March 03, 2010
— Ace From the Corner:
EXCERPTS FROM THE PRESIDENT'S REMARKS ON HEALTH INSURANCEREFORM TODAYPlease find below excerpts from President Obama's remarks this afternoon as prepared for delivery:
"I don't believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance company bureaucrats more control over health care in America. I believe it's time to give the American people more control over their own health insurance. I don't believe we can afford to leave life-and-death decisions about health care to the discretion of insurance company executives alone. I believe that doctors and nurses like the ones in this room should be free to decide what's best for their patients.
The proposal I've put forward gives Americans more control over their health care by holding insurance companies more accountable. It builds on the current system where most Americans get their health insurance from their employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Because I can tell you that as the father of two young girls, I wouldn't want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor."
***
"So this is our proposal. This is where we've ended up. It's an approach that has been debated and changed and I believe improved over the last year. It incorporates the best ideas from Democrats and Republicans - including some of the ideas that Republicans offered during the health care summit, like funding state grants on medical malpractice reform and curbing waste, fraud, and abuse in the health care system.
Republicans didn't suggest funding state grants to explore possible, hypothetical malpractice reform.
"My proposal also gets rid of many of the provisions that had no place in health care reform - provisions that were more about winning individual votes in Congress than improving health care for all Americans."
Still lacking? Provisions that win individual votes in the American electorate.
"***"At stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don't know how this plays politically, but I know it's right. And so I ask Congress to finish its work, and I look forward to signing this reform into law."
That's the "We have to prove we can govern" nonsense.
"Governing" has generally consisted of securing the consent of the governed previously in America. But that's too onerous for the Sheep of God, so governance is now defined without that part.
Posted by: Ace at
09:18 AM
| Comments (313)
Post contains 472 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: joncelli at March 03, 2010 09:20 AM (RD7QR)
what truly us scary is how impudent he is in face of staggering opposition
Posted by: eddiebear at March 03, 2010 09:21 AM (wnU1W)
I don't believe a word you say.
Posted by: Tami at March 03, 2010 09:22 AM (VuLos)
Posted by: Marcus Welby at March 03, 2010 09:23 AM (5V8C8)
The campaign ads are even now composing themselves.
Posted by: Intrepid at March 03, 2010 09:24 AM (92zkk)
They should have a Conference Committee to merge the House and Senate bills, but that would require 60 votes in the Senate. They are promising to pass the Senate bill and after the House does that, they will add bribes to House members through reconciliation. . . and they will take out the objectionable expenses to Fl, Louisiana, and other buyoffs.
Our government is for sale. The problem is that the people are buying government with our money without our consent. If it is a good bill, you shouldn't have to pay people off to get their vote.
I don't have confidence in the future of this country.
Posted by: ThackerAgency at March 03, 2010 09:25 AM (HhRUR)
Posted by: snafu at March 03, 2010 09:25 AM (8d28r)
Posted by: "Rowdy" Prezadizzle Earflaps McAwesomepecs at March 03, 2010 09:25 AM (hLd6l)
Posted by: Joe Fuckin' Biden at March 03, 2010 09:25 AM (0FiCa)
Posted by: Ray-man at March 03, 2010 09:26 AM (V//+X)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 03, 2010 09:29 AM (1Jaio)
No, they are laughing out loud.
14 The ghosts of V. I. Lenin and J. V. Stalin are smiling right now.
Posted by: skye at March 03, 2010 09:29 AM (HwMXR)
Posted by: conscious and believes Ace is a Fn genious at March 03, 2010 09:29 AM (Vu6sl)
Bla bla bla another fking speach by the one. More rhetoric and thus he vomits forth more lies.
It would be nice to hear him say:
My fellow Americans, we are going to nationalize healthcare and take over your life. The Republicans are opposing me on this for political reasons so I am just going to jam it up theirs and your ass with the help of parliementary tricks and unconstitutional acts in the House and Senate. Don't like that do you? hahahaha FU, I won.
Now that would be truth in advertising.
Posted by: Vic at March 03, 2010 09:29 AM (QrA9E)
Sigh, it just isn't the same as when Barry delivers it is his rich, warm baritone while beaming at us with his kind eyes and confident smile.
I'll be in my, uhuhuh.............Never mind.
Posted by: Leftard Moonbat at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (gLSaO)
WOW, he isn't really going to say that is he? Taking LIAR to a brand new plane are we.
Posted by: bill-tb at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (y+QfZ)
Posted by: hutch1200 at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (zQ+Jy)
Two lies in one sentence. Pretty good.
Posted by: Farmer Joe at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (z4es9)
He came up with that? I thought it was in the speech somewhere...
20 Ace's best post title evah!!!!
Posted by: skye at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (HwMXR)
Posted by: Penfold at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (1PeEC)
Nancy Botox just does not yet have the votes, and she needs a little time and arm-twisting to drum them up.
Posted by: Intrepid at March 03, 2010 09:30 AM (92zkk)
Obama isn't interested in governing, Obama is interested in going down in history as the democrat that got health care reform passed. It's all about him.
Posted by: robtr at March 03, 2010 09:31 AM (fwSHf)
Dear Present Obama,
How many times do we have to say NO!
FUCK OFF.
Sincerely,
The unwashed maasses.
Posted by: Americans for less intrusive gov't. at March 03, 2010 09:32 AM (DYJjQ)
So much talking, so little accomplishment.
Posted by: kallisto at March 03, 2010 09:33 AM (+FkcS)
Posted by: MaureenTheTemp at March 03, 2010 09:34 AM (8cihe)
Posted by: huerfano at March 03, 2010 09:34 AM (gLSaO)
28 Yes that's just what I thought when the Dems came up with the 4-6 week time frame after the summit. Arm twisting, bribing AND furiously digging through every congressman's FBI file.
And what dirt they don't find on a legislator, they'll just make up! POOF!
Easy.
