ThinkFast: August 21, 2007
ThinkFast: August 21, 2007
The Bush administration has promulgated new standards that make it much more difficult for states to extend health insurance coverage to children in middle-income families. “Continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program,” the administration is thwarting states’ attempts to expand SCHIP beyond the poverty level.
“U.S. military officials are narrowing the range of Iraq strategy options and appear to be focusing on reducing the U.S. combat role in 2008 while increasing training of Iraqi forces.”
Members of the National Guard are just as likely as active duty soldiers to develop post-traumatic stress after leaving Iraq. Guard members who have had “deployment-linked money trouble,” which affects approximately 26 percent of the soldiers, are six times more likely to have mental-health problems.
“Americans earned a smaller average income in 2005 than in 2000, the fifth consecutive year” that the average income was less than pre-Bush levels. Incomes have been on the rise since 2002, but “the growth in total incomes was concentrated among those making more than $1 million” while “more people were dividing up the national income pie.”
Vice President Cheney’s office responded separately from the White House to a Senate subpoena for documents on warrantless wiretapping. “[T]he response from the vice president was more surprising, because the White House was believed to have abandoned the argument that Cheney is a hybrid entity with both executive and legislative powers.”
Reflecting the priorities of the Democratic majority, Congress is moving to spend as much as $6.7 billion next year to combat global warming, an increase of nearly one-third from the current year.” New spending initiatives include efforts “to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and oil dependency” with new and expanded “federal research initiatives.”
One in five: Number of Medicare enrollees who “said they had put off or even skipped getting some medications because of the program’s high costs,” according to a new Health Affairs poll of more than 16,000 seniors.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner “held talks yesterday with Iraqi leaders in the first visit by a French minister to Baghdad since Paris’s opposition to the US-led invasion in 2003. … Kouchner said France was ‘ready to play a role in the fight against the violence,’ but did not explain how.”
And finally: Obama girl has upset Obama’s girls. The senator said that his six-year old daughter, Sasha, noticed news coverage of the online video that features a “scantily clad actress pledging her affection for the Democratic presidential candidate.” “Sasha asked Mommy about it,” Obama said Monday. “She said, ‘Daddy already has a wife’ or something like that.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I wonder how much money the health insurance industry is funnelling Bush’s way to ensure they will still be able to suck money out of the working poor?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:07 amBush takes a cue from Charles Dickens on health care for kids.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:17 amBush is an agent for the Democrats. Gotta be.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:20 amUnder the rules being floated by the Democratic Congress, people with an income level of $82,000/year will be able to get gubmint funded health insurance for children up to 25.
$82,000/year may be reasonable in NYC, but how is it reasonable in Podunk, Mississippi?
And how is it fair to classify a 25 year old as a child? If we classify a 25 year old as a child, should we then raise the legal drinking age to 26 since children should not be consuming alcoholic beverages?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:23 amThe Bush administration has promulgated new standards that make it much more difficult for states to extend health insurance coverage to children in middle-income families. “Continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program,†the administration is thwarting states’ attempts to expand SCHIP beyond the poverty level.
Until they give free health care to all, I agree do not give free health care to middle class families. I take a look at my neighbor, 4 kids, one more on the way, middle class, why should I pay for their child care when I have to pay for my own?
Now before I get slammed, I am extremely progressive, and there is a huge difference in my govt taking care of those who need help, versus those who will just benefit more.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:24 am“Continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program,†the administration is thwarting states’ attempts to expand SCHIP beyond the poverty level.”
I thought the Republican party was all about not meddling in the states rights. Why in gods name would Bush try to stop states from offering health insurance for children. That man truly is evil. May god have mercy on his soul.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:26 am#5 – should the fire department put out your house fire if you dont write them a check? how about the cops…. should you be required to cut them a check before they will stop that person from killing a family member?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:28 amVeritas,
a 25 year old is not a child, but when he/she is still in school/university, you are required to support him/her. So this age cutoff is still very sensible. And it is done exactly that way all over Europe. You know we do have health insurance. And before you say so: It’s not fascism, it’s security. Over here nobody goes without and Europe is still prosperous. Compare the $ to the €!
August 21st, 2007 at 9:29 am“Until they give free health care to all, I agree do not give free health care to middle class families. I take a look at my neighbor, 4 kids, one more on the way, middle class, why should I pay for their child care when I have to pay for my own?”
How progressive of you. Did you bother to read the article? It says:
“The poverty level for a family of four is set by the federal government at $20,650 in annual income.”
The problem is that this is a level applied to every state without regard to the cost of living in that state. Can you pay your bills and provide your children with health insurance on a salary of $20,650 a year for a family of four? Unless you live in the deep south, there is no way you can do it. What the states are trying to do is to make adjustments to meet what the “poverty level” would be in their particular state. In California, it would be at least twice the Federal standards, maybe three times the standards.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:32 amTP presumably means median income is on the decline, while average income is up (the rich getting richer faster than the rest of us are getting poorer).
“Average income” doesn’t mean the income of the “average” American – that’s (more or less) what Median income means.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:32 am25 is also generally the age that private insurance stops covering children, so it makes sense that a government program do the same.
I got my dental through my parents until 25, even though my medical I got through the university while in college and graduate school. So at 24 and 11 months, there was a bit of a rush to get those 4 impacted wisdom teeth removed…
August 21st, 2007 at 9:34 am“Under the rules being floated by the Democratic Congress, people with an income level of $82,000/year will be able to get gubmint funded health insurance for children up to 25.”
Excuse me, but where in this article does it say that the “Democratic Congress” is passing a bill that allows income levels of $82,000 a year. The article I read says:
“In New York, which covers children up to 250 percent of the poverty level, the Legislature has passed a bill that would raise the limit to 400 percent— $82,600 for a family of four — but the change is subject to federal approval.”
The “legislature” they are referring to here is the New York legislature, not Congress. All the states are doing is trying to adjust the Federal poverty figures to what the actual poverty figures are in the various states.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:36 amThe federal government should not be involved in setting a “poverty” level of $82,600 in ANY State.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:40 amI thought the Republican party was all about not meddling in the states rights. Why in gods name would Bush try to stop states from offering health insurance for children. That man truly is evil. May god have mercy on his soul.
