[Mr.Kimball]

I would think it discretion, given the creative "spin" put on healthcare reform ideas. I am not sure why using words that apply troubles you so. It must, however, because you keep coming back to it. If the analogy I used isn't lying, then neither is Obama's. The detail is this: healthcare reform opponents seek to use fear ("the Commies are coming to kill Granny because they have prime spots on the death panels"), thus, discretion might require protecting the message from distortion until the facts are presented. I go back to this: people shouldn't go broke because they get sick; people shouldn't die or live in agony because they can't afford medical care. As a society, my belief is that we need to make a way to keep that from happening. I believe we can. By the way, my assumption is that the reader will understand what I'm saying. I must attribute more to BGR members literacy than you, which is funny, because you claim the opposite.

Oh, make no mistake, I fully understand the words to use there batboy. I just think it's funny that you try to camoflauge whatever you post about with a conglomeration of words you hope will make some not even question what you say. Even though I fully understand the meanings of the words you use, the plain fact of the matter is, with the circle after circle application that use use them, you end up not saying a darn thing. I guess you think that you have everybody duped with your ramblings, and pray that everyone will surely think that anybody that can type a bunch of high faluttin words surely knows what they are talking about. I can see why you referred to your preference of transparency in a previous post. It certainly applies to your ramblings. Transparency fully comes into view when all the rest of us can clearly see through that "dog and pony show" that you feel you have to put on. Transparent is certainly the best word that comes to mind. I guess it has the opposite effect of what you intended though, huh? You go the Barnum and Bailey route because you have some sort of inferiority complex that makes you feel you have to go to the exteme to get anyone to listen to you? Do you feel that since nobody will pay attention to you in the real world, go can baffle em with the BS on here, and get some sorely needed attention? Or, is is just simply ego?

Oh, so what your saying is that Obama's skin is so thin that he cant handle opposition to anything? You saying that he didn't know that there would be this mass protest against this dumb idea? In other words you once again show that you dont have a clue as to why we have gone the backdoor(closed door) route. Come on batman, wake up, stop the denial and the spin. It's because he and his cronies (sheep) know that if they get this thing passed, the only way they can do it is by deception, and you darn well know I'm right on that. Besides, if his plan was credent, you wouldn't have to worry about what any opponent (fear monger, in your words) says. It's gonna pass on it's own merits and be warmly accepted if it's the right thing. Correct? Kinda appears that American people as a whole are not as stupid as he percieved. Well, that is except for apparently yourself.

What's next from Mr. Obama there batboy? Do we have a Washington Gestapo now in the brewing? Do we now censor everything that any media outlet exposes, that has a contrary view, ie Fox News? You gonna be the one heading up the SS? Do we start hauling republicans to concentration camps? Your one of his submissive lambs being took to slaughter, right? You appear to have all of the credentials to head this up.

I know that to save face, you will in no way agree with me, but it's still called "Lying" batman.

[thecavemaster]

Oh, make no mistake, I fully understand the words to use there batboy. I just think it's funny that you try to camoflauge whatever you post about with a conglomeration of words you hope will make some not even question what you say. Even though I fully understand the meanings of the words you use, the plain fact of the matter is, with the circle after circle application that use use them, you end up not saying a darn thing. I guess you think that you have everybody duped with your ramblings, and pray that everyone will surely think that anybody that can type a bunch of high faluttin words surely knows what they are talking about. I can see why you referred to your preference of transparency in a previous post. It certainly applies to your ramblings. Transparency fully comes into view when all the rest of us can clearly see through that "dog and pony show" that you feel you have to put on. Transparent is certainly the best word that comes to mind. I guess it has the opposite effect of what you intended though, huh? You go the Barnum and Bailey route because you have some sort of inferiority complex that makes you feel you have to go to the exteme to get anyone to listen to you? Do you feel that since nobody will pay attention to you in the real world, go can baffle em with the BS on here, and get some sorely needed attention? Or, is is just simply ego?

