Dog Brothers Public Forum


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 28, 2017, 05:34:06 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
103133 Posts in 2384 Topics by 1090 Members
Latest Member: Cgregurich73
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 178
5851  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 18, 2012, 01:10:28 PM
"Where is the Dem party brain trust?"  "You mean Marx, Alinsky and Soros?"

No, I mean the ones who should be chasing those demons out of their party.  Where is the 'rising tide raises all boats', 'peace through strength', 'it is what you can do for your country' message today on their side of the aisle?

The only economic growth argument they have going, I just posted on the tax and political economic threads, is a combination of more debt, higher disincentives to produce and more assignment of blame, as if there is still room to improve on what already has been exhausted.  Algae and tire pressure checks for a better tomorrow.

After this election I would assume that some real leadership will have to emerge from the dormant, pragmatic and centrist wing of that party.  A lot of those people will have time on their hands...
5852  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics on: March 18, 2012, 12:47:36 PM
"Scott Grannis doesn't [think we aren't heading to an economic collapse]."

Scott has good insight and data.  I would like to go back a little through his blog which I haven't read for a while.  Like Wesbury, it seems to me that we are hearing positive words that describe a very lethargic non-recovery.  I wrote this about housing too, but I'm not going to count any margin of error level 'growth' as any kind of rebound.  Maybe we aren't currently headed into collapse, but we also aren't building up enough economic strength to survive the next, major, self-inflicted setback.

I think both Wesbury and Grannis would agree that the 'growth' they are reporting, from the lowest of all lows, is a fraction of what it ought to be and that our policies are desperately in need of change.
5853  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2012 Presidential - It's not as trendy as it was to be in the Obama campaign on: March 18, 2012, 12:25:35 PM
"It's not as trendy as it was to be involved in the Obama campaign"
   - Barack Obama, March 2012

You don't say!

'Landslide' 2008 was a 7 point win running an error-free blank slate against and aging and confused challenger hated by his own party.  The only demographic group in the country where Obama's approval has not dropped 7 points in popularity is right-ring Republicans.

I quit touting my prediction made at the height of his approval that Barack Obama will not be the nominee of his own party because the only substitute they can think of is to have Hillary run on the exact same record, policies and rhetoric.

Where is the Dem party brain trust?
5854  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Barron's cover story: Housing ready to rebound on: March 18, 2012, 12:12:53 PM
Actually ready to rebound by spring of 2013, this pretend optimism is another way of confirming what PP told us a year ago - to get ready for at least 2 more years of downward movement.  So far, pp has been right on the money.

After falling 34% over the past six years, U.S. home prices will soon bottom. They could turn back up by spring 2013.

(nice ads at the link, try 4 weeks free!)
My prediction was that the housing rebound is tied to the employment and income rebound which is inextricably tied to the Nov 6 election and the policies and expectations that come out of it.

Point of clarification: a 2 or 3% bump following a 40% collapse is not exactly a 'rebound'. 
5855  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on Energy on: March 18, 2012, 12:00:01 PM
This could go in Energy Policy but it really is only about nonsense coming out of the mouth of the President of the United States:

Charles Krauthammer on the Obama Community College energy speech:  “You know, in basketball this would be a double technical,” Krauthammer said. “Obama will stomp on anybody, living or dead, if he’ll get a laugh out of it, and you know eight people who will end up on his side on Nov. 6. But I think the whopper in his speech was where he said, at one point, he said, ‘The real way to reduce prices on gas in America is to decrease demand.’ Then, within three minutes of the same speech, he said we can increase production offshore all we want. It will have no effect on the world price.”

Does he even read these speeches before he delivers them.  Is he a complete moron or does he think you are one?
5856  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Political Economics - Have you been unemployed long? on: March 18, 2012, 11:54:40 AM
The human damage they are willing to do in their ideological battle against economic freedom is appalling.
5857  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Political Economics - Keynesians say we need more stimulus on: March 18, 2012, 11:48:23 AM
Former chief economic adviser Christina Romer says what we need to get different results is more of the same:;_ylt=ArC3bUsdYUwVwF.MUUT2fFGiuYdG;_ylu=X3oDMTQ0a3NjZGI2BG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIFRvcCBTdG9yeSBSaWdodARwa2cDNTU5Nzk1NGQtYzBkNS0zMjI1LWJlYmEtZDZiYjc4MWQzNGI

"I absolutely think more fiscal stimulus would be very helpful," she says. "We need faster growth [to bring down unemployment]. Fiscal stimulus could help do that."

Good grief.  $6 trillion wasn't enough, we need more fiscal stimulus.  Somebody is trying to get her job back.
5858  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Tax Policy: Christina Romer on marginnal tax rates on: March 18, 2012, 11:40:24 AM

"A family’s marginal tax rate is what its members pay to the government if they earn another dollar. If the government takes a smaller chunk of that dollar, a family has more incentive to earn it. Workers may choose to work additional hours, or a stay-at-home spouse may decide to work outside the home. Likewise, entrepreneurs may invest in a new enterprise or expand an existing one. Lower marginal rates also reduce people’s incentives to shield income from taxes, through legal and illegal means."

Oddly, Romer goes on to try to minimize that reality.  With all the scrutiny over copyrights, I end my interest in what she has to say right there.  My advice is don't bother click on the link or read it all.  She is trying to tell potential skydivers without parachutes that the law of gravity is no big deal.
5859  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: March 16, 2012, 11:58:49 PM
"Santorum wants to ban hardcore porn."

That kind of position should be backed up with an stated opinion of where the authority for federal jurisdiction comes from in the constitution.  I suppose it is interstate commerce as much as growing tomatoes on your own property is.
5860  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: March 16, 2012, 11:46:20 PM
Romney called the President a economic lightweight.  That is giving him the benefit of the doubt.  This is a great charge because it begs the followup question to press Romney to back that up with something which is a slow hanging curve ball over the heart of the plate.  If you can't hit that one out of the park you shouldn't be in the game.

The Rutherford Hayes thing is weird.  Mr. President, 6 million jobs are gone, Iran, North Korea and al Qaida are going nuclear, the middle east is in flames, we're a trillion a year in deficit, we shrunk the economy, we diluted the currency by multiple trillions and 19% of the workforce can't find full time work  - why are you babbling about Rutherford Hayes!?
5861  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 15, 2012, 05:17:18 PM
"A better measure would be the poll numbers from the swing states."  

Here is a 2008 Obama electoral map.
Some of the swing states and red states that Obama won:

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida
Virginia, North Carolina
New jersey, New Hampshire
Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana
Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado

The R. nominee needs about 97 points out of states Obama won last time, which by my count is about 7 good sized states from that list.  That is a very high bar.  Really have to aim for a landslide, not to eek out a close one.

