118 Responses to “President Barack Hussein Obama is kicking ass and taking names!”

1. kayinmaine
   January 24th, 2009 @ 10:24 am

   What is also so funny about guys like Ass Limbo in the Neocon Taliban Party is that they’ve been spouting for decades that it’s our money! let us keep our money! let us have a break on our taxes! give us our money back! how dare you American government!, but yet, today these same right wingers are saying, don’t give anyone money! cater to the top 5% of the country and no one else! keep the poor’s money to feed the rich!.

   Spit. Have I mentioned how much I hate and despise the right wing of this country and their ideologies? No? *pushing Volumes 284-926 to you*

2. kayinmaine
   January 24th, 2009 @ 11:48 am

   And look what the Bushies have done under Obama’s presidency already:

   http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/01/23/the-obama-support-for-stay-pending-appeal-in-al-haramain/

   There seems to be some confusion right now, because the right wingers are holding up Eric Holder’s nomination, but it may be for good reason. Obama doesn’t have a guy in the DOJ yet and the above poster is questioning if the Bushites are pulling a fast one. My answer would be ‘yes! they are pulling a fast one’! No word yet from Obama on this.

3. kayinmaine
   January 25th, 2009 @ 9:21 am

   Bah hahahahaha! This is so funny….

   If I will agree that Obama was born in Hawaii, will you guys agree that Bush didn’t lie about Iraq?

   Posted by: JakeD | January 24, 2009 9:57 AM

   http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/01/23/jarrett_will_represent_obama_i.html?wprss=44

   The wingers are so desperate right now! George Bush LIED ABOUT IRAQ, LIED US INTO IRAQ, AND BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA WAS BORN IN HAWAII, but will the wingers believe any of it? Bah hahahaha! Nope. Stooooooooooooooooooooopid.

4. Uncle Fester Lurks
   January 25th, 2009 @ 11:23 pm

   Has anyone else noticed on CNN, the black host Don Lemon calls President Obama, Mr. Obama? You would think as a black man he would call Barack Mr. President. Either this guy doesn’t care for Barack or he is trying to stir up controversy to pump up his career, perhaps he’s aiming to join FUX?

5. kayinmaine
   January 26th, 2009 @ 7:17 am

   Uncle, I’ve noticed the media being just plain ridiculous over the last week, but then again, these assholes haven’t done their job in 8 years, so why would they start now? And it’s not surprising that CNN has the one black reporter on the tv who doesn’t respect President Obama! Be prepared for this kind of thing to continue, because according to the wingers, we liberals “really had nothing against George Bush” and just “made it up” to go after him….so the neocons are going to do the same thing, even though you know and I know that we had PLENTY OF FACTS AGAINST GEORGE & DICKEY RIGHT FROM THE START!

6. Grant in Texas
   January 26th, 2009 @ 5:39 pm

   E.J. Dionne in today’s WaPo feels bipartisanship is already dying. Back to the good old gridlock when nothing got done!!! He says the GOP is carefully formulating lines of attack against the new administration. Less subtle are the groundwork being laid for blaming the new president in the event of a terrorist attack (which the likes of Limbaugh are probably praying for!), and Republican criticism of the president’s economic stimulus plan (let’s make it all about family planning which is a virtual drop in the bucket of the package…0.000235% of the stimulus package). Dionne senses an undercurrent in the Republicans’ thought process: if Obama’s policies succeed, then he and the Democrat party will become unstoppable. Dionne notes that this line of thinking is anything but bipartisan.

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/25/AR2009012501771.html

   Sounds like it isn’t only Rush Limbaugh who wishes to see Obama and thus America FAIL!

7. allyson from lousisian
   March 5th, 2009 @ 9:38 pm

   The American economy is tanking. Obama decides to call a summit on Health care while America is trillions of dollars in debt. Obama has failed. We don’t have to wait for him to fail. He is failing as we speak. Any world leader that ignores the financial health of his country’s economy is a failure. Big Fat Failure.

8. Clif
   March 5th, 2009 @ 10:03 pm

   The American economy is tanking.

   Thanks to the brain dead reaganism economic policies bush ET Al followed.

   No oversight of banks and wall street by the bush admin, even though the law required it.

   Cheating by wall street investment banks and dishonest reports about what the real rating of their investment vehicles actually were.

   Obama decides to call a summit on Health care while America is trillions of dollars in debt.

   Since health care is 17% or the GDP of the United States of America that probably is a good idea, to help curtail costs before it becomes 25% of GDP.

   Obama has failed.

   Pretty early to make that judgment don’t ya thunk?

   After all he isn’t even 100 days into his four years term before he gets reelected.

   We don’t have to wait for him to fail.

   Wait, you just said he failed, and now we don’t have to wauit for something you already claimed has happened?

   Your cognitive dissonance is astounding if not incredulous

   He is failing as we speak.

   Oh so the past is the present in your future tense?

   Up the kool-aid so reality doesn’t interfere with your delusional rantings

   Any world leader that ignores the financial health of his country’s economy is a failure.

   Um he did get a stimulus package approved. and has submitted a budget already, and has called for a halt to earmarks, but you seem to want him to do nothing else,

   I guess reich-wingers have a one track mind and can’t multi task at all.

   Big Fat Failure.

9. Grant in Texas
   March 5th, 2009 @ 10:06 pm

   So Obama hasn’t performed miracles in six weeks? Tell us TROLL ALLYSON, exactly what plan would John McCain have had in place by now if he had been elected?

   You can’t answer that as the Republican HAVE NO PLAN other than tax cuts for the wealthy, plus hoping for Obama (thus America) to fail.

   Houston just announced that they are starting 30 miles of light-rail track building in JUNE, thanks to nearly $100 million they are getting from the stimulus package. It will provide 25,000 JOBS starting in JUNE!!! I know that isn’t January 22, 2009, but the stimulus is already helping our city begin a needed project.

10. Grant in Texas
    March 5th, 2009 @ 10:08 pm

    When you think about it, it is the reich-wing Republcans now calling for Obama “to walk on water”….be our “Messiah”!

11. Clif
    March 5th, 2009 @ 10:22 pm

    Oh and allyson the troll in Louisiana, it ain’t President Obama who is throwin’ up the roadblocks to reinvigorating the economy;

    The senate Republicans are refusing to give a vote to two of President Obama’s key (hopefully soon to be) economic advisors — Austan Goolsbee and Cecilia Rouse.

    The economy is tanking according to the latest brain dead troll, and the republicans are being obstructionists.

    Big Fat Failure.

12. kayinmaine
    March 6th, 2009 @ 6:22 am

    The cost of healthcare has tripled under George Bush and Allyson thinks this has nothing to do with hurting the economy? Allyson, get your head out of your ass!

    By the way, George Bush was the president up until January 20, 2009 at noontime, so tell us Allyson…..what did George Bush do to get the economy back on track?

13. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 1:24 am

    Houston has been working on its little light rail since 1999. It wasn’t contingent on the stimulus package. Furthermore, if gets completed in the next decade it will be a miracle.

    (edit by clif: sorta like the miracle of bush completing a sentence, AND pronouncing all the words correctly?

    Or your learning the correct way to spell Louisiana?)

    Obama has ignored the economy.

    (edit by clif: yes he did in the speech he gave yesterday in Columbus, Ohio, and the stimulus bill he fought for and signed designed to stimul;ate the economy in way like helping build the light rail in Houston YOU mentioned,

    Contradicting yourself in the same post is kinda DUMB girl, but then again your seemingly a brain dead reich-wing kool-aid addict troll ain’t ya?)

    six weeks he should at least pay attention to it. Instead, we get a trillion dollar pork bill that 5% contruction infrastructure stimulus.

    (edit by clif: got a link cause according the CBO the level of construction spending is a tad higher, but the reich-wing fact factory the rest of us call your ass is never wrong is it?

    Well, except when it comes to verifiable facts.)

    A Rand study links the rise in health care costs to a rise in the elderly population. The increase in health care coverage has resulted in a smaller percentage paid out of pocket – now just 20%. The U.S. has still smaller increase in rates than other developed countries.

    (edit by clif: that’s funny cause the bankruptcies due to medical problems is RISING, and the costs of medical insurance and costs have caused more and more corporations which promised benefits to their workers while they helped the corp be profitable for decades to drop it, but the reich-wing has a study from a reich-wing thunk tank to hide behind)

14. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 1:28 am

    There is no money in the treasury.

    (edit by clif: well technically you could be correct since the federal reserve creates accounts with federal banks which then loan the currency to private banks, so the US treasury building probably doesn’t have much money

    The market is dead.

