Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
In recent days, heated policy discussions in Washington have largely focused on two topics: a possible escalation of the war in Afghanistan and health care legislation. Both a troop escalation and health care legislation carry significant price tags: roughly $100 billion and $80-$100 billion a year respectively. (It should be noted that health care reform, unlike a troop surge, would cut the deficit.)
In his New York Times column today, columnist Nicholas Kristof asks why hawks claim health reform is “fiscally irresponsible” while enthusiastically supporting a troop surge in Afghanistan, given the fact that fixing our broken health care system is, unlike a troop surge, essential to the health and well-being of Americans:
The health care legislation pays for itself, according to the Congressional Budget Office, while the deployment in Afghanistan is unfinanced and will raise our budget deficits and undermine our long-term economic security.
So doesn’t it seem odd to hear hawks say that health reform is fiscally irresponsible, while in the next breath they cheer a larger deployment of troops in Afghanistan?
Meanwhile, lack of health insurance kills about 45,000 Americans a year, according to a Harvard study released in September. So which is the greater danger to our homeland security, the Taliban or our dysfunctional insurance system?
Indeed, hawkish legislators have lined up to both demand a costly surge in U.S. troops in Afghanistan while at the same time claiming that deficit-cutting health care legislation would simply be too expensive:
– Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has called for providing the “resources [needed]” for a “significant increase in U.S. forces” while warning that he is “really worried about what [health care reform] would do to the deficit.” [9/13/09, 10/26/09]
– Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has complained that passing health care legislation would “expand government spending even more,” while also boasting of his Republican caucus’s “broad support” for any troop increase in Afghanistan. [10/21/09, 10/11/09]
– Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) wrote a letter to President Obama stating that we “urgently need more resources” in Afghanistan, “including more combat troops,” while at the same time claiming that passing health care legislation would be tantamount to “generational theft” that would run up “unconscionable and unsustainable deficits.” [11/10/09, 8/27/09]
Kristof’s question bears answering. Why is it that hawkish lawmakers are so willing to spend such enormous resources in both lives and treasure on a troop surge in Afghanistan that is increasingly opposed by Americans and Afghans, but are so quick to bark at the price tag of health care legislation that could save the lives of the 45,000 Americans who die every year because they don’t have access to health care? As Glenn Greenwald notes, “Urging that more Americans be sent into endless war paid for with endless debt, while yawning and lazily waving away with boredom the hordes outside dying for lack of health care coverage, is one of the most repugnant images one can imagine.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The troops funding increase should be tagged with a 1% increase for the top 5% of earners.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:48 pmOh! Oh! I know!!!!
Because they’re HYPOCRITES!!
November 12th, 2009 at 3:49 pmWhy Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
Um… because they’re dicks?
Too easy.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:50 pmI’m certain that they see war as the enrichment of their pals in the defense industrial complex, whereas health care only extends the miserable lives of the little people.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:51 pmAnd….they’ll MOST certainly be against funding for health care for the troops maimed in said wars. We know that from their past performances.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:52 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
ain’t no money in peace and love.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:53 pmI wish the Dems would take that entire statement and RUN WITH IT!!! Shout it out to the world.
Sadly, that will never happen. Not with these Dems.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:55 pmTrainwreckedTroll@6
STFU YPPOS.
Idiot
November 12th, 2009 at 3:56 pmUsing their logic, why fund something that won’t make money? It’s an inherent mindset and an unshakeable ideology: everything must make money or it is bad and evil. This is what the Cold War hath spawned: a generation of politicos that are so damned afraid of anything that might HINT at government helping the less fortunate, fearful that if a healthcare bill contains a public option, then the country will become a Communist dictatorship overnight, just like it never did when every Western European nation mandated universal healthcare after WWII.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:56 pmTo the Republicans,
November 12th, 2009 at 3:57 pmDeath is more profitible than life
Oh, I know, I know! Call on me!!! Because wars are good for demagoguery and for big bidness (and health care is not)? Do I get a prize?
Cheers,
November 12th, 2009 at 3:58 pmWhy?
Because, even though most conservatives believe in the Bible, they also believe in “survival of the fittest”?
Instead of helping the common man, they want to help the part of society that will lead to more money from oil lining their pockets?
Well, I can’t answer for them, but it sounds to me like the people that don’t want better healthcare would rather the poorer part of America die so that they can get more fruits of their labor.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:59 pmWhy is it that hawkish lawmakers are so willing to spend such enormous resources in both lives and treasure on a troop surge in Afghanistan that is increasingly opposed by Americans and Afghans, but are so quick to bark at the price tag of health care legislation that could save the lives of the 45,000 Americans who die every year because they don’t have access to health care?
Because the MSM will not call these legislators out.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:59 pmWar is profitable and so is the present health-care denial system
November 12th, 2009 at 4:01 pmYawn.
Yet more hypocrisy from the hypocrites.
It’s what they do, it’s all they do.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:01 pmloco thinks sadam attacked us on 9/11
he’s just plain stupid.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:03 pmWell its easy>>> see with the money they get from health insurance they have to spend on reelections and all and can not use for them selfs…. were war is just plain old good profit.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:04 pmlocomotiveuseless—The Constitution, Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 18, is the “necessary and proper clause” and gives Congress the power to expand its’ reach beyond it’s enumerated powers.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:04 pmI have taught the Constitution and nowhere have I read that it’s the government’s duty to fight fascism. In fact, Washington warned America about getting involved in the affairs of foreign nations. Good advice that our government officials have ignored.