I think there is a poll showing Obama now leading in Florida.  We will see.  Marco Rubio (2012 VP nominee?) won Fl in 2010 by a million votes; second place was another Republican.

Ohio is also crucial.  Colorado, Virginia and battleground Wisconsin will all be leading indicators.  If the Republican wins the real swing states, the truly red states will already be won.  

What will we need to do to win bigdog's vote?
5862  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / 1990 Thomas Sowell explains Derrick Bell: Black does not mean skin color on: March 15, 2012, 04:50:00 PM
Adding this video gem from 'politics'  to the race thread by request:

Sowell: "...[Bell] also said that by black, he does not mean skin color, he means those who are really black, not those who think white and look black. And so what he is really saying is he wants ideological conformity in the people that are hired to fill this position."

Harvard law student Barack Obama made his early mark championing the cause of Prof. Derrick Bell, Harvard Law School's first black professor.
5863  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: March 15, 2012, 03:04:35 PM
Quote from: bigdog on March 13, 2012, 10:22:47 AM
A 12-year-old Minnesota girl was reduced to tears while school officials and a police officer rummaged through her private Facebook postings after forcing her to surrender her password, an ACLU lawsuit alleges.
Interesting case thought the key fact seems to be at issue.  I'm not sure what to think of the privacy rights of a 12 year old posting on the internet.  My first thought is that the issue would go through the parents.  The district says that they did.

'The Tinker case basically found that students can say what they want as long as the speech doesn't cause a disruption at school.'  Certainly there are posts on Facebook that become disruptions in school.  

The issue of privacy for a 12 year old on facebook is confounded by the requirement of facebook that she be 13 to join.

Same group (ACLU) took the other side (?)  regarding the blocking of Pediatricians from asking the child if there are firearms in the house.  A free speech right of the doctor??  Isn't a direct question from your own doctor similarly intimidating, though admittedly not 'armed with a Taser'.

Privacy and free speech depend on the whom is asking what - ?
5864  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Fed, Monetary Policy, Inflation, US Dollar: The 'real' inflation rate on: March 15, 2012, 10:54:56 AM
CPI is calculated by removing those volatile items that go up the most.  Some argue the real inflation rate is higher:

America’s real inflation rate has moved above 8%

Read it at the link, click on the ads.
5865  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 1990 Thomas Sowell explains Derrick Bell: Black does not mean skin color on: March 15, 2012, 10:47:51 AM
Prof. Thomas Sowell was writing and speaking about the Derrick Bell controversy long before the nation heard of the student who championed him, Barack Obama.

If Sowell is correct, the storyline implied in the Frontline piece is incomplete.  Was this about a racial divide or about race AND ideology.  IMHO, that is a HUGE difference!  No time to explore that in a two hour documentary(?), just a clip leaving the impression he championed a black professor with an affirmative action cause and brought the two sides together.  Radical whites and radical blacks are now all working together. 

Sowell: "...[Bell] also said that by black, he does not mean skin color, he means those who are really black, not those who think white and look black. And so what he is really saying is he wants ideological conformity in the people that are hired to fill this position.
5866  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: california on: March 15, 2012, 10:09:13 AM
GM, It is interesting that they have the highest marginal rates in the nation and yet revenues are tanking, but stay tuned.  Rapid economic growth is right around the corner... lol.

We heard the opposing view expressed that tax rates and over-regulation at the margin do not have a noticeable on economic activity or growth. (I asked for data to back up that view - it should be coming shortly.  wink 

The rich simply use the higher rate to calculate their new tax bill and have no interest, motive or option of altering their behavior, to either invest less or invest elsewhere.  That view unfortunately requires a complete denial of the definition of what it means to be rich. 

One of the economists used to track the one-way, UHaul, medium sized truck price movement index to estimate the speed of assets leaving California.

The economic loss of once-great Calif to the rest of this nation is not like Europe losing Greece.
5867  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Economics, the stock market , and other investment/savings strategies on: March 15, 2012, 09:57:38 AM
"sensing that we are about to see the reversal of a decades long trend of downward interest rates.
If I am right, a lot of people will be wanting to sell bonds.
Will this money then be a source of funds flowing into equities?"

Oops, I am trying to quit agreeing with GM but sometimes he nails it... Yes, interest will have to go up, but nothing good in equities comes out of financial panic or collapse in the world's largest economy.

Interest rates can only be super low now if we are not selling all the bonds required to cover current deficit spending.  (QE-to the umpteenth power is already/still happening.)  The market force interest rate right now without central bank manipulation would be a scary high number IMHO.
5868  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 15, 2012, 09:40:43 AM
"Interesting that Santorum is close enough that he may be within the statistical margin of error!"

True.  Also interesting and scary is that, if the election were held today and it isn't, the difference of 3 points of margin of error polling is the difference between winning the White House, ending Obamacare, lowering tax rates, vetoing spending bills, choosing the Supreme Court nominees, Fed nominees, the entire Executive branch, etc. and losing and leaving all that to Obama and his associates from the Ayers, Alinski, Rev. Wright side of politics.

I was listening to Jay Cost or Weekly Standard yesterday who a polling result analyst formerly with Real Clear Politics.  He pointed out Santorum has 2 sides like Newt.  He has the perfect American story with blue collar roots and attracts lower income workers to the Republican side.  Then he also puts his foot in mouth and gets off-message sometimes like his anti-JFK talk recently. In the middle of the BCP religious freedom debate RS was saying JFK should have brought his Catholic faith more into governing?  Valid or not valid, it is about as focused for this election as the lunar colony proposal.  We have a 16 trillion dollar debt, have 35 million people un- or under-employed, are losing our largest state, Iran going nuclear, among other problems.

Santorum carried 27% of independents in his last PA election.
5869  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - March 2012 polling on: March 13, 2012, 12:05:30 PM
The media and Dems successfully shifted the conversation back to social issues with the help of candidate Rick Santorum and the vulgarity of Rush L.

Manipulated unemployment figures are down a bit to 8.3%.  Bin Laden captured, troops home from Iraq.  Afghanistan war ending as far as we know.  Auto industry up?  It doesn't get much better than this...

CBS/NY Times poll shows Pres. Obama tanking  though they have upgraded the title of the story from “Obama Approval Rating Shows Big Slip in Poll” to “Obama’s Rating Falls as Poll Reflects Volatility.”

Rasmussen has Romney leading Obama by 5 points and the generic congressional ballot with R's ahead of Dems by 7-8 points.