Posted by: kallisto at March 03, 2010 09:35 AM (+FkcS)
Posted by: kathysaysso at March 03, 2010 09:36 AM (ZtwUX)
Posted by: doug at March 03, 2010 09:37 AM (Sa/HV)
Many times in our history we have taken up arms to protect a minority against the tyrannical majority in other lands. We, unlike Nazi Germany or Mussolini's Italy, have never stopped being a nation of laws, not of men.
But witness how men with motives and a majority can manipulate law to cruel and unjust ends. Historian Alan Bullock writes that Hitler's dictatorship rested on the constitutional foundation of a single law, the Enabling Law. Hitler needed a two-thirds vote to pass that law, and he cajoled his opposition in the Reichstag to support it. Bullock writes that "Hitler was prepared to promise anything to get his bill through, with the appearances of legality preserved intact." And he succeeded.
Hitler's originality lay in his realization that effective revolutions, in modern conditions, are carried out with, and not against, the power of the State: the correct order of events was first to secure access to that power and then begin his revolution. Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality; he recognized the enormous psychological value of having the law on his side. Instead, he turned the law inside out and made illegality legal.
Posted by: Tami at March 03, 2010 09:37 AM (VuLos)
I do not believe this is some bluff to appease the left. They are going to try to ram this through because they need A WIN. Obama NEEDS something to say "look what I did for you."
Without that, after the novemeber elections his whole left wing agenda is basically doomed and he knows it. If he can't get it now, then his presidency will be a failure.
Posted by: Dan at March 03, 2010 09:39 AM (1jzSs)
Posted by: Intrepid at March 03, 2010 09:39 AM (92zkk)
Agree. On top of that, Pelosi tells Congress to lose their jobs for this piece of shitslation. In other words, she is admitting the public doesn't want this. She is admitting going against the will of the people. This ASTOUNDS me. Treason. Flat out.
Posted by: Twinks at March 03, 2010 09:39 AM (wRPBa)
Thanks Tami.
Is it right for me to be scared of a muslim, and find a patriot in a crazy ex-klansman?
Posted by: hutch1200 at March 03, 2010 09:40 AM (zQ+Jy)
basically doomed and he knows it. If he can't get it now, then his presidency will be is a failure.
Posted by: Dan at March 03, 2010 01:39 PM (1jzSs)
FIFY
Posted by: Mike H at March 03, 2010 09:41 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 09:42 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 09:42 AM (0GFWk)
The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future.
How many times do I have to tell you, I DON'T NEED ANY FREAKING GOVERNMENT BEAUROCRAT LOOKING OUT FOR MY INTERESTS!! I NEED FOR YOU FREAKING GOVERNMENT BEAUROCRATS TO STAY OUT OF MY FREAKING BUSINESS SO I CAN LOOK OUT FOR MY OWN INTERESTS!!!!!!
pant, pant, pant
Now, go organize a community somewhere.
Posted by: katya at March 03, 2010 09:44 AM (qZ0hs)
Does that fucking piece of shit believe this? I want him to GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY WAY. I do NOT WANT WASHINGTON TO SOLVE MY PROBLEMS.
FUCK YOU OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!! You are not my president!
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 09:45 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 09:46 AM (2zkIP)
Now, go organize a community somewhere.
Posted by: katya at March 03, 2010 01:44 PM (qZ0hs)
Katya, I just read this at Reason.
Libertarians are dangerous because they want to take over the government and leave you alone.
Posted by: robtr at March 03, 2010 09:46 AM (fwSHf)
The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future.
When has "Washington" ever done that anyway?
Posted by: Damn Skippy at March 03, 2010 09:47 AM (VDgKF)
Why in Gaia's name haven't states that have recall provisions started yet?
As for the Doofus in Chief, I know that by the time you'd get impeachment rolling it would be time for him to leave -- but it sure as hell would make a statement and notation in revised history books.
Can SC get rid of Lindsey Grahamnesty over this Crap N Tax stuff?
Posted by: RushBabe at March 03, 2010 09:47 AM (LKkE8)
Posted by: hutch1200 at March 03, 2010 09:47 AM (zQ+Jy)
I won
Posted by: Barry at March 03, 2010 09:48 AM (q177U)
The American Soviet people want to know if it's still possible for Washington Moscow to look out for their interests and their future.
ftfweewee
Posted by: Dang Straights at March 03, 2010 09:48 AM (fx8sm)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 09:48 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: Date Nite with the Senate at March 03, 2010 09:49 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: maddogg at March 03, 2010 09:49 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Y-not has a message for Barry at March 03, 2010 09:50 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 01:48 PM (AZGON)
Cause you think you are me, Obaworm
Posted by: G*d at March 03, 2010 09:50 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: beedubya at March 03, 2010 09:51 AM (AnTyA)
The proposal I've put forward gives Americans more control over their health care by holding insurance companies more accountable.
A FREE FREE MARKET WOULD DO THAT YOU MUSLIM COMMUNIST UGLY POS.
Posted by: dagny at March 03, 2010 09:51 AM (g6POu)
Nah, me neither. Going by his track record, this speech will be a huge debacle and drive his numbers even lower and making the whole reconciliation thing a bigger apocalypse than it was already going to be.
Keep talking, Barry, you bumblefuck.
Posted by: nickless at March 03, 2010 09:51 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: robtr at March 03, 2010 09:51 AM (fwSHf)
Posted by: Fresh Air at March 03, 2010 09:51 AM (gJV9g)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (2zkIP)
Oh good Kathleen Sebilius. Her answer? Post partum abortion
Posted by: dagny at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (g6POu)
This is the first day of the end of your career.
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (cGaVN)
Rush giving running commentary helps hold down my lunch
Posted by: AE at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (kSfPT)
Damn! This guy doesn't know when he's licked. At some point he is gonna have one hellova meltdown.
I hope I'm not around when he sets fire to America.
Posted by: katya at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (qZ0hs)
Is it right for me to be scared of a muslim, and find a patriot in a crazy ex-klansman?
Posted by: hutch1200 at March 03, 2010 01:40 PM (zQ+Jy)
Yes. Although, as someone has already suggested, I'm sure that ex-klansman will drool on his way to vote FOR this POS.
