Yet again the Seattle Times editorial board has strongly urged Congress and/or the President to drop health care reform, focus on other issues, and start over from scratch. And yet again the Times has attempted to cover their motives with the following caveat:
For years, this newspaper has favored health care reform. We still favor it, done at the right time and in the right way.
Yeah, well, forgive my cynicism, but I’m not so sure.
As compromised as the current bill is, if history is any guide, this is our last, best chance to pass health care reform for at least a generation. Surely, the Times editors don’t believe that given such a disastrous political failure, Congress or the President would be willing to buck history and touch this rail again anytime soon? Certainly the Times isn’t suggesting that smaller Democratic majorities in both houses, or even a Republican majority in one or the other, would be more likely to pass health care reform than the relatively large Democratic majorities we hold at the moment? The Republicans are clearly invested in blocking reform at any cost, and view this obstructionist strategy as absolutely critical to their long term political survival.
So I can only assume that the Times is being either naive or disingenuous when they repeatedly and aggressively urge Democrats to abandon health care reform at the same time they claim to support it.
Here’s my theory. The Times used to support health care reform, as like most businesses, they saw rising employee health insurance costs as threatening their economic survival. But with the collapse of the newspaper industry, and the large number of journalists and other related professionals now out of work, supply and demand has shifted so far in favor of the publisher that health care costs have ceased to be much of an issue. Newspaper employees are just thankful to have a job, and have repeatedly granted wage and benefit concessions to the Times and other papers nationwide.
If health insurance costs continue to rise, the Times will simply demand even more concessions, with the implied threat that recalcitrant employees can always be replaced by those hungry enough to do the job for less.
Health care crisis solved.
Yeah, I know, that’s an awfully cynical theory. But the only reasonable alternative would be to assume that the Times editors are a bunch of blithering idiots who genuinely and inexplicably believe that defeating health care reform is the surest path toward achieving it… and such a brutally harsh assessment just wouldn’t be polite.
I’ll raise your cynicism by questioning whether they ever really supported HCR in the first place. More likely, they know that their readers support it, and that it sounds good to readers to favor such a popular policy. So they “support” it, knowing that they can always raise questions about timing or details and never have to follow through with any real support when it matters.
So what are the names of the people on this fictional “board”?
To the Leftist Pinheads—
EVERYONE supports some form of Health Care Reform. The Dummocrats favorite trick is to portray those who don’t support THEIR overthetop socialized medicine approach that will bankrupt the country…as being against reform.
I’m for Tort Reform, weeding out more fraud, Interstate Competition etc.
I don’t believe free health care is a “right”.
The Leftist Pinheads will never grow up and have real discussions about this. It’s Dingle Payer at all costs…no matter what the cost.
Hey Mr. Cynical, It’s totally awesome that you support a bunch of ineffective and counter productive “reforms” for health care. Good for you!
I am curious about what you mean when you say you don’t believe health care is a “right.” Do you think that doctors should turn away poor people from the hospital? Should paramedics ask for proof of income before taking people to the hospital? How would your form of economic health care rationing work in your ideal world?
health care is a right?
funny, I dont see it in the constitution anywhere.
if we, as a nation, want to make it a “right”, the lets follow the instructions laid down by the founding fathers and have a constitutional amendment.
lebo–
We need to be mindful that the Leftist Lunatics believe the Constitution is a “living document” that our Founding Fathers were not “Progressive” enough to think about other rights…like Health Care, Food, Algorology.
They trample other peoples Property RIGHTS at the drop of the hat….all for “the greater good” dontchaknow.
But they aren’t Socialists!
Yeah, RIGHT!
Maybe it’s time for Roosevelt’s idea to be revived:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights
@3: Klynical idiot
We know you are for “tort reform” but that is why you ignore the evidence that “tor reform” will change less than 1% of health care costs.
That is also why you are so incredibly stooopid. You keep making the same dumb arguments that have been totally refuted – and you do it over and over without learning anything.
Thanks for demonstrating the apalling lack of evidence, the lack of actual thought and the lack of a brain that those who oppose health care reform have.
Have you ever heard of a preexisting condition?
Have you heard about portability?
