55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 12:04 pm
A reply to Maporsche, who deleted his post (but not quick enough!) -

Well, it IS a compilation, it doesn't pretend not to be.

But I've been watching this all morning, and it's a great representation of how they've been acting the whole time.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 12:41 pm
@parados,
Wrong conclusion. A federal mandate would even the playing field for everybody. If state A wants to provide wigs, and state B doesn't want this coverage, the federal mandate should decide whether wigs are necessary for health care and omit or allow it. In that way, the cost for these mandates will equalize across state lines. Not everybody will be happy, but in my case I don't need a wig for my good health. Some people purposely shave their heads. Why should my insurance premium include costs for wigs?
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 01:42 pm
Quote:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18642&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
REPUBLICAN HEALTH PLAN WOULD REDUCE PREMIUMS, CUT DEFICIT
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Wednesday night released its cost analysis of the Republican health care plan and found that it would reduce health care premiums and cut the deficit by $68 billion over ten years.

The Republican plan does not call for a government insurance plan but rather attempts to reform the system by creating high-risk insurance pools, allowing people to purchase health insurance policies across state lines and instituting medical malpractice reforms.

According to CBO, the GOP bill would:

• Lower costs, particularly for small businesses that have trouble finding affordable health care policies for their employees.

• Decrease rates by 7 percent to 10 percent for this group, and by 5 percent to 8 percent for the individual market, where it can also be difficult to find affordable policies.

• Have the smallest economic impact on the large group market that serves people working for large businesses that have access to the cheapest coverage; those premiums would decline by up to 3 percent.

The analysis, however, shows the Republican plan would do little to expand coverage:

• The CBO found that under the Republican plan, insurance coverage would increase by about 3 million and that the percentage of insured non-elderly adults would remain at about 83 percent after ten years.

• The House bill would increase coverage to an additional 36 million people, raising the number of insured to 96 percent.

How much will the Republican bill cost?

• The CBO put the price tag for the GOP plan at $61 billion, a fraction of the $1.05 trillion cost estimate it gave to the House bill that lawmakers are set to vote on this weekend.

• And the CBO found that the Republican provision to reform medical malpractice liability would result in $41 billion in savings and increase revenues by $13 billion by reducing the cost of private health insurance plans.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 02:41 pm
@ican711nm,
It will also limit how many uninsured will be covered.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 05:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Let's suppose for a moment that the Federal system takes the most comprehensive state coverage and requires it for all states. It would be the federal mandate you agree with. Would you go along with that?

Why are you going on about wigs? What about those that have lost their hair due to chemotherapy. You can't base the benefits of others on what you need personally CI. The idea that a person with cancer might find it beneficial to their mental health to have a wig is hardly an outlandish idea.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 05:55 pm
@parados,
I'm well aware of the fact that my needs aren't necessarily the need of others, but how does a wig belong in health care? Is that the cadillac plan for cancer patients who are treated with chemo? How and when do we limit what is covered under any health plan? There are costs involved in every mandate that many people do not need, but help pay for in their insurance premiums. Is that fair?

Under any health plan, people who believe they should have the wig coverage should also pay for it. It's about competition, and keeping prices low.

When I purchase car insurance, I get it with a high deductible, but with higher limits on liability. That's my choice that I make, and am willing to pay that extra for the higher limits. Why should somebody who pays for the lowest legal limit get the same coverage I pay for? Doesn't make any sense to me!

That also means that you as an individual - even though you may not need the wig coverage - can opt to pay for that benefit to help those who need wigs for their "mental health." I'd rather spend my extra dollar to help Second Harvest Food Bank and Habitat for Humanity.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 11:25 pm
The vote in the House tonight was 220 in favor of that body's bill vs 215 against.
One Repub, Joseph Cao of New Orleans, voted in favor.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 11:40 pm
@realjohnboy,
In order to get the necessary votes, the Obama administration and the House leadership had to agree to an amendment excluding abortions being covered by any government funded insurance plan.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 12:35 am
@realjohnboy,
I really don't have a problem with that exclusion.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 11:39 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
When I purchase car insurance, I get it with a high deductible, but with higher limits on liability. That's my choice that I make, and am willing to pay that extra for the higher limits. Why should somebody who pays for the lowest legal limit get the same coverage I pay for? Doesn't make any sense to me!