Posted by: Tami at March 03, 2010 09:52 AM (VuLos)
This is the biggest gamble of Obama's presidency. Nancy Pelosi may not have the votes to pass the healthcare bill through the House. So, Obama is telling the Blue Dogs that he is prepared to sacrifice them in order to get ObamaCare. Will they cave in and throw away their chances in November, or will they finally live up to their "conservative" label?
Obama: stop smoking smoker!!! How hypercritical.. he wants to change the world but he cannot even change himself!! He is a joke!! Obama just revealed his total partisanship.. he is the president of his constituents not all Americans.
Posted by: sickinmass at March 03, 2010 09:53 AM (Dxfei)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 01:48 PM (AZGON)
Not bloody likely. THAT Messiah suffered so that His people might live- This "messiah" lives to make the people suffer.
Posted by: Nighthawk at March 03, 2010 09:54 AM (OtQXp)
Someone tell me how the system can remain viable when people can make one premium and begin tapping the system for their bills immediately.
Posted by: nickless at March 03, 2010 09:55 AM (MMC8r)
Oh, don't get my hopes up.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 09:55 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 09:55 AM (2zkIP)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has picked liberal firebrand Rep. Pete Stark to replace ousted Chairman Charles Rangel on the tax-writing committee, according to a House leadership aide.
Posted by: Y-not at March 03, 2010 09:55 AM (Kn9r7)
Keep it up, Mr. The Vapid One™. You and the rest of your comrades are soon to be funemployed and your whole agenda reversed. I don't care how long it takes, but this momentary fuck-up by America will be but a short footnote in history.
You, Nanzi and Hairy are going down.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 03, 2010 09:56 AM (i3AsK)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 09:56 AM (cGaVN)
Posted by: G*d at March 03, 2010 09:56 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: AE at March 03, 2010 09:57 AM (kSfPT)
Posted by: Cicero at March 03, 2010 09:57 AM (QKKT0)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 03, 2010 09:57 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Houstonian at March 03, 2010 09:57 AM (9ypY/)
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has picked liberal firebrand Rep. Pete Stark to replace ousted Chairman Charles Rangel on the tax-writing committee, according to a House leadership aide.
Jesus, I think I would rather have Rangel.
Posted by: jewells at March 03, 2010 09:57 AM (l/N7H)
Posted by: fugazi at March 03, 2010 09:58 AM (4bvZp)
Is "liberal firebrand" the new PC for "so fucking nuts they pose a danger to themselves and others"?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 09:58 AM (mR7mk)
Here's my first-ever premium of $300. Now cover me, you heartless vampire insurance company.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 09:59 AM (2zkIP)
They are waiting for us to act. We're waiting for this bill to DIE!
They are waiting for us to lead. Nope, we don't have a ring through our nose, we are waiting for you to get out of the way.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 03, 2010 09:59 AM (cpuvG)
I'm looking forward to the version with puppets and dry ice fog.
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 10:00 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:00 AM (cGaVN)
____________
I would prefer he finish his speech with "Mekka Lekka Hai Mekka Heinie Ho".
Posted by: jambi at March 03, 2010 10:00 AM (ZtwUX)
Meanwhile, either we stop this pile o' crap or we're screwed.
"If they mean to have a war, let it begin here......."
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at March 03, 2010 10:01 AM (JrRME)
I was thinking about this this morning. I think we're headed for (or have already entered) an American civil war, except it is a cold war. But it's a war for our union and our nature, just as the first one was.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:01 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: Fresh Air at March 03, 2010 10:01 AM (gJV9g)
Let me fill you m & m's in on something VERY BASIC.
Obama is a Marxist, ergo the Kenyan Kommie will sign NOTHING that doesn't lead to GOVERNMENT CONTROL. Nothing.
It is useless to analyze anything he says without this kernal of wisdom.
He is not honest and he continues to TELL US, not ask us.
Posted by: gus at March 03, 2010 10:02 AM (Vqruj)
Bingo. The government could just mandate a kiosk in every hospital in the country, where people who get brought in without insurance can make their first payment and then get all the treatment they want before the check even gets deposited. Problem solved, right?
Posted by: nickless at March 03, 2010 10:02 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: citizen khan at March 03, 2010 10:03 AM (qB+Ht)
Posted by: Y-not at March 03, 2010 10:03 AM (Kn9r7)
Posted by: KilltheHippies at March 03, 2010 10:04 AM (VKfXw)
Posted by: fugazi
fugazi, I don't even want to consider the "If you pass this" threat. The Dems' loss of power is nowhere close to payback for what will happen to this country.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:04 AM (2zkIP)
It's extremely diffcult for me to any more outraged today. My eyes are already bloody and I'm eating my blood pressure medicine like cand, which means chewing them first.
Is it time to start drinking yet?
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 03, 2010 10:04 AM (i3AsK)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:05 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: Y-not at March 03, 2010 02:03 PM (Kn9r7)
Nope, it's just the color of royalty is all.
Posted by: Nighthawk at March 03, 2010 10:05 AM (OtQXp)
Posted by: citizen khan at March 03, 2010 10:05 AM (qB+Ht)
Posted by: Just Makes Shit Up at March 03, 2010 10:05 AM (ucq49)
How many people can get to a Tea Party rally in DC in time to do one of those hippy-dippy "sit-ins" to prevent Congress from meeting the day they start moving on this? Probably have to be a couple hundred thousand to ring the entire area. Too bad we have jobs.
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:06 AM (cGaVN)
=More speeches.
Fine, asshole. Bring it.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:06 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: maddogg at March 03, 2010 10:06 AM (OlN4e)
Heh.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:07 AM (mR7mk)
Is "liberal firebrand" the new PC for "so fucking nuts they pose a danger to themselves and others"?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 01:58 PM (mR7mk)
Yes.
Fortney "pete" Stark was always a nut-job. But, he works community groups tirelessly in San Mateo County and has so much Name Recognition that he owns that seat.
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at March 03, 2010 10:07 AM (JrRME)
Posted by: John Bolton, Miguel Estrada, Janice Rogers Brown, numerous other Bush nominees at March 03, 2010 10:07 AM (TctZV)
If this bill gets passed does anyone know how soon the requirement that everyone buy health insurance kicks in?
