Last week, we had the cheery news from Madame Speaker Pelosi that the cost of the House's health-care reform bill was going to come in under $900 billion.
Phew, I'm glad to know we can afford it after all. The Treasury should be able to print that new money within a couple of weeks. Kind of reminds me of the good old days in the last Bush administration when there was no war or bailout we could not afford.
Ahem.
Now for the serious business.
There seem to be two driving assumptions behind health-care reform:
1) That people have a right to health-care.
2) That somebody else should pay for it.
I get the reason why people assume they have a right to health care: It is frankly better than the alternative - you know, dropping dead from swine flu in the parking lot outside the local hospital while nurses mix martinis and greedy docs play golf with insurance execs. But my question for any and all is just where did this right to health care come from?
Was it granted by God, like the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness we cherish in America? If so, why are we not born with a personal-care provider attached? It's darned inconvenient having to drive my car to the doctor's office when I want health care. At the very least, you would think that an inalienable right would come with curbside service. How about providing an ambulance for me so that I can exercise my right whenever I want to? For that matter, why do doctors' offices shut down at night? If I have a right to health care, shouldn't that come with a 24/7 access guarantee?
But that is mere flippant philosophy. Much more important is the nagging question of who is going to pay for my health care. Since I have a right to it, my ability to pay is irrelevant. No matter what the cost (and believe me, health care can be expensive indeed) someone is going to pay for it.
And since we've already established that I have a right to health care, it doesn't matter much to me who pays for it at all - whether it's the government, the health-insurance companies, or just you my neighbor. If I develop a runny nose, the first thing I will do is send for my ambulance, take a trip up to the hospital, ask for a tissue, and then send you the bill. Even if I develop an incurable disease that costs millions of dollars to treat, I think it is only fair for you to pay for my treatment. After all, I have a right.
OK, NOW for the serious business:
Just where is this money coming from to pay for the $900 billion health-care reform bill? (Let's just go ahead and use a low number since it seems to make the folks in Congress happier to think they have pulled the wool over our eyes.)
Remember, this bill is supposed to be revenue-neutral. Otherwise President Obama will veto it. He's promised us that health-care reform won't cost us anything. (Where have we heard that before? Oh yeah, the free lunch thing.)
So we have to ask ourselves two questions:
1) What is the government buying with its $900 billion? (What actual expenditures are planned?)
2) Who is paying the government $900 billion to cover the cost to make sure it is revenue neutral?
This is where our quest to understand health-care reform bogs down. Can you really explain to me what the government is spending its money on? Another layer of bureaucracy surely, but presumably they are also paying my medical bills somewhere along the line, and like I say, I am all in favor of free stuff for me and mine (the American way, right?) But what bothers me is that I keep thinking about some basic economic principles and the fact that there is only so much money to go around, and if you spend money you don't have, you have two choices: 1) Take a loan. 2) Rob a bank.
So far as I know, the only people still loaning us money are the Chinese, and they may just want to see us go deeper in debt, so we are easier to take over later. And as for robbing the bank, I think that might be another description for mugging the taxpayers, who seem to have the deepest pockets and the quietest voice (resistance is futile!).
But remember this is all speculative.
After all, no one really knows what we are being subjected to (yes, I use that phrase intentionally) by our rulers in Washington (yep, again intentional). Sen. Max Baucus and the Senate leadership won't even promise that there will be a bill on the Internet for 72 hours before a vote is taken on it. Madame Speaker Pelosi has four bills roaming the halls of Congress, and she isn't even sure which one says what.
But never fear! Congress is doing our bidding (we hope) as they cobble together a $1 trillion (oops! we're not supposed to use that word!) program to provide Americans with the newfound "right" to health care.
Among the solutions I have found for raising money to pay for health-care reform, the most intriguing include raising the age of eligibility for Medicare, increasing Part B premiums for Medicare, increasing medical cost-sharing for military retirees, eliminating the employer-sponsored insurance tax exclusion, and raising cigarette and alcohol taxes. There is also the neat trick of charging a penalty against people who don't know that government mandated health-care is not just a right but a responsibility. In other words, if you don't cough up your premiums for health-insurance, the government will confiscate them (but that is another story, far too scary to be told in the days preceding Halloween).
Of course, all or none of those options could be in the finished bill. We don't need to know that. After all, we are not senators or representatives. So we are just supposed to reassure our elected representatives that we want to continue to eat slop out of the federal trough and go along with whatever they decide.
It does still worry me a bit that I can't quite figure out how the bill can be revenue-neutral without hurting me as a taxpayer, but gosh, I've never been let down by Congress before, so I don't see why that should be a problem now.
n Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake. E-mail responses may be sent to edit@dailyinterlake.com
Rob123
All in all, a very enjoyable week. Nothing changed, unless someone decides that 51F on Holloween Night is proof that the Health Care system is dysfunctional due to forces that are political in nature yet related to sunspots; but don't worry since rtr will find a cut and paste and explain it all to us. Ah, the security of going to bed at night, with a True Believer watching over me and ready to defend my right to think like him. We've come a long ways, baby.
rtr
Tax Problems #1 Cause of Bankruptcy
April 25, 2005 10:44 AM by James W. Fogal (Archive)
Todd Zywicki of The Volokh Conspiracy fingers tax liabilities as the #1 cause of bankruptcies:
“An interesting thing briefly suggested here is the extent to which tax problems force people into bankruptcy (usually, however, not because they just "forgot" to pay their taxes). There aren't many good studies on this, but some have concluded that as much as 10% of bankruptcy filings are caused by tax liabilities (and that doesn't count those who would have alot more money available to pay their debts but for having to pay their taxes or pay their taxes because they are generally nondischargeable in bankruptcy). For those keeping score at home, this exceeds the number of bankruptcies traditionally thought to be caused by health problems, death in the family, college expenses, and gambling”
====
Well I guess bankruptcy caused by health care once the government starts adding even more taxes do to their socialized death care plan may be come a reality after all...
rtr
One of the biggest crocks I have seen posted here is the one stating people go bankrupt do to health care so we need socialized health care done through socialized governmental taxation.
I would like anyone of those socialists to look up how many old people loose their homes every year do to over taxation from the government since they are on fixed incomes as compared to people going bankrupt do to health care.
rtr
By the way Jack, You stated at the begining of this comment section you wanted to know what the solution to the health care problem was and I just pointed it out for you.
You will probably see the socialist here start screaming and yelling like usural with what I just posted but then they fall into b*m catagory looking for handouts so they can be ignored
rtr
Here is where the real problem started with health care.
1. Insurance companies themselves are to blame for the higher costs of health care but it was seen as a way to expand health care and make it better if it was done in a all for one and one for all socialist manner.
2. Problems arose do to the below activities.
3. Hospitals taking advantage of insurance companies.
4. People that have insurance are twice as likely to go to the doctor for un-necessary reasons.
5. Drug companies were able to take advantage of the hospitals, pharmacies and people in general since they new most people had insurance, medicad, or medicare.
6. The list goes on.
7. The worst thing that can happen is we get governmental health care, first off the government takes at least 25% right off the top just to redistribute that money, second the government always puts regulations on everything which will lower our quality of care, third the government has always and will always spawn fraud and corruption.
8. The real solution is to do away with any and all insurance especially that of the government and make everyone live with in their means. “A free market driven by supply and demand” would take care of all the health care problems.
Next we should put a stop the wellfare rolls and get this country back to what it was founded on which is "Hard work is rewarded" and bums can go without if they so desire.
Bronco, That was a good come back but in reality you got caught in your lies again is all.
Bronco
Nat-res, the rice burner is on the back burner waiting for detail and Craigslist. The other two I will give away to the local used bike parts guy for some minimal credit. The noise pollution law here, like rtr for me, exists but is ignored. Unenforceable without meters and no cops have meters. I replaced the slip-ons with some customs but they were too loud and uncomfortable for me. The slip-in baffles I added make it mellow; I can actually hear myself shifting. The only loudness I enjoy is rock 'n roll and...well, more rock 'n roll. And the Mass. poll was just to jurk the jurk. Just proving you can cut and paste anything to support your politics. Enjoyed your civil discourse on the matter though. Imagine exchanging the populations of a Mass. county with the Flathead. Would scenery and location change any of them?
naturalresources
Bronco, are you riding the "rice burner " or the big "H" these days? How are the noise pollution laws in Hawaii?
naturalresources
Well, Broncs, I wouldn't be too proud of that statistic if I were you. After all, Ma. is "liberal La La Land". The folks there really enjoy the socialist,politically correct climate and then turn around and complain about tough gun laws and all the immigrants swarming around town taking in the socialist handouts created by left leaning politicians looking for more votes down the road. It all started in the 1800's with the influx of Irish immigrants. Here's a quick qoute: The 10-member US House delegation following the 2002 elections again consisted entirely of Democrats. In mid-2003 the Massachusetts state senate had 34 Democrats and six Republicans while the state house of representatives had 136 Democrats, 23 Republicans, and one Independent. Happy Halloween lefties.......and watch your back; the gizzlieys haven't gone into hybernation yet.
rtr
Hans, Rob who ever you are, There is a big difference between truning on a "Light" by posting the truth including cuts and pastes form valid sourses than there is to kick someone with razer blades or to even think of such a thing.
Hans12
A few Kilometers out of Salzburg this morning, riding the Tram up to the snowfields for a little skiing. Decided to look at the old Blackberry and see what the RightTurning Rghteous was educating us on this fine a.m. from the Valley of the Flathead. Same-oh, same-oh. We have a fine tradition of Goose Stepping here, rtr, and will be glad to give you some lessons when the snow flies and the skiing starts at the Big Mountain. Until then, make sure the guy behind you doesn't have razorblades stuck in the point of his boot, as you learn the joy of marching to the beat of one. As you know, your rearend is mighty exposed.
rtr
I believe this coming Sunday and there forward will be the time to "turn and leave" the lights on and expose these c*ckroaches that have invaded our house "Community mostly virtually from out of state" and insulted the majority of the Flathead Valley citizens with their foul dumbed down progressive socialism.
==========
Liberal progressive tax and steal socialists are like getting c*ckroaches in the house.
They sneak in and yet no one knows where they come from until your house is totally invaded by them.
They steal food from your counter, your floor, the cat dish, the dog dish, and anywhere else they think they can steal it from.
It takes vigilance to keep them under control but the best part is you can always “turn on the light and expose them” and they will scurry away back into the crevices they came from because they know they are nothing but dirty little thieves that have to hide in the darkness or they will get caught.
rtr
Bronco, You lie big time unless you can give us a sourse on the net for it.
The fact is the "Bristol-Harrington Poll" is for sports and the "Massachusetts Weekly Objective" does not even exist as near as I can tell.
GIVE US THE SOURSE...!
rtr
Pete
Natres...yea, well I hear there's been an explosion in the Polar Bear population so be careful out there, they seem to like the "warm" weather too.
======================
That is very true, 11 of 13 areas that have Polar Bears are having a population explosion and their favorite food source from what I hear is a tender socialist liberal especially when they are walking around in their light loafers with jingle bells attached to them since it makes them so easy to catch.
I hear what also attacks the bears are the leafy vegetable they carry with them in the plastic bags that has a distinct odor given off by the pipes they carry with them. "Which makes them wonder aimlessly in circles".
The funniest part is these Polar Bears have found out these tender Liberal Socialists can be found around large trees with their arms around them and unwilling to let go and is all they jave to do is pluck them like berries off a bush,,,,Darndest thing I ever heard of but I have been told it is true.
Bronco
The Massachusetts Weekly Objective
Friday, October 30, 2009
The Bristol-Harrington Poll reports a marked increase in President Obama's approval rating today. The poll reveals that 57% of those polled approve of Obama's performance this week. Twenty-one point nine (21.9%) disapprove of the president's performance.
rtr
SorrySOB
Bush leaving office with a 20% approval rating (lowest in history by the way).
====================
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Friday, October 30, 2009 Email to a Friend ShareThis.Advertisement
"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 30% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -9 (see trends). "
Hey moron if only 30% appove of the Kenyan this early in the game what do you think it will be like next year when the people really wise up to his campaign pay back plan useing are tax dollars as so called stimulus money and UNEMPLOYMENT is still going up because of it.
Let see you said Bush had a 20% approval and the Kenyan now has a 30% approval, "What is your point really" Oh yeah is it hard for children to make points when they have none. "I forgot"..
Do us all a favor, Don't post untill you get your facts straight ok........PLEASE
Now do us all another favor and go back to your WORLD WIDE TROLLING that you are so proud of and have bragged about... "We won't miss you believe me".
Pete
Natres...yea, well I hear there's been an explosion in the Polar Bear population so be careful out there, they seem to like the "warm" weather too.
Bronco
Back atcha, nat-res. I ride daily. I put on over 75 miles today. Happy Halloween, brother.
rtr
SorrySOB
They not only made Obama win by a landslide but must of also been responsible for Bush leaving office
================
Look if you are going to post here will you at least get a clue.
Bush had been in for eight years which relates to he couldn't run again "ONLY".
Your Kenyan on the other hand was running against another liberal "REPUBLICRAT" can you remember his name little boy?
I wouldn't give the Kenyan terrorist lover to much credit if I were you since he is destroying the New Socialist Democratic Party from with in right now.
naturalresources
Thanks Pete. Actually the Harley is ready to roll in the event of an unforseeable"Global Warming " event.
Bronco..............BOOO!
SorrySOB
Yep, those Acorn folks must be really good. They not only made Obama win by a landslide but must of also been responsible for Bush leaving office with a 20% approval rating (lowest in history by the way). However, as good as they are, they will have to work much harder to even come close to the shenanigans that occured in 2000 in Florida with the rigged election thanks to the corrupt Sec of State and brother Jeb.
Pete
Natres....good to see you. How's the bike? Put up for winter I suppose?
Pete
SorrySOB....I guess by your definition of success the last 8 years of your life have been hard on you then? I would suggest you not decide your self-worth based on who wins or looses elections...especially in your formative years.
naturalresources
S.O.B., Had the Nobel Prize been awarded to Cheney or Bush........maybe, just maybe.....the gihad, muslim fanatics of the world would , by now, be considering joining the ranks of the free world order.....instead of being at the threshhold of reversing all the efforts of the free world to thwart their malignant behavior toward "civil discourse" in the world today.
naturalresources
To S.O.B, Bronco, sensible,Bighorn, Rob 123,Valley Viewer, etc. and especially Benznd..... please don't give up now on achieving "some sort of political discourse". Consider the following qoute from, purportedly, one of your own, ,Quote of the Day;
"Chaos is the score upon which reality is written."
Henry Miller
And...Sob, once again, the taxpayer funded group called ACORN gave an insurmountable edge to the lopsided election results and you know it to be true in your heart, don't you?
rtr
SorrySOB
Lets give it to Bush and Cheney instead.
======================
How about Truman, Roosevelt, Clinton or the Bushes?
You know it is so funny you don't even know who the president is today.
Question, What world did you come from? Lets just hope for all mankind you go back to it.
SorrySOB
Sure Pete. Lets give it to Bush and Cheney instead. After all, they were so successful in keeping things under control right? By the way, being the super clever and well spoken individual you are it seems like you could have done more to avoid the disaster the GOP experienced last November. You and "Frank" keep up the good work and you might actually bring your numbers up yet. Keep your chin up - not everyone can be winners.
Pete
Now the loons are giving out addresses? lol...Just remember this is MT.
Pete
Headline: "U.S.: Iran's Time Is Ticking...Iran's refusal to come clean on nuclear program has U.S. considering new sanctions — even if it must act alone" Hey, wait a minute....I thought Obama was bringing the world together in a new-found spirit of cooperation and understanding. Is the consensus building not going so well? Imagine that. Better return the Nobel Prize.
Pete
Benznd says..."I come to this site to see what has been posted and to engage in some sort of civil discourse...." This, right after posting...."Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of America he proudly stated. Ah, the father or pack leader of the modern Hitler Youth Organization."............and then Rob applauds the post...."benznd.....I'm afraid to tip my hat at you, so.... "Cheers!...Bravo!" good stuff........"
And for the final act we are to shed tears of regret as they threaten to remove such civil discourse from our midst with as much affected dignity as they can muster. The last time I recall seeing such comical hubris was watching Wiley E. Coyote walk away in a daze after blowing himself up. Beep, beep, and don't let the door hit you on the........lol
rtr
SorrySob
Most respectable forums allow a feature to block or hide a poster rather than suppess his or her free speech.
========================
You know there is an easy solution, Quit reading my posts and responding to them..."LIKE DUH"
rtr
Liberal progressive tax and steal socialists are like getting c*ckroaches in the house.
They sneak in and yet no one knows where they come from until your house is totally invaded by them.
They steal food from your counter, your floor, the cat dish, the dog dish, and anywhere else they think they can steal it from.
It takes vigilance to keep them under control but the best part is you can always “turn on the light and expose them” and they will scurry away back into the crevices they came from because they know they are nothing but dirty little thieves that have to hide in the darkness or they will get caught.
Note: I did not point this at anyone so if you respond then I have to asume you are guilty as charged.
SorrySOB
Sensible. It's 2555 Haywire Gulch Rd.
rtr
SorrySob
Most respectable forums allow a feature to block or hide a poster rather than suppess his or her free speech.
===========================
You know you just posted another lie but then you already new that because you have declared you have TROLLED the WORLD in blogs, news groups and other forums.
Seeing as how you think the DIL is just a boonie paper with a boonie comment section might I suggest you go back to TROLLING the WORLD.
Pete
Benznd, "So here is my PROBLEM with private charity. Just WHO are we talking about here? Who or what is represented by private charities and is their motive purely altruism?"
and........"Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of America he proudly stated. Ah, the father or pack leader of the modern Hitler Youth Organization."
Your post was mostly incoherent but a couple of things came through loud and clear.
First, you confirmed the fact that you think people of faith constitute the vast majority of charitable organizaions, and that in itself should tell you something....but I'm sure it won't.
Secondly, your clumsy off-base condemnation of the Boy Scouts as comparable to the Hitler Youth only served to expose the blatant hypocrisy of the posts that followed bemoaning the lack of civil discourse.
Excellent job on both counts....
SorrySOB
Of course Frank will support the First Amendment but only when two criteria are met: The obnoxious poster is on his side, and he realizes his editorials are not interesting enough to stimulate enough posts on topic. I don't thnk anyone is asking for taking away anyone's free speech as much as they are looking for moderation. Most respectable forums allow a feature to block or hide a poster rather than suppess his or her free speech. Of course, this is the Daily Interlake and we are in the boonies so why expect anything else?
rtr
Hey Frank, I notice how the comment section deteriorates by Thursday and only gets worse by Friday but with that in mind I sure am looking forward to your next Sunday's column.
I sure hope it is something I can really "Sink My Teeth" into like that last couple weeks.
Bronco
Bamg!
rtr
faithful reader
Also, the Flathead Beacon and Missoulian remove offensive comments. Frank could do some research from the Poynter Institute, Society for Professional Journalists or the National Newspaper Association. But he won't. The only possible conclusion is that he condones personal attacks on readers.
===========================
If that were the case there would not be near as many of your posts or your liberal buddies posts here since it has been you liberals that have started it time and time again.
If you start it then the other poster has the right to respond to you, OH thats right unless it is against a liberal and NO ONE has a right to say any thing pointing out their failures. "RIGHT"?
faithful reader
I agree, benzd. Frank has made himself clear. He doesn't care. He should research his own industry. "This is an UN-moderated reader blog. That is the standard in this business because of our respect for free speech."
First Amendment? Oh, really? The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, and the Los Angeles Times moderate reader comments. I guess they don't respect or understand free speech the way Frank does.
From the New York Times, "... the guidelines we provide are clear: no personal attacks and no vulgarity or profanity of any kind. " From the Washington Post, "...we post-moderate. We have a profanity filter that catches basic stuff, but besides that, we deal with issues after publication." From the USC Annenberg Online Journalism Review: "Any newspaper that -- virtually or physically -- operates a discussion forum has responsibilities (again: ethical, journalistic and legal) to monitor and to moderate it."
.Also, the Flathead Beacon and Missoulian remove offensive comments. Frank could do some research from the Poynter Institute, Society for Professional Journalists or the National Newspaper Association. But he won't. The only possible conclusion is that he condones personal attacks on readers.
Keep telling your readers to go away. It's a fascinating business model.
rtr
Benznd
Then I reach my last post and proceed forward, only to come to the realization that one individual feels compelled to post repeatedly.
=======================
The only way you have a smile on your face in this comment section is if everyone is pandering to your liberal I want a handout side.
Other than that the only thing you had was insults in your post so I have to asume you were talking about yourself with the repeated disrespect of others.
rtr
Bronco
I appreciate the right to free speech but when speech becomes offensive, offensive on a personal level as well as offensive to civility, and discourse is constantly interrupted by insults, name-calling, and a never-ending tirade of vitriol that infects everyone within earshot, that right to free speech must be leavened with sanctions for unworthy disruption.
=======================
And you did what by posting all those insults and wasting the space you did?
rtr
Hey Pete, I read that article you posted of the URL, Great information and I certainly noticed it had "Syria" all over it.
Bronco
And Frank, as far as Truman's hot kitchen goes, would he have challenged us to stay in there if it were engulfed in flames? Limits, Frank, limits. No decent society can do without them.
Bronco
Frank, I used to be part of a Thursday evening poker group and we would change venues every so often so the burden of men gambling in the kitchen/den/patio would not fall upon one home/wife/household. Night with the boys, fun, win a little, lose a little, and some very good discourse along the way. We lost a fellow to misfortune and his eventual replacement proved honorable and contributed well to our pockets and to our political and philosophical discussions (religion being checked at the door due to our friend, Pastor Rob, being disinclined to mix his vices). A few weeks pass and it's the new guy's turn to host. He expressed reluctance due to his mentally handicapped son's need for attention and penchant for interruption but we prevailed and were invited to his place. The son (in his twenties) sat and watched the game for about thiry minutes when the discussion turned to the then presidential election (Bush era). Retard (I'm not one to support political correctness) entered the discussion by screaming at anyone who opposed Gore (I supported Bush back then). He was fanatical. He cursed and insulted and became so disruptive that the father removed him from the room. Despite our normal alcohol intake we were unable to sustain our game in a civil and focused manner, hearing him screaming from two walls away. Game broke up early, apologies offered and accepted, and a silent agreement reached on sympathy for our new player and that the game would best be served without the presence of his uncivilized son.
So, I appreciate the right to free speech but when speech becomes offensive, offensive on a personal level as well as offensive to civility, and discourse is constantly interrupted by insults, name-calling, and a never-ending tirade of vitriol that infects everyone within earshot, that right to free speech must be leavened with sanctions for unworthy disruption. We already have censors in place for distasteful words (even the three-letter word for gender is forbidden),why not broaden that to include vile insults and hate speech? If something is not done, and done soon if I read the others correctly, this once fine room will become nearly empty except for the echos of a madman. "...those who maintain their decorum and decency earn the respect of all of us who value civil discourse..." have requested this of the offender but he/she/they are oblivious to the feelings of other people. There is a tyrant in our midst. Our patience wears thin.
rtr
Editor Cliff Harris
Posted: Sunday, Oct 25, 2009 - 10:10:09 pm PDT
“Perhaps we need a conference this winter in Hawaii to stop global cooling!
A week ago, I was a panelist at the world premiere of the award-winning documentary "Not Evil, Just WRONG," which packed the auditorium of the Candlelight Christian Fellowship building on Pioneer Drive in Coeur d'Alene that Sunday evening.
The movie, presented by the Tea Party Patriots of North Idaho, gives a detailed outlook of the potentially devastating consequences of the current GLOBAL WARMING HYSTERIA.
During the question-and-answer period following the movie, I told the audience that we have indisputable proof that we have actually been cooling off as a planet since 1998, especially since early 2007, when our Sun went 'silent' with virtually no sunspot activity (solar storms).
I'm all for "going green" and cutting air and water pollution, particularly in the larger 'heat island' cities of concrete and asphalt.
But, as I told the film attendees, we should be cutting levels of the poisonous CARBON MONOXIDE, not beneficial carbon dioxide, which is absorbed through the air by all plants in the 'photosynthesis' process, the building block of life.
I likewise believe that our Creator, the 'Master Designer of the Universe,' put his 'thermostat' on our Sun for Mankind's benefit.
Whenever our planet warms to a certain point, usually after a period of high sunspot activity, we suddenly see a new cycle of much less activity which rather quickly cools the Earth. Glaciers begin to advance on a global scale.
This summer overall was the third coldest in recorded history east of the Rockies in the U.S. Frosts and freezes killed crops in the fields, mostly north of I-80, at both ends of the chilly season. We had the first early October snows in recorded history this month in Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts where the New England Patriots played the Tennessee Titans in moderate snow on Sunday, Oct. 18, winning 59 to 0!
For much of the U.S. and Canada, the fall harvest of 2009 has been the latest in more than 30 years, since the frigid decade of the 1970s, when our current 'science czar,' John Holdren, predicted that we were heading into "an enormous ice age that would wipe out half of humanity." Needless to say, he was 'dead wrong'! Whatever happened to 'Mad Cow' disease?
Mr. Holdren was at President Obama's side when he received his surprising Nobel Peace Prize earlier this month.
He currently predicts that "hundreds of millions of people will die in the coming decades if we don't stop global warming."
But, the well-respected climate scientist, Lord Christopher Monckton of Cambridge University in London, England, said earlier this past week in Austin, Texas, while promoting his new book, "Apocalypse? No!":
"The danger is that now that President Obama has been given his Nobel Peace Prize, he will go to Copenhagen this December with Al Gore at one elbow and climatologist Jim Hansen at the other in front of the teeming global warming 'zombies' by the tens of thousands. He will sign anything put in front of him without reading the fine print. We only have a few short weeks to stop this! It will endanger our very sovereignty."
SPECIAL NOTE
Next week in 'Gems,' I'll have the latest update on the advancing Hubbard Glacier in Alaska from our correspondent, Skip Ryman, the city manager of neighboring Yakutat, Alaska.
I'll also have a report on this summer's thickening Arctic sea ice, more proof of global cooling to go along with our coldest morning ever so early in the fall season of 15 degrees in Coeur d'Alene on Monday, Columbus Day, Oct. 12.
NORTH IDAHO WEATHER REVIEW AND LONG-RANGE OUTLOOKS
As predicted, our October weather has temporarily returned to a milder and wetter cycle. This precipitation was rather desperately needed after an extremely dry late August, September and early October seven-week span.
In the near-term, I still see the arrival of colder air with even the possibility of a few snow flakes in the overnight hours as a low pressure 'trough' from the Gulf of Alaska invades the Inland Northwest shortly before Halloween.
The weather outlook for this Saturday evening, Oct. 31, calls for cool temperatures in the low- to mid-40s, but not as frigid as the past few years. Halloween night in 2006 saw bone-chilling readings in the teens along with scattered snow flurries. In 2007, Halloween night dipped into the 20s, pretty cold indeed for the little 'trick or treaters.' Last Halloween was in the upper 30s around 7 p.m., a bit of an improvement.
Longer-term, meteorologist Randy Mann and I are still expecting a generally warmer and drier late fall and early winter period thanks, at least in part, to the mild El Ni-o sea-surface temperature event in the tepid waters of the Pacific Ocean regions.
Most of our snow and colder temperatures will likely arrive in the Inland Empire after the first of the year this time around, if the National Weather Service and the rest of us are right in our mild winter of 2009-10 prognostications.”
I believe this is very relevant to last weeks column and a GREAT article.
Sorry for being off topic for this week but I found it to interesdting not to share it.
benznd
I come to this site to see what has been posted and to engage in some sort of civil discourse. I page down from my last post. Wow, lots of comments today. Then I reach my last post and proceed forward, only to come to the realization that one individual feels compelled to post repeatedly. It takes the wind out of my sails and the smile off my face. In the recent past, this site was dominated by people of thought. Those individuals who researched issues then placed that info in a proper context stayed with the weekly 2 cents. Those who did not research and tended to spew negatives at the communists and socialists and lazies slowly withered. The women are gone for the most part. Now some of the more logical, in my estimation, are leaving. Weekly, this site was posting perhaps 400 comments. Now when I reflect, perhaps 200 are from one individual who is not very interesting. Frank has told it how it is and will be, therefore I cannot continue either.
Editor
There appears to be some confusion out there about the nature of reader comments. This is an UN-moderated reader blog. That is the standard in this business because of our respect for free speech. Readers can regulate their own speech quite effectively without me stepping in and doing it for them. Most of the "offensive" speech here is either rhetorical, satirical or political. In the words of Harry Truman, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen." Obviously, some people enjoy posting here. Those who don't are welcome to leave or just read comments without posting. Of course, those who maintain their decorum and decency earn the respect of all of us who value civil discourse.
rtr
The problem with you bronco is you are afraid to stand on your own two feet and that is why you HATE to think of any opposion party getting in but even you can see that your New Socialist Democratic Party is destroying itself from with in.
It isn't rocket science to see it and one can not live on lies alone forever like Obama is doing.
Hans12
Hey rtr, while waiting for the snow here in Austria, I learned how to yodel.....
"laidyouroldladytoo".........what do you think? Any snow on Big Mountain, or is the elevation to low? Of course, it's up to you.
rtr
You know “faithful reader” I think it would be a lot more appropriate if you changed your addy to “hateful reader” in stead of faithful reader since all I in your posts are HATE and DISCONENT.
Bronco
Bighorn, I shall miss your Dalai Lama-esk posts. You have taught me many things and I appreciate that very much. I need to bow out for awhile, too. The virus has infected many of the pack and there is hardly a good read posted anymore. I ignore the ReTaRds' hate only to encounter counter-hate from our decent and civilized others. How the right don't seem to mind what their party idiot says and how he says it is disturbing to me. If they can't stand up for what's decent, civil, and acceptable how can they find any credibility with we who do? And if they gain the next election? They fear everything; I now fear them.
Pete
NH.....Should you still be around...here's a link to a story about Turkey's move away from the west.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26268412-17062,00.html
rtr
faithful reader
Maybe Frank should focus on managing his own web site before he worries about government mismanagement. This place has become a joke.
==============================
Do you really think Frank would miss you since the first thing you do every week is start off the comment section BASHING everyone of Frank columns?
The only joke I see here is you.
rtr
Rob, You must be running out of material because there was a distinct lack of humor in that last post of yours.
Thanks for bringing up the FEDERAL grant, Now if the love of your life slavery to the government hadn't stolen that money from us in the first place there would be no need for a FEDERAL grant from your DADDY and we could take care of our own right here.
Did your parents teach you any self respect at all, just a question?
faithful reader
Maybe Frank should focus on managing his own web site before he worries about government mismanagement. This place has become a joke.
Rob123
" "It's all about slavery to the government and socialism for you". Is it ok if I don't agree with you? I understand your point, after 3000 posts, so please, a simple YES or no would suffice. P.S. I noticed you didn't have a post on the Federal Grant for Fresh Vegies for School Children in Montana, from the front page of the DIL.......Would that be more government slavery with a touch of socialism? Just curious how big a bag your vacuum cleaner has. Although I must admit, it has great suction power.
mooseberryinn
Given the legendary ineptitude of the "leadership" (ho, ho, ho) of the slap-stick flying circus of government, why would anyone trust them to run health care? This whole b.o. show is a tragic comedy.
rtr
Health care for all is theft
Paul G. Swanson
"I find it disturbing when some people, usually liberals, say we have a moral obligation to get everyone health care. And the way they think, or don’t think, is that we should enact this belief in an immoral way. It’s called stealing: taking money from someone without their permission and using it for your own means.
That is what redistribution of income is: thievery. This new, wonderful moral obligation is pitting groups of people against each other like never before. Our country’s morality is going down the toilet because of forcing people against their will to give or receive something at the expense of others.
Most of us have worked hard to get where we are by paying our bills, going to school, learning a trade, helping our neighbor, being responsible, earning and paying for our health insurance as we earn our pay. The new “liberal fascism,” or “change” we can do without, encourages taking advantage of others, forcing them to pay underhanded fees and taxes on an unprecedented scale.
Call Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Sen. Patty Murray and Sen. Maria Cantwell (especially the senators) and let them know your disgust. Health care reform can be done without the immoral ball and chain of dummy-down progressive socialism."
By the way there "sensible" this came from another one of my radical web sites, "The Spokesman Review".
I mean really how much more radical can it get than that right?
rtr
sensible, I am glad to see you hate me so much to be honest with you.
Now go back to your SKY IS FALLING there chicken little.
rtr
Rob
I think. And remember, it's not the ideas that are going to be hidden, but the presentation of the idea by the emotionally damaged that is counter productive to the process of learning and discussing
=========================
OH YE of higher learning, Might I suggest you stay to the topic instead of all the useless insults.
