The fallacy created by the left that Sarah deserted her office is just another liberal attempt to smear a decent and honorable American. Obama can apologize all that he wants to, but Sarah is damned proud of her country and she's not afraid to show it. Shame on Obama, he is dragging this country into an unsustainable debt that our kids and grandkids will never be able to get out of. He'd probably like for the old people to just go away and die, it would give him more $ to give to the derelicts.
Yep. Will had Clark for lunch that day. aagraber45 removed almost all his posts here that mine are replies to. He was absolutely pathetic and ended up saying he was going to find someone younger to argue with; that he'd do it "in [my] honor". I didn't ask aagraber45 if he likes apples because I didn't get a damned thing out of going through the pain in the ass of educating him. He's a moron.
I just finished reading Sarah Palin's book "Going rogue", i can truely say to american. Is that she is going to be our next U.S. PRESIDENT. so for all you liberals out their sorry. she is going to really bring CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
@BenkaiDebussy Wow good to know if she is elected president. She will have the code to launch Nuclear Bombs. Oops quitting is not an option. Be careful what you ask for. You might die for it!!!!
Nope. That was a lie. The Left lies all the time and the lies get repeated so much that people like you start thinking they're true. For instance, one of the ethics charges brought against Sarah when she was governor was filed in the name of a fictional, British soap opera character. THINK ABOUT THAT!! Sarah had to pay a lawyer to address a charge brought against her by somebody who doesn't exist. The Left lies all the time. Their whole philosophy is one Big Lie.
"Palin's political career is over. She'll be lucky to end up like any other tramp on Faux News who is considered to be an expert just for showing up."
LOL!!... Guess who's the latest addition to FauxNews??... LOL!!
Read the book naysayers! Sarah is the real deal! Have horses, smokeless powder, fishin equip., etc. bring it on! First time voted since Perot for someone. Sarah is too good to put up with the BS associated with the office she is what we need tho. This American is PISSED and ready for the real change let the bottom fall out and skimm the flotsum off the top the true Americans with Palin at the helm will go on! Thanks Sarah you have PROFESSIONALY shown what a joke the process is!
If there were a special model of Lambourghini that the company made only 3 of and they sold for $100,000, they'd be in short supply. In fact, the supply'd be entirely depleted, because lots of people could and would pay that for such a rare vehicle. If, however, they sold for $18 billion, all three would still be available because nobody'd pay that for any car. In both situations, the car is scarce. But only in the first case would there be a shortage of those cars.
O-bots have a very childish understanding of economics. Then they routinely mock our representatives, like Sarah Palin, who have a solid grounding in the subject. It's very important that we keep an economic system as complex as health care out the hands of these presumptious, know-nothing O-bots!!! SARAH PALIN 2012!!!!
Economics is not an intuitive subject where one relies on what one "would say". It is a subject full of surprises, where what one "would think" turns out not to be the case. It takes mental discipline and study to know the difference between "shortage" and "scarcity". As a prerequisite, it takes a fundamental understanding of and appreciation for the vital role prices play in preventing scarce resources from becoming short in supply.
No, I said working for a dollar a day would be a step up for millions of children you hold a blind eye to. In fact, it'd be a HUGE step up for George Hussein Onyango Obama, our millionaire-president's 27-year-old half brother, who lives on less than a dollar a MONTH in the outer slums of Nairobi, Kenya. President Obama has met his brother twice. And this president is the "brother's keeper" that hundreds-of-millions of Americans are to entrust with their healthcare? I think not!
I wish you the best in your continued efforts at understanding concepts about the subjects you obviously have a passion for! Might I suggest a dictionary? I use Franklin's electronic Merriam-Webster's Collegiate. It'd be a worthy investment for you to make. You can take it anywhere with you on your travels.
12 year old kids with jobs paying a buck a day would be a step up for millions of children living in dozens of countries driven into the ground by Leftist governments. The only thing that pays for your absurd, quixotic, Leftist ego trips is the free market, grab. Your welcome!
@molloy: Why should our Constitution be updated, with its critics betraying an utter inability to grasp the profound achievement in the advancement of social harmony through individual liberty that is at the heart of American Constitutionalism? No, any "improvement" along your lines would only be regression to Euro-style, elitist-driven ochlocracy. Human nature hasn't changed one bit over the past 200 years. Your outlook isn't modern at all. It's the same vision our founders revolted against.
How government micromanaging our lives works in reality: Hillary Clinton's pollster, Mark Penn, received 6000000 taxpayer dollars in stimulus money to "save" 3 jobs at his public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller. Mark Penn is also president of the polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, which did work for Hillary's campaign in 2008. Free markets and freedom of association are better than this corrupt crap we're getting from Obama and the socialist Democrats.
I am well aware that Palins base is comprised of aging white evangelical males [who would rather chew their collective arm off than rouse their grouchy, gun toting brides] and home schooled teenage boys who disguise their latent homosexuality by swooning over an Alaskan drag queen. Sadly, in your case, I doubt this is enough of a coalition to allow her, however articulate and thoughtful, to secure the presidency.
Just wake up and take off your sleep mask...people know exactly why they love Sarah. For so many reasons, just a few of which include: her love of country and respect for human life, her knowledge of what fiscal responsibility means, oh yeah and a little thing known as common sense...something which you obviously know nothing about....
When free market forces are dismissed in favor of enterprise based on politics, you get stupid stuff like cotton being grown in the desert. It'll be no better, no less wasteful, with government-run health care. It will certainly be much worse, given the much greater complexity of health care compared to utilities. GET GOVERNMENT OUT OF HEALTH CARE! SARAH PALIN 2012!!
Water shortage: a sign that somebody is keeping the price artificially lower than it would be if supply and demand were allowed to operate freely. That is precisely why there is a water shortage in California's dry Central Valley. Less than 10 percent of the water available from federal water projects is used by cities and industries. The vast majority of it is used by farmers, who pay a fraction of what urban users pay, thanks to federal price fixing...
...Like everything that is made artificially cheap, water is used lavishly, including the growing of crops like cotton that require huge amounts of water. It is one thing to grow cotton in Southern states with abundant rainfall. It is something else to grow it out in a California desert with water supplied largely at the taxpayers' expense.
Given this grotesque waste, were contracts renegotiated, when they came up for renewal in 2004, so those who use federal water had to pay the costs for their operation? Of course not! It was an election year. A Department of the Interior spokesman explained: "We don't think it is a good idea for California or the nation to adopt punitive pricing proposals that might have the effect of driving more agriculture out of existence." That's what happens when you mix politics and economics.
But the farmers are learning now that there really IS no free lunch--even when it's being served by the federal government. Market prices for water might have driven many of these farms out of business years ago, but this would have been the product of free people making voluntary arrangements. Economics don't change. Now they're going out of business by an act of tyranny. I don't want such politically-driven decision-making anywhere near my health care.
So while there's real economic benefit to shutting down the water supply, that's not why it's being done. It's political pressure from environmentalist groups concerned more about fish than people. Here's from Nancy Pelosi's own 2004 letter to the Inspector General:
We are writing to request that you investigate allegations that the Bureau of Reclamation, in its haste to finalize water contracts in California, has improperly undermined the required NOAA Fisheries environmental review process [...] This is especially troubling given the recent history of political intervention in NOAA Fisheries' review process, which resulted in the well-documented and catastrophic failure to protect the fish of the Klamath River."
...This letter, from 2004, was the result of a political calculation Nancy made. She pitted urban-environmentalists against socialist farmers to her advantage, since her consituents are largely urban-environmentalist with a distates for large-scale private enterprise of any type--even operations based on a socialist supply of water. Now that these urban-environmentalist types are in the driver's seat, they can tyrannically clamp-down on any economic activity they have a distaste for.
I don't want such special interest groups ever having any power over how I receive health care. You're a fool if you don't see a problem there. To push for government health is to say health care is so important, that we need to flush 78 cents of every dollar we can allot to it down a political/bureacratic toilet so that less than a quarter of that dollar ends up in the hands of people who actually provide health care. Liberals are stuck on stupid.
Again, economics is your weakest subject, aagraber45. I'm going to change my recommendation. Sowell's Applied Economics is too advanced for you. Please get a copy of his expanded and revised Basic Economics. Don't be afraid of the title! Even I reread it from time to time because it is so insightful. Your next essay assignment: Explain the difference between "scarcity" and "shortage". That's something you currently don't know; as made obvious in this childish post of yours.
But again, I've always admired the confidence with which you spout your ignorance. If we can just back it up with a little education, that confidence can be put to better use. Best of luck in your continued development as a citizen of the greatest nation on earth!
Pelosi owns a vineyard, and of course her vineyard has water. More important to grow wine grapes than to grow fruits nuts and vegetables. It is sad when the speaker of the house screws people in her own state.
Even Democratic congressmen can't get Nancy Pelosi to turn the water back on. She has blocked legislation from coming to the floor 7 times about turning the water on. If you think this is compassion, you need to do some serious soul searching. A fish is more important than humans. These are grown men crying everyday because they have to take food handouts when they could be working. Suicides are way up.
Um... and as far as this water stuff. You may want to do some research some place other then with Hannity. Last I heard they turned the water back on. Like 5 months ago. Just saying...
The House voted on the water issue twice, on June 18th and again on July 23rd. On the first vote, 171 Republicans voted for the farmers, 215 Democrats voted for the minnow. On the second vote, 176 Republicans--all but one--voted for the farmers, all but three Democrats voted for the fish. Unfortunately, neither vote was close. Wealthy environmentalists won, the farmers and farm workers lost.
John Duncan raised this issue on the floor of the House on September 24th 2009. Are you now going to consider expanding your sources of information, aagraeber45? You're looking pretty ignorant here...
Wait... wait... I was just thinking about this water issue. Where in the Constitution does is state the government is responsible to provide water to California
Farmers?!? Let the free market fix the water issue!!! This pumping of all this water is liquid socialism! Hiltler pumped water to his farmers! You conservative/socialist/communist water pumpers are ruining this country!!!! I don't remember any of the founding father's mentioning the Government is supposed to pump water!
Why'd they shut the water off? Nothing better demonstrates the level of compassion you can expect from the federal government than how they made those people dependent and then just cut them off to please a special interest group for votes. I don't want such politics anywhere near my healthcare and you're a damned fool if you do. We support a strong military because we know that government is really good at killing people and destroying things. Compassion and finesse is not its forte
badexample. You are a national treasure. 'We support a strong military because we know the government is really good at killing people and destroying things.' Gen Petraues and Gen McChrystal have made it clear that blind aggression equals disaster and have outlined complex counter-insurgency strategies very much based on what you describe as compassion and finesse [ i.e a reduction in collateral damage' and an emphasis on winning hearts and minds]. Try again.