Posted by: KLI50 at March 03, 2010 10:07 AM (p4P7P)
Real world
1. require coverage of preexisting conditions
- people drop insurance and rates go up...
2. Require mandatory coverage or pay a fine
- insurers create minimal coverage policies, people rather pay fine...
3. Mandate coverage, mandate fees...
4. Government run health care
Democrats world
1. Require coverage of preexisting conditions
!!! hey, look over here at the pretty rainbow!!!!
Posted by: nine coconuts at March 03, 2010 10:08 AM (DHNp4)
That's how Medicare works. Don't have to sign up until you need it.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:08 AM (mR7mk)
Just caught part of the speech on CNN. Bottom banner read " It's true that this proposal will cost some money." Next banner said "This proposal is paid for."
Reminds me of a sign I saw on a door. "Automatic door. Pull to open"
Posted by: harleycowboy at March 03, 2010 10:08 AM (JKGfQ)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:08 AM (0GFWk)
What is this, number 8?
This guy REALLY likes the sound of his own voice, doesn't he?
Posted by: looking closely at March 03, 2010 10:09 AM (6Q9g2)
It would also be nice if the GOP could get back to talking about the main problem, which is that this is totally and unequivocally un-Constitutional. I can't stand that they are always going on about costs (which the dems and the CBO just lie about, anyway) but seem almost embarrassed to explain how un-American and ILLEGAL the Indonesian's ideas are.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 10:09 AM (A46hP)
It is useless to analyze anything he says without this kernal of wisdom.
Who's analyzing? We're freaking.
Posted by: katya at March 03, 2010 10:09 AM (qZ0hs)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:09 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:09 AM (cGaVN)
Posted by: shoey at March 03, 2010 10:10 AM (Ed9Xn)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:10 AM (0GFWk)
I'm hoping it's jaudice from liver failure. DRINK UP!!!!!!
Posted by: harleycowboy at March 03, 2010 10:10 AM (JKGfQ)
WTF kinda stupid name is Fortney anyway?
Posted by: Fortney Stark at March 03, 2010 10:10 AM (VDgKF)
Posted by: gus at March 03, 2010 10:11 AM (Vqruj)
but,....
Medicare is a social safety net for low income people
It is run by the states (albeit with fed control)
Medicare sucks and no one wants that as a standard
costs are reflective of this reality
No sane, honest legislator would use that as a model for the entire country.
Posted by: nine coconuts at March 03, 2010 10:11 AM (DHNp4)
And the horse (and I think everyone here knows who I mean) you rode in on.
Posted by: Y-not at March 03, 2010 10:11 AM (Kn9r7)
As troublesome as it is to keeping hitting the SHIFT key and the APOSTROPHE key, that's why I always call it "health" "care" "reform." It's a lie from beginning to end.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:12 AM (2zkIP)
Been hearing that a lot from him lately. Also heard that from Van Jones (I think it came at the end of he NAACP speech where he talked about how he had love for Glenn Beck)
Good to see the commies keeping their America transforming talking points coordinated.
Posted by: little evil at March 03, 2010 10:13 AM (TctZV)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:13 AM (cGaVN)
Will America get a reach around?
Speaking from experience, ahhh no.
Posted by: the chicken at March 03, 2010 10:13 AM (7t+Ws)
Everybody pays new taxes for 3 years before it gets implemented.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 03, 2010 10:13 AM (cpuvG)
Posted by: GarandFan at March 03, 2010 10:14 AM (6mwMs)
but,....
The "but" is pretty much how I understood Heather's post. P.S., Medicare is also a mountain of taxpayer cash that encourages fraud.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:14 AM (2zkIP)
Since I can't afford to pay for any insurance because I'm funemployed and I'll have to go to jail, I'm wondering- will they let me have a laptop in jail?
I gotta keep in touch with y'all morons.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 03, 2010 10:14 AM (i3AsK)
Posted by: FUBAR at March 03, 2010 10:15 AM (1fanL)
And when the voters freak, Rick Perry decides not to do that mistaken thing. He has basic principles and is a basically smart administrator, but also, he simply doesn't go against the will of the people, even when he wants to. That's not the ideal. I liked how Bush was willing to take care of the war effort despite huge opposition. But in domestic policy, it's often smart and honorable to say 'you citizens have convinced me to not go this way, despite my still wanting to'.
Rick Perry is a better man than Obama, but that's not saying very much. Obama knows that the people don't want what he's selling, and he knew it from day 1. He honestly likes that aspect and will go as far as he wants no matter what the people think.
Posted by: throwaway handle at March 03, 2010 10:15 AM (dUOK+)
"And the horse (and I think everyone here knows who I mean) you rode in on."
Horse? Ass, maybe? That'd be me
Posted by: Sheriff Joe at March 03, 2010 10:17 AM (ucq49)
Posted by: er at March 03, 2010 10:17 AM (dtJc/)
Posted by: FUBAR at March 03, 2010 10:18 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: Fresh Air at March 03, 2010 10:18 AM (gJV9g)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:18 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 02:12 PM (2zkIP)
That works for me (though too many SHIFTs are always problematic and dangerous).
Why can't the GOP have just found some better name to call it and stuck with that? I was disappointed enough that they never talk about the Constitutional issues, but at least they could have named it "Health Care Deform" or something - which is more accurate than what The Precedent calls it.
Anyway, this was all inevitable after the GOP participated in the voodoo resuscitation summit, so I'm ticked, but not surprised. Oh well ...
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 10:20 AM (A46hP)
Bills come immediately. Coverage in 4 years.
Posted by: CUS at March 03, 2010 10:20 AM (wOGfT)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 03, 2010 10:20 AM (cpuvG)
a real question for House members is ... Do you trust the Senate to actually fix the Senate bill thru recon ? Because if the House votes yes to the Senate bill, warts and all and Obama signs it then there is nothing that compels the Senate to actually try and pass a recon bill. The Senate gets their bill, done.
Based on all the arm twisting required in the Senate bill does anyone really believe the Senate will agree to strip out significant portions of their bill in a recon bill ? Really ???
