Loading ...
Did President Barack Hussein Obama’s White House Chief Of Staff Chew Democratic Congressman “ObamaCare Maverick” Out In The Nude?
Obviously, everybody knows by now the [ahem... POSSIBLY] disgraced Representative from New York State by the name of Massa has been squealing like a stuck pig (as we put it down here in Lower Alabama — courtesy of The Washington Post) as he’s recently made his otherwise graceful departure from Congress amidst accusations he routinely gropes and lewdly addresses his male staffers. Oh well, nothing new here. In fact, the only thing even somewhat “new under the sun” about this whole fiasco is the fact this guy has a “D” behind his name unlike those more plentiful “R’s” we’ve become accustomed to over recent years when it comes to the subject of “closeted gay but married guys in power”.
Yep, the Republicans no longer hold the patent on the “Congressional gay hypocrite” game — Mr. Massa has now put the Democrats on that same same map. Well, one could insert Barney Franks into this argument but that’d be a bit of a stretch since he’s never (to the best of MY knowledge) been accused of predatory gay behavior, but you probably get my point.
The zaniest of the allegations, yet, perhaps the most BELIEVABLE of them all is this quote made today by Mr. Massa regarding President Obama’s Chief Of Staff’s bullying tactics he [psst... allegedly] employed in an attempt to frighten the former Congressman into casting a “Yea” vote on ObamaCare:
… Mr Massa said: “I am showering, naked as a jailbird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel, not even with a towel wrapped round his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me because I wasn’t going to vote for the president’s budget. Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man?” — The Washington Examiner (bold, mine)
Okay, FIRST OFF — I’m not a gay man — “closeted” or otherwise, not that there’s anything wrong with that, so take my initial response to the bolded part of his statement for what it’s worth and consider the source. That stated, if a man came up to me and started yelling at me, nude, dressed to the “T’s” or otherwise, I’m going to knock his block off in self defense. That’s just ME though — don’t try this at home. Point being — even though I’m sure such an (“alleged“) situation could occur, I’m doubtful I’d find it to be as awkward as I would to be offensive, rude and verging upon physical assault, if not meeting those descriptions to a “T”. If it was “awkward” for Mr. Massa, perhaps it was because he found Mr. Emanuel to be attractive or something?
Just sayin’…
***
Other interesting opinions from great bloggers — both sides of the aisle: The Drudge Retort (“Left”) has a lively discussion going on; My good friend Joe Gandelman of The Moderate Voice (“Centrist”) offers “four certainties” over the Massa debacle; Michelle Malkin (“Right”) reminds us of the time Eric Massa foreshadowed all of this by defending former New Jersey, former “closeted gay married” governor Eliot Spitzer (hmmm…); Hot Air‘s mysterious AllahPundit (“Right”) was hoping FNC‘s Glenn Beck would help set the record straight by taking Mr. Massa to task (oops — Fox News‘ Beck apologized to his viewers after blowing it badly); Alan Colmes of Liberaland seems to be keeping an updated live-blog going on the topic…
Wasn’t Barney Frank and company running a brothel out of his apartment.
Ahem….of course without his knowledge.
Ahem…of course.
@Doomed, Pssst…regardless of the legitimacy of this “claim”, enough evidence exists to consider “Rambo” Emanuel quite the “intiminator” well versed in Chicago style politics. From actual dead fish sent to “enemies of the state” to his offensive language, his track record speaks for itself. Not so sure him naked in a communal shower would be intimitating or simply embarrassing…he is rather “short”….
Ex-Congressman Massa says groping wasn’t sexual – Los Angeles Times : World online news // Mar 10, 2010 at 4:04 AM
[...] [Psst... "allegedly"] Perverted Former Congressman Eric Massa (D … [...]
stoppen met roken Joyce De Troch interview Eric Eraly | Stoppen met Roken // Mar 10, 2010 at 6:22 AM
[...] [Psst... "allegedly"] Perverted Former Congressman Eric Massa (D … [...]