    (edit by clif: Damn, somebody should tell the NYSE, NASDAQ, S$P DOW Jones, the wall street Journal, CNBC, Bloomburg, and of course the that enormous corpulent flesh sack, el gordo la rusho about it cause NONE of them have noticed and tiold the public about it)

    Obama wants to get together and have warm fuzzies about health care. No economist any where has pointed to health care and as underpinning the economic crisis.

    (edit by clif: Just a contributing factor, because the costs of health care push individuals into bankruptcy, and companies to downsize further then they would have to, especially the legacy corporations which fueled the rise of the America’s golden age and were the places the middle class used to get a large percentage of their jobs)

    FYI…The government should simply mandate health insurance as a requirement for Americans to purchase upon employment. The same as they have done for auto insurance. Then we get to choose the coverage, the provider, the doctor and the plan. As with the auto insurance, there will be hundreds of companies that want to compete for those dollars. They will offer the best coverage with the best advantage to obtain customers.

    (edit by clif: more brain dead reich-wing free markets will be our salvation hubris I see, damn that reich-wing kool-aid must be addictive)

    If you’ve been to your county clinic, you will get a taste of the new health care plans.

    (edit by clif: actually I get my health care from a VA clinic, and it seems quite good compared to the “country clinic” around here.

15. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 8:24 am

    I see Allyson has no idea how to spell, ‘Louisiana’. Poor thing. Did you get your education through the leader of the republiCON party, Ass Limbo? Appears so.

16. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 8:25 am

    So, creating jobs is ignoring the economy to you, Allyson? Holy cow! You must be pissed at George Bush who waved bub-bye to 3 million jobs in his last year!

17. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 9:43 am

    So the government should MANDATE everyone to get health insurance UPON EMPLOYMENT??? How about those 14% now UNEMPLOYED????

    I guess our TROLL who claims to be from Louisian [sic] has never shopped for a private insurance policy. This from Smart Money:

    “Before you start your search [for private health insurance], brace yourself. The private health-insurance market isn’t pretty. “It’s a difficult, difficult road to go down,” says Kathleen Stoll, Director of Health Policy for consumer-advocacy group Families USA.

    Here’s what you have to look forward to: steep monthly premiums [as much as $1000 for healthy YOUNG MEN, older folks can have even higher monthly payments. You might find a policy for $650 if you are in top shape but any physical problems can cause this to jump to $850 and PRE-EXISTING conditions may be completely ruled out...and pregnancy may not be covered either]. Watch out for higher copayments, outrageous deductibles and fewer benefits. Moreover, the process can be tedious and downright confusing — which helps explain why there are some 50 million Americans under age 65 who went at least six months without coverage during 2006, according to the 2006 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.”

    http://www.smartmoney.com/spending/deals/buying-private-health-insurance-14819/

18. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 10:06 am

    Yes, TROLL Allison. As a Houstonian I KNOW that Houston has been planning for light rail for nearly a decade and getting the money has been an great obstacle (now who was President during most of this decade??? The Bushes in Houston don’t ride on public transportation so it’s not a concern for them).

    Most of the couple of billion dollars needed will come from bonds BUT the quick infusion of Obama’s stimulus money NOW has helped to jump start the project to begin construction this June rather than putting it off for maybe yet another year. The project is expected to create 60,000 JOBS. The project is way overdue and only includes 30 miles of rail at an average of $73 million a mile.

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/6298263.html

    Not included is the “University line” which is still only in planning since it runs through a wealthy WHITE neighborhood and their Republican Congressman Rep. John Culberson has been trying to reroute it through an area where there would be fewer riders plus would add another mile or two (remember $73 per mile?) to the DIRECT route proposed. That detour would cost more since it would mean building additional bridges across a freeway. But you can’t be having “darkies” ride mass transit through an upscale neighborhood, can you? They might jump out of the cars and rob you OR even come to clean your houses, take care of your kids, and mow your lawns!

19. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 10:29 am

    You all seem to think creating a health insurance of the United States that expands the Medicare model is going to improve costs and coverage.

    The model that improved costs and coverage is the auto insurance model. Before it was mandated auto insurance was expensive and cookie cutter. Now it is affordable, efficient and there are lots of plans to choose from and incentives for lower rates.

    Tom Daschle outlines in his book the necessity of having Americans do with fewer health care services. And the need to have service tied to “quality of life” outcomes. As Medicare and Medicaid do, the government will decide treatments and length of treatment, when and where of treatment.

    Unhooking health insurance from employment would be result hundreds more insurance planners competing for you to decide to go with them. Have you ever noticed there are few commercials for health insurance? No one is competing to serve you.

    Go ahead and get you panties in a wad. More government health care = less service.

20. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 10:39 am

    Trillion dollar deficits. He signed a bill that created more debt than all the past congresses and presidents combined.
    (Edit BY clif: epic fail troll-allyson, quit tryin’ to pull factoids outa yer ass, cause as usual they are wrong.

    Obama did not sign a 11 trillion dollar bill no matter how much fake noise and the reich-wing Wurlitzer machine wants to rant about it)

    Healthcare service which Tom Daschle outlines must include reduced service for all Americans.

    (Edit BY clif: got proof that the health care is gonna be worse then the way insurance industry hikes rates, and denies coverage and delays change?

    got PROOF that the coverage that the house and senate members get is worse then what the insurance industry offers?

    I know the care I get from the VA (due to 100% combat disability)exceeds what people who pay for insurance gets when the insurance industry denies coverage by screeching pre-existing condition or not covered in that policy, or drops people because they get sick)

    No economic plan.

    (Edit BY clif: OUT RIGHT LIE, actually he laid out a plan in the campaign and IS following it with the adjustments the Republican’t Recession of 2008-unknown, has caused)

    No plan to address the deficit.

    (Edit BY clif: damn you lie almost as much as the enormous corpulent, drug addicted, flesh sack does …………………..

    Obama has already said after the recession is curtailed by the stimulus package and recovery startes he is going to address the deficit, SOMETHING George W Bush and the republican’t controlled congress of 1995-2007 NEVER did.

    The deficit can only be addressed by markets which produce taxable income. You could take every penny from every wealthy individual you can name and it will not be a drop in the bucket for this deficit.

    (Edit BY clif: Thanks to the ideology spouted by ronnie ray-gun and the brain dead reich-wingers who pushed for under funding to government and borrowing trillions of dollars to cover their inability to balance a budget,

    Bill Clinton did produce a surplus, between the deficits Bush 41 left him and his budgest of 99-00-01. After Bush43 was selected by five reich-wingers on the supreme court, the brain dead reich-wingers screeched like pigs at a trough so they got tax cuts and the deficit soared, to where Vice President Richard Cheney famously said deficits do not matter)

    Then again, maybe you don’t do math.

    (Edit BY clif: then again you never seem to do reality)

21. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 10:56 am

    We are the only developed nation in the world without universal health care. An ABC poll in 2004 had 62% of Americans favoring such a plan for our nation.

    Canada and Europe have had universal health care for many decades and folks are healthy there. Emergencies come first and folks may have to wait a little longer for minor problems, but overall, folks in all of those nations like their free care.

    Coming home last year from a month of visiting 13 nations in Europe, the first thing to strike me at the Houston airport was how fat most Americans are. You just don’t see much obesity in Europe so they are living a healthier lifestyle, too.

    Back in the 1950’s, while in high school, I had a classmate who went fishing with his father and friends in far northern Saskatchewan at a lake/lodge accessible only by float plane. While there my friend started suffering from appendicitis and was flown to Saskatoon where emergency surgery was performed as his appendix had ruptured. They were not asked to pay at the time. Returning to the U.S. they contacted the provincial government there and they still were never billed. I guess the Canadians put people first and taxpayers don’t mind paying to save lives, even those of non-citizens.

22. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 11:35 am

    George Bush brought America’s debt to $12 TRILLION. Where was your outrage, Allyson?

23. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 11:48 am

    First off, it’s not free healthcare. It’s paid for with taxes.

    Canada’s healthcare was just beginning it’s socialization in the 1950’s. It didn’t complete the project until the ’60’s.

    Why do you want what is an abyssmal failure in other developed countries, resulting in higher taxes and poorer medical care, to be imported to the U.S.?

    http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/161/8/1028

    The U.S. is the mecca for anyone who has the means to come for health care. American health care is superior worldwide.

    Alberta recently made it illegal to seekout privately funded health care.

    So I guess your goal is a giant, government run monopoly on health care. Health care is part of every individual’s life. Now you will have fewer to no choice as to how you would like to address your health care. There will only be one way and that will be established in Washington.

24. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 12:40 pm

    p.s. You can bet that Nancy Pelosi with her $27,000,000 net worth will not be partaking in univrsal health care. She’ll fly to Taiwan, the next great medical mecca. Taiwan will now serve the nation’s rich and well to do while you wait in line to have an appendectomy.

25. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 1:59 pm

    Nancy Pelosi is already getting the best healthcare in the nation, so why would she give up hers to choose Universal Healthcare which will be just as good?