But then again what I am seeing here is that your sky is falling mantality is all wore out in a very few posta and then you to realize you have nothing but fear mongering with "WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE IF WE DON'T BOW DOWN TO THE ALLMIGHTY GOVERNMENT" nothing less and nothing more. "It's all about slavery to the government and socialism for you".
sensible
rtr: i never threatened you............the punishment i mentioned, was like that dealt to rls...........remember him? banished!! i just want to meet you face to face, punk. get you fat as$ off you atv (lazy) or out from behind your computor. mellow the he1l out......and get out of your hate dungeon.............you're one sick sob.
you you are incapable of individual thought (a typical republican malady), you are incapable of critical reasoning...............
now, again, where do you live? scared? i just want to be friends.................
rtr
naturalresources
I'll leave you with this Quote to ponder.in your quest for enlightenment: "By the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability and expectation; for I had four bullets through my coat, and two horses shot under me, yet escaped unhurt, altho' death was levelling my companions on every side." George Washington letter to John Washington, July 18th, 1755
=====================
Exellent Quote, I pondered it and it came to light for me.
The four bullets are, "Bronco, Rob, Bighorn and sensible" that hate freedom of speech and preach English socialism, and my horses were shot from under me by the likes of "faithful reader, tillie, valley viewer" that also hate the DIL which is the most important sourse of FREE SPEECH and information we have here in the Flathead Valley.
rtr
sensible
one cannot yell "fire" in theater.....or "i have a bomb" on a plane. rules, frank. and respect. but that's not "free market" is it.........................your lack of decency offends me, frank
=========================
I couldn't agree with you more so will you Socialist Democrats quite with the Sky Is Falling and demanding I pay for you lazy b*tt and just go out and get a job and pay for your own insurance instead of trying to preach that everyone in this counrty should be a slave to the government.
sensible, THE SKY IS FALLING I'M CHICKEN LITTLE, The kids are falling from trees like apples and they have no insurance..
Does that sound fimilar there little girl. "Speaking of yelling fire."
rtr
sensible
your disparaging remarks are not appreciated. your "cut and paste" radical right reguritation is not the problem.
I WILL MEET YOU ANY WHERE AT ANY TIME. NAME IT PUNK!! COME ON PUNK!!!
=================
First off my cut and pastes did not come from radical sites unless you consider your Huffington post radical.
As for the 1912 Socialist party platform it is exactly what you socialists have been preaching here including government charity "thievery" and not personal charity from the heart like us conservatives have.
The fact of the matter is you HATE any opposing view no matter what it is.
Now you are threatening me with physical violence, What is up with that kind of non-sense.
sensible
rtr said..........."I have been on two ATV rides today, feed the deer, did my day trading.
More than you probably do on a Saturday or Sunday."
you know rtr, i would melt you down. i climb peaks for recreation. 15 mile days with 1000's of vertical feet are common in my world. class 4 chimneys and class 3 scrambles with exposure that would make your pants fill...................
come on, punk.......tell me where you live. i'll pick you up for a "climb" and see how much you can do on a saturday or sunday in my world.................you wouldn't last the first morning, punk. no atv's here. and i don't use ropes, but in your case i might bring one so you can hang yourself.
sensible
FRANK - slowly i'm losing any respect i may have had for you. but i'm getting use to your "tea party" attitude. an attitude that falsehoods and denigrating statements can be screamed at the top of one's ignorant lungs (rtr), in the name of "free speech".
one cannot yell "fire" in theater.....or "i have a bomb" on a plane. rules, frank. and respect. but that's not "free market" is it.........................your lack of decency offends me, frank.
sensible
rtr: i suggested you leave this site for a while because of the ovbvious affect it is having on you..............you don't play well with others. my suggestion was greeted thusly:
1. leave this venue ===== What are you going to do if I don't?
I WILL MEET YOU ANY WHERE AT ANY TIME. NAME IT PUNK!! COME ON PUNK!!!
your disparaging remarks are not appreciated. your "cut and paste" radical right reguritation is not the problem.......we consider the source. it is the relentless demeaning personal comments you continue to make without punishment..........
WHERE DO YOU LIVE? PUNK!
naturalresources
Bighorn0216, " But, Frank, your columns are carefully crafted to incite, so there's no mistaking your intent. "
Bighorn, there is no mistaking your intent when it comes to the "incitefull"degradation of conservative posters here. Why the hypocricy when referring to Franks' well written , well researched articles that appear to provoke honest discussion and comments from most intelligent viewers? Are you ,by chance, related to Bronco?
I'll leave you with this Quote to ponder.in your quest for enlightenment: "By the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability and expectation; for I had four bullets through my coat, and two horses shot under me, yet escaped unhurt, altho' death was levelling my companions on every side." George Washington letter to John Washington, July 18th, 1755
Bighorn0216
Without reviewing the night’s posts, I can in the quietude of this morning’s pause acknowledge the obvious, that time is finite and that not all of its occupations are equally fertile or fruitful. I have learned a good deal here, not so much from content, but from witnessing the microcosm of how the parts and philosophies and factions of our larger society come together and break apart. I better understand now how we have come to where we are.
Time to leave. I bid each of you peace, not just for yourself, but for its effect on all others you encounter. We will meet again, not in name but in spirit.
Namaste
Rob123
I hope that Frank seriously considers a Facebook syle "Hide" option on this site. It would help tremendously, I think. And remember, it's not the ideas that are going to be hidden, but the presentation of the idea by the emotionally damaged that is counter productive to the process of learning and discussing. It's like the old poster I have by my desk in my office, and still look up at and read on certain days: "Argueing with a Truck Driver is like wrestling with a Pig in the mud. After awhile, you realize the pig enjoys it."
rtr
Woody
For everyone out there who has insurance, start asking your providers how long their business can last in the current situation.
========================
Way ahead of you Woody, My insurance has no problem lasting for the next 30 years and I am sure longer but I only ask about 30 since that will be my aproximate life time.
HMO's also have no problem lasting for as long as health care itself lasts.
For those people that don't have insurance they need to either get a job that pays enough for them to buy it or hire on for a company that provides it since there is no excuse for not having insurance in today and age unless you are just unwilling to apply yourself and are willing to live off a small existance of pay which is always your choice but that does not relate to I owe you democratic death care.
rtr
Did you socialist note the bottom of my last post which pointed out the reality of public option death care and the "dummy-down progressive socialism"
I beileve there was one of you posting a few days ago being proud to be a dummy-down progressive socialist.
How is that working out for you now?
Woody
For everyone out there who has insurance, start asking your providers how long their business can last in the current situation. Ask them if the amount they receive from the big insurance companies provides them with any profit margin. Ask them how much food they are putting on the table with the tax write offs that bankruptcies provide. When they answer, if they do, look into their eyes and see for yourself how much trouble most of them are in. So many of us are worried about who will and who shouldn't have coverage that we are failing to see how close to oblivion the system is. My insurance ( the company is self insured and pays to have the system administered) sends out statements that list both the standard pricing and the discounted rate. The uninsured public is being grossly overcharged in order to try and make up for the slim or invisible margin provided by insurance reimbursement. Do not sit by and think that just because you have insurance that health care will always be there. Check for yourself. Ask hard questions of your providers. The answers will shock you.
Bighorn0216
Rest well, warriors. More work tomorrow.
rtr
Health care for all is theft
Paul G. Swanson
"I find it disturbing when some people, usually liberals, say we have a moral obligation to get everyone health care. And the way they think, or don’t think, is that we should enact this belief in an immoral way. It’s called stealing: taking money from someone without their permission and using it for your own means.
That is what redistribution of income is: thievery. This new, wonderful moral obligation is pitting groups of people against each other like never before. Our country’s morality is going down the toilet because of forcing people against their will to give or receive something at the expense of others.
Most of us have worked hard to get where we are by paying our bills, going to school, learning a trade, helping our neighbor, being responsible, earning and paying for our health insurance as we earn our pay. The new “liberal fascism,” or “change” we can do without, encourages taking advantage of others, forcing them to pay underhanded fees and taxes on an unprecedented scale.
Call Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Sen. Patty Murray and Sen. Maria Cantwell (especially the senators) and let them know your disgust. Health care reform can be done without the immoral ball and chain of dummy-down progressive socialism."
rtr
sensible
rtr: even a kind suggestion is treated with contempt...............
you represent "your" kind too well, sadly.
====================
Amazing when just a few posts ago you told me to leave this comment section in no uncertain terms.
How do you look in the mirror without puking.
rtr
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/07/conrad-democrats-alone-cant-pass-health-care--1.html
Democrats Alone Can't Pass Health Care
"Republicans want to protect the right of Americans to make their own health care decisions, to pick their own doctors and their own plans," DeMint said.”
sensible
rtr: even a kind suggestion is treated with contempt...............
you represent "your" kind too well, sadly.
rtr
Bronco do you realize just how stupid that last post of yours was.
Even just the slightest clue?
Speaking of child like you fit the bill.
rtr
Sure is funny how not so much as a single one of you socialists have had anything to add to the comment section that was on topic for over two days now.
AMAZING
rtr
ValleyViewer
Well, duh! We'll never break the cycle of feeding at the trough with that kind of so-called conservative attitude.
==================
We are against making a bigger through and alowing more pigs like you to feed from it.
Bronco
When my kids were young I'd take them to the arcade. They loved the game where squirrels popped out of holes and they could bash them with a foam bat. Don't we have a poster here who used to go by rls, as in squirReLS? I know, sounds ReTaRded. Blame it on jet lag. Bighorn, we keep trying and trying because it is so trying.
ValleyViewer
I've never met a conservative who declined his Social Security or Medicare benefits. Oink oink oink. Know what his excuse will be for feeding at the trough? "I PAID INTO the system, so I'm darn sure going to GET MY share." Well, duh! We'll never break the cycle of feeding at the trough with that kind of so-called conservative attitude.
rtr
Sensible, You under estimate where I live, I have been on two ATV rides today, feed the deer, did my day trading.
More than you probably do on a Saturday or Sunday.
Yep I love this retirement that I WORKED for and I am not looking for handouts or advertizing for any political party here like you and your little socialist friends are.
So maybe it is you that needs to relax.
sensible
rtr: i'm serious...............take a day. follow a trail you've never been on. exert yourself. accomplish a destination. breath the air. relish the sweat.
relax............
rtr
Rob
Thanks for pointing that out since today we have two different types of Medicare which makes it a personal matter between the Doctor and Patient unlike what you socialists want with governmental personal intrusion with an old people’s death health care system.
Thanks again Rob, What would I do without you.
rtr
THE SOCIALIST PARTY PLATFORM of 1912
"By abolishing official charity and substituting a non-contributary system of old age pensions, a general system of insurance by the State of all its members against unemployment and invalidism and a system of compulsory insurance by employers of their workers, without cost to the latter, against industrial diseases, accidents and death".
Approved by the socialists posting here.
rtr
Obamacare failed in Europe
posted by Donny Ferguson on Jun 30, 2009
Guillaume Vuillemey, a researcher at France's Institut Economique Molinari, and Philip Stevens, a researcher at Britain's International Policy Network write in today's Washington Examiner about how Obama's proposed government takeover of the health care system has worked in Europe.
Hint. Not so well.
"President Barack Obama's proposed "public insurance option" for universal health coverage seems logical: A large public insurance fund will provide quality coverage for the uninsured and force competing insurers to lower costs. In practice, though, one needs only look at what decades of government health care have done to ramp up the financial and quality problems endured by Britain and France.
The Obama plan is supposed to make health insurance more competitive. But heavy subsidies will give it a big advantage, pulling an estimated 118.5 million people from private insurers to the public system. This government-subsidized system will eventually dominate the market in a way that would overrule competition...
...One way government tries to limit demand is to decree which new drugs can be prescribed. Many drugs, widely available in America and continental Europe, are denied to British patients.
State mismanagement has also created waiting lines for hospitals, on average causing 8.6 weeks of waiting. Once inside, budgetary cutbacks on cleaning and maintenance mean higher rates of an antibiotic-resistant variety of staph infection. This "superbug" has turned even routine surgery into a lottery of death
This is precisely what happened in Britain. The state provides most health care, via the National Health Service. Patients have almost no say over which physician, surgeon or hospital they can use, while professionals have to conform to government plans and targets...
...America can certainly draw lessons from overseas about saving money on health care. But in the cases of France and Britain, these lessons are in what not to do. These countries show that nationalizing care damages care."
Bighorn0216
Thanks for contributing, rtr-evening (sounds like the next shift has arrived). Always enjoy the opportunity to give due consideration to your unique perspective, and hope you'll find peace in your life. It doesn't seem that you've ever known peace, and I suspect some people have been very bad to you to cause this. I'm sorry if you've felt intimidated or coerced by what I've posted.
Rob123
Concerning spending $78,000.00 per week for 1 month of life for an 80+ patient on his death bed .....rtr wrote;
1.)"Rob
"I am going to answer even if you hate the truth.
The fact is it should not be up to the governemnt at all and that is why you are so cofused, ......It should be between the Patient, Insurance company if you have one and your doctor."ONLY""
1 HOUR LATER
2.)"Rob, You are to funny and to easy, Remeber we have Mediace today so it is a non issue ...."
rtr
sesible
leave this venue. it does you no good..............nor others
==========
Let's break this down.
1. leave this venue ===== What are you going to do if I don't?
2. it does you no good ===== Who are you to say what is good for me?
3. nor others ===== Not your socialist political platform builders you mean since they hate the truth being pointed out to them and you don't want others that read these posts to see the truth about your socialist lies that you have been getting away with posting here for a long time ...
rtr
Bighorn
The sorriest display, though, is the lack of mature moderation by DIL. Tolerance is one thing. Granting imprimatur by default is another
=====================
And as Insulting, Intimidating and Coercive as I have seen you be that is probably a good thing for you.
sensible
rtr: you're spending WAYYYY to much time indoors aggravating people. i've invited you to climb, but that season wanes.............however, the trails are endless. leave this venue. it does you no good..............nor others. explore. expand your view. see things. appreciate nature............the lookouts at this time of year are awesome. take a day. spend it atop a mountain......................relax.
Bighorn0216
SorrySOB, not rising to the bait really is the instruction here, I agree. That's why I thank rtr (whoever he, she, or they are) for giving us this practice. An old New Yorker cartoon shows several fish floating in the vicinity of a barbed hook, with one of the fish saying, "The secret is nonattachment."
Rtr (whoever he, she, or they are) is pure hook, pure shenpa, and until we feel that tug and say, nope, not going there, he, she, or whoever they are will keep coming to this site for their emotional e*jaculations.
The sorriest display, though, is the lack of mature moderation by DIL. Tolerance is one thing. Granting imprimatur by default is another. But, Frank, your columns are carefully crafted to incite, so there's no mistaking your intent. And once rtr (whoever he, she, it, or they are) takes the comment section off topic, the heat is off you. Do you think George Ostrom would have been so disengaged, had the Kalispell Weekly News been an online feature? Not likely.
Maybe we need the Facebook "hide" function, allowing every post by folks whose screed we're not able to babysit right now to be made to disappear.
This isn't at all about debate or dialectic, and has nothing to do with free speech. This is a guy (he, she, it, or they) who stands up every five minutes during the movie and yells, "Fire!" As instructive as that is for anyone trying to learn patience, it is really making the DIL look like a backwoods, genetically-challenged organization, like...well, a dill. And I doubt that the rest of the staff enjoys the guilt by association, though in these economic times, perhaps no one dares speak up.
rtr (he, she, it, or whoever will be posting later tonight) couldn't define "socialism" with a gun pointed to his (or her or his/her "wife's") head.
I've lost any confidence that we're dealing with a lone 55-year-old nonworking "retiree" who hates nonworkers, and who "hates" socialism but can't wait to cash the checks. I think this whole bit of shenanigans has been rigged, starting from the three non-entities who started this thread with taunts and never showed up again--at least, not under their own names. rtr (he, she, it, or whoever will be posting tonight) rails repeatedly against the spectre of "multiple addys." He's the one who keeps that on the front burner, as if he can't stand it that no one is noticing that's his hand is in the cookie jar. It's a dangerous strategy to conduct a full-blown preemptive defense before any charges have been laid, and in doing so, whoever is represented by "rtr" has pretty much told us that the multiple addys are his, and that more than one person posts under his acronym. The one posting this evening so far is the old inarticulate, illucid fellow (or girl, or it, or them) we were introduced to long ago. Welcome back!
Time for the charade to end, through our own efforts, even if DIL won't step in.
rtr
SorrySOB
Over the many years that I’ve spent on newsgroups and forums around the world, I have found one thing in common on every one of them. They always have at least one resident troll or flamer.
================
And you call me a troll,,,,How funny
rtr
SorrySOB
Unfortunately, there is really nothing you can do about them but ignore them or get them banned.
So, You are admitting to a conspiracy of trying to get people banned which everyone has already seen you try more than once.
Frank, I know you have seen the conspiracy of these liberals taking place trying to get people banned but now you have an admission to it.
Yep you were right, Ganging up, Intimidation, coersing, you name it they are trying it.
rtr
You know what is so great about you socialists is that you can turn a non-issue into a tragidy that has never happened and won't happen.
You learned your lesons well from the likes of Al Gore and his global warming didn't you..
rtr
Rob
So, what universe must one live in inorder to find Private Health Insurance when your in your 80's?.....
=====================
Rob, You are to funny and to easy, Remeber we have Mediace today so it is a non issue but your New Socialist Democratic party wants to dismatle it even though we all paid into it all our lives and yes now your socialist party has figured it is ok to kill off old people if they can get the "Death of old people Health Care" passed.
rtr
SorrySOB, Did you happen to notice I haven't responded to you or your insults for two days.......'You must be feeling lonely and left out since you just can't seem to leave me alone..
Rob, Did you notice how SorrySOB discribed you to a tee since you can't answer so much as a single question and yet you have insults for me.
I am going to repost what SorrySOB said about you.
" I did some research. The profile of the classic troll is someone who has trouble dealing with real life - a social loser. Usually under educated and probably homely, he or she is afraid to have a debate with someone face to face. Before the Internet, trolls didn’t have a way to express themselves so they had to be satisfied with yelling at the TV and going to bed."
SorrySOB
Over the many years that I’ve spent on newsgroups and forums around the world, I have found one thing in common on every one of them. They always have at least one resident troll or flamer. Being interested in what makes people like this tick, I did some research. The profile of the classic troll is someone who has trouble dealing with real life - a social loser. Usually under educated and probably homely, he or she is afraid to have a debate with someone face to face. Before the Internet, trolls didn’t have a way to express themselves so they had to be satisfied with yelling at the TV and going to bed. Now, they can stay on the Internet all night and post to their heart’s content. Although still socially, financially, and intellectually inferior, they now have a voice. Unfortunately, there is really nothing you can do about them but ignore them or get them banned. Which brings me to RushJr, Donald Creese, rtr, or whatever tag he happens to post by. Although I know more about him than he would like to admit, I have decided to ignore him and not waste any more time with him. Hopefully, many of the rest of you will resist his baiting and do the same. Either he will eventually give up and go back in his hole, or the rest of the posters will disappear and he and Frank will be the only ones left.
Rob123
benznd.....I'm afraid to tip my hat at you, so.... "Cheers!...Bravo!" good stuff........
Rob123
Dear nitwit rtr: "Rob
"I am going to answer even if you hate the truth." So, what universe must one live in inorder to find Private Health Insurance when your in your 80's?.....Don't be afraid to think. And please, spell it out for me, with coordinates......probably have to turn all the Satelites around inorder to get a GPS fix at your altitude?
rtr
THE SOCIALIST PARTY PLATFORM of 1912
"By abolishing official charity and substituting a non-contributary system of old age pensions, a general system of insurance by the State of all its members against unemployment and invalidism and a system of compulsory insurance by employers of their workers, without cost to the latter, against industrial diseases, accidents and death".
Does this look familiar, It should it was taken right out of the socialist party platform and looks exactly like the New Socialist Democratic Party today.
rtr
You know what is absolutely hilarious about you liberal socialists, You do everything you can to twist the facts in order to equate governmental socialism to charity.
It must work in your minds but it does not work that way in real life or in the minds of the majority of Americans seeing as how most Americans use the brains unlike you socialists.
The reality is governmental charity is another word for governmental thievery, nothing less and nothing more.
benznd
So here is my PROBLEM with private charity. Just WHO are we talking about here? Who or what is represented by private charities and is their motive purely altruism? I don't think so as we are talking about religious indoctrination. There is no doubt that behaviorism is the method utilized in attracting more church members i.e., money. "Look at what this kindness and brotherhood/sisterhood has done for me!" I think I am interested in becoming a member of this remarkable family. WAIT A MINUTE!! Not so fast brother and sister. There IS no free lunch!! Religious indoctrination is the motive, not kindness and generosity. It is capitalism spelled with the big R. Look at the market and determine how to tap it. Pure de fill the coffers ideology. We all know how religion works. Do as I say, not as I do. Pretend to speak for the aAlmighty, but carry the purse. Looks like a duck..... Anyway, cast dispersions upon anything government. The intent. Replace it with the unselfish, loving sSavior. Those who have managed to escape the trappings of this curse (if there is a devil or evil, he or she has taken the shape of religion). There is a direct disconnect between religion and belief in gGod. Ya talk the talk but ya don't walk the walk pilgrim. That is my only John Wayne impersonation. John Wayne and Dick Cheney have/had allot in common. No war experience yet playing with other people's lives with their phony hawkish persona.
The other day I stopped at Simplot as my daughter is the office "girl." There was this nerdy looken dude selling popcorn. Small town, so everybody knows everybody. My daughter introduced me and we shook hands with appropriate eye contact and hand grip. He asked me if I wanted to buy some popcorn. I said, "who is being supported through the sales?" Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of America he proudly stated. Ah, the father or pack leader of the modern Hitler Youth Organization. I did not say that, of course. I was hoping it wasn't disguised by my phony socially correct aura. I was on my way to MB to grocery shop. Big store with lots to choose from, ethnic food and cheese and meats of all kinds. Great place. Anyway, Mr. America proceeded to comment about the equal value of the US and Canadian dollar? Did I ask for that and what purpose did it serve? Then, "I have never been in the store but hear the meat and cheese department is quite nice." SO, your point? Most would have missed his POINT, as it was hidden by his cap. Here is my generalization about Mr. America. A Palin supporter, right wing zealot. Sir, please shop in your own country and buy this here corn, and show how patriotic you can be. Try it, you'll like it. I did not say what was on my mind, obviously or I would have been escorted out of this small community, tarred and feathered. The mentality of the brain damaged. If gGod would not have wanted me to grocery shop for food that his other creations eat, he would have kept mobility out of the evolutionary process.
Now, what I am awaiting is the condemnation of prejudging this individual based upon little information. Does that sound familiar Pete. Good gGod, we are down to a one man right wing band, clapping with one hand. A lonely tree falling in the forest. How about Pete, Xcal, Natres, Frank, Moosedingle*berries (can't help it) and those whom I wish would return. Before making gargantuan generalizations "we are all innocent until we remove our hats!"
rtr
Rob
I am going to answer even if you hate the truth.
The fact is it should not be up to the governemnt at all and that is why you are so cofused, You must have had someone baby sit you all your life.
It should be between the Patient, Insurance company if you have one and your doctor."ONLY"
Just like you pointed out, You just made it public as to what should be dictated or insinuated it would be and what goes on between a doctor and the patient is none of your business.
Rob123
Pete....for sure, for sure.....don't want to go off of any deep ends, R or L. Yet here is a scenario, and what do you think......(my sister is an RN-MS Oncology with U.of Wash Med)....Lets say your 80 years old, and not doing well. Lungs have taken abuse from hard work, and hard play, and your strength is zapped, and the end is near. However, there is a drug out there that runs $78,000.00 a week, and will prolong your life 1 month for almost 100% of people taking it. By 3 months, only 25% are still alive. By 6 months only 5% are still alive. No one has gone 1 year. If your rich and want to eat up your estate, well go for it. But what should government paid insurance do in a situation like this? We all know there are people who will do anything for a little more time. It's going on right now in the U.S. Other countries just say no, unless it is paid for personally. What do you think?
Pete
Bronco...I have seen Frank insulted alot on this website, but being compared to me has got to be the lowest blow he has ever suffered. You are truly a cruel man...may you have writers block for a week.
Bronco
You're welcome..........Frank?
Pete
Rob...trying times indeed, but times of opportunity if we learn from them. My trepidation is that we turn to the government to solve all our problems at the expense of personal involvement...a personal involvement that has more to offer than any government program: sense of community, accountability, flexability, fulfilment, responsibility, empathy, etc. Obviously the government has a role to play...but my hope is that through our helping each other, the governments role will be as minimal as possible.
Pete
Bronco...thanks for the clarification...I was pretty certain thats what you meant, I just didn't want others to mis-interpret my position. I appreciate it.
rtr
Pete
Along the lines of the "Great White Father" hoax we pulled on the Natives.
========================
Even the so call best of intentions when it comes to government are completely lined with lies and fraud.
Look at Social Insecurity supposedly to keep the old people off the streets and from starving.
What crock, It was so the government had a pot of OUR money to pull from when ever they seen fit and if you notice the poor that only pay in a small amount would end up in total poverty and a lot end up on the streets anyway if it isn’t for family if that was all they had to live on and a lot are that way so it didn’t help anyone..
The majority of the last generation could have easily been millionaires if we got to invest our own money instead of the government theft of it.
If the government really cared about retirement they would make it a manditory class in High School to at least make everyone aware of what they should do for their future but the government doesn't want you knowledgeable about any thing that they think they can steal from you.
This health care fraud will be no different with what Obama the socialist is proposing.
The only good news is that at the present time there is not a chance in H*LL of it passing.
rtr
Rob
For gGod's sake, rtr, what type of weird sites do you go to inorder to scrape this garbage up?
===============================
Go look it up as to where the money will be coming from instead of always trying to be a wise guy and I have to say you failed with this one.
It is an out right theft of Medicare that we have all paid into that will be one of the biggest funders of this tax, steal and kill the old health care that is proposed by the socialist democrats.
I realize the truth hurts you but for once try to educate yourself will you instead of continually doing your socialist platform building,
By the way little socialist it is even posted in your Huffington news so you won't have to look very far.
Rob123
Nice post, Pete. Not many would disagree with your thesis......Workfare instead of welfare.....it was making a diference, until the economy tanked. The effort is still there, but it's really tough. Unusual times.
Bronco
Pete, apologies extended. I was referring to our heated exchange many months ago about the holocaust numbers. You believe six million and I quoted facts and figures from reputable sources which refuted popular assent. I found it hard to believe all but 400,000 European Jews died during WW2 since the total population at the time was a reliable 6.4 million. Israel is best served with the higher number as any conspirator would reinforce.
Pete
Bighorn...let me clarify...I think that whatever the motivations of government welfare...good or bad, the practical result has been the same, and that is to create a dependent class in our society and I find that extremely patronizing. Along the lines of the "Great White Father" hoax we pulled on the Natives.
Pete
Bighorn...I agree...especially on the private side or the equation. I've always been of the persuasion that it is my part was to give and not question the motives. Obviously when the government gets involved things become stickier and I think an abusive cycle of co-dependency has developed between the welfare state and recipients. I'm afraid the goal of government welfare isn't to get them out of the situation they are in, but rather to hold them as a captive constituency. I also believe that private charity generally comes with a more human touch that is essential to encouraging change from behaviours that may have contributed to the situation to begin with. That scenario is different from many folks who simply find themselves overwhelmed by circumstances and will be able to dig themselves out with a helping hand. Another thing about government welfare I object to is that is enables society to assuage their collective guilt without having to get down into the trenches and connect with each other. Take the taxes from my paycheck or whatever and I have done my part to be charitable...and charity is much more than that.
Pete
Bronco...aahhh now, now, you've gone and called me a Holocaust defender? Better clarify that statement partner or we will have a little go around.
Bighorn0216
Pete, there are surely those who would take advantage of another's generosity. Though they get the attention, I think they're a tiny minority. My family easily qualified for free school lunches, but my dad wouldn't hear of it. I think most folks who profess or exhibit need are honest about it. But I'm no mindreader. I've spent some time distributing food and sundries from a Loaves and Fishes canteen truck in a southern metro area, and I obviously had no idea whether the guys who showed up were legit or freeloaders. Some seemed to have some pretty nice clothes. Some asked for a second sandwich to take to a friend who was too sick to come over. Were they taking advantage of us, or were they just hungry and down on their luck? I don't know. Even assuming that as many as, say, 20% were taking advantage of us, but not knowing which 20%, we'd still give the sandwich and the soap to anyone who approached us, as long as supplies held up or there were no more requests. In any taxpayer funded social services program, there need to be some enforceable eligibility criteria, and there always are, and yet they fail to some extent. I don't find that to be an indictment of the program.
Bronco
Pete would be Frank's aka. When I first engaged him last year his writing skill was less refined. A great defender of the hHolocaust; his favorite term was "revisionist history." Then Pete disappeared for over a month. Maybe he went to college for a crash course in writing. Pete returns but without the previous 'fire' of conviction. Perhaps a serious stint in the hospital changed him into a quasi-liberal. Enlightenment happens. But consider that naturalresources has taken a back seat since Travis, his brother Ronnie, and his other brother Ronnie, started posting. Is he watching? or letting the idiots do his dirty work with no regard to principle and dignity? Or have we started his enlightenment also? The women have disappeared since the room became tainted by Ronnie, Travis, and Ronnie. I applaud their dignity and unwillingness to read such debased dialog...but I miss Kimber, Tillie, even Louise's weekly worship and mantra (Mrs. Frank?). Reminds me a second grade when they allowed a ReTaRd into class as a student; we learned nothing after that, too busy watching his antics.
Futureres-a warm thanks for turning me on to Shantaram. I am over halfway thru its 900 pages (I read several books at a time,it's a mood thing).
Rob123
Ya know, Bronco, I've been getting that feeling also. Fortunately, they don't have a clue how to sight in their pea shooters......
For gGod's sake, rtr, what type of weird sites do you go to inorder to scrape this garbage up? Close your eyes, and see if your ears ring. That could be a clue.
rtr
Democrats hate senior citizens.
Make sure to read the new and unimproved health care bill that is a piece of work to decimate the Medicare program and lower the quality of health for senior citizens.
This new health care plan should start with “We the New Socialist Democratic Party have determined that senior citizens are not taxable so we have finally found a way to shorten their lives and we are laughing at the fact that they have paid into it all their lives".
Bronco
Sounds like they want to punish you, Rob.
Bronco
Sounds like they want to punish you, Rob.
Rob123
I'm at work, way busy.....Plus if my executive secretary see's me goofing off reading past posts, well, it could be divorce court or grounded.
rtr
Rob
You are very capible of looking back a few posts and it is in several of them "Ask of you to answer it several times" and NO I am not going to play your games after you wouldn't and mostly won't answer it before.
Rob123
rtr.....What was the Question?
rtr
Rob,
I answered your question even though you still haven't answered mine.
I have seen 10 times the insults coming from you and I have tried to be nice to you several times.
I guess what it comes down to is you hate anyone possing you at all.
And I can see it really bothers you to get emasculated in from of your sheep like followers since it is obvious you were some sort of Icon to them at one time here.
The only thing you are to me is another beggar like Bighorn standing on the street corner with your tin cup however..
rtr
Bighorn
I don’t consider being poor to be shameful.
==================
It's the wallowing it that is the problem.
I have heard you say oh poor me so many times I walk away in tears every day thinking about it and then I realize it is just a put on, garbage, a hood wink, a con job, you know what I mean in order to steal from someone else.
Pete
"is rtr actually Franks' alter-ego unleashed?"......good question." Come on Rob...er....Hans...Give us a break with the conspiracy theories. On the other hand It is almost ski season so it might be time to fuel up "Hans", although I'm not sure how your alter-ego fits his giant carbon footprint into a pair of skis. Probably with a dash of Al Gores snakeoil and a rationalization shoe horn. It gives a whole new twist to the term gas mogul. ;-)
Pete
Bighorn...not to "horn" in on your "dialogue" with rtr...but I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. I too grew up po' and so I have a deep affinity for under-dogs and empathy for those less fortunate. But for the grace of God....The only shame I might add to your list is the shame of taking advantage of anothers goodwill. I may disagree with you on the best delivery system...but if more folks put your values to practice instead of looking to others, the world would be a much better place.
Bighorn0216
As for wildly irrelevant “beggar in the street” aspersion, I take it as useful metaphor rather than insult. I don’t consider being poor to be shameful. My family grew up well below the official poverty level, but the siblings have among them six bachelor degrees, three post-grad degrees, three professional licenses, and high-ranking military office. It’s not a bad showing for a bunch of rural Montana po’ folks.