Oh, so what your saying is that Obama's skin is so thin that he cant handle opposition to anything? You saying that he didn't know that there would be this mass protest against this dumb idea? In other words you once again show that you dont have a clue as to why we have gone the backdoor(closed door) route. Come on batman, wake up, stop the denial and the spin. It's because he and his cronies (sheep) know that if they get this thing passed, the only way they can do it is by deception, and you darn well know I'm right on that. Besides, if his plan was credent, you wouldn't have to worry about what any opponent (fear monger, in your words) says. It's gonna pass on it's own merits and be warmly accepted if it's the right thing. Correct? Kinda appears that American people as a whole are not as stupid as he percieved. Well, that is except for apparently yourself.

What's next from Mr. Obama there batboy? Do we have a Washington Gestapo now in the brewing? Do we now censor everything that any media outlet exposes, that has a contrary view, ie Fox News? You gonna be the one heading up the SS? Do we start hauling republicans to concentration camps? Your one of his submissive lambs being took to slaughter, right? You appear to have all of the credentials to head this up.

I know that to save face, you will in no way agree with me, but it's still called "Lying" batman.

It's called "discretion," given the analogy. I wonder, Mr. Kimball, if it's not you with the god complex or something, as you seem to have some sort of all knowing sense about people's motives and lives, which, I realize, is your way of arguing, an attempt to bludgeon people with mean spirited gook. Fear mongering is not new to politics. Fox News didn't event it. Refusing interviews to Fox News or CNBC or whomever won't stop it. But, it is a real "strategy," and given the sorry state of human nature, it works. All the personal venom you can muster can't paralyze that truth. America is a great nation that fought two wars at once in far away lands, getting into a huge chunk of debt. To blame illegals or the poor for "bankrupting the country" and the like is the worst kind of scapegoating. This is a great nation: we can find a way to not let illness bankrupt people, to prevent people from dying or suffering great pain for lack of access to affordable medical care.

[Mr.Kimball]

It's called "discretion," given the analogy. I wonder, Mr. Kimball, if it's not you with the god complex or something, as you seem to have some sort of all knowing sense about people's motives and lives, which, I realize, is your way of arguing, an attempt to bludgeon people with mean spirited gook. Fear mongering is not new to politics. Fox News didn't event it. Refusing interviews to Fox News or CNBC or whomever won't stop it. But, it is a real "strategy," and given the sorry state of human nature, it works. All the personal venom you can muster can't paralyze that truth. America is a great nation that fought two wars at once in far away lands, getting into a huge chunk of debt. To blame illegals or the poor for "bankrupting the country" and the like is the worst kind of scapegoating. This is a great nation: we can find a way to not let illness bankrupt people, to prevent people from dying or suffering great pain for lack of access to affordable medical care.

Sort of looked at your style as the example to follow, I guess......Mr. Pot.


"Stategy" ? To accomplish what? I thought the objective here was to reform our nations health care system and your advocating playing some sort of a game?

Must say I have been waiting in anticipation on something with a little more bite to it than this. Cant say I am not surprised.

[thecavemaster]

Sort of looked at your style as the example to follow, I guess......Mr. Pot.


"Stategy" ? To accomplish what? I thought the objective here was to reform our nations health care system and your advocating playing some sort of a game?

Must say I have been waiting in anticipation on something with a little more bite to it than this. Cant say I am not surprised.

Thou knowest, Associate Justice in the Sky. I would think most everyone has some sort of technique they tend to use in argument, conscious or not. Here is the bite: I say America, great nation that it is, can find a way to keep people out of bankruptcy due to illness, out of the grave or agony because of no access to affordable healthcare. You have ranted against Obama, against me, against the government, against illegal aliens and failed to make a distinction between the working and uninsured poor and what you call, I guess, "the lazy." What positive voice do you bring to this discussion?

[Mr.Kimball]

Thou knowest, Associate Justice in the Sky. I would think most everyone has some sort of technique they tend to use in argument, conscious or not. Here is the bite: I say America, great nation that it is, can find a way to keep people out of bankruptcy due to illness, out of the grave or agony because of no access to affordable healthcare. You have ranted against Obama, against me, against the government, against illegal aliens and failed to make a distinction between the working and uninsured poor and what you call, I guess, "the lazy." What positive voice do you bring to this discussion?