God, how I hate these people. We have plenty of money for war, but not enough for basic Heath Care. Oh and don’t forget the people fighting this war are less than 1% of the Country. These guys have no problem sending our troops on tour after tour, but yet when our troops get home, thousands die every year due to lack of insurance and many end up homeless. Yeah, these as*holes have their priorities straght, don’t they? WTF?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:04 pmdrago, pointing out hypocricy got lou dobbs bumped to faux.
Do you really think it’s such a waste of time?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:05 pmlocomotivebreath1901 says:
I think it has something to do with fighting fascism and defending individual liberties…
Sounds really nice, except you guys did the opposite thing with the Patriot Act and getting rid of habeas corpus.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:06 pmWhy Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
Because, unlike war, saving lives doesn’t get you any points in a dick-measuring contest.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:07 pmRachel? Keith? Please spotlight this tonight.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:07 pmHow about less war, less taxes, less government?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:08 pmWhy Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
The only country that’s banging the war drums and wants the United States to invade more countries in the Middle East is Israel. When Israel wants something, the United States bends over and gives it to them.
Ask Israel why they want war.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:09 pmfine, except you have to pay taxes for the lies you told about the other things.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:10 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I wonder how the Neo-cons and the Repugs are re-acting to Obama rejection of the Afghanistan wars plans? He basically said he wanted to end a long war. I bet the Neo-cons are spitting blood. It is their ultimate dream to have a permanent presence in the Middle East. All their hopes of controlling the region is going up in smoke.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:12 pmZaid: what’s your definition of “incompetence”? Mine’s anyone who ignores Medicare is $38 Trillion unfunded (in today’s dollars), assumes government provided healthcare to millions will not cost anything, and misleads others to think war costs and our healthcare issue (>$38T) are even in the same order of magnitude.
But thanks for again lowering the bar while Rome burns.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:13 pmduke goes off the rails, pretends he didn’t support bush and now wants to be seen as fiscally responsible.
more hypocricy exposed. Heck, this is easy.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:13 pmHow about the straw-man argument from the right-whiners that sending our soldiers to die in wars around the globe somehow, mysteriously and magically, “secures our freedoms” here in America.
Ironically, spending money to save American lives in America while at the same time reducing the deficit with Health Care Reform is somehow “going too far” for these same right-whiners.
For some reason, right-whiners can do nothing BUT whine!
“I hate black presidents, but I’m not racist, whine whine whine!”
“I’m going to blame Pres. Bush’s two recessions on anyone BUT a Republican, whine whine whine!”
“Liberals are horrible, because Limbaugh and Beck told me to think that way, whine whine whine!”
“Democrats voting against the war is anti-support-the-troops, but a Republican holding up Veterans legislation in the Senate is just fine by me, whine whine whine!”
“Deficit spending is wondersful if a Republican is bankrupting our country, but if a Democrat tries to fix Republican-generated problems I’m going to WHINE WHINE WHINE!”
Please, pardon me for my right-whiner impersonation, but the right-whiners just don’t know how whiney they truly are!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:13 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Why, indeed?
Let’s look at some possible reasons:
1. Because they live to throw money away. They never want to see it again. This is accomplished when spending it on war. But when you spend money by investing it in the country’s citizens or the country’s infrastructure, you run into the danger of getting a payoff.
2. Because they only like to blow stuff up. They don’t like to build anything — unless it’s a boondoggle for some fat cat. Destroy, don’t create.
3. Because they only want to spend money that flows into the pockets of their biggest campaign contributors. For this same reason, they don’t want to spend any money on anything that would stop any corporate gravy trains.
4. Because they have become so seriously deranged, they no longer have any touch with the world outside the Capitol. Their universe consists of government contractors, big business, and their lobbyists.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:16 pmWhat a mess…That the eight mind numbing years of Bush/Cheney warmongering left us in.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:16 pmFVNY, I don’t know if you were serious but you should be less cryptic in your posts if you were.
the republicans are the less taxes and less government people while doing the opposite. They also wage war on borrowed money instead of paying for it.
If we decide we want things then we have to pay for them. That’s what democrats have always stood for. That’s why when we spend on Americans we get labeled “tax and spend”
see the difference? Maybe you could give more than a cryptic sentence to tell us where you stand and that might clear up a few things for us all……
November 12th, 2009 at 4:17 pmHere’s the point.
To conservatives, war bears monetary fruit.
Health care? Eh, not so much.
Therefore, war > health.
Which is funny, since those injured from war wouldn’t be injured if war was avoided. And they wouldn’t have to then worry about health that they may have had had they not gone to war.
But that’s they way I see it.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:17 pmRepublicans are the problem
November 12th, 2009 at 4:18 pmKickbacks.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:18 pmWhy Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
Because there’s more money to be had in war’s death and destruction. These hawks don’t even want to provide veterans their due health care because it isn’t funded. But, they’ll throw their weight behind more unfunded war.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:18 pmThe Bushies ruined everything. Cheney can’t recall any of it…
November 12th, 2009 at 4:18 pm#25 – FVNY says:
——————————————————–
“How about less war, less taxes, less government?”
November 12th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Interesting, only one of those made it when the Republicans were in charge: less taxes. Seems the “less taxes” didn’t wuite trickle down to the middle class very well, over 90% of the tax cuts were for the top 1%.