One big problem is that lower income people notice gas and grocery prices while Ivory Tower liberals see only the positive side of that.

CBS reports that most Americans believe there should be an exception to the mandate requiring employers who may have a moral or religious objection to cover birth control for their employees — by a margin of 57-36!

One more CBS/New York Times poll. A majority of Americans say they would favor using U.S. military action against Iran to prevent the country from acquiring nuclear weapons — by a margin of 51-36.

That doesn't even get to the key questions of the day:  How do you like the idea of leaving your children and grandchildren to live in a third world country, and are you better off now than you were SEVEN trillion dollars ago, when Pelosi-Reid-Obama took over Washington with unemployment at 4.6%, partner in crime Rep. Keith Ellison of Mpls. swore on Thomas Jefferson Quran to destroy this country as we once knew it?
5870  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Economics - Unemployment is up or down? on: March 12, 2012, 10:44:06 PM
Gov't figures showed job growth up last month, adjusted for climate model type adjustments.  Of course the denominator of the equation has dropped by 6 million jobs gone.

Gallup has unemployment up last month and real unemployment, the percentage of people looking for full time work and cannot find it is up to 19%.

Unemployment in North Dakota where energy production is legal is 3%.  Nothing to be learned from that.

Unemployment in the Twin Cities metro is 5%.  California 11%.  Nevada 13%.
5871  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Iran on: March 12, 2012, 05:42:19 PM
"he'll be slapping high fives"

It could also be that he knows the difference between an ally and enemy but doesn't know what to do with that information.

If I were commander in chief, besides intelligence briefings I would have psychological experts on whatever is wrong with Ahmedinejad advising me as well.  Correctly predicting and preparing for the enemy's next move is crucial, but difficult to do with raving maniacs.

Allowing Iran to go nuclear is unthinkable.  Blowing up one location to set them back a year while confirming the view of the rest of the world that it is the "Zionists and the American Imperialists" (stealing a phrase from Saddam) who are the aggressors is not much gain.

Somewhere in the larger picture, nations like Russia and China shouldn't be able to play nice with us on other matters and smaller matters and then stab us in the back on crucial areas of non-proliferation and global security.  If this is the biggest containable threat of this time, how about we treat it that way in our relationships with the other members of the security council. 

The commitment to keep Iran non-nuclear needs to have more staying power than one first strike.
5872  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hope and change - an earlier documentary on: March 12, 2012, 02:29:25 PM
I on a lighter note I would note that platitudes similar to those in the 2008 Barack Obama stump speeches were advanced by Pat Paulson's in 1968.
5873  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: $8 trillion at 'teaser interest rates'. on: March 12, 2012, 01:04:53 PM
IIRC, the precedent for this was Sec Rubin under Bill Clinton.  He made a very large and irreponsible gamble of putting long term debt out at short term rates to save money in the shart term that panned out quite well where they were able through other actions (capital gains tax cuts, welfare reform, spending restraints, internet buildout, etc.) balance the budget for a short time (in a bubble economy).

Now that kind of irresponsibility is the norm even though now we KNOW interest rates must go up and that we will be fiscally punished for doing this.  This is not in the context of throwing a Hail Mary to balance the budget.  This is in the context of multi-year, trillion dollar deficits, spending at nearly 1.5 times revenues, immeasurable entitlement liabilities accelerating and releasing yet another budget that reaches balance at date certain: NEVER.
5874  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Iran on: March 12, 2012, 12:53:32 PM
CCP, nice job following this.  It will come down to what Netanyahu can and will do without advance American backing and your questions will dictate much of the aftermath.

Cynical but my take on the White House position is that they are still polling focus groups to measure whether or not Iran going fully nuclear will be considered by historians and the public in general to be George Bush's fault.
5875  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Frontline conclusion: Obama in a very old fashioned sense is a conservative guy. on: March 12, 2012, 12:42:10 PM
I watched the full 2 hour Choice 2008 of Frontline.  

The Frontline piece IMO covers the edges of those controversies but completely glosses over the implications IMO. The impression left is that the issues (at Harvard law School) were horribly divisive and that he was the healer, the one who could reach to both sides.  What were the views he was championing?  Not covered, was my take.  

The top 10 or 12 objections I would have to a Barack Obama administration did not receive any mention, but the viewer of such an exhaustive piece might b e left thinking they have now done their homework for voting.

The next two chapters in American political history were already being written, the beginning of Obama's governance and the 2010 tea party / conservative total repudiation of that.  The setup for both of those eventualities was the real story (IMHO) of the campaign of 2008 - not contemplated whatsoever in the documentary.  What people were voting for in 2008 and what they got were judged quickly to be two different things (in full vetting?), but the essence of that was completely missed by a documentary of such enormous length and painstaking detail (because IMO the producers likely don't even know their own bias).

3 points of interest in the long version:

28:50+ on the long version is where the shorter clip is taken.  Already mentioned, what were the (radical) views he was championing? You would likely need to follow far right wing media to know that.  Young college grad Obama "needed to know if there was a better way to lift people out of poverty", so he pursued improving his resume and increasing the power of his influence instead of studying economics.  He was accepted at one of the nation's most prestigious law schools (no question of how or why he was accepted), he took on student loans (implying that was how it was paid for, really?).  What racial issues was the country going through in the late 1980's?  Dred Scott?  Rosa Parks?  Jackie Robinson??  Was an Ivy League campus keeping out blacks?!  What was Prof. Derrick Bell saying that was divisive?  They say Obama championed his cause (the point conveyed I think was courage), they show him saying Bell was 'speaking the truth', but they did not say what that 'truth' was.  Maybe that is in some other Frontline episode, lol.

Around the 57:00 mark of the first hour they get to the Trinity Church controversy, introduced this way:

"It was a big, popular inner-city church that was known for its community work."

They go on to cover the controversy of Reverend Wright.  Seems to me that is exactly backwards to the point to the rest of America.  Preaching things like "God Damn America' and "America's chickens have come home to roost" is what was drawing the extremely large and  enthusiastic crowds in the heart of the 'capital of black America'; they also do community work.  I can think of other figures in recent history who preached hatred yet did community work, but will decline to name the analogies.

At one hour and 50 minutes:  Obama is described for choosing of Joe Biden as his VP choice: 'Obama is someone who is cautious, someone who in a very old fashioned sense is a conservative guy," - Ryan Lizza NY Times, and used as PBS Frontline's Oct 15 2008 ending on Obama (before they headed back to close on McCain's choice of Sarah Palin).