Comment by bilbogaggins — August 21, 2007 @ 9:26 am
No, no, no — the Republican party is all about states rights unless the states are doing something that hurts GOP contributors. Why in the world would you make the health insurance lobby make 50 concentrated efforts to roll back government funded health care, when one stop in Washington can do it all?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:41 amMore on Congress’ SCHIP proposal to provide healthcare to uninsured children:
“Under the bipartisan Senate bill, Washington would spend about $56 billion over the next five years to cover almost half of the nation’s uninsured children. Over the same period, the Medicare entitlement that Bush signed (after more than four-fifths of House and Senate Republicans voted for it) will cost nearly $330 billion.
“Studies have found that three-fourths of children covered under the current program receive their care through private insurance plans that contract with the states. In that way, the program is no different than Bush’s prescription drug plan: The government pays for services delivered by private insurance companies.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brownstein1aug01,0,2458414.column?coll=la-opinion-columnists
August 21st, 2007 at 9:42 am“U.S. military officials are narrowing the range of Iraq strategy options and appear to be focusing on reducing the U.S. combat role in 2008 while increasing training of Iraqi forces.â€
Forward to the past! Surging backward.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:42 amStates can offer all the healthcare they want — just not using federal money.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:43 amMenehune:
Even Hillary Clinton has admitted the surge is working. Check on the top headline at Drudge Report.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:48 am“#The federal government should not be involved in setting a “poverty†level of $82,600 in ANY State.
Comment by Jake D.”
Hey Jake – I thought you party was all about State’s rights. What difference does it make to the Federal Government if a State chooses to provide health insurance to a child in a family with an income of $82,600 in New York? I guarantee you that if you were trying to raise a family of four in New York City on an income of $82,600, and you didn’t have health insurance through your employer, you would not be able to afford the $1,400+ a month it would cost you to buy private insurance for your family in order to insure your children.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:49 amOne in five: Number of Medicare enrollees who “said they had put off or even skipped getting some medications because of the program’s high costsâ€
One of the biggest problems encountered by people trying to pay for their medication is the high cost of the medication itself. Every time I see an ad for a prescription medication (and I see a lot of them just in a single night of television viewing), I realize how much advertising has raised the overhead for these drug companies. We don’t need the ads. We need less expensive medication.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:49 amThe first step is single-payer health care. Implement it by extending Medicare to everyone. Start by making all minors eligible. Next gradually reduce the age of eligibility in 5 year increments until all adults are covered. Go ahead and let the private insurers compete. This will prove to the free market ideologues that the private sector cannot compete in this industry.
Other developed nations spend half what we spend on health care, yet achieve better health outcomes across the board. What do they have in common? Single-payer insurance systems.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:49 amKouchner said France was ‘ready to play a role in the fight against the violence,’ but did not explain how.â€
Are they going to teach them the Art of Surrender?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:49 ammissmolly
I realize how much advertising has raised the overhead for these drug companies. We don’t need the ads. We need less expensive medication.
Why doesn’t anyone blame the pharmacies? Do any of you realize the insane amount of profit they make on some of the drugs the dispense?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:50 amAs I said, States can offer all the healthcare they want — that’s all about State’s Rights (even though I am registered Independent) — just not using federal money. The Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:52 amDo any of you realize the insame amount of profit PI attorneys make on some of the cases they take on contingency? Research and development, as well as FDA approval and lawsuits on the back end, make the pharmacuetical industry barely profitable.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:56 amTP presumably means median income is on the decline, while average income is up (the rich getting richer faster than the rest of us are getting poorer).
Comment by PeterW — August 21, 2007 @ 9:32 am
The NY Times article clearly states that it is average income. Amazing, isn’t it, that average income could be going down when the uber-rich have seen their income rocket? I, like you, would have thought that the average was going up and the median going down. But Bush has pulled off a real trifecta, driving income of the super-rich way up while driving down both average and median. The bottom 90% are really taking it on the chin under the worst president ever.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:56 amJake only cares about VA healthcare, oh wait, he only pretends to be a vet so he only cares about PVA (pretend Veteran’s Administration) healthcare.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:57 am“Even Hillary Clinton has admitted the surge is working. Check on the top headline at Drudge Report.
Comment by Jake D”
What she said was:
‘We’ve begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, it’s working,†[she said]… ‘We’re just years too late changing our tactics.”
There is a big difference between “the surge is working” and “in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, it’s working”.
Hillary is smart enough to recognize that securing one area in Iraq is not enough to solve the problems the Iraqi people and government is facting. So they throw a large contingent of troops in one area, and that area has less violence. The problem is the minute you leave that area, the violence will increase again. Unless we have enough military in Iraq to completely subjugate the population, which is impossible, the military is not the answer in Iraq.
The only thing that will solve the problems in Iraq is political reconciliation and that is not even on the radar today and is unlikely to happen as long as we are occupying their country. Once we leave, the Iraqi’s will be forced to decide for themselves what they want to do with their country.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:58 amI see Jake still claims to be an Independent, despite having a healthy dose of man-love for his CIC.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:58 amJake D.
Research and development, as well as FDA approval and lawsuits on the back end, make the pharmacuetical industry barely profitable.
Have you considered ‘Wrong’ before? Many business’s in the pharmacuetical industry have profit margins over 20%, over double what the evil oil industry makes.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:58 amI realize how much advertising has raised the overhead for these drug companies. We don’t need the ads. We need less expensive medication.
I work in a doctor’s office. If I added up all the money drug companies spend in this office on catered lunches, “educational” dinners at posh restaurants, golf outings with the doctors, the myriad pens and other crap with drug names on it, etc., then multiply that by every doctor’s office in the country…why, I bet you could fund a small war.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:59 am“One of the biggest problems encountered by people trying to pay for their medication is the high cost of the medication itself.”
The thing about this that is the most unfair is that if you pay for your medications out of pocket, they cost twice what the pharmacy charges the insurance company. And why is that? The people who can least afford the drugs pay the most. And this applies to the new “Medicate Part D”. Since the Republicans were able to get the bill passed with a provision that says that Medicare can’t negotiate for lower prices based on the volume, that means that the Medicare recipient is paying the full price for their drugs, the same as I paid when I was uninsured.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:04 amMarge, Squeege
10% of big pharma’s profit goes into Research & Development. 25-30% goes to advertising.