Do you realize you are calling this socialistic when there is no public option (that COULD hold down costs)?
Why are you (Klynical) so incredibly stupid, naive, pathetically ill-informed and brazenly wrong?
Do you not have the brain cells or anough cerebral cortex to realize what a fool you make of yourself?
Are you deliberately stoopid?
Really, we are all laughing at what a fool you are and how much you are over your head when you write anything other than a complete reprise of Faux News stupidity.
Oh, health care is not a “right” just as Medicare is not a right and taking care of old people or starving people is not a “right”…..they are just “wrongs”.
And Klynical claims to be religious….hahahah
And we got exactly the HCR the reactionary right wanted during the W. Bush years when the DeLay House and the Frist Senate rammed through their status quo is status quo plan down the throats of the American people. Former Majority Leader Frist, who together with his family are well invested in the status quo and have done quite well by it, as have many others.
Health care should be just as much a right as police protection and fire protection, and for the same reasons. They are the product of our social, economic and political advancement, serving as a healthy fruit for our body politic. They are not mentioned in the constitution either, and anybody who supports common protection against thieves, thugs, and blazes instead of hiring out private local services are already fellow socialists as far as I’m concerned. But then again, I’m just a leftist pinhead incapable of using reason in an argument, unlike my opponents in the Caucus of Trolls.
The Idiot KLOWN spews: “But they aren’t Socialists!”
Of course we’re not socialists, you dumbfuck KLOWN, we’re commie-fascists. Didn’t you get the message? Get with the fucking program.
“Are you deliberately stoopid?”
The KLOWN would have to be working awfully hard at it and yet he’s never skipped a beat – every comment of his has been so painfully fucking stupid. It’s got to be the real deal. So, yeah, meet the dumbest fucktard on the planet, our own Mr. Klynical KLOWN.
It’s against the law.
Must happen in libtardo run cities.
Republicans have issued different ideas. DUMMOCRAPTS don’t like them becuz it blows up some of their insipid arguments.
FACT CHECK: Premiums would rise under Obama plan
Re 7
That address is what made FDR a traitor and an oathbreaker.
That address is what made FDR the worst president this country has ever had, or is likely to have.
That address could have been drawn directly from Stalin or Lenin.
FDR was an elitist ass who thought he could destroy the American spirit of independence and self reliance. Trouble is, with the help of LBJ and leftists like you, he did.
Asshole.
The whole discussion about whether health care is a right or not misses the point. It’s just cheaper and more efficient to offer health care on as large a basis as possible. Every industrialized nation in the world, except ours, has recognized this and has over thirty years of experience in making it work. Some do it better than others. But all provide at least as good care as in the U.S. (quite a few better overall care), for a fraction of the U.S. cost.
The equivilent is not a right vs. a priviledge, but simply whether it makes more sense to cover everyone vs. cover only those who are able to pay the premiums. The conservative response seems to assume that there is some sort of invisible barrier preventing germs from crossing between the insured and the uninsured. Obviously, that’s idiotic.
We’ve found that emergency 911 service, fire departments, and police departments all work best if they are supported by taxes and then do their duties without worrying about insurance and billing. Why can’t health care be the same?
FDR, who pulled this country through the greatest crises of the 20th century, putting into motion the revival of the economy in the 30’s and preparing for and waging war on opposite sides of the world against industrial militaristic powers, and approving and advancing the research and engineering of the atomic bomb which saved untold lives in that war, and laying the foundation of the post-war structure for peaceful resolution of conflict in the UN. St. Ronnie standing tall might be able to reach his shoelaces.
And what is it about reactionaries and their unrestrained namecalling? Never mind, the answer is clear enough.
Mr. Clinical and others, if health care is not a right, then we let people die in the hospital corridors for lack of funds. I’m old enough to remember when that actually happened in this country.
No, we say by law that everyone is entitled to health care, at least on an emergency basis. Seems to me pretty close to being a “right”. Actually, come to think about it, what the uninsured get in the emergency room isn’t Health Care, it’s Illness Care — one reason why it’s such a costly and inefficient way to deliver medical services.