Obama can just sing the bill and "pivot" to jobs ...
Posted by: Jeff at March 03, 2010 10:21 AM (B7Wu9)
That's Medicaid. Medicare is for old people, even ones with assets. But yeah--you don't have to pay a premium until you break that hip...and they'll bring you the sign-up forms in the ER.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:21 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: CUS at March 03, 2010 02:20 PM (wOGfT)
This is another completely insane part. Tax us for four years before giving benefits. How easy would it be to repeal, assuming that it somehow passed? It's just crazy, from start to finish.
Posted by: FUBAR at March 03, 2010 10:22 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: docj at March 03, 2010 10:22 AM (D5/Yu)
Posted by: Jeff at March 03, 2010 10:23 AM (B7Wu9)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 10:23 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:24 AM (0GFWk)
Can SC get rid of Lindsey Grahamnesty over this Crap N Tax stuff?
"Recall" at the federal level is a myth. The only provisions in the Consitution for recall are in the executive and judiciary. You can NOT recall a Senator. For removal he either fails to get reelected, he dies in office (most common), he retires, or on rare occasions the Senate can remove him with a 2/3 vote. (hasn't happened since 1862)
Posted by: Vic at March 03, 2010 10:24 AM (QrA9E)
I do not believe this is some bluff to appease the left. They are going to try to ram this through because they need A WIN. Obama NEEDS something to say "look what I did for to you."
FTFY
Posted by: Americans for less obtuse gov't at March 03, 2010 10:24 AM (DYJjQ)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:24 AM (mR7mk)
The more we can extend the timeframe, the better. Elections are 8 months from yesterday. Pence sounded pretty good responding on Fox. He seems on board with the resistance.
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:24 AM (cGaVN)
Double the fuck down.
I double-dog dare you.
Posted by: docj at March 03, 2010 02:22 PM (D5/Yu)
The Precedent is happy to push this to failure. That's his strategy for everything. He doesn't care if it passes or not. He just wants chaos.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 10:25 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:26 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 02:26 PM (0GFWk)
Larry Gatlin, on Hannity's panel, said that McShame should have done that at the voodoo resuscitation summit.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 10:28 AM (A46hP)
That's why we're here. Going where professional pols can't. Blogs are good.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:28 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:29 AM (cGaVN)
Yup. Lacking a Dem supermajority to prevent a filibuster, the Senate bill is effectively locked now. Its either that version passed or start again.
The "only" thing keeping the Senate bill from being law is Pelosi's inability to get a House majority to agree to it. But that is NOT just a small thing. . .its a major thing.
To the extent that reconciliation matters at all, its just a carrot to help persuade House members who otherwise wouldn't vote for the Senate bill to change their minds on it.
The problem is a "chicken and egg" one. Reluctant house members aren't going to want to vote for the Senate bill in blind faith without knowing what the final reconciliation package will look like.
But because of inevitable horse-trading, it will be difficult to precisely define exactly what the reconciliation will consist of until it goes to a final vote (ie AFTER the house members have blindly agreed to it).
Also, its going to be hard just to come up with ANY potential reconciliation that will garner approval from enough House members to pass. Tweak here to gain a vote, and you probably lose a vote there.
Posted by: looking closely at March 03, 2010 10:29 AM (PwGfd)
Yeah maybe, but I still want someone to get up and say he wants to punch the prick in the nose. Yeah I know it's childish and illegal but aaaahh so satisfying.
And also just happens to be what I'd like to do to that "bald communist" that Beck's been showing this week.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 03, 2010 10:29 AM (i3AsK)
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."
it's 1776 again, fellow colonials.
Posted by: Thomas Paine at March 03, 2010 10:31 AM (JrRME)
Posted by: unrealizedviewpoint at March 03, 2010 10:31 AM (kyFpC)
Posted by: ray at March 03, 2010 10:31 AM (Xa4/u)
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:32 AM (2zkIP)
We didn't need the Medicare prescription entitlement, and it has shown no likelihood of finding opposition. I'll bet many who read this blog would be outraged if someone suggested repealing Bush's welfare plan for seniors and drug companies.
Hell, just imagine the campaign for 2012. Ask yourself if the lamestream media will outdo itself in cheerleading for the reelection of President Affirmative Action, the Little Fascist Who Could. Of course they will. It will be surreal.
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 10:32 AM (AZGON)
I heard someone say that the House wants the Senate to go first and the Senate wants the House to go first. Maybe neither will? Obama is like the big retard running through the china shop. Maybe the dems in congress will value their asses more than Obama does and decide to have staring contests.
Posted by: Dang at March 03, 2010 10:33 AM (UA4gE)
I'm no scholar or even that smart but it seems to me that these assholes have been working up to this for months. If we all agree that they need a WIN, then it tells me that they have the votes to do it. Why create the heartache if you don't already know the outcome. Doubt I'm wrong.
This move to the far left was started the very minute that Chicago Jesus became president. Everything after that was just a cardboard facade.
Posted by: Sgt. Fury at March 03, 2010 10:33 AM (XpWHj)
Posted by: Grover at March 03, 2010 10:35 AM (gifD/)
I'm curious: does that work the other way? i.e. if the Senate passes the House bill, Reid whacks it over to Barry's desk?
Because if so it's kind of funny that the burden is all on the House. Don't they get ticked about that?
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:36 AM (2zkIP)
Can the GOP get a spokesman that doesn't look like he was fished out of a river?
Posted by: nickless at March 03, 2010 10:37 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: lincolntf at March 03, 2010 10:37 AM (cGaVN)
But that's true of the last 142 "do-or-die" speeches.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:37 AM (2zkIP)
Heh,
Jim Cramer just said Obama talked and killed the market which is not unusual because he seems to kill the market between 1:30 and 4:00 every day.
Posted by: robtr at March 03, 2010 10:38 AM (fwSHf)
"Can the GOP get a spokesman that doesn't look like he was fished out of a river?"
fished? how 'bout dredged?