    Many Americans who are paying $1200/month for their health insurance get cut off from their benefits too or find themselves with tens of thousands of dollars worth of bills that their very expensive health insurance company wouldn’t cover.

26. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 2:00 pm

    Allyson, just admit it….you want America/Americans to fail where only the top wealthy of the country get all the benefits while the rest gets shit?

27. Clif
    March 7th, 2009 @ 2:10 pm

    allyson de troll, you can screech about people not doin’ de math,

    but you do need to do de spell check ……………….

    seriously,

    trust me on this one.

28. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 4:01 pm

    I just got in an argument at CVS picking up my prescriptions paying $150 in copays on my Aetna private policy. The guy behind me said his mother also has to pay a lot even with insurance. I commented that it might be a good thing if we had better healthcare and he erupted with his “Rush” talking points saying in the UK, if you are on dialysis and reach age 65, the government takes you off of it, thinking you are too old to be worthwhile in society and “let you die!” He asked me, “Do you want that kind of socialized medicine?”

    I only answered that I have visited 30 nations on every continent save Antarctica and South America, lived abroad for two years, just got back from 3 weeks in Australia and New Zealand, last year spent a month in Europe including three days with my cousins in “socialized “Germany” and NEVER have I heard anyone in nations with healthcare for all ever bitch about their programs. Yes, if you have ingrown toenails, you may have to wait for surgery as their triage systems will put open heart surgery ahead of you.

    As his face got red, I just walked out as there is no convincing the brainwashed reich-wingers. I need to start packing for my week in Cancun and Honduras, so the trolls won’t have me poking them all next week.

29. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 5:08 pm

    What an enchanted world you must inhabit. No one bitched about their health care or their tax rate? Did you ask or were you too busy talking about your fabulous self?

    $150 in copays will definitely come to an end. Nationalized health care is necessary, according to Tom Daschle, because Americans way overindulge in medical treatment – some conditions just need to be accepted and not treated.

    So guess that will help you in some way. You will be less medicated but it won’t cost as much either.

30. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

    If Allyson had her way, no American would be allowed to have healthcare, because she feels gawd is The Decider on when people die.

31. clif
    March 7th, 2009 @ 5:33 pm

    allyson de troll, get a freakin’ grip.

    Tom Daschle is NOT part of Obama’s cabinet,

    Try keepin’ up with current events and stop drinkin’ the reich-wing kool-aid cause it makes ya look even dumber then ya do normally.

    If ya want a program that has worked well and the citizens are happy see how the Swiss went about solving their health care problems which were similar to ours before they decided to stop forkin’ over lots of Swiss Francs for less and less health care each year.

    It included both private insurance and government aide for people, but for some reason the private health insurers didn’t want to provide the same levels of care so they volunteered to quit the health care business and the swiss people are quite happy now a days.

    BTW I spent 3 years in Germany and never heard the people there bitchin’ either and they had quite good health care for all, at a much lower price then we pay for our mismanaged insurance limited care system.

    BTW allyson de troll if it is SOOOOO bad why aren’t Canadians runnin’ here to buy their prescriptions instead of our citizens tryin’ to get Canada to buy their prescriptions?

    Got a factiod up your anus fer that one?

32. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 5:44 pm

    Now, now, now, Clif, Allyson doesn’t want to hear the truth, because by doing so screws up her own made up facts. See?

33. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 6:49 pm

    I have diabetes, peripheral neuropathy, arthritis and hypertension. I was just diagnosed with cataracts. I have had part of my colon removed due to cancer several years ago, and constantly having spots removed from my skin after years of sun damage to stave off skin cancer. I guess I could just opt out of treatment as I am 70 this year and just taking up space. These are not diseases I ELECTED to have but some run in our family, generation after generation.

    Maybe it would be good for Allyson to get out of her Louisian swamp now and then to see how the real world lives (and maybe learn how to spell Louisiana too). A little travel is quite educational, that is if one takes their head out of their rear end and looks around, talks to people, visit museums and historical sites. And yes smartass, I do listen to others…something you might benefit from doing. And I mean listening to others besides Rush Limbaugh and his ilk.

34. kayinmaine
    March 7th, 2009 @ 6:57 pm

    Grant, Allyson would be fine with your insurance cutting off your benefits or upping your copays to the point you can’t afford it, because this is capitalism to her. Only the wealthy must stay alive and live a joyous life! Spit.

35. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 9:13 pm

    Ah dear Grant. You are 70. So Aetna is your Medicare provider or supplemental? You have completely opted out of Medicare? Medicare is the government run health insurance specifically for people in your age bracket. You are turning down free health coverage for a private one?

    hmmmm….what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander?

    Doesn’t matter anyway. That choice is going to evaporate in your life time. T Daschle – Obama’s first choice – laid out his plan very succinctly in his book (which you obviously have not read). Should your cancer re occur (which I pray it does not), your age at the time of reoccurence will determine the delivery of treatment. Tom doesn’t see a distinction of how old you might feel. In his equation, if an expensive cancer treatment (not to mention the imaging that necessitates the treatment) only buys you at best another 3 or 4 years, it will not be funded.

    That is the reality of the national health care plan.

36. Clif
    March 7th, 2009 @ 9:24 pm

    That choice is going to evaporate in your life time. T Daschle – Obama’s first choice – laid out his plan very succinctly in his book (which you obviously have not read).

    allyson de troll, I know you’re addicted to screeching about Tom Daschle, but the HHS sec is Kathleen Sebelius, not Tom Daschle, try keeping up with current events.

    That is the reality of the national health care plan.

    said de troll who seems to have read ONE book and not actually investigated the numerous national health care plans already in effect all over this planet.

    ………….. and it is reality for her it seems, but not most civilized countries who have national health care.

    but reich wing half wit trolls have never let facts get in the way of their psychologically incoherent rants based on a failed and flawed reich-wing ideology.

37. allyson from lousisian
    March 7th, 2009 @ 9:53 pm

    (deleted grow up)

38. Grant in Texas
    March 7th, 2009 @ 10:57 pm

    I have BOTH Medicare and Aetna “Supplemental B” through the Texas Retired Teacher’s Association to help make up for the charges that Medicare won’t cover. However, many of the drugs my doctor wants me to take are not available as a generic. So even though I pay $220 a month in premiums, I often pay that much again in co-pays.

    Trying to Google to find out where the guy who interrupted me this afternoon at CVS going off on the horrors of “socialized medicine”, I tried to find out where he got his information that the UK takes old people off of dialysis at age 65 and lets them DIE! I couldn’t find anything of the sort (he probably heard it from Rush!!!) but I found a tirade by the “Libertarian” Cato Institute demonizing universal health care, but they gave no links EXCEPT ONE in a six page report. They said that Cathy Schoen of the Commonwealth Fund (reputable) had lambasted universal health care in a study she did in 2000 comparing the UK, Canada, and the U.S. However, when I went to the article, an interview with Schoen, I found that Cato had done some creative “picking and choosing”. Here is what Cathy Schoen said IN FULL:

    http://www.kaisernetwork.org/health_cast/uploaded_files/102804_schoen_hutton_transcript.pdf

39. allyson from lousisian
    March 8th, 2009 @ 1:00 am

    http://www.privatehealthservice.co.uk/healthinsurance/health-insurance-sorry-your-not-covered/

    Note in this wrap up for private insurance in the UK that “cost effective” means that if your illness is chronic, it is not covered. Then you need supplemental. If you can’t afford supplemental then what?

    Also note…diabetes is chronic.

40. allyson from lousisian
    March 8th, 2009 @ 1:03 am

    disregard previous, it was talking about insurance policies in general.

    (edit by clif, hint read them BEFORE ya post them, then retractions like this aren’t as necessary)

41. allyson from lousisian
    March 8th, 2009 @ 3:07 am

    Amusing you accuse me of heartlessness to provide medical care. I support better coverage to more people with more choices and physician/patient treatment decisions at the institution of choice and at a lower, competitive cost.

    The government wants less coverage to more people with treatment established by a beaurocrat on Washington.

42. Clif
    March 8th, 2009 @ 9:38 am

    Well then YOU do not want the current insurance industry controlled health care system we have because

    They do not;

    support better coverage to more people with more choices and physician/patient treatment decisions at the institution of choice

    They only support more profits for them even if they have to provide;

    less coverage to more people with treatment established by a bureaucrat at the insurance company or managed care company (ie: HMO), who denies coverage or care based on a pre-existing condition, the policies don’t cover the medical problem, routine denials of care which are overturned in arbitration while the condition worsens, arbitrary rules created to deny care and maximize profits, and the fact that much more health care dollars in the USA are diverted to insurance industry overhead and expenses and OT on care itself compared to other modern industrialized nations.