How about we talk about the national debt DOUBLING between 2000 and 2008? Pres. Bush didn’t mind spending the national credit card like a whore during his 8 years, and not one single complaint from the compliant Republicans. Now, they found their voice, and they’re blaming Pres. Obama for Fmr. Pres. Bush’s spending spree.
Seems the only time a Republican calls for “restraint” is when they’re no longer in control. Go figure.
Lastly, why doesn’t anyone remember that Fmr. Pres. Bush enacted the largest growth in Federal government? You know, the Homeland Security Department? Biggest growth in Federal Government in 40 years, and not one single Republican complaint. Not ONE.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:19 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
930 billion and counting on Bush’ Blunders. I want at least that much spent on the well being and health of all Americans.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:22 pmThis is the only time this will surface in the mass media. Watch the rest of them ignore this question which the left has been asking forever. The answer of course is that no one can get obscenely rich off health care reform – that takes a war.
I’m reminded of what Michael Caine said when asked how he created such nuanced, sympathetic bad guys: “No man is a villain to himself.” Most of the Congress is corrupt – but they will never see it.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:23 pmMr. Duke(ing myself),
I don’t recall you posting here (under a different name, of course) chastising the previous administration for the current recession we are enduring.
It did not BEGIN on Nov. 8th 2008, nor Jan 21st 2009.
This is your mess.
We’ve been left to clean the $hit up.
It ain’t easy when the drains have been clogged for so long.
But instead of ignoring the mess, we at least are getting the damn Draino and investigating the pipes.
Mucking foron!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:23 pm1) People without proper health care suffer and die.
2) People in war zones suffer and die.
Hawkish lawmakers enjoy watching people suffer and die?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:23 pmFVNY, I had you pegged on your first post. You’re just a run of the mill coward troll.
Everyone on the planet knows that bush drove this country into the ditch.
Party of personal responsibility my ass.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:24 pmIndependent Concern Troll Alert!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:25 pmPlease be on the look out for the next post:
“I am a Libertarian!”
DRxJ, and the one following that where he claims that we are intolerant and that he is the victim….
November 12th, 2009 at 4:26 pmF@43, Oh Please. Now we have a ‘Rational’ troll who wants us to wake up out of our ‘Coma’. We know both Parties are to blame. But BushCo and the Repugs pratically destroyed this country. It will take decades to put it right. Meanwhile YOU have no problem dumping Pres. Obama for the mess that Bush and the Repugs created. Get Bent!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:27 pmDefense may be a constitutional imperative, but War most certainly is not. Still, if one wishes to argue that our war-spending in Iraq and Afghanistan has anything to do with defense, I would disagree.
The people who attacked us on 9/11 were, primarily, from Saudi Arabia. At some point, we asked the Taliban in Afghanistan to take in Osama bin Laden. Then we decided after the attacks to go after him there. The problem is that since then, he has moved his organization to Pakistan. He is no longer in Afghanistan (assuming he’s alive at all.) So the argument that we need to spend money for “defense” in Afghanistan falls apart.
As for Iraq, they never were a threat to us, and there was never any valid reason to send our troops there in the first place. Staying in Iraq is unjustifiable so, therefore, spending money there is also unjustifiable.
Since there is no good reason at all to keep spending money in Iraq or Afghanistan, so why not put that money to better use?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:27 pmFVNY, both parties didn’t skew intelligence and whip the country up over the fear of non existent WMD’s in a country that didn’t attack us.
Democrats are guilty of being spineless and not willing to ask the tough questions prior to the invasion of Iraq. They are also guilty of going along with the continual supplemental spending bills that Bush wanted and got.
I don’t have a blind eye to the short commings of the democrats or the successes of the republicans. I do note that the Bush administration threw blood and treasure into their bastardized view of what they were after and didn’t care.
Now is the time to hold all remaining accountable and this question is more than valid.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:28 pmI’ll tell you why…
WAR PROFITS!!!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:29 pmWAR ESCALATION = enriching your cronies
HEALTH CARE REMEDY = creating more Democrats
So easy, even a caveman can do it.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:29 pmIt’s quite simple. The Reichwhiners like spending money to kill people because it’s easy to see the results. Instant gratification.
Spending money to help people, on the other hand, seldom shows immediate and dramatic results. Plus a great many of them are convinced that the Rapture will take care of everything any day now.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:31 pmHell@53, I don’t know what is worse. FVNY attitude or his condesending manner. He was speaking as if he was a Father and we are his unruly children. Kind of creeped me out.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:31 pmP.D. what tipped me on fvny is this snippet which he just couldn’t hold in:
November 12th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I wonder where fvny thinks we would be if we had continued down bush’s path.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:35 pmFollow the money. War means money for the corporations. The existing health care industry means money for the corporations. That’s why the repulicans want more war and the status quo on the health care industry. Oh wait, they do want some changes in the health care industry – they want to let companies circumvent existing state laws by allowing corporations to sell insurance from states that have less stringent laws.
It’s that simple. They don’t care about people. Not in the US and not in any war zones. Hell, you can probably buy some cheap rugs in Afghanistan.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:37 pmI wonder where fvny thinks we would be if we had continued down bush’s path.
_________________________________
Bankrupt
November 12th, 2009 at 4:37 pmHere we go again! The Condesending Troll, spreading his wisdom (???).
November 12th, 2009 at 4:38 pmfvny, point out Obama’s bad policies that will doom us as you predict.
You make a lot of brash accusations but no substance.
We predicted that bush would end in economic woes for this country.
We now predict the opposite with Obama. Yet you feel free to pull doom and gloom out of your ass even as things are turning around which they always do when republicans are removed from office.