Yeah, a conservative guy, that's who suburban white soccer moms, 78% of Jewish Americans and the majority of deficit-first independent voters were electing. (Emoticon unavailable)  If that piece passes as full vetting I have some nice property for sale... Respectfully, Doug.
5876  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Political Rants - re. Coffee is an essential benefit too, and gender wars on: March 12, 2012, 10:42:07 AM
How can we not at least grant congress the power to mandate employers at a minimum make peas and carrots available to workers during the work day?  What kind of a country have we become?  Maybe the article is written in jest but just where does nanny state, cradle-to-grave government begin and end, no one knows.

Going the other direction with it, Dem female lawmakers are avenging proposed limits on the slaughtering of our young with viagra legislation.

Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health
Part of a trend, she likens the bill to men legislating ‘a woman’s womb.’

By Jackie Borchardt, Columbus Bureau Updated 11:53 PM Saturday, March 10, 2012

COLUMBUS – Before getting a prescription for Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs, men would have to see a sex therapist, receive a cardiac stress test and get a notarized affidavit signed by a sexual partner affirming impotency, if state Sen. Nina Turner has her way.

The Cleveland Democrat introduced Senate Bill 307 this week.

A critic of efforts to restrict abortion and contraception for women, Turner says she is concerned about men’s reproductive health. Turner’s bill joins a trend of female lawmakers submitting bills regulating men’s health. Turner said if state policymakers want to legislate women’s health choices through measures such as House Bill 125, known as the “Heartbeat bill,” they should also be able to legislate men’s reproductive health...

Read more at the link:  and click on the ads.

I would note in the false declaration of gender wars that I think it is women who are the most energetic of the pro-life movement (anti-women's rights?) and my guess that it is older women who might like to enjoy their aging husbands' erection one more time.
5877  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - Constitutuency Group Justice on: March 10, 2012, 01:05:27 PM
Social-justice, racial-justice, gender-justice, in this case her cause is "Reproductive-Justice".

"Justice" does not need a hyphen or a qualifier, FYI, in the USA in 2012 - other than when used in the context of 'liberty and justice for all'.

A right or a liberty is not defined as requiring someone else to do something for you.

223 years of a right to bear arms and no one has demanded or received a free gun.

If I walk into a synagogue knowing the rules and demand that pork chops and Holy Communion be offered and they refuse, maybe someone watching the spectacle calls me a name, which of us is being boorish?

Unbelievable that people make a hit and run on this without acknowledging the underlying issues. 

Border agents dead, troops in Afghanistan killed, a shooting in Cleveland, 6 million jobs gone perhaps forever, and the President calls and sympathizes with an intentionally divisive, anti-religious rights, anti-limited-government activist/provocateur. 

Let the lines be drawn.
5878  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2012 Presidential: Romney trouble clinching the nomination on: March 09, 2012, 11:57:25 PM
CCP, For some reason there is a difference between a Republican looking rich and a Democrat looking rich.  Clinton, Obama, they call themselves fortunate.  Romney, to them, did it on the backs of the poor.

Santorum is less rich but wears sweater vests.  He made a living lobbying and in public office.  Gingrich, ditto.  Taught a college class, sold some books based on his experience and influence - like Clinton and Obama.  Made some money from Freddie Mac and spent it at Tiffanys.
Here is a negative piece on Romney in a conservative publication:   He echoes some points Crafty made, outspending Santorum 12-1 in Ohio for example to get a one point win. 

Still I don't see the conclusion.  There is a bigger than ever race going on right now for leader of the free world and he is the only one winning.  Obama may win in the end but for now he hasn't run against anybody or won a contested vote.

"he's lost almost every Southern state"  - He won the important one, Florida, or is that the East?

"Romney has done really well in blue-state primaries. But Republicans won't win these states this November. Rollins adds that Romney loses badly in many red states — ones he must carry in November."  - The truly red states anyone not Obama will win.  It is the divided states that determine the election.  Losing badly in red states and the south?  He is in a virtual tie in Alabama and Mississippi.  That not bad for a 'Massachusetts moderate'.

The closing point is of much more concern: "The truth is that his policy advisers and campaign staff are filled with moderates who are out of step with the base of the Republican Party."  - That IS a problem, if true.  Yet he just came out with a 20% across the board marginal tax rate cut, is very strong on national security issues and to the right of Newt on border security and immigration reform.  Santorum voted to the left of Bill Clinton and Al Gore on NAFTA. 

The left, right, moderate model of politics is not very helpful with this Republican field.

P.S.  The loser so far is Ron Paul who was quite a force at the start and hasn't won a single state, even a caucus. 

The link again:  and be sure to click on the ads.

Romney's Fuzzy Math for a Fuzzy Campaign

Thursday, 08 Mar 2012 10:00 PM

By Christopher Ruddy,  Newsmax

I am continually amazed how those at the Romney campaign continue to act victorious when they have such a poor case to make about cinching the nomination.  ...

5879  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Newt Gingrich on: March 09, 2012, 11:27:41 PM
Newt's job is to either drop out or spin things positive the best that he can.  The Cain ruile is that you are all in verbally and in fund raising until the last minute that you are out.  The race for second OTOH is important because front runners can and do stumble.  But getting beat 3 to 1 margin by a 'weak frontrunner' and bragging about it isn't looking too good.

The delegate count is a little misleading because several of Santorum's wins were in in caucus states where no immediate delegates were awarded but his delegates disproportionately moved forward to the conventions where Presidential delegate votes will eventually be awarded.

Newt's strength is the south.  He says he is leading in states in a statistical tie where the momentum is against him.

I like that he won his home state where people have known him longest and know him best.  His daughter Jackie Gingrich Cushman wrote a nice op-ed on that recently.

Yes GM, letters to contributors are a plea for help.   wink

If either Santorum or Newt could see the other as the next Reagan emerging, then maybe one would drop out.  No one I guess drops out based on sympathy for the other competitors.  You drop out because you are out of money or to save face.

How does a 'brokered' convention, best case for Rick or Newt, endorse anyone other than the far and away front runner.  The elites switch to the second or third place candidate on the second ballot or to someone who skipped the process entirely or dropped out early?  I just don't see it.  I've been at a lot of endorsing conventions.  In a bitterly divided party you always have the option of not endorsing.  That is unthinkable.  Delegates move their vote on subsequent ballots to where they see strength and momentum.  For the Dems in '08, Hillary had momentum at the end, Obama had strength.  A small lead guaranteed victory because the elites were not going to reverse that in August to lose legitimacy in November.  Elections, even primaries, have consequences.
5880  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: March 09, 2012, 07:10:02 PM
The argument still is that we already do it and Bush did it so too bad to those with different ideas and those who care about principles or cost effectiveness with the public dollar even though we are trillions and trillions overspent. The constituency is large, therefore we should pander.  