I don’t consider it shameful to need the services of a food shelf, or a homeless mission. I don’t consider it shameful to be unable to afford needed health care. What is shameful is to have the wherewithal to help stock food shelves, or support homeless shelters, or help provide basic medical care, and to do nothing about it—or worse, to insist vehemently that nothing be done.
I’m financially comfortable now, thank you, but I hope to die a “beggar.” I’ve been giving “stuff” away for several years now, or selling it or trashing it, with the goal of having little or nothing of pecuniary value left by the time I die, nothing material that I’m still attached to, no desire for more than I have, and no fear that somebody is going to take anything away from me.
So you unwittingly compliment me, rtr (whichever one of you was writing then), and thank you for that, but I must decline, as I have yet to earn the title “beggar in the street.”
Pete
NH...I didn't respond sooner because my daughter had a birthday and priorities are priorities. I see things have run their usual course while I was partying it up with chocolate cake and Tinker Bell napkins....so I'm not sure I can conjure up the intensity level this morning. Actually don't think I want to, so I'll mention a couple of things. First...because I quoted IHEU (a highly secular organizatiom) you assume I'm relying on punditry? This is quite a leap in judgement...one you are free to make of course, but it will serve you well to keep in mind that you haven't seen my passport and don't have a clue about my personal history. Second, I agree with you that not all Muslims are radical jihadists. There are moderate Muslims, and even "secular" Muslims that have not abandoned Islam per se, but are primarily secular in their approach. The problem is that a large majority of the governments in Muslim countries are radicalized and the trend is not promising. *see the emerging Iranian-Turkish Alliance. What is the engine and/or justification for this radicalization? Islam. Albiet (a) twisted version(s)? I would note that a majority of Germans weren't Nazis, a majority of Chinese weren't Maoist, a majority of Catholics didn't burn heretics at the stake in Spain, a majority of the South weren't slave owners....etc. Call it what you want...Islamo-fascism, Wahabism, Clerical fascism, etc. There is no denying it is here, it is bad, and it is on the ascendency in the Muslim world, and despite what you may think about me, I believe our fellow human beings in the Muslim world deserve better. Next, you didn't level an accusation against a government, you took a gratuitous shot at Bush as "ignorant and prejudiced"....an easy target perhaps, but in light of the massive scale of institutional discrimination in the Muslim world, a tad hypocritical don't you think? Last, I didn't "accuse" you of hiding behind another moniker...I asked. I asked because a number of poster on here have changed their names...mostly as a result of the web page change-over, and I like to know who I'm talking to. :-)
Bighorn0216
Your Fear is palpable, rtr(s)--(hard to know if you're several people, or several personalities.)
I hope you will be relieved of it in time to be able to live peacefully for at least a little while during your retirement.
FutureResident
Bronco - I recommended Shantaram and glad to hear your enjoying it. Someone gave it to me while I was traveling in Africa and I finished it 10 minutes before landing in Bombay for a 3 month stint in India. I got a "hotel" 3 doors down from Leopolds Cafe and ate their several times (not too long before it was shot up during the Bombay terrorist attack). I thought the book was fantastic and would love to hear your final review.
NH - don't strain yourself using logic on this site; it's not worth it in the end. Just like you, I've traveled extensively in the Middle East and Asian Muslim countries (that would be Malaysia and Indonesia for the less informed) and have a much different opinion on the whole subject than the average American, especially the likes of rtr et al. They are stuck and won't ever get it.
Rob123
On rtr's reactionary blurbs, Bronco's statement about 'more than one writer' rings true, if you go back and read some of his stuff and pay attention to syntax and thought progression (in a few, there actually is some). But Faithful Reader also hit on something a few days ago that I have been wondering for a few weeks......."is rtr actually Franks' alter-ego unleashed?"......good question. Certainly hope not. I'm not computer savvy enough to hack into the DIL data base and see rtr's profile. O'well.....and rtr's post "rtr posted at 6:37 pm." is a rare glimpse of his underlie(y)ing thought.....And he only called me dumb and stupid a little at the end.....amazing. Yet I sensed his powerlessness over events, and his disconnect from responsibility except for his "no tax" mantra. Just a little man from Shock Radio in love with his own message......Like drinking coffee with a farmer who is disgusted with all the welfare cheats and crooks who are ruining this country, and then jumps up because the mail lady drives by and he's hoping like heck his Dept. of Ag. check is finally here so he can pay some bills with the money he gets for not planting crops. Total disconnect.
rtr
Bighorn
And as I've before, my job is 10-12 hours per day, often 7 days a week. So when you say I "refuse to work," you give me much to think about. Thank you.
============================
Then why is it after reading your posts you give a person the vision of a begger sitting on the street corner with a tin cup and a sad look on your face.
rtr
Not to worry Bronco, Your moma will throw you a bone tomorrow and take you out for a walk in the morning.
rtr
Benznd
Thank all of you for your kindness towards our fellow Americans as well as all other people of all cultures/societies.
===============
You left out that you are now off to spead your socialist hate and discontent but you will be back after you do your best to Rob the young kids of their lunch money and the old of their medicare since you only think of yourself and a public "Theft" option of health care..
rtr
ValleyViewer
--------
Would you like some cheese with that whine.
benznd
Thank you Bighorn for your heart and wisdom. Your words inspire me. And Bronco, give me some time to think about how I see all of this. At this time, I am just happy to know that there are others who think and feel as I do and often express themselves in a manner that brings "hope" for the future of this country. I have four of my own and 5 grandkids. You understand where I am headed. Thank all of you for your kindness towards our fellow Americans as well as all other people of all cultures/societies. Everyone has a story to tell. It would be nice if I could express myself better tonight, but it is late and I am tired. And Jack, missed you today. Best wishes for a speedy recovery.
Bronco
ValleyViewer, perhaps we can ask our resident psychologist, Benznd, what the effects of long-term interrupted sleep patterns have on unstable minds. Maybe understanding will teach us tolerance and pity instead of frustration and cynicism. Or maybe there's more than one ReTaRd in that windowless room.
ValleyViewer
Last night, at 6:25 p.m., I posted my first comment in a couple weeks, and suggested that some people are posting a little voluminously. In the 22 ½ hours that followed, “rtr” posted various comments at 6:38 p.m., 6:43 p.m., 6:55 p.m., 7:15 p.m., 7:38 p.m., 7:54 p.m., 1:10 a.m., 2:13 a.m., 2:25 a.m., 2:53 a.m., 7:40 a.m., 8:01 a.m., 8:07 a.m., 8:09 a.m., 8:11 a.m., 8:27 a.m., 8:35 a.m., 12:08 p.m., 12:19 p.m., 12:37 p.m., 12:49 p.m., 12:58 p.m., 1:12 p.m., 2:02 p.m., 3;12 p.m., 3:32 p.m., 3:48 p.m., 3:51 p.m., 4:06 p.m., 4:18 p.m., 4:38 p.m., 4:45 p.m., 5:04 p.m., 5:36 p.m., 6:37 p.m., 9:01 p.m.
Bighorn0216
And as I've before, my job is 10-12 hours per day, often 7 days a week. So when you say I "refuse to work," you give me much to think about. Thank you.
Bighorn0216
Thanks, rtr. Your post told me more about you and the work you're doing.
rtr
Bighorn0216
I know how you feel, Every time you post I feel like I have just been Mugged or about to get robbed.
Speeking about your governmental handouts that you refuse to work for.
Bighorn0216
Since the topic has moved from health care to “religion” (via War, and Cynicism), this, from this morning’s reading:
“The gravest sorrow comes from closing our minds to the suffering of others and feeling justified in doing so. *** The second gravest mistake is anything that halts the merit of a bodhisattva. This is not so hard to do. When we hurt or insult people we dislike, who knows? We might be obstructing the merit of a bodhisattva. The best advice therefore is to treat everyone with care.” Pema Chodron, “No Time to Lose.”
Which is to say, our most annoying provocateurs are given to us as, perhaps, our divine teachers, or at least, as fellow travellers in instruction. We can, from engaging them as they are, learn patience and compassion. They are not as far along as others. Teach to the level at which your audience is prepared to hear.
Whichever side of the provocation we find ourselves on in these threads, what are we learning from this engagement? How do we advance? I fail and relapse into reactive frustration myself. I get up, dust myself off, try to do better next time. In the day’s-end accounting, seeing the lapse is a big step forward.
Even this insight is probably not enough to keep any sane aspirant reading these “teaching” threads for much longer. The number of comments is not indicative of the value of the content. They are fueled by the negative training of years’ worth of groundless, angry, lost, unfair and unbalanced accounts, where an “email run rampant on the internet” is taken thereby to be self-authenticating and true. But some folks believe that, and the other folks have to decide what can be learned from that misfortune.
Rest easy tonight, warriors. There is work to do tomorrow.
SorrySOB
From Donald Creese to Rob "You left out Nat, Rawhide, Moseberryinn, editor and several others.You really don't have as big a group as you give yourself credit for" Actually, I believe Rob was scoring by IQ. Considering the list you gave (add 2 points for yourself) it wouldn't take a big group to win.
rtr
Rob
I still don’t know why you brought up the Taliban and that did not answer my question but I will answer yours.
The problem with the Taliban is they are brutal fundamentalist fanatic Muslims.
Is that our concern in my opinion, “NO”
The concern is they fit right into the mentality of the Al Qaida you say does not exist.
That is only the half truth, They do not exist as a fighting force you are correct but they do exist and would regroup and a line themselves with the Taliban which would put America at risk again if we do not keep them in check.
Do I think we can win the war, “NO” but then again it isn’t much of a war anyway, “Right now that is” The however to that is if Obama expands it then we could be in trouble if he doesn’t follow through with it and I just don’t see him as a leader that is capable of taking that on at all.
As for Iraq I don’t think you or me are qualified to say whether we should have went there or not but I do agree with your train of thought that we will never know why.
This garbage I have read that has been posted that it was to make corporations money is from paranoid loons however I do know that.
My PERSONAL thought on it is that Bush my have seen the collapse of the country coming and knew he needed to get men out of the work force which has happened in several wars. “But who knows, That is just my best guess”
As for stopping the wars to make money for health care that is the dumbest statement I have seen posted here. There will always be wars that we have no control over and the cost of the Obama public health care plan would eventually bankrupt America even without any wars “We can’t keep up with Medicad / Medicare and or Social Insecurity” so that statement is plain nuts.
Rob123
rtr: "Note: Rob even went off the deep end on the Taliban which was like an arrow shot out of the dark that I still have no clue where that came from." Ah, the art of the professional twister. As you know darn well, my question was simple, but I wanted a thoughtful answer, with maybe some time spent by you on google before shooting back your standard answer. Q.) Why are we killing Taliban in Afghanistan? I don't know. If more people thought it out, well, we just found a way to pay for Health Reform.
rtr
Rob, That's an old one but a classic for sure.
Rob123
rtr....simple question rtr......Why are we killing Taliban?...I know your knee j*rk answer, but was hoping you would sit down, google the history-sociology of the Taliban, do some thinking, and get back to me. I REALLY don't get it. And if more people think it out, well, maybe we just figured out how to pay for some Health Reform. It's all connected, ya know.
sensible
Pete: yes, you and i will continue to agree to disagree. we have deep fundamental differences about how an ecomony and society should exist . you believe profit to be the only motivator, that it must exist in all equations. i don't,......profit is an unnecessary variable (at times) that skews logic.............not all equations require profit as a variable.....quite to the contrary, the profit variable often inhibits needed consequences through its immediate demands........there may even be biblical references supporting my claim................enter christians.
your reagan "free market" ideology is simplistic and unrealistic. it has proven its worth and here we sit. and any other capitalistic suggestions pale to the " great ronnie free market way"...........well, (as reagan so often started) there you go again, pete. because free market (no rules) and capitialism (rules based) are mutually exclusive
are you a capitalist?
Rob123
Well rtr, here it comes, all spelled out for you:
"A guy is driving around the back woods of Montana and he sees a sign in front of a broken down shanty-style house: 'Talking Dog For Sale ' He rings the bell and the owner appears and tells him the dog is in the backyard.
The guy goes into the backyard and sees a nice looking Labrador retriever sitting there.
'You talk?' he asks.
'Yep,' the Lab replies.
After the guy recovers from the shock of hearing a dog talk, he says 'So, what's your story?'
The Lab looks up and says, 'Well, I discovered that I could talk when I was pretty young. I wanted to help the government, so I told the CIA. In no time at all they had me jetting from country to country, sitting in rooms with spies and world leaders, because no one figured a dog would be eavesdropping.'
'I was one of their most valuable spies for eight years running. But the jetting around really tired me out, and I knew I wasn't getting any younger so I decided to settle down. I signed up for a job at the airport to do some undercover security, wandering near suspicious characters and listening in. I uncovered some incredible dealings and was awarded a batch of medals.' 'I got married, had a mess of puppies, and now I'm just retired.'
The guy is amazed. He goes back in and asks the owner what he wants for the dog.
'Ten dollars,' the guy says..
'Ten dollars? This dog is amazing! Why on earth are you selling him so cheap?'
'Because he's a liar. He never did any of that sh#t. "
rtr
nh0828
There was nothing to say I disagreed with you on, I don't know how many times it has to be stated for you it was an email and I pointed out it had to do with "Syria" when it came to me and not with the emphasis on Muslims like you went off the deep end on.
Note: Rob even went off the deep end on the Taliban which was like an arrow shot out of the dark that I still have no clue where that came from.
rtr
Rob
He really doesn't care who he insults or wages war on, except his buddy Pete.
=======================
You left out Nat, Rawhide, Moseberryinn, editor and several others.
You really don't have as big a group as you give yourself credit for, You just have a loud mouth is all.
nh0828
"Abuse" like what, accusing anyone posting anything contrary to what you believe to be on illegal drugs? Not a particularly mature and intelligent post, rtr. I think a more face-saving response would have been: "I disagree with you, but understand I'm backing up my opinions with things John Stokes told me, so I'm going to have to do some more reliable research and get back to you." That would have been a perfectly respectable and reasonable response, and, unfortunately, entirely uncharacteristic of your mindset.
And rtr, you DID bring up religion. Refer to your original post (which you yourself admit is a random email whizzing about the internet, probably forwarded to you from some eminently respectable and knowledgeable source) on the Muslim appointees to the Department of Homeland Security. Don't try to pretend like you didn't start the conversation; you brought it up in the first place. That's the whole reason why I responded.
As you so eloquently stated, "even if it has nothing to do with the subject at hand you are not alowed [sic] to post it." That part almost made sense. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT AT HAND, so DON'T POST IT. Of course, it's not that you're not allowed (you have the right to say whatever you want, and us "whacky weed"-smoking liberals aren't able to censor you), it's just that it doesn't fit into a conversation about health care reform. Examine that thought for a moment, ESPECIALLY if you're going to accuse people of using this comment space as a platform for furthering their agendas.
Finally--liberal racism? Are you kidding me? As I said in the first line of my original post, I'm white. The accusations and insults you throw out there just plain don't make sense. If you're going to insult me, I recommend accusing me of being: a fascist, communist (bonus points if you use both!), homosexual, atheist, baby-killer, hippie, environmental loon, or Obama-ist. None of those labels would be particularly correct, but hey, they'd at least be more logical incorrect assumptions to jump too than the zany ones you reached.
rtr
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2009/08/16/bad-words-or-freedom-of-speech-trampling-left-wing-extremists-lobbying-to-remove-offensive-words-from-public-school-textbooks-words-include-poor-homeless-teenager-founding-fathe/
“Top of the “you have GOT to be kidding me” list: left-wing extremist liberals are lobbying for a cockamamie list of words to be scrubbed, words they consider offensive removed from the textbooks of public school children. Are we to expect a “Textbook Cleansing Czar” from the Obama administration next? A “Censorship Czar”?”
By the way Rob you didn't answer the question as to what the H*LL the "Taliban" had to do with "Syria" or is that how you answer it """You should know""" Sorry but I don't understand that response.
Rob123
You should know.
rtr
Affects of Marijuana.
1. Causes you to read things into posts that are not there.
2. Causes you to become spacey and write extensive posts in order to get a point across that does not exist in the first place.
3. Causes you to become defensive and paranoid.
4. The list goes on.
rtr
It appears there is another word that is not acceptable to these racist liberals here "Muslim is now a black list word" even if it has nothing to do with the subject at hand you are not alowed to post it.
It now falls in the catagory of abuse.
Rob123
nh0826....Good post, good information......Ignore rtr as much as possible....he's a burned out Shock Jock from Radio who retired early but doesn't know how to turn it off, especially in the afternoons and early p.m., when he becomes an alcohol fueled Rocketman with his Elton John 8 inch Heels and those really big glasses covering his eyes. And don't let him kid you, he is an equal opportunity Rascist/Nationalist/White Christian . He really doesn't care who he insults or wages war on, except his buddy Pete.
rtr
nh0828
Please, don't engage on a subject about which your only source of knowledge is punditry. It's demeaning, and makes you look even less educated than you managed to before.
================================
Please don't be posting while you are high on whacky weed either seeing as how what I posted had NOTHING to do with your liberal racism and hatred that you are expressing to everyone.
rtr
Rob
google 'Taliban', do some historical-sociological studies, and then see if they are who we should be killing? The other warlords are joining their enemy (Taliban) in harmony with the notion that America is now the big enemy.......al qaeda is no longer there......
=============================================
Question, What in the H*LL does that have to do with "Syria" anyway, it appears you have been hanging around sensible and Benznd to much lately, That whacky weed will destroy your brain you know.
nh0828
To: rtr and Pete
Re: Islam
Please, don't engage on a subject about which your only source of knowledge is punditry. It's demeaning, and makes you look even less educated than you managed to before.
Having been to Damascus, spent a great deal of time with Syrians, and studied Islam, the Middle East, and Arab culture a great deal, I'm going to have to pull rank on both of you and inform you that you know very little of which you speak. A "large percentage" of the Syrian population has NOT declared jihad on the United States--instead what you see is the radicalism of a small minority, which is in many places detested and feared more in the Middle East than it is here. There is no overwhelming wave of Islamic fanatics screaming for death to America that represents the majority of the Middle East. Do such people exist? Yes, absolutely, and they are a threat to you and me and American soldiers abroad and Arab civilians in the Middle East. I do not deny this in any way, and I completely agree that these individuals should be stopped by whatever means necessary and legal (note the "and legal" clause). However, the paintbrush with which you slander all Muslims is by far the less accurate way to examine this extremely intricate and diverse religion. It is literally akin to claiming that organizations like "Concerned Christians" (look it up, they're the ones that went to Israel intending to blow up holy sites and facilitate Jesus' second coming) are representative of Christians as a whole. Such a claim would be ludicrous and offensive, and anyone making it would be ridiculed, mocked, and probably threatened for taking such an ignorant and one-sided view on the entire Christian population. What I'm saying is: don't be that guy. It is not an "insult" to the American people that suffered 9/11 to involve Muslims in government--it is an insult to 25% of the world's population to assume that they are dangerous simply because of what they believe.
Now, do Arab evildoers and human rights abusers exist? Absolutely. I won't make excuses for the Saudi or Iranian governments' treatments of prisoners, for gender inequity amongst Arabs, for suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan. My head is not in the sand, trust me. Nor it is it duplicitous of me to level accusations against my own government while supporting a religion that has members that have done bad things. The situation is simply more complicated than you are allowing yourselves to believe. It is so much easier to live in a world where we're the good guys, they're the bad guys, and there's no option but to be with us or with the terrorists. Unfortunately, that world is a fantasy created by people that perfectly fit the dictionary definition of bigots: "a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own."
--NH
And no, this is the only login name I've ever used. I haven't posted on the DIL site for a solid 6 months or a year, and I'm guessing that my (relatively low) post count got reset since then with the site update. I'm not hiding behind different monikers as you accuse me of doing; I am just one individual attempting to engage in intelligent conversation in an open forum, yet thwarted at every turn by ignorance and rabid blindness. Whenever I come back to this site, I'm saddened by the behavior of the community I grew up in.
rtr
Rob
“When that country has a huge population that have declared they want JIHAD against America”.
=======================
Just so you COMPLETELY get it, Did you note the word COUNTRY and NOT RELIGION"
I could careless if they are Red, White, Green, Brown, Jew, Christian or Atheist like you.
You really need to get over your racism and hatred, It is not good for your health "Causes stroke, Heart failure and wrinkles I hear".
Now go back to your nap.
rtr
Rob
You know what was so hilarious about “nh0828” post was I didn’t even think about the religion which points to the fact that it is the liberals are the ones all wrapped up in racism and hatred when it comes to that.
What I stated was that it is an INSULT to all Americans to appoint Kareem Shora from Syria that Obama did for home land security. “When that country has a huge population that have declared they want JIHAD against America”.
Note: What I posted was an email that is running rampant through the internet right now because so many people are upset about it. “Nothing less and Nothing more”.
It has the appearance you are battling with yourself in your own mind with this one seeing as how it isn’t a fight for me.
Sounds like you are the one that needs to take a nap and relax if you ask me.
Rob123
rtr....I'm not that easy. Wait for Pete to react, then you'll get some talking points. While your waiting for Pete to awake from his nap, google 'Taliban', do some historical-sociological studies, and then see if they are who we should be killing? The other warlords are joining their enemy (Taliban) in harmony with the notion that America is now the big enemy.......al qaeda is no longer there......study first, respond second. Try to break out of your reactionary mode, at least while Pete is napping. He'll never know.
rtr
Rob
Coming from you I will have to assume that is an apology with the way you have been acting lately, "Apology accepted".
Rob123
Was sitting on my carpet reading the Koran when the bell on my computer rang with stock suggestions from rtr......Honestly, I'd rather buy Pork Bellies......but thanks for trying to be nice, in your strange, Right Wing, reactionary anarchist way with your Christian sentments melted down to a total "ME!....ME First!...." reality that excels at pointing out the obvious, plus total selfishness in ways that even Ayn Rand would shake her head at and wonder 'what's up?". Too nice a day to get sucked into a P#ss'en match.
rtr
Pete
BTW...NH....You wouldn't happen to have posted under another moniker in the past? :-) It's hard to keep up with all the name swapping going on around here. You would think this sight was run by ACORN.
=======================
Agreed and funny too, Good thing it is only a virtual war of the minds or they wouldn't have half as many soldiers, Man power is eveything you know... :-}
rtr
nh0828
The health care debate is fair game, but really, rtr? Bringing up your prejudiced views on religion in this conversation? Pretty shameful.
===================
I don't really care what you think or what you call me.
We are at war and a large precentage of people from "Damascus, Syria" have sworn JIHAD against the USA and it is an INSULT to the American people to make him a leader of home land security after what happened at 911 and what is happening right now with the wars we are fighting.
rtr
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/
"Health Care Reform
57% Say Health Care Plan Will Increase Costs, 53% Say It Will Reduce Quality of Care, 45% Favor Passage
Monday, October 26, 2009 Email to a Friend ShareThis.Advertisement
If the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats passes, 57% of voters nationwide believe it will raise the cost of health care, and 53% believe the quality of care will get worse. That’s part of the reason that just 45% support the plan. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% are opposed to it. "
Not sure where you get your poll numbers Benznd but I think even Rob would testify that the Rasmussen is one of the best which fortunately for all of us especially the elderly since a huge amount of the money was to come from medicare contradicts your numbers by a considerable amount..
Pete
BTW...NH....You wouldn't happen to have posted under another moniker in the past? :-) It's hard to keep up with all the name swapping going on around here. You would think this sight was run by ACORN.
rtr
Benznd, No matter what you think the good news is there are not enough votes to support anything even close to a public option,
Secondly when you advocate the theft of my money by the government you are INSULTING me too so I guess you will have to refrain from that if you want the other in return.
Pete
Defending Human Rights in Islamic Countries
Submitted by admin on 1 August, 2003 - 03:30. IHN 2003.3 August International Humanist News
Defending Human Rights in Islamic Countries
The General Assembly of IHEU agreed at its meeting in Washington on 13 May that IHEU should lend its support to an international campaign defending human rights in Islamic countries.
From the IHEU...International Humanist and Ethical Union
Defending Human Rights in Islamic Countries
"The campaign is the initiative of a number of Muslim, human rights, and women’s rights organizations. Its purpose is to raise awareness of, and to campaign against, the denial of internationally accepted standards of human rights to both Muslims and non-Muslims, women and men, living in the Islamic world. The campaign will be web-based with an online petition and detailed information in 13 languages on the origins of the Sharia, how it works in practice, and how it falls short of the requirements for a just and equitable system of law."
I don't think the Islamic world should be painted with one brush either, but please spare us the idea that their religion has been wrongly maligned. Are you jewish? Are you a woman? Are you a christian? Are you gay? Are you a Cartoonist whose drawn a cartoon about Islam? Is your name Salman Rushdie? All these conditions make "taint" your view of Islam. To call "our most recent President" ignorant and prejudiced in light of Islams human rights record is beyond moral relativism and naivity and into the realm of duplicity.
rtr
Rob, You say you play the market, You might want to check out "BEAT" good company and yet beat down to almost at a 52 week low, I did real well on it today at $6.00 a share.
Another one you might want to check out is "JTX" with tax season coming up and they have lots of new stuff in the works, "HRB" is too high even though tax season is coming up in my opinion.
Your not the enemy when your not platform building or advocating the theft of my money by the government. "OK" "Fair enough"
benznd
Maybe, as I reread my post, I should have used the word serendipitously as opposed to surreptitiously.
benznd
70%, latest numbers, support public option. Since we are the government, public option seems an appropriate term. Think so. About 25% are positive for Republican party. About 45% positive for Democrats. Not anything to be proud of for either party. Third party? Without sounding derisive, Fox news folks could surreptitiously form that new party.
Is it possible that health care proponents and opponents fall into two categories? Whether one thinks I am looking at one as more positive then another, well, I am not. Those that are proponents, lean towards the humanist philosophy i.e., ethics without religious belief; science and reason lead to more reliable knowledge than faith; SUPPORT a secular government and an inclusive society.
Those who are opponents? I would think that they tend to follow a rigid philosophy. I am at a loss to be more specific, so I ask for assistance. Please refrain from the use of commies or socialists as they are, in themselves, derisive and derogatory.
If you wish to clarify "your" position on health care, please feel free, either side. Use of other's opinions? Unless properly researched and verified through facts, are opinions none-the-less. Proper research starts with an hypothesis, then subjects that hypothesis to research. More to it, but research does not start with a subjective political philosophy, followed by selective research to reinforce stated subjectivity.
rtr
Rob123
===========
Agreed and very good explaination.
You pointed out that it went to it's heigths under Bushes watch and he should have done something about it. “AGREED”
Which has been pointed out over and over again but it did not start with him. "Both parties are guilty" AGREED"
Unemployment today and tomorrow, Pretty scary because there is nothing the government can do to make unemployment sustainable."AGREED"
The dollar is huge. "Agreed"
Along with pandering to minorities for votes "Both parties" when it comes to illegal immigration it was also propping up prices in the housing and commercial markets which made it look like our population growth was creating jobs as well as helping the economy. “Major problem that needs to be fixed and amnesty is not the answer especially with a falling economy in the lower paying job levels.” “Would you agree to that”??
nh0828
The health care debate is fair game, but really, rtr? Bringing up your prejudiced views on religion in this conversation? Pretty shameful.
I am a Caucasian, non-Muslim, Kalispell kid, and I'm deeply offended by your blanket characterization of an entire faith as unfit to hold any position having anything to do with security. As a university student, I spent the spring '09 semester in Lebanon, and then traveled extensively in the Middle East on my own. I heard the call to prayer being broadcast from a mosque near my apartment in Beirut several times a day, discussed topics like conversion and suicide with a sheik while waiting to cross the border into Syria, climbed the tallest minaret of the oldest continually-running university in the world (Al-Azhar, in Cairo), and made Muslim friends all across Turkey. I explained to people everywhere I went not to fear, because not all Americans were as ignorant and prejudiced as our most recent president. I spent time in mosques all across the Middle East, learned an immense amount about cultures so much deeper and richer than our own, and developed a profound respect for the followers of a faith so maligned in the West that people like you feel threatened anytime one is hired by the government. Shame on you for your alarmist rhetoric and ignorant views towards a people that I'm sure you've had zero interaction with beyond what your radical conservative websites tell you about the fringes of Islam, which you interpret to apply to every one of the 1.6 billion Muslims in the world.
Keep your religious bigotry out of the conversation on health care reform, please.
--NH
Pete
Bronco...and your argument is that state mandated compulsory charity is morally superior to charity based on a free-will belief system? I would agree that there are social responsibilities inherent in the teachings of the Bible, but nowhere do I see that those responsibilities are to be turned over to coersive governmental authorities. I also agree that there are many non-religious people who give, but I dont' think "altruistic" giving and faith are mutually exclusive as you seem to suggest. Yet again you seem to think that secular charity is somehow morally superior to that given on the basis of faith and should be especially newsworthy...which suggests that faith based charity isn't as newsworthy, or that secular giving is especially unusual. Either way you seem to have twisted yourself into a pretzel of logic in an attempt to insult people of faith. By the way, if you spent more time in MT you would probably find those donation cans in almost every establishment for one worthy cause or another. Rob probably even has them on his counters. In the future, if you simply can't contain your dislike for religion come on here and flail away...there's no need to take a detour through the good deeds of a coffee house.
Rob123
Concerning Fannie, Freddy, and the Bond Markets in general. There are many, many folks who have stood up and mentioned that the system was untenable as constructed over the past 25+ years, many of them traders and players, who slowly sunk back into the moral swamp. The ninj(n)a loans (no income, no job, no assets) finally did it in. Bi-partisan, although the height of the ninja loans was 2002 to 2006. All easily documented. NOW, however, as the shell game encompasses the FHA, starting with Bush and continuing with Obama, any concerns out there? How dumb are we? Well, looking at the Dollar vs. Euro and Yen, a lot of other people are asking that same question; while the Chinese keep their Yuan firmly pegged to the falling US Dollar, forcing their neighbors to buy dollars like mad inorder to keep their own currency (Exports) from being devastated by the Yuan/Dollar fix. India is not happy. South Korea is not happy. Japan is not happy. And unemployment in the U.S. is going to stay at the present level until someone comes up with a plan. Your turn, Pete and rtr.......remember, it's a bi-partisan swamp.
Bronco
Yeah, Pete, you're right. A bit stretched right now mentally. Churches (people organized under certain beliefs) do a lot of charitable things. Just like the lLord/sShiva/gGod/gGanesh/jJehovah/hHoly sSpirit/aAllah/eEtc. have commanded. How socialistic. Coffee houses fall under no sSupreme bBeing (sStarbucks?) which makes it newsworthy that people don't need a god to answer to for their good behavior. Sometimes acts of charity are altruistic, not performed for reward or by command. Like universal health care. Glad you finally agree. LIBS and LEFTIES, we have a new member. "Hi, my name is Pete and I'm a conservative."
Pete
Sensible...no need for hysterics and a thousand exclamation marks. Good grief. We will just have to agree to disagree. Really simple and not the end of the world to me.
Pete
"How compassionate of a Kalispell coffee company is donating to help the family who lost the baby to disease. I'll be sure to stop by there next summer...as I pass by the churches."......Kudo's to them, but maybe you should drop in some of the churches and check out their ministries to the community before you decide to malign an entire community of faith. My guess is that you'd be pleasantly surprised and a little embarrassed by your silly profiling.
SorrySOB
Yawn.
rtr
Senate Dems short votes for health bill _ for now
The Associated Press
Wednesday, Oct. 28, 2009 | midnight
"Several Democratic senators withheld their backing Tuesday as party leaders tried to nail down support from moderates for the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies as part of a sweeping health overhaul bill.
Across the Capitol, Democratic leaders in the House were working to finalize the shape of a government insurance option in their version of the legislation, with many saying the effort got a boost from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's decision to include a public plan in the Senate measure.
Leaders in both chambers were having trouble with a handful of wavering lawmakers, especially in the Senate where objections from one member can bring action to a halt. The first order of business for Reid was to convince senators to vote in favor of a procedural motion to allow debate on the health care bill to begin, and he urged his colleagues during a weekly lunch to do so, saying they could raise objections and criticism during the debate itself.
With just over nine weeks left in the year, the pressure was on to deliver on President Barack Obama's signature issue of a remake of the U.S. health care system to extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans, control spiraling costs and ban insurance industry practices such as denying coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions.
Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Tuesday he would support sending Reid's bill to the Senate floor for debate but would ultimately oppose the measure as written because it includes the federal insurance option, even though states would be allowed to opt out under the design Reid announced Monday.