You either don’t know much or you just want to make stuff up and try to get others to believe it. Either way, you suck.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:38 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Are you a Libertarian, FVNY?
Serious question.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:40 pmFVNY, you run your mouth, now back your crap.
Let’s see if you’ve got what it takes. Are you a man or a mouse?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:41 pmFVNY says:
First of all, it’s a ‘DemocratIC’ Congress… second of all, I would argue that ‘lowest form of debate’ is actually self-righteous misdirection, a practice you seem to be keenly aware of…
How about you discuss actual solutions to the problems facing us… ’cause ‘Less war, Less taxes, and less government’ only qualifies as an ‘astute’ argument if you are in the first grade…
Just sayin’
November 12th, 2009 at 4:41 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
“Please refrain from insulting me”
preceded by
“sorry to awaken you from your political induced coma.”
Man, I luvs me some Concern Trolls.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:44 pmEspecially those that can never stay on topic.
LOL! A genius! I been called a lot of things by many different trolls, but GENIUS isn’t one of them. I guess I could take that as a compliment. And I will.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:44 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
FVNY says:
so, where is it? What policies that Obama is behind that is pushing us futher into doom?
How is borrowing money to get to work after you had it all stolen from you the same as giving it all away to corporations and rich people?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:45 pmCaption: ‘You mean we both farted at the same time?’
November 12th, 2009 at 4:46 pm“Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?”
Answer:Because the hawkish lawmakers are being paid by the health insurance companies. It all about the benjamins. This healthcare bill is hitting the hawkish lawmakers’ wallets and campaign contributions.
Another question should be asked is why do we have lawmakers with either lack of military background or draft dodgers are on committees and subcommittess in the Senate and Congress such as Intelligence committee, Defense committee, and so on making decisions on bills?
November 12th, 2009 at 4:46 pmfvny is all platitudes that he picked up from the memo.
He has no depth or understanding of the issues. Just what he’s been told.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:46 pmCORRUPTION….anytime a member of congress does not represent his or her constituents, you can bet they are being paid off somehow….i.e. if leiberman is against health reform, and his constituents are for it…he is gettin some from the insurers…simple.
SD
November 12th, 2009 at 4:47 pmI like to learn about the ideologies of many different groups and then formulate my own views.
Wait for it.
Wait for it.
Wait.
And that’s why I visit here, but I guess no one wants to have an honest discussion. I’ll go somewhere else where there ain’t much hating!
November 12th, 2009 at 4:47 pmFVNY, I believe you will find here people who are more than willing to admonish the democrats when it goes against the progressive stance. You should also acknowledge the hypocracy of the mentioned republicans on their willingness to export blood and treasure but won’t use it to benefit those within our borders.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:48 pmThere’s nothing “DemocratIC” about this Congress.
Just sayin’
And that’s why we suspect your ‘non-aligned’ stance… ’cause a: you ignored MOST of my post and b: if you wanna be incorrect about grammar as well as policy you can go on calling it a ‘Democrat’ Congress… but just know that that doesn’t scream ‘unaligned and astute political observer.’
In fact, it says just the opposite.
just sayin’ deux.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:50 pmThere’s always plenty of money for murder with these anti-social bastards. Their contempt for people and life is crystal-clear and obvious.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:55 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
.
THERE’S A KILLING TO BE HAD AT MAKING WAR!
.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:56 pm#33 – FVNY says:
——————————————————–
“fine, except you have to pay taxes for the lies you told about the other things.
____________________________________
?”
November 12th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
One lie was “the Bush tax cuts will pay for themselves!”. not only was this a lie, it was a HUGE freaking lie that nobody called Fmr. Pres. Bush on, and which our children will have to pay for.
This is one lie that requires we return to a higher tax rate across the board just so we DON’T saddle our childrens grand-children with the bill that Fmr. Pres. Bush and the then-Republican majority decided to run up.
Funny how the self-described party of “fiscally responsiblity” was anything BUT fiscally responsible! Then again, their supporters have been very good at lying to themselves and blaming their problems on anyone/everyone but themselves.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:58 pmWell let’s see, how about revenge? Republicans feel the need for revenge toward brown people..strafe and bomb’em. Republicans feel more need for revenge against our own brown and or poor people. Reject their health care, let’em die, who needs’em? Republicans like their revenge served hot and heavy…death and destruction, that will show’em who’s boss.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:59 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Funny how the self-described party of “fiscally responsiblity” was anything BUT fiscally responsible! Then again, their supporters have been very good at lying to themselves and blaming their problems on anyone/everyone but themselves.
________________________________________
I couldn’t agree more.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:00 pmCause evil fascists only care about evil things.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:01 pmQ:Why is corporate welfare ok under Obama when it wasn’t under Bush?
It’s not… that’s why we aren’t ‘giving away’ the money this time… there are conditions.
The conditions are so restrictive that the President of AIG threatened to quit:
http://www.themoneytimes.com/featured/20091111/aig-ceo-threatens-quit-over-pay-cut-id-1090567.html
He DIDN’T of course… ’cause I bet there are plenty of talented people willing to work for a ‘paltry’ $500,000 a year… I’m one of ‘em.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:02 pm#72 – FVNY says:
——————————————————–
“There’s nothing “DemocratIC” about this Congress.”
November 12th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Now you’re blaming the Democrats for how the Republicans governed?