Ironic that you sqeal when it blows back in your face, aint it?

And all with due and righteous cause!!!! Welcome to the real world. Now you wanna get me started on lawyers?


And what have you brought to this discussion, that has been a solution to anything? That's right. Nothing!!!

[thecavemaster]

Ironic that you sqeal when it blows back in your face, aint it?

And all with due and righteous cause!!!! Welcome to the real world. Now you wanna get me started on lawyers?


And what have you brought to this discussion, that has been a solution to anything? That's right. Nothing!!!

I have decent health insurance, as, I'm guessing you do. Squealing is not necessary for us. What I am asking is this: you say you support the idea that people shouldn't go broke because their sick, shouldn't die because of no access to affordable healthcare. But there you stop. We have spent nearly a TRILLION dollars in Iraq. We have yet to find weapons of mass destruction. We have yet to see democracy and peace spread across the MIddle East. We have yet to see a path to peace in Jerusalem. We have yet to link Sadaam Hussein with 9/11... shame some of that money isn't available to provide Americans with affordable healthcare.

[Mr.Kimball]

I have decent health insurance, as, I'm guessing you do. Squealing is not necessary for us. What I am asking is this: you say you support the idea that people shouldn't go broke because their sick, shouldn't die because of no access to affordable healthcare. But there you stop. We have spent nearly a TRILLION dollars in Iraq. We have yet to find weapons of mass destruction. We have yet to see democracy and peace spread across the MIddle East. We have yet to see a path to peace in Jerusalem. We have yet to link Sadaam Hussein with 9/11... shame some of that money isn't available to provide Americans with affordable healthcare.

Yeah, I have it on myself, and pay for it, for 35 other families too.


No one is going to deny that the government has spent a fortune in the middle east.

There's has never been peace in Jerusalem as well as the middle east since time began, either.

Shame some of that money we give to those who will not work cannot be spent on those things as well. Here lies the problem.

What we have is those who cannot help themselvesand those who will not help themselves. I dont think there would be one person out of a million that has a problem with helping those who truely are in need and cannot help themselves. The system is flawed. Fix it, then help those who really need the help. I dont have one problem with that whatsoever. Get the freeloaders off of it though.

[thecavemaster]

Yeah, I have it on myself, and pay for it, for 35 other families too.


No one is going to deny that the government has spent a fortune in the middle east.

There's has never been peace in Jerusalem as well as the middle east since time began, either.

Shame some of that money we give to those who will not work cannot be spent on those things as well. Here lies the problem.

What we have is those who cannot help themselvesand those who will not help themselves. I dont think there would be one person out of a million that has a problem with helping those who truely are in need and cannot help themselves. The system is flawed. Fix it, then help those who really need the help. I dont have one problem with that whatsoever. Get the freeloaders off of it though.

Without a lot more administrative costs, I'm not sure the weeding out of the will nots from the cannots is very easy. Any system that can be devised can be exploited. To get the "will nots" a lot of "cannots" have to suffer. To get the parents who will not, a lot of children who cannot have to suffer. One of the evolving justifications for Iraq was a path toward peace in Jerusalem would be facilitated by Sadaam's removal.... "Let the 'will nots' die, let them rot in their own infection, shrivel up in their own cancer... who cares?'" As much as I think "will nots" do place a drain on society, I can't go there in spirit, Mr. Kimball. I can't.

[lawrencefan]

Our republic cannot survive like this. Too many of our citizens are voting themselves places at the public trough, without having to pay any taxes. If I could set up a new republic based on the platform of the Constitution Party, I would do it.

[congressman]

Our republic cannot survive like this. Too many of our citizens are voting themselves places at the public trough, without having to pay any taxes. If I could set up a new republic based on the platform of the Constitution Party, I would do it.

I <3 the Constitution Party. :Thumbs:

[congressman]

TCM,

I support SCHIP. We can insure kids and surely drop the 'will not' parents. Every kid should be insured, and have access to affordable healthcare. We must give them every opportunity for a healthy start at life.