@aagraber45 If you think the water is back on, please call Congressman Nunes and tell him. He still has it all over his home page.
Also Tea Party people held a rally before Thanksgiving and took food and money up to the people. It would be nice if you would be intellectually honest and discuss this idea of valuing fish more than people, and on that basis whether or not we should have a healthcare plan for fish. Also, do your own homework and provide sources when you think someone is wrong
You were never updated on the water issue--it was swept under the rug--because Obama's gyrating media harem, on which you rely for information, exists solely to push for socialism. "How's making THAT story the talk of the town gonna help the cause of socialism?? Duhhh !?!?!? Common! We're aiming for a bailout from this guy. Don't push THAT story! Duhhh !?!?!"
I mean, I know you think the constitution was rendered obsolete the day somebody invented WATER and PIPES, and that now we live in a free-fall to tyranny, but I still wish you'd ponder the founder's use of the word "water" and "pipes."
Write me an essay about that! Write an essay on how Hilter and through history, the communist/ socialist/ conservative/ tyrants piped water to farmers!
Free market is GOD. Let the free market get them the H2O they desire!
The 'gyrating media Harem' you consistently refer to is pure fantasy. The progressive left, and their multiple media outlets are ready to break ranks w/ Obama for his failure to play hardball with the conservative obstructionists whose grotesque distortions re health care have been so effective w/ the lazy minded,ill educated reactionairies the GOP has been courting, succesfully, for decades. No one better exemplifies this Idiocracy than yourself. Happy Kwanza.
Oh... and as far as the "media harem" you speak of. I probably get more conservative news then 99% of the conservatives. I work field service and travel everyday listening to siruis channels NPR, Patriot, Left, Bloomberg, CNN and just about every other news outlet on the waves. For hours and hours. Then when I get home. I watch Fox, Cnn... etc. I am a total news junkie. Not proud of it, but I am. I listen to Levin, Hannity, Church, Savage, Rush..you name it. I just don't drink kool-aid.
Oh... and I don't think they "shut them off." They are making them lower their consumption like the rest of CA. They have a 2 year drought and a water shortage.
Where is the Constitution, does it say the Government is responsible for providing water to farmers?! That is socialism. The free markets will fix the water issue in CA.
I didn't have buddies die face down in the muck so you liquid socialist/ communist/ conservatives can come in here and impose YOUR big government on me.
If these farmers wanted water..maybe they shouldn't have built their farms there. That is just bad business on the farmers part and they deserve to fail.
Where in the Constitution does it state the government is responsible for helping those whose lives were destroyed by floods, hurricanes, firest fires, mudslides, tornadoes and earthquakes? [ Disasters which have, in recent decades, directly impacted the lives of millions of taxpaying Americans]. Should we not simply let these people put their lives back together on their own,whatever the massive economic hardship? Isn't that the American way you advertise?
Of course the result of such a rigid, backwards and grotesquely self-interested approach would be long term economic damage and destitution for local and state economies that would necessarily adversely effect the national economy. So, not only is this attitude amoral, it entirely nonesensical in terms of the national welfare.
Molloy.. you only worry about that when Bush handles Katrina incompetently, but not when Pelosi does this deliberately. The difference is Bush pledged billions for relief, (I think he fumbled both the relief and rebuilding) but he did provide food and housing for people. Pelosi has refused to intervene, again a very deliberate action. The fish are more important than the people. I demand healthcare for the fish.
Non-Democrats are intellectually honest in admitting that Bush blew it with Katrina, but you all are refusing to acknowledge any lack of compassion on Pelosi's part here.
You missed my point. Who says the local governments are responsible for making sure they have water to farm? Who do you think controls the water supply?
Why doesn't the free market get the farmers water? My point is that conservatism demonize government and bow down to the free market. In THIS case the poor farmers are in perile because the evil government won't deliver the mass quantities of water needed to run farms. You could look at it as the free market running it's course. Maybe we should not build farms in areas that need tons of H2O piped in. OR let the free market find a solution.
@grab You're so close to the truth on this, it's frustrating. But this California thing isn't free market running its course. It's tyranny, plain and simple. First, those farmers don't pay market prices for their water. Don't mistake real economic pressures for "free market". Tyrants face economic realities as much as free people do. Second, you're in denial: fed court ordered that pipe shut. Tyranny! google "Thomas Sowell" and "Subsidies are all wet." What do you think? You made some sense here
I KNOW the truth. You commie / conservative / socialists what to push YOUR big government on me with your socialism. The free market is akin to GOD and can fix ANY problem. The free market and Constitution working in concert together, will save the planet earth. We don't need any other laws, insight or SOCIALISM!!!
If those farmer want socialist water they should move to Europe. Also look at the Canadian's government run water program. You have to wait in lines for months to get water!
I do not think the evil government has "shut off the hose" like you are portraying. They are expected to conserve water just like everyone else. CA is in a 2 year drought.
See things are not a simple as "the Democrats shut off the valve" to farmers. Life is complex. You are dealing with SEVERAL factors here.
aa..I don't think it does. But we are operating with many unconstitutional federal laws, and unless the states act to nullify them or the farmers are successful in court, we are stuck with them. The Feds environmental laws that caused the water to be shut off may also impose on states rights. But in the current reality if you will read about the water problem, the sec of Interior and congress have blocked this water from being turned back on.
Not being a constitutional attorney, my best understanding is all powers of the fed gov are listed in article 1, sec 8 of the constitution, and the bill of rights has a statement that reads:
The powers not delegated by this constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively. You can google the constitution and bill of rights and read them online.
I haven't found anything on water rights, but I am sure there is some provision or for Fed regulation of waterways that run from one state to another. Probably if the water source is strictly located within one state, it would be regulated by that state to deal with the sharing of water between property owners.
2) Tort Reform--crack down on the Democrats' favorite special interest group, the trial lawyers, to prevent frivolous lawsuits
3) Invoke Interstate Commerce Clause and require states to allow purchasing policies across state lines. Disallow state health insurance mandates.
4) Invent a little blue pill to administer free of charge to liberals on an ego trip who think we'd be better off living under tyranny since the world isn't perfect living under freedom.
There, molloy! Now you've seen four counterproposals for reform. Glad to inform you! The question remains for you to realize on your own why you haven't heard of any of these before. Hint: Remember Obama's gyrating media harem?
Hi again! How much of the U.S. healthcare costs go to paying out lawsuits? Less then 1%. Yes... a whole whopping less then 1%.
Let's hear the party of NO's plan. Oh.... that's right. They don't have one. Other then: no, scare, lie, scare, no, no, no, DEATH PANELS!, lie, KILL GRANDMA!, no, lie scare.........
Next subject: Economics. Your weakest... Don't give up! You're gonna grasp this someday. I have faith in you. Today's exercise in Getting-Beyond-Stage-One-Thinking is to write me an essay on this question: Are actual lawsuits the only costs increased in health care by rampant tort abuse? If not, what are some of the other costs aagraber45 overlooked in his rash assertion about the economic insignificance of tort abuse? This is an open book test. Consult Sowell's Applied Economics.
AND I never said the actually payout are the ONLY expense regarding lawsuits. I said 1% accounts for the actual payout. Which is true.
So if someone removes the wrong kidney in surgery, you want to cap the limit that can be paid out? They remove the wrong foot in surgery, you want to cap the payout? A baby and mother dies in labor, due to negligence and you what to limit that payout? To what?!
And I am sure all these "extra" test that are being run have saved many, many lives.
Tort corruption cost is massive, far beyond "actual payout". John Edwards alone increased lawyer pay-outs $60 million, arguing brain-damaged babies were caused by doctors not using Caesarian section, when electronic fetal monitors indicated problems already existed. But this playing on jurys' emotions also increased births done by Caesarian section 6% to 26%. Far from making childbirth safer, the lucrative lawsuits created new dangers. Caesarian sections carry major-surgery risks and expense.
So now, doctors in obstetrics and other specialties have fled states where juries readily succumb to emotional rhetoric from glib lawyers, granting jackpot damage awards that drive up medical malpractice insurance premiums by tens of thousands of dollars a year.
With many doctors now refusing to deliver babies in states with huge damage awards and high malpractice insurance premiums, the net result is that many pregnant women in such places have a hard time finding doctors to give them prenatal care or to be available when their baby is ready to be born. How about NOT capping rewards to victims, but capping lawyers' fees and having a loser-pays policy so there's a greater price to be paid for bringing up frivolous lawsuits? Not in the Democrat plan.
These 'jackpot' damage awards are based on the determination of......jurors are they not? If a jury can decide that a person should receive the death penalty, why are they incapable of deciding how much a malpractice award should be?
@molloyxx1 What libs really want is caps on doctors pay and the sky is the limit on lawyers pay. No doctor can make too little, and no lawyer can sue a doctor for enough. Your side wants to punish the one who contributes the most to society- the doctor, and reward the one that by comparison plays a potentially destructive role - the lawyer- when good doctors are wrongfully sued.
@molloyxx1 SEIU and others are always saying wow look how cheap surgeries are in India! My there must be something wrong with our system since it costs so much more. Nobody thinks $300,000 tuition from Harvard Medical school is too much. No one is trying to cap that!
Right on, Callhermaam! Lawyers, doctors, Palin. Just three of the innumerable examples of how liberal socialists look at the world through the wrong end of the telescope. The quixotic fools just get the wrong answer every goddam time. It's the Sowellian Unconstrained Vision. They operate on false assumptions about their ability to interpret chaotic systems. It's an absurd ego trip and why they're obsessed with micromanaging everything like Obama is. Freakin' busybodies!!
Correction: Caesarian sections increased from 6% of births to 26% of births, a massive increase in risk to both mothers and babies from exposure to major surgery, just so lawyers like John Edwards can make $60 million unjustly attacking doctors who dare to actually deliver babies with natural brain defects.
Lawyers are officers of the court. Their pay can be capped under the same authority that jurors are called to duty and jurors' pay is set. You have no business capping insurance premiums. Neither health insurers nor the doctors they insure are officers of the court. Free people aren't at the beck and call of government. It's the other way around. It's none of government's business how much free people engaged in voluntary transactions earn. That would be tyranny.
Actually, badexample, I am not entirely against capping awards; I was merely pointing out that the 200 year old plus 'sacred' document you consistently refer to is by no means comprehensive enough to refer to in every instance. What is important to remember, however, is that [drumroll please] INSURANCE companies make heady PROFITS selling malpractice insurance; so lets cap their premiums as well, eh. Merry Christmas. And Happy New Year.
