Discussion in 'Politics' started by madanthonywayne, Jan 12, 2010.
Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein, Nein!
No democrats at all!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Does anyone know how the bill is doing?
Depressing, would be my take. Talk about a broken system - -
So do you begin to get a clue about the problems with the US media, campaign funding, etc? Or haven't you noticed that those 40 Republicans with their Blue Dog Dem and think tank allies,
despite having no ideas, no accurate information, no leadership positions, and nothing else of value to contribute,
despite a thirty year track record of abysmal incompetence and screwup, managing the politically enabled and mediated doubling and tripling and quadrupling of health care costs on their watch, to the point the entire economy is put at risk,
despite being financially compromised up the wazoo, with wives holding down executive position at Aetna and investment portfolios at risk and amssive campaign contributions from the major drug and insurance corporations,
have been dominating the media presentations of the health care debate?
Joe Lieberman's face is probably tanning under the TV lights. John McCain's face is on TV every weekend. Even Palin gets a turn at calling any and all Dem health care bills "socialist". The Bandarlog even manage to repeat goofy and counterfactual terms like "Obamacare" every five minutes, as even their shithead terminology is spread far and wide on the prime real estate of the media plantation.
From the Boston Herald:
Why vote for Scott Brown? Let me count the waysYou may be a Scott Brown voter if:
* Unlike Martha Coakley’s campaign, you know how to spell “Massachusetts.”
* You’ve already voted absentee, and you’re urging all your friends to do the same by Friday, just in case.
# You think maybe Martha should be spending more time chasing criminals and less time chasing old ladies in their garden clubs.
# You know at least a few people who voted for Obama in 2008 who are now planning to use their ballot Tuesday to “repent.”
# You’re wondering why last week liberals were so angry that the word “Negro” was listed on the 2010 census form, but now that Harry Reid uses it . . . nothing to see here, folks, move along.
# You’re appalled that ex-Lynn Mayor Chip Clancy, who was fired by the voters in November, is now at age 59 going to collect a $79,200-a-year public pension, with survivor’s benefits for his wife, who by the way has a hack job of her own in the court system making $84,869.90 a year.
# You belong to a union, and they’re telling you to vote for Martha Coakley, and when you ask your pinky-ring thug business agent about the 40 percent tax she wants to impose on your “Cadillac” health plan, he slowly takes the stogie out of his mouth and says, Forget about it, da boys will take of all-a youse.
# You’re puzzled as to who killed the three U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan on Monday, because Martha Coakley said there aren’t any terrorists there anymore.
# You heard that the Amish are going to be exempt from the Obama-Coakley health rationing, and you’re wondering, how does one become Amish?
# You can’t believe any Republican would ever agree to let David Rodham Gergen moderate another debate.
# You’re angry that, when you had to take a pay cut in 2009 to keep your job, the Democrats on Beacon Hill jacked up the sales tax by 25 percent.
# You know Martha Coakley lost the debate when you hear her Kool- Aid drinking sob-sister supporters comparing her performance favorably to . . . Shannon O’Brien’s.
# You’re wondering why the cops, who should know Martha Coakley best, are all endorsing Scott Brown.
# You’re thinking that maybe, just in case, you should lay in some champagne for Tuesday - and does anyone else need anything while you’re up in New Hampshire?
Please tell me that was a letter to the editor.
My take on the media in all this is pretty cynical and critical, but that product of talk radio neural misfiring ranks below what I would expect from a newspaper editor.
Nope, it was an article by Howie Carr Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Who appears to be a regular columnist.
There's also something of a scandal brewing about one of Coakley's aids shoving a newsman to the ground. There's even a picture showing Coakley standing by as her aid shoves the guy to the ground and a video of the event has gone viral:
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A heavy-hitting Democratic operative apologized yesterday for being “too aggressive” when he roughed up a Weekly Standard reporter trying to pitch questions to Attorney General Martha Coakley after a Washington fund-raiser.