43. Clif
    March 8th, 2009 @ 11:04 am

    BTW allyson de troll;

    Bill Maher has put some of your reich-wing talking points in their place;

    Folks, the people are the government. The first responders who put out your fires. That’s your government. The ranger who shoos pedophiles out of the bathroom. The postman who delivers your porn. I mean how stupid is it when people say “Oh yeah that’s all we need. The federal government telling Detroit how to make cars, or Wells Fargo how to run a bank. You want them to look like the Post Office?”

    Yeah. Actually.

    You mean..you mean the place that takes a note in my hand in L.A. on Monday and gives it to my sister in Jersey on Wednesday for forty two cents?

    Well let me be the first to say I would be thrilled if America’s health care system was anywhere near as functional as the Post Office.

    The truth is, recent years have made me much more wary of government doing the opposite. Of stepping aside and letting unregulated private enterprise run things it is plainly too greedy to trust with, like Wall Street, like rebuilding Iraq. Like the way Republicans always frame the health care debate by saying health care decisions should be made by doctors and patients, not government bureaucrats. Leaving out the fact that health decisions aren’t made by doctors, patients or bureaucrats. They’re made by insurance companies.

    Insurance companies. Which are a lot like hospital gowns. Chances are your ass isn’t covered.

    Hope a little truth helps ………………………………

44. allyson from lousisian
    March 8th, 2009 @ 8:46 pm

    Looks like you are afraid of serious discussion as you do not post my other submissions that paint a picture of unversal health care already institutied across the pond.

    Perhaps that part of the discussion is too real.

    Bill Maher, the former Comedy Central host? Seriously?

45. clif
    March 8th, 2009 @ 9:00 pm

    Bill Maher did for the health care discussion what Jon Stewart did for the Wall street crash,

    expose the reich wing hypocrisy and idiotic talking points..

    BTW allyson de troll, I do see a link to a corporate owned insurance industry website trying to make an argument people MUST buy their product;

    Here is their homepage

    got any INDEPENDENT, less bias links to try to prove your brain dead reich-wing talking point?

    cause repeating the lies and spin of the insurance industry ain’t a workin’ so well.

46. clif
    March 8th, 2009 @ 9:05 pm

    BTW here is the industry propagandist who wrote the diatribe you are relying on;

    About The Author
    Michael Challiner is the editor for Critical illness safeguard a uk health and critical illness insurance website. To read more about critical illness insurance visit the critical illness information section

    In other words he is a spoksman for the industry trying to build the private medical insurance business,

    which means he tries as hard as rush limbaugh does to spin what ever factiods he can.

47. Clif
    March 8th, 2009 @ 9:10 pm

    You are relying on;

    a uk health and critical illness insurance website.

    Who has a direct financial interest in tearing down the present health care system so the private insurance industry can INCREASE profits?

    Sorta like relying on Exxon-Mobile for all de facts about Global Warming don’t ya thunk?

48. allyson from lousisian
    March 8th, 2009 @ 9:49 pm

    What about the newspaper articles and the photos that illustrate the true condition of universal health insurance for stakeholders?

    Bill Maher and John Stewart are comedians. Witty, but still comedians.

    The website for supplementary health care in UK is to explain for British citizens the exact nature of supplementary health care. It isn’t propoganda, it has legal implications as to the nature of service represented by supplementary health insurance.

    It’s like using the Aetna website to understand how it dove-tails with Medicare. It isn’t propoganda. Aetna has to explain the advantage and how it works.

    Be brave…post the links to articles about UK health care.

49. kayinmaine
    March 9th, 2009 @ 5:31 am

    Anything that forces the insurance companies of America to lower their prices along with the cost of healthcare in this country is a good thing. Right Allyson? It’s all about capitalism and if the insurance companies aren’t going to conform to the times and fail…and universal healthcare wins….I guess we should be happy capitalism still works!

    So, spend some time today applauding capitalism and universal healthcare. Thanks.

50. kayinmaine
    March 9th, 2009 @ 5:32 am

    And Allyson? Where are your facts above? Provide some links please.

51. Clif
    March 9th, 2009 @ 7:11 am

    Bill Maher and John Stewart are comedians. Witty, but still comedians.

    and willing to speak the TRUTH

    Sorry attacking the messenger and NOT debating the message is an age old deceptive reich-wing trick to deny the truth of what they are saying.

    Because you can not debate that truth obviously.

52. Clif
    March 9th, 2009 @ 7:34 am

    You are using an industry website pushing the very same message they are, and ignoring truths when you don’t want to hear them from people by attacking the person, instead of debating the truth of their message.

    It is like using the coal industry propaganda about clean coal (doesn’t exist presently) as the ONLY basis for debating whether to burn the rest of the coal on the planet and increase CO2 concentrations

    Or Like using the deceptive Petroleum Institute website to debat how much Oil we can produce and whether we could ever become energy independent in Oil and Gas, (we can’t we use 25% of the oil produced but only have 3% of the planets reserves)

    Or using one very slanted website as the basis of your argument concerning only one version of health care is like using the government of Saddam Hussein as the basis of a debate about the virtues of democracy, because HE claimed to have been elected democratically with 99% of the vote.

    same logic YOU are using here.

    BTW why the laser like focus on only one thread?

    It is SIX weeks old and is the ONLY thread you focus on spreading a very slanted version of what you claim is the “facts” from a website and claims of the far right in both countries.

    the rest of the discussions and debates you simply seem to ignore.

    You are starting to seem like a person pushing sound bites for the industry instead of searching for the truth, because all your links are from one isolated version of health care instead of all the versions used all over the planet, and then from the most extreme version of debate about that version at that. This has the effect to push the version the insurance industry in the US wants to be accepted as the solution to the health care problems THEY for the most part were central in creating.

    I wonder why you seem so much an industry spokesperson here?

53. allyson from lousisian
    March 9th, 2009 @ 6:16 pm

    A lower price and better service is best forced by competition.

    These posts show the real story behind universal health care. A back breaking price and sub par service.

    I doubt you will post it.

    Here are the advantages of private health care coverage in the UK. Everyone else, get in line take what’s given ya.
    http://www.consumerrightsexpert.co.uk/PrivateHealthCare.html

    Here’s a photo of a modern UK hospital ward…
    http://www.partnershipsuk.org.uk/uploads/images/Royal%20Ward.jpg

    Here’s your consumer rights list telling you that you do not have a right to be on a same sex ward.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1131220/MAIL-COMMENT-More-hospital-ward-promises.html

54. allyson from lousisian
    March 9th, 2009 @ 6:25 pm

    I am an individual who had good healthcare premiums before, as a state employee, I was forced to utilize one of the giant megalith health care companies. Health care insurance has been an issue for me for many years. It was when I had teenagers that I realized the auto insurance model is much more efficient, leaves me with more affordable choices, is easy to implement.

    I discuss it where there is opportunity. I want my children, who are young adults, to have access to choices, excellent service and amazing break through medicine and the competitive pricing that occurs when hundreds of companies want them as a customer.

    It seems you don’t want to see and you don’t want others to see what government health care looks like.

55. kayinmaine
    March 9th, 2009 @ 6:48 pm

    A state employee? Well, of course you had great healthcare when you work for the state, dimwad.

    You have tons of choices now in the private sector for health insurance….that is….if you want to pay exorbitant prices for very little coverage. It’s your choice. Quit bitching about universal healthcare which will be one more option for all of us. You won’t take it, of course, because the government is attached to it.

56. Clif
    March 9th, 2009 @ 7:56 pm

    sorry allyson BUT screeching about health care in England as BAD while claiming what YOU claim ie had GOOD government health care while you were employed by a government BUT you had to deal with;

    I was forced to utilize one of the giant megalith health care companies.

    doesn’t add up.

    cause your pushing for everyone to be forced to deal with what you didn’t seem to like to deal with.

    Your a reich wing troll who is using the decades old attack health care with the British model since YOU personally have never experienced it FIRST hand but are more then willing to accept a second hand BIAS account as gospel truth

    sorry but that is exactly what trolls do,

    spread reich wing talking points and propaganda which YOU have no first hand knowledge of.

57. allyson from lousisian
    March 9th, 2009 @ 10:19 pm

    State wide insurance has resulted on fewer choices and higher premiums. At one time, local municipalities negotiated the health insurance provider. No it is decided at the state level – everybody gets the same cookie cutter, 3rd rate service.

    Don’t know why you equate that with being good insurance or lower premiums. It is neither.

    The healthcare in the UK is the model most referenced by those who advocate universal health care. The health care provided by the UK is substandard to the current health care or services available in the U.S.

    Why would you want to downgrade?

58. Clif
    March 9th, 2009 @ 10:37 pm

    Why would you want to downgrade?