[thecavemaster]

TCM,

I support SCHIP. We can insure kids and surely drop the 'will not' parents. Every kid should be insured, and have access to affordable healthcare. We must give them every opportunity for a healthy start at life.

The working poor are not "will nots." They are "cannots." Can we agree upon that? Can we agree that a lot of large retail/grocery chains orchestrate things so as to avoid giving benefits, or at least affordable within reason benefits, to employees? Thus, a safety net is necessary.

[congressman]

The working poor are not "will nots." They are "cannots." Can we agree upon that? Can we agree that a lot of large retail/grocery chains orchestrate things so as to avoid giving benefits, or at least affordable within reason benefits, to employees? Thus, a safety net is necessary.

Tell ya what cavemaster.. You seem like a reasonable guy. How about we strike a compromise here. I'll agree that the working poor are the cannots, if you'll agree that the reason they are 'cannots' is because at one point in their life they were 'will nots'. They made bad decisions in life...and they probably didn't get a good education.. then probably continued their streak of stupidity by having kids they knew they couldn't provide for. Deal? So do they need a safety net? Sure... but it didn't help them. It was called, learning from past mistakes.

I seriously don't understand how you can be so sympathetic towards people who can't get it right. You truly believe that some people are destined to be failures, and we have to keep them that way, while helping them with everything that they could have done for themselves already. But I bet if someone who has always been successful were to lose everything they had because of a business mistake, you'd offer a helping hand huh?

Ya know, I typically don't care anything about who I'm talking to, in regards to their personal life. But I would absolutely love to see how much healthcare you'd provide as a business owner and at what cost... as well as how much time you spend down at the shelter handing out loaves of bread.. or even, when was the last time you volunteered at the hospital, or nursing home? I already know these answers... You'd provide cadillac plans for free, and offer rides to the doctor during work hours, not requiring them to clock out. In fact, it'd be time and a half for there trouble. You probably opened a bread factor next door to the homeless shelter in your town, and not only gave away free bread, but have provided them all with jobs (and the cadillac insurance plans mentioned above.). And, don't worry about the last question. You're probably busy at St. Judes tending to the sick. Sorry to bother you. Just get back to me when you're done... that is, if the habitat for humanity meeting gets cancelled this evening.

Its pointless for you to ask me to agree with you on something, when we both know that you'd never do the same.. and that I have no interest in agreeing with you in full, on an issue that I disagree with you totally. It always comes down to the government. I hate it. You'd have its baby. I want people to be more responsible. You want people to pay more taxes to provide for those who haven't been responsible. If you wanna agree on something with me.. I got an idea. Lets come up with a name for our issue. Oh! I know, we'll call it.. Disagreeing. :Thumbs:

[thecavemaster]

Tell ya what cavemaster.. You seem like a reasonable guy. How about we strike a compromise here. I'll agree that the working poor are the cannots, if you'll agree that the reason they are 'cannots' is because at one point in their life they were 'will nots'. They made bad decisions in life...and they probably didn't get a good education.. then probably continued their streak of stupidity by having kids they knew they couldn't provide for. Deal? So do they need a safety net? Sure... but it didn't help them. It was called, learning from past mistakes.

I seriously don't understand how you can be so sympathetic towards people who can't get it right. You truly believe that some people are destined to be failures, and we have to keep them that way, while helping them with everything that they could have done for themselves already. But I bet if someone who has always been successful were to lose everything they had because of a business mistake, you'd offer a helping hand huh?

Ya know, I typically don't care anything about who I'm talking to, in regards to their personal life. But I would absolutely love to see how much healthcare you'd provide as a business owner and at what cost... as well as how much time you spend down at the shelter handing out loaves of bread.. or even, when was the last time you volunteered at the hospital, or nursing home? I already know these answers... You'd provide cadillac plans for free, and offer rides to the doctor during work hours, not requiring them to clock out. In fact, it'd be time and a half for there trouble. You probably opened a bread factor next door to the homeless shelter in your town, and not only gave away free bread, but have provided them all with jobs (and the cadillac insurance plans mentioned above.). And, don't worry about the last question. You're probably busy at St. Judes tending to the sick. Sorry to bother you. Just get back to me when you're done... that is, if the habitat for humanity meeting gets cancelled this evening.