Just like tobacco, advertising drugs should be banned. My God, when anal leakage, seizures and possible death are side effects, do you feel safe taking some of these?
Nobody in a Vioxx suit has yet seen a dime from Merck. They spend more money ‘blowing their own horn’ about who they are than on R&D!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:04 amHealthcare for vets is definitely within the purview of the federal government — healthcare for children, not so much. Let me know if you don’t know the difference. As for the pharmacuetical industry AS A WHOLE (not just a couple superstar outliers), the profit margain is far lower than 20%. As for Hillary Clinton, fine, she has admitted that the surge is working in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, where everyone thought it was hopeless. Patience, my friends, patience.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:04 amThe founding fathers didn’t intend a lot of things that the BA is doing, including Faith Based Initiatives, the Unitary Executive, preemptive military actions, propping-up of the wealth holding class, Federal support of a bankrupt central banking system, ans secrecy in government.
What’s your point?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:05 amYou have no friends here.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:06 amJake D.
As for the pharmacuetical industry AS A WHOLE (not just a couple superstar outliers), the profit margain is far lower than 20%
Every industry has business that fail or barely scrape by, but nice try at a dodge.
In 2001, the ten American drug companies in the Fortune 500 list (not quite the same as the top ten worldwide, but their profit margins are much the same) ranked far above all other American industries in average net return, whether as a percentage of sales (18.5 percent), of assets (16.3 percent), or of shareholders’ equity (33.2 percent). These are astonishing margins. For comparison, the median net return for all other industries in the Fortune 500 was only 3.3 percent of sales.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:08 amThe Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.
Comment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007 @ 9:52 am
The Constitution disagrees with you.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:09 amI work in a doctor’s office. If I added up all the money drug companies spend in this office on catered lunches, “educational†dinners at posh restaurants, golf outings with the doctors, the myriad pens and other crap with drug names on it, etc., then multiply that by every doctor’s office in the country…why, I bet you could fund a small war.
Comment by Marge N. Overa — August 21, 2007 @ 9:59 am
——–
I am writing this while drinking out of my Ambien swag coffee mug. If that isn’t irony, I don’t know what is.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:09 amHave you considered ‘Wrong’ before? Many business’s in the pharmacuetical industry have profit margins over 20%, over double what the evil oil industry makes.
Comment by squegeeboo
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/business/24drugtax.html?ex=1342929600&en=4aa13731b1dd82fe&ei=5088&
August 21st, 2007 at 10:10 amTwo years ago, president and Congress justified one-time tax amnesty to create American jobs
Drug makers amnesty program, $100 billion in foreign profits, minimal taxes Companies did not create jobs in return. since 2005 the American drug industry laid tens of thousands of American workers.
Et tu, Marcus?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:10 am“The Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.
Comment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007″
that sounds right in line with your views on abstinence. ; )
August 21st, 2007 at 10:10 amapologist d0uche bag.
“she has admitted that the surge is working in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, where everyone thought it was hopeless. Patience, my friends, patience.”
So, Jakie, what is going to happen when we leave Al Anbar Province? Do you think that things will stay the same? It is hopeless in Iraq because there is no way we can ever have enough troops there to secure the country. And even if we did have enough troops to secure the country, that is obviously not going to solve their political mess. Without solving their political mess, things in Iraq are hopeless. And the political problems will not be solved until we get the hell out of the way and force the Iraqi’s to deal with governing their own country.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:13 amWe are still in Korea ; )
August 21st, 2007 at 10:14 amComment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007
You were there when the founding fathers were talking about healthcare?
How is it that we can spend trillions planes and on bombs, rebuilding Iraqs schools and hospitals?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:14 am“The Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.
Comment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007″
I don’t believe the Founding Fathers intended for the VP to be both in the Executive branch and the Legislative branch while simultaneously being in neither.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:14 amWe are still in Korea ; )
Comment by Jake D.
North Korea? So Km Jong Il built a nuke, under this admin. And now hes gettiing money and oil. Great.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:16 am“U.S. military officials are narrowing the range of Iraq strategy options and appear to be focusing on reducing the U.S. combat role in 2008 while increasing training of Iraqi forces
It’s called “being out of reinforcements”
August 21st, 2007 at 10:16 am“We are still in Korea ; )
Comment by Jake D. “
We are still in Korea at the invitation of the South Korean government. And, we DO NOT have over 160,000 troops in South Korea. We are also not occupying South Korea.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:16 amWOW Jake is 200 hundre years old!!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:17 amStates can offer all the healthcare they want — just not using federal money.
Comment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007 @ 9:43 am
And you claim to be a lawyer? You can’t even read, apparently. This is a federal program. Y’know, federal money?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:17 amDrugs for Jobs:
Look up “provide for the common defense”.
dim wit:
Good for you. The only CONSTITUTIONAL power they vested in the Office of Vice President, however, was as President of the SENATE (that’s in the Legislative branch BTW).
August 21st, 2007 at 10:18 amI don’t believe the Founding Fathers intended for the VP to be both in the Executive branch and the Legislative branch while simultaneously being in neither.
Comment by dim wit — August 21, 2007 @ 10:14 am
Cheney is trying to recreate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle – who would have guessed that Jefferson discovered it two centuries before Heisenberg?
Maybe, like Schrodinger’s Cat, someone needs to open the box ….
August 21st, 2007 at 10:20 am“Maybe, like Schrodinger’s Cat, someone needs to open the box ….
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — August 21, 2007″
a changing of the kitty litter would suffice.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:21 am10% of pharma’s resources are committed to R&D.
25-30% is used to advertise drugs or ‘blow their own horn’.
America needs to get insurance out of brokering healthcare.
America needs to ban drug advertising.
Profit margins for big pharma make the big oil look almost reasonable.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:22 amLook up “provide for the common defenseâ€.
Yeh, People. Defense. Go. Figger. Economic security is national security.