You and Callhermaan will hear and believe just about anything ANY conservative moonbat tells you huh? And then you parrot it as a fact. I hear all the same b.s. "SEIU" and other conspiracy theories from the mainstream conservative media. You conservatives are really becoming radical. Seriously. I mean "the government is putting stuff in the water for mind control" crazy.
Seriously.... put down the kool-aid pitcher and think for yourself.
Call and I have said nothing about government putting mind control agents in the water supply. It seems our friend grab has been reduced to resorting to analogies, which he feigns to dismiss as irrelevant when they're used against him. Is he just stupid or an insidious little Alinskyite? No matter. One thing's certain: If it weren't for double standards, liberal Leftists like aagraber45 would have no standards at all. They rely on asymetric debate tactics, and hope opponents don't notice.
I have been wondering why a local democratic congressman can't get Pelosi to turn the water back on for the farmers in Central CA. 30,000 farmworkers are in food lines everyday up there
Pelosi has blocked legislation to turn the water back on 7 times. It was turned off because of a 2 in delta smelt fish. See the video **Water Cut Off to California City** - Mendota 41% Unemployment, Federal Disaster Area
How said that the most productive food producers in the world find themselves in a food line.
leo....The same government that can off water to farmers, can turn anyone's water off. It can also take 500 billion from medicare today, take another 500 billion from medicare tomorrow, or it can turn on another group that it once thought worthy of protection and give their health benefits away to someone else. In the meantime the bill will punish tax penalize everyone it was meant to serve: patients, docs, employers, states, and dems in their infinite wisdom will call that compassionate!
The subtext of all this predictable anti-reform rhetoric is this; 'Fuck you, I've got mine.' [ this being the philosphical 'heart of American conservatism]. Not once have I seen a single counter-propostion re reform. Conservatives have opposed child labor laws, civil rights legislation, womens right to vote, worker safety standards, environmental protection laws and evoltion while supporting torture. laws against 'race mixing' and gay marraige. Quite the legacy.
Correction. Conservatives supported laws sustaining the prohibtion against 'race mixing' and have been blatant in their homophobia and, you know, refused to increase funding for AIDS research just as the pandemic was underway.
"Conservatives have opposed child labor laws, civil rights"...ad nauseum. Socialists produced Hitler, Mao and Stalin; hundreds of millions of innocent people enslaved and slaughtered before the alter of Collectivism, all because busybodies like molloyxx1 couldn't get over the fact that we live in an imperfect world. One big, stupid ego trip you're on, molloy!
grexample: So who is a socialist that you are comparing to Hitler. Wow... you have gotten more moonbat'ish over time I see.
You can have social programs without being a "socialist" country. Once again... the problem with conservatism is everything is put in black and white catagories to oversimplify issues. In turn, it is easier to fool gullible people. All capitalism without regs = GOOD. All social programs = BAD.
Ok then.... stay off MY roads, don't use MY post office, don't call MY police or fire departments, don't use MY FDIC, get your grandma off MY medicare... etc. Oh... you lost your job in the recession?! Piss off! No unemployment for YOUR "socialist" ass. You want healthcare now that you are laid off?!? Well... we have this cobra stuff, but it is going to cost you 1,500 a month. Hope you can afford it without a job.
Life is not black and white like dummy Palin makes it out to be.
I heartily agree, badexample. 57 percent of American women [ of voting age, I mean, she might well dominate the Miley Cyrus crowd] want no part of her and her appeal to the Tea Baggers, presently busy creating a deep schism in the already feckless, increasingly idea free and demographically doomed Republican party , will create further havoc. Moreover, we will get to see Newt [ the serial adulturer], Huckabee, Pence and, um, whoever else the GOP conjurs up, rip her to shreds in debates. Cheers.
Sure, molloyxx1! We should all submit the care of our very bodies to the exquisite discretionary faculties of the same, great political and bureaucratic "thinkers" that created such an economic disaster as that vividly portrayed on the us debt clock. At least that's how the liberal lemmings see it! SARAH PALIN 2012!!!
Isn't it interesting how insur companies have to live within a budget, and still manage to have a denial rate 2 X lower than Medicare that doesn't have to live within a budget and has the before mentioned unfunded liabilities of $38 trillion?
Inspite of the fact that the AMA supports Obamacare, their own stats show that Medicare has a denial rate two times higher than does private insurance. Google: AMA supports largest denier of Health Care Claims or google Denied: Medical Insurance Claims . Medicare denied 475,000 claims last yr. All the new proposals have $400-500 billion of cuts to Medicare. Wonder what the denials will be then? It could get way uglier with a gov single payer system. Just the AMAs facts.
Oh, facts schmacts!! Facts don't hold a candle to a good ego trip. You know! Like the one Kathleen Sebelius was on; the big dummy from Kansas who, like Arnold, had to deny taxpayers their refunds by the time HER ego trip was shot as governor. Sarah Palin would never run anything like that. Spending nuts? Just what Obama's looking for!! Of course, it's more her affection for late-term abortion that's being tapped there. That's Barry "Leave-'Em-On-The-Washing-Machine" Obama's favorite gal...
Let Sebelius run health care! We need someone with that kind of respect for life. And for economic matters? Who could please the likes of molloyxx1 better than Larry Summers? Don't worry! He's no conservative. No, he's got the kind of resume Democrats respect. Trust us! He's a HUGE failure. Just ask the Harvard Endowment people. Larry's your man! He drove the endowment down the toilet to the tune of $1.8 billion, despite repeated warnings of excessive risk. RISK SCHMISK! WE'RE DEMOCRATS!
What I find fascinating is the sudden surge of protective emotion certain Republican politicians have for a program [ Medicare] many of them wish had never been put in place and consider a liability, howling that Obama wants to rip 500 billion from the program thus ensuring [Coburn] the untimely deaths of thousands of our seniors. What could explain this sudden embrace of socialism? Please explain.And please dont let Obama murder my parents.
The strong objection to Medicare cuts is that elderly people had the fruit of their labor ripped from their hands their entire lives by this Beast called Government, which promised them health care security at this vulnerable stage of their life in return for their past indentured servitude. It's bait-and-switch. Government would imprison a health insurance executive who conspired to treat his policy holders as Obama aims to treat the elderly. Obama is the Bernie Madoff of U.S. presidents.
badexample. This Beast called Government? Lets look at the GI Bill [ a blantantly socialist reallocation of wealth by your definition] which rewarded WWII vets w/ a free college education and essentaily created the American middle class. Or the[ massive] Highway Bill undertaken during the Eisenhauer admin, which built an infrastructuret hat led to an economic boom. Your preening hatred of government is entirely myopic and underinformed. No surprise.
Youre not an American. Our interstate highway system was legitimate exercise of federal power in that it constitutionally promoted the general welfare by facilitating private economic activity--including health-related economic activity. Our constitution does not empower government to "provide for the general welfare". Free people do that for themselves through voluntary exchange in a free marketincluding charitable exchange. Our highway system exists for voluntary exchange. It's not socialism
You routinely howl about the Beast That Is the Government yet when push comes to shove defend massive governmental spending when, by your tortured analysis, it promotes business interests. I am not aware of anything in the Constitution that sanctions this. BTW, in the 50's the upper tax rate was over 90 percent, so the rich were forced to carry much of the freight re the cost of this Big Government program, hence, redistribution of the wealth, pure and simple, made it all possible. Cheers.
You're not American. Our founders understood that government is necessary for certain, limited functions. That is what our Constitution is all about--precisely defining the legitimate functions of government. "provide for the common defence" "promote the general welfare". There's nothing tortured about it. Your free-and-loose notions about legitimate government power would lead inevitably to complete and utter tyranny. Our founders were much wiser than you are, you stupid fool.
"promote the general welfare" includes non-exclusively promoting business interests in the sense of promoting voluntary exchange between free people, such as by building and maintaining roads for free exchange of goods and services.
Likewise, the Constitution empowers the federal government to "provide for the common defence". To do so, it must pay soldiers and reward them so as to bolster morale and encourage voluntary enlistment. The GI Bill was simply payment to soldiers for services rendered. Nothing in the Constitution empowers the federal government to have anything to do with how private citizens receive or pay for health services. That would be the end of the United States. That is what Leftists like Obama want.
You forgot the "and general welfare" part right after "provide for the common defense." How convenient for you to exclude that.
I am not sure if you noticed.... but things have changed a little bit since the constitution was ratified. For instance, I don't think they had tanks, military jets, or RPG's back then. I am not sure "the right to bear arms" means the average citizen should be allowed to own a RPG, tank, or fully armed F-18. That is just ONE example.
'Sup grab? Spouting your ignorance with the same old confidence, I see. Very disappointing... I still have hopes you'll learn to think more deeply about things. Let's start with a civics lesson and consult the text of the Constitution! I mean, I know you think it was rendered obsolete the day somebody invented a bigger gun, and that now we live in a free-fall to tyranny, but I still wish you'd ponder the founder's use of the word "promote" in the Preamble. Write me an essay about that!
Did I say the constitution is "obsolete?" Um... no. But lets us a little common sense here. Just because something is not spelled out word for word in the Constitiution does not mean it is a common sense approach or solution. The government can possible do things to improve Americans lives and they may not be in the Constitution. AND some of the things in the Constitution need to be, in a common sense fashion, re-tooled or thought through to update to current times.
If you want to "re-tool" my Constitution, you can go through the amendment process. I don't exist to satisfy your Quixotic ego trips. Keep your grimy hands off my body!
I am not even saying we need to "re-tool" the constitiution. So do you think we need an amendment that states "you can't have a fully armed f-18, RPG or tank." No. We need common sense and other laws based on the Constitution, further defining the laws. AND just because the Constitution does not say, "the government is hereforth in charge of the peoples public option to lower healthcare costs".... does not mean the government having a public option is not a good idea.
aarg. Here I confess I misunderstood your Swiftian talent for irony. I was momentarily certain you were yet another one eyed slave of the Know Nothings who resort, often selectively, to the sacred scrawl of a document written when slavery was common practice, women did not have the right to vote and a male citiizen needed a mule and an acre [loosely speaking] to secure the right to vote. The Constitution is a template, written by mortals, well in need of revision.
badexample. Your obsession with your body, with strangers, especially Government Strangers, placing their 'grimy hands' on this sacred object, is, to say the least, disturbing and suggests an impoverished sexual life as well as an unconscious wish to be, um, 'man-handled' by strangers. It verges on the pornographic and I wish, for the sake of decency, you would refrain from this fetishistic kind of free asociation. Thanks in advance.
molloy... Since my wife and I are in the Medical field, we take the hippocratic oath very seriously - do no harm. We view Medicare the same way- do no harm to medicare. Cutting Medicare by $500 billion from seniors including $42 billion from home health, is devastating to seniors. They have paid into it all their lives- it is their benefit. This changes the game for them when they are vulnerable and can't address the change by going back to work.