It was the then Republican majority who wanted to outlaw the filibuster just so they could ram their extremist agenda down the American throats! Now you’re blaming the Democrats for the behavior of the Republicans?
November 12th, 2009 at 5:03 pmNow you’re blaming the Democrats for how the Republicans governed?
It was the then Republican majority who wanted to outlaw the filibuster just so they could ram their extremist agenda down the American throats! Now you’re blaming the Democrats for the behavior of the Republicans?
_________________________________________________
Not blaming. Just making an observation.
I would also say that the Republican Congress under Bush were a bunch of hypocrites. They spent like drunken sailors for 8 years and Bush refused to veto anything.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:05 pmFVNY says:
Have any observations about the President of AIG’s hissy fit?
Or better yet, any observations on the ‘Hawks’ reluctance to CUT the deficit with Health Care reform while simultaneously calling for more spending in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Thank you.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:09 pmSlappyBastinado says:
A steady stream of bombers from Misssouri….day and night….MOAB’s for everybody….until the place is flat and pave it over in the spring.
LOL>>> so not only you are running a illegal tree cutting business you are neither a military kinda guy as well.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:16 pmthat was tried 40 years ago in a place called Viet Nam and they called it carpet bombing or arc lights. and you should read a history book on just how well that went.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
The Reichwing mind gets easier to figure out all the time. They can actually manage the trick of assuming that any possible action from “the left” will have the opposite of its desired effect. As soon as the CBO, or anyone else, says that Bill#X will save a billion dollars? The entire Reichwing media will simply proclaim that it will cost five and the sheeple will never check the facts.
Remember? These are the same people who still Believe Saddam was behind 9/11, the Earth is less than ten-thousand years old, and that the average global temperature has been going down for ten years. They are utterly incapable of reasoned arguments because they make up their own facts.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:20 pmFVNY says:
And I don’t believe for a minute that nationalizing health care is going to CUT the deficit. Its impossible.
so can you explain to me please why its impossible?
November 12th, 2009 at 5:22 pmThanks
Why Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
simple:
1. escalation of war feeds the insect MIC which is part of the corporate powers invested in defense, insurance, media…
2. A decent health care system would benefit the middle class and open the door to competition directed towards corporate insurance/Big Pharma.
3. And, if Obama continues in Afghanistan as the Party of No would like, this would become Obamas war, a quagmire and a win for GNOP during election time.
I listened to Rush for about 5 minutes today and his voice was filled with frustration…because Obama is not falling into the war trap the GNOP so desperately want?
November 12th, 2009 at 5:25 pmAnd I don’t believe for a minute that nationalizing health care is going to CUT the deficit. Its impossible.
And yet, the math is right there in the CBO scoring… and this isn’t a ‘nationalization’ of Health Care.
Far from it.
I define ‘HAWKS’ as those who actively supported the war in Iraq and continued to do so after the ‘justification’ that was put before Congress was shown to be false… have you seen any WMD in Iraq?
How about active ties to Al- Quaeda?
No, that’s strange… Bush promised that we’d find both ‘if’ he was forced to act… remember it was supposed to be the STICK that we were voting on and that Bush would only use military force if all other avenues failed.
P.S. 126 Democrats in the House and 21 in the Senate voted NO on the AUMFAI… don’t know how that qualifies as ‘almost all’
Perhaps you don’t like grammar or math…
November 12th, 2009 at 5:26 pmPPS… letting the banks fail would have resulted in a MASSIVE world wide credit crisis… why should everyone be punished for the bad actions of a few… let’s just punish the executives, okay?
November 12th, 2009 at 5:31 pm.
Dear FVNY,
SINGLE PAYER would be that “Nationalization” you rail about…
… But anybody who’s a somebody already knows that Obama doesn’t support SINGLE PAYER.
So, get your rants in order, buddy. It’s hard to pin an argument against someone when the issue was put to rest a long, LONG time ago. Your irrational FEAR of NATIONALIZED health care is unfounded! Or to be a bit more blunt; Your fear mongering about Nationalized health care is based on a NONEXISTENT REALITY!
.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:46 pmBecause they don’t have to suffer the consequences of going to battle, getting killed or living the rest of their lives as a person who is suddenly blind or legless or armless or a combination of any of these – along with waking up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat after re-living a fierce battle they went through; night after night after night.
If these Chickenhawks are so fond of war, let them send their own children or grandchildren – and in some cases, great grandchildren to fight in Their Beloved Wars!!!!!!
November 12th, 2009 at 5:48 pmbelaccifer lacca,
I’ve often wondered why the MSM doesn’t ask…
… If Social Security had been “PRIVATISED” under Bush’s recommendation, how many people would this economic collapse have effected.
Sure, we know of the homes in default, the unemployment #’s, and the lost pensions(401K’s), BUT…
.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:50 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Wayne A. Schneider says:
Since there is no good reason at all to keep spending money in Iraq or Afghanistan, so why not put that money to better use?
Because after Bush’s Wacky Iraqi Fun Adventure, the whole region with millions of victims are at the mercy of extremists, and after the Coalition of the Willing got rid of any other way to keep them in check, you can’t just cut and run and leave them to their fate.
Well, I mean, you can, but you shouldn’t.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:53 pmconservative guy says:
Here is a novel concept, how about everyone pay for their own health care insurance.
Here’s another novel concept, stop invading other countries and you’ll have enough money to pay for everyone’s health care insurance.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:54 pmHere’s a novel concept, how about everyone pay for their own sherrif, fireman, mail delivery, road construction and street signs.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:56 pmMr. Duke: “explain this: what is a JOBLESS recovery?”