Its pointless for you to ask me to agree with you on something, when we both know that you'd never do the same.. and that I have no interest in agreeing with you in full, on an issue that I disagree with you totally. It always comes down to the government. I hate it. You'd have its baby. I want people to be more responsible. You want people to pay more taxes to provide for those who haven't been responsible. If you wanna agree on something with me.. I got an idea. Lets come up with a name for our issue. Oh! I know, we'll call it.. Disagreeing. :Thumbs:

And yet a new contender for Associate Justice in the Sky emerges: you assume what you do not know. Why the quaint use of "ya know"... hearkening back to Ms. Palin? "The working poor are responsible for their poverty." Sounds like you're in the Word/Faith Gospel movement. I believe in sensible, systematic, and compassion-based social safety nets, congressman. Your hatred of the government is amusing. So, ok, we can agree to disagree. Apparently, you believe the working poor deserve to be poor, that being poor is shameful, that being poor means one is irresponsible. At least the rabbit is out of hiding. "Blessed are the poor." Wonder who said that? Was he crazy? Or, maybe just irresponsible and shameful? Geez, congressman... really, geez...

[Hoot Gibson]

The working poor who vote for liberal Democrats who are sucking large amounts of capital out of our private sector do deserve to be poor. A high unemployment rate depresses wages and given that federal jobs pay twice what an average private sector job pays, expanding the size of the federal government ensures that future unemployment rates will remain high.

One only needs to compare historical unemployment rates of the socialist economies of western Europe to our own to forecast the impact Obamanomics will have on the working poor and everybody else in this country. Good wages and low unemployment cannot be legislated out of thin air. A nation's wealth must be generated by its private sector and even China now understands that basic fact that seems to escape Obama's most rabid supporters.

[thecavemaster]

The working poor who vote for liberal Democrats who are sucking large amounts of capital out of our private sector do deserve to be poor. A high unemployment rate depresses wages and given that federal jobs pay twice what an average private sector job pays, expanding the size of the federal government ensures that future unemployment rates will remain high.

One only needs to compare historical unemployment rates of the socialist economies of western Europe to our own to forecast the impact Obamanomics will have on the working poor and everybody else in this country. Good wages and low unemployment cannot be legislated out of thin air. A nation's wealth must be generated by its private sector and even China Indinow understands that basic fact that seems to escape Obama's most rabid supporters.

Ah, a vote for Obama is a vote for poverty, thus, if you are poor and vote for Obama, you deserve to be poor. If you are an illegal alien picking fruit for an American company for slave wages, you deserve to be poor. If you work for Walmart, and they encourage you to sign up for government benefits so they don't have to provide them, you deserve to be poor. Corrupt human nature explains a lot of this. Greed, lust, etc. A man grows a garden. He works hard and reaps a great crop, which he takes to town and sells, making a good amount of profit. He shares that profit with people who work on his farm and does so in such a way that they have economic means to live decently. Is this capitalism? Does this farmer function in the private sector?

[Mr.Kimball]

And yet a new contender for Associate Justice in the Sky emerges: you assume what you do not know. Why the quaint use of "ya know"... hearkening back to Ms. Palin? "The working poor are responsible for their poverty." Sounds like you're in the Word/Faith Gospel movement. I believe in sensible, systematic, and compassion-based social safety nets, congressman. Your hatred of the government is amusing. So, ok, we can agree to disagree. Apparently, you believe the working poor deserve to be poor, that being poor is shameful, that being poor means one is irresponsible. At least the rabbit is out of hiding. "Blessed are the poor." Wonder who said that? Was he crazy? Or, maybe just irresponsible and shameful? Geez, congressman... really, geez...

Well. well, well. Gee ,and just think I tried to be nice to you yesterday. Oh well.