I'm in the medical field as well, community mental health, and routinely work with clients who have no health care whatsoever [ our county pays for their MH services] sometimes with SSD/SSI applications or appeals pending. They have no non-psychiatric health coverage whatsover. When,for example, a raging toothache comes on they can get an rx for pain meds at the ED, but can't afford to fill it. They suffer for weeks on end until we can arrange care with a mobile dental unit. Its terrible.......
to witness. This applies to all manner of health concerns for these people, many of whom are obese and diabetic [ and, obviously struggling w/ their mental illness all the while]. The system has completely failed them. As for your comments about Medicare cuts, everyone knows that if the reallocation of Medicare funds lead to a drastic reduction of care this would be political suicide. Let's see where AARP lines up on health care reform before jumping to simplistic conclusions.
molloy... the AARP has already lined up on healthcare, and curiously for the same reasons you despise Insurance cos. They stand to benefit because they provide Medicare plans under United Healthcare. They have lobbied to reduce Medicare Advantage benefits, which will allow them to sell more policies. This is not the kind of competition I am looking for. AARP's position means nothing to me. I do my own research.
I see. Suddenly the organization most devoted to the medical care of seniors [ unless you can name another one] has become nefarious and are supporting a reform measure that will, according to the rhetoric of Coburn and Co, hasten the demise or decimation of their base. Puzzling, to say the least. Perhaps even inecplicable. Finally, you said nothing about my comments re the suffering of the unisured. Why is that, considering your advertuised fidelity to your oath?
"most devoted to the medical care of seniors": nothing but a marketing slogan. What's wrong with you, molloyxx1? Where's your cynicism regarding the human beings running AARP? Do you think they volunteer their services? William Novelli, the CEO of AARP, took home $2.04 million in 2006, well above the $779,203, he received in 2004. What would Obama give him for AARP's support? Novelli's no less human than anybody working for an insurance company. The difference: Novelli's useful to Obama.
I love how conservatives are using medicare as a reason to block healthcare reform. I saw a rally where the audience was asked "who is apposed to a government option?" and half the people raised their hands. Then they were asked, "who has Medicare?" and about half the people raised their hands. Then they were asked, "who wants to give up their Medicare?" and NOBODY raised their hand.
"Socialism"..blah..blah..blah.."socialism"
The same scare tactics used when Medicare was put into place.
@aagraber45 Regarding Medicare cuts of $500 billion combined with lowering eligibility to age 55: Only liberals would take a lifeboat that was swamped with people, (plus it has a hole in it) make a bigger hole, throw more people into the boat and say problem solved and call themselves compassionate.
Only a conservative would compare healthcare to a life boat. Conservatives LOVE comparing apple to oranges, because it makes their arguments make "sense."
The economy is not a pond. Cash for clunkers was not like selling a pencil. And healthcare is not like people in a boat.
Read my comment about conservatives oversimplifing issues below.
aa. It could be any boat, and I am talking about Medicare being the boat w a leak in it ($38 trillion) they want to enlarge the hole ($500billion more in cuts) They want to add more people to the swamped boat by reducing the age of elig to 55. That is the liberals idea of "fixing" Medicare.
It's not ANY boat. Or any other silly analogy you think up!
Did you know that they put Medicare and social security into the "general fund" and the money is being used to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan? No wonder it is "bankrupt." Iraq the war started on lies and Afghanistan the botched war BECAUSE we "needed" to start another war in Iraq. Fighting two wars at a time....BRILLIANT!!!
molloy...Seniors are supposed to bend over and take the medicare cuts because the AARP endorses Obamacare? Seniors actually have an opinion about that. 63% of seniors oppose the bill per Rasmussen 12/14. I see, Obama knows better than the seniors, AARP knows better than the seniors. Shifting these benefits from one group to another is like putting a queen size sheet on a king size bed. If $42 billion hm health cuts doesn't bother you, you aren't the one to discuss the uninsured with.
molloy... the onus is on Democrats to explain how they can care about a group like seniors for decades, and then sell them out. Why would I trust such a government with single payer or public option, or to design and dictate what kind of policies priv insur can sell me? They will just change the game and screw over a different group down the road like they did the seniors.
I reject the propostion that seniors have been sold out and explained why this is fantasy in an previous post. What you studiously avoid is the hypocrisy of the GOPs sudden defense of Medicare funding when in irreducible point of fact they were against it from its inception and since then have been trying to defund it. The GOP doesnt give a sweet shit about health care, letting costs double in past 8 years while they controlled [ until Jan 2007] the House, Senate and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
molloy... Breaking something that isnt broken doesnt help you fix something else that is. I dont believe in bulldozing the house to remodel the kitchen. (68- 80% of people are happy with their benefits) But it is worse than that. Medicare is already broken, and they want to break it further in order to fix another problem. I want any resources of any new expenditures of healthcare dollars to be 100% focused on those that dont have insurance. We dont need to hurt seniors in order to do this.
molloy...after checking your channel I see why you are unmoved by the cuts to Medicare: "Moody, self-centered, unpleasant, detest animals and people who smile." Do you work with the mentally ill, or are you merely one of the inmates running the asylum?
One of America's greatest challenges is that the internet is exposing the populace to moronic social ideologies that, in the past, only journalists were exposed to. These ideologies dominate other regions of the world and, with the Left running public education in our country, the people are generally uninformed about the brilliant ideas at the heart of American exceptionalism. The American people are therefore both increasingly exposed to, and susceptible to, the fallacies of the Left.
An exceptionally incoherent attempt at a paragraph which cites not a single example or provides even a momentary window of context. Moreover, American 'exceptionalism' is a decidely dangerous nationalist delusion not so distant from Hitlers promotion of a 'super-race' and one which was routinely employed by the Bush administrations grotesque reign of error, with extraordinarily bad results.
I knew the invective was coming [ versus a reasoned arguement] and so am by no means surprised. A half bright child could tell that this self description was entirely for comic effect.
badexample. Sigh. Whatever your bizarre and deeply paranoid fantasies about surrending your humble, tender body to the Promethean claws of the goons recently ousted from power via the nefarious mechanisms of a free election the fact remains that the for profit system has allowed for rampant cost increases while maximizing profits by denyng care to the very ill and those w/ pre-existing conditions. Your trust in those who care more about profits than your health is, well, touching . Sob.
Do you think government bureaucrats care more about your health than they do about their own self-interest? People are people, whether in government or in business. You gain NOTHING from a government-run system in that regard. Food doesnt find its way to a location convenient for you to pick it up because the people working their asses off to produce it care so very deeply about you. Yet the food gets there. Why? Health care need be no different. Feelings are fickle. Profits bypass them.
Even today, prices are falling and quality is skyrocketing in areas like corneal laser-surgery, where the profit incentive dominates. How can that be? Why don't the doctors raise prices instead of dropping them? Free markets work because of the efficiencies resulting from the profit incentive plus consumers spending their own money. You would do us all no favor by minimizing the role of the profit incentive in health care. Health Savings Accounts would be a much better solution.
Best Selling Author? You mean she actually beat Stephen Meyer and J.K Rowling ? Sarah Palin must be the greatest fiction writer in the history of modern literature.
Whatta gal!
icemeltsinspring 1 year ago
The fallacy created by the left that Sarah deserted her office is just another liberal attempt to smear a decent and honorable American. Obama can apologize all that he wants to, but Sarah is damned proud of her country and she's not afraid to show it. Shame on Obama, he is dragging this country into an unsustainable debt that our kids and grandkids will never be able to get out of. He'd probably like for the old people to just go away and die, it would give him more $ to give to the derelicts.
gritsandgreens1971 1 year ago 4
@gritsandgreens1971 She's so fucking stupid though!!!!
GhettoBlaster100 7 months ago
By the way...uh... do you like apples? We got the Ted Kennedy Senate seat. How do you like them apples?
grexample 2 years ago
He said as though I am a liberal...
Stop being a tool.
belaires 2 years ago
Maybe you're just a tool of the Left.
grexample 2 years ago
So you go to movies to learn how to think, huh?
grexample 2 years ago
Yep. Will had Clark for lunch that day. aagraber45 removed almost all his posts here that mine are replies to. He was absolutely pathetic and ended up saying he was going to find someone younger to argue with; that he'd do it "in [my] honor". I didn't ask aagraber45 if he likes apples because I didn't get a damned thing out of going through the pain in the ass of educating him. He's a moron.
grexample 2 years ago
Sarah Palin 2012~just the RX for what ails America !!!
gritsandgreens1971 2 years ago
I just finished reading Sarah Palin's book "Going rogue", i can truely say to american. Is that she is going to be our next U.S. PRESIDENT. so for all you liberals out their sorry. she is going to really bring CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PALIN/BROWN 2012
kobewild1 2 years ago 2
@kobewild1 Hahahha I'm guessing you aren't a native English speaker? Because if you are then I feel really sorry for you =(
BenkaiDebussy 1 year ago
@BenkaiDebussy Wow good to know if she is elected president. She will have the code to launch Nuclear Bombs. Oops quitting is not an option. Be careful what you ask for. You might die for it!!!!
nbros6 1 year ago
As of January 3, this was the #1 best selling non-fiction book in the USA.
mkl62 2 years ago 6
Nope. That was a lie. The Left lies all the time and the lies get repeated so much that people like you start thinking they're true. For instance, one of the ethics charges brought against Sarah when she was governor was filed in the name of a fictional, British soap opera character. THINK ABOUT THAT!! Sarah had to pay a lawyer to address a charge brought against her by somebody who doesn't exist. The Left lies all the time. Their whole philosophy is one Big Lie.
SARAH PALIN 2012!!!
grexample 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
One month ago I posted the following...
"Palin's political career is over. She'll be lucky to end up like any other tramp on Faux News who is considered to be an expert just for showing up."
LOL!!... Guess who's the latest addition to FauxNews??... LOL!!
.
IncomingMonkeyTurd 2 years ago 2
Read the book naysayers! Sarah is the real deal! Have horses, smokeless powder, fishin equip., etc. bring it on! First time voted since Perot for someone. Sarah is too good to put up with the BS associated with the office she is what we need tho. This American is PISSED and ready for the real change let the bottom fall out and skimm the flotsum off the top the true Americans with Palin at the helm will go on! Thanks Sarah you have PROFESSIONALY shown what a joke the process is!
FBIundercover51 2 years ago 5
Her book set a record for sales on Amazon. I have my copy. It's a great read. I also bought six copies to distribute at the local libraries.
NocternalRevenue 2 years ago 9
If there were a special model of Lambourghini that the company made only 3 of and they sold for $100,000, they'd be in short supply. In fact, the supply'd be entirely depleted, because lots of people could and would pay that for such a rare vehicle. If, however, they sold for $18 billion, all three would still be available because nobody'd pay that for any car. In both situations, the car is scarce. But only in the first case would there be a shortage of those cars.
grexample 2 years ago 10
O-bots have a very childish understanding of economics. Then they routinely mock our representatives, like Sarah Palin, who have a solid grounding in the subject. It's very important that we keep an economic system as complex as health care out the hands of these presumptious, know-nothing O-bots!!! SARAH PALIN 2012!!!!
grexample 2 years ago 9
Again, I recommend Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. You have a lot to learn, my friend.
grexample 2 years ago 9
We currently have lots of people who volunteer their labor for nothing. What's wrong with those people taking home a few dollars instead?
grexample 2 years ago 10
Economics is not an intuitive subject where one relies on what one "would say". It is a subject full of surprises, where what one "would think" turns out not to be the case. It takes mental discipline and study to know the difference between "shortage" and "scarcity". As a prerequisite, it takes a fundamental understanding of and appreciation for the vital role prices play in preventing scarce resources from becoming short in supply.
grexample 2 years ago 3
No, I said working for a dollar a day would be a step up for millions of children you hold a blind eye to. In fact, it'd be a HUGE step up for George Hussein Onyango Obama, our millionaire-president's 27-year-old half brother, who lives on less than a dollar a MONTH in the outer slums of Nairobi, Kenya. President Obama has met his brother twice. And this president is the "brother's keeper" that hundreds-of-millions of Americans are to entrust with their healthcare? I think not!
grexample 2 years ago 10
I wish you the best in your continued efforts at understanding concepts about the subjects you obviously have a passion for! Might I suggest a dictionary? I use Franklin's electronic Merriam-Webster's Collegiate. It'd be a worthy investment for you to make. You can take it anywhere with you on your travels.
grexample 2 years ago 8
12 year old kids with jobs paying a buck a day would be a step up for millions of children living in dozens of countries driven into the ground by Leftist governments. The only thing that pays for your absurd, quixotic, Leftist ego trips is the free market, grab. Your welcome!
grexample 2 years ago 8
@molloy: Why should our Constitution be updated, with its critics betraying an utter inability to grasp the profound achievement in the advancement of social harmony through individual liberty that is at the heart of American Constitutionalism? No, any "improvement" along your lines would only be regression to Euro-style, elitist-driven ochlocracy. Human nature hasn't changed one bit over the past 200 years. Your outlook isn't modern at all. It's the same vision our founders revolted against.
grexample 2 years ago 8
How government micromanaging our lives works in reality: Hillary Clinton's pollster, Mark Penn, received 6000000 taxpayer dollars in stimulus money to "save" 3 jobs at his public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller. Mark Penn is also president of the polling firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, which did work for Hillary's campaign in 2008. Free markets and freedom of association are better than this corrupt crap we're getting from Obama and the socialist Democrats.
grexample 2 years ago 8
Sarah Palin 2012!!!
grexample 2 years ago 4
I am well aware that Palins base is comprised of aging white evangelical males [who would rather chew their collective arm off than rouse their grouchy, gun toting brides] and home schooled teenage boys who disguise their latent homosexuality by swooning over an Alaskan drag queen. Sadly, in your case, I doubt this is enough of a coalition to allow her, however articulate and thoughtful, to secure the presidency.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Happy Kwanza.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Just wake up and take off your sleep mask...people know exactly why they love Sarah. For so many reasons, just a few of which include: her love of country and respect for human life, her knowledge of what fiscal responsibility means, oh yeah and a little thing known as common sense...something which you obviously know nothing about....
gritsandgreens1971 2 years ago 5
When free market forces are dismissed in favor of enterprise based on politics, you get stupid stuff like cotton being grown in the desert. It'll be no better, no less wasteful, with government-run health care. It will certainly be much worse, given the much greater complexity of health care compared to utilities. GET GOVERNMENT OUT OF HEALTH CARE! SARAH PALIN 2012!!
grexample 2 years ago 4
Water shortage: a sign that somebody is keeping the price artificially lower than it would be if supply and demand were allowed to operate freely. That is precisely why there is a water shortage in California's dry Central Valley. Less than 10 percent of the water available from federal water projects is used by cities and industries. The vast majority of it is used by farmers, who pay a fraction of what urban users pay, thanks to federal price fixing...
grexample 2 years ago 7
...Like everything that is made artificially cheap, water is used lavishly, including the growing of crops like cotton that require huge amounts of water. It is one thing to grow cotton in Southern states with abundant rainfall. It is something else to grow it out in a California desert with water supplied largely at the taxpayers' expense.
grexample 2 years ago 6
Given this grotesque waste, were contracts renegotiated, when they came up for renewal in 2004, so those who use federal water had to pay the costs for their operation? Of course not! It was an election year. A Department of the Interior spokesman explained: "We don't think it is a good idea for California or the nation to adopt punitive pricing proposals that might have the effect of driving more agriculture out of existence." That's what happens when you mix politics and economics.
grexample 2 years ago 6
But the farmers are learning now that there really IS no free lunch--even when it's being served by the federal government. Market prices for water might have driven many of these farms out of business years ago, but this would have been the product of free people making voluntary arrangements. Economics don't change. Now they're going out of business by an act of tyranny. I don't want such politically-driven decision-making anywhere near my health care.
grexample 2 years ago 6
So while there's real economic benefit to shutting down the water supply, that's not why it's being done. It's political pressure from environmentalist groups concerned more about fish than people. Here's from Nancy Pelosi's own 2004 letter to the Inspector General:
grexample 2 years ago 5
"Dear Mr. Devaney and Mr. Frazier:
We are writing to request that you investigate allegations that the Bureau of Reclamation, in its haste to finalize water contracts in California, has improperly undermined the required NOAA Fisheries environmental review process [...] This is especially troubling given the recent history of political intervention in NOAA Fisheries' review process, which resulted in the well-documented and catastrophic failure to protect the fish of the Klamath River."
grexample 2 years ago 3
...This letter, from 2004, was the result of a political calculation Nancy made. She pitted urban-environmentalists against socialist farmers to her advantage, since her consituents are largely urban-environmentalist with a distates for large-scale private enterprise of any type--even operations based on a socialist supply of water. Now that these urban-environmentalist types are in the driver's seat, they can tyrannically clamp-down on any economic activity they have a distaste for.
grexample 2 years ago 3
I don't want such special interest groups ever having any power over how I receive health care. You're a fool if you don't see a problem there. To push for government health is to say health care is so important, that we need to flush 78 cents of every dollar we can allot to it down a political/bureacratic toilet so that less than a quarter of that dollar ends up in the hands of people who actually provide health care. Liberals are stuck on stupid.
grexample 2 years ago 6
Oh my gosh. "Water Shortage" is a sign that IT HASN'T RAINED MUCH IN TWO YEARS!!!!!
City after city is having to restrict water usage. This is no conpsiracy here man. Get serious.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Again, economics is your weakest subject, aagraber45. I'm going to change my recommendation. Sowell's Applied Economics is too advanced for you. Please get a copy of his expanded and revised Basic Economics. Don't be afraid of the title! Even I reread it from time to time because it is so insightful. Your next essay assignment: Explain the difference between "scarcity" and "shortage". That's something you currently don't know; as made obvious in this childish post of yours.
grexample 2 years ago 4
But again, I've always admired the confidence with which you spout your ignorance. If we can just back it up with a little education, that confidence can be put to better use. Best of luck in your continued development as a citizen of the greatest nation on earth!
grexample 2 years ago 3
Farms in central ca have turned into a dust bowl. How many years will it take to regrow almond orchards that were killed by the water shut off?
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
Pelosi owns a vineyard, and of course her vineyard has water. More important to grow wine grapes than to grow fruits nuts and vegetables. It is sad when the speaker of the house screws people in her own state.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
Since fish are more important than people, why not have a gov run healthcare plan for fish?
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
Even Democratic congressmen can't get Nancy Pelosi to turn the water back on. She has blocked legislation from coming to the floor 7 times about turning the water on. If you think this is compassion, you need to do some serious soul searching. A fish is more important than humans. These are grown men crying everyday because they have to take food handouts when they could be working. Suicides are way up.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
Um... and as far as this water stuff. You may want to do some research some place other then with Hannity. Last I heard they turned the water back on. Like 5 months ago. Just saying...
aagraber45 2 years ago
The House voted on the water issue twice, on June 18th and again on July 23rd. On the first vote, 171 Republicans voted for the farmers, 215 Democrats voted for the minnow. On the second vote, 176 Republicans--all but one--voted for the farmers, all but three Democrats voted for the fish. Unfortunately, neither vote was close. Wealthy environmentalists won, the farmers and farm workers lost.
grexample 2 years ago 3
John Duncan raised this issue on the floor of the House on September 24th 2009. Are you now going to consider expanding your sources of information, aagraeber45? You're looking pretty ignorant here...
grexample 2 years ago 3
I don't care how I look. I am not here to impress you. I didn't read up on it and I admit it. SO WHAT?!
aagraber45 2 years ago
Wait... wait... I was just thinking about this water issue. Where in the Constitution does is state the government is responsible to provide water to California
Farmers?!? Let the free market fix the water issue!!! This pumping of all this water is liquid socialism! Hiltler pumped water to his farmers! You conservative/socialist/communist water pumpers are ruining this country!!!! I don't remember any of the founding father's mentioning the Government is supposed to pump water!
aagraber45 2 years ago
Why'd they shut the water off? Nothing better demonstrates the level of compassion you can expect from the federal government than how they made those people dependent and then just cut them off to please a special interest group for votes. I don't want such politics anywhere near my healthcare and you're a damned fool if you do. We support a strong military because we know that government is really good at killing people and destroying things. Compassion and finesse is not its forte
grexample 2 years ago 2
badexample. You are a national treasure. 'We support a strong military because we know the government is really good at killing people and destroying things.' Gen Petraues and Gen McChrystal have made it clear that blind aggression equals disaster and have outlined complex counter-insurgency strategies very much based on what you describe as compassion and finesse [ i.e a reduction in collateral damage' and an emphasis on winning hearts and minds]. Try again.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
@aagraber45 If you think the water is back on, please call Congressman Nunes and tell him. He still has it all over his home page.
Also Tea Party people held a rally before Thanksgiving and took food and money up to the people. It would be nice if you would be intellectually honest and discuss this idea of valuing fish more than people, and on that basis whether or not we should have a healthcare plan for fish. Also, do your own homework and provide sources when you think someone is wrong
Callhermaam 2 years ago
I admit... I should have done some reading. You have me there. I normally do, and I may have heard about something different.
I will get back to you on this......
aagraber45 2 years ago
You were never updated on the water issue--it was swept under the rug--because Obama's gyrating media harem, on which you rely for information, exists solely to push for socialism. "How's making THAT story the talk of the town gonna help the cause of socialism?? Duhhh !?!?!? Common! We're aiming for a bailout from this guy. Don't push THAT story! Duhhh !?!?!"
grexample 2 years ago 2
You socialist!
I mean, I know you think the constitution was rendered obsolete the day somebody invented WATER and PIPES, and that now we live in a free-fall to tyranny, but I still wish you'd ponder the founder's use of the word "water" and "pipes."
Write me an essay about that! Write an essay on how Hilter and through history, the communist/ socialist/ conservative/ tyrants piped water to farmers!
Free market is GOD. Let the free market get them the H2O they desire!
aagraber45 2 years ago
The 'gyrating media Harem' you consistently refer to is pure fantasy. The progressive left, and their multiple media outlets are ready to break ranks w/ Obama for his failure to play hardball with the conservative obstructionists whose grotesque distortions re health care have been so effective w/ the lazy minded,ill educated reactionairies the GOP has been courting, succesfully, for decades. No one better exemplifies this Idiocracy than yourself. Happy Kwanza.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Oh... and as far as the "media harem" you speak of. I probably get more conservative news then 99% of the conservatives. I work field service and travel everyday listening to siruis channels NPR, Patriot, Left, Bloomberg, CNN and just about every other news outlet on the waves. For hours and hours. Then when I get home. I watch Fox, Cnn... etc. I am a total news junkie. Not proud of it, but I am. I listen to Levin, Hannity, Church, Savage, Rush..you name it. I just don't drink kool-aid.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Take that pitcher of kool-aid down.... you are swallowing it so fast you have a HUGE mustache and your spilling it down your nice, new shirt.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Oh... and I don't think they "shut them off." They are making them lower their consumption like the rest of CA. They have a 2 year drought and a water shortage.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Where is the Constitution, does it say the Government is responsible for providing water to farmers?! That is socialism. The free markets will fix the water issue in CA.
I didn't have buddies die face down in the muck so you liquid socialist/ communist/ conservatives can come in here and impose YOUR big government on me.
If these farmers wanted water..maybe they shouldn't have built their farms there. That is just bad business on the farmers part and they deserve to fail.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Where in the Constitution does it state the government is responsible for helping those whose lives were destroyed by floods, hurricanes, firest fires, mudslides, tornadoes and earthquakes? [ Disasters which have, in recent decades, directly impacted the lives of millions of taxpaying Americans]. Should we not simply let these people put their lives back together on their own,whatever the massive economic hardship? Isn't that the American way you advertise?
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Of course the result of such a rigid, backwards and grotesquely self-interested approach would be long term economic damage and destitution for local and state economies that would necessarily adversely effect the national economy. So, not only is this attitude amoral, it entirely nonesensical in terms of the national welfare.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Molloy.. you only worry about that when Bush handles Katrina incompetently, but not when Pelosi does this deliberately. The difference is Bush pledged billions for relief, (I think he fumbled both the relief and rebuilding) but he did provide food and housing for people. Pelosi has refused to intervene, again a very deliberate action. The fish are more important than the people. I demand healthcare for the fish.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
Non-Democrats are intellectually honest in admitting that Bush blew it with Katrina, but you all are refusing to acknowledge any lack of compassion on Pelosi's part here.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
You missed my point. Who says the local governments are responsible for making sure they have water to farm? Who do you think controls the water supply?
aagraber45 2 years ago
Why doesn't the free market get the farmers water? My point is that conservatism demonize government and bow down to the free market. In THIS case the poor farmers are in perile because the evil government won't deliver the mass quantities of water needed to run farms. You could look at it as the free market running it's course. Maybe we should not build farms in areas that need tons of H2O piped in. OR let the free market find a solution.
Or are you gonna rely on socialism to fix it?
aagraber45 2 years ago
@grab You're so close to the truth on this, it's frustrating. But this California thing isn't free market running its course. It's tyranny, plain and simple. First, those farmers don't pay market prices for their water. Don't mistake real economic pressures for "free market". Tyrants face economic realities as much as free people do. Second, you're in denial: fed court ordered that pipe shut. Tyranny! google "Thomas Sowell" and "Subsidies are all wet." What do you think? You made some sense here
grexample 2 years ago
I KNOW the truth. You commie / conservative / socialists what to push YOUR big government on me with your socialism. The free market is akin to GOD and can fix ANY problem. The free market and Constitution working in concert together, will save the planet earth. We don't need any other laws, insight or SOCIALISM!!!
If those farmer want socialist water they should move to Europe. Also look at the Canadian's government run water program. You have to wait in lines for months to get water!
aagraber45 2 years ago
I do not think the evil government has "shut off the hose" like you are portraying. They are expected to conserve water just like everyone else. CA is in a 2 year drought.
See things are not a simple as "the Democrats shut off the valve" to farmers. Life is complex. You are dealing with SEVERAL factors here.
aagraber45 2 years ago
aa..I don't think it does. But we are operating with many unconstitutional federal laws, and unless the states act to nullify them or the farmers are successful in court, we are stuck with them. The Feds environmental laws that caused the water to be shut off may also impose on states rights. But in the current reality if you will read about the water problem, the sec of Interior and congress have blocked this water from being turned back on.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
What makes these laws "unconstitutional" by the way?
aagraber45 2 years ago
Not being a constitutional attorney, my best understanding is all powers of the fed gov are listed in article 1, sec 8 of the constitution, and the bill of rights has a statement that reads:
The powers not delegated by this constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively. You can google the constitution and bill of rights and read them online.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
I haven't found anything on water rights, but I am sure there is some provision or for Fed regulation of waterways that run from one state to another. Probably if the water source is strictly located within one state, it would be regulated by that state to deal with the sharing of water between property owners.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
See the video Water Cut Off to California City - Mendota 41% Unemployment, Federal Disaster Area
Callhermaam 2 years ago
Water has been shut off for at least 6 mo to farms in Central CA. 30,000 farmworkers are in food lines.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
1) Tax-Free Health Savings Accounts
2) Tort Reform--crack down on the Democrats' favorite special interest group, the trial lawyers, to prevent frivolous lawsuits
3) Invoke Interstate Commerce Clause and require states to allow purchasing policies across state lines. Disallow state health insurance mandates.
4) Invent a little blue pill to administer free of charge to liberals on an ego trip who think we'd be better off living under tyranny since the world isn't perfect living under freedom.
grexample 2 years ago 8
There, molloy! Now you've seen four counterproposals for reform. Glad to inform you! The question remains for you to realize on your own why you haven't heard of any of these before. Hint: Remember Obama's gyrating media harem?
grexample 2 years ago 8
Hi again! How much of the U.S. healthcare costs go to paying out lawsuits? Less then 1%. Yes... a whole whopping less then 1%.
Let's hear the party of NO's plan. Oh.... that's right. They don't have one. Other then: no, scare, lie, scare, no, no, no, DEATH PANELS!, lie, KILL GRANDMA!, no, lie scare.........
aagraber45 2 years ago
Next subject: Economics. Your weakest... Don't give up! You're gonna grasp this someday. I have faith in you. Today's exercise in Getting-Beyond-Stage-One-Thinking is to write me an essay on this question: Are actual lawsuits the only costs increased in health care by rampant tort abuse? If not, what are some of the other costs aagraber45 overlooked in his rash assertion about the economic insignificance of tort abuse? This is an open book test. Consult Sowell's Applied Economics.
grexample 2 years ago
AND I never said the actually payout are the ONLY expense regarding lawsuits. I said 1% accounts for the actual payout. Which is true.
So if someone removes the wrong kidney in surgery, you want to cap the limit that can be paid out? They remove the wrong foot in surgery, you want to cap the payout? A baby and mother dies in labor, due to negligence and you what to limit that payout? To what?!
And I am sure all these "extra" test that are being run have saved many, many lives.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Tort corruption cost is massive, far beyond "actual payout". John Edwards alone increased lawyer pay-outs $60 million, arguing brain-damaged babies were caused by doctors not using Caesarian section, when electronic fetal monitors indicated problems already existed. But this playing on jurys' emotions also increased births done by Caesarian section 6% to 26%. Far from making childbirth safer, the lucrative lawsuits created new dangers. Caesarian sections carry major-surgery risks and expense.
grexample 2 years ago
So now, doctors in obstetrics and other specialties have fled states where juries readily succumb to emotional rhetoric from glib lawyers, granting jackpot damage awards that drive up medical malpractice insurance premiums by tens of thousands of dollars a year.
grexample 2 years ago
With many doctors now refusing to deliver babies in states with huge damage awards and high malpractice insurance premiums, the net result is that many pregnant women in such places have a hard time finding doctors to give them prenatal care or to be available when their baby is ready to be born. How about NOT capping rewards to victims, but capping lawyers' fees and having a loser-pays policy so there's a greater price to be paid for bringing up frivolous lawsuits? Not in the Democrat plan.
grexample 2 years ago
These 'jackpot' damage awards are based on the determination of......jurors are they not? If a jury can decide that a person should receive the death penalty, why are they incapable of deciding how much a malpractice award should be?
molloyxx1 2 years ago
@molloyxx1 What libs really want is caps on doctors pay and the sky is the limit on lawyers pay. No doctor can make too little, and no lawyer can sue a doctor for enough. Your side wants to punish the one who contributes the most to society- the doctor, and reward the one that by comparison plays a potentially destructive role - the lawyer- when good doctors are wrongfully sued.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
@molloyxx1 SEIU and others are always saying wow look how cheap surgeries are in India! My there must be something wrong with our system since it costs so much more. Nobody thinks $300,000 tuition from Harvard Medical school is too much. No one is trying to cap that!
Callhermaam 2 years ago
Right on, Callhermaam! Lawyers, doctors, Palin. Just three of the innumerable examples of how liberal socialists look at the world through the wrong end of the telescope. The quixotic fools just get the wrong answer every goddam time. It's the Sowellian Unconstrained Vision. They operate on false assumptions about their ability to interpret chaotic systems. It's an absurd ego trip and why they're obsessed with micromanaging everything like Obama is. Freakin' busybodies!!
grexample 2 years ago
Sarah Palin 2012!!!
grexample 2 years ago 2
Correction: Caesarian sections increased from 6% of births to 26% of births, a massive increase in risk to both mothers and babies from exposure to major surgery, just so lawyers like John Edwards can make $60 million unjustly attacking doctors who dare to actually deliver babies with natural brain defects.
grexample 2 years ago
Where in the Constitution does it state malpractice awards should be capped?
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Lawyers are officers of the court. Their pay can be capped under the same authority that jurors are called to duty and jurors' pay is set. You have no business capping insurance premiums. Neither health insurers nor the doctors they insure are officers of the court. Free people aren't at the beck and call of government. It's the other way around. It's none of government's business how much free people engaged in voluntary transactions earn. That would be tyranny.
grexample 2 years ago
Actually, badexample, I am not entirely against capping awards; I was merely pointing out that the 200 year old plus 'sacred' document you consistently refer to is by no means comprehensive enough to refer to in every instance. What is important to remember, however, is that [drumroll please] INSURANCE companies make heady PROFITS selling malpractice insurance; so lets cap their premiums as well, eh. Merry Christmas. And Happy New Year.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
You and Callhermaan will hear and believe just about anything ANY conservative moonbat tells you huh? And then you parrot it as a fact. I hear all the same b.s. "SEIU" and other conspiracy theories from the mainstream conservative media. You conservatives are really becoming radical. Seriously. I mean "the government is putting stuff in the water for mind control" crazy.
Seriously.... put down the kool-aid pitcher and think for yourself.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Call and I have said nothing about government putting mind control agents in the water supply. It seems our friend grab has been reduced to resorting to analogies, which he feigns to dismiss as irrelevant when they're used against him. Is he just stupid or an insidious little Alinskyite? No matter. One thing's certain: If it weren't for double standards, liberal Leftists like aagraber45 would have no standards at all. They rely on asymetric debate tactics, and hope opponents don't notice.
grexample 2 years ago
I have been wondering why a local democratic congressman can't get Pelosi to turn the water back on for the farmers in Central CA. 30,000 farmworkers are in food lines everyday up there
leoollie2 2 years ago 5
Pelosi has blocked legislation to turn the water back on 7 times. It was turned off because of a 2 in delta smelt fish. See the video **Water Cut Off to California City** - Mendota 41% Unemployment, Federal Disaster Area
How said that the most productive food producers in the world find themselves in a food line.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 5
leo.. correction.. How sad, not how said.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
leo....The same government that can off water to farmers, can turn anyone's water off. It can also take 500 billion from medicare today, take another 500 billion from medicare tomorrow, or it can turn on another group that it once thought worthy of protection and give their health benefits away to someone else. In the meantime the bill will punish tax penalize everyone it was meant to serve: patients, docs, employers, states, and dems in their infinite wisdom will call that compassionate!
Callhermaam 2 years ago
The subtext of all this predictable anti-reform rhetoric is this; 'Fuck you, I've got mine.' [ this being the philosphical 'heart of American conservatism]. Not once have I seen a single counter-propostion re reform. Conservatives have opposed child labor laws, civil rights legislation, womens right to vote, worker safety standards, environmental protection laws and evoltion while supporting torture. laws against 'race mixing' and gay marraige. Quite the legacy.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Comment removed
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Correction. Conservatives supported laws sustaining the prohibtion against 'race mixing' and have been blatant in their homophobia and, you know, refused to increase funding for AIDS research just as the pandemic was underway.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
"Conservatives have opposed child labor laws, civil rights"...ad nauseum. Socialists produced Hitler, Mao and Stalin; hundreds of millions of innocent people enslaved and slaughtered before the alter of Collectivism, all because busybodies like molloyxx1 couldn't get over the fact that we live in an imperfect world. One big, stupid ego trip you're on, molloy!
grexample 2 years ago 7
grexample: So who is a socialist that you are comparing to Hitler. Wow... you have gotten more moonbat'ish over time I see.
You can have social programs without being a "socialist" country. Once again... the problem with conservatism is everything is put in black and white catagories to oversimplify issues. In turn, it is easier to fool gullible people. All capitalism without regs = GOOD. All social programs = BAD.
aagraber45 2 years ago
Ok then.... stay off MY roads, don't use MY post office, don't call MY police or fire departments, don't use MY FDIC, get your grandma off MY medicare... etc. Oh... you lost your job in the recession?! Piss off! No unemployment for YOUR "socialist" ass. You want healthcare now that you are laid off?!? Well... we have this cobra stuff, but it is going to cost you 1,500 a month. Hope you can afford it without a job.
Life is not black and white like dummy Palin makes it out to be.
aagraber45 2 years ago
SARAH PALIN 2012!!!
grexample 2 years ago 7
I heartily agree, badexample. 57 percent of American women [ of voting age, I mean, she might well dominate the Miley Cyrus crowd] want no part of her and her appeal to the Tea Baggers, presently busy creating a deep schism in the already feckless, increasingly idea free and demographically doomed Republican party , will create further havoc. Moreover, we will get to see Newt [ the serial adulturer], Huckabee, Pence and, um, whoever else the GOP conjurs up, rip her to shreds in debates. Cheers.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
I encourage everyone to take Callhermaam's advice and visit
us debt clock . org
to see molloyxx1's idea of how to "best run" health care by nationalizing it. MmmHmmm. Oooookaey!
grexample 2 years ago 9
Sure, molloyxx1! We should all submit the care of our very bodies to the exquisite discretionary faculties of the same, great political and bureaucratic "thinkers" that created such an economic disaster as that vividly portrayed on the us debt clock. At least that's how the liberal lemmings see it! SARAH PALIN 2012!!!
grexample 2 years ago 7
Isn't it interesting how insur companies have to live within a budget, and still manage to have a denial rate 2 X lower than Medicare that doesn't have to live within a budget and has the before mentioned unfunded liabilities of $38 trillion?
Callhermaam 2 years ago 4
Inspite of the fact that the AMA supports Obamacare, their own stats show that Medicare has a denial rate two times higher than does private insurance. Google: AMA supports largest denier of Health Care Claims or google Denied: Medical Insurance Claims . Medicare denied 475,000 claims last yr. All the new proposals have $400-500 billion of cuts to Medicare. Wonder what the denials will be then? It could get way uglier with a gov single payer system. Just the AMAs facts.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 4
Oh, facts schmacts!! Facts don't hold a candle to a good ego trip. You know! Like the one Kathleen Sebelius was on; the big dummy from Kansas who, like Arnold, had to deny taxpayers their refunds by the time HER ego trip was shot as governor. Sarah Palin would never run anything like that. Spending nuts? Just what Obama's looking for!! Of course, it's more her affection for late-term abortion that's being tapped there. That's Barry "Leave-'Em-On-The-Washing-Machine" Obama's favorite gal...
grexample 2 years ago 8
Let Sebelius run health care! We need someone with that kind of respect for life. And for economic matters? Who could please the likes of molloyxx1 better than Larry Summers? Don't worry! He's no conservative. No, he's got the kind of resume Democrats respect. Trust us! He's a HUGE failure. Just ask the Harvard Endowment people. Larry's your man! He drove the endowment down the toilet to the tune of $1.8 billion, despite repeated warnings of excessive risk. RISK SCHMISK! WE'RE DEMOCRATS!
grexample 2 years ago 8
What I find fascinating is the sudden surge of protective emotion certain Republican politicians have for a program [ Medicare] many of them wish had never been put in place and consider a liability, howling that Obama wants to rip 500 billion from the program thus ensuring [Coburn] the untimely deaths of thousands of our seniors. What could explain this sudden embrace of socialism? Please explain.And please dont let Obama murder my parents.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
The strong objection to Medicare cuts is that elderly people had the fruit of their labor ripped from their hands their entire lives by this Beast called Government, which promised them health care security at this vulnerable stage of their life in return for their past indentured servitude. It's bait-and-switch. Government would imprison a health insurance executive who conspired to treat his policy holders as Obama aims to treat the elderly. Obama is the Bernie Madoff of U.S. presidents.
grexample 2 years ago 9
grex... very well said.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 4
badexample. This Beast called Government? Lets look at the GI Bill [ a blantantly socialist reallocation of wealth by your definition] which rewarded WWII vets w/ a free college education and essentaily created the American middle class. Or the[ massive] Highway Bill undertaken during the Eisenhauer admin, which built an infrastructuret hat led to an economic boom. Your preening hatred of government is entirely myopic and underinformed. No surprise.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Youre not an American. Our interstate highway system was legitimate exercise of federal power in that it constitutionally promoted the general welfare by facilitating private economic activity--including health-related economic activity. Our constitution does not empower government to "provide for the general welfare". Free people do that for themselves through voluntary exchange in a free marketincluding charitable exchange. Our highway system exists for voluntary exchange. It's not socialism
grexample 2 years ago 6
You routinely howl about the Beast That Is the Government yet when push comes to shove defend massive governmental spending when, by your tortured analysis, it promotes business interests. I am not aware of anything in the Constitution that sanctions this. BTW, in the 50's the upper tax rate was over 90 percent, so the rich were forced to carry much of the freight re the cost of this Big Government program, hence, redistribution of the wealth, pure and simple, made it all possible. Cheers.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
You're not American. Our founders understood that government is necessary for certain, limited functions. That is what our Constitution is all about--precisely defining the legitimate functions of government. "provide for the common defence" "promote the general welfare". There's nothing tortured about it. Your free-and-loose notions about legitimate government power would lead inevitably to complete and utter tyranny. Our founders were much wiser than you are, you stupid fool.
grexample 2 years ago 6
As for the income tax: that needs to be abolished outright, since it was never ratified by the states.
grexample 2 years ago 6
Comment removed
grexample 2 years ago
"promote the general welfare" includes non-exclusively promoting business interests in the sense of promoting voluntary exchange between free people, such as by building and maintaining roads for free exchange of goods and services.
grexample 2 years ago 6
Likewise, the Constitution empowers the federal government to "provide for the common defence". To do so, it must pay soldiers and reward them so as to bolster morale and encourage voluntary enlistment. The GI Bill was simply payment to soldiers for services rendered. Nothing in the Constitution empowers the federal government to have anything to do with how private citizens receive or pay for health services. That would be the end of the United States. That is what Leftists like Obama want.
grexample 2 years ago 6
You forgot the "and general welfare" part right after "provide for the common defense." How convenient for you to exclude that.
