World Politics

[patricknd]

Your uniqueness is astounding..You probably have a bigger flag than your neighbor does.


I got out of Jury duty one time by purposely concentrating on the ADA's breasts when she talked to me..

Admit it, you did it because you were horny. The rest was a happy by product.

 

[redtreviso]

Admit it, you did it because you were horny. The rest was a happy by product.

A happy by product would have been if she had asked to meet me for drinks after the selection

 

[patricknd]

A happy by product would have been if she had asked to meet me for drinks after the selection

Well, you were staring at her breasts. You should try a self deprecating sense of humor. It always worked well for me.

 

[rhubroma]

I assume part of what you don't like about the Ryan plan is how it guts Medicare. Have you looked at what the Obama plan does?

Single payer will result in a decline in care combined with a rise in cost. Govt health care does not work on a scale of 330,000,000. Obama was never serious about fixing the ills of our system. He wants incremental steps to single payer (payor??)...

That's because the insurance lobby is almighty.

We need to break it, set up a socialized system, gain some damn humanity, and join the rest of the civilized planet.

 

[redtreviso]

NUTCASE......................

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1191939045695

\
no comments....what a surprise..

 

[rhubroma]

\
no comments....what a surprise..

So this is what is meant by a right-wing intellectual.

Ok, got it. All my studies in moral philosophy and rhetoric were for naught. Now I can rest in peace.

 

[benpounder]

The oil business.. specifically exports of goods and services bypassed houston in favor of newly formed foreign suppliers linked to the bush family. This was the price Houston paid for Bush sr being in bed with the Saudis.

Come on man, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to offer serious arguments, not partisan talking points.

[my edit]To remind you, it was this statement that brought me into the conversation:

I wish scotty could have seen Houston in 1985.. Neighborhoods with HUD signs on every other house..But that Ronald Reagan he was so wonderful. You and Scott probably didn't have a worry in the world then huh?

I will engage if you can back that assertion with facts, thus far, you have only indulged in hyperbole.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Why do it piecemeal? Why go at this huge issue in a partisan fashion? Have we not had enough of this?

I don't understand what you are saying here, in reference to lobbying. How is it that partisan what I wrote, or the reference to what the COC is complaining about. Because you don't like one aspect of it, and you don't see them taking on all of it, you think we should keep things the way they are? Or do you have a solution?

You told me what you don't like about "Obamacare" or a single payer (without commenting on my specifics), and that you don't like what Ryan's plan does to Medicare. But what do you support? The only thing I can assume, since you offer no alternatives and no plan, is that you think the system we have now works fine. If that's the case, I sure hope you don't lose your job, and nothing happens to you or your family. Perhaps you feel immune? Looked like Cobber felt that way, if you'll recall what happened to him from several pages ago.

 

[benpounder]

No comments on that very interesting article on the Chamber of Commerce lobbying fighting Obama. Very telling, and well worth a read:

Article here.

This is at the real root of our country's problems. Much above all this left/right nonsense.

Yet part of the problem in the article referenced is not news, rather opinion.

After tens of millions of dollars in anonymous political spending flooded the 2010 elections following a landmark Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case...

Yes, and a fair portion of that was from lefty sources. Revealing that the article does not mention that.

Democrats tried to pass a bill known as the Disclose Act to require greater reporting of political spending, only to see it blocked by Senate Republicans.

Makes it sound like a great bill, opposed only by those evil Republicans. That is until you read the fine print - which excludes virtually all funding sources of the DNC. Alpe, I have no problem with disclosure, I do have a problem with laws that shield only one side.

Democrats are now turning to other means, including the possible White House order

Turning to other means??? Other means, like a signing statement? Other means, like an Executive order? I'm only holding this administration to the same standards the left demanded we hold the Bush admin. Yet in certain quarters, the rules only apply to others. (A reason why i venture not into the clinic.)

[my edit]Lest you misunderstand, my beef is with the way the NYTimes frames the issue. It is not objective journalism. It is agenda driven.

 

[rhubroma]

I'd first place a moratorium on all forms of private campaign financing. Then have each candidate allocated the same exact amount of funds to the dime, which naturally come from a public source, and each being allowed the exact same amount of airtime on TV and internet by law.