I’m sure the founding fathers didn’t visualize bailing out idiot financial investors either. But they do and did and will,
August 21st, 2007 at 10:24 amHey Jake – I thought you party was all about State’s rights. What difference does it make to the Federal Government if a State chooses to provide health insurance to a child in a family with an income of $82,600 in New York?
Why? Because they will ask for federal matching funds!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:25 amJake D,
“The Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.”
The Founders also never intended for us to do away with habeus corpus, the 4th amendment, or to torture people, or to uncover valuable intelligence officials for political gain. But that hasn’t stopped this current administration.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:26 amI’d be very interested in counting the number of appearances Cheney has actually made in the Senate over the past seven years.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:27 amAnybody know?
Jake D
“States can offer all the healthcare they want — just not using federal money.”
Federal government has the power to do the same thing. Medicare, the VA. Are you going to try to sell to our armed forces that they must pay for their own health care? You don’t think we owe them at least that?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:28 amAmerica needs to ban drug advertising.
Profit margins for big pharma make the big oil look almost reasonable.
Buhbye first amendment! Oh, pharma profit margins are on par or lower than software, silicon, and banking.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:28 amThe Founding Fathers also never approved of a standing army.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:28 amI wonder how many members of the Bush clan buy their own health insurance? Hey, if Texas wants to insure them…well, perhaps they can find a nice HMO.
Promote the General Welfare, Jake.
My wife is a public health nurse. SCHIP works, it keeps kids out of emergency rooms, saves money and keeps kids healthier.
Problem is the managed care industry doesn’t like it. The Republicans are depending on this special interest to fund the next Republican presidential campaign to stop Hillary Healthcare. Its not about founding fathers, it’s about sugar daddies.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:29 amThe Bush administration has promulgated new standards that make it much more difficult for states to extend health insurance coverage to children in middle-income families. “Continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program,†the administration is thwarting states’ attempts to expand SCHIP beyond the poverty level.
This is one more example of the Bush administration’s goal of destroying the middle class in the U.S. By so doing, a permanent underclass can be created and wealth continually transferred to the so-called “plutocrats.” Do you honestly think the subprime loan crash and subsequent affect on the U.S. economy was a mistake? Remember “the ownership society” Bush spoke about?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:29 amBuhbye first amendment! Oh, pharma profit margins are on par or lower than software, silicon, and banking.
Comment by m12
Its around 14.3 percent. But I dont think that includes the 100 billion min tax amnesty mentioned above.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:31 amOne of the biggest problems encountered by people trying to pay for their medication is the high cost of the medication itself. Every time I see an ad for a prescription medication
Hmm? America has some of the cheapest generic medications in the world.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:32 amThe number of years I worked in the medical field showed me how much money is available in big pharma – the most outrageous to me is the daily advertising for prescription drugs to the general public.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:33 amThere is huge waste, huge expenditures in advertising and decreasing investment in research. Medicare forbids price negotiations on prescriptions, the government prohibits buying drugs outside of our borders – we are captive to the lobbyists who purchase their influence with our representatives.
Hmm? America has some of the cheapest generic medications in the world.
Alot of times you cant swap for generics. Olus there is this card up the sleeve:
August 21st, 2007 at 10:36 amAmgen, the American biotechnology giant, which reported last year that 80 percent of its $14.3 billion in sales occurred in this country, paid about 22 percent in United States federal tax on its $4 billion in profits.
The discrepancy was possible because Amgen claimed a profit margin of almost 100 percent on its foreign sales, but only 15 percent on its American sales.
Thank you, Think Progress! By highlighting the Bush administrations’ “new standards that make it much more difficult for states to extend health insurance coverage to children in middle-income families. “Continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program,†the administration is thwarting states’ attempts to expand SCHIP beyond the poverty level,” you DEMONSTRATE the craven power grab of the Left. The agenda of the Left is not about “helping those who need it” – it is about expanding the Nanny State……Hillary (or Obama….or Edwards) for Nanny- -in-Chief!!!!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:36 amIts around 14.3 percent. But I dont think that includes the 100 billion min tax amnesty mentioned above.
That tax amnesty was bipartisan…as it was necessary for the government to get a single cent.
This is what happens when US taxes grow out of control.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:39 amtest
August 21st, 2007 at 10:40 amm12
Hmm? America has some of the cheapest generic medications in the world.
That are often marked up 300% or more by pharmacies.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:41 amit is about expanding the Nanny State……
Comment by valiant venus
So what do you think of your GOP Nanny state of Iraq?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:42 amM12,
You are still supporting the borrow and spend policies of the Republican party huh?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:42 amDrugs for Jobs? Hah
Alot of times you cant swap for generics
In NYS unless the doctor rights DAW (Dispense as Written) on the prescription pharmacies are required to dispense a generic alternative if there is one available.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:42 ammy posts are not getting through
August 21st, 2007 at 10:42 amTobey Tall
Your probably triggering a filter, stop trying to rewrite your one comment that is getting caught and move on.
Or at least thats what happens to me.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:43 amThis is what happens when US taxes grow out of control.
Comment by m12
I didn’t say it was partisan. You also didn’t read the link I posted
August 21st, 2007 at 10:43 amsquegeeboo
In NYS unless the doctor rights DAW
Gah, ‘writes’, not ‘rights’.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:44 amFYI – Larry Korb and Michael O’Hanlon are debating Iraq on the Diane Rehm Show right now. Great show! http://www.wamu.org
August 21st, 2007 at 10:44 amHey did you know V V that Ishtar is another name for Venus? So is Inanna. In Sumerian that would be INANNA for Venus.
As in the INANNA state of Iraq!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:46 amThat are often marked up 300% or more by pharmacies.
Comment by squegeeboo — August 21, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Hmm? You think those $4 generics have a 300% overhead? What exactly are you referring to?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:47 amCheck on the top headline at Drudge Report.
Comment by Jake D. — August 21, 2007 @ 9:48 am
Since when has Drudge counted as a valid media source?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:48 amI didn’t say it was partisan. You also didn’t read the link I posted
Comment by Drugs for Jobs? Hah — August 21, 2007 @ 10:43 am
No, I did read the link. You seem to be operating under the assertion that there is a problem here.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:48 amHmm? America has some of the cheapest generic medications in the world.