Congratulations congressman, you have appeared to now have neanderthal man almost to his boiling point. Proud of you son.

However, I must give you a WARNING. When you really start to get to him, he'll start sending you these nasty little PMs. He'll talk of perverted things he has done to your wife while your away .Tell you how much he can take care of her while your out of town, and all that. Heck, he'll even invite you to a dark alley somewhere. I've found him to be a heck of a nice guy, with impeccable morals and values (as you have seen) as he genuinely displays on this forum.


How about it Batman, you wanna dispute any of this? I must tell you however that I'm kinda a pack rat type of guy. I dont throw anything away. How bout it, big guy? Should we all compare notes, seein you wanna get a little nasty with our newcomer? Let's at least give him a sportin chance. Come on now, show'em all what a big deep caring heart you really have..Let's show em the real batman. Let's do it, whatta ya say?

[notamoocher]

It seems to me that most people in favor of government healthcare believe that it's the right thing to do, the moral thing.

Well based on this argument is slavery immoral? The dictionary list this: slave--person who is the legal property of and has to serve another, helpless victim of some dominating influence.....

I pay about 44% of my income in taxes, no I'm not one of those fifty rich i just chose to count all my taxes. $0.38 on each gallon of gas, social security tax, federal income tax, state income tax, city tax, sales tax, property tax, excise tax on phone, cable etc., you get the ideal.

So this puts me in the condition of slave two days a week. I know i recieve some benefit from some of these taxes, say 50%. This means that monday of each week I'm A slave.

I know we spend money in many places we have no business so write your congressman.

If healthcare is so important get rid of the Department of Education(budget 68 billion) after all the department of education has no schools.

[thecavemaster]

Well. well, well. Gee ,and just think I tried to be nice to you yesterday. Oh well.

Congratulations congressman, you have appeared to now have neanderthal man almost to his boiling point. Proud of you son.

However, I must give you a WARNING. When you really start to get to him, he'll start sending you these nasty little PMs. He'll talk of perverted things he has done to your wife while your away .Tell you how much he can take care of her while your out of town, and all that. Heck, he'll even invite you to a dark alley somewhere. I've found him to be a heck of a nice guy, with impeccable morals and values (as you have seen) as he genuinely displays on this forum.


How about it Batman, you wanna dispute any of this? I must tell you however that I'm kinda a pack rat type of guy. I dont throw anything away. How bout it, big guy? Should we all compare notes, seein you wanna get a little nasty with our newcomer? Let's at least give him a sportin chance. Come on now, show'em all what a big deep caring heart you really have..Let's show em the real batman. Let's do it, whatta ya say?

I don't dispute any of it, except it's your normal way of arguing. I apologized for the off color remark, in public on this forum. You suggested that I wouldn't want to spar a few rounds with you, didn't you? And, of course, the remarks I made were sarcasm and in jest, sent in a PM, and then paraded out by you as if it proves much of anything. At any rate, I apologized, you accepted, then brought it back up. At which, I guess, I'll apologize again for the remark. I think, at least in my opinion, this line of stuff suggests more about you than me.

[Mr.Kimball]

I don't dispute any of it, except it's your normal way of arguing. I apologized for the off color remark, in public on this forum. You suggested that I wouldn't want to spar a few rounds with you, didn't you? And, of course, the remarks I made were sarcasm and in jest, sent in a PM, and then paraded out by you as if it proves much of anything. At any rate, I apologized, you accepted, then brought it back up. At which, I guess, I'll apologize again for the remark. I think, at least in my opinion, this line of stuff suggests more about you than me.

Sarcasm and jest? Is that what you want to call it? Now that's a clever twist on it.

Is sarcasm and jest what got Bob Geise suspended for? Is sarcasm and jest what got Jimmy the Greek fired over? He said he was just "monkeying" around, you know? Is sarcasm and jest what got Don Imus fired over? They all apologized too, didn't they? They all still ended up fired though, didn't they? Were you on the vocal condemnation bandwagon supporting that too?

I assure everyone that you didn't apologize for anything publicly that you said privately.