Puddybud, I would really like to know if conservatives believe that hospitals and doctors should be able to deny treatment to people who can’t pay. I know it’s against the law. SHOULD it be against the law? Come on out and say “I think people should die for lack of treatment if they can’t pay the bill.” Otherwise you believe in socialized medicine.
sdstarr,
You are a moron.
Nuff SAID Sucka!
lebowski @5,
One of the main arguments against a Bill of Rights at the time was that if we enumerated specific rights in the Constitution, assholes like you would use that as a rationale for denying any rights not specifically enumerated.
If the Fire Dept. was handled the same way as health care in the U.S.:
911 Automated Recording: “You have reached the Firmacare Security 911 Emergency System. Your call is very important to us. Please wait for an operator to come on the line. In the meantime, please have your prepaid account number for 911 service ready, along with your PIN and social security number, and enter that information at when prompted. If you do not have that information handy, hang up now and call back when you have it. If you do not have an account number set up with “Contracted 911 Service”, then you will need a major credit card to set up a new account. Please wait for the next available operator. Your estimated wait time is …. 25 minutes”….
Caller: “&*!!!!$@@!!!X&!!!”
911 Operator: “Hello, welcome to the “911 service’. Our goal is to provide you with excellent service! How may we help you”
Caller: “Help! My house is on fire!”
911 Operator: “I understand that your house is on fire. Is that correct, sir?”
Caller: “Yes, my house is on fire!!!!”
911 Operator: “Would you like us to send an Emergency Response Fire Team to your house?
Caller: “Yes!!!! Send the fire department right now!!!!!”
911 Operator: “Okay, first let me check your account. In reviewing your account, it seems that you have not updated your information in a while. Could you please verify your home address, telephone number, cell phone number, and e-mail address???
Caller: “Just send the fire department to 1234 Mercer Place South, right away!!!!!”
911 Operator: “Okay, I understand that your address is 1234 Mercer Place South. Is that in Providence or Cleveland?”
Caller: “What the hell do you mean in Providence or Cleveland? It’s in Seattle, dummy!!!!!”
911 Operator: “There is no need to get abusive, sir. If you continue to get abusive, I will have to terminate this call”.
Caller: “Look, how come you don’t know I live in Seattle?”
911 Operator: “Sir, I have no way of knowing where you live unless you tell me, sir!”
Caller: “Just where the hell are you located, anyway?”
911 Operator: “Sir, I am not allowed to give out that information. Now, please, let us proceed, I have to complete this call before I can go to lunch.”
Caller: “Lunch??? At 2:00 a.m.???? You are in Pakistan, aren’t you????”
911 Operator: “Sir, I am really not allowed to give out that information. Do you want me to send someone out to your house, or not???”
Caller: “Yes, please send someone right away!!!!”
911 Operator: “Okay, but first let’s look at your policy. I see that you opted for our ‘Expanded-basic’ protection package. That allows for service calls between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with an extra charge for off-hour dispatches. Would you like to pay the extra charge, or would you like to wait until 8:00 a.m., and call back at that time?”
Caller: “Yes, I’ll pay the extra charge, just send someone out right now!!!!”
911 Operator: “The extra charge for off-hours assistance under your policy is…. $28,395.89. We will need payment at this time, before we dispatch the emergency response vehicles.”
Caller: “$28,395.89!!!!! That’s highway robbery!”
911 Operator: “No, sir, it’s capitalism. If you had read the 6-point font on page 237 of the booklet we sent with your billing three months ago, entitled “Changes to your Plan”, you would have seen that we have discretion to charge you whatever we calcluate to be the “prevailing rate” for off-hours dispatches. Do you want the service now, or do you want to call back later after 8:00 a.m.?”
Caller: “Yes, dammit, just send out the fire trucks!”
911 Operator: “Okay, I have your credit card information on file, and I am processing the charge now. Now, did you say you want more than one truck?”
Caller: “Yes, send everything out!!!”
911 Operator: “Now sir, that would be a wasteful expenditure of resources, and I’m sure you would agree that such waste just ends up adding to everyone’s costs. We will send out one car to examine the extent of the fire and determine the appropriate response which is required. This information will then get submitted to our claims processing department, which will evaluate the fire in consultation with our team of experienced fire investigators, and make a decision.”
