Ive got to stop saying, “How stupid can you be?” People are taking it as a challenge.
Sometimes you have to burn a few bridges to keep the crazies from following you!
The apology: I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings when I called you studid…I thought you already knew.
Remove all the warning lables and let the problem sort itself out.
Change your car horn to a gunshot sound instead of a beep-beep.
Posted by Jack
Medical Appointment
I visited a physician last week who was quite enthusiastic. It was a “new” doctor in the practice, a young lady ( at MY age, EVERYBODY is “young”! When I was born, the Dead Sea wasn’t even sick! )
She was obviously a liberal by her dress and manner. I was thinking of hitting on her, but I don’t like the phrase she used, “You remind me of my grandfather.”
She asked me what was wrong, and I replied, “I have a cut on my leg; and I think it may be getting infected.”
She said, “Before we start, I have to ask you a few questions. Are you allergic to any medications?”
I replied, “No.”
She said, “Do you have any guns in the house?”
I said, “HUH??”
She replied, “Guns. Do you have any guns in the house?”
I asked, “Why?”
She said, “I’ve got to ask this question. It is required under the Affordable Care Act.”
I asked, “What are you going to do with the data?”
She said, “We compile it, amalgamate it, and submit it to the government.”
I said, “Well, I have a Tommy Gun. I let my kid Tommy play with it.”
She said, “What’s a Tommy Gun? I don’t think that is the kind of gun they are concerned with.”
With THAT, I knew I had a live one. I said, “It’s similar to a B.A.R., but a little heavier and shorter. I have a B.A.R. also.”
She said, “A B.A.R.?”
I said, “Yes.”
She looked puzzled. Then she brightened up and asked, “Do you have any assault rifles?”
I attempted to look puzzled, and said , “I don’t know. What is an assault rifle?”
She said, “That’s a gun that is used in wars.”
I said, “As a matter of fact, I do I have a replica of a Revolutionary War musket.”
She began to look a bit exasperated. I pretended not to notice and kept up the appearance of trying to be helpful.
She said, “Do you have anything more modern than that?”
I replied, “Well, yes I do. I have a replica muzzle loader from the Civil War. Do you know the difference between a musket and a muzzle loader?”
She rather peevishly said, “No, I don’t; and I don’t want to. What else do you have?”
I said, “I have an M-1.”
She asked, “What’s that?”
I said, “A rifle.”
She asked, “What kind?”
I replied, “It is called a Garand.”
She rather loudly said, “I don’t care if it is a grand rifle or not. Is it an assault rifle?”
To which I replied, “I don’t know. I don’t know what an assault rifle is. You say it’s a rifle used in war, yet you say that my musket and muzzle loader are not assault rifles.”
She calmed down (a bit) and asked, “Anything else?”
I said, “I have an MG-.30, and an MG-.50. I’m also part owner of an Apache. But they are not rifles.”
She stated, “Well, then, I’m not interested in them. Anything else.”
I replied, “Well, yes. I also have a 12-gauge and a 20-gauge pump. They are not rifled though.”
She said, “I’m not interested in pumps; I’m interested in guns.”
I replied, “Well, then, I have a Colt, a Luger, a Glock, a bazooka, a Parabellum, a Kalishnikov, a Henry, an Uzi, a Llama, and a Beretta–but they are not rifles.”
She then said, “I’ve had enough of this. I think you’re toying with me. Let me see your leg.”
I then said, “Excuse me, but before you look at my leg, I have a few questions to ask of you.”
She replied, “Of course. What are they?”
I said, “I have given you a lot of information about my guns. I am somewhat concerned about your knowledge and ability to assimilate, make coherent sense of that information, and report it correctly. Do you know the difference between a .22 caliber and a .223 caliber? It’s a rather fundamental difference.”
She replied, “Actually, I don’t.”
I said, “I see. Let me ask some more relevant questions. “How much money do you make?”
She said, “That’s personal, why do you ask?”
I said, “Well, in pushing the Health Care Act, my president cautioned the population about doctors that would amputate a leg rather than treat a cut because they make more money that way. Consequently, I wish to know if you are financially troubled. What kind of car do you drive? What are your house payments? How much is your mortgage? How much credit card debt do you have? Do you have a student loan; if so, how much?”