That we disagree strongly is reason why we should NOT have one size fits all healthcare.  You really don't see that! You say move on but if you don't care then do that and leave this to people who do.  We should concede arguments with people we disagree with to get their vote? For what?

The woman says she needs $3000 for contraception and she needs it paid for by someone else and the clause in the constitution that authorizes is called focus group  polling.  SHE BROUGHT IT UP, she went public, she reached into GM's wallet even though he had it tucked in a very private place.  She offended a few people, like those who believe in limited government, constitutional government, efficient government or freedom of religion.  And you don't care.  So WHAT?

Repetitive, unresponsive, apathetic and insulting.  Why is this hetero-centric law fair to gays who have no risk of accidental procreation subsidizing sexually active heterosexual women like they are an exploited minority?  Have you answered ANY of the concerns expressed?  No.  If this were dinner conversation in person, would you insult everyone when you don't care about the topic, or politely make an excuse, thank your host and leave.
5881  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: March 09, 2012, 05:17:32 PM
She doesn't have to contracept cost effectively if it isn't supposed to be with her money.  She may have had no actual activity at all but a girl needs to be ready.

Why (again) did she choose to go public with what ought to be private?

Please provide receipts to the committee.  It is an issue now.  Roger Clemons was indicted, charged with lying to Congress and tried in federal court. 

The operation that went on a mission to destroy Joe the Plumber is shocked and disappointed at a personal attack - from a radio show.  Did you know Joe the Plumber was DIVORCED and his plumbing license was good in only one municipality?  He'll never make a quarter million!  He failed his apprenticeship.  Obama knew his earning potential for the next 4 years was limited and proclaimed that fact nationally and publicly.  It wasn't a radio show that went after him personally.  It was the VP candidate first on a national show and then Obama himself, loud and often, without apology.

What a jackass.
5882  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / A question for or about the President on: March 09, 2012, 04:36:57 PM
He had mentors like Ayers, Alinsky, Rev. Wright, the latest to come out is radical Prof. Derrick Bell.  Pres. Obama hired extremists like Van Jones, Anita Dunn, plenty of others, maybe Glen Beck can help with the rest of the names.  He had a Nancy Pelosi-led Dem House for 2 years and he had 60 votes in the Senate for a minute or 2.  He got 'healthcare' done but only in what he considered a transition program to single payer, watered down and necessarily complicated to get the votes of the retiring centrists like Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan, Joe Lieberman, Jim Webb, etc.

Then he had 2 years still running where he can't get more done because of the nay-saying Republican House and his super-slim majority in the Senate, and he is blaming Republicans, really the centrists for refusing to go any further with his agenda although to an unprecedented extent his is legislating what he can from the Czar level and from the spending and regulatory authorities of the Executive Branch.

I have a serious question that is probably impossible to answer:

Without exaggeration or defamation, what would Pres. Barack Obama's policies be in detail, across the board, if he was not constrained whatsoever by Republicans, centrists, the constitution, the media or anyone else? 

What are his own views?  Is he more centrist now than in his radical days or is he a political survivor and tactician still hellbent on changing the direction of the country?  What would the constitution say about the limits on government if he could write it? What would the tax rates be?  On whom?  What would spending be if it could be set be Presidential decree?  What powers would he ceded to the U.N. or a stronger world government if he could?  What would the borders and immigration policy look like if not hounded by the Republicans and the bitter clingers?  What would energy use restrictions be?  Etc. etc.

We have had roughly 4 years to get to know this guy and he wants 4 more.  What are his real views right now on public policy?
5883  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: China on: March 09, 2012, 12:29:26 PM
Bigdog,  Very interesting and surprising implications pointed out at your link.  Thank you.
5884  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: March 09, 2012, 12:27:22 PM
"she's only needing 10 condoms a day"

In the old days he would have to at least buy her 10 dinners a day for her to not be considered ... (the bad word meaning 'loose in morals or promiscuous').
5885  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - Sandra Fluke on: March 09, 2012, 12:17:44 PM
The Iranians storming the embassy were only students, if that is funny.  She is an activist of national exposure.  If you deny that, read on and view the video.  She was a leader of an anti-Catholic organization trying to take down Catholic principles in a Catholic university.  She chose her public role.  And she was discovered and pushed forward by others.  That does not mean deserves bad words, it means she is a public figure, not acting as a student, but as a national policy advocate.  She was being put forward to testify on a panel; of experts.  When denied that she went public.  Rush L. did not go to Georgetown interviewing students.  She came to him via the airwaves as a leading advocate on her side's lead issue.  Why do we always have to argue the obvious?
Ed Shultz called Laura Ingraham a slut, on air.  Yeah, same word, no provocation.  Rachel hasn't quoted Ed Shultz on the forum, but none other than... Sandra Fluke ... had no problem going on his show a week before the Rush Limbaugh incident.  And she wasn't there to say 'Ed, you misogynist'!  She was there to bitch and whine about the plight of women who go to places like Georgetown of their own free choosing.

Was the 'Ed Show', originator of free on air slut calling okay with Fluke because liberals give better apologies?  No.  This is all a highly orchestrated political act and the Rush mistake was just too good to pass up. 

Did Obama ever reach across the aisle and call the 'talk slut' Laura Ingraham and commissurate? Uh, no.  Did it remind him of his daughters?  What a bunch of bullsh*t.

Now Fluke is on the travel and making the rounds to all the shows and all the networks.  She is booked by her PR agent, none other than ... Anita Dunn.

$9 a month for contraception is outrageous for a busy, taxpayer funded college student.  Coast to coast travel for political speaking engagements?  No problem.

Either the White House or the DNC planted the issue and put forward this 'student'.  It started with the George Stephanopolous question off the wall in a debate where Gov. Romney had to say What?? This isn't an issue in any state!  And Stephanopolous agreed on his own show ABC's 'This Week' the next day that he embarrassed himself badly there, set up by ... he didn't say whom.

This woman Fluke chose the nation's oldest Catholic University to set out on a firestorm against Catholic principles.  Yes, Crafty, there are issues beyond religious freedom at stake, but religious freedom IS at stake.

I don't care for Bill O'Reilly much but he seems to have this one figured out:  "But now we see, alright, that Anita Dunn and her firm have embraced her. Now, she appeared on NBC 1, 2, 3, 4 times, CBS once, CNN once — no, five for NBC — and The View also. And each of these times, alright, there was a shadowy booking process. Because I spoke to some of these people. [...] She appears, she shows up. Somebody pays for all of that."

