a galaxy close to home.....
Great line, I'll have to quote it sometime. Clearly Lucas outline the story back in the seventies since the first was labelled episode four. I rather enjoyed the characterization of Anakin as a boy-bitch too. That about summed it up for me. My favorite part of the whole saga was Yoda's bad assed saber duel but then I was already emotionally invested in Yoda and love the contrast of seeing him as old and feeble and yet here he was 900 years young and showing his "moves like Jagger." When 900 years old you reach, look as good you will not, hhmmm? I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
February 12, 2012 - 1:25pm | During the Yoda saber duel I was humming the theme from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles... |
February 12, 2012 - 1:48pm | During the Yoda saber duel I was humming the theme from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles...
I think I enjoyed that RPG.I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