There would be no lobbies, no private financing, just each office runner with the same financial means and media share to get the message across to voters in a public forum. Then let the best man win as they say.

It is appalling and grotesque the system we have in place, for which the only way to get elected is by raising millions, literally hundreds of millions. What a perversion! Not only is the system not very democratic, but itself makes a farce of democracy, for there is nothing egalitarian about it and nothing sane. Everything's rigged and and the office goes to the highest bidder, among people who only really care about arriving and then maintaining power once they have sold themselves to their financial supporters. And all the money that's thrown into and wasted upon such a system. It's enough to turn one's stomach. All that wealth given to charlatans, when it could be used to contribute to financing a national health care system that's truly public, or spent on rebuilding bridges that risk collapse, repave roads in need of repair, finance the public schools, lower the nation's debt, etc.

And we even treat this quite droll farce at the political national conventions, as a celebration of our so called great democracy. The incipience of our ways defies all logic and reason.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't understand what you are saying here, in reference to lobbying. How is it that partisan what I wrote, or the reference to what the COC is complaining about. Because you don't like one aspect of it, and you don't see them taking on all of it, you think we should keep things the way they are? Or do you have a solution?

You told me what you don't like about "Obamacare" or a single payer (without commenting on my specifics), and that you don't like what Ryan's plan does to Medicare. But what do you support? The only thing I can assume, since you offer no alternatives and no plan, is that you think the system we have now works fine. If that's the case, I sure hope you don't lose your job, and nothing happens to you or your family. Perhaps you feel immune? Looked like Cobber felt that way, if you'll recall what happened to him from several pages ago.

I don't understand what you are saying here, in reference to lobbying. How is it that partisan what I wrote, or the reference to what the COC is complaining about. Because you don't like one aspect of it, and you don't see them taking on all of it, you think we should keep things the way they are? Or do you have a solution?

Sorry, I probably could have been more clear. What you wrote was not partisan. What is partisan is the Obama admin, by exectuive order, going after big republican donors. If Obama is to make an executive order why not end lobbying as we know it? The answer is he and the democrats are as dirty as the other side. It has been estimated that there will be $1 Billion raised for the next presidential election. If Obama wants to clean this up, then clean it up and he'll have my full support. But I don't see that being done here.


Obamacare? The accounting does not work. The "savings" are not there. Insurance cost will escalate due to the mandates and this is but the first step to a single payer (payor) system. Obama has to make private insurance so expensive and unpalletable that single payer becomes, literally, the only solution.

Tort reform, regulatory reform are two quick ways cost could be attacked. I still don't understand why health insurance is not structure more like auto insurance. I can pick and choose coverages for my car but am very limited on what I can and can't have regarding health coverages. Insurance exchange, standardized basic insurance package (all states), centralized negotiations for an all-payer system (provider reimbursements for all insurers), shorten the exclusivity period for new drugs (this article is interesting);

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/06/biologics.shtm

There are dozens of ideas that could reform what we have without creating an un-affordable entitlement. But I think it's probably to late for any of this.

 

[Bala Verde]

Hey Scott, did you read the economist lately? They have an interesting special on California. I thought you might be interested.

See http://www.economist.com/node/18563638 (2011) CA Direct Democracy

Other stuff that's worth a read (I saw your post about TX v. CA) are:

http://www.economist.com/node/13990207 (2009) TX v CA
http://www.economist.com/node/18442083 (2011) TX

 

[rhubroma]

Covering your car and covering your health are two unrelated and totally different entities.

But thanks for allowing us to see what is wrong with the US health care system at its ideological basis, namely that there is a powerful group of people in America and a large number of citizens that don't see it that way: or rather they treat both entities as having the same weight and significance in a world where only the logic of the maket counts.

 

[redtreviso]

Come on man, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to offer serious arguments, not partisan talking points.

[my edit]To remind you, it was this statement that brought me into the conversation:
I will engage if you can back that assertion with facts, thus far, you have only indulged in hyperbole.