Fluke claims that only 2% of Catholic women follow the rules and principles of the faith anyway.  Who really cares about such a small religious minority?? ?? ??

Rachel I believer is looking for the big picture, not for herself, on the issue but I would like to ask her in 20 or 30 years how having government enlarged and empowered to screw over and stomp out one faith and its principles has worked out for her religion.  War against religion has not historically been good for ANY religion except the worship for a government controlled life.

You are 2 or 3 more bizarre twists or turns in the road from having a Rick Santorum administration choose the next Secretary of Health and Human Services and you want the federal government in the meantime to accumulate more power over these personal decisions?  Good luck.
5886  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Energy Politics & Science on: March 09, 2012, 10:57:55 AM
CCP, Very interesting stuff.  Your point of the $50k fee is just one indicator but to me the risk is all regulatory. Fracking is under attack even though 57 states say no drinking water has ever been contaminated. 

We have enough overall demand for energy that the explosion of natural gas (bad choice of words?) will find plenty of uses. 

CNG burns cleaner than gasoline, I think it is 25% cleaner for CO2 emissions (when did CO2 become a pollutant?) and cleaner for everything else as well.  CNG is not as transportable as gasoline, but good enough for all commuters and metro traffic.  It would take extremely high pressure to get a reasonable sized tank to get the full mileage range of a gas tank, but only a doctor can afford a full tank of gas these days anyway.

There are compressors to fill the CNG tank overnight from your home natural gas line.  The road tax authorities are not wild about this.

Making CNG widely available in Utah where the mountains trap the air pollution in the valley was Gov. Huntsman's claim to fame.  He didn't tout it during his Presidential bid and I don't know what kept the idea from expanding.  In our state, only the gas company has a CNG station and only fleets and a few hobbyists are using it.  Googling a few vehicles, factory CNG models are available with more coming and there are plenty of kits.  There is always the problem of getting people to gradually switch over before widespread availability, like E-85, but if the price, supply and demand are right it can happen fast enough in the metro areas.  If not Exxon then someone else can do it.  The big constraints are cost in getting the right equipment and of course the regulatory issues.

If the supplies get too high and the prices too low, the usage can easily switch over to other uses like generating electricity.  Remember that Japan with its nuclear problem and Germany closing nuclear plants and the USA failing to build new plants makes a huge, unfilled demand for clean and plentiful substitutes.  You can put the generator at the point of use, home or business instead of taking electricity from the grid.  Like with solar and wind, you could potentially sell power back to the electric company.
5887  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Energy Politics & Science on: March 09, 2012, 12:43:44 AM
CCP wrote: "Scroll to the section for the US.  While converting to natural gas doesn't itself cost much getting a certificate from the EPA will cost a bit more - 50 grand:"

You are correct: "the conversion requires a type certificate from the EPA. Meeting the requirements of a type certificate can cost up to $50,000."

That doesn't make sense to me.  I was wondering where (besides Wikipedia) you came across that.  Maybe it is the fee to Ford, Honda or GM to approve a new model?

CNG is cleaner and we should be all over it for transportation.  Not as a government with credits, subsidies or mandates, but as a people.  Also, consider CNG hybrids for the superclean consumer.
5888  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics: Big fat liar or a slut? One gets you into the Senate. on: March 09, 2012, 12:18:20 AM
"Mandated coverage of abortions is also in play here."

Yes.  The elephant in the room.  I hope there aren't any religious-Americans still hung up on that old 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' commandment.

The writing from Michelle Malkin is powerful.  How did all that happen without the notice of the feminists?  Or did I miss the outrage?  Then we had the Obama million dollar contributor calling Palin a "cunt" and Obama's phony 'Pastor' calling our country "God Damn America".  Then we get the lecture when one conservative pundit calls one liberal activist a slut when he meant prostitute as a bad joke and quickly apologized.

Yes I have quoted Rush L a few times on his political insights and I disapprove of that message and a few others of his.  I also disapprove that liberals made a book calling him a big, fat liar into a best seller with their exuberance and put the author of that trash in the Senate. I do however get the joke that he fumbled, that she was publicly demanding money to have sex and there is a bad word that should have never been spoken for people who do that.  I think the proper word or analogy for the activity was extortion, not prostitution.  Once she got going in the video I posted, the message was clear: Pay me, pay us, or we will make your life a living hell.  We will publicly call all of you out as women haters, with your obnoxious religions and worn-out principles and see that you never hold political power of any kind ever again if you won't pay us for whatever we decide that we need. 
5889  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Politics: What is private or personal anymore? on: March 08, 2012, 02:51:01 PM
I don't accept the name calling.  Repeating what was already apologized for didn't exactly move the civility forward judging the first response.   

This is NOT a question about what the insured and your insurance company agree to include in a private contract.  Why would we care about that?  Fluke was in front of Congress on the issue of what the government will force everyone to pay for.  It isn't "birth control should be covered by insurance carriers", but what government will mandate.  If it reduces healthcare costs, why does it need to be an act of Congress?

Besides Catholics, abstainers, masterbaters and oral sex enthusiasts, gays should be another demographic wondering why they must pay the expenses of women who selectively engage in non-reproductive, heterosexual copulation - without condoms.  All must pay for the activities of some.  I missed the part where this stuff quit being PRIVATE!

Fluke describes this as a necessity.  What other living expenses must be paid by other than the procurer?  Which expenses are our own; where is that line?  There isn't one anymore.  At least it is admitted that: "I suppose there are thoughtful  arguments  against  that position".  Thank you for that.

Why don't you see the disrespect for other people's religions and principles that we are attempting to codify?  Do you see it but figure it is not against your own religion?  An attack against one faith is not an attack against all?

I think you know the man apologized.  That was in the thread while you still quote him and voice the outrage.  Over at one of the other big religions (a different C-word), unbeknownst to the President and Dem opportunists, they preach forgiveness.
Back to Fluke, once again liberals have to lie to make a point?

"...Fluke’s claim that $3,000 would be the cost over her three-year stay at Georgetown Law.
Fluke’s figure seems to have been plucked from thin air. Planned Parenthood estimates the monthly cost at between $15 and $50, which translates to $160 to $600 per year"

At the low end that is $480 for 3 years of continuous coverage.  At Fluke's exaggerated figure with a government 15.5 trillion in debt, maybe we need to look at lower cost alternatives, now that private activity and its consequences are everyone's business.  The point about viagra is equally valid, and sex changes and a lot of other things.