The same argument could be made about car insurance. Why should I have to pay for a minimum of $25000 coverage insurance if I only want $5000 of liability coverage? The state makes me pay for it because someone decided it was necessary. I can disagree with it all I want but that doesn't change the requirement which someone thought was necessary.

Of course there have to be limits CI, but you are doing precisely what I said would happen with your plan. You are setting the limits LOWER, a race to the bottom. Why should insurance have to cover cancer treatment at all if one state doesn't require it? The state that sets the lowest limits is where all the insurance companies will sell policies from. That state will also allow the insurance companies to not have to reveal what they do cover so you as a policy holder won't know.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 11:53 am
@parados,
That's because the state mandates minimums for all drivers to carry auto insurance. You may disagree with the minimums, but why? It protects you from lawsuits to some extent, and covers you for the amount of liability on your policy. It also protects other drivers and passengers when you cause any accident.

I'm not in a position set any coverage lower; that's up to the government and insurance industry, and what benefits the lower premiums will cover. The lower limits will not provide a cadillac plan; that's the way it should be IMHO.

And that will result in real competition where the price and quality will decide demand.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 12:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

I'm not in a position set any coverage lower; that's up to the government and insurance industry, and what benefits the lower premiums will cover. The lower limits will not provide a cadillac plan; that's the way it should be IMHO.

Didn't this whole thing start because you complained some state governments had required wig coverage in policies sold in that state? Your entire argument has been to set the coverage in that state lower when we go to a Federal plan.
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 12:16 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

I really don't have a problem with that exclusion.

Me neither, and I'm very pro-choice.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 12:19 pm
@parados,
They're both consistent; too bad you fail to see it.

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 12:25 pm
AGAIN!

Quote:
OBAMACARE ENDORSEMENTS: WHAT THE BRIBE WAS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN


As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the '09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these -- and the other endorsements -- his package has received are all bought and paid for.
Here are the deals:

* The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill...or else!

* The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact [email protected] . This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .)

* The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

* Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don't buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So -the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an Administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Nov, 2009 11:58 am
Quote:
Mark your calendar and Join us Tonight at 8:00 EST on CPNLIVE.com

Tonight, November 11, 2009 we will be hosting a special show dedicated to the impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama. James V. Lacy, the lawyer that drafted the Articles of Impeachment at ImpeachObamacampaign.com is just one of the expert guests that will join me.

We will also be answering your questions live in the interactive broadcast. So come over to CPNLIVE.com at 8:00 EST, 7:00 CST, 6:00 MST, or 5:00 PST. If you cannot join us them you can watch the broadcast anytime in the CPNLIVE.com show library.

This is your opportunity to ask questions about impeachment. We will also have live discussion in the chat room hosted by our own Inga O’Connor and Caleb Heimlich of the ImpeachObamaCampaign.com crew.
I hope you can join us. The link is http://www.cpnlive.com

Barack Obama fails to mention Terrorism at Ft Hood Memorial
Barack Obama sounded foolish yesterday at the memorial service for the 13 fall heroes at Ft Hood in Texas. He sounded foolish because he refuses to acknowledge the culpability of radical Islam in the events. He wants to divorce the beliefs of Nidal M. Hasan from murderous rampage.

Mounting evidence such as dozens of emails to the radical Imam with ties to the 9-11 hijackers, Anwar al-Awlaki, formally of Falls Church Virginia and recently of Yemen on the Arabian Peninsula, demonstrate that Obama and the Army brass are in denial about Hasan. This was a premeditated act of jihad right down to the ritual cleansing robes captured that morning on a security cam.

The Washington Post even reported an explosive presentation given by Hasan to Army officers outlining his radical ideas. No denying their knowledge now:
"As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program.
Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in the Muslim countries of Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Washington Post.

"It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims,’ he said in the presentation.

"It was really strange,’ said one staff member who attended the presentation and spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the investigation of Hasan. ‘The senior doctors looked really upset’ at the end."

Obama, the Army and the FBI should have removed him from the officer corp after this presentation alone. But the new Obama Army turns its head and ignores radical Islamic jihadist officers in its own ranks.

Obama Subsidizing America’s Islamic Adversaries
If ignoring the jihadists in America isn’t bad enough, how about subsidizing them. The Canada Free Press reports in a story sure to be spiked in the lapdog media the whole story:
"'Islamic jihadists remain the most serious threat against America today, despite President Barack Obama’s effort to improve U.S. relations with the Muslim world,' observes Jim Jacobson, president of Christian Freedom International. Unfortunately, 'Islamic radicals have not reciprocated the president’s attempted outreach."

Earlier this year the president made a celebrated speech in Cairo to promote better relations with the Islamic world but, notes Jacobson, "the primary problem is the hostility of organized Islam to members of other faiths. That hostility starts with persecution against Christians, Jews, and other religious minorities in Muslim nations around the globe.

Now the administration has created a new and expensive technology fund for Islamic countries. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation is providing up to $150 million to 'catalyze and facilitate private sector investments."Target industries include computers and telecommunications."

Why create jobs in America when we can create them for our enemies?

Obama Flees America’s Problems
No wonder Obama is leaving the country. Whenever the job gets too tough this weak man heads for the exits. This week's stop on Obama’s great adventure is South Asia. NewsMax Reports:
"Barack Obama this week makes his first trip to Asia as president, leaving behind a host of domestic problems with a visit that recognizes the region's economic and diplomatic importance to the United States.

The trip, which starts on Thursday, will take Obama to an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Singapore.

But the critical leg will come in China, where Obama will have to navigate an increasingly complex relationship with the country that is the largest holder of U.S. foreign debt and its second-largest trading partner."

Let’s hope he does better in China than he did in Britain. They are still talking in London about how he offended Queen Elizabeth.

One of the reasons Obama deserves to be impeached is he spends more time traveling than dealing with an economy which continues to sink under his leadership. WND.com’s Jerome Corsi reported recently that the real unemployment rate is over 22 percent.

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Nov, 2009 12:01 pm
PERTINENT EXCERPTS FROM THE KORAN
Quote:

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/ot2www-koran?specfile=%2Flv2%2Fenglish%2Frelig%2Fkoran%2Fwww%2Fkoran.o2w&query=wherever+you+find+them&docs=text&sample=1-100&grouping=work

Chapter 2: The Cow : 2.190: And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you , and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.

Chapter 2: The Cow : 2.191: And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

Chapter 2: The Cow : 2.217: They ask you concerning the sacred month about fighting in it. Say: Fighting in it is a grave matter, and hindering (men) from Allah's way and denying Him, and (hindering men from) the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah, and persecution is graver than slaughter; and they will not cease fighting with you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can; and whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever -- these it is whose works shall go for nothing in this world and the hereafter, and they are the inmates of the fire; therein they shall abide.

Chapter 4: The Women : 4.89: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

Chapter 4: The Women : 4.91: You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority.

Chapter 9: The Immunity : 9.5: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Chapter 9: The Immunity : 9.123: O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil) .

0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 08:02 am
Quote:
Thank you former President George W. Bush and former First Lady Laura Bush

We know absolutely no one in Bush family circles and have never met former President George W. Bush or his wife Laura.

If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.

Oh, how we RAILED against Bush in 2000…and how we RAILED against the surge in support Bush received post-9/11 when he went to Ground Zero and stood there with his bullhorn in the ruins on that hideous day.

We were convinced that ANYONE who was president would have done what Bush did, and would have set that right tone of leadership in the wake of that disaster. President Gore, President Perot, President Nader, you name it. ANYONE, we assumed, would have filled that role perfectly.