Posted by: average moron at March 03, 2010 10:39 AM (ucq49)
Yep, but the Senate needs the 60, plus they already changed it and sent it back.
Because if so it's kind of funny that the burden is all on the House. Don't they get ticked about that?
Yep, especially those fake blue dogs.
Posted by: The book of Stuff Jefferson said at March 03, 2010 10:40 AM (cpuvG)
Posted by: dr kill at March 03, 2010 10:40 AM (qO6T2)
Posted by: Mike H at March 03, 2010 10:40 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: Saltyron at March 03, 2010 10:40 AM (5UD8C)
Posted by: evil libertarian at March 03, 2010 10:40 AM (IeEto)
O/T and fwiw to all California morons generally and those in the Central Valley in particular: GOP Senator Roy Ashburn got arrested for DUI at 4 o'clock this morning in Sacramento.
4 a.m.
On a school night.
WTF?
Posted by: mike d at March 03, 2010 10:41 AM (W0V5W)
Numerous states have recall provisions for their Senators.
No they do not. No State has it. The Supremes have ruled that unconstitutional (indirectly) long long ago. No State has EVER recalled a Senator.
Posted by: Vic at March 03, 2010 10:41 AM (QrA9E)
Obama is so darned smart. And clever. He can just lie to the hoi polloi and they believe everything he says. It's almost like his brazen lying proves how smart he is. And classy.
Posted by: rdbrewer at March 03, 2010 10:42 AM (1bMFn)
In other news, one Kansas City sports columnist has discovered that Tea Partiers are racist: http://tinyurl.com/yc2auy5
Posted by: Johnny Rotten's tooth at March 03, 2010 10:43 AM (A4YqN)
That's not what I say.
Posted by: The book of Stuff Jefferson said at March 03, 2010 02:36 PM (cpuvG)
That slave-owner based his reference to government as a necessary evil on what I wrote earlier. Jefferson was as queer as a two-dollar bill.
Posted by: Thomas Paine at March 03, 2010 10:43 AM (JrRME)
On the othe hand, maybe his brazen lying proves what a self-adoring, narcissistic douchebag he is.
In that case, well, his lying still convinces at least one person!
Posted by: rdbrewer at March 03, 2010 10:44 AM (1bMFn)
Yes, lincoln. A monumental effort, and I'm proud of it and ready to keep fighting.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:44 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 02:08 PM (0GFWk)
Some muck-a-muck from Newfoundland, iirc; I want to say Prime Minister but I don't know if that's right.
Posted by: Captain Hate at March 03, 2010 10:44 AM (ypGDY)
O/T and fwiw to all California morons generally and those in the Central Valley in particular: GOP Senator Roy Ashburn got arrested for DUI at 4 o'clock this morning in Sacramento.
4 a.m.
On a school night.
WTF?
WTF else? Of course he did.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:45 AM (2zkIP)
Expect a 'fix' bill in short order.
Posted by: nickless at March 03, 2010 02:32 PM (MMC8r)
Or else. The unions made a huge stink about this the first time and Barry had to back down. This has been a mess from start to finish but Barry is obsessed with wallowing in the mess.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 03, 2010 10:45 AM (1Jaio)
This man will likely test the limits of the powers of the Presidential executive order. He wants what he wants, and he is not going to moderate. If pushed to extremity, he will use it with gusto.
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 10:46 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: just been fucked at March 03, 2010 10:46 AM (ucq49)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and buckets of scorn for the left at March 03, 2010 10:47 AM (erIg9)
Oh good Kathleen Sebilius. Her answer? Post partum abortion
Posted by: dagny at March 03, 2010 01:52 PM (g6POu)
Can we start with Obama?
And as for BamBam looking orange, he's been looking like that for a while now - either a yellow or an orange tint. I don't know if it's the lighting, or if his make-up is covering up a sallow, jaundiced undertone. Someone said on another blog that it is notoriously difficult to "light" people who have darker skin tones for TV cameras.
I've been wondering if it was alcohol-related...
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at March 03, 2010 10:47 AM (lDHba)
I didn't read it that way.
Posted by: kansas at March 03, 2010 10:47 AM (mka2b)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 02:08 PM (0GFWk)
Some muck-a-muck from Newfoundland, iirc; I want to say Prime Minister but I don't know if that's right.
Posted by: Captain Hate at March 03, 2010 02:44 PM (ypGDY)
It was Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams who went to Florida for heart surgery. He couldn't get it done in time under the Canadian system.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 03, 2010 10:48 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: AmishDude at March 03, 2010 10:48 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Tushar at March 03, 2010 10:48 AM (KXhmI)
Posted by: 52 Percenter at March 03, 2010 10:49 AM (mka2b)
Flanked on both sides by folks in white coats and speaking to an audience full of white-coated doctors, for some reason I keep thinking of that scene in Young Frankenstein where Gene Wilder is teaching medical students. However, I don't expect to hear, "Frankenstein is DooDoo!"
Posted by: Vile Roman at March 03, 2010 10:50 AM (iBzKc)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:51 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: Vile Roman at March 03, 2010 10:51 AM (iBzKc)
Posted by: Vic at March 03, 2010 02:41 PM (QrA9E)
Vic, I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I see "the U.S. Constitution does not provide for the recall of Congresspersons" etc. State laws seem to.Why am I seeing this all over the place?
http://tinyurl.com/ygooce2
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:52 AM (2zkIP)
"our calamity is heightened by reflection that we furnish the means by which we suffer"
Good stuff, eh? Translation: We give government the power to fuck us. Some things never change...........
Posted by: Thomas Paine at March 03, 2010 10:52 AM (JrRME)
And before him, MP Belinda Stronach (rumored to be carnally involved with a certain former POTUS) came here for breast cancer treatment, and the former premier of Quebec came twice.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:52 AM (mR7mk)
If they had the votes, it would already be done, and the Dems would be high-fiving each other and claiming credit, rather than posturing, and bringing out the President for the Nth time.
Posted by: looking closely at March 03, 2010 10:52 AM (PwGfd)
They're already starting to scramble away from the edifice as it starts to crumble.
