Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Health care law may be in trouble, but will it matter?

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, March 29, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 6:20 am, Thu Mar 29, 2012.

As we await the Supreme Court's decision on the constitutionality of the Obama administration's health care law, it at least appears from the street that Justice Anthony Kennedy will be called upon to break the tie.

Now, for most of us with even a modicum of understanding of the Constitution, nowhere does it imply, suggest or demand that we purchase anything.

Income taxes are provided for differently under a specific amendment; so if the funding of this program had been clearly designated as a tax, then there really wouldn't be much of an argument, although it would still make most Americans boiling mad (or, at least, it should).

It is my opinion that rather than toss out the entire health care law, the administration will be provided the opportunity to fix that part which requires Americans to participate financially in this travesty. Of course, that would leave open the bigger and more important issue as to how it will all be paid for. I doubt President Obama will have the ability to ram that kind of tax down our collective throats. In other words, unless Justice Kennedy sides with the four justices who would rather enforce an unconstitutional law, ObamaCare will be DOA.

But here we have a president bent on transforming the United States into what he alone believes it should be. All along I've been trumpeting the warning that, if he should win a second term in November, he'll be unleashed from the tethers of another campaign to do whatever he wants. With his wink and nod to the Russians earlier this week regarding our nation's security, he clearly warned us that more ramming and shoving would be in the offing. After all, how could anyone interpret, "This is my last election ... After my election, I have more flexibility," in any other way than the obvious? After his pathetic attempt to back-peddle on his open-mic faux pas, only those adoringly beholden to this man will cast their votes for him because they actually believe he's a good and decent leader. Clearly he is not.

Jerome Kinderman

Lodi

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

125 comments:

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 8:09 am on Fri, Apr 6, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Wow what a profound and insiteful conclusion...the right does not support gay marriage...I wonder why. Could it be their beliefs...maybe they should just wipe their belief slate clean and follow you... Polls??? I don't believe no steeenkinb polls.

    AGAIN: As to your claim of abuse by the Republicans…and the hypocrisy of laws. NAMBLA…is that alright with you? Prostitution and trafficking…is that alright also? How about heroin use is that okay too? What about obesity? That okay? Drinking and driving? Okay? The point is mrb…we have laws for a REASON…most are for the protection of society as a whole…not just a minority…even though some protect ONLY minorities. Is that okay? Are Reps the ONLY ones who pass laws...or is it just the laws they pass you don't like? Eat some Langendorf bread...PLEASE!

    Diversion, obfuscation, stonewalling, busy, turnstile...which is it? No answers?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:03 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Eric stated...Mrm please look into the facts the latest poll in California show that a majority are opposed to a ban on g a y marriage and a look at which politicians and NGOs will show you that overwhelmingly right leaning organization and republican politicians are supportive of the ban while left leaning organizations and Democratic politicians are opposed and once again

    Again, there is Eric's reality and then they is the LA times that disagrees with him...

    LOS ANGELES, Nov. 6 -- Any notion that Tuesday's election represented a liberal juggernaut must overcome a detail from the voting booths of California: The same voters who turned out strongest for Barack Obama also drove a stake through the heart of same-sex marriage.
    Seven in 10 African Americans who went to the polls voted yes on Proposition 8,

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:53 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Eric stated...what I am trying to get through that thick skull is ...

    Now this is the Eric I perceive... people to him have "think skulls" when they see things differently than himself. He is right...they are wrong... the only reason they disagree with him is that they have think skulls. In other words, they are not as enlightened as Eric and are too subborn to understand his wisdom that is so obvious( in his mind).

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 7:04 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Just how am I being “disingenuous?” This is what happens when people parse another’s statements simply to falsely accuse them. What I wrote was, “What the people wanted from Barack H. Obama was someone who would be like us. . .” Notice how nicely the words “What the people” were omitted from the quote making it appear that I was a member of that esteemed group. (But before anyone screams that “the people” includes “all” of us, whenever I refer to “We the People,” I always use capital letters.)

    Of course as a conservative and registered Republican I didn’t want Barack H. Obama to succeed. Heck, I didn’t even want him to win! Yet even though I’ve disagreed with virtually everything he’s tried to do, I’ve done so with respect because that is what he and his office is due. I challenge anyone to point to where this hasn’t been the case.

    On the other hand, what would be extremely disingenuous is if once someone is elected with whom they vehemently disagree that they all of a sudden hop on board behind their policies they voted against in the first place. But I will admit that I didn’t think he would be as bad as he’s turned out to be. Just look at what he and his minions had to do to get this health care bill made into law.

    And now he’s tried to threaten the Supreme Court to not invalidate “his” law! Such audacity – it’s literally jaw-dropping! But then to be ordered to hand in a paper (no less than three pages, single-spaced) explaining what he meant as if he’s in 9th grade. I am embarrassed for him and for our nation. Just how do such actions appear to our friends, much less our enemies? And I’m supposed to want this man to succeed?!?

    Disingenuous? No, not I.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 6:54 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Mrm please look into the facts the latest poll in California show that a majority are opposed to a ban on gay marriage and a look at which politicians and NGOs will show you that overwhelmingly right leaning organization and republican politicians are supportive of the ban while left leaning organizations and Democratic politicians are opposed and once again I am not going to debate gay marriage only that the right would like the government not allow it therefore controlling the liberties of those they disagree with. By the way your constant attempt to prove why gay and l.e.s.b.i.a.n ( that's just silly shame on the LNS) people should not be allowed to marry supports my argument.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 6:27 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Do I have to spell it for you??? It is spelled NO…it is the LAW…decided upon by the voters of each state (42 by the last count)…but it is Republicans that you want to blame…the last I looked CA was a Democratically ran state and yet turned down gay marriage. Why?

    If homosexuality is not chosen, but actually is a biologically-determined characteristic over which we have no choice, then laws should not treat gays and straights differently, since homosexuality would be equivalent to one's race, over which we have no control.

    They claim: Genetic differences... Brain pattern differences… Darwin theory…childhood abuse (some has been shown)… hormonal causes in the birth mother…they have made a lot of claims as to the “cause”… research either debunks their claims or at least does not show any relationship. A woman cannot change to a man nor a man to a woman…for a reason…the genetic make-up of each. I can’t change to a turnip for the same reason…physical impossibility. I wonder why that is.

    Have you ever wondered what scientists are looking for and why and why it takes so long and is so hard to find answers? I think God is just messing them.

    Just because someone wants something and yells loud enough, that does not mean they are going to get it. Have a child sometime. Society doesn’t work that way. Thousands of years…in hundreds of countries and cultures…the precedence/practice has not been changed…one man one woman is for a reason…so a child knows from whence it came…and to further the existence of that society.

    As to your claim of abuse by the Republicans…and the hypocrisy of laws. NAMBLA…is that alright with you? Prostitution and trafficking…is that alright also? How about heroin use is that okay too? What about obesity? That okay? Drinking and driving? Okay? The point is mrb…we have laws for a REASON…most are for the protection of society as a whole…not just a minority…even though some protect ONLY minorities. Is that okay?
    By nature creating a law to protect one person is in general discriminatory to another…but we do it all the time.

    We are supposed to be a melting pot…not a country of 10,000 pots. Sorry…join in.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 4:29 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    mrm I can't decide whether you are ill-informed or just being obstinate but very little research will show you that there is a great difference of opinion between those on the left and those on the right when it comes to banning gay marriage. I will just state my original opinion that the right loves to complain about government overreach and at the same time they support the control of lifestyle choices they disagree with. Why they can't live and let live I do not know but they seem to want it both ways. It’s hypocrisy and that’s wrong.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:42 pm on Thu, Apr 5, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: You have no point...people in the middle, right and left do not believe in gay marriage only people of your ilk.

    Stop and think...the LAW says...not me...until the law is changed by voting (or courts)..not the legislatures...it will stand. No matter what the issue.

    You sir seem to be a lumper...I on the other hand am an includer. You believe that because one conservative says something all conservatives concur. You fail to equivicate on the term differentiate only with liberals. Because I have a position or belief (or had one) that does not define or limit me. When I see someone drowning I don't swim to their rescue, interview them about their life views or beliefs, make a decision on their fate and then either save them or let them drown. I sort of go out with a save first and ask questions later attitude. Which I have done on many occasions...not once did one of them ever get angry because I saved them.

    The problem with most "entitlement friendly" people and politicians is that they would be happy to be alive but would be disappointed (and usually vocal) that I didn't give them their gift for allowing them to let me rescue them. Gracie!!!!!!!!!!!!