    I don’t;

    I want to keep the excellent care I get from the United States Government thru the Veterans Administration.

    I think your problem rests with the state of Texas and it’s republican based government, the ideology they triumph and way they limit service for profit and NOT the US government ……

59. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:24 am

    It’s interesting that you attribute Republican ideologies to all that is wrong with your country and it is conservative republicans that overwhelmingly support veterans home and abroad and veteran benefits and are active in activities that honor veteran’s contribution to national missions.

    Do you call them reich members while they have their hats off to you?

    It is also interesting to note that Universal healthcare would not separate veterans from the general population health care. The country does not have the budget to provide the same degree of service to all citizens. Corners will have to be cut. Expect to join the rest of us in the ward.

60. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:30 am

    It was also Democrats and a democratic congress that subjected us to participation in Viet Nam where we lost excellent people to a conflict we refused to win. I visit the wall and am astounded at the loss.

    It was a Republican president that ended American military involvement there.

    It was a Democratic president that unceremoniously gave the military an assignment in Mogadishu only to have them pull out without the opportunity to address the enemy’s attack.

    Oh well, your politics are your politics. It’s just odd.

61. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:35 am

    Well since YOU complain about how the state of Texas has screwed up YOUR health care, and since 1994 it has been dominated by the republican’t ideology

    the FACTS fit don’t they?

    conservative republicans that overwhelmingly support veterans home and abroad and veteran benefits and are active in activities that honor veteran’s contribution to national missions.

    nice fairy tale

    republicans have worked to privatize the VA

    refuse to fully fund the VA

    made the troops pay for part of their health care by creating Champus, instead of leaving GI health care alone

    deny improvements to the VA

    fought against the 21st cen GI bill for Iraq and Afghan vets

    fought against the truth about the substandard care the Bush admin provided at Walter Reed.

    and YOU claim their waving the flag and standing at a parade really helps the vets?

62. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:42 am

    ….hmmmm. Other factoids….It was under Ronald Reagan that the Department of Veterans Affairs was established and became the second largest cabinet in the president’s office.

    In 1953, under Republican president Dwight D Eisenhower, the Department of Veterans Benefits was established.

    Republicans have a long history of dedication the the men and women of the military.

63. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:43 am

    It was also Democrats and a democratic congress that subjected us to participation in Viet Nam where we lost excellent people to a conflict we refused to win. I visit the wall and am astounded at the loss.

    Wrong it was Dwight David Eisenhower who sent the first troops to Vietnam, who refused to allow a free democratic election in Vietnam in 1956, which sparked the insurrection in the south, which grew into the need for US troops to prevent to total collapse of the government that Alan Dulles used the CIA to create in 1956.

    It was the treaty John Foster Dulles negotiated called SEATO which TIED the US to defending the government his brother Alan Dulles the head of the CIA in the 1950’s created.

    Get your facts straight.

    It was a Democratic president that unceremoniously gave the military an assignment in Mogadishu only to have them pull out without the opportunity to address the enemy’s attack

    Wrong again, George H W Bush started the involvement in Dec 1992 BEFORE Bill Clinton came to power,

    Get your facts straight.

    BTW did YOU serve?

64. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:45 am

    In 1953, under Republican president Dwight D Eisenhower, the Department of Veterans Benefits was established.

    VA, which was established July 21, 1930, to consolidate and coordinate government activities affecting war veterans. The VA incorporated the functions of the former U.S. Veterans’ Bureau, the Bureau of Pensions of the Interior Department and the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers

    wrong again.

65. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:47 am

    Republicans have a long history of dedication the the men and women of the military.

    In words and speeches BUT not the actions the veterans needed.

    there they want to UT funding

    privative so the private sector can PROFIT from the veterans needs

    refuse to give benefits like the 21st cen GI bill the republican’ts fought against cause some soldiers might use it.

66. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 12:53 am

    These bills passed by a democratic congress and signed by FDR are the basis of the modern VA;

    1944 – Mustering-out Payment Act PL 78-225

    It provided servicemen, returning from the Second World War, with money to help them start back with their civilian lives.

    1944 – Servicemen’s Readjustment Act PL 78-346

    The G.I. Bill (officially titled Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, P.L. 78-346, 58 Stat. 284m ,) provided for college or vocational education for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as GIs or G.I.s) as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It also provided many different types of loans for returning veterans to buy homes and start businesses. Since the original act, the term has come to include other veteran benefit programs created to assist veterans of subsequent wars as well as peacetime service.

    1944 – Veterans’ Preference Act PL 78-359

    The Veterans’ Preference Act is a United States federal law passed in 1944. It required the federal government to favor returning war veterans when hiring new employees in an attempt to recognize their service, sacrifice, and skills.

    BTW you didn’t tell the WHOLE truth about creating the Veterans cabinet level department’

    to wit’
    The Department of Veterans Affairs Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-527) passed into law
    

    over the objection of some of the Republicans, who were committed to preventing the U.S. federal government from expanding further. Many Republicans along with most Democrats ultimately supported it on the basis that it was really more of a reorganization than an expansion of government as the new Department was in reality going to be doing very few things that the former Veterans Administration had not already been doing. There was the further consideration that military veterans constitute a large and powerful voting bloc and could easily be offended at the perceived slight that opposition to the bill might have implied.

    So Reagan just signed into law what a democratic congress created OVER republican objections

    Which formalized into a official cabinet office what FDR and the democratic congress created during the end of WW2

    Keep a spinnin right wing talking points cause the FACTS beg to differ.

67. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:01 am

    “VA health benefits are established by Federal law and regulations and funded through appropriations. They are not the same as an insurance contract. Also, veterans do not pay monthly premiums to receive VA health care. In addition, you are not required to use VA as your exclusive health care provider. If you have health insurance, or eligibility for other programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, or CHAMPUS, you may continue to use services under those programs. We recommend that, if you have other health insurance or HMO coverage, you should keep that coverage to provide you with options and flexibility in the future. ”

    From the VA website. It appears CHAMPUS gives you options for your healthcare while you pay nothing to receive VA healthcare.

    Both USA Today and military.com report that Bush backed a bigger GI bill than the one proposed by congress which included a 31% increase in benefits and $500 stipend while in college. Bush threatened to veto the Democratic congress bill because it contained pork and he wanted the funds to go go veterans.

68. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:11 am

    CHAMPUS is for active duty soldiers dipshit

69. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:12 am

    And you failed to address all the factoids you got WRONG so far.

70. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:14 am

    Champus is a way to make veterans PAY for something they were promised when they signed up originally.

    typical republican making veterans pay after they already served.

71. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:23 am

    Your claim;

    Both USA Today and military.com report that Bush backed a bigger GI bill than the one proposed by congress which included a 31% increase in benefits and $500 stipend while in college,

    the TRUTH from get this;

    military.com

    funny eh they don’t say what YOU claim they say

    Congress to Enhance GI Bill; Fight Now Is Over How

    The Bush administration has endorsed a House bill that would improve the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) education benefits in several ways including with a 31 percent jump in monthly benefits and a new $500-a-month stipend to help cover college living expenses.

    The administration’s aim is not only to improve veterans’ benefits in wartime but to derail a far more costly GI Bill reform package that Democrat Jim Webb (Va.), in just his second year as a senator, is shepherding toward likely enactment with tenacity and timely compromises.

    NOT bigger

    so as usual wrong again.

    nice try at deception, but Bush’s suggestions were to improve a vastly inferior bill with weak improvements instead of PROPERLY rewarding the troops who volunteered to serve in a time of war.

72. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:25 am

    And why Bush AND McCain opposed the bill;

    They didn’t want too many troops using the bill instead of a fourth or fifth tour of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan.

73. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:25 am

    Keep a spinnin’ the FACTS still beg to differ.

74. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:26 am

    BTW

    you never answered;

    did you serve?

75. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:43 am

    The bill promoted by Mr. Webb contained pork project not related to Veteran’s benefits. Bush wanted those eliminated from pork projects and applied to veteran’s beneifits. Read the USA today story. That is why he opposed the bill in the form that Mr. Webb had it.

76. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 1:45 am

    from your post that quotes military.com regarding administration goals, “The administration’s aim is not only to improve veterans’ benefits in wartime ”

    No I have not served. My Dad – Marine.

77. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:01 am

    My dad, Army, korean war veteran,

    My uncle, Army, Korean war veteran,

    All my brothers and one sister army

    Youngest brother, Operation Provide Comfort died on duty after returning from Bosnia

    the other sister, Air Force,

    me, Army, Desert Storm, 100% disabled (I don’t rely on a family members service)

    my oldest daughter, Army, Operation Iraqi Freedom,

    Which is why I know a little about the military

78. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:07 am

    I gathered you were deeply military and lefty liberal.

79. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:08 am

    The bill promoted by Mr. Webb contained pork project not related to Veteran’s benefits.

    Specify the “pork” please, since a lot of right wingers throw that term around without ever specifying exactly what the “pork” really is.

    because here is the EXACT wording at military.com;

    Defense officials fear Webb’s GI Bill not only would be costly in dollars but it would threaten the viability of an all-volunteer force by enticing thousands of members to leave service after a single tour to use education benefits, particularly if the option is another wartime tour.

    Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), soon to be the Republican Party’s nominee for president, told reporters on his campaign plan that he is working with others to find an alternative to S. 22 that won’t harm service retention rates.

    harm service retention rates.

    like I said;

    They didn’t want too many troops using the bill instead of a fourth or fifth tour of duty in Iraq or Afghanistan.

80. allyson from lousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:09 am

    I appreciate your service. However, I find your politics odd in light of your family involvement in the miliatry. The military preparedness was decimated during the Clinton years.

81. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:10 am

    lefty liberal

    If that means using REAL FACTS and reality instead of right wing RNC generated talking points,

    then I have provided numerous facts and you the RNC talking points.

82. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:15 am

    The military preparedness was decimated during the Clinton years.

    Based on the BRAC commissions which started in 1988.

    Who was president in 1988?

    Oh right Ronald Reagan.

    And George H W Bush pushed HARD for the post cold war down sizing,

    I know because it started right after the end of Desert Storm, in fact people I knew assigned to 3rd Armor Div KNEW in Kuwait before they redeployed their division was going to be deactivated in the down sizing of the US army in Europe.

    After the Desert Storm, VII Corps was withdrawn back to the United States and disbanded, leaving V Corps as the only major US combat field headquarters in Europe.

    That was NOT Bill Clinton’s doing no matter how much fake news lies about it.

    I am just more for REAL facts and less spin,

    you seem more for spin then real verifiable facts

83. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:23 am

    In fact George W Bush approved a new BRAC in 2005 downsizing even more.

84. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:31 am

    Barack Obama is increasing the size of the force to reduce the strain on individual members, something the republicans in congress or George W Bush never did even though we were fighting two wars.

85. Clif
    March 10th, 2009 @ 2:32 am

    lefty liberal

    Thanks for proving you are a right wing troll spouting the talking points they spout.

    Facts must seem liberal to you cause you try to deny them so much.

86. kayinmaine
    March 10th, 2009 @ 5:21 am

    Who do you serve, Allyson? The whole entire American Taliban? I think so. You’re kind of pathetic, but then again, you knew that already.

87. allysonfromlousisian
    March 10th, 2009 @ 9:08 am

    Looks like you prefer hate speech to discussion and are glued to CNN for all of your favorite cliches. (said the pot glued to reich wing talking points)

    The reality of universal health care is lower than VA health care.

    (Edit by Clif; got a link to actually prove your unproven claims>)

    Competiton among services is what drives down prices.

    It is the Soviet Union that has done the great experiment with government dictating service, standards, costs. As a result their people have few choices in the grocery store, housing that America’s poor would disdain, no fuel for vehicles or heating, the list goes on.

    To think that by some magical fate, applying the exact same model to health care results in sparkly free service that caters to every ill for wellness is illogical.

    But, you obviously enjoy your hate speech and want above all for the government to tell you what to do about your health. Godspeed.

88. allyson from lousisian
    March 17th, 2009 @ 9:43 am

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment

    TWhere does Obama look first to cut from the budget? Military health care. VA care will soon be thing of the past as well. VA healthcare will join medicare and you will get the same as the rest of us and years of service will count for nada.

89. Clif
    March 17th, 2009 @ 11:55 am

    Yo shit for brains;

    RUMOR CONTROL: THERE IS NO PLAN TO MAKE VETERANS BUY HEALTH INSURANCE

    Out-of-control pseudo-journalism and blog rants have distorted a budget proposal into something it isn’t.

    Try keeping up with the FACTS and stop repeating discredited reich-wing spin you dumb shit.

    Typical reich wing stupid troll here

    nothing to see

    move along.

    Damn you are DUMB

90. Clif
    March 17th, 2009 @ 12:28 pm

    BTW SHIT FOR BRAINS here is what President Obama is actually doing;

    Obama Says Yes Duckworth Can

    President submits name for VA post to U.S. Senate

91. Grant in Texas
    March 17th, 2009 @ 12:48 pm

    I see our ignorant TROLL Allyson still hasn’t learned to spell “Louisiana” if she is even from there! “She” may not even be a “she”!

92. allyson from lousisian
    March 17th, 2009 @ 8:02 pm

    (deleted we do NOT attack veterans here like YOU DID)

93. allyson from lousisian
    March 17th, 2009 @ 8:21 pm

    http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/nf09/nfmar09/nf031709-1.htm

    hmmm…this link was deleted. The truth hurts?

    Maybe Obama is backing off and will have a third meeting with all parties. Good thing vawatchdog et.al are keeping up. As far as Obama is considered VA health benefits can shave the budget. Go Obama – the Democrat and friend of all U.S. Veterans. Smack the vets in the butt and they will still vote for you – loyalty over facts.

94. Clif
    March 17th, 2009 @ 10:02 pm

    Yo dipshit it is NOT Obama but some mid level weenie dumb shit.

    And stupid Gen Shinseki has to approve it, which he will NOT however law requires him to LISTEN to brain dead idea

    The congress says it is DOA to them so keep LYING about Obama and wasting your time stupid

    Which republicun’ts didn’t when they CUT VA care for hundreds of thousands of veterans in 2005;

    The selling of VA benefits as welfare

    It’s a disturbing trend – all around us we see the not-so-subtle positioning of the VA as a gigantic welfare program. The VA is not a welfare program! It’s just that simple. The idiomatic definition of welfare is: “Receiving regular assistance from the government or private agencies because of need.” Veterans receive benefits not because they “need” anything; they receive them because they earned them by their service to our country.

    In testimony before the U.S. Senate last year an AMVETS representative said, “As a nation, we owe veterans an enormous debt of gratitude – for their service, their patriotism, and their sacrifices. The benefits to which they are legally entitled are not the product of some social welfare program, as some might argue. Rather they are yet another cost of freedom that unfortunately is too often forgotten.”

    Disturbing trend #2 is that those in Washington who have been the most vocal defenders of veterans are being removed from their positions of influence. VA Secretary Anthony J. Principi was asked, or forced, to resign after he publicly expressed dismay that the Bush administration cut $1.2 billion from the FY 2005 VA budget request. Arlan Specter (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, moved to the Judiciary Committee and was replaced by Larry Craig (R-ID), who supported the administration’s $1.2 billion cut.

    But the biggest blow to veterans came when Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) was removed as Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. Smith was universally respected as a friend to veterans and a fighter for increased benefits, but strayed from the official Party line one too many times. Not only did he lose the chairmanship, he was removed from the Committee.

    Smith has been replaced by Steve Buyer (R-IN). In his first few days as Committee Chair Buyer has managed to offend every veteran’s group in the country. At a time when every veteran knows the VA needs more funding, Buyer said, “I want to modernize the system. I am not a defender of bloated bureaucracies.” Buyer then went on to paint a perfectly clear picture of the VA of the future: “Some of the veterans service organizations, they are having this belief that everyone should have open access to the VA system, when in fact I believe that the VA system should follow its core constituency and the intent of Congress when we laid out our priorities, and that was in fact to take care of our disabled and indigent veterans first.” (emphasis mine)

    This was NOT an off-the-cuff remark by Rep. Buyer. He was placed in his position by the Republican Party leadership and speaks for the Party who answers to the White House. Buyer speaks the gospel and gets his sermons right from the Top.

    The most important part of Buyer’s remarks is his deliberate “welfarizing” of the VA healthcare system. By telling us the priority of the VA is to care for “disabled and indigent” veterans first, he minimizes and denigrates the sacrifices made by ALL veterans. The VA was set up to serve ALL veterans including the “disabled and indigent.” This careful positioning of the VA healthcare system creates the impression that the VA is a welfare program and veterans are just looking for a “handout.” Also, it’s easy to talk about the “intent” of a previous Congress when your goal is to undo what they have done. And the remark about “core constituency” is just plain outlandish. The VA serves ALL veterans.

    Buyer’s remarks are clever, well-planned, well-delivered and approved at the highest levels. They also point to a dismal future for the VA. The VA healthcare system is about to be changed, and there may never be any going back. Priority Group 8 veterans have now been cut from the system. Outgoing VA Secretary Principi has indicated that Priority Group 7 is the next to go. Under-funding means veterans wait months, and sometimes over a year, for necessary surgeries and other medical procedures. Yet Buyer talks of “bloated bureaucracies.” That’s code for “more budget cuts.” Funny that there was no mention of “bloated” bureaucrats. They always seem to survive.