It’s what you get after 30 years of conservative libertarian philosophy. You’re a libertarian right? You don’t agree with government regulations, correct? Then what the hell are you complaining about? This is the result of less regulation – no tariffs, no labor standards, no responsibility to the community, nothing – just go where the labor is the cheapest.
If you’re a libertarian, this is on you and you don’t even seem to get it. Unbelievable.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:01 pmBecause sending people to fight is a substitute for something they themselves lack?
November 12th, 2009 at 6:02 pmBecause it makes them feel powerful?
Because they can make more money by investing in defense contractors?
So, I take it conservative guy wants to abolish Medicare. Great idea, Guy. Take it to the people and see what they think!
November 12th, 2009 at 6:02 pmconservative guy says:
Here is a novel concept, how about everyone pay for their own health care insurance.
thats sounds like one of those old 10 cent drug store novels, that gets dusted off.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:04 pmDUde, isnt it amazing? Endless BILLIONS to spend on some stupid invasion in a country we have no business in, but when it come to helpin the “Sheeple” they turn a blind eye?What a pathetic joke!@
JEss
November 12th, 2009 at 6:05 pmUltimate Privacy
Let’s get something straight here – even a universal single-payer system would NOT be nationalizing health care. That would be nationalizing the payment of health care services.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:05 pmhere’s a novel concept, how about all the freedom loving chicken hawk trolls enlist, volunteer to fight in Afghanistan for free and when they are done, they can stay there.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:06 pmconservative guy, conservative guy – if you’re out to represent all ‘conservatives’ you’re going to have to do a bit better than that!
How do you suppose someone supporting a family of four can affort health insurance premiums on a yearly salary of let’s say $35,000? For a lot of families $35k/yr is actually pretty good! And yet, after taxes, rent, food, gas to get to work there’s not much left to pay for easily $12,000/yr for a family of four to be covered.
Where I do bookkeeping right now their premiums went up 14%-34% this past year. Their wages? Didn’t go up at all.
The math ain’t working! So they are forced to drop their coverage and cross their fingers.
Those conservatives – so compassionate.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:07 pmconservative guy says:
Here is a novel concept,
hers another novel concept for you and your irk>>>> try and be a respectable American.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:09 pmHow about we switch things around/??
Single payer Health Care to take care of America’s Sick and Injured.
Bake Sales and Car Washes to Fund Wars and the Pentagon.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:11 pmI’d love to see the whole country get to vote on this question:
What would you prefer this country spend $100B/yr on:
November 12th, 2009 at 6:14 pma. Staying in Iraq/Afghanistan
b. Ensuring that Americans are covered by basic health insurance
Because the military industry gives them money to wage war and the health care industry gives them money to keep the little guy paying.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:14 pmconservative guy says:
Here is a novel concept, how about everyone pay for their own health care insurance.
Why insurance? Eliminate the insurance part and we save 30% overhead.
But then this would be too much of a win for the dems and Obama,… right?
November 12th, 2009 at 6:15 pmHere’s an idea:
Through the web we all internationally connect and become friends. Then when the war mongering corporate transnational powers decide to instigate war, the lies, hype and hate can not be stirred up through the transnational corporate media so easily.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:22 pmOh, shoot… I though FVNY wanted to talk about the issues… oh, well.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:27 pmBecause war is profitable for the corporations who own most lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
War creates profits. Profits are good. War is good.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:37 pmLieberman, Mc Cain, McConnell and their ilk don’t even care too much for health care for war veterans.
Probably because the people who go to volunteer are generally lower income and they certainly don’t care for them. If they were sons and daughters of the wealthy, well that’s different.
What a bunch of creeps.
Besides their pockets are probably well padded with lots of defense industry bucks from companies in their states and beyond. How is that Country First??????
November 12th, 2009 at 6:46 pmrepugs are just callous, cold, thieves and liars. Their destruction on all levels is deadly.
November 12th, 2009 at 6:59 pmWar is cool and profitable.
You get to blow stuff up, you know “Shock and Awe”.
Weapons manufacturers get to make billions too, and politicians make out pretty good also.
Good for everybody!
Government money for health care?
November 12th, 2009 at 7:13 pmThat’s not exciting.
A lot of those people that need health care are women, children or poor people,
They’re boring. What can they ever do for us?
It also might take away money from insurance companies and our good friends the insurance industry executives.
That’s BAD.
FINALLY…the bazillion dollar question!
And it should be asked…and asked…and asked.
Over and over…in the face of the likes of Traitor Joe.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:16 pmTrue, for the most part, but this is what Repugs hate the most – Obama was a notable, and vocal, exception.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:19 pmWhy…? For the same reason they want to dictate to women their right to govern their own bodies while stripping social services and loving themselves some death penalties. They are short sighted and dense.
A buddy of mine suggests that we hand a baby of color to those morons that stand infront of schools and clinics with graphic signs of abortions. Here ya go… Now raise it well.
The right likes to tell others what to do but not provide support to those that need.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:24 pmWhy Are Hawkish Lawmakers Willing To Pay For An Escalation Of The War But Not For Health Care?
that’s a rhetorical question, right?
there is no amount of money too much for the republicans and LIEberman to spend killing people and blowing shit up – the. sky. is. the. limit.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:43 pmHelping people – not. one. red. cent.
lemmie field this one:
November 12th, 2009 at 7:47 pmbecause there’s money in destruction just like there’s money in being a whore for aetna. yes, joe, i’m talking about YOU
Defense industry and health insurance industry profits=fat campaign contributions for our bought-and-paid-for “representatives”.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:51 pmMax Anax junius -1 @100: “Obama doesn’t support SINGLE PAYER.”