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:57 pm on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Maybe we should ask John McCain how he feels about Sarah's ability to perform on big stage. Much is said by the right about a lack of inexperience of our current president and yet they supported Sarah for vice president. Sarah was a two term mayor of a town with a population of 7,000 and a two year governor of a state with only 700,000 on top of that her educational experience consist of a bachelor in communication from Idaho. She was unable to help McCain win the presidency and therefore partial responsible for Obama's success but keep on with that support the left loves the help.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:35 pm on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    mrm I am not making an argument for or against gay marriage what I am trying to get through that thick skull is that the right wants government to stay out of their lives but wants the government to control actions those who's behavior the right disagrees with, it's hypocrisy.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:32 pm on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Jerome I think you are being disingenuous I doubt that you ever "wanted from Barack H. Obama was someone who would be like us – raised from obscurity yet able to obtain the greatest office on the face of the Earth. " From your postings I doubt that you ever hoped Barrack would succeed.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:14 pm on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    I want to be a Billionaire...that looks like Sean Connery...I may be able to achieve both but that doesn't make me Sean Connery...only someone who looks like him.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:13 pm on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Jerome!! Well put!!!

    mrb: You do not have an argument or point...gay people are co-habitating, have civil unions and as many rights as the government affords them. The law today in most places is not for gay marriage...nor is the general population. If you want to argue your position on this...please...write a LTE. My argument has always been that a marriage is made in order that people might pr-create under the law. Tell me how this can be done in a gay marriage. If you say sprem donor or surrogate mother...you no longer have a marriage you have a tri-union...no matter who becomes responsible for the child. Society moves very slow for a reason...just because you WANT something does not mean you are entitled to it. Wanting to be a woman (when you are a man) is physically impossible...the best you can hope for is a pseudo existence as a woman...you will NEVER be able to have a child nor will you ever be able to create the y chromosome necessary to do so...possession of a vgniaa is not enough, the rest of the reproductive entity is the critical part.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:50 am on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    The amount of vitriolic comments and thoughts surrounding Sarah Palin only goes to prove that she still strikes fear in those who oppose her. She’s not running for office right now, yet at nearly every turn we hear about how stupid she is and “not ready” for prime time. Really? That’s something I still think about President Obama.

    What the people wanted from Barack H. Obama was someone who would be like us – raised from obscurity yet able to obtain the greatest office on the face of the Earth. And he had his chance to be just that; but he failed in terms that are nearly impossible to quantify. Yet he’s still “the” guy to so many. Why?

    Well, I think he really is more like the average American who wants nothing more than to disobey the rules; violate common decency and common sense; spend as much time as possible on the golf course or spiriting around the globe with family in tow in Air Force One at a cost that would probably support a small country. What he is not is brilliant.

    He proved that a couple of weeks ago with his off-mic comments to the outgoing Russian president; and then he really stepped into it big time this week with his “warning” to the Supreme Court. Now like a school boy he’s been tasked to turn in a paper no less than three pages long, single-spaced explaining just what he meant by that not-so veiled threat. And this from the judges on the Federal Appellate court. Clearly the nine in D.C. are following his antics, but they cannot possibly respond – at least not at this time. And it is my opinion that this is precisely what Obama hoped they would do. I can only imagine how disappointed he is today now relying on Eric Holder to write this little essay in an effort to clean off his shoes. Pretty soon he’ll be forced to sit in a virtual corner with a very real “Dunce” hat upon his head.

    Brilliant? Ach!!

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:46 am on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Eric stated.. Darrell the fact that you think Sarah is "an accomplished intellectual thinker" and are actually prepared to make that statement speaks volumes to your own critical thinking skills.

    I think it does as well Eric... thank you for the complement. Obviously, you enjoy the SNL skits and similar productions.

    I noticed you focused on the late night comedy shows and not what you see her talk about on CSPAN.

    I thank you for demonstrating how superficial and intellectually dishonest you and the left are. If Sarah Palin in an air head, that would make you a comatose vegetable in comparison.

    May I ask, is there a policy issue that Ms Palin has stated that you disagree with or are you stuck on watching cartoons and comedy shows like Bs Bobin.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:45 am on Wed, Apr 4, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Almost every government program that begins is dramatically understated when told how expensive it will be. For example, Until 1949, the combined employer and employee Social Security Tax Rate was 2% of the first $3000 of annual income earned. Today, its 15.3 % of $90,000 of income earned.

    Most of Obamacare has not been implemented yet but has already been found to be double in cost than what we were initially told. Is there any doubt, when all the hidden legislation finally is uncovered that the cost will break our bank?

    Eric stated.. Darrell the fact that you think Sarah is "an accomplished intellectual thinker" and are actually prepared to make that statement speaks volumes to your own critical thinking skills.

    I think it does as well Eric... thank you for the complement. Obviously, you enjoy the SNL skits and similar productions.

    I noticed you focused on the late night comedy shows and not what you see her talk about on CSPAN.

    I thank you for demonstrating how superficial and intellectually dishonest you and the left are. If Sarah Palin in an air head, that would make you a comatose vegetable in comparison.

    May I ask, is there a policy issue that Ms Palin has stated that you disagree with or are you stuck on watching cartoons and comedy shows like Bs Bobin.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 5:43 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    well Patrick there is currently a law that states it is mandatory for every person in this country to purchase health insurance WHY

    Patrick every morning on the local news I see a story that involves violent gun crimes if you think that the police reaction, investigation, prosecution, and incarceration of individuals using guns does not cost society you are living in a fantasy world. My previous point was that drugs don't cost society people doing anything irresponsibly cost society and I can't even imagine how gay marriage cost society. My initial argument. that that the right like to take away personal freedoms unless they are freedoms that fall into the narrow conservative view as to what should be practiced freely, is supported by your reaction to my statement. You and most conservatives want to complain that you freedoms are being stepped on but you would turn around and deny others the right to live how they see fit.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:21 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Laws are what make up this country...there is a law on the books that prevents parents from letting their kids play in traffic. Why? There is a law that prohibits yelling "FIRE" in a movie theater? Why? There are laws keeping people from robbing banks. Why
    There are laws keeping people from abusing their children, old people, spouses, parents and others. Why?

    Get back on the turnip truck mrbarrow.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:17 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    HOLY HOKIE POKIE!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME??????????

    Do you know what the LAW is??? Do you know who makes those laws? It's not people like Bill Ayers, Louis Farrakhan, Jane Fonda or Howdy Doody. It is US.

    "...doesn't gun violence cost society a pretty penny?" Nooooooooooooooooo...STUPID people cause society a pretty penny! You seem to live in a fantasy world...try going to www.moviedeaths.com...they have 93 ways people can die. Guns are not in the top 10 of accidental deaths...that means deaths by gun is usually on purpose...when is the last time you ever heard of a dissertation being written by a gun? How about a thesis? An explanation?

    Here is a thought: If people want to kill people...they will find a way...ever heard of Rawanda and their culture wars? They used machetes. You sound like BO...blame someone else, anyone else, something else or Bush...I suppose guns are his fault too. Critical thinking 101. It is called cause and affect.

    If SP is so stupid...then why did she just get hired as a co-host for the Today Show? Critical thinking is needed for this one.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:46 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Joe I agree all politicians make gaffs and I only brought up Sarah because Darrell praised her critical thinking. I do realize that she is not running for office, I do though think she is a political factor, but the sheer volume of Sarah's gaffs make her a special case. I don't blame Sarah she was just in way over her head, bad decision by the republican leaders and it appears they haven't gotten any smarter for the current election.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:40 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Patrick that is my point. Is it for you or anyone else to decide what the constitutional gauratntied right to the pusuit of happiness entails? The right loves to scream about constititional rights but what they are really talking about are freedoms that they agree with. They would then deny others freedoms the conservative right does not agree with.
    You mention the cost of certain actions. The right defends the right to keep and bear arms. Would you say that gun violence and I don't want to get into a discussion about where the fault lies but doesn't gun violence cost society a pretty penny?

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 2:30 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    So, Eric wants to bring up dumb quotes, eh?
    And, a great quote from our campaigning "Dear Leader"....our PRESIDENT doesn't even know how many states are in America? And, Alaska & Hawaii are ONE state?

    "It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states. I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

    There are 57 Islamic states. ; ; So did Obama just lose his bearings, or was this a more telling slip?

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:00 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: I am assuming that your diatribe is connected in some way to critical thinking.

    Do we have to get out the carp that "57 state" BO attested to, or several of ol' JB's gaffs, NP "first we will pass it ...THEN we will read it", or some of HR's idiotic rants?
    Ms Palin isn't running any thing nor is she running for anything.

    Conservatives only allow people to “pursue their own brand of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness” if those things fall into the realm of what conservatives deem to be proper action"...like the liberals want me to pursue THEIR brand of happiness...doped out (we get to pay for the recovery), OWS...we get to pay for the cleanup and the cops, city riots (starting with LA and now threatened in Detroit) that WE pay for...don't stand on your side of the fence and tell me how wonderful it is...cause it ain't. Free at last, free at last...

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 1:35 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Darrell so much info out there this is just way to easy

    Sarah Palin is an accomplished intellectual thinker

    "But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies." --Sarah Palin

    "I want to help clean up the state that is so sorry today of journalism. And I have a communications degree." --Sarah Palin

    "This is Reagan country (applause). Yeah! And perhaps it was destiny that the man who went to California's Eureka College would become so woven within and inter-linked to the Golden State." --Sarah Palin, blundering on Reagan's education while speaking at a fundraiser at California State University-Stanislaus. Eureka College is in Illinois. (June 25, 2010)

    "Here's an example of how it wastes some time. To be judged on or to be talked about on appearance—say chest size—it makes me wear layers, it makes me have to waste time figuring out what am I going to wear so that nobody will look in an area that I don't need them to look at." --Sarah Palin

    "Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant -- they're quite clear -- that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the Ten Commandments." –-Sarah Palin, arguing that Judeo-Christian belief was the basis for American law and should continue to be used as a guiding force for creating future legislation

    etc.etc.etc

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 1:34 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Darrell the fact that you think Sarah is "an accomplished intellectual thinker" and are actually prepared to make that statement speaks volumes to your own critical thinking skills.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 1:07 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    So the right believes health care should be a free market commodity but not oil do those on the right actually understand this logic or are the willing to remain in lockstep no matter what nonsense they are faced with. Great line from the right's cheerleader Rush the huckster limbo "I do the Thinking so you don't have to" If it weren't so true it might be funny.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:47 pm on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    mrm

    unless you can show that Reagan's war on drugs which imprisoned thousands or that the banning of gay marriage are somehow liberal ideals my theory stands just fine. The facts support my theory do you have any facts beyond your hatred of laws that dismiss my theory. I think I was speaking of conservatives not libertarians your a bit confused old man.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 6:28 am on Tue, Apr 3, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Of course no liberal would EVER say anything so disgusting: Read my 3:59PM post.