She said, “I’m not going to answer those questions. You have no right to ask them.”
I then asked, “Do you have training and education in homeopathic techniques? Do you know the benefits/effects of CoQ10, ginseng, fish oil, Creatine, BCAA, and other such herbal treatments?” Do you know the difference between Panax ginseng, American ginseng, and Siberian ginseng?”
She replied, “Well, No!”
I then asked, “Well, have you studied it at all?”
She replied rather defensively, “NO; it’s all a bunch of hogwash anyway!”
I said, “Oh, then you have read the research on it. What have you read?”
She then said, “I don’t waste my time reading such things. Why are you asking me these questions?”
I said, “Well, if I’m going to turn my body over to you for treatment, I believe it is reasonable for me to know something about your motivation, training, experience, and competence. Do you know anything about the practice of holistic medicine?”
She said, rather angrily “No, I don’t!”
I said, “Oh. O.K. How much experience do you have in practicing medicine?”
She replied, “Well, not very much.”
To which I said, “Well, we all have to start somewhere. What medical school did you go to; what is its rank in terms of other medical schools; where did you intern; and where did you do your residency? What is the rank of the hospital where you did your internship and residency?”
She rather peevishly said, “All my credentials are posted in the waiting room.”
To which I said, “Really? The rank of your medical school is posted in the waiting room? Do you have any experience with leg injuries? If so, how much?”
I guess that was too much for her. She rather crossly said, “I think it would be best if you saw a different doctor.” …and started to leave the room.
I said, “You know, doctor. You asked me irrelevant questions about my guns, and I answered them. Whether or not I own guns is really none of your business and has absolutely nothing to do with any treatment you might prescribe. On the other hand, I ask you questions quite relevant to my situation, and you refuse to answer them. Isn’t that somewhat backwards?”
She said, “But I HAVE to ask those questions. It’s the law.”
To which I replied, “Actually, it is NOT the law. Here is what the law says–taken directly from the Affordable Care Act:”
(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS. —A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a) (1) (D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information elating to:
(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully-possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or
(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.
(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION . —None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to-
(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;
(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
You may verify this at: http://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf and http://wizbangblog.com/2013/01/10/obamacare-amendment-does-not-forbid-gun-and-ammo-registration/ .”
“As you can see, you have broken federal law TWICE–once by asking, and once by collecting data.
It is perfectly legal for me to own guns; it is NOT legal for you to ask and/or collect such data.
YOU are breaking the law, and yet YOU are the one that is angry.
Not only that, but you erroneously stated that you must ask such questions, and you did it in a very authoritative and convincing manner.
You gave me false information, which I then acted upon by answering your questions.
On that basis, how can I be expected to trust your medical judgment?
When I attempted to ascertain your medical competency, you became defensive and hostile.”
“There is really no need for me to see another doctor in this practice. I’ll go somewhere else, where my privacy is respected, and I can trust the information I receive.”
Semper Fidelis,
Marty
U. S. Marine Corps, Retired
Posted by Tina
Breitbart has brought to our attention a recent communication sent out by Alan Grayson, Democrat, Florida. Grayson’s letter to his constituents included a photo meant to hit their emotions hard. He fully intended to incite anger and hurt to grab their hard earned cash. He has no concern for the ultimate consequence of his irresponsible race baiting. Take a look at the hook he used to suck up campaign cash. Could anyone be more low down?
Set aside the way this man marginalizes and demeans the Tea Party, a group of concerned citizens, including blacks, whose major complaint has been high taxes, debt, and big oppressive government. The harm done to the Tea Party, regardless the indecency, is political. It can be endured and will be overcome.
Race baiting, however, is the most despicable maneuver on earth because it can destroy the heart and soul of unwitting victims. A murderer is an evil person. I don’t mean to diminish the gravity of the crime of murder. But a murders victim passes from this earth. He isn’t sentenced to a life lived believing that millions of fellow citizens hate him and would do him grievous physical harm! The race bait scum sets out to convince people that he calls friend that they are being targeted. This is covert bullying and it does real damage in the lives of those who believe him. It damages the individuals and the entire black community. It damages society as a whole. He makes victims of those he asks for money to enrich himself.