You hetero guys might not know this, but I’d imagine Rahm is quite the spectacle (in a good way) when he’s nude, yelling, and poking you in the shower (with his finger, I mean).
No doubt, if it occurred at all, the gregarious Massa was a little speechless, bordering on verklempt. Oh, to have been a fly on the tile.
Man, you democrats really do turn on your own when they have the ‘audacity’ to think for themselves.
This isn’t about who is a homophobe, or even who is a Homophile for that matter. Its really about the lack of loyalty within the ranks of the democrat party of hate.
Loyalty is a two way street. You won’t get it if you don’t have it. The fishmonger Rahm Israel Emanuel needs to learn this or his puppet Dumbama will have a very difficult first and only term.
@F&B,
So… you’re saying the Antichrist is Rahm Emanuel now, bro?
@The GTL™, Not me, it was one of your fellow democrats that referred to him as “Satan’s spawn.”
What stands out to me is the contrast. From the day after the 2000 election we were hearing about how mean and nasty Rove was. But the MSM has been silent on
RoveRahm Emanuels Chicago Machine strong arm tactics. Nope, that is just the way he is, nothing to report. Besides – since he is connected with The One, he is incapable of doing anything wrong.Did you write this before the Glenn Beck interview last night? That was a doosey…
@Alabama Moderate, I did! I can’t wait to see the rerun — apparently Beck apologized to his viewers after the end of the show… lol!
the Republicans versus Democrats and Democrats versus Republicans game is certainly entertaining.
It’s important that America be divided by hate and labels. Our ability to cling to false ideals helps keep us weak as a people, so that the people that own both parties can continue to wage their economic war against America and it’s liberties.
Maybe we’re just a few years from the far right Republicans rounding up liberals and putting them in death camps to turn them into soap and candles. The bankers and defense industry could make a lot of money on that.
The Republicans would get the benefit of kicking some butt and being righteous, and the Democrats could play the victim card by whining about the piles of dead Americans being moved around by bulldozers.
Rahm Emmanuel in the mean time could sit back in some back room in Washington, sipping expensive brandies and laughing at how easy it is to manipulate us.
I meant to say that Karl Rove and Rohm Emmanuel could sit together and laugh at us…
@Weaseldog, That’s a great visual w.d. – Rove and Emmanuel backslapping and and giggling together over drinks. Reminds me of a skit from SNL- It played on some apparent feud between Nancy Reagan and whoever the cheif of staff was, only to portray that they were actually in love with each other, Ronald catchs them making out and smiles, taking credit for turning enemies into friends.
?
I can only say that IF the Democrats had indeed wanted health care REFORM……we would have had a strong bipartisan bill. Everyone believes that we need to fix health cares elevator rise in rates.
But seriously? Insurance companies are responsible for escalating health care RATES. I dont know…I would think they are the only ones in this system that are trying to negotiate LOWER rates. Seems to me doctors, nurses, clinics, hospitals are the ones that CHARGE MORE FOR STUFF…..forcing insurance companies to raise rates to stay viable…..but
AS an ALINSKY DEMOCRAT…..HOW do you demonize a bazillion individual doctors? Nurses? Clinics? Hospitals? Drug makers? Pharmacies?……..YOU DONT…..so you Demonize Insurance companies and so from the very beginning the Alinsky LEFT has been feeding Americans a BIG FAT LIE. Its the progressive way.
But lets be honest people. The Democrats from the very beginning have not wanted health care REFORM….they have wanted UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE.
But in America the facts are simple…..we are 1 trillion in the hole already when it comes to deficit spending……adding the burden of national health care would add another 1-2 trillion in government spending to pay for EVERYONES premiums.
The facts are to balance our budget given this set of circumstances we would require 2-3 trillion MORE dollars in federal income. EQUAL TO OUR TAX DOLLARS NOW>>>>>>TODAY.