Perhaps you can reconcile that statement with his ‘03 speech claiming exactly the contrary?
November 12th, 2009 at 7:52 pmMay I share my thoughts? Having been raised in both Britain and apartheid South Africa, and, having lived here for over 25 years, I’m experiencing dejevu. The “hawks”, Republicans, right wingers are behaving EXACTLY like the white Broederbonders of apartheid south africa. Their rhetoric, warmongering, excuses, fumbling muttering nonsensical speeches, all are mirror images of their Broederbonder brethren across the Atlantic to the South. Here’s a link to a blog written by (heavan help us) a school teacher in Western Maine. This is what we are up against; http://tommclaughlin.blogspot.com
November 12th, 2009 at 7:54 pmLuis Chapulin M@105 stop invading other countries to pay for everyone’s healthcare?
Perhaps you can explain the calculations to me? Start with medicare being unfunded to the tune of $38T…
November 12th, 2009 at 7:57 pmDRxJ says:
Mr. Duke(ing myself),
I don’t recall you posting here (under a different name, of course) chastising the previous administration for the current recession we are enduring.
It did not BEGIN on Nov. 8th 2008, nor Jan 21st 2009.
This is your mess.
We’ve been left to clean the $hit up.
It ain’t easy when the drains have been clogged for so long.
But instead of ignoring the mess, we at least are getting the damn Draino and investigating the pipes.
Mucking foron!
My mess? Really. I have zero debt. I have always lived below my means. I don’t pay credit card interest. I collect interest. … I did nothing to contribute to the current economic mess. Sorry, wrong guy.
November 12th, 2009 at 8:21 pmPursueTruth says:
Perhaps you can explain the calculations to me? Start with medicare being unfunded to the tune of $38T…
$38T over 75 years? Let’s see.
“According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report published in October 2007, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could cost taxpayers a total of $2.4 trillion dollars by 2017 when counting the huge interest costs because combat is being financed with borrowed money.”
I’m not as good with financial formulas in Excel as I used to be, but maybe someone else with more time could calculate the cost (in actual terms) of another 10 similar wars in the next 75 years.
Y’know, just to compare oranges to oranges.
And then we can properly compare the cost of making war versus the cost of taking care of Medicaid users.
November 12th, 2009 at 8:43 pmMr.Duke says:
My mess? Really. I have zero debt. I have always lived below my means. I don’t pay credit card interest. I collect interest. … I did nothing to contribute to the current economic mess. Sorry, wrong guy.
Those Iraqi and Afghanistan wars have to be paid somehow, and even if you didn’t get into debt (well done, by the way) your government did. Not to mention the Tax cuts for the rich.
Those debts and less taxes from the previous administration contributed (if not created) the current economic mess.
November 12th, 2009 at 8:47 pmThose two wars have decimated our military, and they have crushed our nation economically.
Any student of history knows the story of the rise and fall of empires due to the
depletion of national wealth through warfare and conquest.
Our nation is in a downward spiral, with very few friends left on the world scene,
because of our arrogance and hubris and inability to consider the wise counsel of others.
I still will never understand why a fraction of the cost of the Afghanistan war wasn’t posted as a reward for Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri.
These wars have virtually destroyed our economy, let alone all the horror, death and destruction in Afghanistan and Iraq.
And yet, the neo-cons are still pushing for more war, this time with Iran.
Just what will be accomplished?
And why are the goddamned teabaggers so utterly silent about this?
Where is all their goddamned fiscal responsibility and distrust of big government?
November 12th, 2009 at 10:07 pmLuis Chapulin M@138
You’re logic isn’t adding up.
Medicare’s unfunded liabilities of $38T is a present value number, discounted to today. The number grows as we breathe. The CBO’s “huge interest” on the wars, growing to a “total of $2.4T” in 9 years is piddly compared to the gargantuan interest on $38T! At 4%, the growth of the $38T is >50% of our budget!
Why aren’t we demanding the proponents of Pelosicare quit tricking their plan (and us) towards budget neutrality long enough to explain how it’s anything more than spit-wads relative to what medicare needs.
I’m not looking to beat anybody up. I’m looking for allies in getting our nation to get informed and correctly weigh our priorities. The money for the wars is an important discussion. But figuring out how to handle our other MUCH LARGER unfunded liabilities will determine whether the country implodes.
Foreign financial analysts are recognizing our point of no-return is near…
November 12th, 2009 at 10:25 pmHealth care, our nation’s highway infrastructure, education, rebuilding a storm destroyed city and the small towns, all this could have been done on what we have spent on an ill advised war. Those who brought us this debacle now clamor like drunk captains.
November 12th, 2009 at 10:32 pmRE: locomotivebreath1901 @ 6:
“…Runs the all-time loser
November 12th, 2009 at 10:42 pmHeadlong to his death.”
evangenital@138 the wars “crushed our nation economically”?
“Crushed”? Just to get our orders of magnitude aligned, I’m pretty sure the interest on the federal debt during the 90’s was larger each year than the money spent annually on the wars.