Caller: “And how long will that take?”
911 Operator: “The claims committee meets on Wednesdays and Fridays. Unfortunately, this is a Saturday, so it will take some time before they make a decision. If you had been more prompt in making your call or anticipating the need for our services, you could have called on Thursday and have had a decision by Friday.”
Caller: “You have got to be @#!!!!! kidding me!”
911 Operator: “Now sir, if you continue to be abusive I will have to terminate this call.
911 Operator: Oh, I have some bad news. It appears that when you signed up for our service, you filled out an application form which said that you don’t drink alchohol. But a check of your credit card statements over the past 12 months has revealed a charge 0f $28.36 three months ago to ‘Joe’s Bar and Grill’. It appears that your insurance policy for this fire will have to be voided due to your misrepresentation.”
Caller: “I don’t drink, dammit. My wife and I just ate dinner there. We drank iced tea!!!!”
911 Operator: “Now sir, we are hardly in a position to evaluate that at this time, are we? If perhaps you could obtain your receipt for that meal, and fax it to our claims department, you could appeal our denial of coverage.”
Caller: “My &&##!!???? reciept just burned up, along with the rest of my house!!!”
911 Operator: “Now, sir, I’ve warned you about your abusive language twice now. I am going to have to terminate this call. Unfortunately, we cannot provide a refund for your off-hours service fee, as that has already been processed and our denial of coverage is deemed to be a service provided to you under the plan. Thank you for calling and allowing us to provide you with excellent service today.”
So, in your humble opinion, there is also no “right” to schooling, no “right” to earn a living, no “right” to vote????
Puddy being Dumb Dumb
“Must happen in libtardo run cities.
How would your form of economic health care rationing work in your ideal world?
Republicans have issued different ideas. DUMMOCRAPTS don’t like them becuz it blows up some of their insipid arguments.”
Nope.
The actual specifics suggested by Reps ARE in Obamacare. These are all piecemeal and do not work on their own.
To date, the Repugnants party has published, even in outline form, only one comprehensive, working proposal. That proposal is based on a huge tax increase for all but the richest Mericans. Good luck on that.
rhp
Beautiful. An illustration such as that puts into clear focus the privatized world the wingnuts aspire to and blather about. Naturally, however, when they get their way and their house is burning down, they would complain about the government not being there and about taxes.
@21….goldy, first off, go fuck yourself you loser..
second, I never said health care should or should not be a “right”. I just dont agree with the term “rights” being passed around like they are candy bars at Wonka’s factory.
if we(as a nation) want to make it a right, then lets pressure congress to make an amendment to the constitution…seems to me that that action alone would pretty much force health care for all.
get it yet, you stupid son of a bitch?
Can the Seattle Times editorial board possibly be more transparently cynical, or out-of-touch with its potential readership? You’d think this newspaper was published in Orange County, California … not Seattle.
@3 “I’m for Tort Reform”
Since when does so-called “tort reform” constitute “health care reform”?
Think about it — legal settlements and expenses amount to less than 1% of health care expenditures, but health insurance companies that provide no medical services take 30% off the top … isn’t it rather obvious where reform needs to be focused?
Furthermore, taking away patients’ right to sue negligent doctors and hospitals doesn’t improve health care, it only gives the worst providers a green light to be even more careless.
@23…
you are correct, kinda.
no, you do not have a “right” to schooling…although I see your point.
no, you do not have a “right” to make a living, if that was the case, then everyone would be guaranteed a job.
as far as voting goes, well your kinda correct, although the 19th amendment tried to clear that up a little bit.
based upon his thread about the KCCD elections, goldy doesnt think people have the right to vote anyway…
@5 “health care is a right?”
Health care is as much a necessity as food, clothing, and shelter; and only a JERK would argue that anyone should be denied the necessities of life in a country as rich as America. Why do you rightwing pricks want to turn us into a third world nation?
LostinNarcissism @15 goes galt. Calls people he disagrees with traitors. On other threads, begs for civil discussion. I’d put this one down as deliberately provocative, and therefore meaningless, but vile, bile.