Lieberman said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press that he's worried a public option would be costly to taxpayers and drive up insurance premiums. An independent who caucuses with Democrats, Lieberman is among a group of about a dozen moderate senators whose support Reid will need.
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., said he's made no commitment to Reid about whether he'll vote to clear the way for debate on the overhaul. "I have to read the bill," Bayh said.
"I haven't made up my mind one way or the other," Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., another key moderate, told reporters. He said he hadn't seen a draft of the bill so it was too soon to say whether he would support a procedural motion to allow debate to begin.
"I think every person has to decide for himself or herself how they're going to vote. For me, it's just too early," Nelson said.
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she prefers "privately delivered, government regulated" health insurance to a public plan, but she is seeking a "principled compromise" on the issue. Landrieu kept her options open. She said the key tests for her will be whether the legislation reduces costs and provides affordable health insurance.
Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, the only Republican to vote in favor of Democrats' health overhaul plan, said she would oppose moving to debate on the bill because of her opposition to letting the government sell insurance in competition with the private market.
Moving to debate on the bill is likely to require 60 votes to overcome a threatened Republican filibuster.
Even so, many House liberals were energized by Reid's decision to include a government insurance plan in his bill, arguing it locked down more votes from moderates for the House bill because they were now less likely to face the prospect of supporting a controversial provision in the House that would not even come to a vote in the Senate.
"There's a sense we got a really big boost yesterday," said Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y. "There's a victory dance in the end zone, just about."
House Democratic leaders were still debating the shape the government insurance plan will take in their bill, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushing for a strong version that would tie providers' payment rates to rates paid by Medicare _ probably resulting in cheaper costs for patients but lower payments to hospitals and doctors, something that troubles moderates.
Pelosi doesn't appear to have the votes for that plan. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said that switching the design to allow the Health and Human Services secretary to negotiate payment rates with providers _ the approach Reid is taking _ gets more support for a public option, which Hoyer said currently commands between 200 and 218 votes in the House. A simple majority in the House is 218.
House leaders said they hoped to make a final decision on the issue within 24 to 48 hours."
rtr
Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse. Tomorrow, the wolves will be herding the sheep!
Obama Appoints two devout Muslims to homeland security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already?
Obama and Janet Napolitano Appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development Source for announcement: Homeland Security Press Room. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/06/obama-appointment-arif-ali-khan-asst-secretary-dhs.html
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is proud to announce that the DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC). http://www.adc.org/
rtr
sensible
that goes for you too, pete and nat res (are you over acorn yet?)...........
==================
I see you arn't over Bush yet, Acorn was during and after Bush.
It's kind of like the chicken and egg thing with you isn't it.
Slight correction,,,sorry
rtr
sensible
that goes for you too, pete and nat res (are you over acorn yet?)...........
==================
I see you arn't over Bush yet, Acorn was after Bush.
It's kind of like the chicken and egg thing with you isn't it.
rtr
sensible
=================
I see you can not stay on topic and or tell the truth all of which brings it back to you are only on the DIL comment section for your socialist political platform building.
rtr
Seniors defend Medicare plan Obama calls 'wasteful'
By John Fritze, USA TODAY
“WASHINGTON — One of the largest spending cuts Congress could rely on to pay for an overhaul of the nation's health care system comes from a Medicare program President Obama has called a "wasteful" subsidy for the health insurance industry.
Don't tell that to cancer survivor Maurice Engleman, 82, who says the controversial Medicare Advantage program — which allows seniors to buy Medicare coverage through private insurance companies — helped him beat cancer.
"There was a seamless link between the medical support and the emotional support," said Engleman, who was diagnosed with tongue cancer last year within a week of his wife's death. "I don't believe Medicare would have taken care of the kind of services I required."
Debate over Medicare Advantage, which has 10.2 million enrollees — about one-fifth of all Medicare participants — illustrates a broader struggle Congress and Obama face as they look for ways to pay for a $1 trillion overhaul of health care without raising taxes on the middle class or compromising care. ”
It has raised concerns among some seniors who might have to pay more for the program or enroll in regular Medicare instead. A Gallup Poll last week found 20% of Americans over 65 say an overhaul will improve their health care — the lowest showing of three age groups.
Medicare Advantage has its roots in the 1970s but was bolstered in 2003 in hopes that private companies could manage Medicare patients more efficiently. Partly because it often has lower out-of-pocket costs than traditional Medicare, enrollment has nearly doubled over six years, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation report. “
Obama and the democrats have NO respect for the elderly.
sensible
rtr: mellow out. mellow out. your cut and paste routine of quoting partisan pundits offers no fact...........these people (i can't believe you quoted mr. morris) lie routinely.
and rtr.....greenspan was appointed by reagan and clinton retained him. ..............but given the sources you cite, i can see why you lack the knowledge..............
and with the lack of intellect, you choose to demean and name call..........that's why people report you for abuse..............there's no agenda. it's called civil discourse. when confronted with the undeniable truth, your defense isn't acknowedgment of fact, rather a childish name-calling tantrum. and it gets old.
mellow out and read mcclatchey or reuters or some less-aligned media, because your right-wing sites are paid big money to protect and promote the causes of big money (banks, insurance industry, oil industry,)...............so just expand your sources.
that goes for you too, pete and nat res (are you over acorn yet?)...........
rtr
Obamacare failed in Europe
posted by Donny Ferguson on Jun 30, 2009
Guillaume Vuillemey, a researcher at France's Institut Economique Molinari, and Philip Stevens, a researcher at Britain's International Policy Network write in today's Washington Examiner about how Obama's proposed government takeover of the health care system has worked in Europe.
Hint. Not so well.
"Click here to read the column, or if you live in the metro D.C. area pick up a copy of The Examiner. Vuillemey and Stevens write, in part:
President Barack Obama's proposed "public insurance option" for universal health coverage seems logical: A large public insurance fund will provide quality coverage for the uninsured and force competing insurers to lower costs. In practice, though, one needs only look at what decades of government health care have done to ramp up the financial and quality problems endured by Britain and France.
The Obama plan is supposed to make health insurance more competitive. But heavy subsidies will give it a big advantage, pulling an estimated 118.5 million people from private insurers to the public system. This government-subsidized system will eventually dominate the market in a way that would overrule competition...
...One way government tries to limit demand is to decree which new drugs can be prescribed. Many drugs, widely available in America and continental Europe, are denied to British patients.
State mismanagement has also created waiting lines for hospitals, on average causing 8.6 weeks of waiting. Once inside, budgetary cutbacks on cleaning and maintenance mean higher rates of an antibiotic-resistant variety of staph infection. This "superbug" has turned even routine surgery into a lottery of death
This is precisely what happened in Britain. The state provides most health care, via the National Health Service. Patients have almost no say over which physician, surgeon or hospital they can use, while professionals have to conform to government plans and targets...
...America can certainly draw lessons from overseas about saving money on health care. But in the cases of France and Britain, these lessons are in what not to do. These countries show that nationalizing care damages care."
sensible
Pete: do you know how congress works? do you understand the advantage of holding power over the legislative agenda? the republican congress, just like the democratic congress of today, controlled which bills that came out of committe and made it to the floor for a vote in 2003...............
if bush wanted reform in 2003, all he had to do was get his party to vote for it (just like the dems on health care today)........
take your right wing, we never do anything wrong, think -tank funded post-analysis of every republican screw-up and file it with rest of them (wmd, tax cuts to millionaires create jobs, the august memo warning of bin laden's attack, al-qaeda links to saddam, "we don't torture" claims, etc).......................
find some truth, pete..................your regurgitation of lies is tiresome. think for once.
sensible
Pete: as to bush proposing reform for freddie and fannie in 2003..................
congress was controlled by republicans. they controlled the agenda. how did the dems inhibit them? all they had to do was pass the bill just like they did the nmedicare reform bill of 2003 (it barely passed with republican support only). YOUR ARGUMENT HOLDS NO WATER, HERE.
AGAIN......bush quotes from 2002 speech to hud:
"We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping"
IS THIS REFORM, PETE????? he asked for MORE money for low-income firsst-time buyers.........he was proud of fannie!!!!!!!! pull your head out of your revisionist a$$
further, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few."
SOUNDS LIKE REFORM TO ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! get a clue, pete. your "history rewrite " version again holds no water.
Rob123
Riding a Harley at Sunset in Hawaii......That does sound very appealing. I took my 14 month old male dog, all bored and such from the rain and lack of walks, up to the snow level yesterday and while I walked, he romped and romped. Great time, although it was coming down pretty good and made me wonder where my new snow plow is, that I ordered in August. The old one is wore out, and the new one is ? Hopefully, the lack of inventory isn't THAT serious? Coming back to town, ran into a hunter with a fresh kill on the side of a logging road. Stopped, and talked a bit, as he seemed befuddled. He had a little hunting knife, and a very gut shot mulie......I smiled, and mentioned that a 450 Weatherby would have probable gutted it totally, while a 30ought 6 just makes a big mess. And I told him to remember to roll up his sleeves. Good day, all in all. Nothing like a good chuckle in the woods to clear the air.
rtr
Health Care Reform
57% Say Health Care Plan Will Increase Costs,
53% Say It Will Reduce Quality of Care,
45% Favor Passage
Monday, October 26, 2009
"If the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats passes, 57% of voters nationwide believe it will raise the cost of health care, and 53% believe the quality of care will get worse. That’s part of the reason that just 45% support the plan. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% are opposed to it."
rtr
Main Category: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance
Also Included In: Public Health
Article Date: 27 Oct 2009 - 4:00 PDT
"President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders have repeatedly praised integrated health care for its ability to improve safety and quality while reducing costs, citing examples such as the Mayo Clinic. But health economists worry that such consolidation may actually increase costs and could lead to monopolies."
rtr
OBAMA WILL REPEAL MEDICARE
By D*ck Morris And Eileen McGann
07.9.2009
“Obama’s health care proposal is, in effect, the repeal of the Medicare program as we know it. The elderly will go from being the group with the most access to free medical care to the one with the least access. Indeed, the principal impact of the Obama health care program will be to reduce sharply the medical services the elderly can use. No longer will their every medical need be met, their every medication prescribed, their every need to improve their quality of life answered.
It is so ironic that the elderly - who were so vigilant when Bush proposed to change Social Security - are so relaxed about the Obama health care proposals. Bush’s Social Security plan, which did not cut their benefits at all, aroused the strongest opposition among the elderly. But Obama’s plan, which will totally gut Medicare and replace it with government-managed care and rationing, has elicited little more than a yawn from most senior citizens.
It’s time for the elderly to wake up before it is too late!”
rtr
faithful reader
----------------
You know maybe what it is, is that if you quite trying to turn these comment sections into Pride Parades and Socialist Party Platforms you wouldn't have an issue now would you.
Like "Nat" said you liberals have done everything you can to iliminate freedom of speech in order to get your way and force your kind of thinking on everyone.
What say for once you stay on topic instead of your platform building.
Bronco
How compassionate of a Kalispell coffee company is donating to help the family who lost the baby to disease. I'll be sure to stop by there next summer...as I pass by the churches.
Bronco
Off topic...kinda. Saw a turbaned security guard checking passengers at the Portland airport. That was cool. Home safe and sound. Took the dogs for a long walk, all of us wagging our tails. Took the Harley for a spin at sunset, maybe there is a gGod, but I doubt it. Made in hHis image, we are gGod too, just not as evolved: but we have potential! Tendency towards complexity. Ultimate complexity=gGod. Thanks for the tip on Shantaram, I forgot who. Pete, thanks for your concern, I know it is heartfelt. Peace and love to all my brothers and sisters (though they don't post anymore due to the obnoxious and abusive ReTaRd).
faithful reader
Benznd, I appreciate your strategy for returning this forum to civil discussion. Ignoring trouble-makers on the Internet usually seems to work. Here's why I think it's futile at the Daily Interlake site, though. The site specifically says that we may not "post material that is obscene, defamatory, threatening, harassing, abusive hateful, or embarrassing to another user of the Site or any other person or entity."
And yet, rtr posted: "faithful reader, What is it with you and your other homosexual friends posting here with trying to turn this comment section into a "Gay Pride Parade" when homosexuality had NOTHING to do with the column at all as Frank pointed out multiple times to you? It had everything to do with the essence of what is right and what is wrong with the LIBERAL LOON JUDGE doing what he did in a custody case by taking the children away from the LEGAL parental parent. "What part of that don't you get and or how many times does it have to be explained to you before you get it" My advice to you is go to the main street of Kalispell without all your out of town and out of state friends with a sign stating you are lite in your loafers and love to swing your limp wrist and that you are looking for a friend "See how that works out for you" instead of polluting this comment section with your LITTLE gay pride parade.!!!"
Considering that I am not homosexual, had posting nothing about homosexuality and certainly had not acknowledged anything rtr had said in any way, I consider that to be harassing, abusive and/or hateful.
What did Frank do when I complained? Not a thing. We can only conclude that the Daily Interlake condones such comments here. For all we know, rtr, is Frank's alter ego. Otherwise, why would this site not respect its readers enough to eliminate the kind of comments it explicitly prohibits?
naturalresources
- says Sensible....You still lost and lost bad last November. The GOP ratings are still in the toilet primarily because the people still see you for what you, and bush, and cheney, and most republicans are. Hypocrites and liars. Oops - forgot to add losers. Actually, the main reason the GOP lost was the termite like affact of Acorn and the far left media news networks that are both getting a pass from the Obama camp, thanks to their negative influence and undermining free speech and voting rights in this once great country. The big question is: can the damage done by far left loons be reversed in our lifetime.?
Pete
Benznd...yes, the cancer info was interesting. Here is another interesting individual who has developed a promising experimental cancer treatment. Unfortunately John left us in February of this year.
"John S. Kanzius was an American inventor, radio and TV engineer, one-time station owner and ham radio operator (Call Sign K3TUP) from Erie, Pennsylvania. He invented a method that has the potential to treat cancer, inspired by his own battle with the deadly disease. [1] [2] He also demonstrated a device that can "burn salt water". Both effects involve the use of his radio frequency transmitter.
Kanzius, an autodidact, stated that he was motivated to research the subject of cancer treatment by his own experiences undergoing chemotherapy for treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma."
John was a great man and will be missed, but hopefully his work will yield lifesaving results.
Pete
SorrySOB...is Gallup on your blacklist too?
rtr
Here is my idea, What say you liberals try to get back on topic instead of trying to get me kicked off of the comment section in order to turn it into your personal political platform.
I'm just guessing that would be the best but then who am I to say.
rtr
Maybe what we should do is ask Frank to check with his IT tech and anyone that comes in with multiple addy's from the same IP address get's deleted so you socialists can't use multiple addys to insult people or thry to take away their freedom of speech.
The use of proxy servers should be immediately deleted from the left side since the right side is not doing that..
Those are allways options I see that may curb so called abuse here.
But then again I believe in freedom of speech no matter how many addys you socialists use in order to keep this as your personal political platform..
Sure looks like we have some foxes in the hen house to me but then who am I to say.
benznd
Bronco, how is the vacation? Funny, people in the continental US dream of Hawaii, and it just may be that people from Hawaii come to the continental US for vacation? You no doubt have family here, so it is a combined trip? When my wife and I were in Alaska, we wanted OUT whenever we could get a chance. I worked for a regional special education cooperative working a job that, for some, sounded adventureous and romantic. Fly from Ketchikan to native villages on nearby islands. As one can imagine, during winter months, there was wind and a very low ceiling. We flew in float planes, between the ocean and the clouds. Can we say "turbulence?" Can we say "change of undies?" Can we say WTHeck, "you have to be kidding, we are going to land in that rough sea?" Hated it and flew about 3 to 4 days per week. We also had some wonderful flights, looking down on whales as they submerged and surfaced, blowing air and water. But, we wanted OUT as much as we could.
rtr
Benznd, What is posted is very desperate indeed.
I am not a skin head and every thing you stated is an out right lie in order to stop anyones freedom of speech that isn't approved by you and your socialist ilk.
"End of story"
SorrySOB
rtr asks, "should I say just how stupid do you think Frank or anyone at the DIL is." The answer is yes. See I could work at FoxNews too.
benznd
Pete, thank you for reading my research. Interesting information? Something that is outside the left-right stuff?
benznd
Pete, thank you for reading my research. Interesting information? Something that is outside the left-right stuff?
benznd
Every time we make reference to ***** it is like throwing a log on a fire. ****** lives for the comments, good or bad, as ****** just likes being recognized. I do not read ****** anymore and do not make reference to *******. Let us try this for 3 days and see if we cannot shape *****'s behavior. Me thinks ****** wants to participate. We CAN shape behavior through reinforcement of appropriate comments. Frank, appropriate comments has NOTHING to do with opposition to one's own political ideology. WE want ***** to post and we support his freedom of thought, delivered in a manner that is socially and intellectually appropriate. This is not a skinhead blog site.
benznd
I almost forgot to tell you Rob, that your pasture comments to Bronco made me laugh out loud. Funny
SorrySOB
Thanks for the report there Pete, but forgive me if I'm a bit hesitant to accept your statistics found at The Christian Science and FoxNews. I understand that those are the only two sources (other than Frank) that you guys have to turn to, but there are others out there if you just look.
rtr
ValleyViewer
I hate the idea of capping the number of comments a reader can make on a particular column.
=====
By the way, We can always play your pathetic socialist liberal game of logging on as multiple users like your ilk does.
"Just how pathetic are you really or should I say just how stupid do you think Frank or anyone at the DIL is might be is a better question to ask"
rtr
ValleyViewer
==================
Let's get this right I have watched you BASH Frank's columns several times and now you want a favor from him in order to put a stop to freedom of speech.
"Again How pathetic is that"
rtr
ValleyViewer
I hate the idea of capping the number of comments a reader can make on a particular column.
=====
No you don't hate that at all or you would not have brought it up.
You socialist liberals have tried ganging up, Intimidation, threats, name calling, abuse button and now this.
You really are getting desperate to save this as your out of state political platform arn't you...."How much more pathetic can you out of state socialist liberals get".
ValleyViewer
It is unfortunate how the Inter Lake's effort to accommodate and facilitate thoughtful discourse on the Editor's column topics has been sabatoged by the voluminous, senseless comments in here. Who are all these slobs? Editor, I hate the idea of capping the number of comments a reader can make on a particular column, but maybe the time has come. Or maybe the Inter Lake could create a separate chat board for all the lonely hearts in here who litter this section with their non-germane ramblings and utterances. It's just a thought. Now I know what Mencken meant when he called "democracy" the "art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage."
Pete
SorrySOB....was the gay comment supposed to be an insult?
Pete
SorrySOB...have you seen the latest polls in VA and NJ? You dems have been so busy rubber-necking at the GOP's last train wreck that you've run yourselves right off the road. My guess is you'll even loose your Senate Majority Leader Mr. Magoo in the next election cycle.
The Christian Science
Conservatives outnumber liberals 2 to 1, Gallup finds
By Dave Cook | 10.27.09
Conservatives continue to outnumber liberals by a wide margin, with moderates nearly as numerous as conservatives, according to data from 16 separate Gallup surveys.
Meanwhile, public opinion on a variety of specific issues shifted rightward in 2009, Gallup says. More American adults hold conservative views than did in 2008, saying they see too much government regulation of business, want less influence by labor unions, favor laws that are less strict on the sale of fire arms, desire less immigration, consider themselves pro-life, and believe reports of global warming are exaggerated.
Issues in which public opinion has not moved to the right since 2008 include the death penalty, gay marriage, the Iraq war, and Afghanistan.
The latest information on the growing number of conservatives confirms a finding Gallup reported in June. The polling organization says 40 percent of Americans describe themselves as conservatives, 36 percent as moderate, and 20 percent as liberal. The figures represent a change from the period 2005-2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.
Uh oh...Since your view of yourself as a winner or loser is based on which political party is in power I would suggest you work on some confidence building exercises before the next election. I hear Benznd has lots of time available since the beet harvest ended and he's a compassionate liberal so two should get along great.
rtr
SorrySOB, You say you and your liberal sheep are not getting mad, What a JOKE, Look back through the posts, Rob's and faithful reader in particular.
The difference between you liberal sheep and the rest of us is we are not trying to build a political platform out of the DIL comment sections and are making it to where you socialists are not getting away with your liberal lies to promote socialism.
Note: I just stated it is none of your business how I vote which relates to I am NOT building a political platform of any kind here.
Note: Ice does not freeze in the oven, China is a communist country no matter what little Robbie says, Clinton and the democrats caused the housing melt down no matter what sensible says and the list of lies continues so you can try to build a socialist political platform and just like you have stated you are trying to do it from out of state because you know you and your ilk are a minority here and are not welcome in the community, or the northwest area.
Like it has been stated before the DIL is the most popular paper in the Flathead valley and for good reason and. "One of those reasons are Frank’s columns that you all like to BASH so much".
It has also been stated if you think I am wrong then start publishing your own paper and see just how far that gets you.
The only thing you would end up with if you published a paper here is a load of fodder for the out house.
rtr
By the way Pete that wasn’t an insult to you, I was just noting your compassion with Bronco is all.
SorrySOB
The way its starting to look is that Donald and Pete should forget about Obama's health care and start rallying for gay rights. They sure seem to know a lot intimate details about each other. By the way, you can write a book about current events, but the bottom line? You still lost and lost bad last November. The GOP ratings are still in the toilet primarily because the people still see you for what you, and bush, and cheney, and most republicans are. Hypocrites and liars. Oops - forgot to add losers. That's what makes the whole idea of making me or anyone else "mad" with your comments is so silly. How can losers make winners mad? Well, maybe in Kalispell but not where I live.
rtr
Rob
And for you, it's more than politics. That is very obvious. I can argue your politics everyday, but you are one rude, stupid personality.
===================
You know Rob I got to thinking about this and you are correct I have never told you what my politics are other than I am not a Socialist Democrat or a Republican.
You know what, It isn't any of your d*mn business how I vote.
rtr
SorrySOB
Interesting rtr, I didn't mention anything about your screen name when I referred to Donald. Surprisingly enough.
==================
You didn't have to I am so use to your continuous insults with that I know who you are referring to.
Unlike you liberals I believe in freedom of speech and think you should be able to throw as many insults as you feel necessary since it gives me a better insight into who and what you really are.
It sure is funny how you liberals go off the deep end with your tempers however, It is so bad even Bronco is admitting to it... "Too funny"
Unlike Pete however it wouldn’t bother me if you spontaneously combusted while reading my posts.
SorrySOB
Interesting rtr, I didn't mention anything about your screen name when I referred to Donald. Surprisingly enough, you responded anyway. Pretty telling I would say. Now be a good little pup and go back and lay in your corner at 2x5x Haywire Gulch. Fill in the blanks for fun.
Pete
Bronco...me thinks you take yourself too seriously. Have some compassion on us and aquire a sense of humor. You'll probably live longer and have less wrinkles...see, I care.
Pete
"....have caused some of the libs to lose their temper." Not real difficult...just call Obama by his given name...and Boom. I guess what they say about old age and thin skin is true.
rtr
Bronco, The reality of it is you can tell very easily which ones are more intelligent alright and which ones work for a living to support themselves and fight to keep this nation free from bums, socialists, pestilence and governmental slavery.
Which one of the above are you with the exception of intelligence?
Be a good little pup now and go back and lay down in your corner.
Bronco
I found a site that posts and supports lefties and liberals. You should read the hue and cry from the few contributing conservatives. Looks like they are outnumbered and have caused some of the libs to lose their temper. Easy to spot which are the intelligent ones, too. Hard to believe that some people make fun of compassion.
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/opinion/columns/frank/article_1adfb008-c101-11de-85a6-001cc4c002e0.html
rtr
SorrySOB, And your Messiah has been able to accomplish what or even make a decision on what since he has been in office did you say?
And there is that Donald insult again, Let see where is that darn abuse button again? Guess I will have to confer with the button pusher "faithful reader" in order to find it..
SorrySOB
Those of you that are getting all wet and excited about Lieberman not backing the health care bill as written have obviously not taken any Political Science classes (or in Donald's case - any classes) or know much about politics. What better way to prep for a big vote than proposing more than you know you can get and then gracefully concede for less when it doesn't get the needed support. Just wait and see how it falls out. Even Frank, especially if armed with his English Comp 101 Cliff Notes, would probably recognize that trick.
rtr
Pete you are going to confuse “sensible” with all these facts,
The next thing you know it is going to be “sensible” with cap locks on and lines to space out her thoughts.
I will say however she does make a point of getting the truth out when it comes to showing it was the Democrats that caused the housing melt down "over and over again" and a glutton for punishment.
Pete
A September 11, 2003 New York Times article shows that President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.” His proposal: An agency within the Treasury Department to supervise mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Fearing that mortgages would no longer be available to people who were unable to pay them back, Democrats eventually killed the proposal. The current meltdown in the mortgage industry is a direct result of giving mortgages to people who could not pay them back, a practice protected by Congressional Democrats.
Both entities were recently taken over by the government, a move that puts trillions of taxpayer dollars at risk.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
But Democrats in Congress, also known as “the caucus perpetually on the wrong side of history,” were having none of this “responsibility” stuff.
”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.
The proposal worked its way around Congress for a couple of years. Efforts at reform of the kind proposed by President Bush were shot down by Democrats each time.
In 2005, Republican Mike Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, brought up a reform bill (H.R. 1461), and Fannie and Freddie’s lobbyists set out to weaken it.
[...]
During this period, Sen. Richard Shelby led a small group of legislators favoring reform, including fellow Republican Sens. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel and Elizabeth Dole. Meanwhile, [Democrat in bed with the mortgage industry Chris] Dodd — who along with Democratic Sens. John Kerry, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the top four recipients of Fannie and Freddie campaign contributions from 1988 to 2008 — actively opposed such measures and further weakened existing regulation.
According to OpenSecrets.org, between 1988 and 2008 Dodd received $133,900, Kerry $111,000, Clinton $75,550, and Obama — in only 143 days in the Senate — received a whopping $105,849 from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Pennsylvania Democrat representative Paul Kanjorksi, who also opposed new Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulations, was given more than any other member of the House of Representatives. He was paid $65,500 by representatives of these entities.
And, in case you were wondering, John McCain co-sponsored a bill requiring greater Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac regulation in 2005. It was also blocked procedurally by Democrats.
The 2003 New York Times article was unearthed by a Free Republic poster.
UPDATE: 2004 video posted to YouTube shows Republicans arguing for, and Democrats arguing against, regulations that would have saved us from the current crisis.
rtr
That D*MN Leberman, I was so much looking forward to more social slavery.
sensible
again, pete..............i provided a link to "text of a speech" given by bush...........not some editorial revue by a partisan author. "text of his speech"...........in 2002. he asked fannie for money (and freddie) for low income housing aide......he asked for relaxed lending standards..........fannie was not an apparent problem and apparently had too strict of lending standards( or he wouldn't haved pushed for relaxed standards!!!).......read the text of his speech
sensible
Pete: i looked at the date.............the bush speech i referenced (with link) was 2 years later. again, why was bush asking for $440 billion from fannie AT THAT TIME. if, according to you, the problem was identified in 2000, why did congress not aaddress the issue? and why did bush promote miinority homeownershiip through fannie and freddie in 2002?
these facts blow your thesis out of the water
Pete
"Lieberman Announces Opposition to Health Care Bill With Government Plan
The announcement is a blow to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and signals that he does not yet have the votes to advance the health care bill." :-)
Pete
Benznd....careful you're going to depress the "overpopulation" crowd...pun intended.
rtr
Obamacare failed in Europe
posted by Donny Ferguson on Jun 30, 2009
Guillaume Vuillemey, a researcher at France's Institut Economique Molinari, and Philip Stevens, a researcher at Britain's International Policy Network write in today's Washington Examiner about how Obama's proposed government takeover of the health care system has worked in Europe.
Hint. Not so well.
The Examiner. Vuillemey and Stevens write, in part:
"President Barack Obama's proposed "public insurance option" for universal health coverage seems logical: A large public insurance fund will provide quality coverage for the uninsured and force competing insurers to lower costs. In practice, though, one needs only look at what decades of government health care have done to ramp up the financial and quality problems endured by Britain and France.
The Obama plan is supposed to make health insurance more competitive. But heavy subsidies will give it a big advantage, pulling an estimated 118.5 million people from private insurers to the public system. This government-subsidized system will eventually dominate the market in a way that would overrule competition...
...One way government tries to limit demand is to decree which new drugs can be prescribed. Many drugs, widely available in America and continental Europe, are denied to British patients.
State mismanagement has also created waiting lines for hospitals, on average causing 8.6 weeks of waiting. Once inside, budgetary cutbacks on cleaning and maintenance mean higher rates of an antibiotic-resistant variety of staph infection. This "superbug" has turned even routine surgery into a lottery of death."
benznd
Here is a different take on health care. Research dollars that just may pay off to future generations. The is a NATURE thing Rob and Jack. NATURE. One more thought concerning Nature/Nurture. I worked with many, many children effected by familial alcohol consumption. I always thought that the negative life experiences caused by damaged brain function was in many, many ways only equal to the environment in which that life was nurtured.
A thought, with research to back it up, about cigarettes. I was listening to Morning Joe and PJ O'rourke made the comment about the taxes for smokes falling heavily on the backs of the poor. Poverty does not create addiction. Addiction can create poverty (not just from buying cigarettes) A correlation?
Nicotine is an addictive drug. It causes changes in the brain that make people want to use it more and more. In addition, addictive drugs cause unpleasant withdrawal symptoms. The good feelings that result when an addictive drug is present — and the bad feelings when it's absent — make breaking any addiction very difficult. Nicotine addiction has historically been one of the hardest addictions to break.
Recent research has revealed that the nicotine from one cigarette is enough to saturate the nicotine receptors in the human brain. "Laboratory experiments confirm that nicotine alters the structure and function of the brain within a day of the very first dose. In humans, nicotine-induced alterations in the brain can trigger addiction with the first cigarette," commented Joseph R. DiFranza, MD, professor of family medicine & community health at the University of Massachusetts Medical School and leader of the UMMS research team. "Nobody expects to get addicted from smoking one cigarette." Many smokers struggle for a lifetime trying to overcome nicotine addiction. The National Institutes of Health estimates that as many as 6.4 million children who are living today will die prematurely as adults because they began to smoke cigarettes during adolescence.
Nicotine has great potential for the future. Researchers have determined that its chemical structure imitates that of acetylcholine, another brain chemical linked to memory and attention. Receptors sit on the nerve cells of the brain. In a disease like Alzheimer’s, nerve cells die off, leaving behind surplus acetylcholine and other chemicals that affect the transmission of brain signals. Nicotine, like acetylcholine, works on these receptor sites to strengthen the signals of these residual chemicals. The result is some improvement in nerve cell function.
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, show that the mole rat's cells express a gene called p16 that makes the cells "claustrophobic," stopping the cells' proliferation when too many of them crowd together, cutting off runaway growth before it can start. The effect of p16 is so pronounced that when researchers mutated the cells to induce a tumor, the cells' growth barely changed, whereas regular mouse cells became fully cancerous. "We think we've found the reason these mole rats don't get cancer, and it's a bit of a surprise," say Vera Gorbunova and Andrei Seluanov, professors of biology at the University of Rochester and lead investigators on the discovery. "It's very early to speculate about the implications, but if the effect of p16 can be simulated in humans we might have a way to halt cancer before it starts."
Pete
Alert to all posters....Rules for Obama's name. #1. President MUST be placed in front of his name...if it is not, it will be seen as a sign of disrespect. #2. Do not use his whole name. This is "Racist". You'll notice I didn't even dare type the middle name. #3. Do not use acronyms...B.O. is very suggestive of something racist...not sure what...but my guess is the Church Lady has some ideas. #4. Don't use his name in vain. He's busy multi-tasking and can't be responding to every plea from his flock. To avoid this I suggest his name only be spelled with consonants...example..brck bm in homage to the JW's out there. You'll notice that even then I avoided the middle name. Some suggested replacements that might work....Messiah, Chosen One, God, or anything that expresses diety...but be careful the rules change daily as the Church Lady and her flock come up with fresh ways to be offended. Until then, have fun you racist pigs.
rtr
Rob
you shock radio moron who can't even put President in front of Obama's name. And for you, it's more than politics. That is very obvious. I can argue your politics everyday, but you are one rude, stupid personality.
===============
Nope, No name calling there that I can see. "Humm"
All you would have had to have said was you already donate to the Knights of Columbus but thanks for offering the information without the insults.."No you couldn't do that".
As for your "Confirmed" by the Helena Diocese Bishop as a "Soldier for Christ", It appears you had an understand of right from wrong at one time.
One can only guess and wonder where you went off the deep end and entered the twilight zone after that.