We hand all this power to government over religion and privacy without fully contemplating what the next elected government will do with it.  That is my opinion.

There is no line of separation between Maher and Pres. Obama, tied together by a million dollars given and accepted and other mutual cooperations.  If they draw a line now it is only from being caught up publicly in this hypocrisy.
5890  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Tax Policy: The case for antitax absolutism - Not a Penny More on: March 08, 2012, 12:39:55 PM
Thoughtful piece at City Journal gives a historical and intellectual perspective for anti-tax-increase principles:  Read it at the link and click on the ads:

William Voegeli is a senior editor of The Claremont Review of Books, author of Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State

"...These critics would have you believe that the antitax movement is nothing but belligerent extremism. The truth, however, is that you don’t have to embrace Norquist’s famous ambition—to shrink government until it’s small enough to be drowned in a bathtub—to conclude that opposing tax increases is both smart politics and wise policy. Nor do you have to make the maximalist supply-side assertion that tax cuts always pay for themselves. In rejecting tax hikes, Republicans aren’t trading in fanaticism. Rather, they’re confronting a governing failure—an abiding lack of candor about what our welfare state costs—that voters grasp but Democrats refuse to admit."...

..."When they refuse to raise taxes, Republicans force Democrats to make a deeply unpersuasive argument. Major expansions of the welfare state are indispensable, this argument goes; but the $5.08 trillion of federal, state, and local government outlays in 2010—35 percent of GDP—is already being spent on its very best uses; therefore, our new government endeavors will require corralling more of the 65 GDP percentage points that now roam contentedly beyond the fence.

Such a platform would be helpful for any candidate seeking the presidency—so long as it was the presidency of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. But no Democratic politician will ever use it successfully to win over a large, diverse electorate residing outside our blue ghettos, which is why Democratic presidential candidates avoid it and instead promise not to raise taxes. This silence is a deafening testament to Democrats’ morose conviction that Americans don’t like their party’s agenda enough to give it the only endorsement that really matters: voting to pay for it. It’s hard to see what incentive Republicans have to extricate Democrats from this dilemma."
5891  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Glibness: My plan will cause energy prices to skyrocket on: March 08, 2012, 11:08:19 AM
Must hear the President to be in his own words, in his own voice, on the audio at the link.  (Please also visit the advertisers.)

— Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.
5892  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Politics - Rush incident starting to backfire on liberals on: March 08, 2012, 10:31:42 AM
With the apology in hand, some advertisers left, some are allegedly asking to come back while the show is announcing new advertisers.  Mostly the ad agencies buy contracts with the local affiliates and then due to an organized campaign from social media have to say don't run our ads during your highest rated show.  That leaves a gap for new purchases.

There seems to be quite a question emerging now after all the silence about the similar and worse comments that have come out of the left.  Most embarrassing is Bill Maher calling Sarah Palin a "c*nt" and giving $1 million to the Obama PAC to advance the political cause of Obama and his wife and daughters.

Here is what for female Dem lawmakers had to say about the liberal misogynists (nothing):

I assume he will have to cancel but David Axelrod followed up his criticism of Rush Limbaugh with a reported announcement that he will be appearing on the Bill Maher show:

"David Axelrod, President Obama's senior campaign strategist, is scheduled to appear on Bill Maher's late-night talk show within the next few weeks, according to Kelley Carville, an HBO spokesman."

Sarah Palin wrote Tuesday on her Facebook page:  "Pres. Obama says he called Sandra Fluke because of his daughters. For the sake of everyone's daughter, why doesn't his super PAC return the $1 million he got from a rabid misogynist?"
5893  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: March 07, 2012, 09:17:26 PM
I don't understand thd format where you quote me and then makde unrelated points, but God Bless your right to do that.
5894  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: March 07, 2012, 02:26:06 PM
As usual, our points miss each other.  There are many many many many many many choices made in health care, most with which I disagree. 

People inform themselves and get a second opinion in medicine all the time.  You have never second guessed a doctor? 

"do I want the lowest cost, poorly trained doctor to set it?"

There isn't a poorly trained or low cost doctor in this country, but it is under central control where you will lose the power to make that choice.  You don't see that?

"I don't care about the motorcycle.  It's trash.  I can buy another one (I've given up and gone to bicycles).  Your theory only pertains to vehicle insurance. "

No! Tedious comes to mind.  We were discussing healthcare insurance.  Please focus.  You can buy a policy to cover the ambulance and all the emergency care, bone setting heart transplant, anything, what on earth is the problem?  In a free market, you might be able to buy a policy to cover only that and not all the procedures that you consider non-essential but others demand.  Still you miss the point and call me wrong.  You WILL lose the right to ride the motorcycle - symbolic for all those types of choices that someone else paying your bills determines to be too risky.

Why don't you push to have government regulate commerce like requiring complete disclosures of prices instead of having government participate in the commerce.

Why don't consumers organize and take over negotiations with the providers if they don't like the way they are treated.  I know someone who did - a major labor union - and they self-insure.  Government isn't the only lever.  Were you going to get me an example of where a free market could not contain costs better than central control?

Rationing who gets what service is not lowering costs.

Why did healthcare go okay the first 200 years of so?

If we want to change the role of the federal government, why not go through the old fashioned process of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION first, if it is such a good idea?

What other rights involve mandating someone else supply the product or perform the service for you? 

Why no comment on GM's analogy?  No one offers to pay for the right to bear arms but BCP at no additional charge is a right higher than self defense?

"I don't want cripples on the street because they couldn't afford to have their leg set."

Yeah, America was so cruel before Pelosi-Obamacare.  Cripples on the street, that is why we chose tyranny over freedom. Who was denied that type of service, where, when?  Nothing sells liberalism like lying. 
5895  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: March 07, 2012, 01:02:25 PM
You should be insuring only for the unexpected that you can't afford. That shares the cost with all the people taking the same or similar risks.  We already have free health care for the poor, that is an old and tired argument.  

"...But they don't need it; there is an MRI down the street; why does each town need a surplus of them time whatever multiplier?  Because of Medical Device salesmen (no fault of theirs; that's their job) and the keeping up with the Jones attitude.  It's cheaper to have big brother say you only need 5 MRI's not 15 for example."

Really?  The only successful form of cost constraint is a free market loaded with competition.  Granted healthcare will never be a free market, but that does not justify a full abandon all of what works for tyranny.