Lefty Quotes:
“Peace, land, bread” V.I. Lenin
“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Wingnut Quotes:
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” Adolph Hitler
“I hold in my hand a list….” Joe McCarthy
Now go take your big ego outside for a walk. It must be sucking all the air out of your house.
RE 31
No matter how many times you use that narcissism crack it busts me up. I mean, the sheer unadulterated Twain quality of humor…Sorry, had to wipe my eyes from the helpless tears of laughter. (Quick pointer, look the word up. My laughter is mainly at you.)
But to the point.
FDR was not the savior you folks think he was. He had great commanders and generals who ran WW2. Yes, he had the sense to trust them to do their jobs, but saying he pulled us through WW2 is like saying…well, I can’t think of anything sufficiently ridiculous.
WW2 itself ended the Depression. Had FDR policies been left on their own to do so they would have worsened it, as many economists think they did.
He took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, an oath he clearly had no intention of fulfilling. He was the worst and least American president we’ve ever had, bar none.
And your equation of Lenin with Roosevelt speaks volumes. So does your silly equation of Hitler as right wing, given that he headed a socialist party.
Philosophies like those of FDR, Johnson, and yours are not just immature and worthless. They are positively dangerous to what made America work until your ilk came along.
Proud
BTW, how well did that whole “Land, bread peace” thing work out for Russia? Oh, now I remember.
Come to think of it Obama must have been reading his pocket copy of great Hitler quotes and come accross the one you cite, Proud.
“I will never support health care reform with an insurance mandate.” Um hmm.
“Guantanamo will be closed.”
“Insuring 30 million more Americans will save money” Have to stop here, because even Obama couldn’t top that lie for pure audacity.
#33 – how well did that whole “Land, bread peace”…
Pretty well, Russia went from being a serfdom to “the world’s 11th largest economy by nominal GDP or the eighth largest by purchasing power parity, with the fifth largest nominal military budget.” [wikipedia]
They are 9th in population.
And the Republicans are always scared of them.
#34 – you do know what insurance is?
The more you spread the risk – the lower the cost. That’s why Reinsurance exists, so that insurers can spread their risk even more, thus lower their expenses in the long term for a short term expense.
So if you have 30 million more buying into the pool, the risk is diluted that much more. Especially as most of the new folks will be younger and less at risk, but some of them will still get sick, even if they think they’ll live forever.
Really SeattleJew? Really?
When Congressional peeps have said repeatedly they haven’t seen the Reconciliation bill yet?
When Nancy Pelosi said “But we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it.“?
Since most of those 30 million are already paying into Medicare, they are paying for Seniors’ healthcare before their own.
Of course, Senior healthcare is some of the most expensive healthcare out there (old folks get sick more often).
Go back and read the AP article. You know the AP, the official organ of the Odumba Administration!
re 36
Umm, yes. I think the short word for what you describe is ‘Ponzi scheme.’
Look, even a liberal can perform basic math. It is impossible for 30 million more people to be insured and save money. Spin it however you like, your president is a liar.
Uptown, have you read what Republican Arizona Congressmen John Shadegg suggests for insurance pools for peeps with pre-existing conditions? It’s a great suggestion where a person with a pre-existing condition gets affordable health insurance. Here uptown, you can listen…
BTW it was rejected by Odumba and his minions. Why? Listen to the audio!
Lostinaseaofblue…
You forgot the no new taxes on peeps making less than $250,000 a year.
Yet, the AP claims health care bill if passed will shock and amaze those same peeps.
For post #41 looks like Goldy’s system destroys the link…
Try this… javascript:launchAudioWindow(‘http://www.townhall.com/MediaPlayer/AudioPlayer.aspx?ContentGuid=0927aba8-6529-4ef1-acea-93d5957319d7’)
Damn trolls, their logic is just too much for little old me.