    Don’t think this “welfarizing” of the VA won’t fly. Using carefully chosen buzz words in the proper setting can sell this in a heartbeat. “Bloated bureaucracies” are hated by all, even though the VA is hardly bloated. “Modernize” is another good word because new is perceived as being much better than old. A phrase like “intent of Congress” coming from a member of Congress has the sound of authority. Then there are the two key words. “Disabled” is easily construed by many to mean unwilling as opposed to its true meaning of unable. “Indigent” just plain means homeless to most people and a majority of Americans feel the homeless choose to be that way.

    Often, this type of campaign to change public perception is referred to as “demonizing.” By “demonizing” the VA and not veterans, the onus has been placed on a governmental system that can be viewed, by some, as “bloated” and out of control. You will notice there is no “demonizing” of veterans in all this rhetoric. To do that would be political suicide. The only way to “support veterans” and cut their services and benefits at the same time is to portray the VA system as broken when it is not. The VA just needs to be funded properly.

    So, get ready for more. The only effective way to keep cutting the VA budget is to sell the concept to the American people as a form of welfare. As an old broadcaster and public relations guy, let me tell you how it’s going to be done.

    1. REMOVE DISSENT. Principi, Specter and Smith are gone. Those with a say now speak with one voice. Unity is important. Say we support veterans.
    2. USE DEFLECTION INSTEAD OF FACT. When asked about under-funding at the VA, President Bush has never directly addressed the issue or answered the question. He uses deflection. Like this statement on October 13, 2004: “We’ve increased VA funding by $22 billion in the four years since I’ve been president.” The dollar figure is accurate and it appears to paint a rosy picture. But it’s a number taken out of context, and does not take into account that veterans seeking healthcare have increased faster than the budget increases can handle them. Don’t worry. Just say we support veterans.
    3. SAY IT AND SAY IT AND SAY IT. If you say it enough people will accept it as the truth. This works for everything from political campaigns to advertising widgets. Just keep saying it. Say we support veterans. Then say it again. Say we support veterans.
    4. GET IN LOCKSTEP. Make sure everyone is saying the same thing. This is only slightly removed from #1 but can only be implemented after the dissenters are gone. Say we support veterans.
    5. FLOAT A TRIAL BALLOON. Once all the proper players are lined up have one of them say it out loud. The Steve Buyer statement about “disabled and indigent” veterans is a perfect example. Say we support veterans.
    6. GAUGE REACTION. Did anybody squawk when you floated the trial balloon? Did the Senate march, en masse, into the Oval Office demanding an end to this? No? Did the veterans’ groups moan and groan? They did? Don’t worry about it because we’ll just go back to #2 and #3 until they believe. OK, it looks like it’s going to fly. Say we support veterans.
    7. REPEAT #3 WITH HELP FROM THE MEDIA. Get the talking points out to the talk show hosts and have them beat it into the ground. Many Americans say they get their “news” from talk shows, so what better place to sell a concept that people will think is factual. Say we support veterans.
    8. PROPOSE LEGISLATION. Use all the right phrases like “bloated bureaucracies” and “core constituents” and “intent of Congress.” Cut the VA to the bone and wait for veterans to yell. Say we support veterans.
    9. LET THEM YELL. Give the other side of the aisle lots of time to scream bloody murder then call them “tax and spend liberals” and move on. Let the veterans groups raise heck and tell them it is for their own good. Say we support veterans.
    10. DISREGARD #9 AND PASS THE LEGISLATION. Hey, we listened, right? Pass the bill and forget about it. Oh, yeah. Don’t forget to say we support veterans.

    Right now we are in the midst of #6. The rest will come faster than you think. As the VA is carefully positioned as a welfare program, public support for more funding will fade away. Is Priority Group 7 next? The Clothing Allowance? Benefits for spouses? How about a dollar cut in monthly benefits? How about longer waits for medical treatment?

    We can sit back and watch this happen or we can do something about it NOW. It is time for a new level of activism in the veteran community. If we accept this deliberate and willful destruction of the VA, we dishonor every American veteran. Let us not allow this to happen.

    This wasn’t a suggestion(which won’t pass) but a planned strategy to DENY benefits to veterans by Bush and the compliant republicunts in congress.

    The plan IS not to cut the funding for veterans BUT charge private insurance carriers for care veterans they insuire for, so as usual YOU LIE

    Like I said the plan will noy be approved nor pass a democratic lead congress unlike the reoublican’ts who just cut off hundreds of thousands of veterans …. during a time of war.

95. allyson from lousisian
    March 18th, 2009 @ 12:59 am

    http://www.factcheck.org/funding_for_veterans_up_27_but_democrats.html
    There were not Bush budget cuts. There was a Bush lower budget increase. Overall VA benefits increased under Bush more so than Clinton.

    (Bush cut the proposed funding while starting a WAR so the amount spent on each individual veterans went DOWN, time waits increased, and as the article shows CUT some veterans completely off from recieving the rights they were told they had for serving this great country something YOU seemed to think wasn’t important enough to do YOURSELF, like most reich wing weenies)

    From the article linked previously…
    “So, why is the White House persisting in this proposal? That’s the question.

    On Monday, March 16, 2009, representatives of the major VSOs met with President Obama and staffers from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the Roosevelt Room of the White House… just prior to Obama’s visit to VA’s Central Office to celebrate 20 years as a Cabinet-level agency.”

    The president himself was at the meeting and gave no indication that he is willing to negotiate the terms. He wants to save $540 million in his budget and he’s doing it with VA health benefits.

    So Barack Obama is supposed to tell some dumb fucking ignorant reich-winger exactly what he is thinking or that gutless chicken hawk goes apeshit like some stupic troll has here)

96. allyson from lousisian
    March 18th, 2009 @ 1:05 am

    You are mistaken. I did not attack a veteran.

    (LIAR you attacked the veterans and NOW you lie about it)

    Obama signed in the new budget and has already approved the ridiculous spending and will now adjust his budget with VA benefits.

    (Sorry but that IS projection, which will not happen.)

97. kayinmaine
    March 18th, 2009 @ 5:31 am

    Allyson, can you explain why one of our soldiers was found hanging by his neck (he’d been there for 2 days before someone found him) at Walter Reed under George Bush?

98. Clif
    March 18th, 2009 @ 5:58 pm

    Obama Nixes Plan to Charge Veterans For Service-Related Health Care

    The President has consistently stated that he is committed to working with veterans on the details of the 2010 VA Budget Proposal. The President demonstrated his deep commitment to veterans by proposing the largest increase in the VA budget in 30 years and calling VSO and MSO leaders into the White House for an unprecedented meeting to discuss various aspects of the budget proposal. In considering the third party billing issue, the administration was seeking to maximize the resources available for veterans; however, the President listened to concerns raised by the VSOs that this might, under certain circumstances, affect veterans and their families’ ability to access health care. Therefore, the President has instructed that its consideration be dropped. The President wants to continue a constructive partnership with the VSOs and MSOs and is grateful to those VSOs and MSOs who have worked in good faith with him on the budget proposal.

    So stupid troll allyson

    officially you can now

    GO FUCK YOURSELF.

99. Clif
    March 18th, 2009 @ 6:00 pm

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told a gathering of veterans’ groups that the White House had agreed to kill the idea of charging third parties for service-related veterans’ health care. Pelosi said:

    I’m pleased to announce that we have some good news. Over the past several days, President Obama has listened to the genuine concerns expressed by veterans’ leaders and veterans’ service organizations regarding the option of billing service connected to veterans’ insurance companies.

    Based on the respect that President Obama has for our nation’s veterans and the principled concerns expressed by veterans’ leaders, the President has made the decision that the combat-wounded veterans should not be billed through their insurance policies for combat-related injuries.

    She seems to agree that cutting veterans benefits LIKE the republicunts did in 2005 is a bad idea.

    Wanna comment on the 2005 CUTS by the republicunts YOU DEFEND?

100. allyson from lousisian
     March 18th, 2009 @ 11:15 pm

     You are screwed by your party and your president daily. Extremely dysfunctional but you must love it. BOHICA, dude.

     Wanna comment on the 2005 CUTS by the republicunts YOU DEFEND?

     I take it from your angry little comment your answer is NO?

101. Clif
     March 18th, 2009 @ 11:22 pm

     Sorry dippy shiite but your the one who was screwed by the reich wing all the while asking for more.

     BOHICA, is the name of the computer program the RNC uses to foole you clowns with the daily talking points stupid.

     It is what Rush says before each and every program, while he is laughing at you rubes all the way to the bank.

     It is the part of the republicunt platform they never admit …….. and you eat that steaming pile of shit right up.

102. kayinmaine
     March 19th, 2009 @ 5:22 am

     Poor Allyson, she believes she’s part of the party that is loved by the world. Bah haha….hahahahahaha….hahahahahaha! Sorry Allyson, but the world doesn’t like al-Qaida, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, you, and your party, The American Taliban.

103. Keith
     July 9th, 2009 @ 1:05 pm

     Well it’s July 9th, 2009 and Obama’s “Plan” is helping to raise unemployment to 9.5%!!! He is letting North Korea PISS ON US by launching missiles and underground nuclear tests, and Cyber Computer messes on our government computer web sites! He is FLIP FLOPPING on a lot of stuff, he is breaking his promise of NO NEW TAXES for anyone making $250,000 or less, AND he has been pushing “CAP & TRADE” which in reality is a HIDDEN TAX on EVERYONE!!! I don’t know about any of you, but THIS GUY SCARES ME! So many think he is the Savior of the U.S.A., sorry, but he is losing popularity FAST! He SUCKS!!!!! So does the Democratic Liberal Agenda! They are all screwed in the head, and his 782 BILLION Dollar Stimulus ISN’T Working and he is considering ANOTHER ONE??? He hasn’t a CLUE!!! Where is Ronald Reagan When You Need Him???

     Rotting in the ground where he belongs.

104. Grant in Texas
     July 9th, 2009 @ 2:44 pm

     Ronald Raygun had an AVERAGE 9.5% unemployment his whole SECOND year of his first term, with a high one month of 10.8%. Obama has only been in office 5 1/2 months and unemployment claims even fell last month! There are still too many out of work but GM and Chyrsler haven’t recovered yet from their biggest slump and many of the unemployed are affiliated with the auto industry.

     Only 11% of the stimulus money has been given out at this time and some states, due to being in financial trouble, have placed the money against their huge debts, pay state employees already on their payrolls rather than put the funds out there for “shovel ready” projects. There must be a clamp down on future outlays that the money MUST leave the statehouse. The funds definately need to be put out there quicker. Maybe Paul Krugman was right in that the stimulus needs to be twice what Obama asked for.

     I am still a big supported of Barack Obama, lived under 13 presidents in my lifetime and never seen anyone other than FDR given such a piling heap of problems as the Republicans passed off to Obama. He hasn’t even had six months yet. I don’t believe he can “walk on water” but the Republicans think he can it appears.

     Ronnie Raygun is the most hyped president of the 20th century due in part to historical revisionists going right to work to slant his accomplishments, even repeat over and over many lies about him.

105. madhatter
     July 9th, 2009 @ 3:33 pm

     Grant,

     We also had prosperity under Reagan and it didn’t take our kids and their kids the rest of their lives to pay it off.

     Yo BOZO) it has yet to be paid off 30 years after it started, Reagan’s BORROW and waste money has never even been considered to be repaid.
     

     Unemployment claims are down but unemployment is up, play on words to indicate unemployment is up. Prediction is unemployment is heading to 11%.

     You seem to forget that we have had 2 1/2 years of democratic control of congress so if you want to blame someone, blame the democrats.

     Sorry but the democratic party did not have control over the executive branch and their regulatory functions JUST over sight of the executive branch, however like the IA revelations showed the executive branch under bush deceived congress

     I will have to hand it to the democrats, they have the american people believing it was the republicans who caused the cards to fall when it was the democrats who were in charge.

     Wrong BOZO see above congress does not regulate the banks nor wall street who gamed the system, it was supposed to be the asleep at the wheel BUSH APPOINTEES job which they did not do.

     Never has so few done TO so many as barack and his band of incompetents.

     Hope I didn’t misspell any thing so you won’t scold me and get off track.

106. Grant in Texas
     July 9th, 2009 @ 3:59 pm

     Reagan had a Republican Senate (53) his first two years in office and the 97th Congress had a Democratic majority that gave him the Kemp-Roth tax cuts he favored (back when their was bi-partisanship on the behalf of Democrats).

     In 1981, at the start of the Reagan administration the deficit was about 2.5 percent of the national economy. By the end it was about 5 percent of the national economy. Interest payments just on that debt went from $69 billion in 1981 to $169 billion at the end of the Reagan administration.

     George H.W. Bush may have been re-elected if not for the recession that Raygun had bequeathed to him and in full force by 1990. The failed Reaganomics (which Bush once had called “Voodoo”!) ultimately brought H. Ross Perot into the picture taking enough votes from Bush to give Clinton the White House with only 43% of the votes.

     Personally I went from making six figures at the beginning of Raygun’s reign to going broke and put out of business by 1988. I remember the 80’s WELL! Thankfully I had my teachers license to fall back on and thus was never unemployed and a statistic.

107. Grant in Texas
     July 9th, 2009 @ 4:11 pm

     Posting blocked, refuting St. Ronnie Raygun’s economic “record”. Other than showing no respect for PRESIDENT Barack Obama and American by not capitalizing (however, you did capitalize Reagan!), you get an A- for your spelling. TROLLS like madhatter often correct spelling/grammar here but don’t like it when the tables are turned.

108. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 6:08 pm

     George Bush added $5 trillion to the debt and when he left office he gave Obama $2 trillion in debt. He lied our nation into 2 wars which he paid for through China. He ignored the housing market crashing. He ignored all the jobs going overseas. He ignored the banking industry and when the run-on-the-banks happened in September 2008, he ignored that to. He ignored the 3 million jobs he lost in the last year and didn’t create one new job the whole time he was in office. He said he inherited a recession from Clinton, but yet, ignored this and did nothing.

     (George Bush’s 2009 budget he signed into law in 2008 is still in effect)

     George Bush stimulated hatred against our country. He bankrupted our country. He divided our country.

     Ronald Reagan, whom George Bush worshiped, started the spend-like-a-drunken-sailor when there’s a deficit! Georgie took this to heart.

     The End.

109. Temple Of The Dog
     July 9th, 2009 @ 6:26 pm

     Bush & Cheney lied and our brave American soldiers died, along with 150,000+ Iraqi citizens.

110. madhatter
     July 9th, 2009 @ 8:15 pm

     Are you sure it was Reagan that put you out of business or was it poor business decisions. Most people are not cut out to be self employed because of the dedication and sacrifice you have to make. At least you had your public service job to fall back on.

     Jobs have been leaving this country for decades and most of them left because we were not competitive. Unions forced companies to look elsewhere for their goods to be manufactured. Textile and steel are good examples of jobs leaving because we could not compete. If the cap and tax becomes law, we will see more jobs go to China because they will not participate in the global warming sham.

     obama will make the Bush deficit look like sand on the beach by the time he is finished. Bush made the mistake of never seeing a spending bill he didn’t like and by the time the democrats came to power it was all over. Show me a country that has taxed itself into prosperity.

111. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 8:25 pm

     Ronald Reagan gave out IOU’s too. Now California’s Gov. Arnold is doing it and the right wing is in a frenzy about it! What is wrong with you wingnuts?

112. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 8:26 pm

     Come 2010/2011, we will start to see a change in the budgets. Tax cuts for the uber wealthy will sunset, they’ll be taxed like they should have been, the Iraq & Afghan war will be done, and Americans will have more money in their pockets due to tax cuts for the 95% of the workforce.

113. Temple Of The Dog
     July 9th, 2009 @ 8:29 pm

     Grant how dare you speak the truth about the republicans Gawd, Ronny Raygun, the horrible “actor” who some how went on to become a horrible governor and then a horrible president!

     Face it trolls, Raygun sucked, unless you were a wealthy person or owned a large company. I remember the job market back then as a 17 year old and it SUCKED!

     But hey, I’m sure the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden loved Ronny Raygun because he help fund, arm and train them to become what they are today. Gee thanks Ronny!

     The republican party, we create the enemies for our country one at a time.

114. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 8:44 pm

     Yep. Here’s Ronald Reagan meeting with the Afghan Taliban back in the 80’s:

     http://nikhasnan.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/c12820-32.jpg

115. Grant in Texas
     July 9th, 2009 @ 9:09 pm

     And Donald Rumsfeld delivering a gift of gold spurs from Ronnie to Saddam Hussein at the time when Saddam was the bestest friend of Raygun/Bush:

     http://ragno.imag.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

116. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 9:11 pm

     Yep. Ronnie loved all the bad guys. He cringed at peace & good news. LOL

117. Grant in Texas
     July 9th, 2009 @ 9:13 pm

     Not counting the huge death toll Raygun left in Latin America, his goons like Ollie North, John Negroponte keeping strife stirred up there.

118. kayinmaine
     July 9th, 2009 @ 9:17 pm

     Is it just me or do you also notice how the right wingers only focus on Clinton and never mention the bullshit during the right wing presidencies, Grant? Hey, at least we Democrats have always been able to list out the faults of Clinton…..but man!….the right wingers think there were no republican presidents in the last 2-3 decades!