    Those are from just TWO liberal sources. It must be sad to not be able to see (metaphorically speaking) beyond the liberal nose.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:03 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ms Bobin.. you really should think before you emotionally say such ugly things about people. I do not care what Sarah Palin looks like. I appreciate her ideas, thoughts and leadership abilities. Sarah Palin is an accomplished intellectual thinker who was appreciated by her state of Alaska with an 85% approval rating during good times and 60 % at her worst time as governor.

    Your animosity and vulgar descriptions of her and her supporters reflect your lack of character. Please reconsider finding a cure for what is producing your venom. It is so unbecoming and inappropriate of you.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:57 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ms Bobin... odd conclusion that you have. I never thought or hinted that Sarah Palin invented anything ( unlike Gore who invented the interest). I only quote her line because of the frenzy and hysterical response the left participated in after she said it. She simply made that phrase common place. The concept was developed long before her political arrival.

    As far as where the phrase or concept came from, I believe it is from countries that have single payer health care system that ration healthcare. When you have one government panel that has the power to determine who gets what... some people lose and some win. When there is no choice and one does not have the legal ability to change the healthcare system, the one entity of control is literally making life and death decisions...thus... the death panel concept.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:39 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Repeat, Mr. Baumbach....your dear, dear Sarah Palin (wonder what the fascination is...the sexy pose on the cover of Runners' World or the expensive designer glasses?) did not invent "death panels." HMO's may not have invented them, but they certainly practice death panel policy daily.

    What a joke that you still cling to this fantasy of your favorite fantasy girl.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:35 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Baumbach wrote: "Charles... that was a scary clip...Robert Reich, very respected by democrats and left side thinking stated national health care needs to ration care for the elderly...that they would be denied treatment in the older years as it is too expensive for our country... that these people have outlived their usefulness and should die rather than be saved. Another example of how Palin was accurate in referring to Obamacare as having death panels."

    If both Mr. Baumbach and Mr. Nelson DO NOT believe that that YouTube clip was highly edited and/or taken out of context, then you both have a very serious problem. I can only say I feel really sorry for you two. I happened to have seen that speech in full at UC Berkeley back in 2007 for a public policy course I took and it had a much different message than this slanted edited version.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:53 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    To add context to K Lees post concerning Arthur C. Brooks, and his views on American Charitable giving...

    Brooks argues that there are three cultural values that best predict charitable giving: religious participation, political views, and family structure. Ninety-one percent of people who identify themselves as religious are likely to give to charity, writes Brooks, as opposed to 66 percent of people who do not.

    The religious giving sector is just as likely to give to secular programs as it is to religious causes. Those who think government should do more to redistribute income are less likely to give to charitable causes, and those who believe the government has less of a role to play in income redistribution tend to give more. Finally, people who couple and raise children are more likely to give philanthropically than those who do not. The more children there are in a family, the more likely that a family will donate to charity. One of Brooks's most controversial findings was that political conservatives give more, despite having incomes that are on average 6 percent lower than liberals.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 3:50 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    BTW: There were more and far worse and disgusting things coming out of the many celebrities who chose to comment...it's just too filthy for the LNS to print.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 3:50 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Mr. Baxter, interesting point of view. Apparently they are "Birds of a Feather" since Obama is impersonating an American President and commiting fraud on the American people. Is he ever going to come clean on his personal background? Actual, not faked, birth certificate, school records, etc???

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 3:49 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mskl: 1% of one dollar is one cent....1% or one million dollars is how much? $10K...who do you think is most likely to benefit from and use those tax dollars?

    1% of 100 dollars is one dollar...1% of 100 million is...1 million...whom do you think uses and benefits from THOSE dollars?

    Cheney gave 78% of his income to charity...yet people make statements like "they should have just let him die." Wow.

    No LIBERAL would EVER say such things...right msb??? Like maybe:

    "Giving it to a 71 year old tyrant who has done nothing but turn his country backwards seems to me that the Ethics Board of Organ Recipients has been greased with money quite adequately."...Money Talks

    Huffington Post:
    First, wouldn’t surprised me if he bumped a few people to get that heart.
    Second, maybe he will have a REAL heart this time. For all those who thank him for his service, he is a greedy, selfish, arrogant pidley excuse for a man.

    This is TOTALLY OUTRAGEOUS. This old old man doesn’t fit ANY of the requirements to get that new heart. He’s not worthy of it physically let alone as a decent human being. There isn’t a transplantation team in the world that would approve…unless there is a lot of cash involved. How disgusting.

    Now that he’s got a heart, maybe he’ll learn how to use it and live in this wonderful world like a normal human being. It doesn’t take much, just a heart!

    Can't wait to see what they have to say about Bush...you kinow... the guy in charge.


     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 3:30 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    "Conservatives only allow...unless ones brand of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness falls within a narrow band of Christian conservative ideals most conservatives would like to outlaw it" Wow. I am a conservative (fiscal) and I HATE laws. Thus goes your theory. I am a conservative (socially) so was D i c k Cheney...yet he fought for gay rights. Thus goes your theory.

    Theories are not facts mrb: FACTS are facts not opinions or examples. This being an opinion page you have a right to speak...however, your opinions carry no credible weight without facts. Wow!

     
  • Kim Lee posted at 1:55 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Kim Lee Posts: 1798

    "While the wealthiest citizens give the most in sheer dollar amounts--the top 10% accounting for at least a quarter of giving, according to Arthur C. Brooks--it's in fact low-income employed Americans who give the highest portion of their income"

    -Forbes.com

     
  • Kim Lee posted at 1:26 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Kim Lee Posts: 1798

    Joanne Bobin @ 5:31 pm on April 1st... I remember those comments from McCain rallies. McCain was indeed appalled at the crowd, that gathered to see him, would say such horrible things.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 12:02 pm on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    Evidently the old saying "Birds of a Feather, Stick Together" is true.
    "A major donor to President Barack Obama has been accused of defrauding a businessman and impersonating a bank official, creating new headaches for Obama's re-election campaign as it deals with the questionable history of another top supporter.
    The New York donor, Abake Assongba, has contributed more than $50,000 to Obama's re-election effort this year, federal records show."
    How ironic is that? One FRAUD supporting another FRAUD.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:50 am on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Let me re-iterate my point: Liberals are glad to give (Joe Biden $470 last year) OTHER people's money...NOT theirs. D-ck and Lynn Cheney gave 78% of their income away in 2005...boooyah! Their money...conservative give more than liberals...proven over and over and over and over and over...and over. ACTIONS speak louder than words.

    Mr Lucas: Please...send me a check for $1000 and I will give it to my favorite charity.

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 11:29 am on Mon, Apr 2, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Jerome wrote….This nation was conceived by two very important ideals: that we were to be a nation of laws (not men) and that each and every one of us has the opportunity to pursue our own brand of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” where the former protects the latter...

    That’s sounds great but that is not what conservatives practice. Conservatives only allow people to “pursue their own brand of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness” if those things fall into the realm of what conservatives deem to be proper action. Mother Reagan’s war on drugs does not allow for some peoples brand of freedom nor does banning gay marriage as a matter of record on this site it seems that unless ones brand of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness falls within a narrow band of Christian conservative ideals most conservatives would like to outlaw it. That is hardly laws protecting feedoms.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:31 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Charles... that was a scary clip...Robert Reich, very respected by democrats and left side thinking stated national health care needs to ration care for the elderly...that they would be denied treatment in the older years as it is too expensive for our country... that these people have outlived their usefulness and should die rather than be saved. Another example of how Palin was accurate in referring to Obamacare as having death panels.

     
  • Charles Nelson posted at 10:59 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 259

    Here's what compassionate liberalism is all about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT7Y0TOBuG4

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:56 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ms Bobin stated...That must be the reason why audience members shouted "let him die,"

    I think that the nature of many liberals is to be compassionate. Does that mean if I hear a liberal wish for the death of conservatives that I should conclude that this person represents what most people who identify themselves as liberal are?

    I think your post is silly Ms Bobin. Mr Kinderman was very accurate as to what a “real” conservative person is.

    As far as your spelling, I could care less Ms Bobin. Since many have referred to you as the spelling monitor and you have denied that you yourself misspell words often, I thought it appropriate to post some of your spelling errors. I also have stated that my spelling is worse than yours.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 5:34 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    That's "compassionate," - before Mr. Baumbach runs my post through Spell Check - something he finds a need to do with my posts, but not his own.

    Must have something to do with critical thinking, or rather the lack of.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 5:31 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    "A Conservative is one who would never deny help to those in need and unable to care for themselves."

    That must be the reason why audience members shouted "let him die," during one of the earlier debates when Ron Paul was asked a question about allowing healthcare for a terminally ill man who could not afford it.

    Why a woman shouted, "Pretend it's Obama," when Santorum was taking some shots at a target at a shooting range the other day.

    Why people in the audience yelled, "Terrorist, kill him, Muslim," when Obama's name was mentioned at McCain campaign rallies in 2008 (even John McCain became horrified at the people who supported him).

    Those darn compasionate conservatives. Gotta love 'em!

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:07 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Lucas just submitted a letter that claimed critical thinking is essential to our country.Yet, After Mr Kinderman and Maple articulated very thoughtful posts in which identifies conservative thinking very well, Mr Lucas offers no thoughtful constructive comments. Instead... he responds by saying thank you for showing that I am right and you are wrong.