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 10:32 am
You’re half right. We do have some of the cheapest generics, but the problem is drug companies, who lose their patents, come up with absurd lawsuits or ideas to stop the production of a generic equivilent.
Example:
Prilosec lost it’s patent a couple of years ago. Astra Zeneca fought tought and nail to extend the patent. Then, in a stroke of pure genius, they added a small, insignificant bonding that did not increase or decrease the effectiveness of the drug, presented to the FDA of a “new” drug for reflux, and spent millions of millions of dollars on advertisement. Perhaps you’ve heard of “the little purple pill”, Nexium.
A drug that costs in excess of $147 for #30, which does the exact same thing as generic Prilosec, or even Prilosec OTC which costs $28.
If drug companies would spend more time and money on research instead of advertisement, we probably wouldn’t have these ridiculous prices. Remember that the next time you see a Cialis or Lunesta commercial!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:49 amm12
Hmm? You think those $4 generics have a 300% overhead? What exactly are you referring to?
My experience from working in a pharmacy.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:50 amHey did you know V V that Ishtar is another name for Venus? So is Inanna. In Sumerian that would be INANNA for Venus.
As in the INANNA state of Iraq!
Comment by Drugs for Jobs? Hah — August 21, 2007 @ 10:46 am
In Arabic it’s the verb “to buy.”
August 21st, 2007 at 10:52 amOr V V we could just call you I V for Innana Valiant
Now we just need another name for Venus. Like the word Hesperos [Greek]. Great. Now we can call V V —
Hesperos Inanna Valiant
aka H.I.V.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:53 amMweh.
That are often marked up 300% or more by pharmacies.
Comment by squegeeboo — August 21, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Well, insurances dictate what they will pay for drugs. Doesn’t matter what the mark up price is, it’s a set rate contracted.
Example: med A costs $5 with a AWP (average wholesale price) of $10. No matter what the pharmacy’s price is (say $25), most insurances will reimburse AWP-40% +$1.25, which is to say the pharmacy will only gross $2.25.
By the way, it was usually the chains that were marking the drug prices up so high
August 21st, 2007 at 10:55 amNo, I did read the link. You seem to be operating under the assertion that there is a problem here.
Yes the way they figure foreign profits vs American ones.
Slicky slicky!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:56 amHmm? America has some of the cheapest generic medications in the world.
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 10:32 am
How many lies are you going to pull out of your ass today? You have several going right now. US taxes are so out of control that the rich are taxed at the lowest rate IN THE WORLD, and the lowest rate in modern history. Their taxes should be at 90%, and no child or senior in this country should starve. But that would mean that the right would have to have a shred of decency and humanity, and they don’t. They sold it all for profits and power, because of the lack in their souls. The right is populated by people of the lowest character and morals. the right will lose its power very soon, and will have to start paying their fair share, or find somewhere else to live.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:56 amIn Arabic it’s the verb “to buy.â€
¶¶ Trailer for sale or rent ¶¶
August 21st, 2007 at 10:58 am¶¶ room to let for fifty cents ¶¶
m12 and squegeeboo, being that pharmacy is my profession, and I deal with the subject every day, I’d love to respond to your posts. Unfortunately, the TP filter monster doesn’t want me to.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:58 amAnother time, p’haps?
How many lies are you going to pull out of your ass today? -RJ
Thats a fairly infinite abyss type thing there ronjazz.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:59 amI guess I’ll have to slap you down like Bill Crystal slapped down Juan Williams on FNS this weekend. It called a troop SURGE, because the increased levels of troops is intended to be TEMPORARY, so OF COURSE our military leaders are planning a troop draw down in the coming months.
To bad you libs missed the boat and didn’t support our military’s success.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:00 amTo bad you libs missed the boat and didn’t support our military’s success.
Comment by Jason Misogynist Hendler — August 21, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Too bad your 40 year old virgin-self missed the boat and didn’t support or help a fallen hero’s family near you!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:02 amIs Bill Clinton going to take responsibility for all the home foreclosures that are occurring as the result of him pushing lenders to expand home ownership through higher risk mortgages? He certainly wanted to take credit for more minorities owning homes than ever before, so he is equally responsible when they lose their homes.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:02 amHow many lies are you going to pull out of your ass today? You have several going right now. US taxes are so out of control that the rich are taxed at the lowest rate IN THE WORLD, and the lowest rate in modern history. Their taxes should be at 90%, and no child or senior in this country should starve.
What nonsense is this? The 35% personal/corporate tax rate is higher than most developed countries. Hong Kong, for example, has a 17.5% corporate tax rate and is thriving.
Your rhetoric would send everyone in the nation into starvation.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:03 amTo bad you libs missed the boat and didn’t support our military’s success -JMH
Wrong-o-Jacko! I supported securing Iraq for one reason. The pottery barn rule. Nice Try. As Rove would say.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:04 amTo bad you libs missed the boat and didn’t support our military’s success.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — August 21, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Too bad you brainless traitors missed the boat and didn’t follow the Constitution or international law. Our military has lost already, three wars and counting, under the Deserter-In-Chief and Defibrillator Dick, with 5 deferments. we’ll be losing soldiers over there as long as we are there, or we’ll be driven out, which is only right, since the invasion was nothing but bullying mass murder by a group of psychopaths. Bush and Cheney are Al Qaeda’s biggest and best supporters. I hope they hang. As for you, you’re just stupid and antiAmerican, typical repig mindless rovot.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:04 amDrugs for Jobs? Hah
The pottery barn rule. Nice Try. As Rove would say.
Your hoping the pottery barn will open factories there?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:05 amtest. duplicate comment that does not SHOW
August 21st, 2007 at 11:06 amtesting again
August 21st, 2007 at 11:07 amthis is balls. some posts dont egt through ……….
August 21st, 2007 at 11:07 amRonJazzzz – If you ever glean a pot to pee in and the proverbial window, you might find that MOST people are unwilling to work hard if the government is going to come along and confiscate 90%. What a pitiful little person you must be to think other people’s efforts and results belong to you, either to use personally or re-distribute …..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:08 amWhat nonsense is this? The 35% personal/corporate tax rate is higher than most developed countries. Hong Kong, for example, has a 17.5% corporate tax rate and is thriving.