Right now that essentially means DOUBLING EVERYONES TAXES….INCLUDING business taxes etc.
So…top earners…..yep your tax is now 77 percent.
all the way down to 30 percent for the struggling middle class.
56 percent tax on Corporations.
The Democrats push for Universal and IN THEIR MIND>>>>>>>>>>FREE>>>>>>>>HEALTHCARE>>>>>>means we end up with a JUNK BILL that OBAMA has claimed he will fix later.
So we must demonize……TEA PARTIES. Insurance companies. Republicans. We cant have an honest debate…..we must DEMONIZE because thats what ALINSKY says to do.
Thats why you are losing the debate……..good day.
@Doomed, You are right. But it doesn’t matter if the democrats lose the debate, they’re willing to sacrifice their own to Socialize healthcare (as demonstrated by their treatment of Eric Massa. The real losers here are the American People, who, according to (liberal) CNN, are against the current healthcare proposals 3 to 1.
Also, your comment regarding who is really trying to keep costs down is absolutely true. Lab tests for a recent routine physical were billed by the doctor at about $270. My insurance company only allowed $80 and I paid my $20 co-pay. It looks like the lab and doctor’s office had grossly inflated their charges beyond what my insurance company deemed to be reasonable and customary. Without my private health insurance there to back me up, I would have owed the doctor the full amount.
@F&B,
It’s my experience that doctors charge you much less if they know you don’t have insurance. A typical visit for an allergy shot costs me $50 without insurance, and $125 with insurance.
They charge more if you have insurance, because they know they’ll have problems collecting and they’ll often have to settle for less than they bill.
As a for instance on how the insurance corps pay out, my dentist tells me that it typically takes months to get payment from an insurance company. A six month wait for payment is not unusual.
In addition to the long waiting period, a doctor has to employ full time staff to keep calling and writing the insurance company to keep the process moving. Otherwise they may not get paid at all. This adds additional costs to your service.
So if you’re a patient that is using insurance, then you’re driving up costs for the doctor in hiring extra administrative staff to battle the insurance company and your providing the insurance company with funds to to fight the doctor over payment. You end up financing both sides of a fight that drives up costs.
@Weaseldog, I don’t buy it Dog. The insurance company paid the agreed upon amount 3 days after the billing date by electronic funds transfer. I was privy to certain records because some doctor bills related to my wife’s worker’s comp claim was printed on the same list.
Why would the doctor charge me more because I have insurance while knowing the insurance company would disallow a large amount of the bill? The argument does not hold up to scrutiny. These aren’t negotiated after the fact, these are rates agreed upon in advance, when the doctor accepts a specific carrier.
Dentists often exaggerate. From those I am aquainted with in the medical profession, it sounds like he is actually talking about Medicare. The government often takes 6 months or more to pay claims.
Insurance companies don’t drive up the costs. In fact, doctors know that by accepting Insurance companies they dramatically increase their customer (patient) base.
Thank you Doomed, for Demonizing Democrats.
In order to keep fleecing America, politicians, bankers, insurance execs, pharmaceutical giants, hospital chains etc…, need to keep Americans divided against themselves.
Thank you for sticking with the program.
As an aside, anyone that thinks that the real goal was Universal Healthcare, doesn’t understand the bait and switch game.
The name of the game isn’t Universal Healthcare, it’s strip mining the US economy and giving those assets to fat cats.
And that is a Republican tradition. Stealing from the poor and giving to the rich. Every Republican knows that making rich people richer, is always noble. Any crime can be justified if it serves this cause.
The Republicans under Bush fought hard for TARP and the subsequent bailouts. Because stealing form the taxpayer to give to rich fat cats is a noble Republican cause.
So what’s wrong with doing this with fat cats that own insurance corporations? Republicans loved the banker bailouts, why not the Insurance Corp bailouts? It’s the same thing, stealing from the taxpayer to make the rich richer.