Insurance = Ponzi scheme (40)
High-risk pools for those with pre-existing conditions – so Shadegg wants to directly subsidize the most expensive to insure. Good deal for the insurance companies, they can just keep dropping folks as they get sick and never pay out on any expensive claims. (41)
Commanders he had a lot to do with putting into positions of authority, Chief of Staff George Marshall being promoted from commanding the barracks at Ft. Vancouver to leading the Army for instance, and co-ordinating the entire country for all out war that was concluded in less than four years is something that George W. Bush isn’t likely to achieved. Furthermore, against his contemporaries Chamberlain, Churchill, Reynaud, Hitler, Stalin, Tojo and Mussolini FDR gave his commanders better support, guidance, and less interference. That’s somehow a bad thing, considering the Republicans were even less inclined to support preparations for war than the somewhat divided Democrats. And if the country hadn’t completely recovered from the astonishing disaster of the Great Depression made entirely during a Republican government and dumped into the lap of the Democrats to fix, somehow it’s all on the Democrats that it wasn’t. Lostinaseaofblue, why don’t you try and get some reading in? You could use it.
@29 “no, you do not have a “right” to schooling…although I see your point”
Universal free public education, which started in the 19th century, was never considered a “right” of the individual. Rather, parents had a legal duty to send their children to school, and children were required to attend. It was intended to benefit society by providing the economy with a skilled workforce, and it made America the richest nation on earth.
Sorry, sucker bet would be a better phrase than Ponzi scheme.
We’ve all been taught that we need to insure our homes, cars, lives etc. All it really amounts to is betting someone that something very unlikely will happen, and then paying them. Money in the bank earning interest is better for dealing with the misfortunes life throws at us. Oh, we can’t do that because democrat policies from FDR on have taken the incentive to provide for ourselves away.
Apparently you didn’t listen to the link. That’s NOT what Shadegg proposed!
LostyinNarcissism whines:
“..but saying he pulled us through WW2 is like saying…well, I can’t think of anything…”
Never stopped you before. Let me finish that one for you…”is like saying Ronald Reagan won the Cold War”.
,i>”WW2 itself ended the Depression…”
Yes. Huge government spending and public debt. Price controls. Rationing. Why, correct me if I am wrong, those are the very policies advocated by today’s GOP, neh?
“So does your silly equation of Hitler as right wing, given that he headed a socialist party.
Well, no. After the Night of the Long Knives the radicals were pretty much eliminated from the nazi party. Ask your buddy, Jonah “Doughy Panload” Goldberg.
But do keep it up. It’s entertaining reading such ludicrous ignorant inanity. Your love for yourself is truly an inspiration.
That’s amazing “thought” Mark Centz. Butt as always you are chronologically deficient. Back then there weren’t reports from embedded reporters telling the opposition party what issues are happening on the front lines. Then you have the opposition party support the war then immediately lie they didn’t support the war.
BIG DIFF from 1941 to 2003.
Hmmm the leftists at Slate disagree with ProudWithStickUpASS. Puddy placed this link before so you can read it since you possess 24 hour moronic Moonbat! memory malady.
Shocking isn’t it ProudWithStickUpASS? You need to stop reading leftist pinhead whackamole crapola!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
@48: Wrong, as usual.
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress......gle-payer/
Fred Kaplan writes amusing speculative column. Pudwacker throws monkey feces. But history is funny that way. Certainly FDR did not singlehandedly win WWII, but it took two to tango (read the fucking column, bullshitter) and Reagan’s strong desire to eliminate all nuclear weapons drove his conservative fascist minions stark raving mad with worry at the time.
But you’ll never hear fuckwads like you admit it, since you hate is all consuming.
Pity. You strike me as halfway intelligent. Perhaps not.
Founding Fathers and insurance…
Reagan compared to FDR? That’s extremely hard on poor FDR. He couldn’t measure up to Reagan in his most vivid fantasies or on his best day. Reagan ended the Cold War without a shot fired. He inspired people to do for themselves rather than rely on government. FDR ruined the countrys’ work ethic, destroyed basic personal responsibility and redefined the role of government in a new and fundamentally un American way.
Yes, massive government spending probably did bring us out of the depression more quickly than time and tide would have. So are you proposing WW3? Overkill, perhaps? (If we do, can we take on the French? They never defend themselves, and their snooty attitude is annoying. Plus Champagne, Bordeau and Brie cheese would be domestic products when we won.)