No one I know attributed the downturn in Houston to anything but Ronald Reagan. 80 82 hard working people of modest means all had jobs in oil related businesses..Anyone in the WORLD needing oil related products had to go through Houston..It was likely the same policies Reagan had towards US steel production and any other industry with organized labor that effected Houston by 85. Those same hard working people were out of their homes.
Perhaps those oil people were expendable in the name of sharing that piece of the pie with foreign interests..There was no risk of losing Texas' support of Republicans or Reagan himself. Things were not great elsewhere in texas because of new federal free trade zones and other Reagan programs.

 

[Bala Verde]

Also interesting: America's transport infrastructure Life in the slow lane

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I had a hard time seeing the humor in that response (and I think I can find some humor in almost anything) to me it was more a chilling realization that I share a country with people like that. I think inbred might be a better explanation than alcoholic.

I do not think that post was meant to be funny. What I posted and what Patrick said are very much in line with a large segment of our population.

When President Obama was elected the necks could not get it out of their minds that the first assault on their liberties and 2nd amendment rights would come quickly. I must have received hundreds of old stupid emails that said that and even tried to either look or sound legit. They were digging up old gun bills etc and attaching President Obama to them.

I do not think this is the first time you became aware that people (mentally challenged / lazy on the facts / or inbred as you say) have many guns. They probably have more today than ever.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

That's because the insurance lobby is almighty.

We need to break it, set up a socialized system, gain some damn humanity, and join the rest of the civilized planet.

You had me at socialized.

 

[redtreviso]

But if he had gone things would have turned out differently with Bush jr and Dan Quayle at his side!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



""He went on to recall, “I was going to the Wharton School of Finance, and I was watching as they did the draft numbers and I got a very, very high number and those numbers never got up to.” The word “deferment” was not mentioned by Trump during his chat with the morning show hosts on WNYW, the Fox affiliate in New York City.

However, Selective Service records reveal that Trump, the fortunate son of a multimillionaire real estate baron, took repeated steps to avoid serving in Vietnam.

By the time his number (356) was drawn during the December 1, 1969 draft lottery, Trump had already received four student deferments and a medical deferment, according to military records on file with the National Archives and Records Administration. An extract of Trump’s Selective Classification record, seen here, was provided in response to a TSG records request.

In fact, the December 1969 draft lottery occurred about 18 months after Trump graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, where he studied business at the Wharton School. So, while claiming that he would “never forget” being at Wharton watching the draft numbers being drawn, the 64-year-old Trump seems to have misremembered, as candidates are fond of saying."""

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/deferments-helped-trump-dodge-vietnam

 

[Hugh Januss]

The final nail in the coffin of our "Democratic" system was the Supremes totally partisan ruling about corporate campaign contributions.
Rhubarb is right, but I say require a campaign tax then split the money evenly amoungst all candidates. Anyone caught cheating by either not spending all their money or spending more would be immediately taken out and shot. This would have an additional benefit of eventually eliminating all politicians, as none of them would be able to forgo the urge to cheat.

 

[Hugh Januss]

That's because the insurance lobby is almighty.

We need to break it, set up a socialized system, gain some damn humanity, and join the rest of the civilized planet.

Oh no, Scott is right, clearly our current Healthcare Industry is so close to being perfect. All it needs is a little fine tuning.

 

[Anonymous]

Oh no, Scott is right, clearly our current Healthcare Industry is so close to being perfect. All it needs is a little fine tuning.

Yeah, uh, no. The words perfect and healthcare have never appeared in a post of mine.

I prefer private market solutions, you prefer big govt solutions. I'm the devil and you are not. I get it.

 

[redtreviso]

Yeah, uh, no. The words perfect and healthcare have never appeared in a post of mine.

I prefer private market solutions, you prefer big govt solutions. I'm the devil and you are not. I get it.

The same private market solutions that that give us Credit Default Swaps and ENRONS...

big government oh noooo lions tigers and bears..

 

[Hugh Januss]

You had me at socialized.

Rhubarb, Glenn would prefer if you would refrain from swearing at him.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yeah, uh, no. The words perfect and healthcare have never appeared in a post of mine.

I prefer private market solutions, you prefer big govt solutions. I'm the devil and you are not. I get it.

A system which takes money that people pay towards healthcare and spends it on advertising so that more people will spend their money with a particular health care corporation, all the while denying services because of "cost", is just plain wrong.

 

[rhubroma]

You mean use dirty words.