Obama and Nancy Pelosi have supported the Republican plan to bailout banker fat cats, why not insurance fat cats?
What is the difference Doomed? You want Republicans to steal from you to make bankers richer, why not the folks that run insurance corporations?
You do support the Rpublican Party and Republican ideals don’t you?
@Weaseldog, Weasel
You are doing no different. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL………..your funny.
You say NO…….DON’T do it. Then you spend your entire post demonizing the GOP.
That is because you are a progressive……its oozziinngg out of every word you write.
Its the progressive talking points all jumbled together in your one post.
@Doomed,
In a way you’re right. I’m demonizing the GOP and the Democratic Party.
But they are exactly the same in function. They just use different words when they make speeches.
Both Republicans and Democrats are at war with the Constitution of the United states of America, and both are dedicated to betraying our nation to make their common owners wealthier.
The material differences between the two parties are:
1. The colors they use. Republicans chose red for fascism. and I have no idea why Democrats chose blue.
2. The mascots. Republicans have an elephant and Democrats have a mule.
They are two teams that play the same game, and are owned by the same people.
Well I have no beef with your sentiment. Both parties are guilty of playing the American people.
The democrats use POVERTY as their drug of choice. They make being poor comfortable while NEVER ever doing anything about eliminating poverty. Republicans make no bones about playing to the rich.
But that should not be an issue other then the progressive left has tried to make it an issue by dividing the country. By Alinskizing the debate and demonizing everything in sight in a desperate effort to pass health care thats a joke. Cap and Tax…oh wait that was waaaay too unpopular so we will regulate it with the EPA, and coming soon to a town hall meeting near you…..Legalizing 12 million more poor democrats to succor with the government TIT.
In the meantime the progressives are trying to legislate salt, fishing, soda. They will take away our guns, fishing poles and SUV’s. They will demand you use a certain kind of lightbulb, send billions to bangledesh and insist that its all the GOP’s fault.
Where does the insanity stop? Hell why not just proclaim themselves communists and declare martial law. Take my money, my house and my cars for the benefit of the great collective and tell me what to eat, when to eat it and how much I can eat.
Fascist? Nah……they are left of European socialists and that is some scary stuff.
Doomed said, “That is because you are a progressive……its oozziinngg out of every word you write.”
No, actually I’m a Constructionist.
You see me as a progressive, whatever that really is, because in your view, people can only belong to one of two parties. Either you’re a corporatist that supports the Republican Party or you’re a corporatist that supports the Democratic Party.
My allegiance is with the US Constitution and the Rule of Law. The Republican Party and Democratic Party work together as slaves under a common master to undermine the US Constitution and the Rule of Law in order to give their Masters increased power and monies.
People who put there support behind either party are at also war with the Constitution of the United States of America, it’s principles, the rule of Law and our liberties.
Because I am vocal supporter of the Constitution of the United States of America, you call me a progressive and laugh at me. And you’re not alone. Many Americans like yourself have been duped into becoming traitors and enemies of freedom. Many of you are not interested in actually bothering to read legislation and comparing it to the articles in the US Constitution. It’s far easier just to engage in sloganeering and let media pundits teach you what to think. After all, thinking can be hard work.
@Weaseldog,Im assuming you mean your a libertarian on Steroids.
If that is so then why the disgruntlement against fat cats getting richer? It is after all a victimless crime isnt it?
There IS NOTHING in the constitution that says HOW much money you can make so Im confused as to why the angst over FAT CATS.
@Doomed,
“@Weaseldog,Im assuming you mean your a libertarian on Steroids.”
If you mean that I believe that politicians should be subject to the rule of law and uphold their oaths. Then sure.
There’s nothing wrong with an honest living.
If robberies are victimless crimes, then I can see your point.
The government has run up a much bigger deficit that health care would cause, to support a massive level of fraud in the financial system.
We’ve had massive fraud in the mortgage industry at all levels and supported by both parties.
We’ve had fraudulent derivative trades in the insurance industries.