I don't know what it is you don't know about medical device sales, but it isn't that easy.  The way you don't take unnecessary MRIs is to PAY FOR THEM.  Do you leave the gas pump on when you leave or fill up on someone else's card, do you buy steaks at the grocery and leave them on the counter and not go back to get them, do you leave your credit card at the golf clubhouse after you charge your green fees and say charge the next several groups too or expect that someone did that for you.  No.  We tie usage to payment; it is quite simple.  We watch our expenses like hawks when it is our money.  

With a federal government running 40% of its expenses unpaid for before Obamacare, it is all a bunch of b*llsh*t to even think taxing the rich or the medical device company is paying for it.  They won't and they don't.   You should be criticizing the political salesmen who say someone else should pay for it when they know no one else is.

"I have no idea why they were implemented, nor do I support any new tax on medical devices."

They were pretending to pay for free health care, BCP for the sexually active, etc.

"If I'm in a motorcycle accident, I break my ribs, injure my knee, and have a concussion, when the ambulance arrives, I'm not going to ask the price.  Nor would I ask the price at the ER room since I'm in pain.  I have no choice...."

You are talking to the wrong guy.  I've been hit by a car (hit and run) and when they finally came they asked me which hospital I wanted to be taken to.  If there was one that had a reputation for higher quality or lower cost, I could have chosen.

Prices are high because of government mandates and third party pay more than any or all other reasons.  Every other industry where these factors are smaller has the natural forces of cost control that are removed from healthcare.  Please point out where this is not true.

The result that will come out of this is losing the right to ride the motorcycle.  Why don't you see that?  You have the freedom to ride and you have the freedom to insure your risk.  Why do you need government to step in - in any way - and limit your choices?

"Third Party Pay is ... a filter actually in many instances reducing costs.  "

Good grief.  Payments funneled through insurance companies to chosen suppliers with bureaucratic decision makers... that is better than free people making free choices?  Why not for all industries instead of just the most crucial ones? FYI, self insured, I was the only one out fixing houses the day after the tornado, half the rest the fully insured were in meetings and negotiations and half with their government mortgages and zero equity never did repair.  God bless your right to vote and post anyway.  I hope the viewpoint expressed is soundly defeated in November.
5896  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: March 07, 2012, 12:17:45 PM
I agree with you on his weaknesses.

"a) were the opposition to Romney not divided, he would be losing;"

But he has multiple opponents now because none of them seal the deal either.  Each had an opportunity.

"b) he lacks the ability to go after Obamacare"

He is poorly positioned to make the argument but his promise to repeal it is in stark contrast to Obama's position.  I don't see exactly how you repeal it or pass anything else when even in a perfect electoral storm they will still lack 60 votes in the Senate.

"c) his wins have come by outspending his opponents-- he will not have this advantage against Baraq, quite the contrary;"

This is true, but in the debates I think he was attacked the most and also super-pacs of the others mostly went after him.  He will have no money advantage against Obama, but no shortage of money either.

"d) he has patrician's guilt complex and will crumple under race baiting and class warfare attacks"

Agree on the first part. 

Romney is conceding that high income earners will see their deductions limited (something to appease the fairness/income inequality argument with), but went on to rather courageously cut their marginal tax rates by the same 20% as all other groups.  He wants to 'preserve the progressivity' in the current tax code, which is bad but the only alternative remaining will be to exacerbate it.  I have seen him Romney change course, but I have not seen him crumble - if that makes any sense.

We are not in the brainstorming time of a year or two ago trying to figure out who could make the perfect President.  The selection process for Republicans is largely over unless something very new develops.  The main alternative still standing, Santorum, isn't the right guy either.  So we are down to electing Romney and trying to shape the actual policies through the congressional elections, or losing our country - that is my take.

Earlier when Newt was being ignored, the tea party bet the farm on Hermann Cain.  I still wonder who it should have been.  Perry, I had hoped - not ready, not the right guy.  Very few are ready. Too bad it isn't Newt making his surge now - without errors!  Almost none have clarity, vision and discipline.  Newt had maybe 2 of those 3.  Romney, who knows.  He has the positioning to win. The hope that he can rise up out of this, win, and be a great President is all I think we have left.

5897  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: March 07, 2012, 11:07:52 AM
"Proliferation of unneeded and redundant Medical Devices on every corner is just one of the reasons our Healthcare system is out of control......."

Good grief, what does that mean?  Will the new medical device excise tax help us to quash these cures gone wild?

"Cost per day for hospital charges averaged $3,949 in the U.S."

Costs are higher than people can afford because of THIRD PARTY PAY.

5898  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - Jon Stewart on Rush on: March 07, 2012, 10:56:01 AM
For balance on the forum, Jon Stewart having his liberal fun attacking Rush:
5899  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential Super Tuesday on: March 07, 2012, 10:52:59 AM
Strange to me that the media line (other than that WSJ piece) while Romney wins 6 more states is how Romney can't close it out.  No offense to the others, but really it was Tim Pawlenty who couldn't close it out, and Rick Perry and Hermann Cain and Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul and Rick Santorum, not to mention the crowd on the sidelines who didn't find the gumption to jump in at all, Christie, Daniels, Jeb Bush, Palin et al.

Did someone say winning the Presidency was supposed to be easy?

True it was a brutal campaign.  And through it we learned that Mitt Romney was... faithful to his wife, successful and clean as a whistle in business, paid his taxes, gained executive experience in government, built the best organization, raised the most money, performed solid and consistent in the debates (biggest slipup was the $10,000 bet), is positioned as strong on defense, strong on border security, has a 20% across the board tax rate cut proposal (Reagan only got 25% through), and is not conservative enough for the farthest right elements in his own party.  He has won in the east, the west, the south (FL) and the midwest.  How could anyone position himself better for a general election?

Mitt Romney in 2012 is a far better candidate than John McCain of 2008 who only lost by 7 points to a magical figure who now must run on a record of cluelessness, damage and drift.

Santorum won 3 states that are safe for any Republican in Nov and Newt won his home state decisively.
5900  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: March 06, 2012, 09:50:49 PM
"Carbonite's stock price seems to be falling faster than Sandra Fluke's undergarments."

I wonder if they will be forced to apologize - and whether the apology will be sincere enough?

Very funny and telling that a right to bear arms never included an obligation for someone else to pay for it - if you even have a right to bear arms at Georgetown University.

There is something about the concept of insurance the activists don't understand.  You insure against expenses uncertain or unforeseen, the regular bills you simply pay.  She is saying the fact women need this is a certainty, not a risk.  For expenses that directly come with life's activities that you choose, like skis for skiers and boxing gloves for boxers, don't you just pay those bills, or do you expect someone else to coercively pay them for you?
Pages: 1 ... 116 117 [118] 119 120 ... 178
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!