The tolerance and support these people receive from the Democrat Party and the media is equally despicable.
If the American people don’t stand up and fight against the liars who win by race baiting our country will be forever in an unnecessary state of division and upheaval.
by Jack
There has been a significant rise in the number of citizens angry over shutdown, the lack of ethics in Washington and how we are being fleeced with taxes and most recently, even by our campaign donations…even they are being abused by greedy legislators. Seems like there is no one we can trust, both party’s have been caught sticking it to us. An example of this is the slush fund they created called Leadership funds that are actually a loophole that allows Congress to spend campaign money on themselves, from lavish vacations to expensive dinners. Only one Senator (Vitter-R) proposed legislation to stop this dirty practice and he couldn’t even get a co-sponsor!
A USA Today poll says that about half of Americans feel Congress would be a better place if incumbents were voted out next year. This polling is similar to the public’s views in previous years when voter dismay cost one side or the other control of the House. In 1994, when Democrats lost their majority, 40% said Congress would be better off if most members were replaced. In 2006, when Republicans lost control, 42% held that view. Now 47% want to replace both Reps and Dems! Wonder what that will do come next election?
In 1973 43% of Americans said they had confidence in Congress – today it’s barely 10%. Revolutions have toppled governments that had better approval numbers! The Gallop poll said Congress was ranked dead last among 16 institutions. Dead last? That’s a mandate for change if I ever saw one.
Joe Kline from Time writes, “Could there be a wave of Independent candidacies in 2014? Are people so sick of the two existing parties that they’re ready to go shopping for something new?” Yes they are Joe. People feel their party has left them and gone over to the dark side. They’re mad and they’re hurt.
“We’re seeing this all over our polling,” says Peter Hart, who does surveys for NBC and the Wall Street Journal. “People are sick of the status quo: 60% believe that the entire Congress should be replaced. They’re looking for alternatives.”
I’ve never witnessed more unhappy voters in my life. Could it be that incumbents in Congress may finally get their just due? Then I remember that the voters always gripe about Congress – then they turn around re-elect the rascals. Well, I’m just hoping this time the numbers are so bad that a surge of independents will be voted in and a bunch of incumbents will be voted out, them maybe they will finally start cleaning up the mess the two party-goers have made.
PS In CA declined to state is the fastest growing segment of the voter roles. The chart below shows the republicans are outnumbered almost 2 to 1 and their numbers are dropping as fast as No Preference and Other are gaining. The GOP is CA is virtually destroyed.
|
Report Date |
Dem |
Rep |
Other |
Preference |
|
|||||
|
Feb. 10, 2013 |
43.9% |
28.9% |
6.3% |
20.9% |
|
|
||||
|
Feb. 10, 2011 |
44.0% |
30.9% |
4.7% |
20.4% |
|
|
||||
|
Feb. 10, 2009 |
44.5% |
31.1% |
4.3% |
20.0% |
|
|
||||
|
Feb. 10, 2007 |
42.5% |
34.2% |
4.5% |
18.8% |
|
|
||||
|
Feb. 10, 2005 |
43.0% |
34.5% |
4.6% |
17.9% |
||||||
Posted by Jack Lee with comments
Here’s a story that’s enough to make you never want to vote again, but you really need to read it, even if it makes you angry. Members of Congress routinely use a form of political action committees to convert campaign cash into lavish lifestyle upgrades for themselves and their family members. Given their lengthy history for corruption this end run around the campaign finance laws should come as no surprise. But, it begs one question, why should we support either party after this?
“60 Minutes” exposed the racket in a Sunday night report, produced with Hoover Institution scholar Peter Schweizer. Though funds from “leadership PACs” are supposed to go to help elect fellow members of one’s own political party, lax campaign laws allow lawmakers to turn their accounts into private slush funds to fund just about anything. (Want to watch the video on this? Warning there are commercials Click here.)
The story by “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft contained selected materials from Schweizer’s forthcoming book Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets.