No, I think it says a lot more about your subconscience.. You know, the way you probably really think, and way much more about the way in which you react, when you aint the one able to be doing the bullying. And now, you want to accuse someone else being an "Associate Justice in the Sky"? Just thought I would remind you of your own transgressions . Of course I expect you to go right on with the jibberish. Typical of those with no conscience on their choice of wording that displays their true innermost thoughts, aint it? :zzz:

[thecavemaster]

Sarcasm and jest? Is that what you want to call it? Now that's a clever twist on it.

Is sarcasm and jest what got Bob Geise suspended for? Is sarcasm and jest what got Jimmy the Greek fired over? He said he was just "monkeying" around, you know? Is sarcasm and jest what got Don Imus fired over? They all apologized too, didn't they? They all still ended up fired though, didn't they? Were you on the vocal condemnation bandwagon supporting that too?

I assure everyone that you didn't apologize for anything publicly that you said privately.

No, I think it says a lot more about your subconscience.. You know, the way you probably really think, and way much more about the way in which you react, when you aint the one able to be doing the bullying. And now, you want to accuse someone else being an "Associate Justice in the Sky"? Just thought I would remind you of your own transgressions . Of course I expect you to go right on with the jibberish. Typical of those with no conscience on their choice of wording that displays their true innermost thoughts, aint it? :zzz:

Like I said, Associate Justice in the Sky, talking about subconsious and all... all I can say of that is "thou knowest." Bring it out: whatever I said privately that was offensive that I haven't apologized for, I'll do it. At any rate, the public option got put back on the table, but it doesn't look like Senator Lieberman will vote for it. I thought "public option" was off the table at this point. My two main points that began this thread still stand for me.

[Mr.Kimball]

Like I said, Associate Justice in the Sky, talking about subconsious and all... all I can say of that is "thou knowest." Bring it out: whatever I said privately that was offensive that I haven't apologized for, I'll do it. At any rate, the public option got put back on the table, but it doesn't look like Senator Lieberman will vote for it. I thought "public option" was off the table at this point. My two main points that began this thread still stand for me.

Naw, not just yet. We'll save it for a rainy day. I certainly wouldn't want anyone on here to think badly of you. Heaven forbid anyone get the notion that you aint all that and more. Besides, even congressman, in the short time he has been on here has already been able to detect your self destructive tendencies. I suspect it'll all play it's self out.

Cheers, batman.

[thecavemaster]

Naw, not just yet. We'll save it for a rainy day. I certainly wouldn't want anyone on here to think badly of you. Heaven forbid anyone get the notion that you aint all that and more. Besides, even congressman, in the short time he has been on here has already been able to detect your self destructive tendencies. I suspect it'll all play it's self out.

Cheers, batman.

Whatsoever thou sayest, AJITS, whatsoever thou sayest.

[Mr.Kimball]

Whatsoever thou sayest, AJITS, whatsoever thou sayest.

Glad we have that little issue covered.

[Hoot Gibson]

Ah, a vote for Obama is a vote for poverty, thus, if you are poor and vote for Obama, you deserve to be poor. If you are an illegal alien picking fruit for an American company for slave wages, you deserve to be poor. If you work for Walmart, and they encourage you to sign up for government benefits so they don't have to provide them, you deserve to be poor. Corrupt human nature explains a lot of this. Greed, lust, etc. A man grows a garden. He works hard and reaps a great crop, which he takes to town and sells, making a good amount of profit. He shares that profit with people who work on his farm and does so in such a way that they have economic means to live decently. Is this capitalism? Does this farmer function in the private sector?

Granted, humans are not perfect. Some are greedy, some are greedy, and some are lazy. A good government does not adopt policies to appeal to the worst side of human nature. Socialism and Marxism reward the lazy while penalizing hard work and success. In the end, the party bosses live lavish lifestyles while their subjects stand in lines for bread and medical services.

Barack Obama claimed that the ARRA would prevent unemployment from rising above 8 percent. The rate is now 9.8 percent, with no relief in sight. Obama said that he did not want to run an auto company but the federal government now has an ownership stake in two of them.