Rob123
Oh, ha ha.....Another brilliant expression by put down rePete.....
Pete
Careful rtr...the Church Lady's finger is twitching....:-)
Rob123
"Do illiterate people get the full effect of Alphabet Soup?" I don't think President Obama shows disrespect , and I am actually a Veteran. And I actually donate money to the local Knights of Columbus every year for the past 32, which is how long I have been in business. And in High School, I was "Confirmed" by the Helena Diocese Bishop as a "Soldier for Christ", a steping stone to the Knights of Columbus, you shock radio moron who can't even put President in front of Obama's name. And for you, it's more than politics. That is very obvious. I can argue your politics everyday, but you are one rude, stupid personality.
Pete
Rawhide....Don't you know this isn't Obama's Swine Flu? This is Bush's Swine Flu...Obama inherited this problem...In fact, Cheney made this flu in his evil underground bunker in Wyoming using Democrat pork and Enron equipement....and beside that...you're a racist for using "hunky-dory" and Obama in the same paragraph. Even though the Church Lady will claim its a Dutch term...we know what you really meant.
rtr
NO Rob I did NOT twist the truth I just pointed out where you could put your money instead of running your mouth.
Then I posted just how bad it is with Obama's disrepect for the Veterns which you did not address either.
Guess you are just all talk when it comes to really wanting to help the veterns just like Obama.
I am guess the two of you would have both been BOOED off the stage in Iraq like Obama was all by himself.
Pete
Sensible...notice the date on this article....and this is the last post on this I will make...not fair to clog up the blog like this...and I think my point is made...caps free.
The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities
Howard Husock -Winter 2000
The Clinton administration has turned the Community Reinvestment Act, a once-obscure and lightly enforced banking regulation law, into one of the most powerful mandates shaping American cities—and, as Senate Banking Committee chairman Phil Gramm memorably put it, a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks. Under its provisions, U.S. banks have committed nearly $1 trillion for inner-city and low-income mortgages and real estate development projects, most of it funneled through a nationwide network of left-wing community groups, intent, in some cases, on teaching their low-income clients that the financial system is their enemy and, implicitly, that government, rather than their own striving, is the key to their well-being.
The CRA's premise sounds unassailable: helping the poor buy and keep homes will stabilize and rebuild city neighborhoods. As enforced today, though, the law portends just the opposite, threatening to undermine the efforts of the upwardly mobile poor by saddling them with neighbors more than usually likely to depress property values by not maintaining their homes adequately or by losing them to foreclosure. The CRA's logic also helps to ensure that inner-city neighborhoods stay poor by discouraging the kinds of investment that might make them better off.
The Act, which Jimmy Carter signed in 1977, grew out of the complaint that urban banks were "redlining" inner-city neighborhoods, refusing to lend to their residents while using their deposits to finance suburban expansion. CRA decreed that banks have "an affirmative obligation" to meet the credit needs of the communities in which they are chartered, and that federal banking regulators should assess how well they do that when considering their requests to merge or to open branches. Implicit in the bill's rationale was a belief that CRA was needed to counter racial discrimination in lending, an assumption that later seemed to gain support from a widely publicized 1990 Federal Reserve Bank of Boston finding that blacks and Hispanics suffered higher mortgage-denial rates than whites, even at similar income levels.
In addition, the Act's backers claimed, CRA would be profitable for banks. They just needed a push from the law to learn how to identify profitable inner-city lending opportunities. Going one step further, the Treasury Department recently asserted that banks that do figure out ways to reach inner-city borrowers might not be able to stop competitors from using similar methods—and therefore would not undertake such marketing in the first place without a push from Washington.
None of these justifications holds up, however, because of the changes that reshaped America's banking industry in the 1990s. Banking in the 1970s, when CRA was passed, was a highly regulated industry in which small, local savings banks, rather than commercial banks, provided most home mortgages. Regulation prohibited savings banks from branching across state lines and sometimes even limited branching within states, inhibiting competition, the most powerful defense against discrimination. With such regulatory protection, savings banks could make a comfortable profit without doing the hard work of finding out which inner-city neighborhoods and borrowers were good risks and which were not. Savings banks also had reason to worry that if they charged inner-city borrowers a higher rate of interest to balance the additional risk of such lending, they might jeopardize the protection from competition they enjoyed. Thanks to these artificially created conditions, some redlining of creditworthy borrowers doubtless occurred.
The insular world of the savings banks collapsed in the early nineties, however, the moment it was exposed to competition. Banking today is a far more wide-open industry, with banks offering mortgages through the Internet, where they compete hotly with aggressive online mortgage companies. Standardized, computer-based scoring systems now rate the creditworthiness of applicants, and the giant, government-chartered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have helped create huge pools of credit by purchasing mortgage loans and packaging large numbers of them together into securities for sale to bond buyers. With such intense competition for profits and so much money available to lend, it's hard to imagine that banks couldn't instantly figure out how to market to minorities or would resist such efforts for fear of inspiring imitators. Nor has the race discrimination argument for CRA held up. A September 1999 study by Freddie Mac, for instance, confirmed what previous Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation studies had found: that African-Americans have disproportionate levels of credit problems, which explains why they have a harder time qualifying for mortgage money. As Freddie Mac found, blacks with incomes of $65,000 to $75,000 a year have on average worse credit records than whites making under $25,000.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas had it right when it said—in a paper pointedly entitled "Red Lining or Red Herring?"—"the CRA may not be needed in today's financial environment to ensure all segments of our economy enjoy access to credit." True, some households—those with a history of credit problems, for instance, or those buying homes in neighborhoods where re-selling them might be difficult—may not qualify for loans at all, and some may have to pay higher interest rates, in reflection of higher risk. But higher rates in such situations are balanced by lower house prices. This is not a conspiracy against the poor; it's how markets measure risk and work to make credit available.
Nevertheless, until recently, the CRA didn't matter all that much. During the seventies and eighties, CRA enforcement was perfunctory. Regulators asked banks to demonstrate that they were trying to reach their entire "assessment area" by advertising in minority-oriented newspapers or by sending their executives to serve on the boards of local community groups. The Clinton administration changed this state of affairs dramatically. Ignoring the sweeping transformation of the banking industry since the CRA was passed, the Clinton Treasury Department's 1995 regulations made getting a satisfactory CRA rating much harder. The new regulations de-emphasized subjective assessment measures in favor of strictly numerical ones. Bank examiners would use federal home-loan data, broken down by neighborhood, income group, and race, to rate banks on performance. There would be no more A's for effort. Only results—specific loans, specific levels of service—would count. Where and to whom have home loans been made? Have banks invested in all neighborhoods within their assessment area? Do they operate branches in those neighborhoods?
Crucially, the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. The old CRA evaluation process had allowed advocacy groups a chance to express their views on individual banks, and publicly available data on the lending patterns of individual banks allowed activist groups to target institutions considered vulnerable to protest. But for advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition—a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the CRA—issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled "The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved." "Timely comments," the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, "can have a strong influence on a bank's CRA rating."
The Clinton administration's get-tough regulatory regime mattered so crucially because bank deregulation had set off a wave of mega-mergers, including the acquisition of the Bank of America by NationsBank, BankBoston by Fleet Financial, and Bankers Trust by Deutsche Bank. Regulatory approval of such mergers depended, in part, on positive CRA ratings. "To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application," advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, "lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations." By intervening—even just threatening to intervene—in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city. Observes Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, which has $220 million in bank mortgage money to parcel out, "CRA is the backbone of everything we do."
In addition to providing the nonprofits with mortgage money to disburse, CRA allows those organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion so far has gone to pay for services and salaries of the nonprofit groups involved. To deal with such groups and to produce CRA compliance data for regulators, banks routinely establish separate CRA departments. A CRA consultant industry has sprung up to assist them. New financial-services firms offer to help banks that think they have a CRA problem make quick "investments" in packaged portfolios of CRA loans to get into compliance.
The result of all this activity, argues the CEO of one midsize bank, is that "banks are promising to make loans they would have made anyway, with some extra aggressiveness on risky mortgages thrown in." Many bankers—and even some CRA advocates—share his view. As one Fed economist puts it, the assertion that CRA was needed to force banks to see profitable lending opportunities is "like saying you need the rooster to tell the sun to come up. It was going to happen anyway." And indeed, a survey of the lending policies of Chicago-area mortgage companies by a CRA-connected community group, the Woodstock Institute, found "a tendency to lend in a wide variety of neighborhoods"—even though the CRA doesn't apply to such lenders.
If loans that win banks good CRA ratings were going to be made anyway, and if most of those loans are profitable, should CRA, even if redundant, bother anyone? Yes: because the CRA funnels billions of investment dollars through groups that understand protest and political advocacy but not marketing or finance. This amateur delivery system for investment capital already shows signs that it may be going about its business unwisely. And a quiet change in CRA's mission—so that it no longer directs credit only to specific places, as Congress mandated, but also to low- and moderate-income home buyers, wherever they buy their property—greatly extends the area where these groups can cause damage.
There is no more important player in the CRA-inspired mortgage industry than the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. Chief executive Bruce Marks has set out to become the Wal-Mart of home mortgages for lower-income households. Using churches and radio advertising to reach borrowers, he has made NACA a brand name nationwide, with offices in 21 states, and he plans to double that number within a year. With "delegated underwriting authority" from the banks, NACA itself—not the banks—determines whether a mortgage applicant is qualified, and it closes sales right in its own offices. It expects to close 5,000 mortgages next year, earning a $2,000 origination fee on each. Its annual budget exceeds $10 million.
Marks, a Scarsdale native, NYU MBA, and former Federal Reserve employee, unabashedly calls himself a "bank terrorist"—his public relations spokesman laughingly refers to him as "the shark, the predator," and the NACA newspaper is named the Avenger. They're not kidding: bankers so fear the tactically brilliant Marks for his ability to disrupt annual meetings and even target bank executives' homes that they often call him to make deals before they announce any plans that will put them in CRA's crosshairs. A $3 billion loan commitment by Nationsbank, for instance, well in advance of its announced merger with Bank of America, "was a preventive strike," says one NACA spokesman.
Marks is unhesitatingly candid about his intent to use NACA to promote an activist, left-wing political agenda. NACA loan applicants must attend a workshop that celebrates—to the accompaniment of gospel music—the protests that have helped the group win its bank lending agreements. If applicants do buy a home through NACA, they must pledge to assist the organization in five "actions" annually—anything from making phone calls to full-scale "mobilizations" against target banks, "mau-mauing" them, as sixties' radicals used to call it. "NACA believes in aggressive grassroots advocacy," says its Homebuyer's Workbook.
The NACA policy agenda embraces the whole universe of financial institutions. It advocates tough federal usury laws, restrictions on the information that banks can provide to credit-rating services, financial sanctions against banks with poor CRA ratings even if they're not about to merge or branch, and the extension of CRA requirements to insurance companies and other financial institutions. But Marks's political agenda reaches far beyond finance. He wants, he says, to do whatever he can to ensure that "working people have good jobs at good wages." The home mortgage business is his tool for political organizing: the Homebuyer's Workbook contains a voter registration application and states that "NACA's mission of neighborhood stabilization is based on participation in the political process. To participate you must register to vote." Marks plans to install a high-capacity phone system that can forward hundreds of calls to congressional offices—"or Phil Gramm's house"—to buttress NACA campaigns. The combination of an army of "volunteers" and a voter registration drive portends (though there is no evidence of this so far) that someday CRA-related funds and Marks's troop of CRA borrowers might end up fueling a host of Democratic candidacies. During the Reagan years, the Right used to talk of cutting off the flow of federal funds to left-liberal groups, a goal called "defunding the Left"; through the CRA, the Clinton administration has found a highly effective way of doing exactly the opposite, funneling millions to NACA or to outfits like ACORN, which advocates a nationalized health-care system, "people before profits at the utilities," and a tax code based "solely on the ability to pay."
Whatever his long-term political goals, Marks may well reshape urban and suburban neighborhoods because of the terms on which NACA qualifies prospective home buyers. While most CRA-supported borrowers would doubtless find loans in today's competitive mortgage industry, a small percentage would not, and NACA welcomes such buyers with open arms. "Our job," says Marks, "is to push the envelope." Accordingly, he gladly lends to people with less than $3,000 in savings, or with checkered credit histories or significant debt. Many of his borrowers are single-parent heads of household. Such borrowers are, Marks believes, fundamentally oppressed and at permanent disadvantage, and therefore society must adjust its rules for them. Hence, NACA's most crucial policy decision: it requires no down payments whatsoever from its borrowers. A down-payment requirement, based on concern as to whether a borrower can make payments, is—when applied to low-income minority buyers—"patronizing and almost racist," Marks says.
This policy—"America's best mortgage program for working people," NACA calls it—is an experiment with extraordinarily high risks. There is no surer way to destabilize a neighborhood than for its new generation of home buyers to lack the means to pay their mortgages—which is likely to be the case for a significant percentage of those granted a no-down-payment mortgage based on their low-income classification rather than their good credit history. Even if such buyers do not lose their homes, they are a group more likely to defer maintenance on their properties, creating the problems that lead to streets going bad and neighborhoods going downhill. Stable or increasing property values grow out of the efforts of many; one unpainted house, one sagging porch, one abandoned property is a threat to the work of dozens, because such signs of neglect discourage prospective buyers.
A no-down-payment policy reflects a belief that poor families should qualify for home ownership because they are poor, in contrast to the reality that some poor families are prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to own property, and some are not. Keeping their distance from those unable to save money is a crucial means by which upwardly mobile, self-sacrificing people establish and maintain the value of the homes they buy. If we empower those with bad habits, or those who have made bad decisions, to follow those with good habits to better neighborhoods—thanks to CRA's new emphasis on lending to low-income borrowers no matter where they buy their homes—those neighborhoods will not remain better for long.
Because many of the activists' big-money deals with the banks are so new, no one knows for sure exactly which neighborhoods the community groups are flooding with CRA-related mortgages and what effect they are having on those neighborhoods. But some suggestive early returns are available from Massachusetts, where CRA-related advocacy has flourished for more than a decade. A study for a consortium of banks and community groups found that during the 1990s home purchases financed by nonprofit lenders have overwhelmingly not been in the inner-city areas where redlining had been suspected. Instead, 41 percent of all the loans went to the lower-middle-class neighborhoods of Hyde Park, Roslindale, and Dorchester Center/Codman Square—Boston's equivalent of New York's borough of Queens—and additional loans went to borrowers moving to the suburbs. In other words, CRA lending appears to be helping borrowers move out of inner-city neighborhoods into better-off areas. Similarly, not-yet-published data from the state-funded Massachusetts Housing Partnership show that many new Dorchester Center, Roslindale, and Hyde Park home buyers came from much poorer parts of the city, such as the Roxbury ghetto. Florence Higgins, a home-ownership counsellor for the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, confirms the trend, noting that many buyers she counsels lived in subsidized rental apartments prior to buying their homes.
This CRA-facilitated migration makes the mortgage terms of groups like NACA particularly troubling. In a September 1999 story, the Wall Street Journal reported, based on a review of court documents by Boston real estate analyst John Anderson, that the Fleet Bank initiated foreclosure proceedings against 4 percent of loans made for Fleet by NACA in 1994 and 1995—a rate four times the industry average. Overextended buyers don't always get much help from their nonprofit intermediaries, either: Boston radio station WBUR reported in July that home buyers in danger of losing their homes had trouble getting their phone calls returned by the ACORN Housing group.
NACA frankly admits that it is willing to run these risks. It emphasizes the virtues of the counselling programs it offers (like all CRA groups) to prepare its typical buyer—"a hotel worker with an income of $25K and probably some past credit problems," says a NACA spokesman—and it operates what it calls a "neighborhood stabilization fund" on which buyers who fall behind on payments can draw. But Bruce Marks says that he would consider a low foreclosure rate to be a problem. "If we had a foreclosure rate of 1 percent, that would just prove we were skimming," he says. Accordingly, in mid-1999, 8.2 percent of the mortgages NACA had arranged with the Fleet Bank were delinquent, compared with the national average of 1.9 percent. "Considering our clientele," Marks asserts, "nine out of ten would have to be considered a success."
The no-down-payment policy has sparked so sharp a division within the CRA industry that the National Community Reinvestment Coalition has expelled Bruce Marks and NACA from its ranks over it. The precipitating incident: when James Johnson, then CEO of Fannie Mae, made a speech to NCRC members on the importance of down payments to keep mortgage-backed securities easily salable, NACA troops, in keeping with the group's style of personalizing disputes, distributed pictures of Johnson, captioned: "I make $6 million a year, and I can afford a down payment. Why can't you?" Says Josh Silver, research director of NCRC: "There is no quicker way to undermine CRA than through bad loans." NCRC represents hundreds of smallish community groups, many of which do insist on down payments—and many of which make loans in the same neighborhoods as NACA and understand the risk its philosophy poses. Still, whenever NACA opens a new branch office, it will be difficult for the nonprofits already operating in that area to avoid matching its come-one, come-all terms.
Even without a no-down-payment policy, the pressure on banks to make CRA-related loans may be leading to foreclosures. Though bankers generally cheerlead for CRA out of fear of being branded racists if they do not, the CEO of one midsize bank grumbles that 20 percent of his institution's CRA-related mortgages, which required only $500 down payments, were delinquent in their very first year, and probably 7 percent will end in foreclosure. "The problem with CRA," says an executive with a major national financial-services firm, "is that banks will simply throw money at things because they want that CRA rating." From the banks' point of view, CRA lending is simply a price of doing business—even if some of the mortgages must be written off. The growth in very large banks—ones most likely to sign major CRA agreements—also means that those advancing the funds for CRA loans are less likely to have to worry about the effects of those loans going bad: such loans will be a small portion of their lending portfolios.
Looking into the future gives further cause for concern: "The bulk of these loans," notes a Federal Reserve economist, "have been made during a period in which we have not experienced an economic downturn." The Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America's own success stories make you wonder how much CRA-related carnage will result when the economy cools. The group likes to promote, for instance, the story of Renea Swain-Price, grateful for NACA's negotiating on her behalf with Fleet Bank to prevent foreclosure when she fell behind on a $1,400 monthly mortgage payment on her three-family house in Dorchester. Yet NACA had no qualms about arranging the $137,500 mortgage in the first place, notwithstanding the fact that Swain-Price's husband was in prison, that she'd had previous credit problems, and that the monthly mortgage payment constituted more than half her monthly salary. The fact that NACA has arranged an agreement to forestall foreclosure does not inspire confidence that she will have the resources required to maintain her aging frame house: her new monthly payment, in recognition of previously missed payments, is $1,879.
Even if all the CRA-related loans marketed by nonprofits were to turn out fine, the CRA system is still troubling. Like affirmative action, it robs the creditworthy of the certain knowledge that they have qualified by dint of their own effort for a first home mortgage, a milestone in any family's life. At the same time, it sends the message that this most important milestone has been provided through the beneficence of government, devaluing individual accomplishment. Perhaps the Clinton White House sees this as a costless way to use the banking system to create a new crop of passionate Democratic loyalists, convinced that CRA has delivered them from an uncaring Mammon—when, in all likelihood, banks would have been eager to have most of them as customers, regulation or no.
CRA also serves to enforce misguided views about how cities should develop, or redevelop. Consider the "investment" criterion—the loans to commercial borrowers rather than individual home buyers—that constitutes 25 percent of the record on which banks are judged in their compliance review. The Comptroller of the Currency's office makes clear that it is not interested in just any sort of investment in so-called underserved neighborhoods. Investment in a new apartment building or shopping center might not count, if it would help change a poor neighborhood into a more prosperous one, or if it is not directly aimed at serving those of low income. Regulators want banks to invest in housing developments built through nonprofit community development corporations. Banks not only receive CRA credit for such "investment"—which they can make anywhere in the country, not just in their backyard—but they also receive corporate tax credits for it, through the Low Income Housing Tax Credit. Banks have little incentive to make sure such projects are well managed, since they get their tax credits and CRA credits up front.
This investment policy misunderstands what is good for cities and for the poor. Cities that are alive are cities in flux, with neighborhoods rising and falling, as tastes and economies change. This ceaseless flux is a process, as Jane Jacobs brilliantly described it in The Economy of Cities, that fuels investment, creates jobs, and sparks innovative adaptation of older buildings to new purposes. Those of modest means benefit both from the new jobs and from being able to rent or purchase homes in once-expensive neighborhoods that take on new roles. The idea that it is necessary to flash-freeze certain neighborhoods and set them aside for the poor threatens to disrupt urban vitality and the renewal that comes from the individual plans and efforts of a city's people.
But keeping these neighborhoods forever poor is the CRA vision. CRA will help virtually any lower-income family that can come close to affording a mortgage payment to purchase a home, often in a non-poor neighborhood. Thanks to CRA-driven bank investment, poor neighborhoods would then fill up with subsidized rental complexes, presumably for those poor families who can't earn enough even to get a subsidized, easy credit mortgage. The effects of all this could be to undermine lower-middle-class neighborhoods by introducing families not prepared for home ownership into them and to leave behind poor neighborhoods in which low-income apartments, filled with the worst-off and least competent, stand alone—hardly a recipe for renewal.
It will take a Republican president to change or abolish CRA, so firmly wedded to it is the Clinton administration and so powerfully does it serve Democratic Party interests. When Senator Gramm attacked the CRA for its role in funding advocacy groups and for the burden it imposes on banks, the Clinton administration fought back furiously, willing to let the crucial Financial Services Modernization Act, to which Gramm had attached his CRA changes, die, unless Gramm dropped demands that, for instance, CRA reviews become less frequent. In the end, Gramm, despite his key position as the chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (even the committee's name reflects a CRA consciousness) and his willingness to hold repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act hostage to CRA reform, could only manage to require community groups to make public their agreements with banks, disclosing the size of their loan commitments and fees.
A new president should push for outright abolition of the CRA. Failing that, he could simply instruct the Treasury to roll back the compliance criteria to their more relaxed, pre-Clintonian level. But to make the case for repeal—and ensure that some future Democratic president couldn't simply reimpose Clinton's rules—he might test the basic premise of the Community Reinvestment Act: that the banking industry serves the rich, not the poor. He could carry out a controlled experiment requiring no CRA lending in six Federal Reserve districts, while CRA remains in force in six others. A comparison of lending records would show whether there is any real case for CRA. In addition, CRA regulators should require nonprofit groups with large CRA-related loan commitments to track and report foreclosure and delinquency rates. For it is these that will reflect the true threat that CRA poses, a threat to the health of cities
rtr
Pete
Sure, but when faced with the same "racist" charges leveled regularly on this sight, they buckled...and we all paid the price.
======================
Right on, I'm not going to buckle here however no matter how much intimidation and threats they through my way.
I have to say when it gets so feable they are going for the abuse button when they are more guilty of what they are acusing the conservatives of it must be wareing on them.
sensible
if jimmy carter and bill clinton "forced" fannie and freddie why did bush say this at a HUD dinner. THIS IS A QUOTE FROM BUSH IN 2002
"We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping"
apparently fannie and freddie weren't doing enough!!!!
further, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few."
if fannie and freddie were problems, why did bush propose this? again, pete, if freddie and fannie were problems in 2002, why didn't the republican congress or bush do something? their actions speak much louder than your shallow reasoning.
Rawhide
Let's see now; Despite all the promises and assurances, the Obama government hasn't been able to produce or distribute anything near the numbers of swine flu vaccines needed. They still haven't been able to inoculate even our health care professionals (doctors, nurses, etc.). Now we learn this "epidemic" will peak weeks before most of the vaccine becomes available, but don't worry because they say there will be plenty for all, sometime after the epidemic has peaked. Huh? And then comes the regular seasonal flu, but they won't start producing that vaccine until after they are done with the swine flue stuff. I guess Obama's bureaucrats can't do two things at once (I won't even go into his indecision over additional troops for Afghanistan). But I'm sure everything will be just hunky-dory soon as we get this new govment health care program.
Rob123
"Did you ever notice that when you blow in a dog's face, he gets mad at you, but when you take him on a car ride, he sticks his head out the window?" Eh, rtr? The Knights of Columbus rationale for giving out wheel chairs has absolutely nothing to do with your statement that the VA, under President Obama, won't give Vets wheel chairs. Once again, you twisted little Shock Radio Twirp, you mangled reality inorder to serve some momentary emotional high devoid of Intellect and any notion of Truth or Moral Goodness.
rtr
sensible, You are 180 degrees off base and only trying to blame the republicans since you are a socialist democrat, You seem to forget BOTH Pete and Myself have said we are neither Republican or Socialist Democrats.
You have a stake in trying to make this a political platform for your socialist Democrats as compared to us not having any stake in any political platform therefore your information is tainted, continually changing I have noticed and misleading to suit your needs unlike that of us that have no stake in any political platform and only want the truth posted.
Now I believe you should start writing a letter of apology to Clinton for calling him a liar here when he meant what he said when it come to his apologizing to America for the housing melt down.
Pete
"Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd deserve blame for Fannie and Freddie
The Independent, a British newspaper, blames the Democrats for the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:
What is the proximate cause of the collapse of confidence in the world's banks? Millions of improvident loans to American housebuyers. Which organisations were on their own responsible for guaranteeing half of this $12 trillion market? Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the so-called Government Sponsored Enterprises which last month were formally nationalised to prevent their immediate and catastrophic collapse. Now, who do you think were among the leading figures blocking all the earlier attempts by President Bush — and other Republicans — to bring these lending behemoths under greater regulatory control? Step forward, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.
In September 2003 the Bush administration launched a measure to bring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under stricter regulatory control, after a report by outside investigators established that they were not adequately hedging against risks and that Fannie Mae in particular had scandalously mis-stated its accounts. In 2006, it was revealed that Fannie Mae had overstated its earnings — to which its senior executives' bonuses were linked — by a stunning $9.3billion. Between 1998 and 2003, Fannie Mae's executive chairman, Franklin Raines, picked up over $90m in bonuses and stock options.
Yet Barney Frank and his chums blocked all Bush's attempts to put a rein on Raines. During the House Financial Services Committee hearing following Bush's initiative, Frank declared: "The more people exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness [at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae], the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially." His colleague on the committee, the California Democrat Maxine Walters, said: "There were nearly a dozen hearings where we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke. Mr Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac and particularly at Fannie Mae under the outstanding leadership of Mr Franklin Raines."
When Mr Raines himself was challenged by the Republican Christopher Shays, to the effect that his ratio of capital to assets (that is, mortgages) of 3 per cent was dangerously low, the Fannie Mae boss retorted that "our assets are so riskless, we could have a capital ratio of under 2 per cent". "
sensible
Pete said: " mortgage lenders didn't wake up one fine day deciding to junk long-held standards of creditworthiness in order to make ill-advised loans to unqualified borrowers."................
here's alan greenspan's take under oath:
Greenspan, 82, acknowledged under questioning that he had made a “mistake” in believing that banks, operating in their own self-interest, would do what was necessary to protect their shareholders and institutions. Greenspan called that “a flaw in the model ... that defines how the world works.”***
***"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.***
*** “Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”
Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.”***
***Many Republican lawmakers on the oversight committee tried to blame the mortgage meltdown on the unchecked growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant government-sponsored mortgage-finance companies that were placed in a government conservatorship last month. Republicans have argued that Democratic lawmakers blocked measures to reform the companies.
But Mr. Greenspan, who was first appointed by President Ronald Reagan, placed far more blame on the Wall Street companies that bundled subprime mortgages into pools and sold them as mortgage-backed securities. Global demand for the securities was so high, he said, that Wall Street companies pressured lenders to lower their standards and produce more “paper.”
“The evidence strongly suggests that without the excess demand from securitizers, subprime mortgage originations (undeniably the original source of the crisis) would have been far smaller and defaults accordingly far lower,” he said
sorry pete..............................read that last line carefully....................wall street, not your "wicked" governement caused this mess. also, in 2002 the world derivative market had a value around $75 trillion.......by 2005 that market value had increased to over $500 trillion.............THAT'S A HUGE INCREASE IN MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES........refinancing, not new ownership was the leading reason for the increase in mortgages (needed to create the increased defivative market)
get your facts straight, pete. wall street pressured mortgage lenders (who held that paper for only days or hours before selling it off). they had no reason to deny a loan if wall street would buy it so quickly with no questions asked
Pete
The seeds of this crisis can be found in the Democrat parties cynical political equation of paying off one of their base constituencies using various quasi-government agencies and manipulating legislation to fit their political agenda..'see the Community Reinvestment Act. When the Bush administration pushed for tightening up regulation because they saw the writing on the wall, they were re-buffed by Barney Frank and others. Do I wish the Bush White House would have had ignored the "racist" charges that have been the typical "skunk spray" of the left and pushed on to do the right thing? Sure, but when faced with the same "racist" charges leveled regularly on this sight, they buckled...and we all paid the price.
Pete
"There really isn’t any question of which approach is factually correct: right on the front page of the Times edition of December 21 is a chart that shows the growth of home ownership in the United States since 1990. In 1993 it was 63 percent; by the end of the Clinton administration it was 68 percent. The growth in the Bush administration was about 1 percent. The Times itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers--a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks.".....and....
Boston Globe..."'THE PRIVATE SECTOR got us into this mess. The government has to get us out of it."
That's Barney Frank's story, and he's sticking to it. As the Massachusetts Democrat has explained it in recent days, the current financial crisis is the spawn of the free market run amok, with the political class guilty only of failing to rein the capitalists in. The Wall Street meltdown was caused by "bad decisions that were made by people in the private sector," Frank said; the country is in dire straits today "thanks to a conservative philosophy that says the market knows best." And that philosophy goes "back to Ronald Reagan, when at his inauguration he said, 'Government is not the answer to our problems; government is the problem.' "
In fact, that isn't what Reagan said. His actual words were: "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Were he president today, he would be saying much the same thing.
Because while the mortgage crisis convulsing Wall Street has its share of private-sector culprits -- many of whom have been learning lately just how pitiless the private sector’s discipline can be -- they weren't the ones who "got us into this mess." Barney Frank's talking points notwithstanding, mortgage lenders didn't wake up one fine day deciding to junk long-held standards of creditworthiness in order to make ill-advised loans to unqualified borrowers. It would be closer to the truth to say they woke up to find the government twisting their arms and demanding that they do so - or else.
The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.
The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.
All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.
As long as housing prices kept rising, the illusion that all this was good public policy could be sustained. But it didn't take a financial whiz to recognize that a day of reckoning would come. "What does it mean when Boston banks start making many more loans to minorities?" I asked in this space in 1995. "Most likely, that they are knowingly approving risky loans in order to get the feds and the activists off their backs . . . When the coming wave of foreclosures rolls through the inner city, which of today's self-congratulating bankers, politicians, and regulators plans to take the credit?"
Frank doesn't. But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train. If Frank is looking for a culprit to blame, he can find one suspect in the nearest mirror."
rtr
OH so now you are admitting it was Clinton, About time and NO it wasn't a FORCED regulation by congress, It was a FORCED regulation coming from the FED's between Clinton and Greenspan "ONLY". Which Clinton has apoligized for on NATIONAL TV "MSNBC" for causing the housing melt down.
rtr
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20190.html
Obama backtracks on veterans' insurance
"President Barack Obama reversed course Wednesday on a highly charged proposal to have private insurance companies, instead of the Veterans Affairs Department, pay for veterans' service-related injuries."
This is your Kenyan in action alright, He doesn’t give a cr*p about our Veterns.
Do you need more information Rob or do I need to post more for you since there is a ton of information with the Kenyans lack of respect for our Veterns.
sensible
rtr: from jan. 1995 to jan 2007, republicans controlled congress and THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. every bill clinton signed, was a republican bill.......CLINTON DID WHAT YOU ASKED!!!!! so blame him for signing your bills..........
you demonstrate very shallow logic rtr.........shallow logic.
rtr
By the way sensible it was FORCED regualtion by Clinton to loan to people that they knew couls not pay back the loans and NOT the lack of regulation that caused the melt dowm.
rtr
Again sensible you are lying since you are not pointing out that Greenspan worked for Clinton first which caused the housing melt down admitted to by Clinton on National "MSNBC" news and NOT Fox.
rtr
There you go Rob, Put your money where your mouth is.
Contact: Andrew Walther of Knights of Columbus, +1-203-752-4253
"NEW HAVEN, Conn., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --- The Knights of Columbus will distribute $1 million worth of wheelchairs to veterans in need at four VA Hospital locations on Veterans Day weekend, Nov. 9 and 10, continuing a long history of K of C service to the men and women of the U.S. military.
The Knights of Columbus has purchased 2000 wheelchairs and partnered with the Wheelchair Foundation to distribute them"
sensible
isn't it just like a republican to blame a democratic president for signing a republican bill. your (republican) deregulation efforts were followed by the white house...........isn't that what you wanted? you wanted "no derivative regulation" and got it!! you wanted lower cash reserves, you got it!! you wanted repeal of glass-steagal, you got it!! you got what you wanted because clinton signed republican bills..................so blame clinton.
sensible
Pete: DEREGULATIO0N was the theme of that report (an excellent report on frontline)reagan appointee greenspan headed the fed. he was boss. rubin was lauded by republicans after his appointment in 1993 summers was hand picked by greenspan and rubin............ALL were deregulators, incliuding clinton. this is what you wanted, pete. you wanted deregulation, and you got it. the glass-steagal repeal got 1 democratic vote (none in the house) in the senate, and clinton signed it (mistake).
lol, pete................lol...............it was YOUR policy that was implemented........lol
rtr
http://themessthatgreenspanmade.blogspot.com/2007/12/clinton-housing-bubble.html
The Clinton Housing Bubble
By VERNON L. SMITH
"The joint housing and mortgage-market crisis once again reminds us that all financial implosions stem from the same cause: borrowing short and lending long without enough equity to weather periodic storms in the gap between.
But this bubble was different. Besides being fueled by housing purchases and repackaged loans, each with inadequate equity -- doubling down with other people's money -- at the end of the capital-gains rainbow was the right to take up to $500,000 of profit, tax free.
Thank you President Bill Clinton for your 1997 action, applauded by the banks, the realtors and all citizens in search of half-millionaire status from an investment they could understand and self deceptively believe to be low risk; thank you for fueling the mother of all housing bubbles; thank you for enabling so many of us who bought second or third homes, and homes before construction began, which we then sold to someone else who dreamed of riches from owning homes long enough to sell to another fool."
Nice try sensible, but you just can't get away with your lies without having them poined out.
Rob123
"Obama won't even give the VET's a wheel chair if they have to have it of need it " Show me where you found this! As a Veteran, I'll buy the dude a wheel chair and get whoever turned him down fired. All you have to do, rtr, is show me where you got this. If it's more 'Shock Radio', i won't be suprised.
rtr
sensible
rtr: it's a bush quote (2002).................sorry if you don't like it. sorry if it upsets your fantasy world. bush said this, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few." He called on Fannie Mae and the private sector "to unlock millions of dollars, to make it available for the purchase of a home"
========================
I guess you better tell Clinton that then since he spent an hour on NATIONAL TV "MSNBC" apoligizing to the American public do to the fact that he caused it and forced the banks to take on loans that could not be paid back.
I have stated Bush could have put a stop to it AFTER Clinton started it but did not do that.
Fanny and freddy were one of Obama's biggest campaign funders and look who he bailed out, Clintons old friends that were at the top of the food chain with Clinton.
sensible
rtr and your ilk......................you can deny facts all you want. you can live in your "fox news" fantasy world where all" that is wrong" is democratic. your refusal to accept fact demonstrates the weakness in your arguments................you're a good frank clone. so keep screaming when you're confronted with fact......that makes you right (apparently).
now...........did you read bush's speech to HUD? did you? or are your afraid another of your "fantasy facts" will be exposed for what it is................outright deceit, by design.
sensible
rtr: it's a bush quote (2002).................sorry if you don't like it. sorry if it upsets your fantasy world. bush said this, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few." He called on Fannie Mae and the private sector "to unlock millions of dollars, to make it available for the purchase of a home"
your denial is not my problem.
here is the FULL text of bush's speech to:www.hud.gov/news/speeches/presremarks.cfm
here's a few more quotes: "I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping.:
"The best way to do so, I think, is to set up a single family affordable housing tax credit to the tune of $2.4 billion over the next five years to encourage affordable single family housing in inner-city America."
"And so I've asked Congress to fully fund an American Dream down payment fund which will help a low-income family to qualify to buy, to buy."
Pete
"Frontline Blames Clinton Economic Team for the Wall Street Collapse
Report blames Rubin, Summers and the Clintonistas."......sounds sensible..lol
rtr
naturalresources
The only thing you left out was the fact that Veterans have already paid a big price for their well deserved healthcare.....so the "free", socialized form of health care for Veterans wasn't so "free" after all was it?
========================
NOTE: Obama won't even give the VET's a wheel chair if they have to have it of need it "They have to buy their own" once they leave the hospital after putting their lives on the line.
It kind of takes you back to the fact that Obama is for death panels and wished the soldiers were killed instead.
NO wonder he got BOOED off the stage in IRAQ.
Rob123
Bronco...."is she ready to be put out to pasture?".....I'm sure if she is out in the pasture, it is only because she is looking for you, cattle prod in one hand and oats in the other, trying to lead you to a little 'shelter from the storm'.....It's all good.....
naturalresources
JB Stone says; "Speaking of "free health care".....how about those VETERANS all the politicians seem to want to use for their "warm & fuzzy" rhetoric.....???". Nice , thoughtful comment, JB. The only thing you left out was the fact that Veterans have already paid a big price for their well deserved healthcare.....so the "free", socialized form of health care for Veterans wasn't so "free" after all was it?
"
rtr
sensible
and where were you when this was said in 2002, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few." He called on Fannie Mae and the private sector "to unlock millions of dollars, to make it available for the purchase of a home"--an important reminder that subprime lenders were taking their cue straight from the top
========================
This is an OUT RIGHT lie when it comes to Bush and how many times does it have to be pointed out to you that it was Clinton that started it and admitted to it on national TV.
By the way where were you in PORTESTING CLINTON for this mess that he caused.
rtr
http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/30/obama-health-care-reform-opinions-columnists-public-option-medicare.html
Obama's Top Five Health Care Lies
Shikha Dalmia, 07.01.09, 12:01 AM EDT
TonySopranoCare.
"President Barack Obama walked into the Oval Office with a veritable halo over his head. In the eyes of his backers, he could say or do no wrong because he had evidently descended directly from heaven to return celestial order to our fallen world. Oprah declared his tongue to be "dipped in the unvarnished truth." Newsweek editor Evan Thomas averred that Obama "stands above the country and above the world as a sort of a God."
"But when it comes to health care reform, with every passing day, Obama seems less God and more demagogue, uttering not transcendental truths, but bald-faced lies. Here are the top five lies that His Awesomeness has told--the first two for no reason other than to get elected and the next three to sell socialized medicine to a wary nation."
I can certainly see why you like Forbes, Rob.
sensible
JBSTONE: where were you when the medicare bill of 2003 was passed while adding over $1 trillion to our budget deficit? at a tea party? where were you when $1.2 trillion in tax cuts to millionaires (with the PROMISE of jobs) was added to our deficit? at a tea party? where were you when tony zinni, scott ritter, and hans blix warned against an unneccessary in iraq that added another $1+ trillion to our deficit? at a tea party? where were you when sec. paulson demanded $700 billion last sept. to bail out thieves on wall street? at a tea party?
and where were you when this was said in 2002, "Under 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanic Americans own a home," Bush observed in 2002. "That's just too few." He called on Fannie Mae and the private sector "to unlock millions of dollars, to make it available for the purchase of a home"--an important reminder that subprime lenders were taking their cue straight from the top.......................where were you? at a tea party?
you have every right to protest. you have a right to your opinion. but you have no right to your own facts (obama CUT your taxes)....................protest the "right issues" against the "right perpetrators". don't hide behind the right-wing denial curtain........toto has exposed it
rtr
Excuse me for the last post, That was Rob this time with the foul mouth, It is hard to tell for me since there are SO MANY insults coming from the left at all times I just can't keep the names straight any more.
By the way there faithful reader Frank pointed out he was NOT summoning me and he stated "WE" as in YOU and et al could rev my engine, OH YE of short memory with only the things you want to remember and twist to your liking. "That is called a lie in a politically correct fashion you know".. How's that working out for you now?
rtr
Yup, you nailed me Pete. I fit right into your syereotypes. Ya don't even need vasoline or KYJelly, do ya? Just a nice, clean, tight fit. Good for you, big guy
====================
Hey there faithful reader, Could you give us one of your curiosity speechs when it comes to what you think of Bronco's foul mouth here.
Oh that's right Bronco is one of you socialist politically correct platform builders so that is OK with you right.
rtr
faithful reader
Once a site degenerates to the point that someone routinely calls readers names (homosexual, lazy b*m, idiot),
==============
faithful reader
Once a site degenerates to the point that someone routinely calls readers names (homosexual, lazy b*m, idiot),
==============
You failed to point out where any of your liberal friends or anyone else has called any one a homosexual in this column.
You never addressed the "Donald" comment.
sensible called me an idiot and yet you only point fingers towards the conservative side, I did tell sensible it was ok with me though and joked about it instead of acting like you.
Would you like me to point out where you stated you had already stated hitting the "Abuse button" and now you say you didn't "Which one is it".
You say you rarely post and only out of curiosity, REALLY in a pigs eye.
Oh yeah your politically correct abuse is ok, Next time I see a bunch of socialist political platform building going on I will go out and kiss that Mulberry bush of yours before I post and maybe that will help me be more politically correct. "Do you think"?
Bronco
Rob, 100 lbs, huh? My wife hit 110, is she ready to be put out to pasture? And Bighorn, a ReTaRd might call you a liar and communist lover if you keep posting like that. Then of course he'll tell everyone he doesn't call people names. Dee, Dee, Dee. Sorry, Benznd, one slipped through before coffee.
Rob123
Yup, you nailed me Pete. I fit right into your syereotypes. Ya don't even need vasoline or KYJelly, do ya? Just a nice, clean, tight fit. Good for you, big guy. Maybe you should go to Thailand with your friends and see why Germans AND MANY OTHER Nationalities go there on Medical Shopping Tours. It's not always what your preconceived notions dictate. You might be surprised at the thinking. And the rehab phase, when your choice is a 200lb 'Nurse Gretchen' who barks orders for your every move in a deep, gutteral voice, versus a 100Lb Asian Beauty trained in Physical Therapy Science and Tantra Yoga and wants to cure your whole Being......well, it all becomes clear; if your actually a Libertarian and can learn from the experience, and not go into Culture Shock. So give it a try. Bangkok is a hoot. So instead of Shorting the Market, Cash some of those Bonds and spread your wings.....See if your a Libertarian or merely a crusty old conservative using 'Libertarian' as a means not to explain yourSelf as you belittle everything that might upset your well ordered 'piece of paradise'.
JBSTONE
"Let's be clear that "abuse" does not mean someone posted a comment you disagree with. If people start trying to get comments removed just because they represent a different point of view, we are in trouble as a nation. And I have to tell you, they have started to do just that."
Jeez, Mr. Milele....
What a SAD commentary on the state of affairs on our collective affairs of state.
I guess "free" speech only applies when you've downed enough Kook Aid to satisfy the Left and other fringe elements in our society.
The heck with THEM. I will continue to speak out, attend T.E.A. Party demonstrations, etc.
I'm no "fan" of the Federal Government these days, but at LEAST I'm doing something about it.......
Speaking of "free health care".....how about those VETERANS all the politicians seem to want to use for their "warm & fuzzy" rhetoric.....???
http://tinyurl.com/yl5a5n3
faithful reader
For the record, I have not marked for abuse any comment with which I disagree. That's abuse of its own kind. I like to read local opposing viewpoints if they are intelligently stated. I have fewer opinions of my own than curiosity, so topics such as global warming draw me in and yes, I do follow the links that readers provide, even if I don't say much.
It makes good business sense to moderate these forums. Once a site degenerates to the point that someone routinely calls readers names (homosexual, lazy b*m, idiot), reasonable discourse ceases and people stop posting and reading. Those hit counters go down and advertisers wonder why they are spending money on a site that people don't visit.
I think it's also about the Daily Inter Lake's respect for its readers. In one of these forums, Frank recently wrote that he would summon the resident abuser here to comment. As I've said, it will be interesting to see what he does, now that there is a clear pattern of personal insults and name-calling, and readers have objected.
Pete
"Chamber Benefiting From White House Criticism, Group's President Says
Even though a few companies have left the Chamber of Commerce over its opposition to President Obama's domestic policies, the organization is actually benefiting from its place in the White House crosshairs, the group's president, Tom Donohue, said in a published interview." ...............How can this be Church Lady? Could it be SATAN?
Pete
Rob...so now you've turned into the high priest of propriety who sits with his mighty finger hovering over the "report abuse" button just waiting to be offended, the venerable "Chuch Lady" of the PC left. "Well isn't that special."
Pete
"I would gladly pay for the medical care for those "aliens" and their dependents. It would be the privilege of a lifetime." Once more, there is nothing keeping you from doing so, or is this simply a rhetorical gesture...kind of like "hope and change".
rtr
Bighorn
If the Chinese weren't buying our debt, we'd have already descended into anarchy.
=====================
Pure unadulterated lies and nothing but bunk spoken from a true communist lover of China when you state lies like this that is suppose to make Communist China look better than America.
China is failing right now "Crashing" "The Europeon IMG" is being torn apart and the stock market is falling do to our unemplyment since Obama thinks paying back campaign funders is more important than the economy with stimuling jobs with the money.
OH YEAH and then there is the illegal aliens that are taking our jobs and using MILLIONS in health care costs.
The list goes on with failing socialism right here in the USA.
Pete
Rob...per your German example. My uncle, a retired LA school teacher goes to Thailand every year for a few months of R and R. As we talked the other day he mentioned the large number of German Nationals that visit the city where he stays....intrigued, I asked him why? Health care....he answered, much cheaper and no waiting. Hip replacements, dental work, etc. Its such a booming business that most of the offices are billboarded in German. Even with the cost of travel they find it cheaper and more convenient. Interesting considering your post.
rtr
Bighorn you wouldn't know a Mexican illegal from an Islamic illegal terorrist unless you talked to them and then you might not even know.
But then again you have just stated you wouldn't care either and welcome them with open arms.
rtr
Gee Bighorn, Last time I checked illegal means illegal and the terrorists come in all colors, "Remember Ayers", Oh yeah he was a home grown terrorist sorry about that.
=====
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/6/5/124700.shtml
Terrorists Use Mexico to Enter U.S.
Jim Meyers
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Reprint Information
Book on Katie Couric Makes Waves
White House: We're Not Subject to FOIA
FBI Seeks 2 Mysterious Men on Ferry
Publisher: Conservatives Do Read As Much As Liberals
Romney Shrugs Off Mormon History Film
"Counterterrorism authorities have come to fear that the porous U.S.-Mexico border provides entry into the United States, not only for illegal aliens, but for Islamic terrorists as well".
"And these same Islamic terrorists may also be using Mexico as the conduit to bring nuclear devices into the U.S. for a WMD attack. These are among the chilling disclosure from Paul L. Williams, author of the just-released book "The Day of Islam: The Annihilation of America and the Western World."
Bighorn0216
rtr, where's the Mexican or Chinese war? Where are the Mexican or Chinese terrorists?
If the Chinese weren't buying our debt, we'd have already descended into anarchy.
By the way, including in your posts that it's "NOT abuse" is feeble, pointless, and gutless.
And yeah, Frank, give it more than three hours before you announce that it's not working.
Bighorn0216
The filter is a pill, Benz. Make friends with the asterisk. Plant it mid-word, and you're clear.
rtr
Bighorn, It is amazing that you are so removed from the real world that you can NOT understand we are at WAR.
Illegal aliens could just as well be the terrorists living right next to you and your thought on it is give them our country it isn't worth fighting for any way.
People like you make me sick and that is NOT abuse just an observation from a true American Patriot...
rtr
Bighorn you know you are right I was off quite a few million, Look below.
===============
http://www.rense.com/general81/dtli.htm
Staggering Cost Of Illegal
Aliens In America
Taxpayers Taken To The Cleaners
By Frosty Wooldridge
4-10-8
"Illegal alien migration into the United States costs American taxpayers $346 billion annually reported by the National Research Council. While employers of illegal aliens rake-in billions of dollars, the US citizens subsidize what may be called organized "Slavery in 21st Century America."
benznd
Wow, it took me 15 minutes to figure out what I had written that contained profanity. I had some purposely misspelled words, but absolutely nothing profane. I said Hi in an attempt to remove the error message then tried again, but no good. Frustration like that could cause Tardive Dyskinesia!! Will that be censored? Here goes.........
benznd
Frank, show a little respect for those who blog on this site. Why would one request removal of an individual who argues another point. Why else would we engage. You notice, no one asked for other members who oppose us to be censored! Now did they? Get off it you lazy so and so, no good sheep. You see, when one uses this kind of 2nd grade language, it becomes bullying and patterned verbal abuse. So wake up Frankie. Get it right, or move to another state. Get off your disengaged whatever you call it and get a real job Frank.
Bighorn0216
I posted a news story, "rtr." I didn't "forget" to mention anything. I wasn't mentioning anything. I was passing along a detailed account of waste in the current healthcare system, prepared by a global research and news organization with no dog in the hunt. Reuters News Service, I trust. Thomson Co., one of the premier information technology companies in the world, I trust.
And you toss in the imaginary, made-up number "$300,000 million," and expect anyone to take you seriously? Kind of down on aliens, huh? I've lived in several countries and in U.S. states north and south, and there are NO--absolutely NO-- people who will work harder than Mexicans and Chinese. After a taiphoon that wiped out roads to our neighborhood in Taipei, I watched for weeks as Chinese workers carried wet concrete in five-gallon buckets, one on each side of their shoulder-pole, up a steep mountain road. Many of those workers didn't have shoes. I've watched Mexican workers in Texas build millionaires' houses in 100-degree heat, carrying rock and mortar all day long, while people who hold them in contempt drive by in their SUVs.
I would gladly pay for the medical care for those "aliens" and their dependents. It would be the privilege of a lifetime.
I'm also going to have to pay for your medical care, "rtr," since there's no actuarial possibility that you've paid in as much as you're going to take out, having "ReTiRed" at or before 55. Not from your pension fund, not from Socialist Security. You're on the dole, my man. Be thankful to the guys, like me, older than you, who are working. We're paying your way.
benznd
Hi
rtr
sesible
rtr: fat fingers..................
new rules: when you're talking (posting), one of has to be listening (reading).
=======================
I understand that one, No problem here, I am compasionate, Not so sure about your friends though since they are highly educated and spelling is more important to them than the train of thought itself.
rtr
Rob
" just to jog the minds of the social sheep." oh gGod, cut me some slack...
===================
I always do that Rob as you can imagine what my mother always told me about giving some one enough rope "Or slack as you call it", "You know the rest".
rtr
Hey Frank, If you noticed I have not pushed the "Abuse" button, I believe in freedom of speech for all, Even the ones that have used name calling against me "Donald for example" along with the low level politicaly correct in their eyes insults I have not pushed the button on.
No need to respond.
sensible
rtr: fat fingers..................
new rules: when you're talking (posting), one of has to be listening (reading).
Rob123
" just to jog the minds of the social sheep." oh gGod, cut me some slack...
rtr
sensible
rtr: you're inabilkity to recognize your own previous comments and claims IS "idiocy". that's not name calling. sorry you can't follow the train of thought you ignited..............
===========
You really should be careful you are starting to type like me.
If you hadn't noticed lighting a little fire every once in a while is a good thing just to jog the minds of the social sheep.
sensible
rtr: you're inabilkity to recognize your own previous comments and claims IS "idiocy". that's not name calling. sorry you can't follow the train of thought you ignited..............
rtr
senxible
then you went idiot again.............
===============
So now you are calling me names,,,,Remember what you liberal friends said about that abuse button.
Not to worry I wouldn't do that since I am not like them and their politicaly correct intimidation.
I have to say however your posts are just to hard to follow, Mybe in my early 20's when I had a smoke ring curling above my head I might have been able to follow them but not nowdays.
Editor
Let's be clear that "abuse" does not mean someone posted a comment you disagree with. If people start trying to get comments removed just because they represent a different point of view, we are in trouble as a nation. And I have to tell you, they have started to do just that.
Rob123
rtr: "......make them live by the same standards WE have to live by?" I guess you have a mouse in your pocket? I don't want to be cruel, so I'd leave it up to the retiring Sen or Rep if he wants to live like you and your mouse. I know if they wanted to take my plane up for a spin, they would pay AT LEAST cost. It's only fair, with Av Gas this expensive. And BYO on anything else.
sensible
rtr: i quoted you.......you said, "" Why do you think they call it a free market "
you started it............i responded.
then you went idiot again.............
rtr
Rob
The original intent of the lucrative retirement perks, both wages and health insurance, was an attempt to get people to LEAVE OFFICE. Really. It didn't work, so it should be corrected.
=================
So we both agree on this then, Throw the bums out that are in now "elect new bums" and start over again and make them live by the same standards we have to live by?
rtr
http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/AidAbetUnlawfulSec8USC1324.html
"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."
rtr
mtyler
Our health care system is in the straits that its in because we've been giving to many people free health care. I want every one to pay something. Even illegal aliens. Even those who are unemployed.
=========
What you are for is a low quaility socialized health care that will destroy all insurance that is worth while for everyone that can afford health care.
As for your Illegal alien comment it goes to show just how Un-American you really are.
Rob123
The original intent of the lucrative retirement perks, both wages and health insurance, was an attempt to get people to LEAVE OFFICE. Really. It didn't work, so it should be corrected.
Rob123
mtyler.....thank you, good information. The Public Option is coming back as a valid option. Even Cramer on Mad Money pointed out that States with 1 or 2 Insurance companies providing 60+% coverage HAVE to have the Public Option to get the prices down. And the anti-trust freebie HAS to go. My gGod, thinking of these bozos sitting in a bordello in Vegas fixing prices just makes me furious. I'd go to jail or pay a huge fine for talking Retail Price with a competitor. And Insurance Companies have had this since the end of WW2.
rtr
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
===========
sensible did bring up a good part of the constitution even if this has nothing to do with what she posted.
katorce14, Note where is says everything is to be uniform throughout the United States.
That is what I was talking about when it comes to the likes of Obama being forced to have the same low quaility insurance he trying to force on us and his exorbatant retirement along with the rest of the criminals in government need to be put on SS and Medicare just like us when they retire.
Would we agree?
Rob123
Come on, rtr.....GDR is the German Democratic Republic, you know, the Old East Germany........."....1995, the reorganization of the health care system in the former GDR still was far from completion".
Well, duh. What a mess.
mtyler
I think people are looking at this health care debate all wrong. The problem isn't "how do we give more people access to health care?" Because in actuality, everyone already has health care whether or not they have insurance. If you're in a car accident and they life flight you to the nearest emergency room, you'll get treated whether your insured or not. Take your kid with a broken arm to the emergency room and they'll treat you whether you have insurance or not. It doesn't matter if your insured, illegal, rich or poor, you'll get treated.
How do I know this? A few years ago I was unemployed. During that time, my wife suffered a brain aneurysm and had to be life flighted to Missoula. Six weeks and $100,000 hospital bill later, she made a full recovery. The hospital wrote off the bill because we couldn't pay. Happens every day. Should the hospital have denied us care? That's one point of view I don't think too many people share.
The real question is this: "How do we get more people to pay for their health care they're already getting?" The only way to do that is to make it mandatory and to provide it at a rate which people can afford. The only way to get the price down is to remove inefficiencies, cut out the insurance middleman, tort reform, preventative care to move people out of the emergency room and into a doctors office, and yes, a public option to provide competition.
Our health care system is in the straits that its in because we've been giving to many people free health care. I want every one to pay something. Even illegal aliens. Even those who are unemployed.
rtr
sensible, That has nothing to do with a free market at all.
It pretains to Defence and Welfare of the country which does NOT corralate to socialism with Health Care or the stock market if that is what your point is.
It is hard to tell what your point is reading your post however, No need to explain though since I really don't care what you have to say..
sensible
Pete and rtr:
oligopoly: a market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market
monopoly: 1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
PETE....CAPS!!.... one needs RULES and refs to stop either of these two aforementioned conditions to exist. currently, our banking system, our oil industry, our insurance industry (through anti-trust exempt status), our food products (cargill and adm), and walmart (i hate walmart) having existing entry barriers that inhibit competition..............THIS IS NOT CAPITALISM......but it is "free market", free market corporatism.............
now get your priorities straight, do you want a "free market" or capitalism.......they are mutually exclusive..........choose!!!
sensible
rtr: " Why do you think they call it a free market "
the constitution says nothing about a free market. it does address commerce and money. remember that nasty constitution.....................read article I section 8.
your little fantasy "free market" world is only a dream inked by ayn rand........
rtr
http://www.germanculture.com.ua/library/facts/bl_health_care.htm
"For residents of the former GDR, "German the era of free care ended in 1991. The political decision to adopt the FRG's "French health care system required the reorganization of nearly all components of health care in the new Länder. As of mid-1995, the reorganization of the health care system in the former GDR still was far from completion".
========================
Yep, Beyond Hysterics is right:, The Health Care that failed.
Rob123
Beyond Hysterics: The Health Care Model That Works
Anita Raghavan, 09.01.09, 06:00 PM EDT
Forbes Magazine dated September 21, 2009
As America agonizes over remaking health care, it might check out a private/public system that has been in place for years--the one in Germany.
"Whether they have public or private coverage, most Germans love their care. In a recent survey by m&m Management & Marketing Consulting 84% of private insurance clients expressed satisfaction; so did 85% of those who rely on the public system. Tough to find that in America. Germany spends $3,588 per capita, per year, or 10.4% of its GDP, on health care. The U.S. shells out $7,290 per person, 16% of economic output. This difference is not because we have more old people. One in five Germans is 65 or older, compared with one in eight in the U.S."
"If you want a health care system where you don't have to worry that you could go broke, where you could lose your health insurance or get off-the-charts doctors bills, look at the German model," says Uwe Reinhardt, economics professor at Princeton University. He believes that German and Swiss systems, which offer near-universal care without rationing services, come closest to something that Americans, long used to a private system, could stomach."
Good article.....Plus, if Steve Forbes wasn't so geeky, he'd be a great president......
rtr
It is out right socialism to regulate a free market, Why do you think they call it a free market instead of a socialized market.
Oh yeah and the COMMUNIST country of China allows for their companies to put together fraudulant balance sheets to prop up their GDP so why not do that too.
rtr
sensible
the possibility that some "undeserving" person is benifitting from poor frank's (and his minions) taxes
poor, poor frank
================
Frank it looks like you need to put a "Report Abuse" button at the bottom of your column next week since it appears you are offending people..
benznd
As I was working the treadmill this PM, I was letting my mind run free like the radical it is. I was thinking about Pete and his comments and beliefs in the free market system. I thought, until recent, the system seemed to work relatively well. Then I thought, well it worked well for some. We did have a middle class when I was growing up. My dad drove truck and we seemed to do OK. Teachers appeared to be within that middle class as well. I would guess those raised in poverty would beg to differ with me. At the time, I would not have had the maturity to understand anyway. I believe greed has always played a role in our system. At one time, individuals in supervisory or CEO positions made approximately 40 times that of their blue collar neighbors. Now, according to what has been reported, that separation has risen to 400 times. We have sat back and allowed the free market system to operate unregulated. Our unemployment is about 10%. Our current national debt is 11.4 trillion. We have now elected a progressive presidency and congress. It is time to regulate our free market. If anyone thinks that represents socialism, I wish to add my voice that it is NOT. No one would support a socialistic system as we were all raised in this system. At the present time, many of us realize the corrupt current financial and health care system has taken us to the brink. We must adapt, as the option is extinction.
rtr
katorce14,
which country has moved away from health care for all.
=========
I missed one, Sorry.
It is Germany that is moving away from it the most, Started out they moved toward the French design "1991" which I posted earlier and as of "1995" they are still moving father from their Socialized Health Care because it is breaking them and they have found it not to be any where as near as good as it was cracked up to be.
rtr
katorce14, The posts we have had back and forth lately have been for the most part very civil, I have no problem there and pointed that out earlier.
I will respond to what you ask.
As for the Canadian Health Care I have talked to several myself and took a long vacation there this last summer as far north as Edmonton and we have friends down here that are from Canada.
What they say is their Health Care is fine so long as you don't get really sick of need immediate care because you have to wait to long and you never really know what is or isn't covered until you do get really sick.
The friends we have here "Have money" so it isn't an issue for them but they say they wait to go to the doctor when they come down here instead of going to over worked, under paid, rationed care when it comes to who gets taken in first up North.
======
For the record I don't support the VAT===
Glad to hear that since it is a Pelosi nightmare of theft.
Roll back the Bush Tax cuts on the top one percent ====
This is NOT just a tax on the one percent it hits all of us and would be disastrous for the economy with a bad economy like we have today and as you know all taxes are passed down so realize what to call one percent is the corporations that will pass it down and it would increase your taxes as well at your level so you would end up with a double dose of taxes.
Eliminate the cap on wages subject to SS and Medicare.====
I agree, Give the old people a break.
Eliminate the double SS and Medicare tax on self employed.===
I am not sure if you have your facts straight here, In fact I know for sure that the farmers in Eastern Montana are allowed to decline from paying into SS and Medicare for the Majority of their lives and then pay in the Maximum amount for the least needed years to collect full SS and Medicare.
I am totally against what I just stated, If one pays in we all pay in and that is one of the issues with the government fraud. "Note if Obama makes us take his low quality health care then FROCE him to use it too" it’s only fair.
Let me add one more, Make the politicians live off what they earned and SS and not the exorbitant retirement they get, When you hear Obama and party say they want the millionaires money taxed more then do it to them too and no more handouts for them either.
Tax money that is made doing nothing but investing as regular income.===
It is not quite that simple.
It is taxed after you realize your profits "Another wards after you sell the investment" as for taxing money while it is invested "In the market unrealized or unsold" that is not right because it is your money and you could end up loosing it all.
Tax wages and bonuses over 1 million annually at 60 percent.===
Absolutely not, Just because someone else makes more money than me doesn’t mean I should be jealous of their income and try to steal as much as I can after all we all had and have the chance at doing what those people do and believe you me they are 24/7 people and I was never interested in working that hard.
And I never said that only the rich supported the war I said only the rich BENEFITED from the war, big difference. =====
I see where you are coming from and to a point you are right but for the most part you are not looking at it correctly.
Obama today is keeping the wars going and even expanding them in order to keep men out of the work force here at home.
WWI, WWII and Viet Nam were the same way which benefits all of us back home with having more jobs and the soldiers also pay taxes so it is a win win situation no matter how ugly that may sound to you it is a fact.
Also it is clear that you think that I support everything President Obama does and says.=======
I do not recall saying you did and I have posted several times there were plenty of things
I have posted several times about Clinton forcing the banks to take loans the democrats knew could never be paid back which was a major cause of the melt down “I was not being mean when I stated that, Just truthful” Bush could have put a stop to it but didn’t because it was politically incorrect to stop ghetto people from having loans and would have made him look bad.
I did not agree with Bush on many things including the above and the patriot Act which Obama is expanding on also.
By the way I am not a Republican either.
===
When it comes to Obama and Government Motors, Insurance companies and Banks.
That should in itself have been enough to have him impeach with in the first 100 days and thrown him to the wolves.
Fraud, Campaign pay backs you name it.
It is nothing less than out right socialism, criminal fraud and goes against everything this country stands for.
The word progressive I find to be disturbing because Government intrusion in our lives is really all that amounts to which any one in their right mind should fight against in my opinion.
Thanks again for asking like you did and sharing with all of us.
MrMark
Why are all you dopes even discussing this. Bighorn said it all. Anything else is just phulabber! Thanks Bighorn for your great insight!
sensible
so frank................with this money the "government" is collecting, who's benifitting? welfare reform, and the costs associated with welfare are minimal. defense spending is ALWAYS justified in your crowd. seniors on medicare aren't complaining.....are they ripping us off? seniors on social security don't seem to be complaining.....are they ripping us off? who's ripping us off, frank? and where is that money going?
the possibility that some "undeserving" person is benifitting from poor frank's (and his minions) taxes ............it makes me cry. poor haliburton. poor wall street. poor millionaires. poor blackwater. poor insurance (anit-trust exempt) companies.......poor, poor frank
katorce14
rtr - I only want to speak the truth, So educate me, which country has moved away from health care for all. And why do all the Canadians I talk to and hear from say that although there are some issues with that system they would not get rid of it.
For the record I don't support the VAT
so that you can better aim at me, here is what I do support
Roll back the Bush Tax cuts on the top one percent
Eliminate the cap on wages subject to SS and medicare
Eliminate the double SS and medicare tax on self employed
Tax money that is made doing nothing but investing as regular income
Tax wages and bonuses over 1 million annually at 60 percent
And I never said that only the rich supported the war I said only the rich BENEFITED from the war, big difference.
Also it is clear that you think that I support everything President Obama does and says. Not true, I understand where you might get that impression becasue on the right you supported everything Bush did without question and you assume we lefties are the same sheep as you. Sorry to inform you that I am not that sheep.
I am critical of Obama on several fronts not the least of which are his changed position on don't ask don't tell,his continued support of a war that should never have been, and his cozying up to the banks.
That said i am a progressive and during the Bush years I saw us go backward in many areas. I will continue to Support Dems as long as they are moving forward. if Republicans choose to move the PEOPLE forward I would support them. Of course that has not happened since Nixon.
rtr
Jack you are correct that it is the kids we need to be thinking about and like both Pete and Myself pointed out TORT reform is a huge step forward and a place to start the with instead of the knee j*rk reaction that is going on in the Whitehouse now that is out of control.
The iliminatation of supporting Mexico when it comes to our Health Care is a tremendous burrdon on our Health Care system.
If they want it then they pay for it and if they are illegals then deport them and make a job opening for one of our people here in the USA since that would increase revenue for the government as well.
Let's start with the basics and move one step at a time and not make a situation that is just now being looked into much worse that it supposedly is right now.
SS was suppose to be a God send for us all but in reality it was invented just so the politicans had another pot to steal from.
rtr
Let see if he allows you liberals to directly insult me by calling me Donald more than once here infering that I am an internet stalker and child molester.
That doesn't even begin to count the low level insults I have recieved from the liberal side.
JackPoynter
Pete said:
Jack...you show me a system that works, is sustainable, and maintains our freedom and I'm all for it.
I don't have answers Pete, if I was pushing an agenda I would. I'm looking for recognition of the problem and possible answers.
Pete said:
I'm sure you understand that this didn't happen in a vacuum and that there are many forces at work...
Certainly I am, that was the point of the big post I made, to show what the forces were.
Pete said:
What has happened to the cost and quality of higher ed since the government got in the business of subsidizing that industry and what effect has the sky-rocketing costs had on doctors who are trying to pay off enormous loans?
One of the things that has happened to higher ed in the health profession, is that the university administrators have seen the huge wages their students were making, and decided they wanted a piece of it, just like everyone associated with the problem. Another piece of the problem is the perception that collge grads are making big bucks, with the same result: higher ed wants their piece. And wages have been going up, becausing of the late lamented housing boom. Now that bubble has popped, higher ed, in principle, should be reversing itself...but don't hold your breath.
Pete said:
How about Tort?....
What about it? That's another piece of the insurance problem. The problem isn't high awards, its that malpracticing doctors are being protected at the expense of the rest of us, including other doctors who have to pay higher insurance rates as a result. Malpractice Torts are supposed to serve a purpose, to get rid of the trash in the system.
Pete said:
and on it goes with the barnacles. Why aren't we addressing those issues instead of rushing pell mell into the loving arms of a omniscience, omnipotent, and soon to be omnipresent government. No thanks.
I'm trying to get people to address those issues. But all you guys want to do is talk about how the other party is out to get you; you'll still be talking political theory when the world collapses around you. That's the plural you, not just you personally.
But I'm done. I've defined the problem and its causes, and I've tried to raise your consciousness level about it. I've already had one stroke, and odds are you're going to be the ones dealing with all this mess, I'll be out of it. Mostly, I'm just worried about my kids.
faithful reader
Rob, I started doing that last night. Flag the abusive comments and otherwise ignore them. We'll see if Frank really wants a civil forum or not.
rtr
Rob, Would that be like your personal attack on me calling me Donald?
Rob123
I suggest that anyone who has a problem with rtr's style of personal attacks and lack of self-control, just start hitting the Report Abuse icon at the bottom of his little temper tantrums. Enough already.....give it a try. See if it works. If not, maybe we can take his breathalizer off the 73 Chevy Ignition and put it on his Computer' on/off button.?
sensible
editor: did you have a column following this disclosure..................from 2005
"The White House released budget figures yesterday indicating that the new Medicare prescription drug benefit will cost more than $1.2 trillion in the coming decade, a much higher price tag than President Bush suggested when he narrowly won passage of the law in late 2003.
The projections represent the most complete picture to date of how much the program will cost after it begins next year. The expense of the new drug benefit has been a source of much controversy since the day Congress approved it, with Democrats and some Republicans complaining that the White House has consistently low-balled the expected cost to the government.
As recently as September, Medicare chief Mark B. McClellan said the new drug package would cost $534 billion over 10 years. Last night, he acknowledged that the cumulative cost of the program between 2006 and 2015 will reach $1.2 trillion, but he cited several major savings and offsets that he said will reduce the federal government's bottom-line cost to $720 billion. "
AGAIN (CAPS...PETE...CAPS), where were you when the republicans were spending like drunken sailors? where were you? $1.2 trillion on your children's credit card for medicare.....$1+ trillion on your children's credit card for iraq..........and no on said squat ............not one republican dissenter to deficits.....not one
your contrived "fiscal" arguments would hold water better if you consistently stood for something.....but you stand for nothing, except the tirade of the moment.
faithful reader
I read that too, Benznd. I shudder to think of the column and comments addressing that.
rtr
It has already been pointed out to you several times that Tort reform needs to be done which would lower costs emensely but you liberals HATE that because then there would be no need for your socialist slavery to be invoked in the form of socialist programs or more taxation.
You on the other hand have posted nothing other than you are to lazy to get a job and work for your own insurance and feel other people owe you.
As for Rob and et al they just want socialism at any cost no matter how much deciet it takes to get us there.
rtr
Bighorn0216
======================
You forgot to mention the $300,000 million for illegal aliens that need to be deported and do not deserve our health care unless they can pay for it.
Was that a convent omission or what since the democrats are unwilling to eliminate them from their Health care plan?
rtr
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/257099
'Patient Lottery' in Gander, NF Will Provide Better Care for Almost 2,000 Residents
"In May of this year, the community of Gander, Newfoundland, Canada elected to hold a 'lottery' style selection of patients for two newly arrived Family Physicians. Although innovative, this approach is unlikely to help in solving a worsening shortage of doctors nationwide."
benznd
I realize this is off-topic. Yet it also represents conservative dogma and very easily could be a 2 cents future column.
TAOS, N.M. – Larry Whitten marched into this northern New Mexico town in late July on a mission: resurrect a failing hotel.
The tough-talking former Marine immediately laid down some new rules. Among them, he forbade the Hispanic workers at the run-down, Southwestern adobe-style hotel from speaking Spanish in his presence (he thought they'd be talking about him), and ordered some to Anglicize their names.
No more Martin (Mahr-TEEN). It was plain-old Martin. No more Marcos. Now it would be Mark.
Whitten's management style had worked for him as he's turned around other distressed hotels he bought in recent years across the country.
The 63-year-old Texan, however, wasn't prepared for what followed.
His rules and his firing of several Hispanic employees angered his employees and many in this liberal enclave of 5,000 residents at the base of the Sangre de Cristo mountains, where the most alternative of lifestyles can find a home and where Spanish language, culture and traditions have a long and revered history.
rtr
katorce14, Remember what I ask of you earlier, Please posts the truth.
At this point and time you are not even coming close to the truth and just making up lies.
What you stated about Europe is NOT true and they are moving towards are way of health care just like I pointed out because their system has failed.
Canaga has rationed health care, Be my guest on that one.
The few pennie you quote is nothing but an out right lie, "Google VAT" with the end result of 20 cents on the dollar which will hit the middle and lower class the worst.
As for the rich only supporting the Iraq war that is nonsence, I did get to see Obama BOOED off the stage in Iraq however if that tells you anything.
Bighorn0216
A little perspective on $900 billion over 10 years--we waste nearly that much annually under the current system.
WASTE IN THE U.S. HEALTHCARE SYSTEM PEGGED AT $700 BILLION IN REPORT FROM THOMSON REUTERS
Ann Arbor, MI October 26, 2009 - The U.S. healthcare system wastes between $600 billion and $850 billion annually, according to a white paper published today by Thomson Reuters.
The report identifies the most significant drivers of wasteful spending - including administrative inefficiency, unnecessary treatment, medical errors, and fraud - and quantifies their cost. It is based on a review of published research and analyses of proprietary healthcare data.
"The bad news is that an estimated $700 billion is wasted annually. That's one-third of the nation's healthcare bill," said Robert Kelley, vice president of healthcare analytics at Thomson Reuters and author of the white paper. "The good news is that by attacking waste, healthcare costs can be reduced without adversely affecting the quality of care or access to care.
"That's the point of this report - to identify areas in the healthcare system that can generate game-changing savings," Kelley said.
Here are some of the study's key findings:
• Unnecessary Care (40% of healthcare waste): Unwarranted treatment, such as the over-use of antibiotics and the use of diagnostic lab tests to protect against malpractice exposure, accounts for $250 billion to $325 billion in annual healthcare spending.
• Fraud (19% of healthcare waste): Healthcare fraud costs $125 billion to $175 billion each year, manifesting itself in everything from fraudulent Medicare claims to kickbacks for referrals for unnecessary services.
• Administrative Inefficiency (17% of healthcare waste): The large volume of redundant paperwork in the U.S healthcare system accounts for $100 billion to $150 billion in spending annually.
• Healthcare Provider Errors (12% of healthcare waste): Medical mistakes account for $75 billion to $100 billion in unnecessary spending each year.
• Preventable Conditions (6% of healthcare waste): Approximately $25 billion to $50 billion is spent annually on hospitalizations to address conditions such as uncontrolled diabetes, which are much less costly to treat when individuals receive timely access to outpatient care.
• Lack of Care Coordination (6% of healthcare waste): Inefficient communication between providers, including lack of access to medical records when specialists intervene, leads to duplication of tests and inappropriate treatments that cost $25 billion to $50 billion annually.
Journalists may request a copy of the report from David Wilkins at (734) 913-3397 or david.wilkins@thomsonreuters.com.
About Thomson Reuters
Thomson Reuters is the world's leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals. We combine industry expertise with innovative technology to deliver critical information to leading decision makers in the financial, legal, tax and accounting, healthcare and science and media markets, powered by the world's most trusted news organization. With headquarters in New York and major operations in London and Eagan, Minnesota, Thomson Reuters employs more than 50,000 people and operates in over 100 countries. Thomson Reuters shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX: TRI) and New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: TRI). For more information, go to www.thomsonreuters.com
benznd
Kat you might want to direct your responses to others who respond with like awareness of issues. Research identifies the boisterous of one side or another as "thinking" they represent the collective thoughts of an ideology or dogma. Take that into consideration when you choose who to respond to. Just a thought. There are numerous individuals whose responses are way too predictable. I am assuming that those whose responses are predictable, practice pedagogical dogma. For example, Rob explains his actual business situation supporting a rationale for change, as well as you, Jack, and many others on this blog. I posted the "free market" CEO salaries of our for-profit health care system. Personally, these salaries are outrageous. I put my personal ideology out there for others to shoot at. All that comes my way is some form of 1) personal attack for my own existential situation b) labeling, etc. (-: I asked this of motorcycle man some time ago, tell us what you want. No response. I ask Pete to tell us what he wants. NO response other than some paranoia about "them." We are darned if we do and darned if we don't. Take the high ground and quit trying to alienate through name calling. Quit hitting your dinner guests with the 2X4 as they enter the dining room. I first said this to a high school principal who asked my wife and I to come to his office to talk about the bullying of my autistic daughter. My wife was a board member at the time. One might expect some level of respect for her community responsibility. We presented specifics, he responded with generalities, helplessness, and insinuations that we were out-of-line expecting change. Reminds me of the current situation.
katorce14
PETE - Look around all over Europe and just to the North to find just the system you are looking for. These systems vary from country to country and some even use private insurers. the end result is the same a few pennies from each pocket and EVERYONE has insurance.
Two problems I see from your perspective
1) Everyone has the same coverage. for example in Canada if you have the money to buy your way to the front of the line you have to go to the USA. I am all for that. Provide the basics and make people pay for cosmetic or convenience surgery. what they do not have in Europe is people filing Bankruptcy for medical expenses.
2) The few pennies from each pocket.
katorce14
Pete - No the one where the rich control the Government and exercise the control of the people through large corporations. Remember the Republicans controlled both houses and the presidency just a few years ago. It is not about which of the parties control things that is a well orchestrated ruse to keep you from noticing that the people have no say at all.
Example: In poll after poll the people want health care for all Americans. The most likely bill to come out of this will simply require that we buy it at whatever cost from corporate America. Who wins? This Government you chastise continually gains nothing (individuals in the Government gain money for re-election) , the corporations gain total control over the health care decisions of the people and the people get, nothing.
Another Example of the rich controlling few getting what they want: the war in Iraq. It is easy to see how large corporations gained from this and for a time it gained the president the ability to push whatever they wanted in contracts to friends or we risked "not supporting our troops" what did the people of this country gain for that, again nadn.
Are you seeing a pattern yet? I am just curious how come you defend that?
katorce14
Pete - No the one where the rich control the Government and exercise the control of the people through large corporations. Remember the Republicans controlled both houses and the presidency just a few years ago. It is not about which of the parties control things that is a well orchestrated ruse to keep you from noticing that the people have no say at all.
Example: In poll after poll the people want health care for all Americans. The most likely bill to come out of this will simply require that we buy it at whatever cost from corporate America. Who wins? This Government you chastise continually gains nothing (individuals in the Government gain money for re-election) , the corporations gain total control over the health care decisions of the people and the people get, nothing.
Another Example of the rich controlling few getting what they want: the war in Iraq. It is easy to see how large corporations gained from this and for a time it gained the president the ability to push whatever they wanted in contracts to friends or we risked "not supporting our troops" what did the people of this country gain for that, again nadn.
Are you seeing a pattern yet? I am just curious how come you defend that?
rtr
Katorce, You are twisting facts in order to fit your needs, It must be that uncontrollable democratic thing of never being able to tell the truth.
THIS country was founded as a Repulic and NOTHING like what you pointed out.
Very simple, I owe you nothing and it is your resposibility to achieve what you want out of life and if you refuse to do that then it is your problem and NOT mine.
rtr
Rob, Since 1991 Germany has been moving toward the French design and in 1995 it still hasn't moved as far as it plans to go with free enterprise.
This can be found on the internet for proof if you need I can pull it up for you.
As for the health care problem it wasn't all that bad until Obama proclaimed it to be out of control and now he wants a knee j*rk reaction to implement more taxes and install another socialist program he can steal from just like SS is all.
JackPoynter
So okay. You guys are all caught up in political theory, where I'm describing a practical problem and looking for a practical solution.
You will not pay attention until the problem becomes practical in your regard, and that is when you and your loved ones are caught in the vise.
The practice of trying to solve problem A when problem B is the more immediate is called "displacement activity." Watching this happening would be really interesting if it wasn't all just so darned IMPORTANT.
Pete
Kat...and what Oligarchy would that be? The one where the democrat party controls both houses of congress and the presidency?
Rob123
rtr: They are not going back to a "free Market' in Europe. However, deductables are rising, excluded visits for sniffling noses are paid either out of pocket or by a secondary policy, etc. Common Sense.....If ya want to bring your child down to the hospital inorder to get a confirmation that he/she has the flu, fine, but it will cost you, IN EUROPE. And they give the same advice as American Doctors, go home, drink lots of liquids, and in 3 to 7 days it will pass.
And Pete: You can cheaply put me down by suggesting there are plenty of alternative ways, but why do you never mention what these alternative solutions might look like? Cat got your tongue? Spell it out. I'm all ears. Let's start with Doctor's Pay. Is a Heart Surgeon worth $1m+ a year? After Taxes and other benefits? Gee, that's less than the top insurance principals make, and he's got more education. Think he's jeolous?
Pete
Jack...you show me a system that works, is sustainable, and maintains our freedom and I'm all for it. I'm sure you understand that this didn't happen in a vacuum and that there are many forces at work...What has happened to the cost and quality of higher ed since the government got in the business of subsidizing that industry and what effect has the sky-rocketing costs had on doctors who are trying to pay off enormous loans? How about Tort?....and on it goes with the barnacles. Why aren't we addressing those issues instead of rushing pell mell into the loving arms of a omniscience, omnipotent, and soon to be omnipresent government. No thanks.
rtr
Health Care is a typical governmental cause and effect, They caused the souring prices with regulation put on insurance companies so now they are trying to convince you they are the ones to fix it by taxing you and just like SS they will steal from this program for their personal funding programs for campaign contributions.
rtr
Jack
The free market cannot work, because none of the parties can abandon a proposed contract, so none of the normal feedback systems work.
=====================
This is an absurd statement since the government is NOT allowing the free market to be a part of the Insurance today when it comes to allowing them to cross state lines.
Jack
Costs have to come down. And if the health care industry will not reduce them voluntarily, we have to help them see the light. A national campaign of disrepect for them might be a good start.
=================
Like I pointed out earlier Jack the only thing the government has ever produced is fraud which they can not control after they introduce any kind of socialist program.
I pointed out Medicare / Medicaid that are so fraudulently rampant in Florida that there is more money being made in Health Care Fraud “From the government” Than there is in the drug trade right now.
This will only get worse it the government regualtions forcing higher prices are NOT lifted and the government gets it's hands completely out of the health care industry.
katorce14
RTR - Further our government can not be Socialist. Socialism is an economic system just as is Capitalism and communism. Our Government is a Democracy, but only just barely, we are quickly approaching an Oligarchy, which is the government system you seem (prove me wrong) to advocate
By the way PETE let me save you the time
Wikipedia: An Oligarchy (Greek Ὀλιγαρχία, Oligarkhía) (oligocracy) is a form of government in which power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society distinguished by royal, wealth, intellectual, family, military, or religious hegemony. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (ὀλίγος olígos) and "rule" (ἀρχή arkhē). Such states are often controlled by politically powerful families whose children are heavily conditioned and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy
Pete
Kat...now let me guess.....in your peoples paradise you want to mandate everyone pay in for the good of the collective? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need, kind or thing?
Pete
Kat....
From Encylopedia Britannica.....the theory and practice of organizing society into “corporations” subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction.
You like that any better? Still stings doesn't it.
katorce14
RTR - you did not answer the question. What is a fair share?
Imagine in this world where all insurance companies are allowed to play in all states.
First that is a states rights issue and you Republicans are normally all over anything that impedes states rights. Minnesota for example (I have been told) requires only non profit insurance companies. Does the Federal Government have the right to make them get rid of that rule?
Second who is going to go after an insurance company in Vermont or New Jersey which acts badly in Montana, Surely not the federal government (we hate them) Talk about opening the door to fraud.
But Okay lets play in your sandbox a minute, but why only allow insurance companies in America to complete here? Why not tear down restrictions so that I can by insurance from China or anywhere else in the world? Answer: see reason two above
JackPoynter
Pete, you're pretty reasonable for the most part.
Think about this in terms of a system analysis:
We're in a feedback death spiral as far as health care costs go. As the tide of costs rise, more and more payers abandon ship, and more and more costs are passed to the steadily diminishing set of remaining payers. In the ultimate case, no payers are left EXCEPT the government, and then we really will have government health care, will ye or nill ye.
I'm not in favor of government health care, but WE NEED A DIFFERENT SYSTEM.
The free market cannot work, because none of the parties can abandon a proposed contract, so none of the normal feedback systems work.
The way I see this going, if nothing else happens, is Obama's health care system gets passed, the government gives the insurance companies billions of dollars, they distribute the money according to current norms, and current rates of increase, and prices continue to rise, only this time the health care industry will be sucking on the public teat, which is inexhaustible as long as we are.
But eventually the government has all our money, and the cycle stops, except we are all vassals of the hospitals.
With regarding to waiting until the last minute to advance this argument, I've been talking about this for a long time, just not on this forum. And you can see how much press its gotten.
As long as most of us had health insurance, and the rest of us could get some sort of treatment at the hospital, nobody gave a rats rear end.
And those who have insurance currently are hanging on to the present system with every ounce of will they have - but they too are going to be out in the cold eventually.
Then you're going to see some sort of desperation move, and that will be way too late for anything except chaos.
Costs have to come down. And if the health care industry will not reduce them voluntarily, we have to help them see the light. A national campaign of disrepect for them might be a good start.
katorce14
PETE - I do not advocate for government control. I advocate for putting the power in the hands of the people. In other words all the people paying for all the people's insurance etc. This system works well in roads, bridges, school systems, wars, police, fire departments etc... In many many other countries (including IRAQ) it works for health care as well. Here at home we prefer a system where the rich can buy the care they need, (because they can't bear the thought of being in the same line as the cattle), the really poor can get it taken care of eventually and more and more frequently the middle , well too bad if they get sick. It sickens me that people like you are so stingy. Makes me wonder which of those two groups you fall into. Let me guess you are in those who can buy your way to the front of the line.
Pete
Kat....so you are saying the Wikipedia definition was wrong?
Pete
"The Europeans and other Industrialized Nations figured that out a long time ago......." So I go back to my original question..."Show me a sustainable public healthcare system with comparable controls such as ours."
katorce14
Pete- Seriously you are using Wikipedia as a source? High schools don't even allow that.
And thanks for the Compliment but you got that wrong as well. I am a LEFTY not a LEFTIST
Pete
Rob...there are plenty of alternate scenarios you just haven't taken the time to research them because you are cozy with your own ideology, and A.) You certainly won't hear them discussed in Congress right now as Pelosi and Reid et al have a lock-down on dissent and won't even entertain Republican alternatives in committee. and B.) You won't hear them discussed on the news sources you consume as evidenced by your "ACORN who?" response from a few weeks ago. A balanced diet would go a long way toward legitimizing the "independent" streak you claim, but have yet to display.
rtr
Rob
The Europeans and other Industrialized Nations figured that out a long time ago.......
======================
The reality of it is the Europeans have figured out their socailist haelth care does NOT work and are slowly changing it back to a free market enity because they can not sustain the cost with in their governments and have found out the hard way that a free market works the best.
I beg of you liberal socialists posting here to start being truthful and honest instead of only trying to drive home your failed political platform that is not working any where in the world today.
Even the COMMUNIST country of China is going to capitalism because they want to be a part of the modern world and exit their third world status.
Pete
Wikipedia... "Political scientists may also use the term corporatism to describe a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through corporations."
Licensing and regulating officially incorporated organizations and running them either directly or indirectly: ACORN, Moveon.org, National Endowment of the Arts, National Endowment of the Humanities, AFGE, SEIU, etc.
Establishing the state as the source of legitimacy: Obama's war on the Chamber of Commerce, War on Foxnews, etc.
As well as running them: GM, Citigroup, AIG etc.
Careful who you call a corporatist....you leftist on here fit the description much better than the libertarian element present...and you continue to push for more government control with the healthcare takeover.
rtr
Katorce14
====================
I am not sure how you can say insurance companies are socialism when that is the opposite of a free market which they work in UNLIKE what the government is which has become socialist especially under Obama who wants to take away the free market and competition..
You need to research better or think just a little bit before you post such things..
I am not saying that to be mean at all, It is just a fact.
rtr
Katorce14
==================
Thank you for addessing me in civil manner I will return the respect.
I never once stuck up for the status Quo, In fact I did just the opposite.
It is the government right now that is causing a problem that should not and does not exist in the first place do to the regulations the government is putting on the insurance companies not being allowed to cross state lines.
Compitition is what makes prices go sown and not the government which could run a convience store a little lone a medical plan, Medicade / Medicare are prime expamples with retioning right now and the rest of its failed policies.
The government only opens the medical industry to more and more coruption.
NOTE: In Florida right now they figure 95% of all medical supply companies covered by Medicade don't even exist "And chagring the government MILLIONS" do to fraud since the government can not control who is being paid and for what.
The government ONLY produces FRAUD and corruption when they get their hands on anything and the proof is in what they have control of today.
Rob123
Drop the ideological, and think, Pete. I'm in the 38% Tax Bracket. I pay for those Vouchers, like everyone else who pays taxes, or gives to charity. Plus an onslought of 501 (c) donations for everything imaginable. And Jack's statement at the end of his fine dispatch :'"So, the bottom line in my opinion is that the health care system does not belong in the free market system; it can't. All the requirements for a contract cannot be met." The Europeans and other Industrialized Nations figured that out a long time ago.......Here comes the Screaming Tea Party folks, with their 1950's "better dead than red" anti-everything onslought. If possible, it would be nice for them to offer an alternative scenario.......Or justify $1M wages to 'specialists'.
Pete
Jack...how about not waiting until 3am to make healthcare decisions? You are right that the government has barnacled the system, but that is no reason to give up the ship. How about dry dock and knocking off some of the drag on the system? If healthcare doesn't belong in the market then where does it belong? This willingness to throw the baby out with the bathwater is reactionary and dangerous.
Pete
"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic" ....not sure if Ben F. said this, but if he didn't he should have. :-)
Pete
"Every evening, the same 10 friends eat dinner together, family style, at the same restaurant. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. They always pay it the way we pay taxes:
• The first four are poor and pay nothing.
• The fifth pays $1.
• The sixth pays $3.
• The seventh, $7
• The eighth, $12.
• The ninth, $18.
• The 10th, (the most well-to-do) pays $59.
One night the restaurant owner announces that because they're such good customers, he's dropping their group dinner bill to $80. Let's call that a tax cut. They want to continue paying their bill as we pay taxes. So the four poorest men still eat free. But if the other six split the $20 tax cut evenly, each would save $3.33. That means the fifth and sixth men would end up being paid to eat. The restaurant owner works out a plan: The fifth man eats free; the sixth pays $2; the seventh, $5; the eighth, $9; the ninth, $12; and the 10th guy pays $52. All six are better off than before, and the four poor guys still eat for nothing. The trouble starts when they leave the restaurant and begin to compare what they reaped from the $20 cut. "I only got a dollar of it," says the sixth man, "but he (pointing at No. 10) got $7." The fifth guy, who also saved a dollar by getting his meal free, agrees that it's not fair for the richest to get seven times the savings as he. No. 7, grousing that the wealthy get all the breaks, points out that he only got two bucks. "Wait a minute," the first four poor guys yell in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men jump the 10th and administer a severe beating. The next night he doesn't come for dinner. They shrug it off and eat without him. The customary $80 bill comes. Surprise! They're $52 short.
Yes, those who pay the most taxes get the most back from tax reductions. But tax them too much — punish them for the wealth they may have — and they just might stop bringing their money to the table."
katorce14
RTR - what would you consider a fair share. I calculated the numbers according to what Senator Baucus pays along with what we pay on his behalf and his premiums are over a thousand dollars a month. Is that a fair share? I wonder how many in this forum pay there own insurance? no not the employee portion but all of it.
I do not unestand why you insist on defending the status quo, Corporatist perhaps?
The fact is that small business people are hit the hardest, especially the one and two person mom and pops. The current medical system could be seen as stymieing small business. and if you don't think small business owners work hard then you my friend really are delusional.
As I said I do not know anyone who is asking for free care. I and others realize it will cost, the issue is good Christian people of this nation who "don't want to pay for someone else's health care" Well guess what you already do. Insurance is nothing more than corporate owned socialist program, taking premiums from you to pay other people bills. The difference is along the way the CEO and lobbyists suck off a large percent. Also consider the policeman and fireman and congressperson etc.. you and I already pay these peoples health insurance. Are you saying these groups are just sucking off the teet?
rtr
Jack
So, the bottom line in my opinion is that the health care system does not belong in the free market system; it can't. All the requirements for a contract cannot be met.
This is not a partisan problem; this is nailing all of us except the very rich; we MUST find a solution.
====================
There is a lot that can be done and letting the government take control is the worst solution we could ever have.
SS, Medicare / Medicaid are prime examples of a failed government being capable of running any thing.
The government is a bought and paid for entity that will never be on the side of the working person especially since socialism has creep into the picture.
Tort reform is HUGE and would make the free market work when it comes to insurance across state lines, Congress will NOT even address it because there is no money in it for them and only a reduction in cost for us…”They don’t care about cost reduction”
If they wanted to help out there are plenty of INDEPENDENT hospitals that want to go into competition with the “Insane Name” of NON profit hospitals and yet the INDEPENDENT hospitals will be put out of business with the government plan. "I posted a couple weeks ago about a private hospital that would be forced out of business do to the regulations placed on them if the government takes over".
This government plan is all about the rich continuing to get richer and with the support of the government and has nothing to do with lowering the cost of medical care.
The free market would take care of this if the government would remove the regulations and open up competition instead of closing competition and creating a problem with the medical system that would not exist if it was left up to a free market.
This is just like Clinton forcing banks to make loans to people they knew could never pay it back and then claim it was the banks fault until the government got caught in those lies but then it was to late and the collapse of Wall Street happened in 2008 – 2009. "And Bush didn’t stop it either so I am not sticking up for him at all"
Pete
Rob...I'm not talking about vouchers that you get reimbursed for...I guess your charity is processing the paperwork? Show me a sustainable public healthcare system with comparable controls such as ours. Also, please don't talk about Bell jars and blinders when you can't seem to get beyond a socialist approach to any problem you've ever addressed on here while consistently ignoring mountains of imperical evidence that discredits that very ideology. Our market economy is the most compassionate system there is, so why should we compromise with those who espouse melding it with a failed system? I am very willing to put healthcare up on blocks and do some repairs, but when you suggest putting stone age tires on it I have to disagree.
JackPoynter
So, I've identified a problem, what's the solution?
First, we're in a hole and we have to stop digging. The insurance plan system has not, will not, and cannot, continue to work.
Second, prices have to come down; they cannot continue to rise.
Third, free health care is a loser. Somebody has to pay, and better all of us than some of us.
So we need to work out a way for those things to happen.
I have very carefully avoided all mention of Conservatives, Liberals, Republicans or Democrats or Libertarians.
This is not a partisan problem; this is nailing all of us except the very rich; we MUST find a solution.
Have at it.
JackPoynter
We really need an edit facility on this site, I was a kid in the 1950's, not in the 1905's.
JackPoynter
When I was a kid, somewhere back in the late Pleistocene (actually it was the 1905's), my mother was a single parent (divorced) working in the civil service on Warner Robins AFB in Georgia. So: 1. She was a woman, 2. She was working for the civil service. 3. We had a single income family. 4. She had three growing boys to take care of. 5. We lived in an area of the country which was economically depressed. 6. We had no health insurance (for the simple reason it was only for catastrophic health conditions at the time.)
And yet she was able to take care of our maintenance health care costs out of pocket. We didn't get much dentistry, but if we needed to go to the doctor, we were able to go, and she was able to pay for it out of her purse.
That simply is not possible today. It is flatly impossible for a person with a normal working man's income without health insurance to see a private doctor, and still be able to pay the bills.
The cost of health care is a scandal, literally. And it is my contention that getting everyone health insurance is not the answer, because health insurance is not the answer, it's the problem.
During the 1950's, the cost of catastrophic health care (heart attack, stroke, cancer, tuberculosis, leprosy, whatever) was prohibitive, even if it was available. Blue Cross and Blue Shield (they were separate companies then,) began as a way for everyone to pay a little bit so that those who had catastrophic health care needs would be able to get them. Since the cost of insurance was so low, and the country was in a boom cycle and everyone was hiring, companies used health insurance as an enticement for new employees, and everyone was happy as a pig in mud.
Until all those folks who were healthy started complaining about paying into a system and never getting any benefit, forgetting the fact that 'never' is a very strong word, and that insurance is supposed to exist to cover the cases when 'never' suddenly arrives.
So health insurance started experiencing what we called 'scope creep' when I was in business; it started to be used for more and more things. At the same time, everyone in the health industry, who had always believed, as everyone does, that they deserved to make more money than they did, began raising their rates. That includes all the primary care givers, hospital administrations, health care education, and research and development; that can't be an all-inclusive list, but you get the picture.
And all the people in ancillary industries saw all the money that the health-care folks were making, and they raised their prices also.
Along about this time the insurance companies started fighting back. They saw what was happening, and began to institute cost control measures: caps on fees, strict scrutiny of tests, denial of coverage. So far so good, capitalism is working fine: costs are going up, consumers are fighting back.
Except the people doing the fighting were not the consumers, they were the insurance fund distributors. And the actual consumers, we the people, began to fight the people who were trying to control costs. First of all, the health industry simply billed us for the costs the insurance company was unwilling to pay. That made us mad, and we wrote editiorials about the mean insurance companies (in some cases justified,) and demanded that 'something be done!' So Congress instituted some help, in the form of Medicare and / or Medicaid, and the insurance companies said to heck with it, we'll cover whatever is mandated in those programs.
So everybody relaxed, and costs in the health care industry kept going up and up, but we didn't care, because insurance was paying for it, and the insurance companies didn't care, because insurance payments and medicare / medicaid was paying for everything. And local governments began to authorize the mean old hospitals to pay for health care for the indigent in emergency rooms, because they were turning people away, and we can't have that in America, and besides, how many indigents are there, really.
Well really, there were a bunch of them. And hospitals passed the cost of their care to the insurance companies in the form of even higher fees, and the insurance companies paid it.
So far, so good. But then, Wall Street decided to impose their culture on the rest of us, and raised the value of stocks when companies became leaner and meaner by laying off people. Which meant more indigents. Then came the Savings and Loan implosion in the the 1980's, and the dot.com implosion, and the financial crisis, and 9/11, and the immigrant invasions, and NAFTA, all of which created more and more and more indigents, and still health care costs kept going up.
And the free market finally began to operate. The employers said "Enough! We're out of here." And insurance payments began to decline, and pressures on hospital emergency rooms increased even more, and fees to the insurance companies increased even higher.
And here we are in the year of our Lord 2009, totally screwed. And no one is talking about the central problem, which is that health care costs are just too high for the individual, and all anyone wants to talk about is the care and feeding of the insurers. What the current health care bill will do is mandate the continued existence of health care insurance, and all the pressures that drive up health care costs will still be with us, and we will just be delaying the total breakdown of the health care system for a few years.
For the free market system to operate correctly, the concept of contract is vital, and inferred from that is the ability for either of the contractees to walk away from the contract if they desire. But government is forcing one side to participate, and in essence setting the rules of the contract, and the other side simply cannot walk away in many health care situations. When it's 3:00 in the morning, and your child is convulsing with fever, you will take any deal and worry about paying for it later.
So, the bottom line in my opinion is that the health care system does not belong in the free market system; it can't. All the requirements for a contract cannot be met.
Rob123
2. What income group pays the most federal income taxes today?
"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shouldered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare." I work for a living, with a payroll that I meet and taxes that I pay. You took early retirement. From What profession? Shock Radio?
rtr
Rob I get it, If you don’t get your way here you call people a "Donald" and accuse them of having no compassion.
If you put half as much effort into helping people stand on their own two feet and take care of themselves "As you do hatred of your fellow man" your words might mean something but you are advocating the theft of the working class as your right so your words of compassion are meaningless.
Rob123
Baptism
by Ted Thomas Jr.
Cold wind.
I help my father
into the shower
with his good hand
he grips my arm for support.
Inside he sits like Buddha
on a plastic stool
and waits for me
to begin.
I drench him
with warm water,
soap his head, his back,
the flabby stomach,
the private parts
private no more.
I had not before seen my father's
nakedness, nor the changing
contour of his being,
his growing helplessness.
His brown skin glistens
and I think of him
as a young man on the night
of my conception:
Panting, capable, shining
with sweat and definition,
the soft hands of my mother
grasping his shoulders.
I pat him dry,
he lets me dress him
in the white
hospital clothes,
oil his hair,
put him to bed
and forgive him.
"Baptism" by Ted Thomas Jr., from Singing With The Dead. © Moon Pie Press, 2007
Rob123
pete....".....I'm sure they could use free gas to drive to the clinic and maybe some convenience store groceries.".....What reality are you in, Pete? I already do. Thousands of dollars a month.....people with vouchers from various agencies, food stamps, Ministerial Funds, I accept them all, put them together in the back room, and send them to the appropriate address, be it State or Church. A lot of inpaid paperwork.....Add to that NSF checks that after many tries and turned over for prosecution, are NEVER collected ($2000.00 per month, on average, is NEVER collected) ......It's been going on for years...decades in fact.....Some of the biggest jumps were during the Reagan Years as the Chamber of Commerce decided to attack the root cause of all the shoplifting, especially by the solid Middle Class folks sliding down the path towards "NOT" middle class.....There are so many agencies, State and Church (after the Bush2 years), that I demand picture ID for Free Stuff. We are already there. The whining is coming from folks who don't get out much, and are in some form of Bell-Jar detached from Mainstreet America Reality. And from Folks who don't see a need to make it Rational, since their distrust of the Professional Government Employee Class is 100%. A form of nihilism that is eating the bowels out of America, since Most Americans (62%) are willing to help those less fortunate while only some (42%) are willing to have their taxes raised $500.00 a year for Increased Medical Coverage. Yet the cost of the uninsured popping into the ER costs an average of $1000.00+ a year on each Insurance Policy. But it's hidden? So OK? Take the Blinders off, and deal with what is going on. Enough of the Ideological nincompoopishness.
Pete
Frank the Editor....excellent article. All the more remarkable because you were able to elucidate the duplicity inherent in the Democrats healthcare agenda in such a small column despite the voluminous evidence and the natural constraints of the time-space continuum. You might even win a Nobel Prize for it...but I wouldn't hold my breath, I hear they're giving it to a first grader...they think he's going to be a great writer some day. :-)
Pete
Bronco....as the "compassion" police you are consistently capricious in your application of "peace and love for all"....but that's what make you a loveable liberal right? The pathalogical absence of self-awareness when it comes to hypocrisy. As a result I am quite able to happily dismiss your attempts at "calling the kettle" and move on with a smile, content in the knowledge that...
"The hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself." ~Hannah Arendt
benznd
Pete, please answer the question! Now just who is it that is out to get you?
Bronco
Perhaps we should ask ourselves what it is we stand for exactly. Do we support turning away people without health insurance? A child from a poor family suffers from third degree burns over her hands and arms from some accident. No insurance, no means of paying for care. Vote: treat or turn away? Only a ReTaRd would turn her away. Sniffles and minor ailments, scratches, a cold...yes, there must be guidelines. And it will be very difficult to do. The alternative is what we have now and what we have now is not working. Compassion verses selfishness and greed? Is there a middle ground? Pete, what would Nietzsche say? "To see others suffer does one good; to be unwilling to help can be nobler than the virtue which jumps to help." Ewww. How about "When you cannot answer a man's argument, do not panic. You can always call him names." There are no answers.
Pete
Bronco...offering you a way to assuage your liberal guilt is bitter? I thought it was helpful.
Bronco
Pete, your timing is bad. Perhaps the advice on bitterness should not have appeared immediately after your bitter post.
Pete
Bronco..... "Growth in wisdom may be exactly measured by decrease in bitterness”
Friedrich Nietzsche.
Pete
"I consider it a privilege, not a burden, to participate in extending that right to others."....Then go ahead...what is stopping you? Do you all need some kind of governement sanction to follow your conscience? I'm sure the families Benznd talks about will accept cash, check or credit card...and Rob...I'm sure they could use free gas to drive to the clinic and maybe some convenience store groceries. I suspect I'm not the only one tired of leftist who think the definition of compassion is spending someone elses money.
drunkle2
FACT CHECK: Health insurer profits not so fat
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html
rtr
Bighorn
====================
You loose again, I am retired and yet making money today, No leaching here and I am certainly not interested in paying for lazy socialist scum bags like you either.
By the way low life what are my chances of cashing out on all that social insecurity I was forced to pay in to..
OH yeah thats right non because leaches like you have better plans for it..
rtr
Bighorn
========
I hate to burst your tiny little bubble but you are like a tick on a pigs b*tt compared to the rest of us that live here when it comes to your socialism.
Bighorn0216
When you get a job, rtr, you can talk about working and contributing. Otherwise, you're just the leach you accuse others of being. If, gGod forbid, you collect on your early 55-year-old-cash-out pension for non-workers and Socialist Security (in about 9 years) for a long time, you'll easily take out more than you put in. That makes you a card-carrying Socialist. Eat up from the trough you pretend to hate so much.
rtr
Bighorn
but understand that the attrition rate of thoughtful contributors here is directly related, as is the number of folks interested in purchasing the DIL at the stands. Yak yourselves out of work if you hear the call.
===========================
One of the reasons the DIL is so successful is because of Frank and his columns because we are a conservative community, area and state which relates to YOU need to start your own paper.
OH YEAH, It is that supply and demand thing and YOU wouldn't be in demand so just keep right on insulting us here in Montana since that is all you have.
Bighorn0216
As for insulting the Flathead Valley, rtr, you are it.
Bighorn0216
rtr, you're too obtuse to know that I'm referring to you. You epitomize the "hayseed" aspersion. You are the quintessential hayseed.
Congratulations.
By the way, "national" doesn't mean "the entire state." Come out of home arrest once in a while.
rtr
Bighorn
This is sere, arid land, and doesn't matter a whit in the national discourse. Which is why no one cares what hayseed Montanans think.
========================
You have to love it, Not only are these politicaly correct socialists insulting the Flathead Valley but now it is the entire state.
rtr
Hey Xcal, Just think if we could cash out on our Social Insecurity like we can with our pension plans.
OH yeah then the Government couldn't siphen money out of it and keep us from getting what we deserve and have paid into it.
You know what, If I had put all that money that the government stole from me in the stock market over my life time for social insecurity I would be a millionaire even with the crash in 2008 - 2009..
Bighorn0216
Do something about the tenor of the Comments threads or not -- I suspect "not," because they do track the tenor of the columns, and, too, of course, "the Founding Fathers fought against any kind of civility!!!!! [and against Socialism!!!"] -- but understand that the attrition rate of thoughtful contributors here is directly related, as is the number of folks interested in purchasing the DIL at the stands. Yak yourselves out of work if you hear the call.
This is sere, arid land, and doesn't matter a whit in the national discourse. Which is why no one cares what hayseed Montanans think. Thanks, DIL management, for that.
rtr
Hey Benznd, Since you want it so politically correct maybe the rule should be that no one from out of state should be allowed to post here since their posts are not representative of the Flathead Valley.
How is this working out for you now Mister North Dakota beet farmer.?
benznd
Xcal, I just reread my first research on health care dollars and the pockets of CEO's. My post did not make any reference to your question. Sorry. I will have to resume my search for numbers and facts. I would certainly be in favor of your investment of SS dollars in the stock market. A risk, undoubtly. But for some, Russian roulette is the game we play with our future.
rtr
By the way Benznd, That was a direct insult to me with your last post so that is without a vote a year violation for you.
I would like to be more political correct and intimidating like you but it just isn't in me.
rtr
Benznd, I agree, But I think YOU should only get a five day violation and not a seven day violation since I am more compassionate that you.
benznd
I would vote for rescinding privilege. I believe we have all cleaned it up. Try to keep comments civil and restrained. I could see a probation period with a vote of the bloggers, thumbs up or down after another 7 days. That would be fair, even though at this stage, nine lives have been used. That is how I see it anyway. Are you listening rtr?
rtr
faithful reader
=============
I do not not see where any of your socialist friends or anyone else has used the word homosexual in this comment section at all,,,Please point that out?
Lazy B*MS refers to people that are to lazy to work for a living and pay for their own insurance like you obviously which is an INSULT to anyone that has to pay for the lazy B*MS that are unwilling to do so.
NOW IS THE TIME: The name Donald was used in referance to me which refers to the low life scum bag stalker and child molester and you know it which is untrue and those posts should be removed.
Would you like to try again to insult both me and the "editor" again at the same time with your politicaly correct intimidation?
faithful reader
It will be interesting to see how Frank deals with this. Most sites (including this one, I believe) have a policy against abusive posts and personal attacks. In this case, the author of precisely those violations is an avowed fan of the editor. Does that mean that calling other readers lazy bums and homosexuals without any provocation will be overlooked? I guess we'll see.
rtr
DavidS, I would like to retract one thing and point out whant is broken with our health care and that is every time an illegal alien comes in for health care ICE needs to be called and they need to be deported immediately which would save us many millions a year with health care and open up new jobs for Americans as well.
Who knows maybe even a lazy b*m like you could get a job then and start paying your own way.
rtr
DavidS
The simple reality is the present health care system is broken and inadequate, a substantial majority of Americans know that and want serious health care reform including a public insurance option. It is coming, whether Frank likes it or not.
==========================
First off the health care system is not broken but then again it would sure make me laugh when you little whinning socialists get fined $3,700 a year when you don't pay your fair share which is the main plan on the table right now.
That would teach you for being a lazy b*m with your handout looking to steal other peoples money now wouldn't it.
rtr
Rob
It's Sunday, Donald. It's ok to think.
=================
Are you refering to one of your sheep like socialist followers when you refer to this Donald person?
rtr
The founding Fathers of this country would have never agreed with this socialist health care and the proof is in the fact that it was socialism and over taxation that they fought and died to prevent from happening in the revolutionary war.
If you NOTE there were NO socialist plans when are for Father wrote the constitution or the Bill Of Rights which again points to the fact that they hated socialism.
Rob123
It's Sunday, Donald. It's ok to think.
rtr
NOTE: These socialists that complain about Iraq when it is their Messiah that is expanding both wars at the same time because he knows it was the right thing to do when Bush took us into them in the first place.
But God forbid you will never hear them admitting to what their Messiah is doing when it comes to that..
Rob123
"I consider it a privilege, not a burden, to participate in extending that right to others." I agree, benznd.....I think the Founding Fathers would also agree......
rtr
David e
Health Care may not be a Constitutional Right, but it is a social or moral obligation.
=========================
You could not be any farther from the truth with stating that.
I do not owe you anything and if I want to give my money to someone I will decide who it goes to and NOT a socialist minded person like you that wants it to go to the ones that are too lazy to get out and earn their own way.
OH did that hit home with you,,,sorry
rtr
And just think Benznd if you would have chose to work harder and apply yourself your name could have been added to that list. "But you didn't" So I guess you have nothing to complain about now do you.
rtr
No body is saying they don't give a cr*p about other people as the socialists try to portray it.
The fact of the matter is the Obama plan is stealing money from the elderly Medicare so I guess the same could be said of you socialists and that is that you don't give a CR*P about old people and only think about your own lazy b*tts.
Sad but true since you are just looking for hand outs from the working class at our expense.
benznd
Xcal. I do not recall anyone indicating 30% of health care dollars going to CEO salaries. However, as you can see, many of these individuals are making thousands of dollars per day. And they bring NOTHING to the table. No product, nada.
benznd
* United Health Group
CEO: William W McGuire
2005: 124.8 mil
5-year: 342 mil
* Forest Labs
CEO: Howard Solomon
2005: 92.1 mil
5-year: 295 mil
* Caremark Rx
CEO: Edwin M Crawford
2005: 77.9 mil
5-year: 93.6 mil
* Abbott Lab
CEO: Miles White
2005: 26.2 mil
5-year: 25.8 mil
* Aetna
CEO: John Rowe
2005: 22.1 mil
5-year:57.8 mil
* Amgen
CEO: Kevin Sharer
2005:5.7 mil
5-year:59.5 mil
* Bectin-Dickinson
CEO: Edwin Ludwig
2005: 10 mil
5-year:18 mil
* Boston Scientific
CEO:
2005:38.1 mil
5-year:45 mil
* Cardinal Health
CEO: James Tobin
2005:1.1 mil
5-year:33.5 mil
* Cigna
CEO: H. Edward Hanway
2005:13.3 mil
5-year:62.8 mil
* Genzyme
CEO: Henri Termeer
2005: 19 mil
5-year:60.7 mil
* Humana
CEO: Michael McAllister
2005:2.3 mil
5-year:12.9 mil
* Johnson & Johnson
CEO: William Weldon
2005:6.1 mil
5-year:19.7 mil
* Laboratory Corp America
CEO: Thomas MacMahon
2005:7.9 mil
5-year:41.8 mil
* Eli Lilly
CEO: Sidney Taurel
2005:7.2 mil
5-year:37.9 mil
* McKesson
CEO: John Hammergen
2005: 13.4 mil
5-year:31.2 mil
* Medtronic
CEO: Arthur Collins
2005: 4.7 mil
5-year:39 mil
* Merck Raymond Gilmartin
CEO:
2005: 37.8 mil
5-year:49.6 mil
* PacifiCare Health
CEO: Howard Phanstiel
2005: 3.4 mil
5-year: 8.5 mil
* Pfizer
CEO: Henry McKinnell
2005: 14 mil
5-year: 74 mil
* Well Choice
CEO: Michael Stocker
2005: 3.2 mil
5-year: 10.7 mil
* WellPoint
CEO: Larry Glasscock
2005: 23 mil
5-year: 46.8 mil
* Wyeth
CEO: Robert Essner
2005:6.5 mil
5-year: 28.9 mil
TOTAL 2005: 559.8 mil
TOTAL 5-Year: 14.9 billion
Related Topics:
* Group Pushes Universal Health Care
* Is Health Insurance a Right?
Technorati Tags: health care, health care reform, CEO compensation, health insurance
The opinions expressed in the WebMD Blogs are of the author and the author alone. WebMD does not endorse any specific product, service, treatment or political point of view.
Posted by: Doctor K at 3:45 PM
Email This EMail This Discussion Discuss with others Link Link to this post
The opinions expressed in the WebMD Blogs are of the author and the author alone. They do not reflect the opinions of WebMD and they have not been reviewed by a WebMD physician or any member of the WebMD editorial staff for accuracy, balance or objectivity. WebMD Blogs are not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your physician or other qualified health provider because of something you have read on WebMD. WebMD does not endorse any specific product, service or treatment. If you think you have a medical emergency, call your doctor or dial 911 immediately.
mooseberryinn
The obama disaster continues.
benznd
Exhibit 6.11: Private Health Insurance Administrative Costs per Person Covered, 1986-2003
The cost per enrollee for private health insurance expenses not related to direct care services (such as administrative costs and profits) continued to rise, from $85 in 1986 to $421 in 2003. The most rapid growth occurred in the 4-year period from 1987 to 1990, when these administrative costs rose 125%. For the six-year period from 1998 to 2003, administrative costs per enrollee nearly doubled (+95%).
Notes: These data show the net cost of private health insurance per private enrollee (including Blue Cross/Blue Shield, commercial insurance, HMOs, and self-insured plans), as calculated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Net cost of insurance is the difference between premiums earned and benefits incurred, and includes insurers’ costs of paying bills, advertising, sales commissions, and other administrative costs; net additions/subtractions from reserves; rate credits and dividends; premium taxes; and profits or losses. Private enrollment is estimated by CMS using the National Health Insurance Survey and the Current Population Survey.
Source: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of the Actuary, National Health Statistics Group: 2003 National Health Care Expenditures Data Files for Downloading, file nhe03.zip, Administration and Net Cost of Private Health Insurance, at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/statistics/nhe/default.asp, and unpublished CMS data on private health insurance enrollment .
Woody
Nice try, Frank. But, I was talking about your writing.
Flathead Frank
$900 million over 10 years is way less than the money Bush wasted in Iraq. We have spent $2 trillion and the Sunnis and Shiites continue to blow each other up, as they always will. Much of that $900 million will come from Premiums, only unlike now they will be affordable with a check on rising costs., That our Country Editor seems to think the $900 million is for one year, and is for free health care shows his shocking lack of research and knowledge about the things he writes about. Also, nobody is saying affordable and effective health care is a birthright. It is simply good public policy for corporations, small business and citizens. Good public policy along the lines of things that Frank the Country Editor and his Tea Sacking Friends abhor -- Social Security, Medicare, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and the Voting Rights Act.
benznd
Xcal, thank you for asking where the 30% of health care dollars go? I say, as well as many others, "to the health care industry." But, I think it is a necessity to check it out. Perhaps this will also provide some incentive for all to check their facts, think so?
DavidS
Our little country editor continues to display very considerable selfishness as he continues to froth at the mouth over health care reform. The simple reality is the present health care system is broken and inadequate, a substantial majority of Americans know that and want serious health care reform including a public insurance option. It is coming, whether Frank likes it or not.
benznd
I consider it a privilege, not a burden, to participate in extending that right to others. I’m fortunate enough to be one of the taxpayers who will be hit hardest when it comes time to fund a national healthcare program. If my health history continues as it has, I will be unlikely to ever utilize the services of such a program, even though I paid into it big time. But here’s my message: that does not mean that I’m not a beneficiary of the program. To have contributed in any small way to alleviating the suffering of anyone to whom relief is otherwise financially unavailable is a gift to that other person, and to myself. It also makes the country healthier and stronger. Bighorn, altruism is a collective social evolutionary characteristic. A product of social diversity and longevity. It is both nature and nurture. Thank you for this. We should all thank you for this, for without it? Can anyone say "MESS IN YOUR OWN NEST?"
david e
Health Care may not be a Constitutional Right, but it is a social or moral obligation. We chose to create a society a better society and we all have an obligation to each other. The current system is a free market enterprise that has out priced the average consumer. If the current system continues without major reform it will soon price itself out of the range of the above average consumer. What if grocery stores priced food the way the health care industry priced aspirin. We would all be real hungry. How many of you would drive by a car accident without rendering aid or calling for help. Its the same deal. Wake up and Think
SorrySOB
Tell you what. Let's just bring all the troops home from Iraq for a few weeks and we will have the heath care situation covered for the next ten years. Amazing how Frank tries to rally the tea sacks with big numbers and expects everybody to overlook the T-Rex sized elephants sitting in the chair next to them. Like Bronco said, a bunch of the some old political posturing. However, in this case, it once again falls flat.
Xcalifornian
Katoroe14: " They can blame lawsuits and whine all they want, the fact is that 30 plus percent of your insurance premium dollars go into the pockets of CEO's, rather into health care. " ?. Where do you get this nonsense? Please site your source. If these companies are making so much money, why weren't my SS taxes invested in insurance stocks? If they had been, maybe we wouldn't be sitting here with the sure knowledge that that liberal boondoggle will also soon collapse. Besides, if you eliminate all the high paying jobs, who's going to pay for your free health care? Sniff, sniff I smell a VAT - and that means you.
Bronco
What's the point of raising concerns if, when they are addressed in a logical and fulfilling manner, the concerns stubbornly refuse to go away? "What if...?" "Well, then we..." "Oh. What if...?" "We already answered that!" The questions are always the same; they have been answered. Why keep asking the same questions? How ReTaRded is that? Say what you want and quit hiding who you are: I oppose health care for all because I really don't give a carp about people I don't know. Look, folks, we already know how the Jewish zombie feels about this issue; he addressed it at length in hHis second book. Opposing health care makes hypocrites out of every Christian out there. It has been pointed out that a small cut in our military budget would cover health care costs. Once the politicians get done posing and posturing, once the conservatives embrace the greatest commandment, we can evolve just a bit more. Our choices are peace and love, or war and hate. I'm taking the family to Crater Lake. Peace and love to all of you...to scoff is to oppose...waR is for haTeRs. benznd, you're covered, brother.
Bighorn0216
When we start out with the inscrutable “nurses mixing martinis” argument, and toss in the obligatory “Madame Speaker” reference (transparently an epithet and not an honorific when used here), the tenor and course of the Comments thread is preordained, though the subject deserves more honest and mature consideration.
The false premise underlying most handout horror stories is that nothing is received back. Yes, some of my tax dollars will fund the health care of other people. But, too, some of my health care will be funded by tax dollars paid into the pool by others, as well. (I’ll get here shortly to the people too poor to afford health care or to be required to pay into the system.) That the Department of Transportation takes some of my money to build a bridge and Tennessee and repair a highway in Michigan doesn’t mean I’ve been “robbed” by the government. Tennessee and Michigan taxpayers help fund transportation projects in Montana and Minnesota, as well. That's part of what being citizens of a federation is about.
Same with paying into a healthcare insurance pool. Though gGod knows I’ve done everything to avoid it, I’m blessed with good health. If I had to recount my last three visits to a doctor, I’d have to go back 10 years. During those 10 years, I’ve paid many thousands of dollars into the insurance pool and my employer has paid in even more on my behalf. Nearly all of it went to pay for other insureds’ treatment, which often greatly exceeded in cost what they had paid in. Does that mean I’ve been “robbed”? No, that’s the nature of the insurance casino business. We bet against our good health, and if we lose the bet, we’re out all our money. If we win, we’re not faced with catastrophic, bankrupting health bills. It’s not that our money didn’t buy anything; it bought a hedge against a risk.
What if you don’t have the money to participate in the gamble? What if poor health and the barrier of low income meant simply that you didn’t get treatment, in this supposedly richest and most advanced country in the history of the world?
That’s where, I believe, the notion of a “right” to basic healthcare comes from. No, it isn’t a constitutional right. It’s a moral imperative that a rich and powerful country attend to the basic needs of its citizens, and one of those needs is to be treated and taken care of when you are sick. It’s a “right” of humanity and of decency.
I consider it a privilege, not a burden, to participate in extending that right to others. I’m fortunate enough to be one of the taxpayers who will be hit hardest when it comes time to fund a national healthcare program. If my health history continues as it has, I will be unlikely to ever utilize the services of such a program, even though I paid into it big time. But here’s my message: that does not mean that I’m not a beneficiary of the program. To have contributed in any small way to alleviating the suffering of anyone to whom relief is otherwise financially unavailable is a gift to that other person, and to myself. It also makes the country healthier and stronger.
That there will be excesses, waste, and fraud in a national program goes without saying, but that is an indictment not of the program but of the nature of the characters who run the show. It isn’t a reason to refuse to see that basic healthcare is accorded to all. The cost of doing nothing is far greater than $900 billion.
SorrySOB
Especially those who starts topics such as "blacks that smell" on other forums. You should be careful about what your post on the Internet. It is amazing what you can find out about people by doing a simple Google search. Right Donald?
faithful reader
benzend, if that means what I think it does, count me in, too. It's never wise to feed trolls or pet grizzly bears.
rtr
Benznd
rtr, pooooolllllleeezzzze, would you just take a breath for a moment. Your posts, your posts....
===================
Not as long as I keep seeing the social lies and being posted about a Governmental low quaility of health care that will be rationed and people will die because of it.
NOTE: Obama having to declare the national emergancy just to get people treated for swine flu under the currently run governmental Medicare plan.
Now what is your socialist political agenda here?
benznd
Sorry Bronco, I just broke our sacred trust
benznd
rtr, pooooolllllleeezzzze, would you just take a breath for a moment. Your posts, your posts....
rtr
katorce14
This is only about poor people dieing, why should we care about that?
========
What it is about is dictated , rationed, low quaility health care that we will all be forced into if Obama has his way "That is with the exception of his family" since he said he would not even sign up for it since he has good insurance unlike the government proposed plans.
katorce14
Just how long is long enough to debate this? Should the bill be put on the Internet 6 weeks before a vote? maybe six months.I venture a guess that less than one percent of the people would download the actual bill. Instead they would count on organisation such as the chambers of commerce and the insurance industry to tell them what was in in. Facts are short in this debate and what is quoted as facts come from just such web pages not the actual bill (can you say death panel). At some point we must count on our legislators to legislate.
I fully agree with your request for transparency, I agreed when the patriot act was crammed through in the middle of the night and was called unpatriotic for feeling that way. I don't remember Frank asking for that to be on the Internet for any length of time. Of course that was all about the security of the nation. This is only about poor people dieing, why should we care about that?
rtr
Benznd, As I pointed out yesterday you do not read the Interlake since you knew nothing about the methane being used at the Flathead Valley dump to generate power why is it you just show up to BASH Franks columns that are not to your political likeing especialy since you don't live here.
Question: What is you liberal or should I say socialist political agenda with that in mind?
rtr
Just off the press and very disturbing, "Not the swine flu but what it takes to get treated if you are on a government plan already".
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125640028120405945.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular
Obama Declares Swine-Flu Emergency
By BETSY MCKAY and CAM SIMPSON
"WASHINGTON--President Barack Obama declared the swine-flu outbreak a national emergency, easing the way for doctors and health-care facilities to respond more quickly to the growing number of sick people, the White House said Saturday.
The declaration, which Mr. Obama signed Friday, authorizes the administration to waive or modify certain federal requirements involving Medicare, Medicaid, and health privacy rules to speed treatment."
This right here backs up my last post since it takes a national emergency from the president in order to speed up treatment for swine flu today with the government plans,, God forbid what it will be like if a government run health care gets voted in will be like.
The next thing you know the congress will have to vote on each and everything that is authorized to be preformed medically... "Thats what I want, A bunch of out of touch with reality lawyers dictating health care"
rtr
Great job as always Frank.
What you left out however is that Medicare is already a rationed health care for the elderly just like any government health care would be.
Example: Most doctors can only afford to have a few Medicare patents do to the government NOT paying the standard price in order to keep their offices running, pay the help and etc. and the fact that Medicare only covers what the government allows for even if you are dyeing from such a condition “GOVERNMENT APPROVED OR DIE HEALTH CARE” and if it doesn’t met their criteria you die..
The fact that the government wants to ROB from a low quality government health care like Medicare really lets you know just how worthless this new government health care would be.
benznd
Starting your comment with the sexist Madame Speaker sets the tone for this week. Not much reason to continue reading. Frank also brings gGod into the conversation. Why even go there, I ask myself. I have been a part of this site since its inception. Nothing has changed, yet I continue to blog. Every now and then I see new names and without commenting, hope they will continue. As we have all noted in the past, Frank keeps this site active and I thank him for that. I think Frank would not and could not deny health care to anyone, as everyone has their stories. I have given a couple examples of individuals without health care in the Valley. No educational opportunities as youth. Poverty and alcohol in their families, identifying generational alcoholism, poverty and abandonment. Hard working individuals with low paying jobs. No alcohol for them. They are survivors. Can't read too well and both of these good men, there are lots of good women as well, have families. Frank would not deny them health care, I know that and so does he. I present to him and you specific examples that bring this national issue to your front door. Ignore them or help them, that is the "bottom line" of this entire discussion. Let us confront this question, specific and direct. It is NEVER a question of money Frank. One new Navy carrier? One month in Iraq? Money? Not the issue. So, I come back to my initial comment about the use of or introduction of sexism and religious dogma......Frank, if there are chemtrails, and their purpose is mind/crowd control, then perhaps you are a victim. Forgive him gGod, for he knows not what he says.
katorce14
Mainer1776
Are your really aware of the actual amount that lawsuits contribute to health care? It appears not, you should really look it up. Yes there are frivolous suits in the medical field just as in all fields, but lets not throw out the whole system. I suspect you might feel differently if your doctor took out the wrong kidney or caused harm to you child during child birth. Frivolous is in the eye of the beholder.
Some say the best option is to cap punitive damages, great as long as ALL costs ever incurred by the patient and family are covered for the rest of the patients life. All to often these things are settled for pennies on the dollar, the patient is left with a life of pain, and the doctor goes back to doing what he/she did without word ever getting out that the doctor might have done the same thing four times. I agree that mistakes are made in every vocation, when I make them in mine i have to pay for them in money and reputation. It sounds as though you want doctors to be free of liability on both accounts.
katorce14
Frank: as usual a fact or two missing.
1) That 900 million over ten years. Let than spent on the Iraq war and less than given to the richest one percent in tax cuts.
2) I do not know anyone who wants free health care. What we are after is affordable health care. The insurance companies have NO incentive to make cheap care possible, and they never will.
Health care should be the desired end result but Insurance companies place profit as the desired end result. They can blame lawsuits and whine all they want, the fact is that 30 plus percent of your insurance premium dollars go into the pockets of CEO's, rather into health care. Lets not even look at the millions and millions that goes to lobbying and advertising all in an effort to convince little country editors that a few dozen deaths a day - due to something we could fix if we wanted to - is something we should hold on to.
Editor
Woody:
Good morning.
I think this level of attention is just what the Congress is counting on. Sleight of hand is all about taking advantage of inattention.
Now go back to sleep. ;-)
Woody
I could only get a third of the way through before the only thing I could hear was the adults in a Peanuts cartoon. Frank, I hope that the next time you need care you get exactly what you expect, a drunken nurse and an absent physician.
Woody
Blake I was asleep at 2:22 AM. Westbrook, did you give those sales people all the information they are asking for. They could surely give a quote without my phone number. Mainer, I agree about malpractice, that is why I only deal with practionsers that will agree to binding arbitration. I will be back after I have read Frank's piece.
Mainer1776
Give me what I want, make someone else pay for it. The reason health care is expensive in the United States is because of : (1)Medicare. There is no competition for price any longer. All health care providers get the same pay. Medicare sets the baseline for professional fees for all procedures. (2) Someone else pays. When patients are removed from the financial picture of their health care, they want everything done whether it really needs to be done or not. (3) The threat of malpractice. Malpractice lawyer: "Dr. You didn't do the test that would have shown Mrs. Smith needed a corpulectomy." Doctor: "In my professional judgement, the test wasn't needed." Malpractice lawyer: "So Dr., you KNOW ahead of time what the outcome of a diagnostic test will be? Come now. Surely, you know that the test is simple and not so expensive as to be prohibitive? YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT TEST AND YOU WERE NEGLIGENT IN NOT DOING IT. I rest my case."
westbrook25
You can get instant medical insurance at the lowest price from http://bit.ly/39pFJx
Blake48
It's disappointing that The Wise One (aka "Rob") hasn't shown up yet to put the editor down and, thereby, put the world right. And what about Woody, sensible, Tillie, and Bronco?? Have they all been laid low by swine flu, thus validating our president's declaration of National Emergency?