GS has been front running trades with government approval for years.
GS further fraudulent sold CDSs and then bet against them, knowing they were junk, but misrepresenting their value.
The government continues to support fraudulent accounting in banking by allowing banks to value their toxic assets at imaginary values.
Then there’s the game played with the bailout payback. It worked like this…
1. The government buys preferred shares from a bank at inflated values.
2. The government then trades those shares at a discounted value for common stock at an inflated value.
3. The bank buys back the common stock at a discounted value.
4. The bank announces it paid back the loan.
This is how a $20 billion loan is repaid with $4 billion.
The difference is billed to you and me. The gov is stealing from us, and the economy to keep the wheels of this fraudulent financial system greased.
This is continuing to cause widespread destruction to the US Economy. If another nation caused this amount of damage through criminal activities, it would be considered an act of war. But because it’s banks and the government committing the crimes, we stand by and let it happen.
The victims in this crime that are getting noticeably hammered (ignoring unemployment for a moment), are investors. Anyone with a stake in the stock market, a mutual fund, a 401k, a pension plan, IRA, etc… These people are being robbed. Goldman Sachs, with full government support has computers in the major trading centers that shim themselves between trades. Using flash trades, they figure out the limits of buy and sell orders, then they become the middle man and eat the profit between them.
This is highly illegal. It is theft, and it’s draining retirement and investment accounts.
Now if there really was any such thing as a victimless crime, what makes you think it’s acceptable to profit from a criminal enterprise?
@Weaseldog,
I don’t think its acceptable, but then Im not a libertarian.
However everything you point to is legislation and regulation put in place by our government and has nothing to do with the constitution. Yet your alternative seems to be MORE regulation and legislation. Its just that now instead of someone else determing who makes the rules you want to be the one making the rules.
Now the progressives are in charge and what are they doing……they are legislating and regulating EVERYTHING in site……none of that has any bearing on the constitutional validity of their actions……its as you say…..a moral imperative that each party takes upon themselves to dictate to the masses what is good and what is not good for them.
I will agree BOTH sides do it and both sides tend to be overboard in the direction of their values but right now its the progressives turn and they are overboard in ways that havent been seen since FDR…….and most of his programs were struck down as unconstitutional.
@Doomed,
Well, I never said i was a libertarian. I labeled myself a constructionist.
You imply that libertarians are career criminals. Then you imply that I’m a libertarian. Actually, called me a libertarian on steriods. So a super career criminal?
Then you go on to describe fraud and crime in your view are allowed by the US Constitution. Then you go on to imply that all laws are regulations are bad.
For instance, you say, “Yet your alternative seems to be MORE regulation and legislation.”
Which seems to me to be a strange response to my argument that the problem is widespread criminal behavior in government and the top levels of industry.
I would characterize my argument as one, that is instead asking for enforcement of existing laws and regulations. And you have a problem with this.
You sound to me like and anarchist on steroids. Anything goes to make a buck. It doesn’t matter if it’s illegal or not.
You invented the following argument and ascribed it to me, “its as you say…..a moral imperative that each party takes upon themselves to dictate to the masses what is good and what is not good for them.”
If there is a moral imperative, it’s greed and lust for power. Your argument on the whole, makes it sound like you see this as a virtue though.
You’ve argued that the crimes I’ve discussed, such as the Patriot Act (which suspends Habeus Corpus and allows Search and Seizure without warrants), and massive criminality and fraud in the Federal Government and Wall Street have nothing to do with the US Constitution.
What you don’t know about the Constitution of the United States of America is that this document provides the framework for our government, our legal system, our laws and law enforcement.
The way this document works is that the citizenry are assumed to have all rights not explicitly denied and the government only has those rights which are explicitly expressed.
Let me repeat that last part, because it’s important in understanding whether government actions are constitutional. The government only has those rights which are explicitly expressed.
If the US Constitution doesn’t give the government the right to do something, then it is unconstitutional for the government to do it.