    How disappointing to learn that Mr Lucas was simply writing a letter to lambast conservatives rather than do what his letter asked us to do , which is critical thinking.

    A real shame Mr Lucas was insincere.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 2:45 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    Mr Maple said:

    I WILL NOT BE THREATENED IN YOUR HOME OR MINE! And as I said, the tough guy is back with an attitude.

    This has something to do with me?

     
  • John Lucas posted at 2:32 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    Thank you Mr Maple and Mr Kinderman for proving my point. Your posts on what I said were screeds attempting to prove your moral superiority. I notice you did not attempt to debate my first point.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:25 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    I WILL NOT BE THREATENED IN YOUR HOME OR MINE! And as I said, the tough guy is back with an attitude.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:22 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Kinderman: I would like to add...WE and many of us here are bound and determined to help those who NEED help succeed in achieving those goals...we also want those who do so to pay back to society...thus charity.

    I have come to the conclusion that every animal on earth at some point in time expects its offspring to fend for itself...save for the liberals. When is the last time someone ever came to your house and offered you free food, insurance, phone service, child care, an education (college included), speech, rights or even a Big Mac? We now have people in Detroit threatening to "burn this town down to the ground" if the state doesn bail them out...THAT is what I expect from liberals. Their words not mine. I say: Eat your words young man.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:12 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    HOW about ABC 20/20???: Sioux Falls is rural and religious; half of the population goes to church every week. People in San Francisco make much more money, are predominantly liberal, and just 14 percent of people in San Francisco attend church every week. Liberals are said to care more about helping the poor; so did people in San Francisco give more?

    It turns out that this idea that liberals give more…is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income, 24 were red states in the last presidential election.

    Arthur Brooks, the author of "Who Really Cares," says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

    And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.

    "You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

    Maybe your rich family (you know the one who can buy and sell me??) isn't so giving...after all???? Booooyah!

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:09 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Lucas: Very deceitful Forbes: The Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project at the Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies compiled a ranking of private philanthropy in 36 countries from 1995 to 2002. Based on giving alone, the U.S. comes first, giving 1.85% of GDP, followed by Israel at 1.34% and Canada at 1.17%. But based on volunteerism alone, the Netherlands comes first, followed by Sweden and then the U.S.

    The more studies you read about motivations for philanthropy, the murkier they become. One fact, though, does stand out: Among developed nations, those with higher taxes and bigger social safety nets tend to have lower rates of giving. In charitable giving as a percentage of GDP, nations with cradle-to-grave welfare systems rank far down the Johns Hopkins list: Sweden 18th, France 21st, Germany 32nd.
    FIRST in giving THIRD is volunteering. Who do you think is getting all of the foreign aid? Sweden? Who pays the most for the UN, IMF, Global Peace and UNICEF or the hundreds of other chaities around the world??? Russia?? Venezuela? Cuba? Maybe China?

    Liberals are glad to give (Joe Biden $470 last year) OTHER people's money...NOT theirs. D-ck and Lynn Cheney gave 78% of their income away in 2005...boooyah!

    America has a culture of giving with the wealthiest citizens giving the most in sheer dollar amounts--the top 10% accounting for at least a quarter of giving, according to Arthur C. Brooks--it's in fact low-income employed Americans who give the highest portion of their income, or 4.5%.

    The U.S. culture is unique when it comes to a belief in philanthropy. It's a value that may be rooted in Christian tithing, but has spread to the secular world. Maybe it's a recognition that with individual freedom comes responsibility, too.

    How about posting some facts instead of your dilatant ideas.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:59 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    A Conservative is one who believes in freedom while taking personal responsibility for one’s self. A Conservative is one who would never deny help to those in need and unable to care for themselves. A Conservative is one who knows the difference between a hand “up” and a hand “out” and despises the latter as it serves only to enslave people to those who have the ultimate power to cease the support if certain conditions are not obeyed by the victims.

    This nation was conceived by two very important ideals: that we were to be a nation of laws (not men) and that each and every one of us has the opportunity to pursue our own brand of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” where the former protects the latter.

    In just the past few years I’ve seen the United States morph right in front of my eyes. To say it has been disturbing is a gross understatement. The lies, chicanery, and distortions that had this president force this health care bill through were and remain unlike anything I’ve seen in all of my 55 years as an American. The hatred of our Constitution by those who swore an oath to protect it sickens me yet emboldens me to continue my fight against them.

    We have only seven months until we can return to the People what is rightfully theirs - “Life, Liberty and [THEIR] Pursuit of Happiness.” I'm convinced that the more people who actually take the time to vote will result in saving this nation. Sitting on the sidelines and doing nothing will have catastrophic results. It's up to us.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 12:37 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    The way Conservatives and Liberals look at the current health care system can be summed up by the following two statements:

    A Liberal will look at the tens of millions of people who have suffer health and financial problems that exist in no other developed country in the world and asks, "Why can we not adopt any of these systems since they are much cheaper and work better?

    A Conservative looks at same situation, looks at the horror that is happening to the victims of our system and feels morally superior to those being crushed by that system.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:00 pm on Sun, Apr 1, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Joe and Jerome...I disagree...this is our mighty country...self cleaning...it is people like us who tried to do the right thing that actually did the wrong thing..we allowed the creeps to run us out of business...we have been enablers (like those who help alcoholics, obese people and druggies).

    We have allowed the loud mouth people to replace those of reason and intellect.

    We have not challenged the Bullies of the Political play yard...you know the ones who are willing to stand up (for their agrandizement) and yell and scream filthy, untrue and unsubstantiated statements full of whatever garbage they care to throw. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Rev Wright. BO, Pelosi, Reed, and too many "celebrities" to even mention. These people want to run down this country (which is us) in order for them to look good to the other hate filled scum.

    Well...for me (and a lot of other people)...I am done with them...I am from here on out reverting back to my days in Woodbridge...I am going to stand up for my country, speak out against racist pigs on boths sides of the color fence, protect my way of life with my words, make sure God (or whomever you believe in) is treated with at least the same respect as the owner of a brothel, give to my fellow man from my pocket, turn my attention to educating children without making them feel like the world is about to crush them, take to task those who disrespect the military (and those who support it...like Katy Perry) even if it takes a physical turn.

    I am tired of defending you, me, my family, my history and those who just want to live in peace and harmony. I have no grudges...just don't push me.

    I am going BACK TO OUR FUTURE! I am taking responsibility!

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 8:58 pm on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    And this is where I have to disagree with you, Mr. Baxter. Obama cannot run a positive campaign this year; he already had that opportunity in 2008 with his "Hope and Change" mantra. That really won't fly this time around. So even if he were to do as you claim, convincing Americans that he's the solution and will be able to stamp out all this bad stuff, whoever runs against him will have so much ammunition that Obama won't know what hit him.

    No, President Obama can only go negative this time around. Now how that will play out exactly is almost anyone's guess. But what I fear more than his campaign is what he will actually do if he wins that second term with nothing left to hold him in check.

    He still believes in this transformation of his - that's where his eyes are trained. In fact, unrest and sadly violence will only serve him well to that end. Why do you think he hasn't said anything about the OWS idiocy or why he's fanned the flames (as you said) regarding this Trayvon Martin situation and the Fluke silliness?

    It will certainly only get worse before it gets better - if it can ever get better.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 7:45 pm on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    Apparently our "Dear Leader" delights in fanning the flames of racism, sexism, cronyism and any other incitable "ism" that fills the front pages of main stream media. Wonder why that is? Oh yeah, he is trying to get re-elected and wants Americans to think he is the solution. His big campaign will be to stamp out all this bad stuff (he incited) and make America wonderful again. If you believed him in '08, the 2012 election should be a no brainer to vote him out.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 7:34 pm on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    Mr. Kinderman, apathy in America is rampant. Everyone lives in their own little world and as long as nothing disturbs them they could care less what goes on in the rest of the country. A lot has to do with the education system in America. It has evolved into a politically liberal juggernaut getting worse with each generation. America appears to be collapsing in debt and the liberals are not only clueless on how to stop it, they seem eager to deliver the "death knell".

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 4:52 pm on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Baxter, the entire nation knew of these actions taken either by or on behalf of the President of the United States.

    As far as I can tell, they simply don't care. It didn't matter how this bill would become law; only that it did. The Constitution means nothing to Reid and Pelosi or to this White House.

    Although there are four on the Supreme Court who can't be counted on either, it will be up to probably one man to ensure that we all don't slide down that so-called slippery slope if this terrible healthcare law is allowed to stand. One man - and isn't it ironic that his name is Kennedy.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 4:07 pm on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    HEY BOBBIN, didja read my 8:44 am post yesterday? Are you "totally amazed"? Truth hard for you to swallow? Relevant and FACTUAL. Read it again, digest the FACTS about your "Great President". He should be kicked out of the Whitehouse on his lying butt.. Instead braindead LIBERALS put him on a pedestal and drool every time his deceitful face is on TV.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 9:37 am on Sat, Mar 31, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    DB: "liberty to me is having "choice" "...absolutely...after all of the BS put on paper that is the quintessential tenant for both liberals and conservatives...I choose to pay for mine...others choose for me to pay their way...I like my choices better.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:49 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Joe stated...Egads, JOANNE BOBIN'S mentor, Keith Olberman got FIRED today...

    Are you certain of your facts Joe. I was convinced that Keith Olberman was a fictitious name and that Ms Bobin was his mother who taught him everything he knows. In addition, their public personalities are so similar that one would easily draw this conclusion.

    Now that you bring forth the notion that Mr Olberman is Ms Bobin's mentor, I obviously was mistaken.