This is a bipartisan scam, according to the “60 Minutes” piece. Consider the case of Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). His leadership PAC dropped $107,752 at the Breakers resort in Palm Beach, Fla. during the 2012 election cycle. That is over three times as much money as he gave the National Republican Senatorial Committee to get fellow Republicans elected. One year, Chambliss spent nearly one-third of his entire leadership PAC funds on golf, limos, and at least one private jet ride. His leadership PAC also picked up a $26,814 dinner tab at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse and $10,344 at Pebble Beach.
Then there’s Rep. Rob Andrew (D-N.J.). He tapped his wife, a lawyer and an associate law dean at Rutgers School of Law-Camden, to be a PAC compliance officer for his leadership PAC. She approved the use of donor dollars to fly her, Rep. Andrews, and their two daughters to Edinburgh, Scotland for a wedding at a posh resort. Andrews’s leadership PAC paid $16,575 in airfare. His campaign committee picked up the rest of the tab, which was slightly under $14,000.
Schweizer says Andrews’s leadership PAC even paid for the wedding gift, which was china from Bloomingdale’s. Andrews and his wife even merged a campaign event with their daughter’s graduation party, allowing them to combine the costs of the two events, even though the PAC did not pick up the entire bill. “Look, they’re not having leadership PAC meetings at the Hampton Inn down the road. They’re going to the premier golfing and resorts in the United States and in– sometimes around the world. And that’s ostensibly where they’re doing this leadership PAC work.”
What you see more often is that members will keep the leadership PAC and they will use it in retirement for everything that is vaguely a political expense. If they become a lobbyist, which about half of members who leave Congress do nowadays, that becomes their lobbying slush fund. So it just keeps going, at least until death and in some cases even beyond death.
When Republican Congressman Paul Gillmor of Ohio died suddenly from a heart attack in 2007, his staff decided that no political contribution should go unspent.
Former Federal Elections Commissioner Potter reported, “What we know is that the staff went off to a number of dinners and pizza parties and other events using the leadership PAC money. What they said was, ‘Well, it’s a grieving process. And also, we need to talk to each other about getting new jobs, and this is a way to do it.’
Leadership PACs are a political slush fund. Over time, we’ve had them. They’ve been outlawed. They spring back in new guises, and this is the latest guise.
Melanie Sloan is the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a small group that tracks campaign expenditures. As we said earlier it’s against the law to use campaign funds for personal use, but Sloan says it’s perfectly acceptable to use campaign funds to hire your wife, husband, children, grandchildren and in-laws.
CREW’s Most Corrupt Members of Congress
Melanie Sloan: While there are anti-nepotism rules that prevent them from hiring their family members on the official staff– they can indeed hire them on the campaign payroll. And do.
Steve Kroft: And they do?
Melanie Sloan: And they do.
Sloan says there are at least 75 members of Congress who have hired members of their family to work on their campaign and paid them with political contributions.
Until Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas retired last year he seemed to be the leader with six family members on the campaign payroll — daughter, daughter’s mother in-law, three grandchildren and a grandchild in-law. Paying them a total of $304,000 over the past two election cycles.
But Paul only ranked third in total payouts to family members — behind former Republican Congressman Jerry Lewis and Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters both of California.
Steve Kroft: For some congressmen and senators, this is sort of a family business.
Melanie Sloan: Absolutely. It is a family business. They have members of their family on the campaign payroll. And they also will often have members of their family who are lobbyists and lobby on issues in which the member may even be working.
We were interested in talking to Republican Congressman Rodney Alexander who had just retired midterm, after winning a campaign with no Democratic opposition last year. A race in which he paid his two daughters a total of $130,000.
There’s a reason why Congressmen go in with modest means and come out rich. Read on…
Sloan says another way congressmen can personally benefit from the use of political contributions is by making personal loans to their campaign funds, then charging above market and sometimes exorbitant interest rates. Sloan’s organization found at least 15 cases, with the worst offender being Democratic Congresswoman Grace Napolitano who charged her campaign 18 percent.
Steve Kroft: How much money did she loan her campaign?
Melanie Sloan: She loaned herself $150,000 and over a 12-year period took in $228,000 in interest. She didn’t see anything wrong with this, and explained that as a Hispanic women she couldn’t get a bank load (BS) and so she had to loan herself the money “and bank’s charge interest.” she said. She doesn’t get it because she doesn’t want to get it.
Peter Schweizer: We hear a lot about how there’s so much partisan fighting in Washington, Steve. Here’s a great example of bipartisanship. Both sides like this current system.
Here’s the bottom line: All you need to see is Rep Vitter’s effort to change this can’t get even one co-sponsor. Did you hear me? Let me say that again loud and clear…he could not get one co-sponsor!
Sadly, just when you think you’ve found an honest man you discover that he’s not without sin either, in 2009 Vitter was caught up in the D.C. Madame’s scandal. He later apologized for his bad judgment and alleged criminal misconduct and said he made peace with his wife…he was forgiven by the voters and he was reelected. However, his sexual misconduct should be no less forgivable than former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s, just because he’s a conservative. The people have every right to expect elected representatives to set a high standard for ethics and keep their private life unsullied, if they can’t – they shouldn’t hold office.
I’ve long held that we need campaign finance reform to our representatives away from temptation and in CA I helped get Prop 208 (major campaign finance reform) on the ballot. It passed by huge numbers and this could only be seen as a mandate by the people for change. So how did the two big political parties react? They sued this new law to death. Then they returned to business as usual. No reform bills, a totally indifferent attitude toward the will of the people.
Our government has ceased being for the people. A group with the ethics of the mob is running Congress and we can’t expect mobsters to reform themselves.
Posted by Tina
BE SURE TO TUNE IN: CBS “60 MINUTES” TONIGHT – REPORT ON CORRUPTION IN DC
CBS reporter Steve Croft and Government Accountability Institute President and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer will present information from an investigation into the corruption that befouls our government:
Sources say top CBS executives thought the report was so explosive that they made it the show’s lead story and delayed airing it for another week in order to capture tonight’s much larger NFL-viewing audience. The report features selected revelations from Schweizer’s forthcoming book, “Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets”.
The program will air following the football game tonight.
Posted by Tina
Speaking at an AP conference in Denver, Gary Pruitt, president and CEO of The Associated Press, included some harsh words in his remarks about Justice Department snooping in 2012 and warned of the chilling effect it has had on journalists:
DENVER (AP) — Governments that try to force citizens to decide between a free press and national security create a “false choice” that weakens democracy, and journalists must fight increasing government overreach that has had a chilling effect on efforts to hold leaders accountable, the president and CEO of The Associated Press said.
Gary Pruitt told the 69th General Assembly of the Inter American Press Association on Saturday that the U.S. Justice Department’s secret seizure of records of thousands of telephone calls to and from AP reporters in 2012 is one of the most blatant violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution the 167-year-old news cooperative has ever encountered.
The Justice Department action involving the AP resonated far beyond the U.S., including Latin America, where journalists for decades have fought to exercise press freedoms under authoritarian regimes, Pruitt said.
“The actions by the Department of Justice could not have been more tailor-made to comfort authoritarian regimes who want to suppress the news media. ‘The United States does it too,’ they can say,” Pruitt said.
What more is there to say about an administration that approaches the people’s right to know like a third world dictator would? And yet even with these revelations, this man continues to be sheltered and promoted by many journalists in the American press. Now we have to wonder, is their support an indication that they share his plans for fundamental transformation of America or is it that they have been intimidated into virtual silence and acquiescence?
Posted by Tina
The Obamacare exchanges have not started out well. Americans are watching to see whether or not the troubled exchanges will indeed end in a train wreck or after a few minor “glitches” deliver a viable product for the American people. From Oregon to Washington DC and from Florida to Alaska, the news has not been very promising. A few initial numbers will give us an idea about how well it’s going so far and where we actually need to be as we take this rocky ride into 2014.
The early numbers have been, collected by David Freddeso of Conservative Intelligence Briefing. These numbers may not be perfect or completely up to date but do give us an idea about the starting point and what the Obama administration’s baby needs for a successful launch.
According to Freddoso, Obama’s goal for the various exchanges is 500,000 enrollees this month.
Freddoso questions whether that number includes those with low incomes who will be placed in Medicaid:
In terms of getting more people insured, it might seem like a minor detail. But the private insurance exchanges, a centerpiece of Obamacare, need a very large number of people to sign up if they are to be viable insurance pools. By the Obama administration’s estimate, they need about 7 million people to sign up for the exchanges nationwide. (They also estimate they need 2.7 million of those to be young/healthy types, a separate but related issue.) There is a separate goal of enrolling another 8 million poor people in Medicaid.
I’m thinking the 500,00 refers to private insurance only since the success of the program depends on the paying public.
Freddoso then digs into the numbers reported by various states and finds that so far, a majority of the successful enrollees turn out to be those eligible for Medicaid.
In Minnesota out of 3800 applicants only 406 were private insurance customers.
In Washington State 90% of applicants were placed in Medicaid but they did have 3,000 private insurance enrollees.
California added 600,000 people to the Medicaid (Medical?) rolls; only 17,000 have signed up for private insurance. (week old figures) California is apparently among those being a bit crafty about their figures.
Wisconsin reports less than 100 private exchange enrollments. It claims it will shift thousands of Medicaid patients into the private program…we’ll see.
Colorado had 305 applicants with 226 enrollments, last count. No report on Medicaid numbers.
Maryland enrolled “more than 1,120″ last week.
Alaska reports zero persons enrolled as of late last week.
The slow roll out of Obamacare is indeed chugging at a snail’s pace.
Early reports of big technical problems within the federal and other exchanges have not helped to give the people of this land much confidence:
WASHINGTON — The federal health care exchange was built using 10-year-old technology that may require constant fixes and updates for the next six months and the eventual overhaul of the entire system, technology experts told USA TODAY.
The site could be perfect, but if the systems from which it draws data are not up to speed, it doesn’t matter, said John Engates, chief technology officer at Rackspace, a cloud computer service provider.
“It is a core problem in the sense of it’s fundamental to this thing actually working, but it’s not necessarily a problem that the people who wrote HealthCare.gov can get to,” Engates said. “Even if they had a perfect system, it still won’t work.” …
… “The application could be fundamentally flawed,” said Jeff Kim, president of CDNetworks, a content-delivery network. “They may be using 1990s technology in 2.0 world.” …
… “I think it’s a data problem,” Kim said. “It always comes down to that.”
And if that’s the case, the problems are beyond “rocky,” he said. Instead, it would require a “fundamental re-architecture.” In the meantime, “I think they’re just trying to shore up as quickly as possible. They don’t have time to start from scratch.”
See what I mean?
A number of changes have already occurred in response to this laws passage. People have reported losing their current insurance under their employer or being advised that their current insurance has been cancelled. If these people are unable to enroll cleanly through the exchanges will the healthcare system work for them or will they experience chaos…will people’s lives be upended or materially damaged?
Those who are cheering for Obama are certain this is just a temporary “glitch” but I’m not convinced after listening to the tech guys. I’ve also dealt with bureaucracies and when something goes wrong it can be a nightmare trying to sort it out. So, how often might big bureaucratic snafus happen over the next year? Think about it…a patient arrives at the emergency room with a swollen belly and in deep pain. After his name is called he seats himself gingerly and the nice lady behind the desk asks:
“Do you have insurance, Mr Skerood?”
“I think so.”
“Did you sign up through the exchange?”
“Yeah”
“Let me just take a look…is that Skerood with one “r” or two?
“Just…just one.
(typing)
“Sorry sir, I know you’re in pain, but I can’t find anything under the name I. M. Skerood…you do live at 2 Bummer Lane here in the city?
(Skerood Nods)
“Well I’m still not finding it. Did you receive a paper confirmation through the mail?”
“No…well, I got this confirmation enrollment number when I signed up, and I printed it out, but now they’re saying the computer has that number associated with someone else…and they can’t find my application. I’ve called and sent emails but…”
Well, don’t worry…we can admit you…but, you do know that if we can’t figure this out you will be charged the full amount for the care and the government may also charge you the tax for failing to get an insurance plan….sir?”
“Oh dear, Mr. Skerood…Mr. Skerood…are you alright?
“Nancy, Nancy…get the Doctor, Mr. Skerood is in deep trouble”
(Nancy, running toward the emergency room)
(under her breath) “Oh well…we’re all shafted. What difference does it now make?”