And the US Constitution certainly does not the US Government the power to engage in criminal enterprises for the benefit of private individuals that are engaging in criminal behavior.
And I’ll reiterate a point you’re having trouble with. Asking that laws be enforced is not the same as asking for new regulations.
It’s stupid to ask for new regulations, when the laws that are currently being violated aren’t enforced.
As a thought experiment exploring your general argument that any crime that makes a profit is worth doing, consider the following scenario.
You’re walking up to your car after a long day of work. After you open the door, a man shoots you in the back of the head with a .38. He takes your wallet and your car. He profits from this enterprise. In his criminal career, he ends up making more money than you did, over the long haul.
Would you commend this man for being a good capitalist? Is he a better man than you because he makes more money? Would you argue that in his case the law should not be enforced?
What if he didn’t kill you, but just robbed you of your wallet and car at gunpoint. Would this be a career you’d admire?
What if he just stole your identity and emptied you bank account?
What if he owned the investment firm that manages your 401k, and over the years skimmed your account to buy vacation homes and jet skiis with?
What if he managed your trades and engaged in front running to skim your funds at a loss to you and took a commission? That’s very close to how GS makes record profits.
@Weaseldog,
Would you rather I ascribe to you a conservative?
From Wikipedia:
I hardly think your conservative. You claim not to be progressive so that leaves libertarian. However as you debate this its very clear you are not a libertarian because you keep falling back to progressive talking points. Ergo.
I did not say that libertarians were criminals. I said that if a crime is victimless they advocate its not a crime. Being a FAT CAT is not criminal. Making money is not criminal and it now becomes incumbent upon you to substantiate the allegation that as you put it………….
Doomed, both parties play the same game. Republicans have their own brand of restrictive laws they support.
And what happens is we the citizenry get squeezed from both sides.
It’s my view that so long as the citizenry supports our two party system as it is, and doesn’t demand change from both of them, we’re just going to ping pong between the two and keep losing.
I believe that the Democrats are going to be ousted, and the Republicans are going to simply take their turn betraying the USA. Then when Americans have had enough of that, they’ll vote the Dems back in for a repeat performance.
And why shouldn’t it be this way? A large contingent of people support their representatives without question. They don’t bother to watch their activities, their votes or read the bills.
In regards to some disturbing language I found in the Patriot Act, Pete Sessions informed me that he asked a lawyer if the Patriot Act was Constitutional. The lawyer said it was, so Pete voted for it, again and again. I took the time to read the parts of it that are not classified and there are lot of things in it, that are in direct opposition to the articles in the US Constitution. It’s clear enough that most any fifth grader would see it.
And even Obama, that famed Constitution Scholar voted for it.
When it comes to screwing the US Constitution, bipartisanship is the rule of the day. Both parties are on board with that.
@Weaseldog, Which brings us full circle back to my original post in which you replied.
I do not disagree with much of what you said. In fact I can sympathize to an extent with what you are saying.
But it brings me back to one important topic. Why are we demonizing insurance companies? They simply try to bring you coverage. Its the doctors, nurses and clinics and hospitals and drug companies that keep escalating their prices that are at fault here.
Not insurance companies.
Yet the progressive solution is to LEGISLATE< REGULATE to solve the "Alinsky Crisis".
There is no crisis with insurance companies. Hell they were the first to climb on board with the PRESIDENT way back when….realizing that they stand to GAIN by having health care overhaul.
It is why this bill will do almost nothing to bring down costs and will in fact INCREASE costs. The Dems know this……they want universal health care……they want to create a crisis….and then solve it.
Doomed said, “Making money is not criminal and it now becomes incumbent upon you to substantiate the allegation that as you put it………….
You’ve argued that the crimes I’ve discussed, such as the Patriot Act (which suspends Habeus Corpus and allows Search and Seizure without warrants), and massive criminality and fraud in the Federal Government and Wall Street have nothing to do with the US Constitution.”