     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:15 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Why do liberals only complain about abuses of executive power when so-called conservatives are in the White House? Why do they routinely give Democrat presidents a blank check to attack the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Is the Constitution a partisan football?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:39 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ryan Jameson posted at 12:52 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.So my liberal friends, while the human aspect of bettering ourselves may seem to be a valid argument, do not forget that the most basic tenant of humanity is liberty, in this man's opinion anyway.

    Perfectly stated... and liberty to me is having "choice" to be able to participate in something or not. Freedom to have more control over your own destiny.

    Thank you Mr Jameson for a thought provoking post and thank you Mr Kinderman for a great letter that generated wonderful thinking on this thread.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:28 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ms Bobin stated...This has to be THE MOST HONEST comment ever by Mr. Baumbach. So, you have finally admitted that the "main intent" of your comments is NOT to dialogue, but to pontificate. Well said, Mr. Baumbach! You must feel very well today - confession is good for the soul.

    One can always count on Ms Bobin to "DISTORT" and characterize things in a false light.

    When you take into account the sentence I posted to Mr Lucas below , it is very clear that I was specifically referring to Mr Lucas and he alone. I was not talking about my participation here as a whole. Since I consider My Lucas a far left wing radical person who has an extreme point of view with a very closed mind, I have no reason to care to have a dialogue with him as it is pointless. Therefore, when he puts his toxic ideas out there, I wish to balance his perspective with mine.
    However, there are many liberal people who are not as closed minded as Mr Lucas and dialogue is possible.
    So it is actually comical that Ms Bobin would generalize my entire participation based upon one specific person I was addressing. That sounds very narrow minded to me. Maybe Ms Bobin needs to mature and think a bit before she writes.


    Previous post directed “ONLY” to my interaction with Mr Lucas...In reality. it has little value to me or do I care if you read my posts. Since my post is to normally rebutt the liberal perspective “YOU” put forth, its every body but you I am hoping read my post

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 6:25 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889


    Egads, JOANNE BOBIN'S mentor, Keith Olberman got FIRED today. I hope it doesn't send her off of the same cliff she claims Bush drove our economy over. I would really miss her.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 5:48 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Seems to me crowder you are the one strokin': "As a progressive, I feel happy to have helped these individuals in need..."

    Mr C: Well put: "dumfounded by the general attitude in America, especially ilk of OWS, et al, with the "you have it, WE want/demand you give it to US" . My statement to them is work for your own welfare just like the ones who "have it" did." Booorah!!!

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 5:26 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    In all of my years as an employer, I paid in tens of thousands of dollars of "employer matching funds" to both Social Security AND MediCare. I never paid into SS for myself but did invest wisely, saved and lived way under my means so when the time came to retire, I would be able to be "comfortable". I will never collect a dime of SS, nor should I, regardless of the years of paying into the "system" for the benefit of others. The word "entitlement" is bantered about these days totally in the wrong context. Nobody should be "entitled" to anything they didn't work or pay for unless they are physically or mentally disabled. I am dumfounded by the general attitude in America, especially ilk of OWS, et al, with the "you have it, WE want/demand you give it to US" . My statement to them is work for your own welfare just like the ones who "have it" did. It is called taking responsibility for yourself, apparently a forgotten concept these days.

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 4:58 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 245

    Maple, you ought to tattoo that Ali quote on the undersides of your eyelids, the way you stroke yourself publicly for all your perceived good deeds.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:30 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Crowder: I would venture to guess that I have given away more money and possessions in my 60 years of life than you have made in your.

    If there is one thing that I know about myself is that I am NOT selfish...sometimes to a fault. Nor am I greedy. Cruelty would be left to you...what you said about Mr Kinderman and Mr Dockter was a VERY good example.

    You remind me of the guy Muhammed Ali despised..."If you open a door for someone expecting a "thank you"...you opened the door for the wrong reason.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:19 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    No Mr Crowder: "Pay my way...fix me up...let me go...feed my face...clothe my body...pay for my sex...keep me clean...listen to my wails..."or we will burn this city down"! (Shortened version of the man's speech) Who said that? One person said that...at a city council meeting in Detroit.

    YOU have helped them...how about WE? DB pays taxes, JK pays taxes, JB pays taxes, RC pays taxes...VA Checks? SS...you and I pay that in. Md Cad, Md Care...sorry bub...those were earned...try to get one sometime...they are not welfare. I am sorry that the entire burden falls on just you...and the liberals.

    YOU judge me??? "Greed or selfishness? Why so much contempt for the poor and the sick? Why so much contempt for those who pay their way, your way, my way and many others way. Load feel lighter now?

     
  • Andy Crowder posted at 3:45 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Andy Crowder Posts: 245

    Pat Maple wants to know who might have said,
    "Pay my way...fix me up...let me go...feed my face...clothe my body...pay for my sex...keep me clean...listen to my wails..."

    Several of our conservative friends who used to post at LNS have been either temporarily or permanently supported by taxpayers, surviving on VA checks, SSI, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other subsidies. I recall Brian admitting that his family had used Medicaid (and grateful for the opportunity) and Jerome Kinderman offered that he is entirely dependent on entitlements due to disability. Kinderman even used a state subsidy to have his car repaired and then complained bitterly about some inadequacy of the service in a letter to the editor.

    As a progressive, I feel happy to have helped these individuals in need and think it rather cruel that Pat Maple mocks them in his post. However, it always shocks me when those who have benefited most from entitlements want to bar others equally as deserving or desperate from receiving the same help. Greed or selfishness? Why so much contempt for the poor and the sick?

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 2:52 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Mr. Kinderman, you are exactly right. Obama's administration is relying heavily that the "ignorant" American voters not only being forgetful but far more interested in news about Trayvon Martin, Sandra Fluke, Lindsay Lohan, and Paris Hilton than what is going on in their back rooms. And, unfortunately, they just might be right. One thing certain, the mainstream media is certainly cooperating by supplying plenty of misdirection and keeping anything detrimental to the liberal cause out of print. It is incumbent on EVERY American voter, regardless of party affiliation, to go the polls in November informed with the TRUTH.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:54 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Jameson: The crux of your argument is pursuit. The pursuit of happiness to be specific...May I ask: Did anyone ever come to your house and give you a job or did you have to go out and look for one? Did anyone ever come to you and give you your house or did you go out, find a job and then buy your home? Did anyone ever come to you and give you money or did you wait in line like most of us for our paycheck? Did anyone...I think my point is made.

    Happiness is the second part of your point. What is happiness...it is as different to each person as are the fingerprints on their hands. So the constitution states that as a very broad right. The tern entrepreneur comes to mind...we are ALL entrepreneurs on the search for our happiness: risk-taking business persons...

    It may not seem at first we are but from my perspective: Marriage...work...sports...fun...hiking...children...education...travel...insurance... driving...love making...homes...are all a form of entreprenurial risk-taking...thus the original term...PURSUIT. There is no guaranteed success in anything and it is those who do actually succeed that we celebrate in some way....money, spirit, health, adulation...someway. Those who are given anything often fail to appreciate its value and demean those two words.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:34 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Very well put, Mr. Jameson. Let's see if any of that sinks in.

     
  • Ryan Jameson posted at 12:52 pm on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Liberals correct me if I am wrong, I would like to explore the heart if the issue.

    This healthcare mandate seems to be the next logical step in the progression of a happy, healthy society. The society in which the sick are healed and everyone has well being to be productive and to live the American dream. The equality of all to gain access to the best healthcare is their right as an American and the best overall benefit to our nation as a whole.

    Here is where I have a problem, and I think most conservatives would agree with this articulation. Nowhere is it written that men should be guaranteed happiness in our Constitution. We are afforded the right to "pursue happiness" under the auspices of liberty. So I take it very seriously when the government, which under the Constitution is bound to protect my liberty and not my happiness, tells me what I must and must not buy in relation to my own health. Something struck me about a post from Mr. Lucas (when he wasn't being childish) about the health systems in other nations. I got to thinking about the difference between the US and these other nations. What I found? The constitution and moreover the writings of the men who created this nation and what they had to say about liberty and security. Foremost as an American I have a problem with the direction that this country is taking. I do not believe that all men are guaranteed happiness nor do I believe they should receive it through legislation. So my liberal friends, while the human aspect of bettering ourselves may seem to be a valid argument, do not forget that the most basic tenant of humanity is liberty, in this man's opinion anyway.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:55 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Pay my way...fix me up...let me go...feed my face...clothe my body...pay for my sex...keep me clean...listen to my wails..."or we will burn this city down"! Who said that?

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:45 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Just what is wrong with pontificating on an open forum? That is precisely what I did with my letter here and those that came before.

    Sure, I would have liked to engage in some good healthy conversations or even a truly “spirited” debate. But such opportunities are extremely rare owing to the type of discourse that usually graces these pages.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:16 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Baumbach wrote: "Interesting. You must be under the mistaken impression that the main intent of my comments is to engage in a dialogue. "

    This has to be THE MOST HONEST comment ever by Mr. Baumbach. So, you have finally admitted that the "main intent" of your comments is NOT to dialogue, but to pontificate. Well said, Mr. Baumbach! You must feel very well today - confession is good for the soul.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:04 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Baxter, you're memory is exemplary. But I'm afraid that even in these times of near-instant recall of practically every event back to the time Christ walked the Earth (and earlier), the facts you've laid out are nearly forgotten. And this is precisely what the Obama administration is banking on.