“Depletion of national wealth through warfare and conquest”? We’ve been so placated by the deceivers we elected and MSM manipulators, we can’t see the gorilla for being impressed with their flea. How long did the housing bubble take to develop? (10 years) Shouldn’t we all be extremely more skeptical of anyone who wasn’t constantly warning about the increasing dangers, especially when they now feign innocence while pointing elsewhere? Or worse yet, consider it another “crisis not to be wasted”.
The gorilla is our nation’s unfunded liabilities.
November 12th, 2009 at 10:49 pmArctic Ghetto@140 You are completely mistaken. The cost of healthcare could NOT have been covered by the money spent on the wars.
Granted if we ever get a good plan, that kind of money could make a good investment in improving our healthcare costs.
But, for lack of a good plan…
November 12th, 2009 at 10:54 pmYeah iv wondered that to and its the same anti choice, pro company, anti tax, pro business exemption, pro life and pro family and pro war,
November 13th, 2009 at 12:06 amthese jackasses are as reasonable as the idea one man can be socialist Islamic radical black nationalist fascist racist Nazi genocidal Stalinist hitlerist bin ladenist Chicago thug person and not explode
yeah they can’t ever explain the big sticking points but I guess that’s why they only appeal to the stupidest among us
LocomotiveBreath
Why are you cons so stupid and brainwashed. Why do you lie so much. Providing for the general wellfare is JUST as constitutionally mandated as providing for the common defense you ignorant brainwashed moron
November 13th, 2009 at 12:06 amSlappyBeggerino
Why do you keep wasting your time. There is no pity for you. No matter how much you beg you arent getting anymore pity
November 13th, 2009 at 12:09 amI want to hear Lieberman paraphrase Eisenhower’s line on going to Korea:
“I can go or send your kid to Afghanistan or Iraq, but I will not let you go to a doctor.”
November 13th, 2009 at 12:10 amFVNY
No its not impossible. You are brainwashed. You are stupid. Your delusions do not constitute reality. The countries WITH nationalized healthcare have BETTER healthcare for which they pay LESS per capita. So NO it is not impossible. I could explain why but its been done a few hundred times and those of you who let Rush do your thinking for you are never going to accept factual reality anyway. The bottom line is that the evidence is the countries that pay less and get more WITH nationalized healthcare. Then again no one in this administration is even TALKING about nationalizing healthcare so why not STFU till you have some dim idea what you are talking about?
November 13th, 2009 at 12:12 amPursue truth that can easily be done. If you listen to what he has said he thinks it is the best overall answer but given our CURRENT system it would be too hard to get from here to there. Its like saying playing lead guitar for Led Zeppelin would be the best job I could have but given I am tonedeaf I guess I will be a heart surgeon. It really isnt that complicated.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:14 amConservaTROLL
Here is a novel concept why dont you do the decent thing for the first time in your life and kill yourself
November 13th, 2009 at 12:15 amIts typical republican thinking. There is ALWAYS enough money to kill brown people anywhere but spend a dime not filitered through a rich mans pockets to help an American citizen and the world is about to end
November 13th, 2009 at 12:18 amThe answer to the headline is easy:
Escalation of war = profits for corporations
defeating health care = profits for corporations
Democrats are just corporate lap dogs just like the Republicans.
November 13th, 2009 at 3:56 amFinn @152
Passing any of the current wealthcare bills either from the House or the Senate= mandated profits for wealthcare corporations.
You are correct, Finn.
The Democrats are even more disgusting than Republicans because they are intentionally misleading everyone about thr wealthcare corporate welfare bills. At least we know where the Republicans actually stand. Granted, where Republicans stand is a pretty rank.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:24 am“So doesn’t it seem odd to hear hawks say that health reform is fiscally irresponsible, while in the next breath they cheer a larger deployment of troops in Afghanistan?”
Well acutally, no. This is the kind of inherent hypocrisy I would expect to spew out of the GOP.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:02 pmI don’t understand how so many people can so easily loose sight of the job of the American Federal governemnt and the job of the American citizen. It’s my job to pay for my health insurance (if I choose to buy it). And it’s the fedral governemnts job to choose when to go to war. Whether you like it or not, you can’t change the fabric of our nation. I’m sorry but we can’t let you. We just won’t. This is in spite of your liberal public adecuation that embraces neo-marxism and dislikes our great American way.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:04 pmShameisgood
YOU should be ashamed of how STUPID and BRAINWASHED you are. It IS part of the fabric of our country to provide for the general wellfare. What that means is a democratic decision NOT YOURS you ignorant moronic weasel
November 14th, 2009 at 12:43 amI can’t stand Joe Lieberman’s “tickled baby” grin.
November 14th, 2009 at 9:02 amEugeneDebs
My point is very simple: for all those who believe a larger amount of money should be spent on welfare than war are ignorant. in a very small nut-shell, the federal goverment is in place to defend our nation by the degree a citiezen can not defend himself; and it is the citizens responsibilty, at no business to the federal government, to provide for himself. Even if that provision is acheived through hard-ships, including temporarily going without, as he pursue the ability (the ABILITY provided by our great nation) to secure it for himself. THIS is an example of the great liberty our nation provides for us. However, many seen to think our nation must provide the service AND the ability, even the service at the confiscatory exspense of others. This is not rigth and what I disagree with. However I do not disagree with a welfare system for the truly needy. I do however hate Marxism which, as is the new health-care bill, robs from the rich and gives to the poor. Or as mostly in this case, robs liberty and taxes from the rich and working class, and gives power to the fedaeral governmnt, and a larger “entitlement” attitude to the lower-class masses.
November 16th, 2009 at 2:24 pm