Well, we told you before how much the current president, Dr. Utopia, made us realize just how wrong we were about Bush. We shudder to think what Dr. Utopia would have done post-9/11. He would have not gone there with a bullhorn and struck that right tone. More likely than not, he would have been his usual fey, apologetic self and waxed professorially about how evil America is and how justified Muslims are for attacking us, with a sidebar on how good the attacks were because they would humble us.

Honestly, we don’t think President Gore would have been much better that day. The world needed George W. Bush, his bullhorn, and his indominable spirit that day…and we will forever be grateful to this man for that.

As we will always be grateful for what George and Laura Bush did this week, with no media attention, when they very quietly went to Ft. Hood and met personally with the families of the victims of this terrorist attack.

FOR HOURS.

The Bushes went and met privately with these families for HOURS, hugging them, holding them, comforting them.

If there are any of you out there with any connection at all to the Bushes, we implore you to give them our thanks…you tell them that a bunch of gay Hillary guys in Boystown, Chicago were wrong about the Bushes…and are deeply, deeply sorry for any jokes we told about them in the past, any bad thoughts we had about these good, good people.

You may be as surprised by this as we are ourselves, but from this day forward George W. and Laura Bush are now on the same list for us as the Clintons, Geraldine Ferraro, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, and the other political figures we keep in our hearts and never allow anyone to badmouth.

Criticize their policies academically and intelligently and discuss the Bush presidency in historical and political terms…but you mess with the Bushes personally and, from this day forward, you’ll answer to us.

We hope someday to be able to thank George W. and Laura in person for all they’ve done, and continue to do. They didn’t have to head to Ft. Hood. That was not their responsibility.

The Obamas should have done that.

But didn’t.

Wouldn’t.

Thank goodness George W. is still on his watch, with wonderful Laura at his side.

We are blessed as a nation to have these two out there…just as we are blessed to have the Clintons on the job, traveling the world doing the good they do.

And we are blessed to have Dick Cheney, wherever he is, keeping tabs on all that’s going on and speaking out when the current administration does anything too reckless and dangerous.

Cheney’s someone else we villainized and maligned in the past who we were also wrong about. There has never been a Vice President, including Gore, Biden, or Mondale, who was more supportive of gay rights than “Darth Cheney”. There has never been a Vice President more spot-on right about the dangers facing this country from Islamic terrorism.

We live in strange, strange times indeed.

We are now officially committed fans of George W. and Laura Bush. We are fans of Dick Cheney. Our gratitude for them makes us newly protective of them, and the continued role they play in this country.

After the primary battle of 2008, we never thought we’d go back to Texas for anything, but sometime in 2010 we want to find some event in Dallas the Bushes will be at so at least one of us can go up to them, tell them we are deeply sorry for ever thinking ill of them, and thank them from the bottom of our hearts for their service to America.

We’re sure they will just stare at us and wonder why these gay Chicagoans are crying, but we don’t think we can get through a meeting with them without being emotional.

What they did at Ft. Hood for those families humbles us. Every day, the Bushes are most likely doing something just like it behind the scenes.

We hope if any of you encounter them you will let them know this is deeply appreciated beyond partisan lines.

We will never look at the Bushes, the Bush presidencies, or their legacies the same again…and someday when his presidential library is built, we will be so proud to visit there and tell anyone will listen about November 10th, 2009, the day we finally appreciated former President George W. Bush and his wife Laura.

Thank you for your service, Mr. President. We’re sorry we didn’t appreciate you while you were in office, but we thank Heaven we’ve wised up and can see the good you are out there doing, under the radar, today.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 09:48 am
@McGentrix,
A bunch of Obama haters use the Bushes as a way to attack Obama?

Shocking!

Cycloptichorn
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 10:53 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Bush, incompetently dealt with the USA economy.

Obama, is incompetently and fraudulently dealing with the USA economy.

A bunch of Obama lovers use the Bushes and Sarah Palin as a way to divert attention away from Obama's incompentence and fraud.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.31 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 02:21:12