Are you arguing that any act that makes you money is legal?
Earlier I made a comment to the point that people are unable to make judgments on the legality of legislation, because they never bother to actually read it, or compare it to the US Constitution. They instead, use media pundits as their brains and absorb pre-digested knowledge from them and accept it as the truth.
i believe you make my case here. You come across as an intelligent person. If you were to actually read the Patriot Act, and the US Constitution in the same sitting and make comparisons, I believe you’d better understand what I am talking about.
Dick Cheney says that Republicans reject reality and live a community of non-reality based inventions. A fantasy Based Community as you will. This makes it very difficult to converse with Republicans or pose arguments. Because they reject the actual reading of legislation and the debate on points there-in.
Please read the Patriot Act, then we’ll have some basis for discussion.
@Weaseldog, I reject your assertions because you hide behind the constitution without citing chapter and verse and thousands of cases of legal precedents that allowed our congress to pass such a document with a fair amount of bipartisan agreement.
But none of that has anything to do with health care nor does it have anything to do with fat cats and Wall street getting rich.
It is however a GREAT DIVERSION from the original point of my post which is the Democrats simply want to take over health care by creating a crisis and then offering to solve it.
@Doomed,
I see, because you and I agree on the Healthcare issue to a large degree, you reject my arguments on issues that you are largely ignorant on.
You seem to lack the capacity to discuss this issue in a logical manner. you do argue well from an emotional point. Your feelings are what matters here. Not facts or points of law.
Are you a teenage girl?
@Weaseldog, Am I a teenage girl?
That would be no.
This is what you wrote in your first post in response to my post. It has been what I have been trying to discuss from the beginning.
Then you imply we are all ignorant because WE WONT read the bill……DUH……WE CANT. Oh wait….Im talking about health care and YOUR talking about the Patriot ACT….as you posted earlier…… BAIT and SWITCH.
AS far as how I argue a point. I am still trying to debate the first topic and you keep scatter gunning me with a dozen other things…..ALINSKY tactics by the way….and then claiming I wont stick to the point.
I have been on point from the beginning.
That point is simple. It is not the Insurance companies responsible for rising health care costs. It is Doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, Pharmaceuticals, and medical devices companies that can pretty much charge whatever the hell they want and insurance companies try to negotiate somewhat of a reasonable fee and make money to boot.
Heaven for freakin bid that health insurance companies should make any money WHILE hospitals are charging 20 dollars for a FREAKIN Aspirin but its INSURANCE companies fault that they can charge such outrageous prices.
Simply put its the progressive left…..ALINSKIZING the debate…..they had to find a demon….someone or something to make the evil monster…Like BUSH is HITLER, CHENEY is GOEBELS……..Insurance companies are evil and you want to talk about the patriot act.
@Weaseldog, You’re missing the point – the fact – that two reasonable and intelligent people can read the same thing and draw different conclusions. This includes the Patriot Act and the U.S. Constitution. But one point you haven’t made makes me wonder if you have ever read Saul Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals” which is clearly guiding the philosophy and actions of many powerful democrats, including Obama.
In addition, you stated that Republicans reject the reading of legislation, yet it is the democrats who were not satisfied with a 1000+ page piece of “healthcare” legislation and therefore proceeded to enhance it to the tune of about 1400 more pages.
I read the first “healthcare” bill proposed by the democrats, and many other people did too. The dem’s quickly realized that as more people learned what was actually in the bill, the opposition to it grew rapidly. So they made a 2400 page monolith that was virtually impossible for anyone to read – even professional legislators need a team of staff members and small army of lawyers to decipher all the provisions and references to other legislation.
Weaseldog, even your statement that the Patriot Act suspends Habeus Corpus and allows search and seizure without warrants is extremely disingenuous and misleading. Mainly because it doesn’t. Except under specific circumstances which do not include the vast, vast majority of American Citizens. And beyond that, anyone who reads the entire Patriot Act in one sitting has way too much time on their hands.