Obama won't be like Clinton. Rush marvels about how there were no real tell-alls about Clinton. Eventually, Obama will be the most hated man in America and everybody around him will be desperately trying to disassociate themselves.
Posted by: AmishDude at March 03, 2010 10:54 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: AmishDude
To my eternal exasperation, teh One's tricks seem to help. His scores on Rasmussen surged after the SOTU and that Kabuki Konference.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:54 AM (2zkIP)
When are the Democrats in the House going to stand the fuck up and revolt against Obama and Pelosi?
Posted by: mama T at March 03, 2010 10:55 AM (pq986)
George Orwell @ 201
Repeal is not a pipe dream. Remember Prohibition? It was unpopular, and was repealed. Fuck the MSM, they have spent their credibility and are more and more irrelevant to issues at hand. They have been unable to win the public to Zero care, and so their opposition to repeal will be equally effective.
Posted by: maddogg at March 03, 2010 10:55 AM (OlN4e)
If Rahm goes, who'll feed totus?
I said that that damn Jew would wind up under Obama's bus. I really don't think the time is quite right though. He'll wait for a time that he'll be able to blame all Jews for the failings of his CoS. That's just my ignorant opinion.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at March 03, 2010 10:56 AM (r1h5M)
Posted by: King Leonidas at March 03, 2010 02:53 PM (IhQuA)
Or you could fix the NOLA levies by stacking the bloated corpse men.
Posted by: alppuccino at March 03, 2010 10:56 AM (ESeAZ)
Whitlock is so soaked in race I'm surprised he even catches box scores anymore. He just wrote a piece about how Joey Porter intercepting Peyton Manning had racial connotations...I'm pretty sure the only people in America who saw a black man and a white man on that play (instead of a guy in a Saints uni and a guy in a Colts uni) were Whitlock and Stormfront.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:56 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 10:57 AM (0GFWk)
It didn't come with a clause that said 67 Senators would be required to undo it. Apparently proggs learned something from Prohibition.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 10:58 AM (mR7mk)
...
Obama will be the most hated man in America and everybody around him will be desperately trying to disassociate themselves.
------------------------
Obama's post-presidency exile will be . . . well, a precedent.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 10:58 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: The Mega Independent at March 03, 2010 10:58 AM (5I0Yr)
I assume this has already been answered somewhere, but how can this bill pass Constitutional muster (Article 1, section 7) given that it originated in the Senate? How exactly are they weaseling their way out of this?
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at March 03, 2010 10:59 AM (sXLx/)
McConnel said that if Buttfuck* does this then every Repub will run to repeal it. He sounded pretty pissed. I don't know if they will, but can it actually be repealed, especially if it doesn't kick in for a few years?
I am so effing pissed, I can't see straight. I need to go out for a while today, but am scared that if I run across a lefty puke, I'll wind up in jail!
*he didn't exactly say that, but he should have.
Posted by: Steph at March 03, 2010 10:59 AM (riZEn)
It didn't come with a clause that said 67 Senators would be required to undo it. Apparently proggs learned something from Prohibition.
That clause is meaningless. Another law to eliminate that one. You can't make an irreversible law. Thats just silly.
Posted by: maddogg at March 03, 2010 11:00 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: nevergiveup at March 03, 2010 11:00 AM (0GFWk)
When are the Democrats in the House going to stand the fuck up and revolt against Obama and Pelosi?
Democrats have been revolting since 1968.
Posted by: Damn Skippy at March 03, 2010 11:01 AM (VDgKF)
"If Rahm goes, who'll feed totus?"
Or toto for that matter. Just click your heels/receivers three times, saying there's no place like home.
Maybe all the asshats go back to Chicago, the commie hell hole that spawned them.
Posted by: Ave moron at March 03, 2010 11:01 AM (ucq49)
They don't have the guts. Sullen, skulking, evasive gamesmanship will continue to be their way.
Heh, and that's just fine with me as long as it keeps them from "moving forward" to quote a favorite term of Nancy's.
Posted by: arhooley at March 03, 2010 11:03 AM (2zkIP)
Posted by: kansas at March 03, 2010 11:08 AM (mka2b)
Posted by: George Orwell at March 03, 2010 01:48 PM (AZGON)
Or "tetelestai." I'm still waiting for a phantom hand to appear in the Oval Office and write "mene mene tekel upharsin."
Posted by: Insomniac at March 03, 2010 11:10 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Barry McEarflaps at March 03, 2010 11:10 AM (BFqyO)
I have zero interest in reading anything written by a man who believes a football team is "racist" because they hire "too many guys with college degrees"--what, black men can't get college degrees?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 11:12 AM (mR7mk)
Winston Smith would be proud.
Actually, O'Brien would have been proud. Winston Smith was trying to free himself.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 03, 2010 11:13 AM (ujg0T)
If you know what I mean.
Posted by: Winston Smith at March 03, 2010 11:13 AM (BFqyO)
Posted by: curious at March 03, 2010 11:14 AM (p302b)
Would you guys who are dumping on Whitlock, read his article please? http://tinyurl.com/yc2auy5
Misleading headline aside, the actual article describes who the real racists were, yes, the African-Americans, in that particular situation.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 03, 2010 11:14 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: Barry Hussein Soetero Dunham Obama at March 03, 2010 11:15 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: curious at March 03, 2010 11:16 AM (p302b)
Posted by: ray at March 03, 2010 11:16 AM (Xa4/u)
"the actual article describes who the real racists were, yes, the African-Americans"
I call racist BS
Posted by: Al Sharpton at March 03, 2010 11:18 AM (ucq49)
Why am I seeing this all over the place?
In all the places you are seeing that the people posting are not checking the facts. Some States may actually have an old law on the books that specifies recall, but they are like that old law someone posted on here the other day from South Carolina that made it illegal to be a commie.
The key paragraph in that CRS study is this:
As to removal by recall, the United States Constitution does not provide for nor authorize the recall of United States officers such as Senators, Representatives, or the President or Vice President, and thus no Member of Congress has ever been recalled in the history of the United States. The recall of Members was considered during the time of the drafting of the federal Constitution in 1787, but no such provisions were included in the final version sent to the States for ratification, and the specific drafting and ratifying debates indicate an express understanding of the Framers and ratifiers that no right or power to recall a Senator or Representative from the United States Congress exists under the Constitution.