Your rhetoric would send everyone in the nation into starvation.
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 11:03 am
More outright lies, and this nation has already been sent tumbling into starvation, not to mention the infrastucture killing people. You can quote all the bullshit percentages you want, the fact is that nobody in the top 2% pays those percentages, they exist just to keep idiots like you quiet. Your gullibility enables the plutocrats to take America’s assets overseas, to ship all the good jobs to India and China, while our children get lead poisoning and our pets die from lack of oversight of imports. Empty rhetoric from your empty head, as usual. What an idiot you are, what a shameful, antiAmerican fool.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:09 amYour hoping the pottery barn will open factories there?
Comment by squegeeboo
No, No, Its a reference to Colin Powells you break it you buy it when speaking of Iraqs 27 million people.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:10 amJason – “Personal responsibility” is THE CURSE word of the Left…..they like the Nanny and her State wiping their runny noses…
August 21st, 2007 at 11:10 amDrugs for Jobs? Hah
No, No, Its a reference to Colin Powells you break it you buy it when speaking of Iraqs 27 million people.
Oh, darn. I was hoping that lamp I like would be dropping in price soon due to cheap foreign labor.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:12 amWhat a pitiful little person you must be to think other people’s efforts and results belong to you, either to use personally or re-distribute …..
Comment by valiant the anorexic aphroditius venus — August 21, 2007 @ 11:08 am
What a pitiful little person you must be to pretend to be married and have children (one deceased), while in reality your meth habit has left you skinnier than Olive Oil.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:12 amGood show MA. I show your pic to my oldest daughter as a warning of the dangers of drug use.
Thank you
I bet Bush gets along great with kids, especially since he has the mind of one.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:14 ammight find that MOST people are unwilling to work hard if the government is going to come along and confiscate 90%. What a pitiful little person you must be to think other people’s efforts and results belong to you, either to use personally or re-distribute …..
Comment by valiant venus — August 21, 2007 @ 11:08 am
As usual, your thorough ignorance of history marks you as a gullible tool for the corporate thieves and rapists of the planet to continue destroying the environment and the rule of law. I agree that the current rightwing ethos of greed and profit over the good of the citizenry would be difficult to overturn, but that is only since America was sold out by the charlatans and traitors that you worship. Get off your knees and take the corporate dick out of your mouth and learn to think instead of puking out talking points.
Fat chance, I know. You’re lost.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:14 amRonJazzzzz bemoans “sent tumbling into starvation”?? Where do you live?
I propose a compromise…..since so many of our nations’ workers accept drug testing as a condition of employment (which “allows” them to earn the money that the government taxes to give to others), why don’t we drug test entitlement program recipients?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:15 amHey M.A. or V.V.
weren’t you the one making fun of JMH’s picture on YouTube, when you thought it was VVGFU?
Well JMH is here.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:15 amCare to apologize, or would that not be categorized as “personal responsiblity” per your definition?
Looks like the libs are upset that Hill’reh has triangulated again, and driven Obama’s numbers into the dirt – enjoy voting for Bush-Cheney lite next year.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amwhy don’t we drug test entitlement program recipients?
Comment by valiant venus — August 21, 2007 @ 11:15 am
Start with the administration. They are entitlement program abusers of the first order. Good luck with that.
Why does wingnuttia send all the morons to TP to try to sell their antiAmerican bull?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amMore outright lies, and this nation has already been sent tumbling into starvation, not to mention the infrastucture killing people. You can quote all the bullshit percentages you want, the fact is that nobody in the top 2% pays those percentages, they exist just to keep idiots like you quiet.
First you claim that you want a 90% marginal tax rate, then you claim nobody pays all the bullshit percentages we currently have! Brilliant!
Surely John Kerry and John Edwards at least pay this bullshit percentage? Nope?
It’s your kind with their stupidity who are killing our competitive advantage and sending our jobs away.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:18 amRonJazzzzzzz- If you would put down your well-worn copy of “People’s History of the US” by celebrated anti-American, Howard Zinn, you might be able to address my point that hard working people are not willing to work their a$$e$ off to give 9 out of 10 dollars earned to the government. (Pssst….that’s not “greed” – what you are proposing is totalitarianism…….why am I not surprised??)
But please allow me congratulate you….you have the “I am a VICTIM” role down pat....
August 21st, 2007 at 11:20 amronjazz
As usual, your thorough ignorance of history marks you as a gullible tool for the corporate thieves and rapists of the planet to continue destroying the environment and the rule of law.
JFK cut individual taxes because they were at 91% (well technically Johnson signed the bill, but it was JFK’s proposal)
August 21st, 2007 at 11:20 amDRxJ,
Provide link to video, and I will confirm whether it is me or not.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:21 amRonJazzzz notes, “Start with the administration. They are entitlement program abusers of the first order.” A “Come to Jesus” moment….government officials should be drug tested….along with other “entitlement” program recipients.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:23 am“Until they give free health care to all, I agree do not give free health care to middle class families. I take a look at my neighbor, 4 kids, one more on the way, middle class, why should I pay for their child care when I have to pay for my own?
Now before I get slammed, I am extremely progressive, and there is a huge difference in my govt taking care of those who need help, versus those who will just benefit more.”
In some ways I agree with you. I have always found it crazy how you need a permit to fish, show a reasonable plan for a business loan, pass a test to drive etc, but any 2 people can get together and have a child. Like it or not the fact is some poeple should not have children for all kinds of reasons yet they do and society has to deal with the burden of this.
Before any of you flame me on this I ask you to take a day and go visit a State Foster Care facility, go to your nearest CPS office and talk to case workers, hear what is happening to these kids before you write one comment about my post. I grew up in that system and can tell you for serveral years all I was to the foster parents I lived with was a monthly check and the object of a regular midnight visit. For me things turned out alright because of talking to peoplpe and self motivation but for others that is not the case and they will never escape their nightmare. It takes ALOT to be a parent and ALOT of people are not qualified.