I am not sure if you noticed.... but things have changed a little bit since the constitution was ratified. For instance, I don't think they had tanks, military jets, or RPG's back then. I am not sure "the right to bear arms" means the average citizen should be allowed to own a RPG, tank, or fully armed F-18. That is just ONE example.
aagraber45 2 years ago
'Sup grab? Spouting your ignorance with the same old confidence, I see. Very disappointing... I still have hopes you'll learn to think more deeply about things. Let's start with a civics lesson and consult the text of the Constitution! I mean, I know you think it was rendered obsolete the day somebody invented a bigger gun, and that now we live in a free-fall to tyranny, but I still wish you'd ponder the founder's use of the word "promote" in the Preamble. Write me an essay about that!
grexample 2 years ago
Did I say the constitution is "obsolete?" Um... no. But lets us a little common sense here. Just because something is not spelled out word for word in the Constitiution does not mean it is a common sense approach or solution. The government can possible do things to improve Americans lives and they may not be in the Constitution. AND some of the things in the Constitution need to be, in a common sense fashion, re-tooled or thought through to update to current times.
aagraber45 2 years ago
If you want to "re-tool" my Constitution, you can go through the amendment process. I don't exist to satisfy your Quixotic ego trips. Keep your grimy hands off my body!
grexample 2 years ago
I am not even saying we need to "re-tool" the constitiution. So do you think we need an amendment that states "you can't have a fully armed f-18, RPG or tank." No. We need common sense and other laws based on the Constitution, further defining the laws. AND just because the Constitution does not say, "the government is hereforth in charge of the peoples public option to lower healthcare costs".... does not mean the government having a public option is not a good idea.
aagraber45 2 years ago
aarg. Here I confess I misunderstood your Swiftian talent for irony. I was momentarily certain you were yet another one eyed slave of the Know Nothings who resort, often selectively, to the sacred scrawl of a document written when slavery was common practice, women did not have the right to vote and a male citiizen needed a mule and an acre [loosely speaking] to secure the right to vote. The Constitution is a template, written by mortals, well in need of revision.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
badexample. Your obsession with your body, with strangers, especially Government Strangers, placing their 'grimy hands' on this sacred object, is, to say the least, disturbing and suggests an impoverished sexual life as well as an unconscious wish to be, um, 'man-handled' by strangers. It verges on the pornographic and I wish, for the sake of decency, you would refrain from this fetishistic kind of free asociation. Thanks in advance.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
molloy... Since my wife and I are in the Medical field, we take the hippocratic oath very seriously - do no harm. We view Medicare the same way- do no harm to medicare. Cutting Medicare by $500 billion from seniors including $42 billion from home health, is devastating to seniors. They have paid into it all their lives- it is their benefit. This changes the game for them when they are vulnerable and can't address the change by going back to work.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 3
LOL, 'medical field'! Sure you are, teabagger, sure you are.
obdaddy 2 years ago
I'm in the medical field as well, community mental health, and routinely work with clients who have no health care whatsoever [ our county pays for their MH services] sometimes with SSD/SSI applications or appeals pending. They have no non-psychiatric health coverage whatsover. When,for example, a raging toothache comes on they can get an rx for pain meds at the ED, but can't afford to fill it. They suffer for weeks on end until we can arrange care with a mobile dental unit. Its terrible.......
molloyxx1 2 years ago
to witness. This applies to all manner of health concerns for these people, many of whom are obese and diabetic [ and, obviously struggling w/ their mental illness all the while]. The system has completely failed them. As for your comments about Medicare cuts, everyone knows that if the reallocation of Medicare funds lead to a drastic reduction of care this would be political suicide. Let's see where AARP lines up on health care reform before jumping to simplistic conclusions.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
molloy... the AARP has already lined up on healthcare, and curiously for the same reasons you despise Insurance cos. They stand to benefit because they provide Medicare plans under United Healthcare. They have lobbied to reduce Medicare Advantage benefits, which will allow them to sell more policies. This is not the kind of competition I am looking for. AARP's position means nothing to me. I do my own research.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
I see. Suddenly the organization most devoted to the medical care of seniors [ unless you can name another one] has become nefarious and are supporting a reform measure that will, according to the rhetoric of Coburn and Co, hasten the demise or decimation of their base. Puzzling, to say the least. Perhaps even inecplicable. Finally, you said nothing about my comments re the suffering of the unisured. Why is that, considering your advertuised fidelity to your oath?
molloyxx1 2 years ago
"most devoted to the medical care of seniors": nothing but a marketing slogan. What's wrong with you, molloyxx1? Where's your cynicism regarding the human beings running AARP? Do you think they volunteer their services? William Novelli, the CEO of AARP, took home $2.04 million in 2006, well above the $779,203, he received in 2004. What would Obama give him for AARP's support? Novelli's no less human than anybody working for an insurance company. The difference: Novelli's useful to Obama.
grexample 2 years ago 7
I love how conservatives are using medicare as a reason to block healthcare reform. I saw a rally where the audience was asked "who is apposed to a government option?" and half the people raised their hands. Then they were asked, "who has Medicare?" and about half the people raised their hands. Then they were asked, "who wants to give up their Medicare?" and NOBODY raised their hand.
"Socialism"..blah..blah..blah.."socialism"
The same scare tactics used when Medicare was put into place.
aagraber45 2 years ago
@aagraber45 Regarding Medicare cuts of $500 billion combined with lowering eligibility to age 55: Only liberals would take a lifeboat that was swamped with people, (plus it has a hole in it) make a bigger hole, throw more people into the boat and say problem solved and call themselves compassionate.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
@Callhermaam Medicare already has $38 trillion in unfunded liabilities, why not ad $500 billion in cuts?
Callhermaam 2 years ago
Only a conservative would compare healthcare to a life boat. Conservatives LOVE comparing apple to oranges, because it makes their arguments make "sense."
The economy is not a pond. Cash for clunkers was not like selling a pencil. And healthcare is not like people in a boat.
Read my comment about conservatives oversimplifing issues below.
aagraber45 2 years ago
aa. It could be any boat, and I am talking about Medicare being the boat w a leak in it ($38 trillion) they want to enlarge the hole ($500billion more in cuts) They want to add more people to the swamped boat by reducing the age of elig to 55. That is the liberals idea of "fixing" Medicare.
Callhermaam 2 years ago
It's not ANY boat. Or any other silly analogy you think up!
Did you know that they put Medicare and social security into the "general fund" and the money is being used to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan? No wonder it is "bankrupt." Iraq the war started on lies and Afghanistan the botched war BECAUSE we "needed" to start another war in Iraq. Fighting two wars at a time....BRILLIANT!!!
aagraber45 2 years ago
molloy...Seniors are supposed to bend over and take the medicare cuts because the AARP endorses Obamacare? Seniors actually have an opinion about that. 63% of seniors oppose the bill per Rasmussen 12/14. I see, Obama knows better than the seniors, AARP knows better than the seniors. Shifting these benefits from one group to another is like putting a queen size sheet on a king size bed. If $42 billion hm health cuts doesn't bother you, you aren't the one to discuss the uninsured with.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
grexample 2 years ago
Comment removed
grexample 2 years ago
Comment removed
grexample 2 years ago
So whose side is Novelli on? The seniors' or Obama's and the Democrat's in Congress??? Follow the money!!
grexample 2 years ago 7
molloy... the onus is on Democrats to explain how they can care about a group like seniors for decades, and then sell them out. Why would I trust such a government with single payer or public option, or to design and dictate what kind of policies priv insur can sell me? They will just change the game and screw over a different group down the road like they did the seniors.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 3
I reject the propostion that seniors have been sold out and explained why this is fantasy in an previous post. What you studiously avoid is the hypocrisy of the GOPs sudden defense of Medicare funding when in irreducible point of fact they were against it from its inception and since then have been trying to defund it. The GOP doesnt give a sweet shit about health care, letting costs double in past 8 years while they controlled [ until Jan 2007] the House, Senate and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
molloy... Breaking something that isnt broken doesnt help you fix something else that is. I dont believe in bulldozing the house to remodel the kitchen. (68- 80% of people are happy with their benefits) But it is worse than that. Medicare is already broken, and they want to break it further in order to fix another problem. I want any resources of any new expenditures of healthcare dollars to be 100% focused on those that dont have insurance. We dont need to hurt seniors in order to do this.
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
molloy...after checking your channel I see why you are unmoved by the cuts to Medicare: "Moody, self-centered, unpleasant, detest animals and people who smile." Do you work with the mentally ill, or are you merely one of the inmates running the asylum?
Callhermaam 2 years ago 2
One of America's greatest challenges is that the internet is exposing the populace to moronic social ideologies that, in the past, only journalists were exposed to. These ideologies dominate other regions of the world and, with the Left running public education in our country, the people are generally uninformed about the brilliant ideas at the heart of American exceptionalism. The American people are therefore both increasingly exposed to, and susceptible to, the fallacies of the Left.
grexample 2 years ago 7
An exceptionally incoherent attempt at a paragraph which cites not a single example or provides even a momentary window of context. Moreover, American 'exceptionalism' is a decidely dangerous nationalist delusion not so distant from Hitlers promotion of a 'super-race' and one which was routinely employed by the Bush administrations grotesque reign of error, with extraordinarily bad results.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Ha, ha, ha.... you truly are funny. Wipe that kool-aid mustache off of your face, grexample.
aagraber45 2 years ago
I knew the invective was coming [ versus a reasoned arguement] and so am by no means surprised. A half bright child could tell that this self description was entirely for comic effect.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
badexample. Sigh. Whatever your bizarre and deeply paranoid fantasies about surrending your humble, tender body to the Promethean claws of the goons recently ousted from power via the nefarious mechanisms of a free election the fact remains that the for profit system has allowed for rampant cost increases while maximizing profits by denyng care to the very ill and those w/ pre-existing conditions. Your trust in those who care more about profits than your health is, well, touching . Sob.
molloyxx1 2 years ago
Do you think government bureaucrats care more about your health than they do about their own self-interest? People are people, whether in government or in business. You gain NOTHING from a government-run system in that regard. Food doesnt find its way to a location convenient for you to pick it up because the people working their asses off to produce it care so very deeply about you. Yet the food gets there. Why? Health care need be no different. Feelings are fickle. Profits bypass them.
grexample 2 years ago 5
Even today, prices are falling and quality is skyrocketing in areas like corneal laser-surgery, where the profit incentive dominates. How can that be? Why don't the doctors raise prices instead of dropping them? Free markets work because of the efficiencies resulting from the profit incentive plus consumers spending their own money. You would do us all no favor by minimizing the role of the profit incentive in health care. Health Savings Accounts would be a much better solution.
grexample 2 years ago 5
Palin 2012 !
niceley335 2 years ago 10
isnt that retard baby really her daughters first child? heard the kid is a retard because the little slut was drunk all the time!
hailung23 2 years ago
I dont know but if thats true thats some funny shit!!!
Darkkorners 2 years ago
Best Selling Author? You mean she actually beat Stephen Meyer and J.K Rowling ? Sarah Palin must be the greatest fiction writer in the history of modern literature.
allemosmustdie209 2 years ago