    When coupled with far too many Americans not even taking the time to vote and others still expecting their "ObamaBucks," November is a steep uphill climb for Republicans. It's an amazing thing considering that un-employment is still well above the 8% threshold that Obama promised we would be below and just yesterday I paid nearly $4.50 per gallon for gasoline. My opinion of my fellow Americans is changing.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 8:44 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    Just how did Obama managed to get his Obamacare bill passed in the first place? Through bribery and strong-arm tactics, that's how. Forget about the following?
    * The Cornhusker Kickback.
    * $300,000,000 of bribes to Louisiana's Senator Mary Landrieu.
    * A new hospital in Connecticut for morally challenged Senator Chris Dodd.
    * Roughly ten billion in community health centers to buy off Vermont's Bernie Sanders.
    * An exemption of Bill Nelson's Florida constituents from the Medicare Advantage cuts applicable to everyone else.
    * A threat to take away Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman's committee chairmanship unless he falls into line.

    True Chicago style thuggery politics at it's finest.

     
  • Gary Musto posted at 6:37 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Gary Musto Posts: 506

    So long John Lucas wish you all the luck in the world and good health, but I'm sure not gonna miss your name calling and hissy fits.

    Mr. Kinderman speaks the truth and Mr. Lucas couldn't handle the truth.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 12:38 am on Fri, Mar 30, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Kinderman... I am scratching my head as if I have Psoriasis.

    You are normally a thoughtful , wise and kind man. I’m not sure what caused you to engage in such cruelty and high pressure tactics. I think when you stated “ Mr. Lucas, I'd be more than happy to discuss the Bush presidency (either one for that matter) just as long as I believe it's relevant and germane to the issue at hand.”.. it was just way overboard. Any man would break under such pressure and I certainly do not blame Mr Lucus for making a scene and huffing off to bed. You then had the gall and insensitivity to wish him a good night sleep... Your harsh rhetoric knows no bounds.

    It's no wonder that Mr Lucas claimed he was dealing with the insanity,the stupidity... and the incompetence of Conservatives. It's just a miracle that his raised blood pressure didn't cause a heart attack.
    In all seriousness Mr Kinderman, you are a respectful gentleman!

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:03 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    This is precisely what happens nearly each and every time I attempt to engage in a healthy yet civil and even spirited debate with a liberal/progressive. They stomp off in a huff claiming of high blood pressure problems or other such virtual maladies and blaming it all on conservatives. Not failing to mention of course a few nice little names to round out their not-so-fond farewells. It's funny, liberals/progressives never seem to bother me much at all. I wonder why that might be . . .

    Good night, Mr. Lucas. Sleep well.

    And just in case you're at all interested, I've never thought much of John Kenneth Galbraith. But I'm sure you could have figured that out all by yourself.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 9:45 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    This my last post. Dealing with the insanity,t he stupidity, the incompetence of Conservatives just raises my blood pressure too much. Life is just too short. In passing I will leave you with a chart I made.

    1 2 3 4 5
    France 11.8% $3,978 81.5 1st
    Germany 11.6% $4,218 80.3 25th
    Austria 11.0% $4,298 80.4 9th
    Denmark 11.5% $4,348 79.0 34th
    Canada 11.3% $4,478 80.7 30th
    Luxembourg 7.8% $4,808 80.7 16th
    Netherlands 12% $4,914 80.6 17th
    Switzerland 11.6% $5,344 82.3 20th
    Norway 9.6% $5,352 81.0 11th
    United States 17.4% $7,960 78.2 37th

    Country
    Percent of GDP spent on medical
    Amount of money spent per person in the country
    Life expectancy
    Ranking in the world by analyzing outcomes(WHO)

    If we spent the same as the Netherlands on health in this country how much would we save? Do the math. Our GDP in 2008 was over 14 Trillion dollars. We spent 6.4% more. It works out to close to 900 billion dollars we would have spent less PER YEAR.

    We spend between $2500 and $5000 more per person than any other country in the world and unlike the other countries on the list we do not even insure 45 million of our own people.

    We rank 50th in the world in life expectancy

    This does not include the medical bankruptcies because of medical bills that do not even exist in these other countries

    This is what Conservatism is all about. It is not about figuring out a way to provide medical care for the citizens of a country in a inexpensive competent fashion. Conservatism in America is about shoving as much of the national income to the top 1/10 of one percent as fast as one can and our medical system is just one example.

    John Kenneth Galbraith said it best:
    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

    You guys take care and I wish you the best.


     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:40 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Lucas stated...I find it so interesting that our conservative friends do not want to talk about the Bush Presidency...

    Mr Kinderman stated... Mr. Lucas, I'd be more than happy to discuss the Bush presidency ...either one for that matter) just as long as I believe it's relevant and germane to the issue at hand.

    Tall order Mr Kinderman . Will be interesting if someone like Mr lucas can make it relevant. Im sure since Mr Lucas is a sincere man, he will soon been putting forth his points of view.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:24 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Lucas stated...The reason i never answer you is that I never bother to read your posts

    Interesting. You must be under the mistaken impression that the main intent of my comments is to engage in a dialogue. .

    In reality. it has little value to me or do I care if you read my posts. Since my post is to normally rebutt the liberal perspective you put forth, its every body but you I am hoping read my post. I have no expectations that you can comprehend what I say, so my target is not you. I read your posts as I find it educational so that when I draw conclusionals about liberals, its based on the information I read.

    ...

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 7:53 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Lucas, I'd be more than happy to discuss the Bush presidency (either one for that matter) just as long as I believe it's relevant and germane to the issue at hand. Since there appears to be nothing in my letter that has any connection to either one’s administration, perhaps it would be wise to keep our eye on the ball.

    But where I find fault with my liberal "friends" is that they don't want to discuss any aspects of these historical eras except of course where they believe they can lay blame for any problems with the current administration. Since Inauguration Day 2009 it's been nearly non-stop "Bush's fault" rather than taking ownership for what Barack H. Obama signed on for well before he won in 2008.

    It's abundantly clear to me that not only is President Obama over his head, but he's well aware of that fact. So the only way he can win another term - and for the life of me I cannot fathom why he would want to do so considering his incompetence so far - is to divert attention to his predecessor.

    It's really all quite sad. But even sadder are those who are so blind to this reality.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:42 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    Darrell, I noticed the top of your post that it said Mr Lucas. Then I noticed the there were a lot of lines in your post. The reason i never answer you is that I never bother to read your posts. I am telling you this because I hate to see somebody work so hard at something when the person it is directed to does not waste his time looking at it. Just trying to help

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:33 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Darrell stated...the first Black American was elected to the office of the president.

    Barack Obama only looks 50... I would guess many thought he had an old soul ... now there is confirmation that he does.

    Obviously, it should have been Barack H. Obama was our first black president elected and is now our president.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:26 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Lucas stated...What we Liberals cannot understand is why you Conservatives want to go back to the same policies which he championed when you know now they led to nothing but disaster.

    Please clarify with the facts you claim you always use in making your points. Specifically what policies are you referring to? Can you post the legislation that was enacted that led to these disasters? Can you articulate what were the specific damages that these so called disasters caused? What policies were followed then that are not followed now? For example, many liberals for years claimed George W. Bushes policy of detaining combatants at Gitmo was illegal and demanded Gitmo be closed. Barack H Obama announced in 2008 that Gitmo would be closed at maximum one year. Its still open after almost four years and George W. Bush policies are still being used excluding, of course, the effective water boarding technique ( some in error called torture) that was only used on three people.

    The Patriot Act was a Bush administration promotion. The dems once again screamed that Bush was a terrorist and wanted to spy on Americans... What did the liberals do after Obama not only embraced the Patriot Act but made in stronger.... were the outraged? No... they simply looked to their leader, Barack H. Obama and thought... well maybe the Patriot Act was not so bad after all. If Barack H. Obama thinks its ok... it must be. How do you spell hypocrisy?
    Obviously it begins with a big “L”... ( L does not stand for Lucas)

    So I am very confused when Mr Lucas talks about conservatives. In reality, Barack H. Obama embraced George W. Bush policies in many instances. When he had super majorities in both houses and could have distanced themselves from all of George W Bushes policies...they demonstrates how insincere and hypocritical they are in reality.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:24 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    I find it so interesting that our conservative friends do not want to talk about the Bush Presidency(not surprising but interesting none the less) but get on their knees in religious ecstasy when discussing Saint Ronnie. George Bush was the epitome of Conservatism. He cut taxes, he deregulated everything he could get his hands on, he turned the executive branch of the government as did his conservative brothers did in the legislative branch into the hands of his corporate masters. It was not George Bush that turned everything he touched into garbage it was his policies. Those policies were supported by Conservatives everywhere including those on this blog. It is not that you do not want to discuss George Bush it is you do not ant to talk about what the policies you support produce

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:56 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH***NEWSFLASH
    **** Alert **Alert****Alert**** Alert**Alert**** Alert **Alert**** Alert

    IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT THAT MAY SHOCK SOME OF YOU...
    There was an election in 2008 and the first Black American was elected to the office of the president. Our president is now Barack Obama and all those in a Bush stupor can celebrate and rejoice. Your nightmare is over and the man who walks on water has arrived. Bush is no longer president... I repeat... Bush is no longer president.

    NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH*** NEWSFLASH***NEWSFLASH
    **** Alert **Alert****Alert**** Alert**Alert**** Alert **Alert**** Alert

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 6:48 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    BOBBIN, I have read YOUR contributions to this forum and about all you manage to do is berate, demean and whine about BUSH. If I were you, I wouldn't criticize other people not making meaninful contributions.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 6:14 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    If Mr. Baxter ever posted anything worth reading OR contributed to the conversation, I would be totally amazed.