Posted by: Vic at March 03, 2010 11:18 AM (QrA9E)
Now, the morons and moronettes and others like us are ALWAYS in the "strongly disapprove" column. And day by day, people in the middle are migrating to the "disapprove column."
Meanwhile, the far left bounces from "strongly approve" to "approve." When Obama does something we really hate, the leftists who have been grumpily sitting in the "approve" or even the "disapprove" column (because he hasn't been governing in a Marxist-enough manner to suit them) get all excited and migrate into the "strongly approve" column.
That's why whenever we see him do something like this, that Rasmussen number goes from -20 to -12.
At the same time, however, the people who normally don't pay attention or care are getting angry, and every week another one or two move into the disapprove camp, and then will eventually move into the "strongly disapprove" camp.
Hope this helps. My intention is that you not despair when you see those Rasmussen numbers.
Posted by: Miss Marple at March 03, 2010 11:19 AM (4DwVn)
Posted by: Al Sharpton at March 03, 2010 11:19 AM (ucq49)
Assume that the Democrats cram this through and that the Republicans run on repeal and takeover both the House and the Senate. Now assume that as one of the first acts next year the House passes a bill that completely repeals this law. How precious would it be to see the Democrats use the filibuster to prevent the repeal from coming to a final vote in the Senate?
And furthermore, how precious would it be for the Senate Republicans to use reconciliation to pass the repeal, immediately followed by passing a Congressional resolution that reads, "Resolved, karma is indeed a bitch."
Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at March 03, 2010 11:21 AM (sXLx/)
Posted by: curious at March 03, 2010 11:25 AM (p302b)
It will be very hard to get rid of it, but not impossible. We did repeal prohibition, you know.
All that Obama has done is ensure that we work towards a 60-vote majority in the Senate. Or 67, if that 's what it takes to overrule a veto (I can't remember).
Posted by: Miss Marple at March 03, 2010 11:27 AM (4DwVn)
Posted by: curious at March 03, 2010 11:29 AM (p302b)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 11:30 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at March 03, 2010 02:52 PM (mR7mk)
It's almost as if Canadian politician are saying that Canada's wonderful national health is good enough for the peasants but not for the political elite.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at March 03, 2010 11:33 AM (1Jaio)
The white coats was a humorous touch, I must admit -- the insult to my intelligence was blatant, which adds some hilarity.
I'm trying very hard to stay calm in the face of this insanity -- in the end, there is no other way to confront chaos.
Posted by: unknown jane at March 03, 2010 11:45 AM (5/yRG)
1. Before Barry Obama's next televised speech, prepare your "Bullshit Bingo" card by drawing a square -- I find that 5" x 5" is a good size -- and dividing it into columns --five across and five down. That will give you 25 1-inch blocks. 2. Write one of the following words/phrases in each block: · Restored our reputation · Strategic fit · Let me be clear · Make no mistake · Back from the brink · Signs of recovery · Out of the loop · Benchmark · Job creation · Fiscal restraint · Win-win · Affordable health care · Previous Administration · Empower (or empowerment) · Greed on Wall Street · At the end of the day · I don't want to get bogged down with (your choice: details / figures/ amount) · Touch base · Mindset · Corporate greed · Ballpark · Game plan · Leverage · Inherited as in "I inherited this mess” · Relief for working families 3. Check off the appropriate block when you hear one of those words/phrases. 4. When you get five blocks horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, stand up and shout "BULLSHIT!"
Posted by: Say What? at March 03, 2010 11:54 AM (vwh8M)
Misleading headline aside, the actual article
describes who the real racists were, yes, the African-Americans, in
that particular situation.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 03, 2010 03:14 PM (ujg0T)
Whitlock's still a fat turd who sometimes lurches into the truth by accident. His guest spots for Jim Rome make an almost completely unlistenable show 100% unbearable.
Posted by: Captain Hate at March 03, 2010 11:55 AM (ypGDY)
Posted by: Dr. Frank N. Furter at March 03, 2010 12:11 PM (eJZU3)
The first four months of unemployment is unemployment.
After that, it's loafing.
Posted by: Dr. Frank N. Furter at March 03, 2010 04:14 PM (eJZU3)
I'm still trying to figure out how the federal government has any power over specific unemployment payments, to begin with. I have yet to understand where this power derives from.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 03, 2010 12:24 PM (A46hP)
You don't need to find 535 lampposts.
We just need to count the spikes on the fence surrounding the White House.
Pour encourager les autres.
Posted by: delayna at March 03, 2010 01:19 PM (5wkBp)
@11: "This guy is on a mission to deliver us into Federal slavery."
If he can't get reparations, he'll at least get revenge.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 03, 2010 01:40 PM (kmEfr)
Posted by: Laura Castellano at March 03, 2010 03:28 PM (fuw6p)
Posted by: ron dorque at March 03, 2010 03:55 PM (w3LXN)
Posted by: Last Conservative In Brooklyn at March 03, 2010 03:55 PM (7uAeI)
train tickets,
life insurance quotes,
train tickets,
dental insurance quotes,
car insurance quotes
Posted by: iiahgSHAH at June 25, 2010 06:22 AM (FsHwY)
Posted by: louisiana carpets at September 17, 2010 03:02 AM (EZome)
Posted by: Find antiques at September 19, 2010 05:22 AM (wNmOM)
Posted by: furniture frames at September 23, 2010 06:08 AM (tGDwC)
Posted by: auto leasing directory at September 25, 2010 05:05 AM (wHIXu)
Posted by: clock signs directory at September 29, 2010 06:37 AM (tcfv5)
Posted by: Wholesale at April 18, 2011 05:04 AM (o9dkR)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2421 seconds, 441 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
I read something where no matter what, Stupak is a "NO" on the Senate Version. If that is true, do they have the votes?
Posted by: eddiebear at March 03, 2010 09:20 AM (wnU1W)