Democrats with brains are beginning to get weak-kneed over Obama's agenda. That is where the real hope is - because Obama's changes will bring nothing but misery and government dependency to American citizens.

What is Nancy Pelosi calling the govenment option today? The public option? The competitive option? The consumer option? It is going to take more than daily name changes to sell this clunker of a plan to Democrats facing elections next year.

[Mr.Kimball]

Granted, humans are not perfect. Some are greedy, some are greedy, and some are lazy. A good government does not adopt policies to appeal to the worst side of human nature. Socialism and Marxism reward the lazy while penalizing hard work and success. In the end, the party bosses live lavish lifestyles while their subjects stand in lines for bread and medical services.

Barack Obama claimed that the ARRA would prevent unemployment from rising above 8 percent. The rate is now 9.8 percent, with no relief in sight. Obama said that he did not want to run an auto company but the federal government now has an ownership stake in two of them.

Democrats with brains are beginning to get weak-kneed over Obama's agenda. That is where the real hope is - because Obama's changes will bring nothing but misery and government dependency to American citizens.

What is Nancy Pelosi calling the govenment option today? The public option? The competitive option? The consumer option? It is going to take more than daily name changes to sell this clunker of a plan to Democrats facing elections next year.

Actually it is higher than that. When a workers unemployment benefits run out, the unemployed worker is no longer considered unemployed and included in government statistics.

[thecavemaster]

Actually it is higher than that. When a workers unemployment benefits run out, the unemployed worker is no longer considered unemployed and included in government statistics.

Are we to conclude that Barack Obama's economic policies, having been in office all this time, are the cause of these unemployment figures being what they are?

[Mr.Kimball]

Are we to conclude that Barack Obama's economic policies, having been in office all this time, are the cause of these unemployment figures being what they are?

Not making any statement whatsoever, other than the % is actually higher than what the government statistics show at the present because some have exhausted their benefits.

It is of my opinion however, that in the future things will continue to get worse with the policies of this president. Call it gloom and doom, call me a fear monger, call me or my thoughts whatever you will, but IMO, eastern Kentucky is prospering right now compared to what I fear we will be seeing in the not so distant future. His policies will devastate the only viable option this area has for economic survival. Those government figures will continue to skyrocket in the coalfields.

[Hoot Gibson]

Actually it is higher than that. When a workers unemployment benefits run out, the unemployed worker is no longer considered unemployed and included in government statistics.

I agree. The estimate that I hear most often is 17 percent. I am also reading estimates that the official unemployment rate will peak at 10.5 percent in mid-2010. However, I have no faith in any forecast based on the statistics compiled by the Obama administration.

This is the same group of morons that predicted that the stimulus spending would halt the official unemployment rate increase at around 8 percent and the same group of "experts" who predicted that the cost of the "Cash for Clunkers" would be $1 billion, a few weeks before pumping an additional $2 billion into the program.

Yet we are supposed to believe that liberals can forecast temperatures 50 to 100 years in the future and we are also asked to believe that the nationalization of our healthcare system will have a 10-year cost of less than $1 trillion.

I have always said that people get the government that they deserve but I sure wish that it would be possible to limit the fallout over Obamanomics to the people who are still supporting the clown.

[Beetle01]

I have one question about the so called Helth Care Reform with the public option the liberals are wanting. I would like for a Dem or liberal to answer for me.

What happens if it doesn't work? What if after 10 years its cost twice as much, has been ineffective? What politician could possibly take it away? Who is going to run on a platform of "Im going to take away health coverage for 40million people in this country."

Thats why Im for moving in stages.

First thing is regulation for Insurance companies, these companies rob our country blind every day.
Right now a few HC companies have a monopoly stranglehold on the competition due to anti-trust laws. They can keep anyone from coming into their territory and offering better coverage for cheaper.

These protections have to go, and it is one thing I agree with the Dems on for sure. Do it now, don't wait. Its time we start doing things the right way in this country again. If these politicians can't do it, its time to get rid of them and find some that will.