    Maybe it would be more productive to ready yourself for the next Taco Truck Competition by cleaning out your bus and gassing it up instead of wasting everyone's time in this forum.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 6:06 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730


    Mr Baxter said:

    BOBBIN, wah, wah, wah....You keep whining about Bush. You do realize he isn't the President any longer, don't you?

    One thing Conservatives and Liberals can agree on is Thank God that George Bush is not President anymore. His policies and leadership on National Security (Largest terror attack on US soil in history, the unpaid for and one of the biggest foreign disasters in US history, the Iraq war, his inability to kill of capture Ben Laden etc) and financial policies that led to the biggest financial disaster since the Great Depression is something everyone condemns even Conservatives. What we Liberals cannot understand is why you Conservatives want to go back to the same policies which he championed when you know now they led to nothing but disaster.

     
  • Joe Baxter posted at 5:24 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joe Baxter Posts: 1889

    BOBBIN, wah, wah, wah....You keep whining about Bush. You do realize he isn't the President any longer, don't you?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:46 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Tillet stated...No major foreign policy decisions are ever made in the midst of an election cycle, nor should they...

    One might scratch their head and wonder how Mr Tillet or anyone else would know when decisions are actually made. Any president could decide ( make a decision ) at any point in time of a future event. Had Mr Tillet stated that policy is not IMPLEMENTED in the mist of an election cycle, I could then understand his point. In in this case, a reasonable person could conclude that President Obama could have easily made a decision and made an agreement now, to implement a policy after the election was over. Mr Kinderman's thinking makes so much sense, one would wonder why anyone would disagree ( except for the reason Mr Kinderman identified)

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 3:41 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Lucas, while you're certainly free to base your opinion on anything you choose, so am I. However, I am convinced that after this last election Mr. Obama will in fact pull out all the stops based upon his assertion that he will have more flexibility. I’ve known this all along.

    However, if this were just about national security then I would be much more alarmed than if this was just his thoughts about everything in general. If his choice to make such a promise to Putin through his predecessor doesn't scare the pants off everyone with a fully functioning brain, then I don't know what will. There should be nothing more important to any U.S. president than the security of this nation. Of course it's no secret where Obama comes from insofar as our military is concerned. His mindset mimics those who truly believe we can all sit and join hands with nations such as Russia and even Iran and settle our differences over a glass of Kool-Aid and a few verses of Kumbaya.

    Putin's a thug - and Obama's playing right into his hands with this whole nuclear disarmament agenda. By having added flexibility without the constraints of another election should strike fear not at our enemies, but straight at us.

    My most fervent hope is that this man can be stopped before it's too late. But I fear that too many of us have already been duped to the extent that they really believe he's a nice guy and worthy of an additional four years. I've never been fooled.

    Oh, and by the way Mr. Lucas, you're correct that this isn't about former President George W. Bush - so you might want to consider keeping your focus on the present and future.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 3:34 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Kinderman stated...In short, Mr. Tillett's excuses on the president’s behalf (which I am sure the latter really does appreciate) simply make no sense; unless of course one is completely in the tank for President Barack Hussein Obama.

    Interesting observation. I think it is likely that Mr Tillett is in the tank for President Obama if you consider the information in his past posts. He is a proud union supporter and teacher, his union gives overwhelmingly to democratic candidates. He often ridicules conservative thinkers and would most likely state conservatives are not thinkers. He has made a number of posts that when he needed documentation, would cite articles of information he read from Huffington post. Is there anyone that would dispute that the Huffington Post favors Obama and has a left wing leaning? Of course Mr Tillett may not be in the tank for president Obama. But would anyone be surprised if he were? I can see where Mr Kinderman is making a good point.

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 1:49 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Tillett is simply trying to explain away what Obama actually meant during his soft-spoken conversation with the former Russian president. Now had Obama not mentioned that this was his "last election," then perhaps the benefit of the doubt would lean in his favor. But clearly this has nothing to do with him making important decisions during a presidential campaign. Although I agree that Barack H. Obama has really never left "campaign mode" during his entire term, we did hire him to conduct the nation's business during the entire duration - not to exclude this entire year when I suppose Mr. Tillett believes that the really big decisions should be placed on hold. In fact, I was very critical of George W. Bush's lack of attention during his last year or so. Thinking as Mr. Tillett, I guess I should have given Bush a pass then since he was on his way out and should have been more concerned about the new curtains and carpets in his and Laura's retirement home in Texas.

    In short, Mr. Tillett's excuses on the president’s behalf (which I am sure the latter really does appreciate) simply make no sense; unless of course one is completely in the tank for President Barack Hussein Obama.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 1:46 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Ms. Bobin,
    The topic is neither Ms. Parigoris nor myself.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 1:44 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    With his wink and nod to the Russians earlier this week regarding our nation's security, he clearly warned us that more ramming and shoving would be in the offing.


    Jerome this was about National Security. You not talking about George Bush under whose watch the biggest terror attack in US History occurred, who started an unfunded war in Iraq, the biggest foreign policy disaster since Vietnam, and who never got Ben Laden. You are talking about the man who killed Ben Laden and got us out of Iraq. It is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that when it comes to National security the question should be:

    Can this country survive if we put a conservative in charge of National Security?

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 1:27 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Ms. Parigoris wrote: "Like most Americans, Ms Bobin, I was alseep- it took a charlatan with ties to Marxism with a very shady past to wake me up."

    That has to be the funniest comment here today. Ms. Parigoris's awakening more likely has to do with a comment she made on another thread today and she is quite disingenuous. "Shady past?" "Ties to Marxism?" If Ms. Parigoris could even define Marxism I would be surprised.

    Mr. Liebich - if you think that Ms. Parigoris is a moderate, i.e., leaning neither left nor right, then you should just go back to dwelling on your CIA conspiracy theories. She, at the VERY least, is a very gullible woman who has fallen prey to a group that even mainstream Republicans consider radical.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:58 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Kim,
    It's as sad as it is pathetic but unfortunately most Americans are hopelessly stuck in the false left/right paradigm. I don't anticipate Ms. Bobin will awaken anytime soon...

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:50 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Mr. Tillett stated, "The most wealthy individuals and corporations use their vast resources to influence legislation to make more money to influence more legislation to make more money..."

    Exactly! I couldn't agree more. Speaking of more... Did you know that more than half of President Obama's most generous campaign fundraisers have visited the White House at least once for meetings with top advisers, holiday parties or state dinners according to a review by The Associated Press? Did you know scores made multiple visits? The top Romney contributors reads like a who’s who of Wall Street and the financial cartel as well. Romney's top contributor is Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Barclays.
    I suggest this "influence" could be one of the the reasons relatives of Presidential candidate Mitt Romney have joined the campaign of Texas Congressman Ron Paul.

     
  • Kim Parigoris posted at 12:38 pm on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    He lifted the moratorium after the damage was done. 10 oil rigs left the Gulf "Ten oil rigs have left the Gulf of Mexico since the Obama Administration imposed a moratorium on deepwater oil and gas drilling in May 2010, according to documentation obtained from Sen. David Vitter’s (R-La.) office.
    The ten rigs named in the document are: Marinas, Discover Americas, Ocean Endeavor, Ocean Confidence, Stena Forth, Clyde Bourdeaux, Ensco 8503, Deep Ocean Clarion, Discover Spirit, and Amirante. The rigs have left the Gulf for locations in Egypt, Congo, French Guiana, Liberia, Nigeria and Brazil."
    Sorry- you can spin his comments to Russia all you want...a diplomat does not make comments like that based on speculation of what the election outcome will be, and that HE will have more flexibility. How about Congress, the Senate, etc? He makes it sound like HE is the dictator of this country.
    Yes, he has apologized more than any other President..It is no use discussing things like this with an Obamanite. The more I learn about the Bush's the less I like them too- GHW signed us on to Agenda 21 and Jr spent like a drunken sailor. But I am talking about TODAY and all Ms Bobin can do is wallow in her hatred of GW Bush in her retaliation. Like most Americans, Ms Bobin, I was alseep- it took a charlatan with ties to Marxism with a very shady past to wake me up.
    Obama has been President for over 3 years now- let's drop the "I inherited a mess" crying. OK- I have a life and need to go now

     
  • Jeff Tillett posted at 11:49 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jeff Tillett Posts: 551

    1) The President was not making "side deals" with Russia. What he said was not controversial. The US is in the middle of an election cycle, as Russia just completed. No major foreign policy decisions are ever made in the midst of an election cycle, nor should they. Look to what GHWB accomplished, a major arms draw down, with Gorbachev, before the fall of USSR... in 1990, far from an election.
    2) Answering a question about the tragic death of a black teen in a personal fashion or the arrest of a home owner fro B&E on his own home is not "incit[ing] racial tension".
    3) He hasn't apologized for America any more than other Presidents, like Reagan or GWB.
    4) He did not give money to Brazil. The Export-Import Bank, whose directors all had been appointed by GWB, offered Brazil a loan to be used to buy equipment from American companies.
    5) He did place a moratorium on drilling immediately after the BP disaster, but then lifted it. Drilling and oil production is at it's highest since the mid-80's.

    As for redistribution of wealth, an argument could be made that he does in fact want this, but it should be viewed as a positive. We currently do have a system that unfairly distributes wealth to the most wealthy. The most wealthy individuals and corporations use their vast resources to influence legislation to make more money to influence more legislation to make more money...

