ThinkFast: July 16, 2007
ThinkFast: July 16, 2007
Roll Call writes, “Just a year ago, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) was disregarded, even by some in his own party, as a bleeding-heart liberal defeatist for his stance on the Iraq War.” When Feingold first floated the idea of setting a withdrawal date two years ago, few of his colleagues supported him. This week, Senate will take up the Levin-Reed redeployment bill, which is “nearly identical in scope to the amendment Feingold” last June.
“Two suicide bombers struck the volatile northern city of Kirkuk this morning, killing 73 people and wounding 178 more. … The death toll is expected to rise as rescuers frantically dig through concrete and rubble in hopes of finding survivors.”
“Years before the war began,” Pentagon officials knew that armored MRAP vehicles better shielded troops from roadside bombs than Humvees. “But military officials repeatedly balked at appeals — from commanders on the battlefield and from the Pentagon’s own staff” — dating back to Dec. 2003, to provide the MRAPs, a USA Today investigation found.
“An internal investigation that the House Intelligence Committee has refused to make public portrays the panel as embarrassingly entangled in the Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham bribery scandal.” The report “describes the committee as a dysfunctional entity that served as a crossroads for almost every major figure in the ongoing criminal probe by the Justice Department.”
“Barring an unlikely confirmation of Leslie Southwick to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by the Judiciary Committee this week, Senate GOP leaders have privately mapped out a retaliatory plan that involves blocking passage of Democratic legislation from now until the August recess.”
“The Department of Homeland Security lost senior leaders at twice the rate of the rest of the federal government over the past two years, including 23 of 26 top officials who report to the secretary.”
“U.N. inspectors have verified that North Korea shut down its nuclear reactor, the watchdog agency’s chief said Monday, the first on-the-ground achievement toward scaling back Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions since the international standoff began in late 2002.”
$12.5 million: Amount of taxpayer money spent to store 85 million pounds of unused ice ordered by FEMA after Hurricane Katrina. FEMA has stored the ice for two years, even though the agency’s “own regulations required that they dispose of the ice after three months.”
And finally: “In the Bush White House, sports are a metaphor for life.” The AP notes that sports metaphors “have become a pervasive way for Bush and his team to describe almost anything.” “I’m going to sprint to the finish,” said President Bush of the rest of his time in office. When asked whether Bush will be vetoing more bills, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow replied, “The ball really lies in the court of those in Congress.” And of course, there was the infamous “slam dunk” comment by former CIA director George Tenet.
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“Just a year ago, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) was disregarded, even by some in his own party…”
Well, that’s the problem with being a visionary and not a ideologue, sometimes it takes a while before people catch up with you.
I believe that Mr. Feingold had the vision to not approve the war in the first place.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:11 am“a retaliatory plan blocking passage of Democratic legislation…”
I see that the Republicans are adopting a scorched earth strategy during their continued retreat. It won’t work. It will just hurt the party worse in the 2008 elections. And it is just plain disgusting.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:13 amThat’s why the Dems can’t get meaningful legislation passed. If this is the Rethug tactic, Dems should focus each and every bill on the impeachment of Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:14 amWhat did you miss? Did I see the LATimes report that 45pct of insurgents in Iraq were Saudi Arabian? When does ‘regime change’ in Riyadh start?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:14 am“U.N. inspectors have verified that North Korea shut down its nuclear reactor, the watchdog agency’s chief said Monday, the first on-the-ground achievement toward scaling back Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions since the international standoff began in late 2002.â€
Isn’t it amazing what a little diplomacy can do?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:15 am“$12.5 million: Amount of taxpayer money spent to store 85 million pounds of unused ice ordered by FEMA after Hurricane Katrina. FEMA has stored the ice for two years, even though the agency’s “own regulations required that they dispose of the ice after three months.â€
Anyone want to bet that a Friend of Bush has the contract to store this ice? I would really like to know the amount of our taxes that has gone into Friend of Bush’s pockets since he took office. I’m willing to bet the farm that the dollar amount is staggering, especially if you include Katrina and Iraq in the totals.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:18 amMorning’ Katie! Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you about the vision of Russ Feingold. It’s a simple matter of perspective and timing – or perhaps it can be called true vision versus propagandized vision? However you dice it though, Russ Feingold comes up on the top of the heap either way.
The main point of distinction for Russ Feingold, as we all well recall, is that Russ Feingold had the very same data and information to digest as did all of the other Congressmen and came up with a totally uncontaminated opinion at the time. He was scoffed at, derided, and ostracized by his peers (another hallmark of pure genius….look at Mozart, Van Gogh, and all contemporary visionaries during their respective lifetimes).
The other point I am trying to make is that, despite being fed the probability by the Bush Cabal that Saddam did have WMD’s, the consensus of opinion internationally and with the UN was to continue to permit the inspectors to do their job as they were doing with Hussein’s cooperation. So, despite the fact that at that same time there did appear at least the illusion of WMD’s, Russ Feingold had the presence of mind to maturely vote “no” because he felt that the current program was working and time was the necessary ingredient to see if the Plan was working…..sound familiar today? Of course, the Bush liars are now spinning precisely the same concept with their “giving the plan in Iraq to work” which is delusional at best/insane at worst. They use this mindset when it works with their agenda – and don’t use the same rational concept when they wanted to attack Iraq. These are the worst kind of shapeshifters we’ve ever had as moles within our democracy.
They need to immediately impeached or we will suffer the consequences of their capricious, illicit, amoral, and highly illegal activities for 18 more months. This country doesn’t have that kind of time to right this ship which appears headed for self-destruction.
Cindy Sheehan is right – she’s putting Pelosi’s butt on the grill to either put up or shut up. And, from all outward appearances, our little Ms. “on the take” Pelosi is doing just that – betraying all of the americans who trusted her in the midterms. Whether Pelosi is a Bush mouthpiece and a total sham of an individual will remain to be seen – and soon….the July 23 clock is ticking for impeachment, Nancy! Will you wake up in time or will you have to learn the hard way by losing your seat in the next election.
The cards are in Nancy’s hands now. Sheehan is poised and she’s gaining great support since her ultimatum.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:21 amKatie: Yesterday Ace submitted several websites with background information on the Bush Crime Family which were written pre-41’s presidential campaign. This information about their affiliations with con men and known criminals and the tanking of S & L’s which fell on the backs of taxpayers is appalling. They’ve all been involved in illegal activities for decades so it’s no wonder this one is now raping this democracy.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:23 amOf course, if this information was not quashed by the one who still runs this country (Bush 41) and his operatives at the time, he would never have been elected president; likewise, if GWB’s affiliation with the Bin Laden brothers in his oil businesses would have been made public before 911, the eyes would have been rolling when this tragedy occurred – ergo….the ignoring of intel from 43 countries who had info about 911! Bush’s intimate ties and perhaps collusion with the BL family would have been immediately outed if those intel reports from other countries (Germany, France, etc.) had been made public at the time.
I guess the perfect adage for this level of continuous corruption and nepotism in this country when describing the Bush Family would be:
The apple never falls far from the tree!
July 16th, 2007 at 9:29 amSo, once again we see a total misanthrope acting, ostensibly, on behalf of an entire national of people making choices to protect his greedy interests and reputation OVER the safety of those he’s taken an oath to protect. What’s wrong with this picture??
July 16th, 2007 at 9:30 amI’m with you. The Treasury has been looted – but good. Congress should extend the Statute of Limitations (if there is one), for corruption in Public office, or under color of law. China knows how to deal with corrupt public officials. maybe there’s a lesson for us there.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:31 am“Barring an unlikely confirmation of Leslie Southwick to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by the Judiciary Committee this week, Senate GOP leaders have privately mapped out a retaliatory plan that involves blocking passage of Democratic legislation from now until the August recess.â€
Republicans – always the obstructionists and always place their party BEFORE the American people. Republicans don’t like the American people. It’s always about “me” with Republicans and never about “us”.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:32 amIf Republicans know so much about how to with the war in Iraq, then WHY DIDN’T THEY WIN IT BEFORE NOW? They had unlimited resources and unwaivering support of Congress for 4 years and have accomplished essentially NOTHING. In fact, it’s been shown that we are LESS SAFE.
Republicans: If you know so much about winning a war, then FINISH IT!
July 16th, 2007 at 9:38 amI wish somebody would put the “suicide squeeze” on you know who ….
July 16th, 2007 at 9:39 amThe rationale that the Goopers intend to disrupt all legislation because they can’t get a “Yes” vote in the Senate on an extreme conservative judge is a blind. They plan to disrupt that legislation anyway. Framing it as if it were about Judge Leslie Southwick is just more theater of the absurd. It helps their base live in the fantasy world that the Goopers only want judges who will “apply the law” rather than “legislate from the bench”. Manure. Those purported descriptions are Base code for judges who are somewhat to the right of Genghis Khan.
Bad facts, but good emotional theater. The Dems had best shoot back with a better message of their own about what judges like Southwick and his confirmed peers have done to damage our laws and our society.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:40 amI’m with you. The Treasury has been looted – but good. Congress should extend the Statute of Limitations (if there is one), for corruption in Public office, or under color of law. China knows how to deal with corrupt public officials. maybe there’s a lesson for us there.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:41 amGood morning, Marcus, Katie and veritas…
It is my understanding that the next generation is going to be stuck paying off the bills that the Cheney/Bush cabal created and it will be the first time in US history that a subsequent generation will be financially worse off than the preceeding generation. That’s criminal.
“Comment by Republicans Can’t Govern.”
Your name says it all… Republicans should never be allowed to have control of our government. Crooks and liars, all of them.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:43 am#17. Obviously, I agree completely. Republicans continually argue for smaller government, stating that government is inefficient — then they go on to prove it by trying to govern.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:45 amPelosi is in the pocket of AIPAC – the warmongers in our midst:
Oct. 25, 2006 – While reportedly under investigation for her ties to an influential pro-Israel lobbying organization, California Rep. Jane Harman last month hosted a private dinner for the group that was attended by two top Bush administration officials—Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.
The Sept. 13 dinner took place at the home of Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Select Committee on Intelligence, and was attended by over 120 top financial backers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). The highlight of the evening was a panel discussion in which Harman played the host, questioning Negroponte and Chertoff about Mideast developments, international terrorism and homeland-security issues, according to an AIPAC official.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15419753/site/newsweek/
THE ENTIRE SYSTEM IS HIJACKED.
DEPORT AIPAC
Hey Mr. Chertoff…how’s that domestic terror attack coming along…are you still on-schedule?
Welcome to the ONE PARTY SYSTEM.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:47 am“SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.”
from Thomas Paines work “Common Sense”.
http://www.ushistory.org/PAINE/commonsense/singlehtml.htm
We have been betrayed by both the Republican President as well as the Democrat Congress.
The partisian toadies of both parties here who because of their blind adherence to group think can’t seem to put away their tendentious views.
The solutions to the problems which face US are not to be found in ideological and/or partisan extremism but in common sense.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:47 amWhat are we to do when the entire process of elections becomes subverted, controlled by an outside force that takes US tax payer dollars, offshores them, then launders them right back into the political process thereby ensuring that only their hand-picked candidates become government officials?
When all that cash is utilized to purchase media time to promote AIPAC’s hand-picked candidates – the executives of the media companies can clearly see who they need to support in order to enrich themselves. The news departments are instructed to perpetuate the game for profit.
Our tax dollars have been used to destroy Democracy. The electoral process is completely broken as a result of the money in politics. It is ironc that there is a new cry for publicly funded campaigns. They already are publicly funded…it’s just that the entity responsible for distributing the public funding is AIPAC.
While the vast majority of Americans are crying out for lobbying reform, every Jewish organization is actively campaigning against it – to protect AIPAC’s grip on the system.
Remember this?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/101704A.shtml
In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend — but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
The aide said that guys like me were ”in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who ”believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ”That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. ”We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
- Ron Suskind “Without a Doubt”
All that cash leads to that kind of arrogance. Frankly, I’d rather fix the problem now than study it later.
DEPORT AIPAC and win back your Democracy.
It really is that simple
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/AIPACClinton.html
Hedrick Smith noted in his book Power Game that AIPAC had become a “superlobby … [It] gained so much political muscle that by 1985 AIPAC and its allies could force President Reagan to renege on an arms deal he had promised to [Jordan's] King Hussein. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with Saudi Arabia; and Secretary of State George Shultz had to sit down with AIPAC’s executive director — not Congressional leaders — to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate.”
“You are the most effective general interest group…across the entire planet.” Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
“Aipac has a lot of influence on foreign policy,” says JJ Goldberg, editor of the Jewish newspaper The Forward. “They work hard to ensure that America endorses pretty much Israel’s view of the world and the Middle East.”
“A great asset to our country”. Condoleezza Rice describing AIPAC in March, 2003.
“Fully three-fourths of America’s foreign aid budget is devoted to Israeli security interests is a tribute in considerable measure to the lobbying prowess of AIPAC and the importance of the Jewish community in American politics.” — Prominent conservative lawyer and political commentator, Benjamin Ginsberg.
“I asked Rosen if aipac suffered a loss of influence after the Steiner affair. A half smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a napkin across the table. “You see this napkin?†he said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.†Jeffrey Goldberg (The New Yorker).
“AIPAC’s Israel lobby has the power to pump up to a million dollars into the campaign coffers of any friendly member of Congress, or into the campaign of the opponents of an unfriendly member.” — Richard Curtiss, executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
“A lobby is a night flower, it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.” — AIPAC research director Steve Rosen, 2001.
“The friendship between Israel and the United States is a great asset to our country. And AIPAC is a great advocate for this vital relationship.” White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.
“Congress is ‘terrorized’ by AIPAC… In practice, the lobby groups function as an informal extension of the Israeli government.” — “They Dare to Speak Out,” — Congressman (1961-1982) Paul Findley.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee
Ms. Pelosi is proving how powerless she is with each passing day.
The foregoing explains why.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:49 amTP can add this to “Think Fast”…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070715/wl_sthasia_afp/pakistanafghanistanunrestpeacescrap3rdlead
So when the Taliban take control in Pakistan, the Islamists will have the bomb.
We can give a big round of applause to the Republicans for allowing the Taliban to get close to having the bomb (sarc).
As always, Republicans are weak on National security.
And one more piece of news… the taliban almost killed PM Karzi. This is what happens when the Republicans are controlling their war for profits.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:50 amWe have been betrayed by both the Republican President as well as the Democrat Congress.
Comment by Troll
Nice try but after 6 yrs of total Repub control and less than a yr of a badly split Congress to fix the mess, you’re not laying this nightmare off on the other other side. The current situation is pretty a much a Repub production.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:52 am“$12.5 million: taxpayer money spent to store 85 million pounds of unused ice, own regulations required that they dispose of the ice after three months.â€
ahhhh refreshing freezer-burned ice. send it to the Iraqi troops via Halliburton so they can have a $75.00 fecal slushy. supportin’ the troops and makin’ sum munny
July 16th, 2007 at 9:52 am.
This explains EVERYTHING:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae5t_55OWbo
The best government that money can buy.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:53 am“Republicans – always the obstructionists and always place their party BEFORE the American people. Republicans don’t like the American people. It’s always about “me†with Republicans and never about “usâ€.
Comment by Coffins draped with flags — July 16, 2007 @ 9:32 am”
What a load. The Republicans operate the exact same way the Democrats do when they are in the same position. Wake up. The only glimmer of truth in your statement is that the Republicans are more apt to stress what’s best for the individual, while the Democrat is more apt to think in group terms, and is willing to trample the rights of the individual to accomplish their aims.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:53 amMs. Pelosi is proving how powerless she is with each passing day.
Comment by ace
And you prefer the “Iron-fisted rule” of the Bugman?
Ace… a**, what’s the difference?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:54 amMORE WAR…IRAN IS NEXT!
AIPAC SPY SCANDAL:
CONSPIRACY TO COMMUNICATE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO AGENT OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENT
1. Defendant LAWRENCE ANTHONY FRANKLIN was employed by the United States government at the Department of Defense (DoD) in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), International Security Affairs (ISA), Office of Near East and South Asia, Office of Northern Gulf Affairs, Iran desk, and held a Top Secret security clearance with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI). FRANKLIN’S office was located within the Pentagon, in the Eastern District of Virginia. FRANKLIN was also a Colonel in the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR).
2. Throughout his employment with the United States government, FRANKLIN repeatedly signed written agreements acknowledging his duty to safeguard classified information
3. At no time was FRANKLIN authorized to release classified information to ROSEN and WEISMANN except with respect to Overt Acts 43 and 44 in count one.
4. Defendant STEVEN J. ROSEN was employed as the Director of Foreign Policy Issues for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in Washington, D.C. ROSEN was hired by AIPAC in or about July 1982. AIPAC, according to its website, is ” America’s ProIsrael Lobby.” AIPAC lobbies the U.S. Congress and Executive Branch agencies on various issues related to Israel and U.S. Foreign policy in the Middle East. As the Director of Foreign Policy Issues, ROSEN lobbied on behalf of AIPAC, primarily with officials within the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. During the time period of this indictment, ROSEN did not have a U.S. government security clearance and was not authorized to receive or possess U.S. government classified information.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/reports/2005/franklin_indictment_04aug2005.htm
WAYS, MANNER AND MEANS OF THE CONSPIRACY
A. It was part of the conspiracy that, in an effort to influence persons within and outside the United States government, ROSEN and WEISSMAN would cultivate relationships with FRANKLIN and others and would use their contacts within the U.S. government and elsewhere to gather sensitive U.S. government information, including classified information relating to the national defense, for subsequent unlawful communication, delivery and transmission to persons not entitled to receive it.
B. It was further part of the conspiracy that FRANKLIN would use his position as a desk officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense to gather information relating to the national defense, for subsequent unlawful communication, delivery and transmission to ROSEN and WEISSMAN and others not entitled to receive it.
C. It was further part of the conspiracy that FRANKLIN, ROSEN and WEISSMAN would meet at locations in the Eastern District of Virginia and elsewhere, to exchange information, including classified information relating to the national defense.
D. It was further part of the conspiracy that FRANKLIN would unlawfully deliver, communicate and transmit classified national defense information in an effort to advance his own personal foreign policy agenda and influence persons within and outside the United States government.
E. It was further part of the conspiracy that ROSEN and WEISSMAN, without lawful authority, would communicate to persons not entitled to receive it, classified information relating to the national defense.
On or about June 11, 1999, WEISSMAN had a conversation with FO-1 and told FO-1 that a “Secret FBI, classified FBI report” on the Khobar Towers bombing had been prepared and that he (WEISSMAN) had gotten this information from three different sources, including United States government officials.
On or about March 13, 2003 , WEISSMAN had a separate conversation with FO-1. WEISSMAN asked FO-1, “Have you talked to Steve about Iran lately?” WEISSMAN related that “we” had heard from a “friend of ours in the Pentagon” about a national intelligence document. WEISSMAN discussed specifics about the classified draft internal policy document and the internal deliberations of United States government officials.
On or about March 18, 2003 , in a conversation with a member of the media about the classified draft internal policy document, ROSEN stated, “I’m not supposed to know this,” and that it was a “considerable story.” He encouraged the member of the media to pursue the story.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:54 am#
Ms. Pelosi is proving how powerless she is with each passing day.
Comment by ace
And you prefer the “Iron-fisted rule†of the Bugman?
Ace… a**, what’s the difference?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 16, 2007 @ 9:54 am
The difference is that true REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE do the bidding OF THE PEOPLE
As for the difference between ACE ad a**…
ACE provides fact-based information with verifiable links to support his contentions – and encourages people to participate in fact-based dialogue in support of advancing the discovery of THE TRUTH.
As for a** – you seem to be an expert of that topic.
Got any relevant facts and links to ADD to the conversation – or are you just here to SwiftBoat?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:58 amO. Bigfoot…
Looks like my comment is correct, otherwise, you wouldn’t object so strongly. Ha, gotcha with the truth. It is the “me” mentality that is quickly destroying our economy and our morality. It was never about “me” with Jesus. In fact, Jesus provided “free health care” to everyone that needed it. The “me” thinkers are selfish and are never truly happy. And they can never truly be followers of Jesus until they begin thinking about “we” instead of “me”.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:01 amThe delay in the AIPAC / Franklin Spy Trial is specifically designed to ensure that the Neocons have the time to bomb Ira and Syria to Kingdom Come (on Israel’s behalf) without raising the public’s awareness of just how AIPAC came to control both Congress, and US Foreign Policy.
Demand that the media cover the delay of the AIPAC FRANKLIN SPY CASE – and the ramifications of Justice Delayed.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:05 am…Senate GOP leaders have privately mapped out a retaliatory plan…
well, it isn’t private any more… thankfully…
now, if they will just use this valuable info to the peoples’ benefit…
ya think?
July 16th, 2007 at 10:06 amGot any relevant facts and links to ADD to the conversation – or are you just here to SwiftBoat?
Comment by ace
My goodness, you’re a manly man!
July 16th, 2007 at 10:06 amThe current situation is pretty a much a Repub production.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 16, 2007 @ 9:52 am
The current situation has been a long time in the making. Our problems are a domestic political one. We have made the federal government too lucrative. Sixty years of Democrats empowering and expanding the fed at every opportunity makes them culpable as well.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:07 amOur govt./democracy is compromised for the most part and all we can do is research, read, talk, and wait for the next crooked rigged election. It doesn’t look very good as I see few saviors on the horizon and a public that still really doesn’t get the situation we are in.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:11 am$12.5 million: Amount of taxpayer money spent to store 85 million pounds of unused ice ordered by FEMA after Hurricane Katrina.
I wonder whether this amount is included in the “relief” supposedly sent to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.
Whether it is or not, it’s more money that could have gone to help American victims of a natural disaster, but wasn’t.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:14 amwow, ace is good for the ole’ “cut and paste”…
that AIPAC video, was pretty neat ace! I might have to attend a policy meeting. I never really knew that much about them til you posted that link. Thanks buddy!
July 16th, 2007 at 10:18 amTwo of your links lead me to Roll Call. While I’m sure a bastion of knowledge. But it is a bastion of knowledge I must sign up for.
Anyway, the U.S. government has always and especially know been crook-ed. At least the Democratic Party knows something about governing.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:19 amAs for a** – you seem to be an expert of that topic.
dumdumdumdadoodadumdum
dumdumdumdadoodadumdum
dumdumdumdadoodadumdum
dumdumdumdadoodadumdum
I LIKE BIG BUTTS AND I CANNOT LIE,
THOSE OTHA BROTHAS CAN’T DEN-
oops!
sorry all.
:D
July 16th, 2007 at 10:22 amAt least the Democratic Party knows something about governing.
Comment by o — July 16, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Sure it does. But is it good governing or simply leading US to serfdom by expanding an increasingly corrupt and unaccountable federal Gov?
July 16th, 2007 at 10:29 amCunningham….aha this is why the DOJ wanted C. Lam out!
You have to read the whole LA times article, just amazing!!!
But even more scary is Cunningham’s behavior was being facilitated by the House Intelligence Committee, and Issa from San Diego is on that committee also, wonder what his involvement (if any) could have been!
Issa is walking a thin line, his mud runs from the west coast to the east, yet he still can’t build a bridge with his mud!!!!
I am sick of politicans who are more worried by the next election and how they fund it, when their focus must be on the people and the consitution….END of story!
Just like Sara Taylor said…“I took a oath to serve and defend the
president” ….
See this is the way they all think! They serve the constitution of the united states!
July 16th, 2007 at 10:31 am#34 The current situation has been a long time in the making. Our problems are a domestic political one. We have made the federal government too lucrative. Sixty years of Democrats empowering and expanding the fed at every opportunity makes them culpable as well.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 10:07 am
Oh, that’s rich. Dems are culpable of some Republicans corruption because the (D)’s had to know that a (R) would rob his mother if had an opportunity, and putting so much money under his watch was giving him an irresistible wish to steal the money. Baddie Democrats…
July 16th, 2007 at 10:39 amComment by Coffins draped with flags — July 16, 2007 @ 10:01 am
The “me thinkers” on both sides continue to expand the fed for their own purposes.
Jesus said “feed the hungry” he did not say “have government feed the hungry”. He himself provided health care he did not insist the Romans government provide it. So if you want preach at least get your facts straight.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:43 amYears before the war began,†Pentagon officials knew that armored MRAP vehicles better shielded troops from roadside bombs than Humvees. “But military officials repeatedly balked at appeals — from commanders on the battlefield and from the Pentagon’s own staff†— dating back to Dec. 2003, to provide the MRAPs, a USA Today investigation found.
This war is a business, and to run a business you can’t be dumping money into human resources all the time — the shareholders need their cut.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:44 am/snark
This guy is so underrated and should be president.
Wish he could give some balls to Pelosi.
jack jett
July 16th, 2007 at 10:45 amhttp://www.jackejett.com
Comment by Zooey
“You go to war with the army you have. Not the army you wish you had” Rumsfeld
July 16th, 2007 at 10:47 amComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 10:39 am
Evil
The dems have been stealing from Social Security for decades to fund their pork and thus buy the votes of people who are too stupid to know better and now we have a crisis. That is just an example of many that the Dems are equally culpable and corrupt as the Republicans.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:47 amSure it does. But is it good governing or simply leading US to serfdom by expanding an increasingly corrupt and unaccountable federal Gov?
Comment by Troll
Sounds alot like you are describing the last 6 years under total Republican control to me.
Care to try explain the difference?
And you prefer the “Iron-fisted rule†of the Bugman?
Ace… a**, what’s the difference?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Much as I despise Delay, he actually accomplished his goal of corrupting and subverting the government because he did something.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:48 amPelosi accomplishes nothing because she does nothing, just like most of the democrats did nothing the last 6 years, except roll over like submissive puppies. Please tell Pelosi how to find a Tablle
Sounds alot like you are describing the last 6 years under total Republican control to me.
Care to try explain the difference?
Comment by No-Chit — July 16, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Chit
There is no difference. The Federal Government has been granted way too much power and neither party is virtuous. The party system has led to corruption.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:54 amComment by Zooey
“You go to war with the army you have. Not the army you wish you had†Rumsfeld
Comment by willyloman
Of course, it is what you make it….you know, being the SecDef. If your Army isn’t properly equipped, or could be better equipped, I have to believe the $$ spent so far would have been adequate to supply MRAP’s to the Military rather than BlackWater. If they’re buying them then you can’t really use the ‘lack of supply’ argument.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:56 amI love when Christians justify modern conservative policy by saying Jesus never said the government should do this or that. Guess what, jackasses? Jesus never said the government should discriminate against homosexuals, either, but Christianity is always invoked in that debate.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:57 amdescribes the committee as a dysfunctional entity that served as a crossroads for almost every major figure in the ongoing criminal probe by the Justice Department.â€
Ah, Mr Fox, welcome to your new job as night watch animal here at the chicken coop.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:06 amAs soon as you pick those feathers out of your teeth, we’ll get started on your first assignment.
Of course, it is what you make it….you know, being the SecDef. If your Army isn’t properly equipped, or could be better equipped, I have to believe the $$ spent so far would have been adequate to supply MRAP’s to the Military rather than BlackWater. If they’re buying them then you can’t really use the ‘lack of supply’ argument.
Comment by SGT Higgins
Lack of supply…..lack of ordering – what’s the difference? Oy…
Rumsfeld tried to run this war like a damned fire sale, and all he and his idiot friends accomplished was quagmire and massive death tolls.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:11 amRumsfeld tried to run this war like a damned fire sale, and all he and his idiot friends accomplished was quagmire and massive death tolls.
Comment by Zooey
I’m not even convinced they were ever in it to win it. I mean, every war SOMEONE makes out like a bandit. Rummy and his handlers (cheney & co.) probably figured out a long time ago how to make millions off of this war.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:18 amI mean, to think that they sat around and thought about HOW to do this war, and to think they didn’t have additional ‘unofficial’ meetings about how to profit from it, seems ridiculous. Cheney had to have known he stood to actually make a sizable profit through Halliburton before the war ever happened, and greed would have caused him to suggest that Rummy make it last as long as possible, but make it look good. (thus Rummy’s failed entry strategy and lack of an exit strategy)
“Anyone want to bet that a Friend of Bush has the contract to store this ice? I would really like to know the amount of our taxes that has gone into Friend of Bush’s pockets since he took office. I’m willing to bet the farm that the dollar amount is staggering, especially if you include Katrina and Iraq in the totals.”
I checked the Taxpayers for Common Sense website (highly recommend for finding out where our tax dollars are going,) and they have a list of all contracts awarded related to Katrina:
http://www.taxpayer.net/budget/katrinaspending/femacontracts11-25.pdf
The ice moving and storage was handled by a company called AmeriCold out of Atlanta. The AmeriCold site doesn’t list their Board of Directors.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:26 amThe current situation is pretty a much a Repub production.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 16, 2007 @ 9:52 am
The current situation has been a long time in the making. Our problems are a domestic political one. We have made the federal government too lucrative. Sixty years of Democrats empowering and expanding the fed at every opportunity makes them culpable as well.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 10:07 am
First sentence above, seems okay, second sentence, seems okay, third; starting to slip fourth; he’s gone (or she)
Perhaps you missed the last 25 years. It was under Reagan that the current situation developed. that was the beginning of the big military buildup, the ’star wars’ misslie plan, the tax cuts for the rich,and the simultaneous cutting of domestic programs.
When George Bush took over, he had a surplus. A SURPLUS; for the intellectually challenged that means taking in more money than spending.
Now we have a deficit, it’s the opposite of a surplus. Trillions of dollars of it. My recently born granddaughter has a $60,000 debt she owes to China and Japan. Which party has had six years to outspend every president in history? Combined?
You are well named.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:27 amesus said “feed the hungry†he did not say “have government feed the hungryâ€. He himself provided health care he did not insist the Romans government provide it. So if you want preach at least get your facts straight.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 10:43 am
Jesus is gone. Will you stand in for him or are you too busy looking for a Dem. to blame for our problems?
I’m not even convinced they were ever in it to win it. I mean, every war SOMEONE makes out like a bandit. Rummy and his handlers (cheney & co.) probably figured out a long time ago how to make millions off of this war.
Comment by SGT Higgins — July 16, 2007 @ 11:18 am
Sarge; read the PNAC. The theories of Leo Strauss, founder/Philosopher of the neo con movement. Endless war is the goal, not victory. That’s why these dipshits keep saying we are in it for generations. Profit is the icing on their world domination cake.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:35 amThe party system has led to corruption.
Comment by Troll
that is why corporate funding of elections needs to be made illegal and the lobby bribe system needs to be done away with.
We also need a death penalty for any congresscritter, president or vice president found guilty of abuse of power, bribery or corruption. A few hanged along the cherry trees in Washington would stop alot of then abuse.
We need a viable 3rd party to challenge the 2 crooked parties in power now.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:38 amComment by SGT Higgins — July 16, 2007 @ 11:18 am
Absolutely! This was is a profit machine, nothing less. Ded troops and civilians are merely the “cost of doing business.”
I don’t think that’s what you signed up for.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:43 amThe current situation has been a long time in the making. Our problems are a domestic political one. We have made the federal government too lucrative. Sixty years of Democrats empowering and expanding the fed at every opportunity makes them culpable as well.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 10:07 am
What a lame joke this post is. You do realize that the largest job growth sector since Bush has been in office has been in government jobs, don’t you? And that doesn’t even count the contractors they’ve outsourced to.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:46 amI mean, every war SOMEONE makes out like a bandit. Rummy and his handlers (cheney & co.) probably figured out a long time ago how to make millions off of this war.
Comment by SGT Higgins
Unfortunately way too many wars and conflicts are not because of a real threat to the US. But for Corporate interests.
It is unexceptable that the blood of the men and women who serve be spilt, not for a true defense of our country, but to the wims of a corporate ceo. Iraq is about oil, while Osama bin Laudin roams free in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Hell, most of the invasions and actions in central and south america was for US Fruit Corp or the oil companies. I could go on all day with the list.
Like I said in my previous post, we need a death penalty for those who abuse public office, especially those who spend the lives of our military men and women needlessly.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:56 amThe theories of Leo Strauss, founder/Philosopher of the neo con movement. Endless war is the goal, not victory
Endless war is the goal, not victory.
Comment by funky p
And I ain’t even no fillossiffer and i figgered it out, so that makes me part smart, huh? lol
the “cost of doing business.â€
I don’t think that’s what you signed up for.
Comment by Zooey
No, it’s not. But I’ll be staying in.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:58 amPerhaps you missed the last 25 years. It was under Reagan that the current situation developed. that was the beginning of the big military buildup, the ’star wars’ misslie plan, the tax cuts for the rich,and the simultaneous cutting of domestic programs.
When George Bush took over, he had a surplus. A SURPLUS; for the intellectually challenged that means taking in more money than spending.
Now we have a deficit, it’s the opposite of a surplus. Trillions of dollars of it. My recently born granddaughter has a $60,000 debt she owes to China and Japan. Which party has had six years to outspend every president in history? Combined?
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 11:27 am
Funky
You err if you think I am defending the republicans.
The military is at least explicitly a legit role of the federal gov. Reagan was sucessful in ending the cold war, that was money well spent unless you are a communist. Reagan also had to correct the errors of Carter whose policies were destroying our military.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:58 amway too many wars and conflicts are not because of a real threat to the US.
Comment by No-Chit
I agree but in all fairness, your statement could end after ‘threat’ and still be just as accurate.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:59 amThe Duke Cunningham scandal is being stonewalled by Dems and Repugs alike. They are letting Porter Goss skate, when he should be at the very least, investigated.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:02 pmPoliticians steal, lie, cheat, molest, commit adultery, then ask us to support their campaigns with money and votes. We need to remove the corporatocracy from our elections and our government.
The L.A. Times should be commended. Now let’s see the Classified report.
I agree but in all fairness, your statement could end after ‘threat’ and still be just as accurate.
Comment by SGT Higgins
But I am a chatty b*stard, just slap me upside the head and say STFU
:D
July 16th, 2007 at 12:04 pmWhat a lame joke this post is. You do realize that the largest job growth sector since Bush has been in office has been in government jobs, don’t you? And that doesn’t even count the contractors they’ve outsourced to.
Comment by ann — July 16, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Yes I realize the enormous growth in fed jobs and am alarmed by it. Bush is far from conservative in most of his approach to governing. Big government and deficit spending, exept for our nations defense, is wrong and threatens liberty no matter what party is responsible for it.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:08 pmBut I am a chatty b*stard, just slap me upside the head and say STFU
Comment by No-Chit
lol Would you settle for a, ’stifle, Edith’ ? or a “pipe down’ every now and then?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:09 pmNo, it’s not. But I’ll be staying in.
Comment by SGT Higgins
I know yo will. It’s good tohave people in your position with their eyes wide open — politically, that is. I’m sure it’s not a problem keeping your eyes open when someone is trying to shoot your ass off.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:10 pmPlease forgive my typos — my son’s keyboard is CRAP!!
July 16th, 2007 at 12:11 pmWow such non-partisan talk from someone who still uses “Democrat” instead of Democratic
July 16th, 2007 at 12:14 pmI’m sure it’s not a problem keeping your eyes open when someone is trying to shoot your ass off.
Comment by Zooey
LOL Yeah, that tends to keep one’s attention and focus.
my son’s keyboard is CRAP!!
Comment by Zooey
I have the same issue on my home comp. The kids use it to play games on nick jr. or some such crap. Every now and again I hear them just beating away at the space bar. Usually I respond with a, “Hey! Cut it out!” Then the TAP! TAP! TAP! becomes tap. tap. tap. lol
July 16th, 2007 at 12:16 pmol Would you settle for a, ’stifle, Edith’ ? or a “pipe down’ every now and then?
Comment by SGT Higgins
That works too and I’m less likely to forget I told you to and hit back, to be truthfull. =)
No, it’s not. But I’ll be staying in.
Comment by SGT Higgins
I admire that.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:16 pm“Reagan also had to correct the errors of Carter whose policies were destroying our military.”
Comment by Troll —
Reagan sold weapons to both sides of the Iran/Iraq war – or did you forget that part? He also lied to Americans about it. Going around the Boland amendment to fund “insurgents” in Colombia, and setting the stage for 9/11. You should get your facts straight.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pmZooey, can you find the crap key?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pm“Yes I realize the enormous growth in fed jobs and am alarmed by it. Bush is far from conservative in most of his approach to governing.”
The ship’s already sailed on that scam. Bush is a conservative, and “conservatives” sat on their hands while he was spending like a drunken sailor. You can’t realistically now claim that his policies aren’t conservative – they are. It’s just that conservatism always was just a collection of untested bromides (until you guys took over) and now its a failed experiment. Time to rebrand yourself a libertarian…
July 16th, 2007 at 12:21 pmZooey, can you find the crap key?
Comment by RUCerious
It’s on my own keyboard — custom installed. :-D
July 16th, 2007 at 12:21 pmThat works too and I’m less likely to forget I told you to and hit back, to be truthfull. =)
Then it’s settled!
No, it’s not. But I’ll be staying in.
I admire that. — Aww Shucks.
Comment by No-Chit
July 16th, 2007 at 12:22 pmI have the same issue on my home comp. The kids use it to play games on nick jr. or some such crap. Every now and again I hear them just beating away at the space bar. Usually I respond with a, “Hey! Cut it out!†Then the TAP! TAP! TAP! becomes tap. tap. tap. lol
Comment by SGT Higgins
This keyboard looks like it’s been dragged through a pigsty and sprinkled liberally with Mountain Dew.
I have to wash my hands BEFORE I go to the bathroom!
July 16th, 2007 at 12:23 pmI admire that. — Aww Shucks.
Comment by No-Chit
Comment by SGT Higgins
Oh lordy, where are my hipwaders….?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:24 pmOh lordy, where are my hipwaders….?
Comment by Zooey
Lmao…they gotta be around there somewhere….try behind the couch.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:26 pmComment by barfly — July 16, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
Over the last 5-10 years, I have become convinced that modern conservativism is nothing but cover for racism, authoritarianism, and fascism. Shame on me for not seeing it sooner.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:26 pmOh lordy, where are my hipwaders….?
Comment by Zooey
What?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:30 pmYou ever seen two guys punch the snot out of each other then walk away friends?
Women never understand anything….
/jk
The map behind Feingold depicts possible Bush retirement spots. You can’t see Paraguay, but it’s currently in first place–the twins were real-estate shopping down there (seriously!)
July 16th, 2007 at 12:31 pmThe military is at least explicitly a legit role of the federal gov. Reagan was sucessful in ending the cold war, that was money well spent unless you are a communist. Reagan also had to correct the errors of Carter whose policies were destroying our military.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Funny stuff, you might want to give stand-up comedy a try.
Brehzhev ended the cold war as much or more than the Reagan team. What, Reagan says tear down that wall, a good thing to say, and Russia says “oh, sure Mr. Reagan, how could we have been so wrong.”
During the 1970s Brezhnev attempted to normalize relations between West Germany and the Warsaw Pact and to ease tensions with the United States through the policy known as détente. At the same time, he saw to it that the Soviet Union’s military-industrial complex was greatly expanded and modernized. Under his leadership, the Soviets achieved parity with the United States in strategic nuclear weapons, and their space program overtook the American one. A huge navy was fitted out and the army remained the largest in the world. The Soviet Union supported “wars of national liberation” in developing countries through the provision of military aid to left-wing movements and governments. But Brezhnev’s unceasing buildup of his defense and aerospace industries left other sectors of the economy increasingly deprived of funds. Soviet agriculture, consumer-goods industries, and health-care services declined throughout the 1970s and early ’80s as a consequence, resulting in shortages and declining standards of living. In 1976, Brezhnev was made marshal of the Soviet Union, thus becoming the only other party leader after Stalin to hold the highest military rank. The system of collective leadership ended with his dismissal of Podgorny as chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet in May 1977 and Brezhnev’s election to that position the following month. He thus became the first person in Soviet history to hold both the leadership of the party and of the state. In 1979 Brezhnev reached agreement with Jimmy Carter on a new bilateral strategic arms limitation treaty (SALT II), but the U.S. Senate refused to ratify the treaty, and soon afterward the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan (December 1979) in an effort to prop up a faltering communist government there.
What action, other than training arming and backing Osama bin Laden against Russia in Afghanistan, did Reagan take that ‘ended the cold war’?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:31 pmThat well spent money on star wars. For a system that still does not work. It cannot shoot down a missile even when it knows where the missile is headed and at what speed trajectory etc.. It has no chance of taking out a clandestine missile.
The errors of Carter usually boils down to the hostage crisis in Iran. There is good evidence that the Reagan/Bush campaign made a deal with the Ayatollah to hold off releasing the hostages until after the election. They did, and on the day of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released. What a lucky coincidence for Reagan/Bush
Maybe you’re too young to remember all that.
Gorbachev also led to the changing political environment by instituting progressive political concepts (for Russia) such as proposals for multi-candidate elections and the appointment of non-Party members to government positions. His radical changes in politics and the economy transformed Russia. Or maybe he was just afraid of Reagan’s Star Wars. Whatever.
By the way; Iran, our enemy then and now, also made secret arrangements with Reagan/Bush to release hostages, trade arms during the Iran/Contra fiasco. You remember, the one GW Bush was ‘out of the loop’ on. You know, that thing where GW Bush pardoned traitor Weinberger BEFORE the trial. You remember right? Good Times!
You should get your facts straight.
Comment by barfly — July 16, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
What facts did I get wrong Barfly?
Time to rebrand yourself a libertarian…
Comment by barfly — July 16, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
All true patriots with humanitarian interests and an understanding of history have libertarian leanings. I believe in Classical liberalism of the founding fathers and will support any politician who professes to hold these same views and then actually supports these views while in office. Otherwise they go.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:32 pmWomen never understand anything….
/jk
Comment by No-Chit
Oh yeah, I understand! My youngest dislocated his shoulder trying to punch his older brother’s lights out, but they were friends by the time we got back from the ER.
I was wearing my hipwaders that day as well….. :)
July 16th, 2007 at 12:33 pmLmao…they gotta be around there somewhere….try behind the couch.
Comment by SGT Higgins
I’m SOL. :(
My couch is 400 miles away.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:34 pmMy youngest dislocated his shoulder trying to punch his older brother’s lights out —– dislocated shoulder? That’s a heck of a right-cross on that kid, I wouldn’t wanna cross him.
Comment by Zooey
July 16th, 2007 at 12:36 pmThe map behind Feingold depicts possible Bush retirement spots. You can’t see Paraguay, but it’s currently in first place–the twins were real-estate shopping down there (seriously!)
Comment by bogtrotters — July 16, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
The compound has already been purchased. It adjoins a secret U.S. military installation. The Paraguayan government kindly voted to not extradite war criminals in the wake of the huge land purchase (rumored to be 100 acres)The Bush twins were looking for the party places :>)
July 16th, 2007 at 12:37 pmMy couch is 400 miles away.
Comment by Zooey
Wha? You went on a road trip and didn’t think to bring along your hipwaders? Serves you right, young lady!
July 16th, 2007 at 12:37 pmThat’s a heck of a right-cross on that kid, I wouldn’t wanna cross him.
Comment by SGT Higgins
I’m just glad he didn’t connect — I paid a lot for that dental work. :)
Wha? You went on a road trip and didn’t think to bring along your hipwaders? Serves you right, young lady!
Comment by SGT Higgins
What can I say? I usually need hipwaders in Idaho, not Oregon. I’ll have to get a set for each place now…..geez.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:43 pmComment by Troll
Reagan actually delayed the long, predicted collapse of the Soviet Union by his “tough guy”posturing.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:48 pmZbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union before Ronnie Raygun was ever elected, historical fact.
I’m just glad he didn’t connect — I paid a lot for that dental work. :)
So teeth are considerably more expensive than shoulders…got it (filing that info for later).
I’ll have to get a set for each place now…..geez. —- Maybe you can find a BS 2-4-1 sale. lol
Comment by Zooey
July 16th, 2007 at 12:49 pmHow come no one has said a word about what it costs to get Kim to shut down the NK Nuk plant?
He shure as heck did not do that for free and I for on would like to know what the costs was.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:52 pmSo teeth are considerably more expensive than shoulders…got it (filing that info for later).
–Only if the screaming and crying subject with said dangling shoulder does not require surgery.
I’ll have to get a set for each place now…..geez. —- Maybe you can find a BS 2-4-1 sale. lol
Comment by SGT Higgins
–Shouldn’t be a problem in the Zookeeper World.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:54 pmPlenty O Bullshit and accessories to go around.
Ace, veritas, Katie; you are to be commended for your excellent and informative posts on this thread. I am not by inference diminishing any other contribution. Troll; I think you are not so trollish, and I both disagree with and appreciate your posts as well. I am here to learn and share, not enshrine my own point of view. Too bad the real trolls do not have the same ends in mind.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:54 pmI for on would like to know what the costs was.
Comment by Dave
Article I read said that SKorea immediately delivered oil to NK.
Seems every crazy world leader, everywhere, loves them some oil.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:55 pm#
How come no one has said a word about what it costs to get Kim to shut down the NK Nuk plant?
He shure as heck did not do that for free and I for on would like to know what the costs was.
Comment by Dave — July 16, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
From what I’ve read, we lifted some embargoes on N. Korea, and probably will provide some food and medical.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:58 pmWhatever the cost, it is worth it. Now why don’t these idiots do the same thing in Iran? Negotiate, use diplomacy, whatever. The difference? Iran has oil. Lots!
Only if the screaming and crying subject with said dangling shoulder does not require surgery.
Comment by Zooey — Right? That would likely set one back a bit.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:58 pmNegotiate, use diplomacy, whatever. The difference? Iran has oil. Lots!
Comment by funky p
hey, how’s about we throw Iran at N. Korea?
July 16th, 2007 at 12:59 pmFunky
You’re barking up the wrong tree. I did not say Reagan was not corrupt. However his military buildup did play a role in the demise of the USSR and this was and is a legit role of the fed gov..
Most politicians on he left and the right are corrupt and have undermined the constitution. My arguement is that this corruption is a natural result of the size and power of the fed gov and nothing will change until the fed gov is reduced.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:00 pmRight? That would likely set one back a bit.
Comment by SGT Higgins
Even with insurance. Yikes.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:01 pmEven with insurance. Yikes.
Comment by Zooey
Yeah, I can imagine. My wife needs a root canal and we’ve had to ’save up’ for it. We gotta pay like 50%…I actually feel guilty sometimes because all of my coverage is free.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:04 pmTroll,
Reagan outspent the Soviets on military might, giving us the most massive debt in history until now, and their system collapsed under it’s own weight.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:05 pm#95 How come no one has said a word about what it costs to get Kim to shut down the NK Nuk plant?
He shure as heck did not do that for free and I for on would like to know what the costs was.
Comment by Dave — July 16, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
The cost has been an illegal war less.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:12 pmZooey
What is the difference if the massive debt is the result of military spending or domestic entittlements? As far as I can tell nothing with the exeption being that the constitution explicitly authorizes the fed gov to establish and maintain a military wheras it does not explicitly authorize much of the domestic spending which takes place.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:15 pm#106 Zooey
What is the difference if the massive debt is the result of military spending or domestic entittlements? As far as I can tell nothing with the exeption being that the constitution explicitly authorizes the fed gov to establish and maintain a military wheras it does not explicitly authorize much of the domestic spending which takes place.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
Perhaps because in 1776 existed the military concept, but not the healthcare, orphanage, police or firefighter concepts? And, if there doesn’t exists a limit on government expendings in the Constitution, what makes you think that putting a cap in the “entitlement” (what a load of Repug crap in a single word) is Constitutional?
July 16th, 2007 at 1:26 pmTroll,
So you have a problem with making sure that our citizens are cared for?
I get the idea that we ought to care for our citizens from the preamble of the Constitution.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:28 pmHi, Mrs Zooey. How is going your vacation? :D
July 16th, 2007 at 1:29 pmWell said, Senor Evil!
July 16th, 2007 at 1:30 pmJesus said “feed the hungry†he did not say “have government feed the hungryâ€. He himself provided health care he did not insist the Romans government provide it. So if you want preach at least get your facts straight.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @
Okay… following your logic, we don’t need government because individuals will be feeding the hungry and healing the sick for free and we won’t need the government’s support which would be the collective support of the the “we’s” vs the “me’s”. So let’s just get rid of government because “we” don’t need it. That’s what the Republicans think and are trying to do with one exception… they still want the “we’s” to pay for their salaries and health care and other benefits without answering to the “we’s”. Republicans are all about themselves. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:31 pmHi Senor Evil,
I’m in Portland, since my son needed me again. We went to the Coast yesterday. It was beautiful. I’ll put pictures on facebook when I get home.
I hope you’redoing well. :)
July 16th, 2007 at 1:34 pmMost politicians on he left and the right are corrupt and have undermined the constitution. My arguement is that this corruption is a natural result of the size and power of the fed gov and nothing will change until the fed gov is reduced.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
We agree here. We disagree on the military buildup being either necessary or helpful. The defense industry has been raping our government these past 25-30 years, with $700 hammers and other such rip-offs, but none is so blatant or costly as the revered Star Wars missile defense shield. Billions and billions wasted on a system that has yet to prove useful or functional. It is just the high tech wet dream of the conservatives, and neo conservatives, who plan to dominate space once they have the earth under their dominion. They even got Putin to ramp up their nuclear missile programs, and recently Putin dropped out of the missile defense treaty. This is all due to the sabre rattling by the neo cons who relish the re-imlementation of the arms race…it’s good for business. From yesterday’s Waho post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/14/AR2007071400005.html?hpid=moreheadlines
July 16th, 2007 at 1:36 pmThe Iraq war may be politically unpopular, but it has been a boon for the defense industry. Last year, the sector soared 27.7 percent, while the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index rose 13.6 percent. So far this year, the industry has gained 26.7 percent, compared with the S&P’s 9.5 percent increase. Since 2001, defense stocks that make up the S&P Aerospace & Defense Select Industry Index have climbed 181.7 percent; the broader market is up 17.6 percent.
Don’t take my word for it, read the PNAC documents on their website. Space domination is on their agenda too.
#112 Hi Senor Evil,
I’m in Portland, since my son needed me again. We went to the Coast yesterday. It was beautiful. I’ll put pictures on facebook when I get home.
I hope you’redoing well. :)
Comment by Zooey — July 16, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
He he, your son is lucky for having such a caring mother :)
I’m doing fine, thanks, waiting for my own vacation (starts Aug 6!), and forwarding a lot of work to not have a mountain of to-do’s when I return Sept 3 :D
July 16th, 2007 at 1:38 pmComment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
The money has gone there:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070715/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_air_surge_ii_2
Too bad that troops haven’t their body armor or enough armored Humvees. What sells fine are posh new aircrafts.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:47 pmEvil
Certainly there were other social concerns but the authors of the constitution expected the state and local government to deal with these domestic issues.
“So you have a problem with making sure that our citizens are cared for?”
Comment by Zooey — July 16, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
Absolutely not. I am a firm believer in the principle of subsidiarity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity) because it empowers the individual through empowering local and state gov..
July 16th, 2007 at 1:49 pmSo you have a problem with making sure that our citizens are cared for?
I get the idea that we ought to care for our citizens from the preamble of the Constitution.
Comment by Zooey
What?
Where is that….
Oh, here it is
……..in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare………..
Yep, you’re right =)
She got you there Troll
July 16th, 2007 at 1:58 pm“Positive subsidiarity”, which is the ethical imperative for communal, institutional or governmental action to create the social conditions necessary to the full development of the individual, such as the right to work, decent housing, health care, etc., is another important aspect of the subsidiarity principle.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:59 pmFrom the article in Wiki you provided.
So, as I read this, government has a role, or an ethical imperative, to create the conditions for an individual to fully develop. Sounds to me like education, healthcare, and a strong economic environment are the responsibility of the government. Government has to create the environment where the individual can thrive.
We do not have that environment, because government military actions, which undermine us in every way imaginable, have taken away the funding which could be used to realize the goals set forth in the subsidiarity principal.
The money has gone there:
http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ ap/ 20070715/ ap_on_re_mi_ea/ iraq_air_surge_ii_2
Too bad that troops haven’t their body armor or enough armored Humvees. What sells fine are posh new aircrafts.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Wow, those Reaper aircraft are sure versatile. They are remote-controlled and some evil person could use that technology to fly such airplanes into buildings.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:02 pmI’m just saying.
Republicans are all about themselves. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
Comment by Coffins draped with flags — July 16, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
There are good and bad democrats and republicans. There are rich and greedy in both parties as well.
There are compassionate people within both also.
But my arguement is that the federal government has become too corrupt, massive and unaccountable and that while it is virtuous to have concern for our fellow human beings there is no virtue in goverment compelling individuals to care for each other. That would be government legislating morality which I understand progressive oppose. People may also legitimatley disagree where personal or societal responsibility ends and government responsibility begins.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:05 pmAbsolutely not. I am a firm believer in the principle of subsidiarity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity) because it empowers the individual through empowering local and state gov..
Comment by Troll
In other words you wish to model the US after the EU.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:06 pmOk
I disagree.
Pat Leahy is going to be a busy guy. I hope he can continue to be as sharp as he was with that Sara Taylor clown.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:07 pmThat would be government legislating morality which I understand progressive oppose.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
This is not about legislating morality.
This is the government living up to its responsibility to look after the well-being of its citizens. That is the primordial task of a government, whether fending off external enemies of dispensing justice.
The state or government you are arguing for is closer to what the Romans had, which largely left people to their own devices.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:16 pmFunky
“Possitive Subsidiarity” is an aspect of the principle in Catholic Social teaching yet it is distinct from the “Principle of Subsidiarity”.
The Principle of Subsidiarity is contained in the tenth amendment to the constitution. Possitive rights are not enshrined in the constitution however negitive rights are.
Chit,
July 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pmIt says PROMOTE the general welfare not PROVIDE.
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
July 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pm* * *
Holy crap!
The above touted principle of subsidiarity, which I read about through your link, was originated as a Christian social principle:
A distinctive feature of Catholic social teaching is its concern for the poorest members of society. This concern echoes elements of the Jewish law and of the prophetic books of the Old Testament, and recalls the teachings of Jesus Christ recorded in the New Testament, such as his declaration that “whatever you have done for one of these least brothers of Mine, you have done for Me.”[1] Another distinctive feature of Catholic social doctrine is the way in which it has consistently critiqued modern social and political ideologies both of the left and of the right: communism, conservatism, socialism, libertarianism, capitalism, liberalism and Nazism have all been condemned, at least in their pure forms, by the Popes at one time or another.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:21 pmThis is a good and noble idea in many respects. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has had other priorities as evidenced by a recent $600 million settlement. A lot of good can be accomplished for $600 million dollars; and that’s just one of many such settlements already agreed to. There will be more.
Great theory, Pope Leo XII, too bad your policies eventually allowed perverts to eventually run the church.
In the Rerum novarum, an encylical by Leo XII in 1891, the cooperation between the working classes and moneyed, or capitalist classes, ws encouraged:
Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers – that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages are fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this – that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one’s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. “Behold, the hire of the laborers… which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.”(6) Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen’s earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. Were these precepts carefully obeyed and followed out, would they not be sufficient of themselves to keep under all strife and all its causes?
My answer to that last question, is, yes, but that’s not what we have today. Somebody (Catholic church, I’m looking at you) dropped the ball.
In other words you wish to model the US after the EU.
Ok
I disagree.
Comment by No-Chit — July 16, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
No I wish the US government to hold fast to the tenth Amendment.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:21 pm#117 Evil
Certainly there were other social concerns but the authors of the constitution expected the state and local government to deal with these domestic issues.
Has crossed your mind the idea that these good people, the writers of the Constitution were imperfect or prescient of the needs of the modern world? If we go with their work unaltered, why can’t do the same with the Code of Hammurabi? After all, the Code of Hammurabi was the first one.
“So you have a problem with making sure that our citizens are cared for?â€
Comment by Zooey — July 16, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
Absolutely not. I am a firm believer in the principle of subsidiarity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity) because it empowers the individual through empowering local and state gov..
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Hey, I’m a Federalist too. And, given that the health of all the Americans is a national problem, let’s create an Universal Healthcare System NOW!
I like your point of view.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:22 pm#120 Wow, those Reaper aircraft are sure versatile. They are remote-controlled and some evil person could use that technology to fly such airplanes into buildings.
I’m just saying.
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Exactly. Who needs an squad of 20 suicide fanatics when you can hack the system and make the Reaper ™ blow some stuff around their base?
July 16th, 2007 at 2:29 pmThe wiki page you cited does not put it that way. They say that positive subsidiarity, as in the quote I used above,
July 16th, 2007 at 2:31 pmis another important aspect of the subsidiarity principle.
Not separate from, another IMPORTANT aspect, and it is a moral and ethical duty under the principle you advocate, not distinct from.
That’s like saying the bill of rights is an important aspect of the constitution, but distinct from it. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Either you have a moral and ethical imperative, or you don’t. You are parsing to make your point, but the principle of subsidiarity, and positive subsidiarity, are linked and not distinct from each other.
Gregor said
“This is not about legislating morality. ”
Yes it is.
“This is the government living up to its responsibility to look after the well-being of its citizens. That is the primordial task of a government, whether fending off external enemies of dispensing justice.”
Justice is not forcing persons to give up their property for redistribution to others. That’s tyranny.
“The state or government you are arguing for is closer to what the Romans had, which largely left people to their own devices.”
No I am not arguing for anarchy. But for the right of the individual to have representation and government which is accountable to its citizens. The principle of subsidiarity helps to guarantee this right.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:34 pmAnd, given that the health of all the Americans is a national problem, let’s create an Universal Healthcare System NOW!
I like your point of view.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Hunger is a national problem lets provide free food for 300 million people. Homelessness is also a national problem lets provide free homes too. Some people dress in expensive suits while other in rags are cold and unseemly lets have a national clothing program as well. It is foolishness!!! That is Communism. It does not work economically and is incompatable with a free society.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:41 pmRepublicans – always the obstructionists and always place their party BEFORE the American people. Republicans don’t like the American people. It’s always about “me†with Republicans and never about “usâ€.
Actually, idiot, Judge Southwick is strongly supported by both Mississippi senators, supported by judges and lawyers from both parties in Mississippi, rated uniamiously well qualified by the ABA, and is an Iraq War veteran.
Is this how the Democrats support a former soldier?
July 16th, 2007 at 2:41 pm#131 “This is the government living up to its responsibility to look after the well-being of its citizens. That is the primordial task of a government, whether fending off external enemies of dispensing justice.â€
Justice is not forcing persons to give up their property for redistribution to others. That’s tyranny.
Taxes for paying the military. Tax cuts to the rich ones. Taxes to subsidize farm products of the USA, or give them tax cuts. Tax cuts to the Oil industry. Guess that, under your logic, you’re in a tiranny.
“The state or government you are arguing for is closer to what the Romans had, which largely left people to their own devices.â€
No I am not arguing for anarchy. But for the right of the individual to have representation and government which is accountable to its citizens. The principle of subsidiarity helps to guarantee this right.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
The Roman Empire was a Dictatorship, so way far from an anarchy. They had laws. A lot. But very fews to favor the common people.
And, by saying “The principle of subsidiarity helps to guarantee this right.” you’re simply describing a way of organizing the job of govern a country. Having a right of the individual to have representation and government which is accountable to its citizens can be achieved with another organization, less “Federalist” as well.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:41 pm#132 And, given that the health of all the Americans is a national problem, let’s create an Universal Healthcare System NOW!
I like your point of view.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Hunger is a national problem lets provide free food for 300 million people. Homelessness is also a national problem lets provide free homes too. Some people dress in expensive suits while other in rags are cold and unseemly lets have a national clothing program as well. It is foolishness!!! That is Communism. It does not work economically and is incompatable with a free society.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
Hey, at last the “communism” strawman. I was asking myself how much it will last until some “Federalist” or “Republican” would use it in this thread.
No. Universal Healthcare isn’t equivalent to rampant communism, by far, or destroying the private property. It’s exacly as your military. Everybody pays taxes to run the military, because is a matter of National Security.
Explain me why having a healthy population isn’t a question of National Security.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:46 pmFunky
July 16th, 2007 at 2:54 pmI agree Wikipedia is not the greatest source for understanding the principle. See the Papal Encyclical for more information it is very interesting.
Explain me why having a healthy population isn’t a question of National Security.
Did the founding fathers have a department of healthcare? Nope, they certainly didn’t hold your outlandish beliefs!
July 16th, 2007 at 2:55 pm#136 Funky
I agree Wikipedia is not the greatest source for understanding the principle. See the Papal Encyclical for more information it is very interesting.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:54 pm
Most probably Troll prefers Conservapedia best.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:55 pm#137 Explain me why having a healthy population isn’t a question of National Security.
Did the founding fathers have a department of healthcare? Nope, they certainly didn’t hold your outlandish beliefs!
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
You’re right. And, the 2nd ammendment, when speaking about the right to bear arms, is referring to a 1776 flint and lock musket, not a Magnum .357 pistol, or an AK-47.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:58 pmExplain me why having a healthy population isn’t a question of National Security.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Evil
July 16th, 2007 at 2:59 pmDefine “Healthy”. Modern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact. Today most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
You’re right. And, the 2nd ammendment, when speaking about the right to bear arms, is referring to a 1776 flint and lock musket, not a Magnum .357 pistol, or an AK-47.
Actually, pistols of various sorts existed in the late 1700s and early 1800s…
July 16th, 2007 at 3:00 pmDefine “Healthyâ€. Modern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact. Today most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
You forget that the Democrats want free lunches bought and paid for by others…that’s the nature of their party.
Kerry and Edwards will never pay this health care tax.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:02 pm#141 Explain me why having a healthy population isn’t a question of National Security.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Evil
Define “Healthyâ€. Modern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact. Today most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
Your “most” americans have access to healthcare lets out 41 milions of americans. Guess that a 13% of the population matters for something.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:04 pmToday most Americans have access to health care.
And … there’s some that don’t … but “I dont see this as a real concern.”
July 16th, 2007 at 3:04 pm#142 You’re right. And, the 2nd ammendment, when speaking about the right to bear arms, is referring to a 1776 flint and lock musket, not a Magnum .357 pistol, or an AK-47.
Actually, pistols of various sorts existed in the late 1700s and early 1800s…
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
#142 Define “Healthyâ€. Modern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact. Today most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
You forget that the Democrats want free lunches bought and paid for by others…that’s the nature of their party.
Kerry and Edwards will never pay this health care tax.
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:02 pm
You succeded bringing nothing to the debate.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:07 pmYour “most†americans have access to healthcare lets out 41 milions of americans. Guess that a 13% of the population matters for something.
Where did the idea of everyone getting hundreds of thousands of dollars of drugs, implants, and surgeries come from anyway?
Who is going to pay it?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:08 pmEg
That 13% includes those who CHOOSE not to buy it (ah CHOICE another allegedly progressive value.), it also includes the poor who are provided for in many states. So who is left? Those poor in a few states that do not provide it. Maybe you should address that issue.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:11 pm#147 Your “most†americans have access to healthcare lets out 41 milions of americans. Guess that a 13% of the population matters for something.
Where did the idea of everyone getting hundreds of thousands of dollars of drugs, implants, and surgeries come from anyway?
Who is going to pay it?
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
Cutting the tax cuts to the Pharma Industry, Private Insurers, negotiation of prices by a bigger share of buyers with the healthcare industries, and bringing down the redundant, overloaded bureaucracy of private insurance companies, and forgetting the “for profit” concept of healthcare would do most of the magic, and pay for itself.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:13 pmAnd … there’s some that don’t … but “I dont see this as a real concern.â€
Comment by Egreggious — July 16, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
Eg the concern was not their health but rather National Security. But you knew that didn’t you? So you’d rather be dishonest in the debate. That says alot about you.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:15 pm#148 That 13% includes those who CHOOSE not to buy it (ah CHOICE another allegedly progressive value.), it also includes the poor who are provided for in many states. So who is left? Those poor in a few states that do not provide it. Maybe you should address that issue.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
So your idea is having a universal healthcare system in every state that doesn’t have it, ending with every state in the USA having Universal Healthcare. Wouldn’t it produce a lot of extra bureaucracy, than a single optimized agency?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:16 pmCutting the tax cuts to the Pharma Industry, Private Insurers, negotiation of prices by a bigger share of buyers with the healthcare industries, and bringing down the redundant, overloaded bureaucracy of private insurance companies, and forgetting the “for profit†concept of healthcare would do most of the magic, and pay for itself.
Numbers, please!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:17 pmModern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact.
Comment by Troll
Right. I guess that whole Spanish Flu thing was just natural selection?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:18 pmToday most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
Translation: Troll has insurance, so piss off!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:19 pmCutting the tax cuts to the Pharma Industry, Private Insurers, negotiation of prices by a bigger share of buyers with the healthcare industries, and bringing down the redundant, overloaded bureaucracy of private insurance companies, and forgetting the “for profit†concept of healthcare would do most of the magic, and pay for itself.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
Evil,
July 16th, 2007 at 3:19 pmProfit is the motive which has made modern medicine as advnced as it is. If you believe that non profit medicine can work put your money where your mouth is and start a non profit provider. I’ll watch you fail and laugh.
#152 Cutting the tax cuts to the Pharma Industry, Private Insurers, negotiation of prices by a bigger share of buyers with the healthcare industries, and bringing down the redundant, overloaded bureaucracy of private insurance companies, and forgetting the “for profit†concept of healthcare would do most of the magic, and pay for itself.
Numbers, please!
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:17 pm
The countries of the first world that have Universal Healthcare pay half per capita than the USA. QUED.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:20 pm#153 Modern medicine did not exist for quite some time but we managed to survive as a nation despite that fact.
Comment by Troll
Right. I guess that whole Spanish Flu thing was just natural selection?
Comment by SGT Higgins — July 16, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
How dare you? It was a plague sent by God, and the Spanish Inquisition!
/Sarcasm off
July 16th, 2007 at 3:21 pmThe countries of the first world that have Universal Healthcare pay half per capita than the USA. QUED.
So? That doesn’t prove that we can do it.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:21 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
It may but it will be much more accountable to the citizens.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:22 pmWhat if someone wanted a selective abortion because it was determined the fetus would be gay or a spaniard do you think you should pay for that?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:24 pmProfit is the motive which has made modern medicine as advnced as it is. If you believe that non profit medicine can work put your money where your mouth is and start a non profit provider. I’ll watch you fail and laugh.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
A little secret: there exists a lot of first rank Pharma corporations in countries with Universal Healthcare and, believe me, they make great benefits. You simply don’t (want to?) understand the concept of universal healthcare.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:26 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
Lmao, thanks for pointing out the sarcasm. I made it to ‘Spanish Inquisition’ with a straight face.
then I read WHO the poster was, everything kinda fell into place at that point.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:26 pm#158 The countries of the first world that have Universal Healthcare pay half per capita than the USA. QUED.
So? That doesn’t prove that we can do it.
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
Such a patriot!
/Sarcasm off
July 16th, 2007 at 3:27 pm#159 Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
It may but it will be much more accountable to the citizens.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
So you believe that other federal big agencies, as the military, aren’t enough accountable?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:30 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
I am a patriot. Our nation enjoys larger homes, more/faster cars, and many more material goods than other nations.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:30 pmSo Evil should the gov also provide food, housing, jobs and clothing to all? If not why not?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:30 pmOh man, I’m missing out on a health care debate…. darn it, but it’s to late to jump in now, plus any regular poster should be able to sum up my viewpoint nicely on this one.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:30 pmSo you believe that other federal big agencies, as the military, aren’t enough accountable?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
The question is do you?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:31 pmI am a patriot. Our nation enjoys larger homes, more/faster cars, and many more material goods than other nations.
Comment by m12
That doesn’t make you a patriot, DUMB ASS.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:32 pmOur nation enjoys larger homes, more/faster cars, and many more material goods than other nations.
Comment by m12
That means we’re ‘winning’!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:32 pmYay! No nation is as materialistic as our nation! We’re the biggest, baddest, rootin-tootin’est, pollutin’est, MF’ers on the planet…..in Yo’ FACE, Italy!
/sarcasm off
You’re right. And, the 2nd ammendment, when speaking about the right to bear arms, is referring to a 1776 flint and lock musket, not a Magnum .357 pistol, or an AK-47.
Actually, pistols of various sorts existed in the late 1700s and early 1800s…
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
You are usually pretty uninformed.
Do you really know how different a Magnum .357 and an AK-47 are from any weapon conceived in 1781?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:32 pm#160 What if someone wanted a selective abortion because it was determined the fetus would be gay or a spaniard do you think you should pay for that?
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:24 pm
There doesn’t exists “selective” abortion in my country. Rape, grave mental or physical deficiences of the fetus, or grave danger for the health of the mother are legal motives for abortion, and I support all three. And, living in an universal healthcare country, I have payed for them already. Your point is?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pmThat means we’re ‘winning’!
Yay! No nation is as materialistic as our nation! We’re the biggest, baddest, rootin-tootin’est, pollutin’est, MF’ers on the planet…..in Yo’ FACE, Italy!
Winning at what, exactly?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pmComment by Zooey — July 16, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Does gutting our military with tiny budgets make one a patriot?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:35 pm#165 Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
I am a patriot. Our nation enjoys larger homes, more/faster cars, and many more material goods than other nations.
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
Your moral portrait looks as the one of Dorian Grey, if the only who matters for you is money.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:35 pmI do not think our elected leaders on the Federal level are accountable enough. I believe the solution is to take away as much power from the federal government as is practically possible and return that power to the state and local governments.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:36 pmWinning at what, exactly?
Comment by m12
Oh, sorry, I thought the sarcasm was apparent (c’MON dude, I s-p-e-l-l-e-d it out for you and everything)
You made a stupid comment, I phoned in my response. If you are trying to debate and argue sarcasm, you win, i give up.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:37 pmDo you really know how different a Magnum .357 and an AK-47 are from any weapon conceived in 1781?
An Ak-47, perhaps. The concept of a revolver dates back to the late 1600s.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmYour moral portrait looks as the one of Dorian Grey, if the only who matters for you is money.
And what is your moral portrait, exactly? Bankrupting our nation with health care costs for 12 million illegals?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmDoes gutting our military with tiny budgets make one a patriot?
Comment by m12
Do asinine questions make you appear intelligent?
hint: Answer starts with an ‘N’….ends with an ‘O’.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pm#166 So Evil should the gov also provide food, housing, jobs and clothing to all? If not why not?
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
So, for you it is an all or nothing matter? Sorry, but not for me. Following the words of Jesus, cloth the nudes, feed the hungry, and give shelter to the ones without a roof over their heads. As for the rich ones, they can provide themselves, don’t you think?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmPATRIOT: A person who loves, supports and defends their country.
Hey look! Nothing about big-assed houses, fast cars, mass consumerism, or a giant military. Go figure….
July 16th, 2007 at 3:42 pm#166 So you believe that other federal big agencies, as the military, aren’t enough accountable?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
The question is do you?
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
Frankly, your military is the stronger and more modern of the world. I think if universal healthcare was managed as is managed the military now, you would have cheaper health insurance for everybody, and far more advanced.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:44 pmYour point is?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
My point is that people will disagree as to what is a legitimate health care need and what is not. This will become another partisan issue with national health care further complicating what is already a difficult issue which is electing gov officials. So many issues already makes the choice a lesser of two evils decision in many cases and in the end it will be determined by which candidate has the most money to spend to push their image and less who truly represents the voter.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:47 pm#176 I do not think our elected leaders on the Federal level are accountable enough. I believe the solution is to take away as much power from the federal government as is practically possible and return that power to the state and local governments.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
But your point was that, in a “Federalist” country, they will be MORE accountable. If they are already accountable enough, why change again the laws to a system that hasn’t proved yet to be enough accountable, increasing in the process the amount of bureaucracy and government spending?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:47 pmFrankly, your military is the stronger and more modern of the world. I think if universal healthcare was managed as is managed the military now, you would have cheaper health insurance for everybody, and far more advanced.
I thought the liberal position was that the military is being poorly managed….
July 16th, 2007 at 3:48 pmHey look! Nothing about big-assed houses, fast cars, mass consumerism, or a giant military. Go figure….
Comment by Zooey
DAMN! I was kinda hopin’ to aspire to ‘Patriot’ status there for a minute. Can I trade in the fast car and mass consumerism for a house w/ an extra room or two? lol
July 16th, 2007 at 3:48 pmI thought the liberal position was that the military is being poorly managed….
Comment by m12
There you go again…..putting EVERYone in the same ‘BOX’.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:49 pmJustice is not forcing persons to give up their property for redistribution to others. That’s tyranny.
Agreed but off topic. No one said we should dissolve private property rights.
No I am not arguing for anarchy. But for the right of the individual to have representation and government which is accountable to its citizens. The principle of subsidiarity helps to guarantee this right.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
I don’t get how the principle of subsidiarity guarantees anything. It’s not a document of law in force in the U.S.A. The constitution is our document.
136 Funky
I agree Wikipedia is not the greatest source for understanding the principle. See the Papal Encyclical for more information it is very interesting.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:54 pm
I quoted above from the Papal Encyclical, and read some of it. it does nothing to support your contentions. See post 127 which quotes the encyclical.
Today most Americans have access to health care and it is likely to remain that way so I dont see this as a real concern.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
40 million Americans cannot afford it. Access doesn’t happen without means. Plus, France has the best health care system in the world. We are #37. Something wrong with that picture.
Actually, idiot, Judge Southwick is strongly supported by both Mississippi senators, supported by judges and lawyers from both parties in Mississippi, rated uniamiously well qualified by the ABA, and is an Iraq War veteran.
Is this how the Democrats support a former soldier?
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
You could have made your point without impugning the poster with the term idiot. That insult does not in any way bolster the point (however pathetic) you wish to make. So, why the insult?
As to your support of Southwick for the above stated reasons; that’s how we got Alito and Roberts. These supposed strict constructionists are overturning precedents. What ever happened to the uproar from the right about activist judges?
Did the founding fathers have a department of healthcare? Nope, they certainly didn’t hold your outlandish beliefs!
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
They didn’t have an FBI, Homeland Security, or a Project for a New American Century running the government either. Let’s return to the good old days when only rich white gentry could vote and stuff.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:50 pmAs for the rich ones, they can provide themselves, don’t you think?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Yes they can provide health care for themselves. Relatively speaking most Americans are “rich”.
Thank you.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:50 pm#184 Your point is?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
My point is that people will disagree as to what is a legitimate health care need and what is not. This will become another partisan issue with national health care further complicating what is already a difficult issue which is electing gov officials. So many issues already makes the choice a lesser of two evils decision in many cases and in the end it will be determined by which candidate has the most money to spend to push their image and less who truly represents the voter.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
Universal Healthcare stands also for no exceptions.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:52 pmThat 13% includes those who CHOOSE not to buy it (ah CHOICE another allegedly progressive value.), it also includes the poor who are provided for in many states. So who is left? Those poor in a few states that do not provide it. Maybe you should address that issue.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:11 pm
The poor and the rich get healthcare. It is those who have modest incomes that get screwed. What do you think is the the number 1 cause of bankruptcy in this country? It’s high medical bills.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:54 pmFrankly, your military is the stronger and more modern of the world. I think if universal healthcare was managed as is managed the military now, you would have cheaper health insurance for everybody, and far more advanced.
I thought the liberal position was that the military is being poorly managed….
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
As if every liberal was following the same agenda, as you do with the PNAC policy? No, not really. My position is that your country spends too much in military and nothing in healthcare for their citizens. I only say that, putting the same money and effort in Universal Healthcare would bring awesome results. And far more peaceful. And just imagine the big bucks your country would make selling all that healthcare thingies to other countries…
July 16th, 2007 at 3:56 pmComment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Really? A revolver like a 357Magnum? That’s fascinating. Were they thinking flintlock, matchlock, or wheellock, or what?
With such advanced thinking as revolvers, I wonder why gas-operated automatic rifles weren’t also being developed in the 17th century, or at least after 1700.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:00 pmAs for the rich ones, they can provide themselves, don’t you think?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Yes they can provide health care for themselves. Relatively speaking most Americans are “richâ€.
Thank you.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Hey, no problem helping the 13% then, isn’t?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:00 pmWell, has been interesting, but I must sign off now. Bye all.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:02 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
Evil
Here in the states the federal gov refers to the gov in DC.. That is why I avoid the “federalist” terminology it is too confusing.
We would not have to change the laws, the laws already exist and have been ignored by the courts and elected officials. We need to elect leaders who understand that individual liberty has been diminished and is further threatened by the size and growth of the Federal government.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmSo Evil should the gov also provide food, housing, jobs and clothing to all? If not why not?
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
July 16th, 2007 at 4:07 pmNow I know you are being deliberately obtuse and are now arguing against yourself. You brought up the principal of subsidiarity, whose foundation lay upon a moral and ethical imperative to provide the environment for individuals to thrive. In this country, that principal only seems to apply to corporations, while the pope (Leo XII), in his encyclical
asserted that capitalists must work ethically with the workers. What is ethical about the way big business has come to run this country.
Where is that golden middle ground where everyone benefits. Our system has become rigged to allow corporations to usurp the rights of individual citizens. Excellent examples are cited above, such as the Pharma bill that allowed our sick to be raped by prescription drug overcharges. They even had them put in the bill that they cannot collectively purchase drugs at lower cost. It is expressly forbidden to negotiate lower prices on bulk purchases. Who does this legislation benefit?
All those great theries are just concepts on pieces of paper, however noble. That is not what we have. We have corporatocracy, a coalition of government and corporate mutual self interest.
The founding fathers did not put that in the constitution either. That would be fascism. (defined as the government and corporate interests coincide)
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 3:54 pm
That is the risk they take when they do not purchase health care.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:07 pmAs to your support of Southwick for the above stated reasons; that’s how we got Alito and Roberts. These supposed strict constructionists are overturning precedents. What ever happened to the uproar from the right about activist judges?
The turd Ginsberg also overturned precedents. Your point, exactly?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:10 pmAnd just imagine the big bucks your country would make selling all that healthcare thingies to other countries…
You mean like how Brazil just decided to buy our AIDS drugs, which the US pharmaceuticals spent millions of dollars to develop?
Nope, they stole the formula!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pmYes they can provide health care for themselves. Relatively speaking most Americans are “richâ€.
Thank you.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Yeah, just not rich enough to get a finger reattached, even with insurance…like the guy is Sicko.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pmOr maybe you think a Dr. should have to get permission from a cost-cutting bureaucrat before performing a needed procedure on a sick patient. Zooey is right. You talk like someone either who is rich or has a good health plan, or both. Get it straight. Your health and treatment should not depend on a for-profit system to see if you get treated. Other counties do it, 36 of them better than we do, and it is as affordable as spending $12billion/month on Iraq. Thats above and beyond the cost of our regular Defense budget which strangely does not include Iraq!
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
Funky
I agree that corporations also have impinged on liberty but the solution is not to run from the hands of one abusive master to another.
I argue that both the democrat and republican leadership have sold out to their corporate masters and play US against each other while they all get rich.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:21 pmIf what you say is true (fascism) then to feed the gov is to feed the corporations which is foolish.
The only solution is to take away the profit motive, the only way we can do this is to take the money out of DC put it back into the hands of American citizens who can dole it out as they see fit rather than corrupt politicians. Then politicians in DC will be more willing to act against the large corporations and special interests and make laws which will benefit small business and the individual.
Funky said
“Zooey is right. You talk like someone either who is rich or has a good health plan, or both. ”
I know for some its hard to fathom but could it be that some things such as principles are more important than “me”.
Liberty or death.
“Get it straight. Your health and treatment should not depend on a for-profit system to see if you get treated.”
Why not? (Should or should not implies objective morals be careful) Government under our constitution has a contractual obligation to provide protection of our negative rights. The founding fathers who also lived in a business world and had many of these same debates chose not to provide possitive rights in the constitution. If you think we ought to have them state your case to the people and propose a constitutional amendment.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmThere is no one so blind as he who will not see.
The turd Ginsberg also overturned precedents. Your point, exactly?
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
A supporting fact on the case(s)you cite re. Ginsburg would assist you in making your unsubstantiated point. Calling her a turd will not. However, the Clinton did it approach is juvenile, and assumes that I agree with the un-cited Ginsburg position. How can that be if even you do not know what that (those)decisions are? I am not going to debate you on this diversion from the topic under discussion.
As for Mr. Troll, unfortunately not everyone can afford health care, and more unfortunately, for the ones that can, we rank 37th in the world in overall satisfaction. And we spend way more for this dissatisfying outcome than the countries with good healthcare systems.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pmLiberal/progressive ideology is to care for the poor and sick and infirm among us. You clearly disagree that government, despite the preamble to the constitution, has any role to play.
The government, of by and for the people, is whatever we want it to be. Now, get the corporate greedy pigs in the insurance company off our backs. We do not need bureaucrats between doctors and patients.
Troll, you are just arguing for the sake of argument. You brought up that whole principle of subsidiarity, then disavowed its populist encyclical and moral/ethical imperatives. If you want to bring in the Catholic Church in support of your arguments, you cannot repudiate the teachings of Jesus in the same breath. (like taking care of those less fortunate)
It is inconsistent to argue positions of the church whilst denying for America the true underlying principles of Christianity.
He said blessed are the Peacemakers, not profit takers, and not war mongers.
I’m outta here.
I never said we have no obligation to care for the less fortunate I just think it should be done on a local or state level so to allow the citizens to have some control over its operation. That is consistent.
It is a big leap from taking care of the poor to universal Health care. That I am absolutely against on a nation level. However I may be open to state health care. The devil is in the details.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pmA little secret: there exists a lot of first rank Pharma corporations in countries with Universal Healthcare and, believe me, they make great benefits. You simply don’t (want to?) understand the concept of universal healthcare.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
There appear to be some grave misconceptions about how Universal Healthcare will play out, and be paid for, eh?
First and foremost, the massive bulk of the insurance industry will simply no longer exist. Period. That particular role will be assumed by the framework that is put into place in it’s stead. Some private insurers will still exist, providing the insurance for those who want to go all out with insurance for elective procedures and the like. This is a huge percentage of the money spent every year on healthcare in America.
Second, the removal of “for-profit” in Big Pharma and insurance companies alike doesn’t eliminate R&D costs. It simply eliminates the profits that must be made in order to pay out dividends to stockholders, the huge bonuses paid to CEOs, fleets of private limousines, fleets of private Lears, and other expenses normally reserved for “profit spending”. This is not to say that a pharma company cannot have cars or planes for its employees. It simply won’t have as nice a fleet of such vehicles. A huge amount of pharma research is done in the universities by advanced students as it is. All of those subsidies can be put back into the system, used to pay for our healthcare.
Finally, removing the “for-profit” motive from the healthcare business eliminates the fiduciary responsibility to continue to make profits. This means it will no longer be in a pharma company’s best interest to withhold a cure for a major disease. Currently, it is. If there were a cure for cancer, the multitude of drugs to stave of the cancer, the drugs to stave of the effects of chemotherapy, the drugs used to revitalize one’s appetite after such therapy, the drugs to stave off the side-effects of the other drugs used in the cancer therapy, and every other existing stream of revenue that Big Pharma receives in relationship to cancer treatment would dry up. No Big Pharma CEO that is doing his or her job correctly is meeting their fiduciary responsibility if they release a cure for a major disease that eliminates all that profit. Do you not see the conflict of interests presented to such a business? BY LAW, THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN PROFITS. RELEASING A CURE ELIMINATES PROFITS, SO BY LAW THEY CANNOT RELEASE CURES.
Get it through your thick skulls. Universal Health Care is good for everyone except those corporations profiting off of the misery and misfortune of others in the medical field. Profit + Healthcare = HOLDING BACK CURES, and NOT PAYING OUT CLAIMS FOR TREATMENT. In other words, Profit + Healthcare = EVIL.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:26 pmProfit + food= Evil
Profit + housing= Evil
How are these equations any different?
How about tens if not hundreds of thousands of average americans out of jobs= Evil
July 16th, 2007 at 7:06 pmWhy the hell isn’t Feingold running for president? He would have cleaned up in the debates. Hillary and Edwards would be begging him not to exclude the “2nd tier” candidates. Now all that’s left is Kucinich and Gravel, and that means just Kucinich.
I hope Dems are smart and vote for Kucinich and that Repubs are smart and vote for Paul.
That’s the best general election I could ever hope for.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:06 pmYeah you hope so TP.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:17 pmProfit + food= Evil
Profit + housing= Evil
How are these equations any different?
How about tens if not hundreds of thousands of average americans out of jobs= Evil
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
Which is precisely why a completely Capitalist society will never, ever work. I have no problem with thousands upon thousands of racketeers (insurance salesmen and executives) lose their jobs and are required to find legitimate work. I do have a problem with our factory jobs and the like being outsourced. Any corporation who uses outsourced work to eliminate those jobs in America should have their products taxed in such a manner that the cost of their product is the same as it would have been if American workers had manufactured them.
I do, in fact, think that Big Food + Profits = EVIL. Restaurants, grocers and the like? Oh, hell no. But if an entire industry (farming) REQUIRES government subsidies for their business to work AT ALL, it is in all likelihood a proper candidate for an industry that needs to be socialized.
We already have socialized housing for the poor. It has been working pretty shitty, since, you know, certain groups of people (who just so happen to be more likely to be abundant landowners) do everything they possibly can to make sure that funding to such…projects. Hell, anyone making minimum wage in this country cannot afford to pay for the cheapest housing possible anyhow.
Profit + Housing != Evil, however.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:35 pmAnd you call yourself “Moderation” why?
July 16th, 2007 at 8:34 pm“O. Bigfoot…
Looks like my comment is correct, otherwise, you wouldn’t object so strongly. Ha, gotcha with the truth. It is the “me†mentality that is quickly destroying our economy and our morality. It was never about “me†with Jesus. In fact, Jesus provided “free health care†to everyone that needed it. The “me†thinkers are selfish and are never truly happy. And they can never truly be followers of Jesus until they begin thinking about “we†instead of “meâ€.
Comment by Coffins draped with flags — July 16, 2007 @ 10:01 am”
Nope, your comment is a “load” because what is good for the individual IS good for the group. When one makes decisions with the individual in mind, rights are preserved. When one makes decisions based on the group mentality, someones rights get trampled.
The individual has a right to succeed or fail, the individual has the right to be happy or unhappy. The individual doesn’t much care about how his neighbor lives his personal life, as long as it doesn’t interfere with his.
It’s not the “me” mentality that is destroying our economy or out morality, it’s the folks who feel “it takes a village”.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:47 pm“Which is precisely why a completely Capitalist society will never, ever work. I have no problem with thousands upon thousands of racketeers (insurance salesmen and executives) lose their jobs and are required to find legitimate work. I do have a problem with our factory jobs and the like being outsourced. Any corporation who uses outsourced work to eliminate those jobs in America should have their products taxed in such a manner that the cost of their product is the same as it would have been if American workers had manufactured them.
I do, in fact, think that Big Food + Profits = EVIL. Restaurants, grocers and the like? Oh, hell no. But if an entire industry (farming) REQUIRES government subsidies for their business to work AT ALL, it is in all likelihood a proper candidate for an industry that needs to be socialized.
Comment by Moderation — July 16, 2007 @ 7:35 pm”
A completely capitalistic system is the only system that WILL ever work. It is only after government gets involved that things get screwed up. When government tampers with one area of the economy, they unwittingly throw the entire system out of balance.
Just as when government tampers with nature, they ALWAYS cause an imbalance and unintended consequences, which then requires what? More government intervention.
When government got on the slippery slope of regulating one market, thinking they were doing it for the public good, they started a chain reaction that can eventually, if unchecked, destroy our nation.
It is only socialism that will ALWAYS surely fail. In socialism, one will NEVER find a “benevolent dictator”.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:55 pmBravo Bigfoot!!!
Regarding the
Comment by Moderation — July 16, 2007 @ 7:35 pm
Evil Spaniard should have seen this then he’d now why we scream communism everytime the Universal health care is discussed.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:57 pmA supporting fact on the case(s)you cite re. Ginsburg would assist you in making your unsubstantiated point. Calling her a turd will not. However, the Clinton did it approach is juvenile, and assumes that I agree with the un-cited Ginsburg position. How can that be if even you do not know what that (those)decisions are? I am not going to debate you on this diversion from the topic under discussion.
Enjoy.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html
“That analysis should have controlled Bowers, and it controls here. Bowers was not correct when it was decided, is not correct today, and is hereby overruled”
July 16th, 2007 at 9:27 pmGet it through your thick skulls. Universal Health Care is good for everyone except those corporations profiting off of the misery and misfortune of others in the medical field. Profit + Healthcare = HOLDING BACK CURES, and NOT PAYING OUT CLAIMS FOR TREATMENT. In other words, Profit + Healthcare = EVIL.
You operate under the foolish assertion that Pharma is somehow obligated to provide cures.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:29 pm#201 You mean like how Brazil just decided to buy our AIDS drugs, which the US pharmaceuticals spent millions of dollars to develop?
Nope, they stole the formula!
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
You’re very dishonest, m12. You made the exact same claim 2 months ago, and I addressed the problem like this (sorry for pasting the whole post again):
When Brazil decides to steal Aids drugs through a compulsory license, how is that fair to Merck, and the $800 million they poured into drug development?
Comment by m12 — May 8, 2007 @ 2:26 pm
I think you mean this new:
http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ nm/ 20070504/ bs_nm/ merck_brazil_dc_4
But Brazil isn’t stealing the drug. It’s using the benefits of free market:
It was the first time Brazil bypassed a patent to acquire cheaper drugs for its AIDS prevention program, a step recently taken by Thailand. Other countries, including Canada and Italy, have also used a clause in World Trade Organization rules to flout drug patents in the name of public health.
FYI: Brazil has used a legal move in the rulings done by the WTO, you know, the organization created by the USA to watch for free trade fairness. So no ’stealing’ here.
Talks over the price of Merck’s drug, Efavirenz, broke off on Thursday when the health ministry rejected the New Jersey-based company’s offer to cut its $1.59 per pill price by 30 percent. Brazil wanted to pay what Merck charges Thailand, or $0.65 per pill.
Free market again. Brazil says: if you want our market, lower the price or you’re out.
“The compulsory licensing of Efavirenz is a legitimate and necessary measure to guarantee that all patients have access to the drug,†Lula’s office said in a statement.
And, it’s not simply a market question. Clearly, it’s a matter of fairness and public health. And, think of the MANY USA people who travel to Brazil to have sex and return to home infected. It’s WORLD PUBLIC HEALTH, selfish brat.
Representatives of some 200,000 AIDS patients who receive state-sponsored antiretroviral drugs applauded at a ceremony in Brazil’s presidential palace, but drugmakers reacted angrily.
Let’s do some math here: 200,000 AIDS patients only in Brazil, taking a .65$ pill every day = 130,000 $ per day; 130,000 $ per day * 30 days per month = 3,900,000 $ per month; 3,900,000 $ per month * 12 months per year = 46,300,000 $ = 5,78% of the invested 800,000,000 $ invested by Merck (your own number). Doesn’t look as a great ROI.
BUT, Brazil is only a country and the population of Brazil is ‘only’ of 186,112,794 persons. That means that is around a 3% of the population of the world, or that the population of the world is almost 33 times greater than the one of Brazil.
Let’s do some math then: assuming that the percentage of AIDS infected people in the world is the same than in Brazil (it’s not, there are places where is lower, the western countries more or less, and places where is high also, Africa, China or India, but also, Merck sells pills at a higher price in other countries), so Merck is earning around:
46,300,000 $ * 32 times the population of Brazil = 1,527,900,000 $ PER YEAR.
That is a 190.99% of ROI. Dang poor Merck executives.
And, remember, with the pill, the patients are supposed to live more than a year. Or, if not, really, what is selling Merck? Sugar cubes, seems, if people can have a life expectancy of more than a year.
Comment by Evil Spaniard — May 8, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
Therefore, no stealing, but a negotiation, where the Pharma industry keeps making millions. And a demonstration that development costs are payed the very first year. The rest is pure greed of the Pharma corporation, playing with the lives of people.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:23 amComment by Evil Spaniard — July 16, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
Evil
Here in the states the federal gov refers to the gov in DC.. That is why I avoid the “federalist†terminology it is too confusing.
I understand the concept “Federalism” and its differences with the “Federal” government, believe me. The “Federalism” concept isn’t exclusive from the USA and, in fact, it existed forever, though outside of America is known as “Nationalism”. The difference is that, in the USA, doesn’t exists a clear geographical separation between ethnics, or at least, not as defined and historical as is in Europe, Africa or Asia, simply because your country is a country of immigrants (and this isn’t an insult, simpy I’m stating a fact to make my explanation clearer). For references to what I’m speaking of, seek information sources about Irish, Armenian, or Flanders or Corsican autodetermination efforts. They want a “Federalist” government, because they think that they identity may be diluted if integrated in a greater country, without enough care for diversity.
I believe also that “local” government is good, but not to the extent the “Federalists” have in the USA, where you are eager to destroy working federal programs to redo them at a local level. That puts you in the hands of the Republicans that want to destroy the federal government and nothing else. And, reducing certain things to local level reduces its efficiency and increases the cost, and reduces your hability to influence the results locally because you increase the number of bureaucrats between you and the ones that have real power.
We would not have to change the laws, the laws already exist and have been ignored by the courts and elected officials. We need to elect leaders who understand that individual liberty has been diminished and is further threatened by the size and growth of the Federal government.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
The difference between you and me is that you are skeptic about federal politicians, and I’m skeptic about all politicians. I’m not as naïf, but defunding federal programs, specially the ones that help people, isn’t the answer to more freedom. And, increasing the number of politicians and bureaucrats at localest levels, neither. With every one of them, you’re increasing the odds of having a corrupt one.
Comment by funky p — July 16, 2007 @ 4:07 pm
Funky
I agree that corporations also have impinged on liberty but the solution is not to run from the hands of one abusive master to another.
I argue that both the democrat and republican leadership have sold out to their corporate masters and play US against each other while they all get rich.
If what you say is true (fascism) then to feed the gov is to feed the corporations which is foolish.
The only solution is to take away the profit motive, the only way we can do this is to take the money out of DC put it back into the hands of American citizens who can dole it out as they see fit rather than corrupt politicians. Then politicians in DC will be more willing to act against the large corporations and special interests and make laws which will benefit small business and the individual.
Comment by Troll — July 16, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
Start by helping the democrats in the ethics reforms, and fight for a profit-free campaigning. Now, the candidates are in the hands of the groups paying their bills. Abolish the “lobbyist donations” concept. Even the lobbyists. But cutting healhcare or student loands? This is far from your goals.
July 17th, 2007 at 7:55 amSorry Evil,
I am just an ordinary guy but the Govenor of my state knows me and my family. As a matter of fact the Democrat LT Gov. in neighboring Massachusetts and I are friends. Growing up I knew everyone of the city councilors personally and I lived in a fairly large city. The state rep was my best friends dad. I still know my state reps and they know me. I don’t know anyone in DC. when I write my Sen. they don’t even respond. Though I have met them through other contacts and have even campaigned for one. I am a nobody to them. And I am a nobody to the President. The bureaucrats on the state level answer to the elected officials and I have had great success in making them jump.
I think my experience is not that unusual. I may have more personal contact but most people I know are much more satisfied with their local and state Gov. than with the Fed.
As far as efficiency in concerned. Cost is not my first concern as a consumer, product and customer service are.
I am a skeptic about all politicians. But I know that if I dont like one on a state or local level my efforts can truly effect his/her reelection. I can also effect legislation on the state and local level.
Tranfering power from the Federal level to the State and Local level would not increase the number of elected officials.
The best way we can help people is to take the power away from DC we then empower the individual. Yes we should cut many Fed programs. Leave it up to the states to fund them and administer them. The only place that really could not survive this change would be DC itself due to the massive poverty there.
Finally, politicians (Democrat or Republican) and “ethics” are a contradiction in terms. The changes proposed address the symptoms not the disease. The politicians always find a way to make it lucrative and we are no better off than when we started.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:34 am