• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Sphincter Blames GOP For Kemps Death?

Mike

Well-known member
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Democrat, said part of the reason that he left the Republican Party last week was disillusionment with its health-care priorities, and suggested that had the Republicans taken a more moderate track, Jack Kemp may have won his battle with cancer.
Mr. Specter, responding to a question from CBS' Bob Schieffer over whether he had let down Pennsylvanians who wanted a Republican.....

No one learns to tell whoppers like this in just a few days. He's been Democrat all along and has his "word twisting" skills honed down to a fine art as only a Democrat can..................... :roll: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Democrat, said part of the reason that he left the Republican Party last week was disillusionment with its health-care priorities, and suggested that had the Republicans taken a more moderate track, Jack Kemp may have won his battle with cancer.
Mr. Specter, responding to a question from CBS' Bob Schieffer over whether he had let down Pennsylvanians who wanted a Republican.....

No one learns to tell whoppers like this in just a few days. He's been Democrat all along and has his "word twisting" skills honed down to a fine art as only a Democrat can..................... :roll: :roll:

Seems a little far fetched--but old Specter is an avid supporter of finding cures for cancer....
And their are many out there that have said almost the same thing- how many treatments/cures for cancer could have been found with the $Trillions that were indebted fighting the Bush Oil War or that were sunk into the sandpit in appeasement money afterward..... :???:
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Seems a little far fetched--but old Specter is an avid supporter of finding cures for cancer....
And their are many out there that have said almost the same thing- how many treatments/cures for cancer could have been found with the $Trillions that were indebted fighting the Bush Oil War or that were sunk into the sandpit in appeasement money afterward..... :???:

Here's a new one. Cancer is Bush's fault. You heard it from OT first.
 

Broke Cowboy

Well-known member
Cancer - big business

Find a cure and everyone is out of work.

Cynical? Yeah

I do not believe we will ever do much but spend money on research

Cure will come after I am dead.

It is all Bush's fault

BC
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Broke Cowboy said:
Cancer - big business

Find a cure and everyone is out of work.

Cynical? Yeah

I do not believe we will ever do much but spend money on research

Cure will come after I am dead.

It is all Bush's fault

BC

Absolutely correct. Yet OT blames Bush.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Democrat, said part of the reason that he left the Republican Party last week was disillusionment with its health-care priorities, and suggested that had the Republicans taken a more moderate track, Jack Kemp may have won his battle with cancer.
Mr. Specter, responding to a question from CBS' Bob Schieffer over whether he had let down Pennsylvanians who wanted a Republican.....

No one learns to tell whoppers like this in just a few days. He's been Democrat all along and has his "word twisting" skills honed down to a fine art as only a Democrat can..................... :roll: :roll:

Seems a little far fetched--but old Specter is an avid supporter of finding cures for cancer....
And their are many out there that have said almost the same thing- how many treatments/cures for cancer could have been found with the $Trillions that were indebted fighting the Bush Oil War or that were sunk into the sandpit in appeasement money afterward..... :???:

Clinton was not in war with Iraq, then why did he not spend them Trillions on Cancer cures?

You sure like to hold onto this what if with that Iraq money. Fact is if we did not go to war in Iraq then we would not have borrowed that money. There was not some stock pile of money laying around that congress had to decide what to do with.

So your reasoning is that we should borrow money to help cure Cancer?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
No one learns to tell whoppers like this in just a few days. He's been Democrat all along and has his "word twisting" skills honed down to a fine art as only a Democrat can..................... :roll: :roll:

Seems a little far fetched--but old Specter is an avid supporter of finding cures for cancer....
And their are many out there that have said almost the same thing- how many treatments/cures for cancer could have been found with the $Trillions that were indebted fighting the Bush Oil War or that were sunk into the sandpit in appeasement money afterward..... :???:

Clinton was not in war with Iraq, then why did he not spend them Trillions on Cancer cures?

You sure like to hold onto this what if with that Iraq money. Fact is if we did not go to war in Iraq then we would not have borrowed that money. There was not some stock pile of money laying around that congress had to decide what to do with.

So your reasoning is that we should borrow money to help cure Cancer?

:???: :???:

We probably shouldn't have endebted ourselves to the $ Trillions of dollars we did either way- but we did-and we ended up with the failed economy that Bush left us with....
But if you haven't heard many folks saying/who believe that that money that was spent in the Bush nationbuilding in a sandpit couldn't have been put to much better uses on cancer/disease research and health care reform- then you live in a very sheltered world.....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Seems a little far fetched--but old Specter is an avid supporter of finding cures for cancer....
And their are many out there that have said almost the same thing- how many treatments/cures for cancer could have been found with the $Trillions that were indebted fighting the Bush Oil War or that were sunk into the sandpit in appeasement money afterward..... :???:

Clinton was not in war with Iraq, then why did he not spend them Trillions on Cancer cures?

You sure like to hold onto this what if with that Iraq money. Fact is if we did not go to war in Iraq then we would not have borrowed that money. There was not some stock pile of money laying around that congress had to decide what to do with.

So your reasoning is that we should borrow money to help cure Cancer?

:???: :???:

We probably shouldn't have endebted ourselves to the $ Trillions of dollars we did either way- but we did-and we ended up with the failed economy that Bush left us with....
But if you haven't heard many folks saying/who believe that that money that was spent in the Bush nationbuilding in a sandpit couldn't have been put to much better uses on cancer/disease research and health care reform- then you live in a very sheltered world.....

The reality is you have no idea of going into Iraq worked, Bush kept us safe no attacks. So how can you second guess what he did if it worked?

Reality is probably could throw 10 Trillion dollars at Cancer research and no cure to be found.

You like to live in the what ifs, well I will live in real world, going to Iraq worked we have not been attacked since 911!
 

MsSage

Well-known member
With this much money you would think they would have gotten farther in a cure.
Dont even start in on me about if you knew someone.....Mom died from lung, Dad had throat is clean 1 year, MIL breast clean 6 years, Friend liver, dear mentor brain.

The following table shows NCI spending in FY 2005, 2006, and 2007 for the 10 most common types of cancer in the United States, excluding basal cell and squamous cell skin cancers. The cancers are listed in decreasing order of incidence; i.e., from the highest number of new cases each year to the lowest. Source: NCI Office of Budget and Finance (OBF).

Cancer Type 2005 Spending
(in millions) 2006 Spending
(in millions) 2007 Spending
(in millions)
Lung $266.1 $242.9 $226.9
Prostate 309.0 293.2 296.1
Breast 560.1 584.7 572.4
Colorectal 253.1 244.1 258.4
Bladder 30.1 24.4 19.8
Non-Hodgkin
Lymphoma 107.0 114.1 113.0
Melanoma 102.9 108.0 97.7
Kidney 32.9 33.0 31.4
Leukemia 220.6 223.5 205.5
Uterine 31.1 19.4 16.6

Other Federal Government agencies, including other NIH Institutes and Centers, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Department of Defense (DOD), fund cancer research. In addition, state and local governments, voluntary organizations, private institutions, and industry also spend substantial amounts of money on cancer-related research.


Komen has dedicated nearly $1 billion to creating awareness and finding a cure for breast cancer, making it the nation's largest private funding source for breast health and breast cancer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure
 
Top