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:49 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    The following video is a must see for those still suffering from Obamanosis.
    The guy constantly lies and many Americans are stupid enough to STILL believe him. What else is there to say?

    http://youtu.be/kg9m1F8B2_c

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:49 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Just wondering where Ms. Parigoris's astounding sense of outrage was from 2001-2008 when the Bush Administration, lead by the recently transplanted VP Cheney, was committing us to 2 unnecessary wars and driving the economy into the ditch? When Cheney was lining his friends' pockets with cash from no-bid contracts in the Middle East?

    Where was Ms. Parigoris's outrage when a former alcoholic/drug addicted failed businessman was elected to the presidency? A man whose daddy got him a cush appointment to the TX National Guard to avoid Vietnam service. A man who couldn't even finish his service with the Guard? A man whose daddy's political cronies groomed him for the TX governorship and the presidency? Who filled his cabinet with daddy's crony war hawks? A man who greatest aspiration was REALLY to be the Commissioner of Baseball.

    Mr. Kinderman wrote: "rallying the voters to follow him in his quest to “transform the United States of America,” or words to that effect."

    "Or words to that effect?" Again - if Mr. Kinderman wants to believe that it is within the power of ONE individual to do that, then just keep on keepin' on. No sense even talking about it.

     
  • Kim Parigoris posted at 11:21 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    I don't really want to get entrenched in the racial issue because God knows there are enough people in this country doing it, but where is Obama's outrage when a white 13 year old in Missouri is told he was getting what he deserved while he was set on fire by 2 black youths? Where is the outrage when 2 British tourists get lost in a neighborhood in Florida last week and are murdered by a black 17 year old? Have you heard about the University of Mssissippi student (white) shot and killed last weekend and 3 black suspects were seen fleeing the scene? The last thing we need right now is our President fueling the flames of racism and unrest. He is supposed to be leading us, setting an example of tolerance and goodness- not pitting us against each other. that is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson's job.

     
  • Kim Parigoris posted at 11:05 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    Lies? Saying that Trayvon Martin could be his son, again taking a stand before all (or any) of the facts were in on the case? That isn't getting involved? Jumping to the defense of Professor Gates before he knew all the facts, and having a "beer Summit" to patch things up? That isn't getting involved? He needs to keep his nose out of these issues, especially before he knows the facts. The Global Poverty Act of 2007- the ONLY bill he ever sponsored in his career as a Senator? The one where the United States would fork over .7% of our GDP to the United Nations to be "redistributed" to underdeveloped nations? The only bill that he felt passionate enough to sponsor? He voted 38 times out of 75 in 2007- otherwise he only voted "Present" or he was absent. "President Obama has decided to help finance offshore drilling--just not off America's shores. During a recent visit to Rio de Janeiro, President Obama offered a $2 billion loan guarantee to Petrobras (a Brazilian energy company) to explore Brazil's Tupi oil field--even though he put a moratorium on such efforts in the United States, killing more than 19,000 domestic jobs and siphoning approximately $1.1 billion from America's economy."

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:58 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    Mr. Tillett, just what can you point to within Ms. Paragoris' post that would be considered "lies and/or fallacious innuendo?"

     
  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 10:56 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2362

    When I hear and/or read from those opposed to my opinion criticize me for using a politician’s own words and ideas to bolster my stance, that’s when I know the “debate” is won. I remember unmistakably hearing Barack Obama as a candidate rallying the voters to follow him in his quest to “transform the United States of America,” or words to that effect. Furthermore, anyone with a minimum ability to determine what he meant through his whispering assurances to the out-going Russian president should clearly understand that this transformation will be so much easier to achieve once he is no longer constrained by the tethers of another campaign; one that he’d have to again fool the American people into believing that he has their collective interests at heart. He doesn’t.

    The evidence is so overwhelming that in answer to another’s post here about half of the country believing Obama is doing a good job, I can only respond that if this is true (which I am not conceding that it is) I’m very concerned about them. Perhaps the answers lie within the videos of “average” Americans created by Nancy Pelosi’s own daughter. For those unfamiliar with her work, just do a little Googling and you won’t have much trouble finding it.

    Finally, as I personally gear up for what will certainly be the dirtiest presidential campaign in the history of the Republic, I don’t intend to stand on the sidelines. True, I may not make much of a difference with my trusty wireless keyboard and mouse, but I’m certainly going to try.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:25 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Ms. Bobin,
    The "transformation" you choose to ignore was rejected by a vote of 414-0 yesterday...

     
  • Jeff Tillett posted at 10:24 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Jeff Tillett Posts: 551

    Kim, that was an extraordinary rant... it was filled solely with lies and/or fallacious innuendo. Not one single fact or truth.

     
  • Kim Parigoris posted at 10:03 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Kim Parigoris Posts: 470

    If Bush had been caught making "side deals" with Russian diplomats he would have been impeached. Obama should be tried for treason and anyone who has not figured this guy out yet has some serious blinders on..He incites racial tension, he sticks his nose where it doesn't belong such as the Gates case and this Trayvon Martin case, he apologizes for America, he wants to redistribute our wealth, (what is left of it) gives Brazil money for Petrobras oil exploration and drilling in their region but puts a moratorium on ours, the list just goes on and on and on. If he is re-elected, I guess we will all have lots of time to discuss all of this as we are standing in the soup line together..

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 10:00 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Kinderman wrote: "But here we have a president bent on transforming the United States into what he alone believes it should be."

    This seems to be the catch phrase of every anti-Obamaite - but none seems to be able to explain what "transformation" Obama is bent on, or they respond with, "he is a socialist." That's why we have a Constitution and 3 branches of government - to prevent this so-called "transformation."

    Just saw a clip of Wayne LaPierre ranting that Obama wants to destroy the 2nd Amendment (again). Now people are running out (again) buying guns before Obama takes his pen and draws a line through it, nullifying it forever.

    Mr. Baumbach wrote:

    "Sarah Palin was ridiculed with her Death Panel comments... but for some people, it will become a reality. Sarah Palin was right."

    I'm sorry that Mr. Baumbach has such a thing for Sarah Palin that he has to defend her so passionately ALL THE TIME. Palin's day is done - get over her.

    If anyone does not think that there are a bunch of "death panels" working at HMO's right now, then they are fooling themselves. Health insurance companies make decisions daily to deny critically ill people the coverage they need to get the treatment they need because they have pre-existing conditions. These are Death Panels.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 9:33 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    In the most simplest of ways: Congress makes laws, the Pres okays those laws and the Supreme Court tells them whether or not they got it right. They got OBC wrong...which is why 85% of the people in this country think congress and BO's gang are all idiots.

     
  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:00 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Unfortunately our elected representatives are clueless about the Constitution which they are sworn to uphold. For example, John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, was once asked where in the Constitution does it state that the federal government has the authority to force Americans to buy a product. "Under several clauses, the good and welfare clause and a couple others," Conyers responded. See for yourself... http://youtu.be/f0VYOa2BRbg

    My point is...Shouldn't the chairman of the House Judiciary Commitee know that there is no such clause in the Constitution? The word "good" only appears once in the Constitution, in Article 3, Section 1, which deals with the Judicial Branch, not the powers of Congress.

    What's next? Will Obama require all Americans to purchase a General Motors car?

     
  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:39 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1562

    Jerome seems unable to grasp the fact that half the country approves of the job Obama’s doing and it is not "he alone" that sees a better way forward.
    I would agree with Jerome that the mandate is a lousy idea but not because I think it's unconsitutional.
    It seems unfair to further burden the youth of this country so the boomers can have more. Already we see retirement ages extended and any talk of social security reform is targeted to those under fifty. Why should the young be burdened because of bad planning by the boomers? The mandate is a second social security plan so that those already or soon to be retired can pay less in health insurance funded by those young and healthy enough not to need insurance.

     
  • Steve Schmidt posted at 4:55 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2570

    One interesting out come of this ruling that has come to my attention is the way that it will relate to drug laws. If the SCOTUS finds that the federal government has no right to regulate commerce free situations under the Interstate Commerce Clause, the federal laws against the personal cultivation and consumption of cannabis will lose their constitutional underpinnings.

    It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:29 am on Thu, Mar 29, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Kinderman stated... Of course, that would leave open the bigger and more important issue as to how it will all be paid for...

    That is the trillion dollar question. President Obama and his willing partners intentionally drastically understated what this will cost. Unfortunately, as in all national healthcare systems, as the costs escalate uncontrollably, the central committee will be forced to resort to some type of rationing of healthcare.
    Typically, its the elderly that pay the price with long waits that many times result in death before treatment is approved. In some countries the waiting list is 3 years. The bean counters in the accounting department will not have to face the public who suffers as a result of their cost saving measures.

    Sarah Palin was ridiculed with her Death Panel comments... but for some people, it will become a reality. Sarah Palin was right.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 11 hours ago by Marta Deike.

article: Tokay High School graduate Marta Deike …

Thank you, Lodi News Sentinel. I feel so honored.

More...

Posted 19 hours ago by tara Agans.

article: Tokay High School graduate Marta Deike …

What a inspiring story! Sometimes people don't look sick on the outside ,its called having a invisible illness. Some people who have very s…

More...

Posted 20 hours ago by Walter Chang.

article: Letter: Immigrants must come to the U.…

"not much you can do..." He can continue to blog his displeasure. He can continue to keep his TV tuned to FAUXNEWS 24/7. He ca…

More...

Posted 21 hours ago by Todd Cronin.

article: Lodi Lake vehicle passes available

Fifty dollars huh. I think I'll park at my friend's house and walk in...[wink]

More...

Posted 21 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Steve Hansen: Over-regulated medication…

Funny the Mr Hansen mock the Cuba healthcare. Should have check because the United States ranked only by TWO step above Cuba by the World …

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

CREATE AN EVENT

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists