April 08, 2010
— LauraW Massachusetts is a handy current example of a government-mandated health insurance system.
As a response to a rise in health insurance rates, The Commonwealth demonstrates the appreciation and understanding of free markets that government is famous for.
From Tom M's email to me:
Massachusetts has a "Health Connector Authority", which is designed to help businesses find health insurance. This year, because they don't like rate increases by Insurance Companies, they have dropped the companies they will recommend to - one company. The other insurance companies don't much like this, of course, but Massachusetts says "Tough".
Wheeeeeeeeee! I love this ride! Bring in the lawyers!
Until yesterday when most health insurers filed suit against the state, the authority offered access to scores of policies from as many as six different insurers.The current lack of choices highlights the growing tensions between the state, which is seeking to curb rising health-care costs, and the insurers, which claim their premiums reflect the rising cost of health care.
Last week, the state rejected hundreds of proposed insurance rate increases, saying the premiums were excessive and unreasonable. Yesterday, the insurers fired back with a lawsuit accusing the state of acting illegally when it ordered insurers to charge last yearÂ’s rates.
Read to the end of the article (not long) for the precious quote from one Brian Rosman.
Posted by: LauraW at
07:57 AM
| Comments (400)
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at April 08, 2010 08:02 AM (ucq49)
If Massachusetts says the rates are unreasonable, then it must be true and all you Howie Carr fans at WKRO in Boston should just sit down and shut the fuck up. They know what's best for you, and all the jaw-boning from conservative talkers like Limbaugh and Ingraham won't change their opinion. So there.
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:02 AM (M5t+h)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at April 08, 2010 08:03 AM (Oxen1)
Posted by: oblig. at April 08, 2010 08:04 AM (x7Ao8)
Posted by: conscious and waiting for the collapse of our medical system at April 08, 2010 08:05 AM (YVZlY)
Let's play a game. The Insurance companies in Mass who are suing the commonwealth people's republic are suing on the grounds the governor's action is 'arbitrary.'
What other words are there other than arbitrary to describe what Gov Devil Patrick is doing?
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 08:08 AM (W9XyJ)
Never heard of him.
Posted by: Martha Coakley at April 08, 2010 12:06 PM (Kn9r7)
Hey, he was my favorite White Sox player.
Posted by: Barack Obama - Greatest White Sox fan evah at April 08, 2010 08:08 AM (YVZlY)
No matter how horrific the health care system in Massachusetts becomes, it is a miniscule example of what happens when Obama care is running at full speed.
The bureaucratic booger-pickers in Washington will be deciding your fate, and there is not one thing you can do about it. You won't even know the name of the person so you can send a Hallmark 'fuck you' card to thank the asshole for denying you treatment.
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:09 AM (M5t+h)
Posted by: dudeinsantacruz at April 08, 2010 08:10 AM (fVm0w)
btw, and somewhat related...
Rush's best words of wisdom yesterday: "Obama does not govern, he rules."
Rule by decree. The Democrats = Weimar Republic
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 08:11 AM (W9XyJ)
California is this dumb. Don't underestimate the stupidity of this state government in Sacramento.
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:11 AM (iYbLN)
Posted by: DocJ at April 08, 2010 08:12 AM (dt6br)
Posted by: rawmuse at April 08, 2010 08:14 AM (OQ3LO)
btw II, it's nice to see a lauraw post. They are few ad far between, these days. I miss you, my little babushka.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 08:14 AM (W9XyJ)
There was also KikiCare in Hawaii, which only lasted for something like 8 months before burning through every cent authorized for it and going belly up. That was, as with the ShrillaryCare idiocy above, only about providing children's health insurance.
But ... too late for all this. The Washington junta has declared that "all boys who under 16 years old, are now ... 16 years old," and that is that.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at April 08, 2010 08:14 AM (N49h9)
The money quote from the article:
“This violates the basic tenet of health-care reform,” said Brian Rosman of the advocacy group Health Care for All. “And the innocent victims are the people who are trying to get insurance for their families.”
/WASF, chaos, does it matter what the precise name of the end is anymore?
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 08:15 AM (9hSKh)
Lack of choice under state-mandated health insurance program?
I is confused??? How am that possible??? I told that state-mandated health insurance increase choice!
Posted by: typical stupid fucking Obama voter at April 08, 2010 08:16 AM (tWf3S)
California sucks so bad that I'm looking forward to Basic Training in Missouri.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 12:14 PM (F9NPo)
California doesn't suck, because this advertisement told me so.
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:17 AM (M5t+h)
I have been remiss in my duties, therefore I decree our agreement shall extend till the day after the MS Walk, April 25th.
So it is written, so it is done.
BTW those twats, Brad & Dianne, or whatever their names are, think I'm a ghey man. Ha!
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:17 AM (iYbLN)
Posted by: speedster1 at April 08, 2010 08:19 AM (Ia4Vc)
Posted by: April at April 08, 2010 08:19 AM (b0THY)
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 12:17 PM (iYbLN)
Well, I never believed you to be ghey. You may be bad to hold one in your mouth but I don't think you would suck on it.
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:20 AM (M5t+h)
29 Thanks mpfs. I already have weapons for defense, but that isn't doing to dissuade you from your self-imposed duties.
/What fools they are.
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 08:21 AM (9hSKh)
1) ever notice how Fish has the ncanny knack to work in something a blowjobs in all his posts?
2) shouldn't Fish and Mrs Paul's Fish Sticks be mortal enemies?
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 08:22 AM (W9XyJ)
What other words are there other than arbitrary to describe what Gov Devil Patrick is doing?
Posted by: Baboo
unexpected
acting stupidly
well within normal parameters for the average Democrat
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 08:22 AM (R2fpr)
I see...
The system must fail.
The Cloward–Piven strategy
creates a Meta-Crisis;
a socioeconomic disaster beyond measure. . .
BRAAAIIINS!!!!
Wha? Huh? Where am I?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 08:22 AM (0q2P7)
2) shouldn't Fish and Mrs Paul's Fish Sticks be mortal enemies?
Posted by: Baboo
No, no they aren't. If you knew the reason, you'd never eat another fish stick.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 08:23 AM (R2fpr)
31 Just filling in for you, in case you couldn't make it, Kratos.
No worries. I actually should be doing something constructive, but I can't resist watching this trainwreck. Very macabre.
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 08:23 AM (9hSKh)
CNBC is getting all happy days right now. 50 trillion debt? Whoopety-doo!
I guess they got Immelt's email.
Posted by: TexasJew at April 08, 2010 08:24 AM (iEdIQ)
Next week when they're forced to close down, they never have to beg permission from the gov't again. Worked for Catholic Charities.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 08:24 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: unknown jane at April 08, 2010 08:24 AM (5/yRG)
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 12:22 PM (W9XyJ)
I've never noticed that phenomenon, but I defer to your special post monitoring and blowjob notation skills. Were you the little fat kid who was a school crossing guard?
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:28 AM (M5t+h)
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 08:30 AM (g4J4S)
In Soviet Kalifornia, we now have special mini-vans (hybrid of course) that drive around Burbank giving tickets to anyone that waters their lawn on the wrong day.
In a few years, the IRS will be enforcing eco-laws too. They already got the Obamacare SS gig.
I'm glad my Dad didn't live to see this. I'm pretty fucking sure that this isn't why he enlisted and fought in Vietnam and worked himself to death when he got back. So that some child -like commie cocksuckers could micromanage every instant of our lives from cradle to grave.
Call the Obambalamps, I'm getting a migraine.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 08:30 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: Baboo
unexpected
acting stupidly
well within normal parameters for the average Democrat
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 12:22 PM (R2fpr)
Made them a deal that they couldn't refuse.
Posted by: WalrusRex at April 08, 2010 08:31 AM (xxgag)
Massachusetts has a "Health Connector Authority.
It's called "The Commonwealth Connector" - sounds like a highway ... highway to fiscal hell.
Posted by: jpsr at April 08, 2010 08:32 AM (CW29u)
It was my thinking that the federal plan would now take over the MA plan because of federal supremacy.
Posted by: Vic at April 08, 2010 08:32 AM (QrA9E)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 08:34 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: Baboo
Oh, there's fish in there all right........It's how it gets in there that scares me. Hint: remember what you've been noticing about those posts?
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 08:34 AM (R2fpr)
Posted by: Next liberal argument for health care at April 08, 2010 08:35 AM (4JpPD)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 08:35 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at April 08, 2010 08:36 AM (7VvJB)
I laughed so hard someone asked me why. I didn't even try to explain.
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 08:37 AM (8WZWv)
I was wondering how the MA plan was going to interface with the congressional plan.
It was my thinking that the federal plan would now take over the MA plan because of federal supremacy.
Watching the two pieces of crap fighting each other could make for a cool B movie. Or even a solid B+ movie. Ray Harryhausen could make stop motion bureaucratic monsters battling (stupidly) to the death.
"It Came From Beyond its' Budget"
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 08:38 AM (R2fpr)
Patrick is leading with 35% because the (R) and right-of-center (I) are splitting the rest with about 25% each.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 08:38 AM (W9XyJ)
At least there isn't a war on like there was in '66.
Obama and Biden said everything is cool now. Whew! Woot. Peace rulez!
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 08:39 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 08:39 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 08:40 AM (0q2P7)
1. 50+ House gain
2. 7-9 Senate gain
3. Stupak gone--the poster boy for hypocrisy of the left, if not now, then never
4. Reid ousted
If these things don't happen, we're done. (Even with these, the R's better gain a sac or we're still done) If these things don't happen, the only things that would "save" us would be events so catastrophic as to not be talked about in polite company.
Posted by: The Hammer at April 08, 2010 08:41 AM (YBTwf)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 08:41 AM (F9NPo)
Yeah but a convicted sex offender can live on your street, rape and murder your daughter/son and it's all good in California.
The smoking menace is worse than child molester/rapists/murderers in this state.
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:41 AM (iYbLN)
Posted by: donabernathy at April 08, 2010 08:42 AM (cRkOm)
Posted by: nutmegory at April 08, 2010 08:43 AM (MX6cG)
It's Bizarro world: while you can't hardly legally use tobacco in the state, with an official state agency with a mission to end it's use all together, Marijuana on the other hand....
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 08:43 AM (0q2P7)
O/T
Rush just stated that in some states dead beat dads who no longer participate in a childÂ’s life are eligible for the EITC, Earned Income Tax Credit.
Makes me happy I worked my butt off for 60 years so the miscreants can benefit from my labor while then sit on their ass, toke weed, drink beer, smoke crack, and father more bastards. Ain't America grand?
Posted by: Fish at April 08, 2010 08:43 AM (M5t+h)
Posted by: Progressive who was taught Hitler was "right-wing" at April 08, 2010 08:44 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 08:45 AM (AZGON)
And you intolerant winger assholes want to take away their state-funded Viagra! Fascists!!
Posted by: Progressive who was taught Hitler was at April 08, 2010 08:46 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 08:47 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: Willard in Paramus at April 08, 2010 08:47 AM (jat5l)
If the Nov. election doesn't result in these things, at a minimum, we're done.
1. 50+ House gain
2. 7-9 Senate gain
3. Stupak gone--the poster boy for hypocrisy of the left, if not now, then never
4. Reid ousted
If these things don't happen, we're done. (Even with these, the R's better gain a sac or we're still done) If these things don't happen, the only things that would "save" us would be events so catastrophic as to not be talked about in polite company.
Posted by: The Hammer at April 08, 2010 12:41 PM (YBTwf)
I'm waiting for Romney to be the GOP nominee in 2012.We are so screwed.
Posted by: Ed Anger at April 08, 2010 08:47 AM (7+pP9)
Rush just stated that in some states dead beat dads who no longer participate in a childÂ’s life are eligible for the EITC, Earned Income Tax Credit.
Makes sense. They're honoring Teh One's "Dad".
Posted by: laceyunderalls at April 08, 2010 08:47 AM (pLTLS)
70 I welcome our new Overlords, as long as they have a Sam Adams tap in the ambalamps.
Sam Adams has been deemed "not good" and anything not "good" is "bad", hence illegal.
Posted by: Sandra Bullock from Demolition Man at April 08, 2010 08:48 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: unknown jane at April 08, 2010 08:49 AM (5/yRG)
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:49 AM (iYbLN)
Posted by: Mike Steele, suave in his nightclub at April 08, 2010 08:50 AM (AZGON)
86 4.5 and one minute later 5.5 aftershocks. This has to stop sometime.
They were expecting this kind of activity several days after the SoCal earthquake, right?
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 08:52 AM (9hSKh)
Far too many Lexuseses and Mercedeses with "war is not the answer" and "coexist" stickers on them. Inevitably some leathery old whore with fake tits and skin that looks like beef jerky and enough diamonds dripping off her to choke a dozen donkeys will get out of the peace-mobile and saunter into a boutique that would call the cops on anyone without a AAA credit rating.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 08:54 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 08:54 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:55 AM (iYbLN)
Good on Lt. Gov. Kinder. Dems. Gov. Nixon and A.G. Kostner can go get stuffed, at least somebody is listening to their bosses.
Anybody who thinks that this health care bill is good for America either hasn't bothered to see past their own selfish, "FREE STUFF! GIMME SOME!" attitude or is being willingly obtuse about it. Somebody has to pay for it and it ain't gonna be the almost 50% of the country who have no tax liability.
Part of the bill will be laid at the feet of those who will have their Social Security and Medicare cut, and part will come from those who bust their humps to earn a living just to see some of it forcibly taken away to given to the "GIMMIE's".
But the best part will be when they institute the VAT, or Value Added Tax to make up the trillions of dollars this sham will cost. Because then even the "GIMMIE's" will have to pay their share everytime they buy ANYTHING!! Then the howling will ensue.
And that howling will be music to the ears of everyone tired of seeing their hard earned money being pissed away on "Feel Good" B.S. social programs and it will be the silver lining to the cloud.
Posted by: FORGER - Racist Czar at April 08, 2010 08:55 AM (yg7ni)
Posted by: african chick at April 08, 2010 08:55 AM (+Air/)
We don't have to guess about where the nation is heading with health insurance costs - and we know who to blame.
Mitt Romney created the conditions in Massachusetts that led to ObamaCare being passed here as a "labratory experiment." That helped Democrats hone the political message they would need to enact it federally.
Results: A huge failure - enabled by a Republican.
RomneyCare has - like mandatory car insurance - guaranteed massive institutionalized rate increases year after year after year. Massachusetts residents now pay the highest health insurance premiums in the state. Insurers have requested double-digit rate increases and have suspending writing any new health insurance policies until they get those increases.
And to deal with the costs, the state of Massachusetts has been removing people eligible to receive care (via death panel). They're actually cutting people off from receiving care ... but they use the state IRS to mandate insurance purchases. It's absolutely the worst of both possible worlds.
And Mitt signed this. Worked with Democrats to make it happen.
Mitt Romney has a lot of explaining to do about why he would have signed such a bill. I think his Mormon upbringing played a large role in why he decided to cross the aisle (McCain-like) and work with the Democrats to enact the Democrats' legislative initiatives. And I think he would do that as President - just as McCain probably would have.
We don't have to wonder how Mitt Romney would govern ... we can see it in his actions as Governor of Massachusetts. He would work with the Democrats to enact their legislation and he would sign their tax bills.
So, if you want the Democrats' legislation enacted - if you want massive tax increases ... then the thing to do is to get behind the Mitt Romney campaign for President. But if you prefer a more conservative agenda ... then you have to ensure that Mitt Romney doesn't get the nomination. You have to defeat Mitt Romney first and foremost.
Being a Republican has to mean something different than being a Democrat. Or the Republican Party doesn't deserve to continue to exist and the migration to a Tea Party will accelerate.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 08:56 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: any given entertainment law attorney at April 08, 2010 08:56 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 08:56 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: race czar varoon varoom at April 08, 2010 08:56 AM (rVJH4)
But on the upside this will cause a "unexpected" drop in unemployment as they have to hire more agents to fill this obvious need. All hail the green gestapo!
Call the Obambalamps, I'm getting a migraine.
Patience my friend. All is not yet lost. I think were all in for quite the surprise this November.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at April 08, 2010 08:56 AM (e8T35)
94 I guess people are too stupid to recognize cheaper premiums on their own so mommy has to come to their rescue.
This violates the basic tenet of health-care reform. And the innocent victims are the people who are trying to get insurance for their families.
Posted by: Brian Rosman at April 08, 2010 08:57 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: The Future at April 08, 2010 08:57 AM (muUqs)
...some leathery old whore with fake tits and skin that looks like beef jerky and enough diamonds dripping off her to choke a dozen donkeys will get out of the peace-mobile and saunter into a boutique that would call the cops on anyone without a AAA credit rating.
Sounds like what happens here does not stay here
Posted by: las vegas at April 08, 2010 08:57 AM (rVJH4)
Posted by: sifty
It felt like rhinos were fucking.
Posted by: mpfs at April 08, 2010 08:57 AM (iYbLN)
97 Was that an earthquake in San Diego? Or did those pandas finally start fucking?
They were capsizing Cali? How big are these pandas?
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 08:58 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 12:54 PM (F9NPo)
That's rich. Driving axis power autos while decrying war. LOL.
Liberals are just too funny. I just wish someone would get them back in their sandbox, where they can't hurt anyone with their idiocy.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at April 08, 2010 08:58 AM (N49h9)
108 Was Ted on Mass's insurance?
Congresscriters have their own separate health coverage, methinks.
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 09:01 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Saddam Hussein Obama at April 08, 2010 09:03 AM (wPB5R)
And his family is worth how much? Stashed overseas so it's not taxed? He was able to get anything a Congressplan wouldn't cover (ha!).
Posted by: Progressive who was taught Hitler was at April 08, 2010 09:03 AM (mR7mk)
I have a friend who lives in LA who mentioned last night that she watches LA get annihilated in 2012 over and over because it brings her such joy. My plot to get her to move to Houston so that I have somewhere to stay when I move there is proceeding apace.
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 09:04 AM (8WZWv)
Troll Troll!
Punching in every direction, even the imaginary ones.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 09:04 AM (0q2P7)
You need to stop being all logical and stuff. That's mean dontcha know.
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 09:05 AM (8WZWv)
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 09:06 AM (8WZWv)
The only reason these limousine liberals want universal health care is so they can have a permanent source of healthy servants to keep the infrastructure running while they tan.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:07 AM (F9NPo)
Maybe it's like the right to bear arms--offer not valid in all areas, restrictions will apply.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 09:08 AM (mR7mk)
#113 And his family is worth how much? Stashed overseas so it's not taxed? He was able to get anything a Congressplan wouldn't cover (ha!).
Good point, dirt-stealing Radish, but do you really think Teddy didn't bilk the Congressional plan as much as he could? More money for booze...
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at April 08, 2010 09:08 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 08, 2010 09:10 AM (OqTsN)
Posted by: History at April 08, 2010 09:11 AM (F9NPo)
118 sickinmass - I read the one comment that starts with "I agree everyone has a right to be healthy". Ummm. What? So now Obama is going to outlaw disease? That's pretty damn spiffy.
To not outlaw disease violates the basic tenet of health-care reform. It's not fair that some people are beset with disease and disability even while in the womb! It's not fair that people get old and wrinkly and fat! It's all the insurance companies' fault!
Posted by: Brian Rosman at April 08, 2010 09:11 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:12 AM (F9NPo)
message from the future....thanks for f'ing everything up.........and the whole barack thing? were you high?
Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 08, 2010 09:13 AM (OqTsN)
Posted by: bill-tb at April 08, 2010 09:15 AM (y+QfZ)
Why Did Rome Fall?
There are adherents to single factors, but more people think a combination of such factors as Christianity, decadence, lead, monetary trouble, and military problems caused the Fall of Rome. Imperial incompetence and chance could be added to the list. Even the rise of Islam is proposed as the reason for Rome's fall, by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople in A.D. 1453.
Wheeee! Looks like the only thing that we have to look forward to is the lead poisoning!
Posted by: shibumi at April 08, 2010 09:15 AM (OKZrE)
Houston so that I have somewhere to stay when I move there is proceeding apace.
Hell Alex, you can crash on my couch if Plan A falls through. As long as you know how to load magazines and which end of the rifle goes *bang*.
Posted by: Dang Straights at April 08, 2010 09:18 AM (fx8sm)
Posted by: beedubya at April 08, 2010 09:18 AM (AnTyA)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:18 AM (F9NPo)
He's a liberal. He assumes that if you've had even a modicum of success in life, you screwed someone less fortunate to get there.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at April 08, 2010 09:19 AM (554T5)
It's almost as if a bunch of leftists who don't understand or even want to understand economics are making really big economic policies.
P.S.: This definitely DOES NOT help, you know who.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 08, 2010 09:19 AM (B+qrE)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 08, 2010 09:20 AM (OqTsN)
And the Global Cooling. Krakatoa, Redoubt, what's the difference?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 09:20 AM (mR7mk)
I consider everyone I ever screwed to be very fortunate.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:21 AM (F9NPo)
If you fail your re education program the lead poisoning will be high velocity.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at April 08, 2010 09:23 AM (tf9Ne)
I'm curious how the low-bidding insurance companies are staying profitable or at least treading water. Is this a matter of low overhead, operating at a loss, or being dicks about paying claims?
As far as I know, only Medicare has the advantage of simply not paying a valid claim (or making partial payment). Is that advantage being farmed out to other companies now?
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at April 08, 2010 09:23 AM (30xKW)
How can you expect incompetent state government to regulate something as large and expansive as a state-wide insurance program?
This calls for Federal Incompetence!
Posted by: nickless at April 08, 2010 09:24 AM (MMC8r)
That rat bastard McCain ruined everything with his lousy campaign and such...
He's no great American.....
Posted by: Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Laura Ingraham at April 08, 2010 09:24 AM (5Ttcl)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at April 08, 2010 09:25 AM (554T5)
Damn! You would think you were reading a story of one of the major papers in the U.S. under a Republican administration.
I guess the left is the left and there is nothing to be done for it...
except to vigorously oppose it and expose their cancerous ideology.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at April 08, 2010 09:25 AM (RkRxq)
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 01:06 PM
It's also Queef Uberdouche's first line in his manifesto "The War on Death"
Posted by: beedubya at April 08, 2010 09:25 AM (AnTyA)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 08, 2010 09:26 AM (OqTsN)
Posted by: dagny at April 08, 2010 09:26 AM (qItro)
You know who this helps?
Mitt Rom...wait, never mind. Nonstory! Nonstory! Nothing to see here everybody! Move along!
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at April 08, 2010 09:27 AM (FkKjr)
Census troubles:
Placing a cap on costs if immigrants try to evade the count, the response plan notes that a census worker will attempt to visit a home six times at most - or fewer, if a resident makes clear he won't cooperate - before the worker questions neighbors to get the information. If that fails, the Census Bureau will statistically impute data based on characteristics of neighboring households.
In 2000, imputation, ... increased the U.S. population by 1.1 million, particularly among urban racial minorities who would have been missed by a head count.
imputation - cool word
Posted by: i am the census at April 08, 2010 09:28 AM (CW29u)
When? Where?
Posted by: Plywood Futures Investor at April 08, 2010 09:30 AM (mR7mk)
L.A. County Health Inspector: I'm here to inspect your donuts grope you
Posted by: I'm from the government and I'm here to help you at April 08, 2010 09:31 AM (YVZlY)
No, no, no, the lawyers get paid and that's the really important part.
Posted by: alexthechick at April 08, 2010 09:32 AM (8WZWv)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 09:32 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:32 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 09:33 AM (AZGON)
If they can make shit up, why can't we?
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:34 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: George Orwell at April 08, 2010 09:34 AM (AZGON)
I'll feel more optimistic about the GOP taking the House when I hear chatter about so-called blue dogs mulling over switching to the Republican party.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 09:35 AM (uFokq)
Isn't HCA the same as HCAN and a branch of SEIU/ACORN?
Posted by: ExZonie at April 08, 2010 09:35 AM (as47X)
-----------
It wasn't that cool when Billy Jeff tried to tax imputed income. Buying a house because it's cheaper than renting? Well, that money you're saving would have been imputed income eligible for taxation.
Posted by: Anachronda at April 08, 2010 09:36 AM (3K4hn)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:37 AM (F9NPo)
Someone should tell Brian cocksucker Rosman that still calling it insurance violates the basic tenets of the English language.
You can't go and redefine shit whenever you feel it like.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 09:38 AM (uFokq)
Authorities in Mexico said Thursday that they have found the body of a Los Angeles woman, according to the Associated Press. The AP also reported that her husband has been detained as a suspect.
Monica Beresford-Redman, wife of "Survivor" producer Bruce Beresford-Redman, was on vacation with her family, staying at the Moon Palace Hotel in Cancun.
Is it too soon to say "ironic"
Posted by: conscious and prepared to be flamed at April 08, 2010 09:38 AM (YVZlY)
You can't go and redefine shit whenever you feel it like.
Haven't been paying attention lately, eh?
Posted by: Dang Straights at April 08, 2010 09:39 AM (fx8sm)
Let's just all call them Snowe-Collins Democrats.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:39 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: Tom Coburn at April 08, 2010 09:40 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 09:40 AM (CW29u)
Posted by: Tom Coburn at April 08, 2010 09:41 AM (F9NPo)
true, but it's a good indicator of things to come in November.
Political survival being a critter's #1 priority, and all. I'm just looking for signs that support Dick Morris' prediction.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 09:41 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 01:37 PM (F9NPo)
If you've got your tongue up Nancy Pelosi's ass, you can keep your tongue up Nancy Pelosi's ass.
Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama - Humanitarian at April 08, 2010 09:42 AM (YVZlY)
Karl..who at times can be sort of inciteful..has a completely idiotic post over at Hotair titled "Could the GOP Have Pre-empted ObamaCare"....it really is painfully stupid...but the kicker is his sub-head..
Some influential bloggers seem to think so, including Ed Morrissey
Posted by: beedubya at April 08, 2010 09:42 AM (AnTyA)
Really??..Link??
Posted by: beedubya at April 08, 2010 09:44 AM (AnTyA)
Didn't the Three Stooges - Slappy, Blinky, and Harry, tell us, when everyone is mandated to buy insurance, the cost of health care would decrease?
Who knew?
Posted by: franksalterego at April 08, 2010 09:45 AM (+6fgE)
Sam Adams has been deemed "not good" and anything not "good" is "bad", hence illegal.
I think you mean "ungood".
Posted by: Winston Smith at April 08, 2010 09:45 AM (30xKW)
Yet it shouldn't be a slow news day what with Obama over in Prague making us less safe, and all. That stupid treaty Obama signed is one of the worst and most harmful blunders of his term.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 09:46 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at April 08, 2010 09:46 AM (7VvJB)
HA is the #3 blog at wikio. I've said on the message board to ace, that if he put at the top of his website a portal, like HA has, then his website would get a lot more casual traffic.
Of couse, someone would have to update it constantly
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 09:47 AM (wuv1c)
Really??..Link??
RE Linda Douglas - don't know how to do the link
National Review Online - The Corner
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 09:48 AM (CW29u)
She's a nice lady.
I'm sure she likes to look at kittens while she eats a baby and raises taxes.
ps: Never screw a Thai tranny hooker on a junket and get filmed doing it. The DNC always finds the film eventually.
Posted by: Tom Coburn at April 08, 2010 09:49 AM (F9NPo)
Either way, if Romney runs in 2012, he is going to have a tough time. I don't quite understand where he is coming from on this issue.
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 09:49 AM (aYS5W)
I agree.
Frankly, so many of us are funemployed, I think we could all pitch in and help with the news updates.
The other thing I'd suggest is specializing a bit, tapping into the expertise of the morons. We could kick HA ass on science/technology and military stuff.
Posted by: Y-not at April 08, 2010 09:51 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: Sockpuppet Ace at April 08, 2010 09:51 AM (LdYLm)
Romney needs to say either the studies we did were wrong, and it was a mistake, or what we did was good, but it was larded up after I left, and that's why it's bad.
Either way, if Romney runs in 2012, he is going to have a tough time. I don't quite understand where he is coming from on this issue.
dude, he is the front runner. He is not only going to run, he is in the process of running right now.
I can say with almost certainty that Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate in 2012. And if by some chance it isn't Romney, it will be Huckabee.
We are fucked. We truly are.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 09:52 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Dr Spank at April 08, 2010 09:53 AM (muUqs)
Is garrett here? I'd like to discuss what to do with pheasant breasts.
Posted by: Y-not the little Princess at April 08, 2010 09:53 AM (Kn9r7)
Yes. And emphasize that it was done at the state level. He's said this, but it doesn't seem to be getting picked up.
Posted by: Y-not the little Princess at April 08, 2010 09:54 AM (Kn9r7)
Fifty thou a year -- buys a lot of beer
Things are going great, and they're only getting better
I'm doing all right, getting good grades
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades
I gotta wear shades
Posted by: Obamalamps at April 08, 2010 09:54 AM (TraYZ)
I wish Rudy would run for something...anything. There's a Senate seat in NY that's his for the taking, I believe. And Rudy'd be a lock for governor, too. Be a shame to blow those opportunities.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 09:54 AM (uFokq)
Romney needs to say either the studies we did were wrong, and it
was a mistake, or what we did was good, but it was larded up after I left, and that's why it's bad.
Either
way, if Romney runs in 2012, he is going to have a tough time. I don't
quite understand where he is coming from on this issue.
dude, he is the front runner. He is not only going to run, he is in the process of running right now.
I can say with almost certainty that Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate in 2012. And if by some chance it isn't Romney, it will be Huckabee.
We are fucked. We truly are.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 01:52 PM (wuv1c)
I'd take a bet that Romney won't be the nominee. Remember when Hillary was the shoo-in. McCain was almost out of it. Usually the front-runner is toast.
Posted by: Ludicrous Speed at April 08, 2010 09:54 AM (LdYLm)
It won't be Huckabee. Too many sane, rich people in the GOP to let that happen.
Posted by: Y-not the little Princess at April 08, 2010 09:55 AM (Kn9r7)
Gabe just tweeted: NASA saying 71 ft asteroid will pass inside the moon's orbit and past us this afternoon: http://is.gd/bknKB
Bad news: It's going to miss us
Posted by: conscious and wondering who summoned this one at April 08, 2010 09:55 AM (YVZlY)
I can say with almost certainty that Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate in 2012. And if by some chance it isn't Romney, it will be Huckabee.
We are fucked. We truly are.
I will lay a grand out in the open...RIGHT NOW in front of everyone that it will be neither.
Is it a bet?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 08, 2010 09:56 AM (B+qrE)
Gabe just tweeted: NASA saying 71 ft asteroid will pass inside the moon's orbit and past us this afternoon: http://is.gd/bknKB
Dammit Unclefacts, quit half-assing it.
Posted by: Dang Straights at April 08, 2010 09:57 AM (fx8sm)
-----
First last night's scoop and now this. Man, that Gabe has sources everywhere!
Posted by: Y-not the little Princess at April 08, 2010 09:57 AM (Kn9r7)
Before enacting Mittcare I met with the doctors and nurses to see how government could help.They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of our great state. Clearly, something had to be done.
Posted by: Mitt Romney at April 08, 2010 09:58 AM (Oxen1)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 09:58 AM (F9NPo)
Price-fixing does not make a good or service more affordable; it makes the good or service unobtainable at any price.
This lesson has had to be learned and re-learned so often, even in our own history, that it just confirms my belief that schools simply have given up on teaching history any more.
In the last two years of the US civil war, Jefferson Davis was faced with a truly gruesome dilemma: the southern economy was in shambles, the industrial sector (what little there was of it) operating at a fraction of its former capacity, and the South's single cash crop -- cotton -- rendered worthless due to the Union blockade. Housewives could no longer afford even the basic staples of life -- flour, coffee, cornmeal. (There was even a "bread riot" in Richmond in which Jeff Davis himself had to intervene.) It got so bad that tradesmen and business would only accept gold or Yankee greenbacks as payment -- and when you've been reduced to using your enemies' currency, you are done. So Jefferson Davis imposed draconian price-controls on all manner of goods to escape this trap.
However, what ended up happening is that tradespeople simply went out of business or went to an underground economy (barter or gold). Instead of making goods and services cheaper for the common folks, his action actually made the situation much worse by making the goods impossible to procure in many cases, no matter the price. Jefferson Davis, among many others in history, found that you cannot force businesspeople to operate at a loss indefinitely. The market will have its way, whether you like it or not.
Healthcare is not a "right". It is a service (with associated facilities and materials costs) that must operate with a certain amount of profitable margin. And our medical technology is such that the costs to provide this service are high -- to be sure, there is inefficiency and waste in the system, but even absent those pressures, it's still expensive to provide good health care. And insurance companies, who must match premiums to more-or-less match those costs, must have the flexibility to adjust their premiums -- if not, they go out of business.
Posted by: Monty at April 08, 2010 09:59 AM (4Pleu)
Well it's about fucking time:
Cows absolved of causing global warming with nitrous oxide
Livestock could actually be good for the environment according to a new study that found grazing cows or sheep can cut emissions of a powerful greenhouse gas.
Posted by: conscious and happy for the cows at April 08, 2010 10:00 AM (YVZlY)
I wouldn't be surprised if the repubs nominated obama.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at April 08, 2010 10:00 AM (7VvJB)
Only science stuff on HA has to do with Apple, and stories entitled "Dude."
They have no chance against us morons!
Posted by: shibumi at April 08, 2010 10:00 AM (OKZrE)
And if by some chance it isn't Romney, it will be Huckabee.
It won't be Huckabee. Too many sane, rich people in the GOP to let that happen.
You can't look at the Republican Primary through a national lens. What matters most are the first 3-5 states.
Iowa and South Carolina will go to Huckabee, New Hampshire and Nevada will go to Romney. At this point other candidates will drop out. No one is going to try the Rudy Giulini tactic of waiting for one of the later states(florida) to make a stand. If you can't win one of the first four states, you are as good as toast.
We all know the southern states will vote for huckabee, and the northern and western states will vote for Romney(he will get more of the McCain votes that Huckabee).
It will be Romney's to lose, and if he does lose it, it will be Huckabee standing next in line.
I think most people, including people on this blog and myself, will end up backing Romney because we fear the alternative, Huckabee.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:01 AM (wuv1c)
Don't forget the evolution threads. Those are comedy gold!
Seriously, though, I would be willing to work a couple of hours a day finding stories and feeding them to one of the official morons. We could take shifts.
Posted by: Y-not the little Princess at April 08, 2010 10:02 AM (Kn9r7)
"Ace, you killed a man with a trident!"
"Yeah.I stabbed him in the heart."
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:03 AM (F9NPo)
I'm not that keen on him myself (he wasn't that impressive when I lived in Indiana), but Mitch Daniels would be the logical choice if those other two are the front-runners.
There are some good people in Congress, but I think we'd be better off running a governor.
Posted by: Y-not at April 08, 2010 10:05 AM (Kn9r7)
VOTE FOR DEVAL PATRICK He needs a new car...
No, actually, he doesn't.
You see, the first act Deval Patrick did as Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was to buy himself a brand new $70,000 Cadillac with taxpayer money.
How's that for stereotype?
Next thing he did ... keep in mind that Massachusetts has a 10% unemployment rate and a $1 billion budget shortfall because of RomneyCare ... was buy some $17,000 curtains for his new office.
He's a multi-millionaire who could easily afford to buy his own god damned Cadillac, but he stuck the taxpayers of Massachusetts with it.
They buy themselves new cars and fancy offices with our fucking money and then bitch when they have to write unemployment checks.
Are you tired of being fucked by these people yet?
They're laughing at you all the way to their bank.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:05 AM (VRJIW)
I can say with almost certainty that Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate in 2012. And if by some chance it isn't Romney, it will be Huckabee.
We are fucked. We truly are.
I will lay a grand out in the open...RIGHT NOW in front of everyone that it will be neither.
Is it a bet?
What are you betting? It won't be Romney, or are you betting on who it will be?
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:05 AM (wuv1c)
I'm kind of surprised women who wear them are allowed to partake in infidel fun--thought that was just for the men.
Posted by: Plywood Futures Investor at April 08, 2010 10:06 AM (mR7mk)
Price-fixing does not make a good or service more affordable; it makes the good or service unobtainable at any price.
Minor quibble... Price-fixing a good or service drives it into the black market. It can still be obtained for a price; just not legally.
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at April 08, 2010 10:06 AM (30xKW)
Posted by: conscious and offering up handy hints at April 08, 2010 10:07 AM (YVZlY)
VOTE FOR DEVAL PATRICK He needs a new car...
Cadillace Deval they call him. I read that Obama's top domestic priority is not jobs but to get Deval re-elected. "Together We Can"
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 10:08 AM (CW29u)
I think most people, including people on this blog and myself, will end up backing Romney because we fear the alternative, Huckabee.
I'm not that keen on him myself (he wasn't that impressive when I lived in Indiana), but Mitch Daniels would be the logical choice if those other two are the front-runners.
There are some good people in Congress, but I think we'd be better off running a governor.
I agree, I want Paul Ryan, but I would be happy with a number of people that aren't named Romney, Huckabee or Palin. However, the republican party doesn't work like the democrat party. We are essentially a deli counter and the candidate with the next spot in line gets his chance on the ticket. I mean we ran Bob friggin Dole in 1996, Bush 1 in 1988, Reagan in 1980, Ford in 1976, Nixon in 1960, 1968 . They were all either frontrunners, vice presidents or the next in line. The last two times our party has chosen someone not "in line" was Goldwater in 64 and Bush 2 in 00.
That's just how the party works, to its detriment.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:09 AM (wuv1c)
We'd totally win a street brawl with HA. Like in Anchorman.
Ew. What's that smell? Smell like Big Foot's dick!
Posted by: laceyunderalls-smelly pirate hooker living on Whore Island at April 08, 2010 10:10 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Dr Spank at April 08, 2010 10:10 AM (muUqs)
I wouldn't be surprised if the repubs nominated obama.
Equally likely is the GOP nominating nobody.
Posted by: Baboo (from the Jeannie Cartoon) at April 08, 2010 10:10 AM (uFokq)
I'm predicting Palin / Perry or Palin / Pence
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:10 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 08, 2010 10:11 AM (0GFWk)
I wouldn't be surprised if the repubs nominated obama.
Equally likely is the GOP nominating nobody.
Running someone against Obama is kinda racist.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:11 AM (wuv1c)
Then get behind Tim Pawlenty or any of the other conservative candidates who will not cross the aisle to help Democrats fuck us right up the ass.
I'm looking for a leader who wants to take the fight to these scumbags ... not work with them. I'm looking for a guy who is going to punch them back twice as hard ... not someone who will seek "bipartisanship."
Romney and Huckabee are both cut from the same cloth ideologically.
Go read up on Mormons, or watch the online documentary PBS did to learn more about how Mormons work (and keep in mind that Harry Reid is a Mormon also who will work very closely with Romney if they are elected)
If you're concerned about Huckabee and his plans ... Romney should scare the living bejeezus out of you.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:11 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at April 08, 2010 10:12 AM (7VvJB)
On the bright side, "Anybody" outpolls Obama by about 10%.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 10:12 AM (mR7mk)
Excellent comment, Monty. I would just add a simple analogy:
Price-fixing does not make a good or service more affordable;
Posted by: Monty at April 08, 2010 01:59 PM (4Pleu)
Fixing prices to make things affordable is like opening your refrigerator to cool the kitchen.
Liberals still wouldn't understand the problem with their solution ...
Posted by: progressoverpeace at April 08, 2010 10:13 AM (N49h9)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:13 AM (F9NPo)
I am almost positive Palin will not run. There is more money in not being the president.
I don't particularly want her to anyway.
I think the candidates will be
Romney
Huckabee
Ron Paul
Sam Brownback
Mike Pence
John Thune
and a few smaller candidates that will pull out before the primaries actually start.
oh and Fred Thompson, but he'll only get in some time after the Ohio Primary.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:13 AM (wuv1c)
Actually, it's "Coupe" Deval which is his nickname.
Thanks ! I knew it looked wrong even with Cadillac misspelled but I couldn't remember what they called him.
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 10:14 AM (CW29u)
That's great! I like him. He seems like such a gentleman.
I'm rooting for Phil, of course, but Watson would be a great guy to see win. I also like Anthony Kim right now.
It's frustrating. Out here the coverage doesn't start until 1 pm. Grrr.
Posted by: Y-not at April 08, 2010 10:14 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: Purity Republican at April 08, 2010 10:14 AM (muUqs)
It really pisses me off when people push Romney right now. The people pushing him know as well as I do that he won't win. They push him anyway as a crafty way of undermining the anti-Obamacare faction in the GOP.
What Frum and his co-conspirators want is not for Romney to beat Obama in 2012. What they want is for Obama to defeat Romney in 2012, use the deadly force of the federal government to destroy (perhaps literally, as in kill) their GOP rivals, and then give them the leftovers.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 10:14 AM (bKMRL)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:15 AM (F9NPo)
-----------------
That's because it's completely overshadowed by the fact that he keeps talking about what a good idea it was and how well it's working out.
Posted by: Anachronda at April 08, 2010 10:16 AM (3K4hn)
Mormons who support socialized medicine, taxpayer-funded abortions, and gun control, and who won't win anyway should not be allowed to run for elected office, or babysit anyone's kids.
FIFY.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 10:16 AM (bKMRL)
Posted by: rdbrewer at April 08, 2010 10:16 AM (ZLIb7)
Mallamutt. Even if Palin does get it, i think increase the chance of a Romney win. It would divide Huckabee's base, not Romneys.
Also, i hope this isn't blaspemous, while I do hope Rubio wins, I am beginning to feel that Rubio is like Obama in 2008, he is a blank slate that every conservative projects their ideas upon. I am told by all conservative blogs that he a good guy and conservative. He is clearly better than crist, but not being from florida, i am not really familiar with Rubio's background. He is a good looking guy with a good looking family, which helps, but i am not sold on him being a conservative savior, not yet anyway. Also, we already have a novice as president. I want someone with a little experience.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:19 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:19 AM (F9NPo)
You broke my heart Fred. You broke my heart.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:21 AM (F9NPo)
I'm not spreading anything. I encourage you to go educate yourself about Mormons and how they work together. One place to start is the PBS documentary ... but Google is your friend.
Mormons are good hard-working people. The way they operate leaves me troubled and especially concerned about Mitt Romney working with Harry Reid to enact Democrat legislation ... which is what he did as Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
But make up your own mind. Go educate yourself if you believe others are spreading "paranoia."
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:22 AM (VRJIW)
I'm kind of surprised women who wear them are allowed to partake in infidel fun--thought that was just for the men.
Posted by: Plywood Futures Investor at April 08, 2010 02:06 PM (mR7mk)
Hahahaha! If it weren't for the fact that the liability insurance would kill me, I'd start up a muslim womens' go-kart race league in Dearborn.
Posted by: Reactionary at April 08, 2010 10:23 AM (xUM1Q)
It really pisses me off when people push Romney right now. The people pushing him know as well as I do that he won't win. They push him anyway as a crafty way of undermining the anti-Obamacare faction in the GOP.
What Frum and his co-conspirators want is not for Romney to beat Obama in 2012. What they want is for Obama to defeat Romney in 2012, use the deadly force of the federal government to destroy (perhaps literally, as in kill) their GOP rivals, and then give them the leftovers.
I don't want Romney at all, but he is the frontrunner, along with Huckabee. The only way the real conservatives* can beat them is if we coalesce around one candidate who is not either of those two.
As i said, and is evidenced by republican primary history, the person who wins the first several states usally ends up winning the nomination.
Well Iowa and South Carolina are guaranteed to vote for Huckabee(or Palin) and New Hampshire and Nevada are guarenteed to go to Romney. Then whoever wins florida(romney had more than double the votes huckabee did there in 200
will probably go on to win super tuesday.
*someguy
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:24 AM (wuv1c)
I'd say Pawlenty is the nominee. Might come down to Pence, Pawlenty, and Thune.
Thune and Pence will split the more conservative-leaners and we'll end up with Pawlenty, a.k.a. McCain jr.
wow, that's sounds so likely I'm a little annoyed
Posted by: Boo Boo bear at April 08, 2010 10:24 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Purity Republican at April 08, 2010 10:25 AM (muUqs)
Nobody's going to remember this in 2012, right?
Posted by: Mitt Romney at April 08, 2010 10:26 AM (DYJjQ)
"COPENHAGEN (Reuters) – A few hundred warehouse workers and drivers at Danish brewer Carlsberg halted work for a second day on Thursday to protest a company decision to limit beer drinking at work to lunch breaks."
""There has been free beer, water and soft drinks everywhere," he said.
"Yesterday, beers were removed from all refrigerators. The only place you can get a beer in future is in the canteen, at lunch."
Bekke said drivers retained an old right to three beers per day outside lunch hours, and warehouse workers claimed the same right"
"He added that Carlsberg's trucks have alcohol locks so drivers would not be able to drink too much and drive."Posted by: Tami at April 08, 2010 10:26 AM (VuLos)
Actually, believe it or not I doubt either of them will have a good showing this time around. I think that the political winds have shifted, if nothing else the fact that John McCain, who granted squeaked past the gates in the last Presidential election to take the primary thanks to two supposedly more "conservative" candidates splitting votes is now in a monster fight just to win his own Senate primary should show us all something.
Things are not anywhere near the same as they once were. Even a year ago I don't think anyone would have predicted that McCain would have to fight just to win the primary for Senate in Arizona, but here we just a short span of time later and McCain is in the fight of his life just to save his Senate seat.
The political landscape out there has changed, significantly, and all bets are off now. If you'd asked me a year ago I would have agreed wholeheartedly that Romney would probably take the nomination in 2012 in a walk. Now? Well now I think Romneycare will prove to be more deadly to him than a world class case of Achilles's heel.
The thing we need to remember is that there is a whole new class of voter out there folks. All the previous models of "likely voters" is out the window. I don't think these next two elections are going to be decided by a small portion of party faithful on either side, as they have been for many years up till now.
A whole new section of the electorate who didn't normally participate much in the political process has awakened, and they are pissed. I think that a smart, conservative candidate will most likely take advantage of this in the early primaries and Romney will most likely be on the sidelines or very nearly out of the race by Florida.
McCain will have a snowballs chance in hell, his Presidential aspirations are pretty much done. He'll be damn lucky to hold onto his Senate seat and quite frankly I'm really hoping his luck is out on that score too. Nothing would please me more than seeing McCain retired to some RINO pasture where he can badmouth conservatives to his buddies in the mainstream media all he wants but will no longer be allowed to do any real damage.
I think the midterms will be a huge shock to both parties.. my only hope is that the Republican's don't misunderstand that this is something new, something different than politics as usual. The RINO, Democrat Lite thing is done. People don't want that. They don't want a republican who might as well be a democrat. They want their country back. I just hope the party is listening, because if not by 2012 we might be looking at another ballgame entirely.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at April 08, 2010 10:27 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 02:22 PM (VRJIW)
Ok, name 3 good reasons why a Mormon shouldn't be President. Don't name 3 reasons about Romney, we know his background. I want to know why A Mormon should not be President.
Posted by: inquiring minds want to know at April 08, 2010 10:28 AM (YVZlY)
Again, this is all fairly premature. Just saying, Rubio could have a very significant impact on the 2012 process. Remember, McCain's path to the nomination was propelled by winning Florida and that win was propelled by Crist.
I agree with the Crist McCain relationship, and Rubio will be a factor if he wins. I agree completely. I guess i was refering more to the idea that Rubio is our guy in 2012, which i am not sold on.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:29 AM (wuv1c)
Aren't they the people that worship a large pipe organ
Nah, that's Andrew Sullivan.
haha. thread winner and worth the risk
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:29 AM (wuv1c)
Yesterday, beers were removed from all refrigerators. The only place you can get a beer in future is in the canteen, at lunch."
That is an outrage - I hope the employees get a good lawyer. Sounds like a case for Jackie Chiles, Esq.
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 10:31 AM (CW29u)
stuckonstupid.
factor this into your equation.
How many tea party people are registered as independents or democrats?
and
How many states have open primaires?
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:31 AM (wuv1c)
he he he ha ha ha HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!
What's next? Watching Inconvenient Truth for an informative non biased look at global climate?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at April 08, 2010 10:32 AM (0q2P7)
Are there more...fed-up, smaller-gov't new voters for 2010 than there were never-voted-before-there-was-a-black-guy-on-the-ballot new 2008 voters? I expect the latter to show up again in 2012. Six or seven times apiece.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 10:32 AM (mR7mk)
Are there more...fed-up, smaller-gov't new voters for 2010 than there were never-voted-before-there-was-a-black-guy-on-the-ballot new 2008 voters? I expect the latter to show up again in 2012.
Wonder what their slogan will be - Rock the Vote? Vote or Die?
Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 10:34 AM (CW29u)
Don't think he will run in 2012, neithe rwill Scott Brown. But, Rubio has shown an ability to organize a grass root movement. That is one hell of a valuable data base to have for an early primary. Especailly if you belive that Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina will serve the role of weeding out the field.
i know this is shrewd and it doesn't mean anything to me, a persons race or creed, but let's keep in mind that Rubio's Cuba(read:hispanic) heritage may be beneficial in say 2016 or 2020.
Look at the black vote turn out in 2008, I would assume we could expect the same from the hispanic vote for Rubio as well.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:34 AM (wuv1c)
I don't even like typing this:
McCain / Steele 2012
otherwise known as Obama's 2nd Term
it didn't occur to me, but we probably should consider the fact that mccain may take another shot at it. i doubt he would be any more successful that Adlai Stevenson
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:35 AM (wuv1c)
This is where I ask how you're going to verify that everybody who checks the "R" box when signing up to vote via the DMV/State Fair/pretty girl holding the clipboard/mailing in the form in the phone book/etc holds one or more conservative/Republican beliefs, and everyone ignores me because restricting the primary in their state to just people who checked the box is going to magically give their candidate the nomination.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at April 08, 2010 10:36 AM (mR7mk)
Fear the Muthafuckin' Reaper, Liberal Bitches!
Might have to tone down the campaign slogan a tad, but you get the idea.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:37 AM (F9NPo)
Well Iowa and South Carolina are guaranteed to vote for Huckabee(or Palin) and New Hampshire and Nevada are guarenteed to go to Romney
Well, geez, since you can foretell the future, I guess I have nothing more to say.
BTW, I live in Nevada, and a Romney win here is nowhere near preordained.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 10:37 AM (bKMRL)
I never said that and don't believe it.
I said Mitt Romney will work with fellow Mormon Harry Reid to pass Democrat legislation.
And I base that opinion on Romney's devotion to Mormonism and his record as Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where he worked hand-in-hand with Democrats to enact their legislation and to raise taxes. Romney's Mormonism informs his politics and will be, and should be, part of the debate in exactly the same way that Huckabee's faith should be part of the debate.
I encourage people to make up their own minds by educating themselves about how Mormons operate in society, in the State of Utah, and within their churches. Make up your own mind about how important that issue is to you.
Romney has a record. Look at it and decide for yourself whether he would work with Harry Reid ... or if he would try to destroy his fellow Mormon. Harry Reid is working hand-in-hand with Barack Obama to institute Socialism in the United States. I believe Mitt Romney would not fight a fellow Mormon. He would be excommunicated if he did that. But make up your own mind.
Nevertheless if you are against ObamaCare and the takeover of health care by government, then you cannot support Mitt Romney, because Mitt Romney made it happen in Massachusetts and gave Obama the blueprint for getting it passed.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:38 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: sifty
I like it.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 10:39 AM (R2fpr)
Reid is getting fired soon.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:40 AM (F9NPo)
Hey Someguy, are you still out there? I'm still waiting for your answer:
Name 3 good reasons why a Mormon shouldn't be President. Don't name 3 reasons about Romney, we know his background. I want to know why A Mormon should not be President.
Posted by: inquiring minds want to know at April 08, 2010 10:41 AM (YVZlY)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:43 AM (F9NPo)
1. They worship pipe organs
2. They have sex with their children s children
3. They're generally creepy people that have piercing blue eyes.
Posted by: Barbarian at April 08, 2010 10:43 AM (EL+OC)
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 10:44 AM (bKMRL)
No, I suggested that as a place to start, but you certainly shouldn't take their word for it (or anyone's word for it.)
Google is your friend. Go educate yourself.
Mormons have a record that is publicly available to anyone who wishes to know what they're all about.
Regardless ... Mitt Romney has a long and illustrious record of fucking over Republicans by working with Democrats to pass their legislation.
Do you want Republicans working with Democrats?
I don't. So, naturally, I would never vote for Romney.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:44 AM (VRJIW)
Hey Someguy, are you still out there? I'm still waiting for your answer:
Name 3 good reasons why a Mormon shouldn't be President. Don't name 3 reasons about Romney, we know his background. I want to know why A Mormon should not be President.
Posted by: inquiring minds want to know
If you try cribbing notes from "Why a Papist should not be President", we'll know. And Christoph will be Pissedoph that you stole from him.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 10:44 AM (R2fpr)
She didn't say that a Mormon shouldn't be president, she said that the major reason that Romney shouldn't be president is that he's a devout Mormon.
Nuance.
Posted by: Y-not has learned about nuance at April 08, 2010 10:44 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:44 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: Barbarian
Great. Now I have to go home and stone my daughter to death.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 08, 2010 10:46 AM (R2fpr)
2. They have sex with their children s children
3. They're generally creepy people that have piercing blue eyes and hair that does not move in the wind.
----
fify
Posted by: Y-not has learned about nuance at April 08, 2010 10:46 AM (Kn9r7)
Fear the Muthafuckin' Reaper, Liberal Bitches!
Might have to tone down the campaign slogan a tad, but you get the idea.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 02:37 PM (F9NPo)
Pure awesome. But if we go this way, please please somebody make sure that Fred does a lot of coke on the campaign trail. He REALLY needs some motivation, some fire. His heart didn't seem to be in it last time, and I think that's a big part of why he didn't get the nod.
Posted by: Reactionary at April 08, 2010 10:46 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: Rosie O'Someguy at April 08, 2010 10:47 AM (F9NPo)
"I believe Mitt Romney would not fight a fellow Mormon. He would be excommunicated if he did that. But make up your own mind."
Nonsense. Otherwise Utah politics would be littered with excommunicated politicians who opposed each other. Seriously, 'tard, take your uneducated bigotry and stuff it.
PS: A PBS special does not an education make.
PPS: Why do you think Romney would be the one excommunicated for not cooperating with Reid? Why wouldn't the pro-abortion Reid be excommunicated by a pro-life Church? Ye gods, you're dumb.
Posted by: At Work, Undercover at April 08, 2010 10:48 AM (V7aQ1)
On the contrary, I'm not asking questions. I've made up my mind.
I'm linking you to information the validity of which you can judge for yourself. You should be asking questions.
I live in Massachusetts. I've had to pay $13,000 a year for health insurance required by Republican Mitt Romney that I didn't have to pay before he became Governor and signed that legislation.
He is a tax raiser and a Republican only in name. He was elected Governor n Massachusetts primarily because Democrats knew they could count on him to be "bi-partisan."
I didn't support John McCain and would work to make sure Romney is never a Republican nominee and won't vote for him if he is the nominee. I won't vote for Democrats ... or Republicans who work with Democrats to pass Democrat initiatives.
And neither will the country. McCain was exactly this type of a candidate ... and we have Barack Obama because we chose a poor nominee.
Let's not make the same mistake twice.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:48 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: Romney campaign strategist at April 08, 2010 10:49 AM (Kn9r7)
Well I think especially by the time we get to the 2012 election a lot of them will be registering as Republicans so they can vote in the primaries. Certainly the tea party organizers are smart enough to put the word out on this, and get their people to register so they do have a strong voice in the primaries.
I think most of the tea partiers are all too aware of the fact that the Democrats have abandoned them, common sense and reason a long way back and as such there really isn't much benefit to trying to influence a democratic primary.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at April 08, 2010 10:51 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 10:53 AM (F9NPo)
Huckabee and Romney. Are we really so bereft of good talent that we can have no others? I love Sarah, but it's not realistic that she should run for Prez at this point. It's a nice dream, of course.
Surely there are other, better candidates. Ones that do not smack or RINOism or deeply misguided (I would say often unbiblical) religious zealotry. If that's the best we got, I think it's gonna be a rough ride. Don't get me wrong - I'd much rather have even the Huckster rather than Jugears, but I really want to see somebody run who I can vote for without holding my nose.
Posted by: Reactionary at April 08, 2010 10:54 AM (xUM1Q)
I can't tell you that, because I don't care if a Mormon is President. Mormons are good, hardworking people. If you doubt that, you can learn all about Mormons here, and here.
I do care if Mitt Romney is President, because the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is also a Mormon and because Romney has a record of working with Democrats to pass their legislation. So I believe he would work with Reid. I don't want my President working with Reid. Barack Obama works with Reid.
Since I don't like Democrat ideas and their plans to turn America into a Socialist Repbublic, naturally, I don't think it would be a good idea to elect Romney. He would work closely with his fellow Mormon in the Senate to pass Democrat-backed legislation. Everything in his upbringing and in his record supports this suggestion. You might disagree, and you get a vote, but I'm not ever voting for him ... just as I didn't vote for John McCain. And I think most conservatives will not vote for him for these reasons.
If we nominate Romney, we guarantee 4 more years of Barack Obama.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 10:55 AM (VRJIW)
@313: You get to the heart of the anti-Romney argument, much more accurately than someguy's paranoid rantings. Not that he's a Satanist, but that his beliefs are for sale.
(As with many conspiracy theories, his have a small bit of truth taken out of context: yes, the Mormons have odd beliefs and a hierarchical structure; but the idea that the church would excommunicate Romney for disagreeing with Reid is asinine. The problem, if anything, is that the LDS doesn't excommunicate much of anybody, including those, like Reid, who don't follow it).
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 10:55 AM (bKMRL)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 02:53 PM (F9NPo)
Understandable. I suppose all other concerns pale in comparison. Fred's prolly saving up fuel - keeping the fire place banked - so he's good to go when duty calls.
Posted by: Reactionary at April 08, 2010 10:55 AM (xUM1Q)
I hope that wasn't as painful as it sounds. And while I'll agree in general with your assessment of McCain and Romney I just can't quite get past the utter stupidity of your anti-Mormon screed.
No, I'm not a Mormon. And No, I don't claim to be an expert on their religion. But I do know enough to recognize idiotic bigotry when I see it, and I've seen it here in your postings. When you post such nonsense you do yourself and the rest of us a great deal of discredit. So please, grow up a bit.
Posted by: StuckOnStupid at April 08, 2010 10:55 AM (e8T35)
First off, Rick Perry is going to run and he will be the odds on favorite to win the nomination.
Second off, somebody needs to do something about the open primary system, its what got us McCain in 2008. All the independents voted for the Maverick in the primaries then switched to Obama during the election.
Third off, there will be a primary challenge to Obama, especially if unemployment remains above 8.5%. This challenger will most likely be a governor from a conservative state.
Posted by: Next liberal argument for health care at April 08, 2010 10:56 AM (4JpPD)
Well Iowa and South Carolina are guaranteed to vote for Huckabee(or Palin) and New Hampshire and Nevada are guarenteed to go to Romney
Well, geez, since you can foretell the future, I guess I have nothing more to say.
BTW, I live in Nevada, and a Romney win here is nowhere near preordained.
if the options are romney and huckabee? I think it is preordained.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:56 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 02:48 PM (VRJIW)
So let's see if I've got your thought process correct:
Romney is a Mormon = all Mormons are bad
Hey Someguy, what's next, replace Mormon with Catholic, Protestant? Why don't you judge the person and their politics and not the person and their religion?
Posted by: inquiring minds want to know at April 08, 2010 10:57 AM (YVZlY)
My logic is sound.
McCain won in 2008, why? it was his turn.
same with dole, bush 1, reagan, ford, and nixon. It is hard to unseat a front runner in the republican party, actually its almost impossible.
Now the only issue is who was next in line, Romney or Huckabee. Let's be honest, both men will run, hell they are in the process of running right now.
They also have the benefit of name recognition. Not only did they run in 2008, but Huckabee has had a show on fox for serveral years.
It would be hard for a Pawlenty, Daniels, Thune, or even my favorite, Ryan to break through.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:59 AM (wuv1c)
if the options are romney and huckabee? I think it is preordained.
Well, you're wrong.
You think nevada would go huckabee over romney?
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 10:59 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 11:00 AM (F9NPo)
First off, Rick Perry is going to run and he will be the odds on favorite to win the nomination.
Second off, somebody needs to do something about the open primary system, its what got us McCain in 2008. All the independents voted for the Maverick in the primaries then switched to Obama during the election.
Third off, there will be a primary challenge to Obama, especially if unemployment remains above 8.5%. This challenger will most likely be a governor from a conservative state.
some states might benefit from open primaries. States like mine, Pennsylvania have a ton of pro life democrats who would probably pick a better republican candidate than the republicans did in 2008. Heck we had Rick Santorum as a senator, who i like a lot, and he surely didn't win with just Republican votes.
Posted by: Ben at April 08, 2010 11:02 AM (wuv1c)
I don't care if he or she shakes a monkey foot and howls naked at the moon, the next Republican with policies like Reagan gets my vote.
Don't look at me, I'm a Democrat.
Posted by: ErikW at April 08, 2010 11:04 AM (vdbCG)
Posted by: D1Stewart at April 08, 2010 11:05 AM (jb8Yk)
Huckabee and Romney. Are we really so bereft of good talent that we can have no others?
That's the problem. The entire American political system is designed to allow the crap to float to the top; both Republican and Democrat.
I know it sounds insane, but its almost like powerful unseen forces are at work choosing our craptastic political leaders.
Of course, it could be just an idiotic, ill-informed and capricious electorate.
Posted by: Next liberal argument for health care at April 08, 2010 11:05 AM (4JpPD)
What specifically did I say?
I believe Romney would work with his fellow Mormon Harry Reid to pass Democrat legislation - based on Romney's public record. I linked you to the Book of Mormon so you can read it yourself. I am not characterizing it. You decide what you think it says.
PBS did a documentary that is a place to start to learn about how Mormons operate in the society they have built for themselves. There are other sources of information publicly available. Educate yourself and decide for yourself.
I've decided for myself.
Guy is a Democrat in sheep's clothing and he will work with his fellow Mormon in the Senate to pass Democrat legislation.
He's Mitt "Obama" Romney II.
I fail to see how educating yourself makes one a bigot and just as Democrats cry "racism" to stop debate about their politics, I won't let inane cries of "bigot" stop me from pointing out why we do not want Mitt Romney as the nominee of our political party.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:05 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 03:00 PM (F9NPo)
Thanks. I will be counting on your vote.
Posted by: the leader of the Monkey Foot Shakers and Howling at the Moon Religious Sect at April 08, 2010 11:06 AM (YVZlY)
Posted by: The Chicken at April 08, 2010 11:07 AM (F9NPo)
You think nevada would go huckabee over romney?
No, I think that both candidates will be sufficiently un-fresh by 2012 that someone else will win. I also think that we are seeing a fundamental change in the electorate--a shift to the right--that will make a lot of these arguments seem as outdated as a discussion, in Massachusetts in 1780, of whom would win the upcoming British parliamentary elections (a discussion that would have been relevant ten years before).
More to the point, though, it's bad enough when you post your doom and gloom crap. It's worse when you try to tell me that the people in my own state are robots who are predestined to vote for someone. I know my state first hand from living here since 1972, you know it from online posts.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:10 AM (bKMRL)
I believe Romney would work with his fellow Mormon Harry Reid to pass Democrat legislation - based on Romney's public record.
Hey Someguy, so which one is it:
a. Romney will work with Harry Reid because they have similar political goals, or
b. Romney will work with Harry Reid because they are both Mormons
Waiting for your answer.
Posted by: inquiring minds want to know at April 08, 2010 11:12 AM (YVZlY)
Sam Adams has been deemed "not good" and anything not "good" is "bad", hence illegal.
I think you mean "ungood".
Posted by: Winston Smith at April 08, 2010 01:45 PM (30xKW)
Don't you mean "fungood"?
Okay, reductio ad absurdum achieved. Move along.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 11:14 AM (g4J4S)
I think someguy has the misconception that Mormons are leftist. They aren't.
Nevertheless, Mitt Romney still should not be nominated.
Currently, we are in the midst of a conservative revolution. The GOP can either embrace that revolution or embrace the Obama counterrevolution. To nominate a status quo candidate like Romney will be a message that the GOP is on Obama's side, not the Tea Partiers.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:16 AM (bKMRL)
I'm still wondering what specific concerns someguy has about how Mormons "operate."
I assume it's that their lack of caffeine consumption means that they fall asleep at their desks, reducing their productivity.
Sorta' like the problem with Jooos like Cantor who are always gallivanting off for some High Holy Day.
Posted by: Y-not at April 08, 2010 11:21 AM (Kn9r7)
We tea party types are not a bunch of stupid racists and homophobes like the DNC and RNC think we are.
I don't need some asshole in a $1000 suit telling me who to vote for. I can read and research on my own, thank you.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 11:22 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: TimothyJ at April 08, 2010 11:23 AM (IKKIf)
-------------
We can have caffeine, it just has to be cold and fizzy.
Posted by: Anachronda at April 08, 2010 11:27 AM (3K4hn)
I have the conception that Mitt Romney is both a Mormon, and a leftist, who would work hand-in-hand with fellow Mormon Harry Reid to enact Democrat legislation - precisely the way he did as Governor of Massachusetts.
You might disagree, so I encourage you to do your own educating of yourself. I've lived in Massachusetts under his leadership. I've made up my mind based on what I know of the man, and how he governed.
Mitt Romney isn't a mystery. Mormons aren't a mystery. Both have a publicly available record for anyone who wishes to educate themselves to see.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:29 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:32 AM (bKMRL)
eDUCAE YOURDAMNSELF MONORS!!!ELEVENTY1111
ps: don't go swimming immediately after punching down. you'll get cramps
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 11:33 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: Nancy Pelosi, Papist at April 08, 2010 11:33 AM (Kn9r7)
"Which is it:
a. Romney will work with Harry Reid because they have similar political goals, or
b. Romney will work with Harry Reid because they are both Mormons"
It is, of course:
c. Romney will work with Harry Reid because both are Mormons who share similar political goals and beliefs. If Harry Reid was a Muslim, I don't think they would work together or share political beliefs.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:34 AM (VRJIW)
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:35 AM (bKMRL)
Posted by: Wilfred Brimley, Mormon at April 08, 2010 11:35 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: somebitch at April 08, 2010 11:35 AM (F9NPo)
Posted by: Ted Bundy at April 08, 2010 11:36 AM (Kn9r7)
Billy Barty:
Actually, if Romney were thinking exactly the same way as most Mormons, I would love having him as President. Most Mormons are conservative. Romney, however, is not.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:37 AM (bKMRL)
Posted by: somebitch at April 08, 2010 11:38 AM (F9NPo)
"For now, at least, the fastest-rising Republicans seem to be those most in sync with Tea PartiersÂ’ aversion to taxes and Washington-based programs and regulations.
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the GOPÂ’s vice presidential nominee in 2008, draws big, enthusiastic crowds wherever she goes, even if party insiders question her ability to be elected president. SheÂ’ll be in New Orleans, too.
In Texas, Perry fended off HutchisonÂ’s challenge by running as an anti-Washington, anti-establishment candidate. He welcomed support from Tea Party activists and other hard-core conservatives.
(Mitt) Romney and other more pro-establishment contenders are edging to the right and anxiously watching to see how high the Tea Party tide will rise."
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:38 AM (VRJIW)
I think the MSM has shot their wad for influencing elections. And I don't think there is enough stupid overly religious people in SC to put Huck up front.
The ONLY way Huck can win SC is for there to be 20 candidates on the ticket with a fairly even split between them and Huck come out ahead by a few points WITH the Republicans NOT having fixed the ludicrous winner take all shit. In that case yes, Huck could win by getting 10 or 11% of the vote.
The RNC better start fixing that crap soon.
Posted by: Vic at April 08, 2010 11:39 AM (QrA9E)
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:40 AM (bKMRL)
Most Mormons are extremely conservative and they are hard-working, God-fearing people.
Some of them, however, are Democrats.
Harry Reid and Mitt Romney share both a religion and a political belief system that will allow them to work together in a bi-partisan way to "solve problems." They are the pro-establishment candidates. Neither one sees a problem with the government taking over the health care system. Romney got it done in Massachusetts and Reid got it done federally using Massachusetts as the testing ground.
Now Massachusetts is going broke and unemployment is rampant.
Do you want Harry Reid solving problems with Mitt Romney? Or Barack Obama?
I don't.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:43 AM (VRJIW)
I am not anti-Mormon. I encourage you to read the Book of Mormon and to view the PBS documentary and seek other sources of information so that you can decide for yourself whether you agree with how Mormons operate in society and how that would impact a Romney Presidency with Harry Reid in the Senate.
Mormons operate a certain way in society. You may agree that it's a good way. I suggest you educate yourself to the way they operate in the society they want to create and have created for themselves.
I've lived under Romney's leadership. I've watched how his policies, shaped by his Mormon upbringing and his leftist tendencies, have impacted my life and the lives of my family members. He's hurt my family. He's made us poorer. He worked with Democrats to enact oppressive taxes and a very expensive health insurance mandate here.
After living through that, and still suffering from its after-effects, I cannot support the man. He will work with his fellow Mormon(s) in the Senate to enact Democrat legislative priorities. I don't want my President working with Democrats to enact their legislation.
I want my President to stop them.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:48 AM (VRJIW)
Romney is a walking billboard for blue-blood Republicans that only think of the average working Republican as someone to fix a flat tire on their limo. He'd let us vote for him if he must.
If he can straighten out his condescending elitist disdain for the unwashed masses, he might have a shot.
Posted by: sifty at April 08, 2010 11:50 AM (F9NPo)
Trying to predict a Mormon politician's actions from the Book of Mormon makes about as much sense as trying to predict a supposed Christian's actions from the Bible. Mormons are individuals who make up their own minds.
Granted, the Salt Lake City hierarchy could enforce its will through excommunication; but, considering that they haven't excommunicated Reid, it seems that they are not willing to do so.
I also want my President to stop the leftists, and I agree that Romney would be unlikely to do so. John Cornyn also seems unlikely to lead a fight against the Left, and I he isn't a Mormon.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 11:56 AM (bKMRL)
There is a school of thought (maybe I just invented it; maybe he did) that makes Romney's experience with healthcare a kind of triangulation that reassures non-conservatives, but doesn't make him a no go in the eyes of conservatives--what do you think of that?
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 11:56 AM (k99rL)
"Do Mormons control the world?"
No, only Utah.
Wikipedia:
"About 80% of Utah's Legislature are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, while they account for 61 percent of the population. Since becoming a state in 1896, Utah has had only two non-Mormon governors.
Utah is much more conservative than the United States as a whole, particularly on social issues. Compared to other Republican-dominated states in the Mountain West such as Wyoming, Utah politics have a more moralistic and less libertarian character according to David Magleby.
In 1998 the Church expressed concern that Utahns perceived the Republican Party as an LDS institution and authorized lifelong Democrat Marlin Jensen to promote LDS bipartisanship."
Do you want a bi-partisan President working with Harry Reid?
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 11:59 AM (VRJIW)
The reason I don't like Romney is that he's winked at some of the most vicious blue-blood attacks on Sarah Palin by David Frum, et al. He lets other people do the dirty work and thinks we're too dumb to notice.
If he wants my vote in the general election--he's already lost it in the primaries--he'll need to condemn swine like Frum.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 12:00 PM (bKMRL)
There ain't no way we make it to 2012 as a whole Country.
No way.
Posted by: TXMarko at April 08, 2010 12:01 PM (3YPqe)
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 12:04 PM (g4J4S)
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 12:06 PM (k99rL)
-----------
Isn't there supposed to be someone summoning meteors?
Posted by: Ancient Mayans at April 08, 2010 12:06 PM (3K4hn)
Romney's experience with healthcare a kind of triangulation that reassures non-conservatives, but doesn't make him a no go in the eyes of conservatives--what do you think of that?
The fact that he's saying Mass. health care was a good idea when conservatives are yelling "repeal" doesn't bode well for him.
Posted by: Mama AJ at April 08, 2010 12:07 PM (XdlcF)
I think that is the way Democrats think.
Look, Romney believes in government-controlled health care - as evidenced by the fact that he signed such legislation as Governor of Massachusetts.
Barack Obama also believes in government-controlled health care.
Romney and Obama and Reid share beliefs. Romney has joined with Democrats to take over health care (in Massachusetts) and force people to buy insurance. Just like Obama has just done.
What is the difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama vis-a-vis government control over our lives and raising taxes through IRS mandates to purchase products?
Romney = Obama
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 12:08 PM (VRJIW)
Except that it's both repeal and replace, also I agree it's at best a tightrope walk, and would be political death if the GOP primary was the only thing that mattered, but it's not.
The essential is that there are several dynamics involved in what someone is politically; its not just left-right. That's both why Romney has great potential and great "?"s. Same why Palin is less viable than some of us hope, or would like her to be.
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 12:13 PM (k99rL)
Compared to other Republican-dominated states in the Mountain West such as Wyoming, Utah politics have a more moralistic and less libertarian character according to David Magleby.
Since someguy put this out there, I want to comment:
It is true that Utah is more socially conservative than other intermountain West states, but not as much as is commonly thought. Even in my own state, Nevada, the idea that we're some sort of libertarian paradise is a misunderstanding.
Generally, western states have two kinds of people:
1. Old-fashioned conservatives who adhere to older social conventions. This generally means being staunchly pro-gun and usually somewhat pro-life. We aren't talking about evangelicals here--although there are plenty of those two--but we are talking about people who would have been at home in the Fifties, or at least the Eighties, not because God Told Them To, but because they consider that the decent way to behave. Usually they are more common in smaller towns.
2. California refugees who left their state when its leftist policies ruined it, but who maintain the generally leftist Californian outlook.
The reason the western states swung toward the Dems in 2006 and 2008 wasn't that a bunch of cowboys said, "Dadgummit, them evangelicals is sure screwin' up our hoedowns." It was because they had more California voters in them.
The cowboy types still voted Republican and still held socially conservative views; the CA refugees voted Democrat, and maintained their hatred for "rednecks."
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 12:14 PM (bKMRL)
/tortured sentence structure and logical flow to use a couple of funny monikers I (think I) invented
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 12:19 PM (g4J4S)
ParisParamus: It isn't just health care that Romney went leftist on. He also was a gun control supporter and a pro-abortionist. Basically his governorship consisted of (a) get elected; (b) sign everything sent to him by the far-left Democrat/Communist MA legislature; (c) announce he wouldn't run again for a second term.
The real question should be: Why should we vote for him? His accomplishments are zero. So are his personal beliefs.
I'd even rather have Gun Control Giuliani. At least he did a good job as mayor of NYC.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 12:22 PM (bKMRL)
I suspect (he said hopefully) that the day of the Republican centrist is past.
Then please call John Cornyn and tell him to stop saying that we won't try to undo Obamacare.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 12:23 PM (bKMRL)
I mentioned this in the context of a commenter suggesting they were leaning toward Romney because Huckabee's fundamentalism bothered them.
Romney is not drawn from the ranks of conservatives who believe in small government (as evidenced by his takeover of health care in Massachusetts, support for individual mandates, support for huge tax increases, etc.).
Romney is drawn from the fundamentalist conservative wing ... same as Huckabee. Both men are fervent believers in the moralistic aspects of Republicanism - Romney driven there by his life as a devout Mormon.
That's why Romney has no problem working with Democrats. He shares their beliefs about the size and scope of government intrusion into our lives. And he is cut from the same cloth as Huckabee vis-a-vis fundamentalism.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 12:25 PM (VRJIW)
someguy, are you really trying to make a point about present-day motivations with an event that happened over 150 years ago?
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 12:27 PM (g4J4S)
You may be right, but you need to distinguish between being less conservative, and having no, or too few principles to ground your position(s). McCain is not Romney is not McCain
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 12:30 PM (k99rL)
No, I just thought that, in the context of the unique history of Mormonism, a joke about watching Mormons kill children was in poor taste, so I linked the author of that joke to some public sources of information with which he can inform himself.
The internet makes it very easy to link people to publicly available information they may not be aware of so that they don't make inappropriate jokes about Mormons killing children.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 12:36 PM (VRJIW)
Someguy, is that your trip? Fear of the Judgmental Christian Menace?
If so, you can relax. Social conservatives as a whole are much more likely to be fiscal conservatives as well. Both Romney and Huckabee tilted left because they governed Democrat states. (Arkansas is southern and nominally conservative, but it has such an entrenched Democrat establishment that both GOP--Huckabee, Rockefeller--and Democrat governors--Clinton, Tucker--tend to govern far to the left of the voters). Nevertheless, if you compare, say Jim DeMint (social conservative) vs. John McCain (not), you will find that DeMint is much more libertarian economically.
This is related to what I said about western states: they aren't anomalous libertarian purists who want the government to stay away from both health clinics and abortion clinics, or who want married gay couples with automatic weapons. On the contrary, they are either old-fashioned western conservatives, who don't much like the federal government but support Judeo-Christian ethics; or they are CA refugees who ruined their last state, and who now want the government to take guns away from their new neighbors.
Posted by: Ken at April 08, 2010 12:41 PM (bKMRL)
Sarcastic joke about a Mormon killing and eating a child: Inappropriate & in poor taste (because of an event that happened 153 years ago)
Thnx for the tip, someguy
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 12:45 PM (g4J4S)
No, that was the original commentator's trip.
The original commenter to whom I was referring was concerned about Huckabee's fundamentalism; and was leaning toward the equally fundamental Romney as some sort of a fallback position - not really understanding that Romney is a "big government" Republican who is very fundamental owing to his Mormon upbringing.
I don't like Romney because I've had to live under his leadership and am still paying for it. He's a big-taxing, big government Republican like John McCain ... who cannot defeat Barack Obama any more than McCain did.
His Mormonism informs these policies; and so you should educate yourself about his Mormonism for that reason.
The difference between Romney and Huckabee is that Romney is a Mormon. Otherwise, they are interchangable with each other, and for that matter, Harry Reid and Barack Obama.
All from the same cloth in my view - judging them on their records.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 12:47 PM (VRJIW)
Mormons operate a certain way in society. You may agree that it's a good way. I suggest you educate yourself to the way they operate in the society they want to create and have created for themselves.
I've lived under Romney's leadership. I've watched how his policies, shaped by his Mormon upbringing and his leftist tendencies, have impacted my life and the lives of my family members. He's hurt my family. He's made us poorer. He worked with Democrats to enact oppressive taxes and a very expensive health insurance mandate here.
After living through that, and still suffering from its after-effects, I cannot support the man. He will work with his fellow Mormon(s) in the Senate to enact Democrat legislative priorities. I don't want my President working with Democrats to enact their legislation.
I want my President to stop them.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 03:48 PM (VRJIW)
I'm going to "pull a someguy" right now.
Hey Someguy,
YOU ARE A FUCKING BIGOT!
Read back through what you wrote. It's not about Romney, it's about Mormons. The Mormons didn't make Romney vote a certain way, Romney made his own decisions. Romney was pro-choice. That is as anti a Mormon position as there can be. You've exposed yourself. Go crawl in a fucking hole.
Posted by: the guy who forgot to include the at April 08, 2010 12:48 PM (YVZlY)
You're welcome.
I think you got it.
It is inappropriate to make jokes about Mormons killing children, because they have this massacre event in their history that still haunts the Mormon Church where they did hunt down and kill children. It evokes in them great shame.
It is rude to make jokes about this. So please stop.
I linked you to the history because you are clearly unaware of it and its impact on current Mormons - who explain in the Frontline documentary exactly how this event still echoes in the Mormon Church.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 12:51 PM (VRJIW)
The idea that Palin is not going to run is pure fantasy. She's been running hard since her book release last fall. What's she doing at SRLC this weekend? Not catering, brotha.
Its going to be Palin v Romney, limited gov't v. big gov't. Palin wins in a rout.
Posted by: Les Grossman at April 08, 2010 01:08 PM (jat5l)
It is rude to make jokes about this. So please stop."
Not to go all intellectual on you, someguy, but suck my dick.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 01:09 PM (g4J4S)
You know what? Suck my dick twice.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 01:24 PM (g4J4S)
Or they could have given IOUs to the doctors, like California did to those dumb enough to overpay.
Or laid off some employees so the claims would back up and the doctors would not get paid until more money came in.
Doctors don't need to eat, do they? Maybe they could give the IOUs to the med schools for their student loans.
Better yet, maybe the government would take them as tax payments. Or they could go for malpractice insurance premiums, because lawyers don't need to eat either.
Do I have to solve everything?
Posted by: MarkD at April 08, 2010 01:36 PM (YhZfg)
Yeah... lucky bastards. They got the comic relief. We got the humorroid.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 01:41 PM (g4J4S)
Before Mitt Romney came to Massachusetts and worked with Democrats to pass the health care bill, I was not required to purchase health insurance.
After Mitt Romney worked with the Democrats and signed RomneyCare in Massachusetts, I was required to purchase a health insurance policy or face Massachusetts IRS fines and penalties.
This tax increase cost me and my family $13,000 a year, which is the average health insurance premium in the state today (but it's going up every year). Massachusetts residents pay the highest premiums of any state because of this law. We're required to buy it.
Romney didn't veto the bill ... he was for it. He signed it. He worked with Democrats to craft the legislation in fact. He thought it was a good idea.
Mitt Romney passed one of the largest tax increases in the history of the Commonwealth and then promptly moved out of state so he and his family wouldn't be subject to those taxes. He moved back to Utah.
Republicans here will never forgive him - and you should be aware we'll work against him if Republicans elsewhere nominate him nationally to lead our ticket in 2012.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 01:42 PM (VRJIW)
At least I don't make jokes about Mormons killing children.
That's over the line and you should apologize to those Mormons who are reading this blog. They have a unique history in this area and I'm sure they don't appreciate you joking about it.
Posted by: someguy at April 08, 2010 01:44 PM (VRJIW)
And you should suck my dick.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 01:51 PM (g4J4S)
Oh well. There's always next time.
Posted by: jwpaine at April 08, 2010 01:57 PM (g4J4S)
In any case, Palin isn't running in 2012. 2020? Maybe; hopefully not 2016 because you know what that will have meant.
Posted by: ParisParamus at April 08, 2010 02:05 PM (W3eob)
Posted by: eman at April 08, 2010 05:19 PM (QZA9F)
Posted by: anyhu at April 09, 2010 12:33 AM (paWLR)
thank you ...
ÃáÃá ãæÇÞÚ ÇáÊÃáÃÉ ßæßÊÃá ÇáÇÞÊÕÇà ÇáãäÒáà ãäÊÃÃÇÊ ãäÊÃÃÇÊ ßæßÊÃá
Posted by: sultan at April 09, 2010 10:54 PM (WFYoY)
Posted by: aziz at May 05, 2011 10:03 AM (F61jX)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2751 seconds, 528 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: tank at April 08, 2010 08:02 AM (CW29u)