Poster #7 think before you post…. those are isolated incidents that will never happen to a good portion of the population and those situations do not last for years. Plus there are laws that if you do something stupid you have to pay the state for their help, like if you drive in a wash that is flooded and marked closed or go to areas that are out of bounds and need rescue like skiers or mountain climbers do.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:23 amJFK cut individual taxes because they were at 91% (well technically Johnson signed the bill, but it was JFK’s proposal)
Comment by squegeeboo — August 21, 2007 @ 11:20 am
yeah, and that’s too bad. America grew strong and became the leader of the world under the 91% tax rate, but the greedmongers would rather have 10 vacation homes than a strong America. that’s why we’re losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and why there are so few good jobs left here. they care not about America, only their own pockets.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:24 amforgive the spelling….
August 21st, 2007 at 11:24 amMichelle Obama on Hillary Clinton: She travels with her husband in part “to model what it means to have family values,” adding “if you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House.”
Zinger!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:26 amBut please allow me congratulate you….you have the “I am a VICTIM†role down pat…. Comment by valiant venus
Tell me about the PTT and how it bails out the irresponsible snotty nose market practices V V
August 21st, 2007 at 11:27 amyeah, and that’s too bad. America grew strong and became the leader of the world under the 91% tax rate, but the greedmongers would rather have 10 vacation homes than a strong America. that’s why we’re losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and why there are so few good jobs left here. they care not about America, only their own pockets.
Comment by ronjazz — August 21, 2007 @ 11:24 am
Shh! Nobody tell ronjazz that growth in the 60s and 80s far ourdid that in the 50s with his confiscatory rates…..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:27 amm-12 – As you well know, with the hypocritical likes of top Dems (ie.)John Kerry, Al Gore, Hillary etc….their intentions…not their actions are important. I knew they were sneering hypocritical elitists when the lot of them consume more energy than anyone else, donate used underwear and have few itemized charitable deductions on their income tax forms……..But they sound like they will solve the problems of the “masses” so Progs love them…….
August 21st, 2007 at 11:27 amShh! Nobody tell ronjazz that growth in the 60s and 80s far ourdid that in the 50s with his confiscatory rates…..
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 11:27 am
wrong again. you’re stuill buying into the Wall St. propoganda that the rich getting richer is good for the whole country. that is not the case.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:29 amRonJazzzz – I hate to break it to you, but it “ain’t your $$$”. You’re what I call one ENVIOUS, pitiful guy…..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:29 am“if you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House.â€
If you can’t keep your underage kids from getting drunk at Chi Chi’s, you cant run the White House!
>>
August 21st, 2007 at 11:30 amDRxJ or Valient,
Please post link to alleged video of me, and I will confirm whether or not it is me.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:30 amRonJazzzz – I hate to break it to you, but it “ain’t your $$$â€. You’re what I call one ENVIOUS, pitiful guy…..
Comment by valiant venus — August 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am
don’t you get tired of being wrong, and appearing stupid, venal and greedy? Obviously not. Go back to the jungle you so clearly want to live in.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:31 amRonJazzzz – I hate to break it to you, but it “ain’t your $$$â€. You’re what I call one ENVIOUS, pitiful guy…..
Comment by valiant venus
It think the trolls are Hilarious, they act like they are in the 1% club. What about the stock market bailout? Eh?
YOUR MONEY!!!!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:32 amThe only thing Bush runs is away. He shamed the USA on 9/11, and has been shaming us ever since. What a sissy coward, like his followers, all 23% of them.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:32 amIf you can’t keep your underage kids from getting drunk at Chi Chi’s, you cant run the White House!
>>
Comment by Drugs for Jobs? Hah — August 21, 2007 @ 11:30 am
Good thing those kids aren’t running for President, eh?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:33 amwrong again. you’re stuill buying into the Wall St. propoganda that the rich getting richer is good for the whole country. that is not the case.
Comment by ronjazz — August 21, 2007 @ 11:29 am
Right again, actually. You still buy into the false truth that you possess a shred of intelligence!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:33 amGood thing those kids aren’t running for President, eh?
Comment by m12
Neither is Bill!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amIt think the trolls are Hilarious, they act like they are in the 1% club. What about the stock market bailout? Eh?
YOUR MONEY!!!!
Whose money do you think is dumped into Medicare?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:35 amNeither is Bill!
Comment by Drugs for Jobs? Hah — August 21, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Bill ran his own house, like a brothel, I might add. It’s Hillary who couldn’t perform her marital duties…..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:36 amRight again, actually. You still buy into the false truth that you possess a shred of intelligence!
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 11:33 am
well, as long as you know how stupid you are, everything’s fine. who feeds you? it must be an awful job.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:36 amOh well, would liked to have seen it, but no matter, I can feast on liberal netrooters frustration that they fight the fights, but the Clintonistas reap the reward, giving Republicans most of the policy agenda wins they desired to begin with.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:37 amWhose money do you think is dumped into Medicare?
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 11:35 am
see, this is the brilliance of the rightwing lizard brain. bailing out the ultra-rich from there poor choices is exactly like saving the lives of children and the elderly. perfect little Nazi pig you are, m12.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:38 am#125 – The Fed moves money into and out of the market all the time….do your homework…. Now if greeedy leftards didn’t want to expand homeownership to people with crappy credit…..
m12 – Poor Ron….he really should be pitied, you know…..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:39 amgiving Republicans most of the policy agenda wins they desired to begin with.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — August 21, 2007 @ 11:37 am
again with the “wins”, while America loses. why are Republicans at war with their own country? is it for the same reason that the Bush family funded Hitler, or holds hands with Saudi terrorists?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:40 amJason – Not to be rude….but who cares what pic they post?? They did the same thing to me…..it was much easier NOT address their lunacy considering the venomous sources. Psssst……have you EVER seen a more vile or hateful bunch than angry Leftards??? Keep your fingers away from their cage.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:43 amIf SCHIP is only available to families at the poverty level, I think our government funded health care for Congress should be reduced to those senators and representatives who live below the poverty level.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:44 am3 RATwing trolls, sucking each other off.
yes, you three losers talk to each other. reinforce your treason and hatred, it’s what you do best. wear your ignorance and fear with pride, among the rest of the 23% of knuckle-dragging America-hating rightist trash. North Korea would welcome you with open arms, and you’d fit right in.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:45 amPsssst……have you EVER seen a more vile or hateful bunch than angry Leftards??? Keep your fingers away from their cage.
Comment by valiant venus — August 21, 2007 @ 11:43 am
Riiiight, because you’re all sweetness and light. When did they let you out of rehab, anyway?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:46 amBill ran his own house, like a brothel, I might add. It’s Hillary who couldn’t perform her marital duties…..
Comment by m12
I would say that was Newt, at the same time, I might add. Seems none of his ex wives could perform their dutiesssssss
August 21st, 2007 at 11:47 am“The Founding Fathers never intended for a FEDERAL government that would provide healthcare insurance for children.”
Well, of course, not silly, they didn’t have health insurance in 1700s – you just died. Times change, Jake. The Founding Fathers never intended that a FEDERAL government would be able to spy on its citizens by telephone or computer. Things change as society advances.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:47 am#136, valiant,
Trust me, I am merely curious if it is truly a pic of me or not. I am certain there is plenty more dirt out there on me to be had, than any pic or video fit for YouTube.
Moreover, libs have never needed dirt to tear someone down in the eyes of someone’s peers, they merely have to call someone mean or typical man, etc., and most on the right will cower in fear. Clinton can sexually assault women at will, and his own wife will support that, but Reps won’t support their own, even when they are right.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:49 amPsssst……have you EVER seen a more vile or hateful bunch than angry Leftards??? Keep your fingers away from their cage.
Comment by valiant venus
Naw, Im laughing at your slovenly parrot pundit attempts to make people angry with regurgitated words, whats even funnier is your projection of an opinion that you think is actually true!!!
Thats kinda looney you gotta admit. What are you gonna call us next, Moonbats? LOL.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:51 amGummmmy-
“Riiiight, because you’re all sweetness and light.” How’d you know??? **I’m blushing!**
I guess you could call vacation time “restorative”….I think your crowd refers to it as “rehab”…..
August 21st, 2007 at 11:52 amMoreover, libs have never needed dirt to tear someone down in the eyes of someone’s peers
Like V V trys to do with her words? She was tearing you down for your looks Jason! Remember V V just likes to argue for the hell of it, shes enjoying her Neo-kook looney cage rants!!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:54 am#143 -”What are you gonna call us next, Moonbats? ”
Why insult bats? They do a wonderful job for the ecosystem….unlike Leftards….
August 21st, 2007 at 11:54 amI guess you could call vacation time “restorativeâ€â€¦.I think your crowd refers to it as “rehabâ€â€¦.. Comment by valiant venus
Like the one your crowd manboob Rush went too?
Or was that the Viagra Commie Cuba trip?
Bwah!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:55 am#145, Drugs,
I am not even certain that the image was of me, so why would I care about what she says?
I happen to know that I am a very good looking man, so sticks and stones ….
August 21st, 2007 at 11:56 amThere’s a special going on at Wal-Mart, exclusively for our Trolls. They can buy pre-stained briefs and undies, mostly white with a large brown streak in the middle. Just need to show the cashier your latest troll post, and you too, qualify for the pre-shit-stained underwear. Don’t leave home without them!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:57 amI would say that was Newt, at the same time, I might add. Seems none of his ex wives could perform their dutiesssssss
Comment by Drugs for Jobs? Hah — August 21, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Nope, he said that himself, when he mentinoed how his first wife was too ugly to be the first lady.
At least those wives have the sense not to run for the oval office!
August 21st, 2007 at 11:58 amThey do a wonderful job for the ecosystem….unlike Leftards
Ahh yes, the ecosystem, Conpervatives don’t help that a bit, they help out the Yech-o-system like old Bob Allen down at the public restroom peering over the wall with a 20 dollar bill in his sweaty little hand!!
August 21st, 2007 at 12:01 pmAt least those wives have the sense not to run for the oval office!
Comment by m12
Whaddya mean, they are carrying oval offices!!
August 21st, 2007 at 12:02 pmI am not even certain that the image was of me, so why would I care about what she says?
Helloooo!! I don’t!!
August 21st, 2007 at 12:04 pmThere’s a special going on at Wal-Mart, exclusively for our Trolls.
-ronjazz
They got adult baby diapers in stock with the Vitter logo!!
The Conpervatives are gonna circle the block for them bad-boys!!
August 21st, 2007 at 12:08 pmI enjoy listening to Newt Gingrich speak extemporaneously about current events and history….That said…..I would NEVER support him…..his personal moral compass is so screwed up, he thinks the “N” on the dial stands for “NEWT”.
August 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pmDemocratic presidents run better national economies than Republican presidents.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081707N.shtml
http://www.forbes.com/ home/ commerce/ 2004/ 07/ 20/ cx_da_0720presidents.html
August 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pmGlobal Warming… with new and expanded “federal research initiatives.â€
Yes, global warming is big business. Lots of people getting rich off the fear and hype.
Over $50 billion spent (so far) on the Global Warming con job. And growing.
LMAO.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:56 pmDo you even bother to cross-check the drivel you try to pass as fact?
Sure household income went down, yet per-capita GDP went up while the average family size went down. In other words, if my daughter moved out and got a base-pay job, my family income went up while her lower pay contributed to dropping the lower overall household income.
Concentrate on the entire wealth level spread across everyone, that number went up.
Just spin from people who are obviously willing to believe anything.
August 21st, 2007 at 2:34 pmIt is hard to imagine that Bush might reduce the troop presence in Iraq. It would mean admitting the surge has failed. He went ahead with the surge even though the Joint Chiefs of Staff didn’t support it. Petraeus has indicated that troops would stay in Iraq for the next decade. Withdrawing some troops won’t work. All troops must be brought home not just some.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:44 amCheney must be getting desperate to make such a weak argument. It won’t stand up in court or with Congress. He is not a member of the executive branch. He can’t ask for funding for his office under the executive branch and then not abide by executive orders regarding classification and declassification of documents. He is not above the law.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:48 amCongress must spend more money and do everything it can to fight global warming. If Bush wants to pick a fight with Congress over reality and the facts about global warming he will only lose this fight. His argument is based on fiction produced by the AEI and oil companies.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:51 am