A YouTube video of the sidewalk scuffle Tuesday night went viral and had Coakley yesterday blaming it all on “aggressive” GOP “stalkers.”
Brown campaign spokesman Michael Harrington dismissed the accusation of stalkers, saying, “I think she made it up, just like her assertion there are no terrorists in Afghanistan. Knocking down reporters who ask questions is the type of arrogant behavior we’ve come to expect from the political machine and their candidate.”
McCormack told the Herald he met Coakley Jan. 5 after a radio debate at the WTKK (96.9-FM) studios, where he asked her four questions.
“She knew that there was a reporter who asked her a question. We had met before. I asked her four questions. She saw me get knocked to the ground and kept walking,” McCormack said. “I wouldn’t say I was surprised. . . . She’s decided she’s entitled to the seat without answering questions on issues that are of national importance.”
Here's the video:
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
not really the dems are spineless
like medicare for all?
The poll you linked to showed that such a policy might have the support of the majority of country (the Devil would be in the details), unlike the present load of crap they're attempting to ram down our throats.
The details aren't hard. everyone gets covored by medicare
one of the many reason I hate the right wing. Most of what I see as bad init was done to try and get the republicans and right wings dems on board with hand outs to the insurance companies. but yes the current bill is bad.
OK, but how will you pay for it? Will the premium charged reflect the actual cost of insurance? The premium senior citizens pay for medicare doesn't even come close. Will it be mandatory, or can you choose private insurance instead? Will it operate exactly like medicare? Will we still have medicare advantage programs? How much will this add to the national debt? Will it kick in immediately, or not until the 2014 like the current bill?
I'd favor a more incremental approach, perhaps letting people buy into Medicare at a younger age so long as the premiums cover the cost. Perhaps the age could be dropped over time. Also, allow insurance to be purchased across state lines. That wouldn't cost anything and would certainly lower costs.
But just about anything would be better than the bill before congress now.
I don't see handouts to insurance companies as a right wing issue, but as an example of typical politics. I sure as hell don't support hand outs to any industry.
premiemums and taxes
to the extent they remain affordable yes.
Not sure but probably modled after the swiss or taiwanese systems.
So not an editor anyway.
My local paper prints talk radio garbage regularly too - especially since they started losing money big time, apparently from loss of ad revenue, and felt they needed to suck up to the corporate wallet a bit more.
Same way you pay for Medicare now. The most expensive demographic segment - by far - is already enrolled, so the increase in necessary revenue should be fairly small.
That and allowing Medicare to employ market forces - negotiated drug prices etc - might actually reduce the cost of Medicare in the near future, as it is currently burdened with legacy costs from the effects of poor medical care in those under 65.
I didn't see any shoving. The dude tripped over a metal grate of some sort.
I agree with you Mad. It will be an interesting race to watch. I would not be suprised to see some Chicago Republicans voting in this election. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
same thing i saw though he did prevent him from running after her to badger her any staffer would have done that when they candidate had made it clear no more questions.
...On the entrepreneurs and businessmen that earned their wealth, to pay for the rest of the people that haven't done squat. That sounds fair.
So working hard in three jobs to provide for your family is doing squat. Your idea of fairness seem to be if we can't fuck the poor and downtrodden its not fair.
No, if the poor are working hard then we ought to help them. (notice that I said we, not the government).
But many people are just pot-head lazy bastards living off welfare and free services. I mean, alot of people, that don't want to put effort in. It's unfair to tax entrepreneurs and successful people to pay for these morons.
WE the people to create a more perfect union...
don't know many potheads do you?
no it is unfair to not tax those people to pay for those they have put into those positions
"God created the heavens and the Earth"
Nonsense is nonsense, any way.
Nope, but I do know that there are plenty out there. And plenty of morons that never bothered pursuing education and have low standards, who don't deserve to be given anything for free.
What? Entrepreneurs are self-made.
Separate names with a comma.