In spite of the way it must look to you, everyone who disagrees with you does not get their information from Fox News or other media pundits. It was good to see Doomed bring the discussion back to the point of Healthcare and the multi-trillion dollar deception the democrats are attempting to shove down the throats of the American people.
@F&B,
I have few disagreements with you too on the Healthcare bill. I see no point in arguing about something that I largely agree with you on.
Where I disagree is, the role of insurance companies. I have direct experience with insurance companies being slow to pay. Some call me a liar, because they had a different experience once. I also have direct experience with getting big discounts because I did not have insurance. Both at hospitals and in with a family practitioner.
Hospitals are huge corporate giants. Their purpose is to make money. they’ll gouge everywhere they can. If they can’t gouge, because you just don’t have the money, they’ll negotiate to get everything they can.
Doomed is against laws and regulations. How would you cut gouging without them?
And the Healthcare Bill is a bailout for the corporate giants. It has nothing to do with the practice of Healthcare. It needs to die.
“You’re missing the point – the fact – that two reasonable and intelligent people can read the same thing and draw different conclusions.”
Actually when it was being debated on the floor, I asked a number of reasonable people who supported it, to read passages from it, and they changed their minds about it being constitutional.
The point where your argument breaks down is that reasonable people don’t read it, but take the MSM’s word for it that it will make them safer.
@Weaseldog, You’re probably right that we agree on more points than we disagree. So I won’t rehash any of that.
I do believe that, whether it is truly needed or not, the U.S. health care system could be modified to increase available coverage but two things are needed and they are both bitter pills to some. Health care legislation would have to provide increased regulation of the insurance and medical industries and serious tort reform.
Actually I am NOT against regulation and legislation. In fact you will find that most companies favor legislation and regulations because it gives them advantages and protections in a dog eat dog consumer driven world.
I agree that we need health care reform in a bad way. I have no doubt in my mind that this health care bill is a pork driven, agenda driven bill that we all have not even seen yet that is designed for one purpose…..to take over health care in this country.
As to the Patriot act. I do believe that our government fundamentally has become unconstitutional. It has power grabbed since the civil war in which the powers of the states WERE CRUSHED and since that time the FEDS have swelled in power and the states have become welfare YES BOYS and GIRLS>
But that does not alter the fact that this debate began when you accused me of bashing the DEMS WHO are incidently RUNNING the show now and then you began bashing the GOP in kind for what could only be surmised as their willingness to use social and their own versions of>>>>>>
“”"a moral imperative that each party takes upon themselves to dictate to the masses what is good and what is not good for them.”"”
Im trying to clear up some of the questions you asked above. I am a conservative. I vote for many democrats. Always have. I tend to vote for the person who is NOT running on social issues because I believe in America its not the GOP or the DEMS right or responsibility to dictate moral imperatives to the masses. I support the GOP more often then I support the Democrats for one over riding reason.
The Democrats have impoverished the poor and continue to make poverty a huge asset to their base rather then combating and fixing poverty. For that I despise the Democratic party. I do not DESPISE individual democrats but I do despise their willingness to use the poor as political pawns while NEVER……EVER doing anything about fixing poverty.
They simply make being poor more comfortable at huge expenses to this nation………The GOP on the other hand makes no bones about catering to the rich, corporations, business, laissez faire, free markets and economic solutions to social burdens.
For that I like their straight forward and honest approach to what they believe in. The only party that in my opinion has their believers fooled is the dems who claim they care about the poor but then never do anything about poverty….they only perpetuate it by making it more comfortable to BE POOR.
Hi there, Nice article. I’ve only discovered blogging recenly and I am totally addicted!! It’s sites like this that are to blame!
I have been so encouraged that I decided to create my own site. I am in the middle of researching for an article i am writing and was wondering if I can link to your post? I think it will be of some interest to my readers. All the best! Keep up the good work. Brittany Papple