Try getting a grip on reality. The current recession while painful is in no rational way comparable to the Depression. There is no measure, whether unemployment, GDP or any other by it can be seen to be.
Have a pleasant evening.
Re 54
Franklin did a lot of things. Some very wise, some not. And?
Reagan?!
Iran-Contra: The use of proceeds from covert arms sales to Iran to fund the Contras in Nicaragua, which had been specifically outlawed by an act of Congress.
Of course he knew nothing, just like all good Repugs when caught with their pants down.
Goldy,
Please don’t *ever* give up critiquing the Seattle Times editorial page. I know it can be like shooting fish in a barrel- but it needs to be done. They live in a silly fantasy world.
Thank you.
#48 Here it is, direct from Shadegg.
@3, 13 — It’s hard to tell who’s stoopier, Klown or Puttbutt; they run neck-and-neck.
@23 “So, in your humble opinion, there is also no “right” to schooling, no ‘right’ to earn a living, no ‘right’ to vote????”
That’s right, Steve, cheap labor conservatives believe workers have no right to the necessities of life unless an Employer deigns to grace them with a Job, which of course, is entirely at the Employer’s discretion and solely upon the Employer’s terms.
Here is a more complete enunciation of the cheap labor conservative credo:
“At bottom, conservatives believe in a social hierarchy of ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ …. They have taken this corrosive social vision and dressed it up with a ‘respectable’ sounding ideology [which] is pure hogwash ….
“You’ve heard those slogans. ‘Less government’, ‘personal responsibility’ and lots of flag waving … are ’shorthand’ for an entire worldview [which] the right has been pounding … into … public [consciousness] for getting on forty years. …
“When you cut right through it, right-wing ideology is just ‘dime-store economics’ –- intended to dress their ideology up and make it look respectable. You don’t really need to know much about economics to understand it. They certainly don’t. It all gets down to two simple words. ‘Cheap labor’. That’s their whole philosophy in a nutshell … they’re ‘cheap-labor conservatives’.
“[C]heap-labor conservatives are defenders of corporate America, whose fortunes depend on labor. The larger the labor supply, the cheaper it is. The more desperately you need a job, the cheaper you’ll work, and the more power those ‘corporate lords’ have over you. If you are a wealthy elite – or a ‘wannabe’ like most dittoheads – your wealth, power and privilege is enhanced by a labor pool [that is] forced to work cheap. …
“Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like social spending or our ’safety net’. Why[?] Because when you’re unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like –- which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you ‘over a barrel’ and [forced] to ‘work cheap or starve’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why[?] These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you ‘over a barrel’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives like ‘free trade’, NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why[?] Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world who are ‘over a barrel’ and will work cheap.
“Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman’s right to choose. Why[?] Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women ‘over a barrel’, forcing them to work cheap.
“Cheap-labor conservatives don’t like unions. Why[?] Because when labor ’sticks together’, wages go up. …
“Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about ‘morality’, ‘virtue’, ‘respect for authority’, ‘hard work’ and other ‘values’. Why[?] So they can blame your being ‘over a barrel’ on your own ‘immorality’, lack of ‘values’ and ‘poor choices’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry
among wage earners distracts them and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.
“The Cheap-Labor Conservative ‘Dirty Secret’: They Don’t Really Like Prosperity
“Maybe you don’t believe that cheap-labor conservatives like unemployment, poverty and ‘cheap labor’. Consider these facts.
“Unemployment was 23 percent when FDR took office in 1933. It dropped to 2.5 percent by time the next Republican was in the White House in 1953. It climbed back to 6.5 percent by the end of the Eisenhower administration. It dropped to 3.5 percent by the time LBJ left office. It climbed over 5 percent shortly after Nixon took office, and stayed there for 27 years, until Clinton brought it down to 4.5 percent early in his second term.
“That same period – especially from the late forties into the early seventies – was the ‘golden age’ of the United States. We sent men to the moon. We built our Interstate Highway system. We ended segregation in the South and established Medicare. In those days, a single wage earner could support an entire family on his wages. I grew up then, and I will tell you that life was good ….
“These facts provide a nice background to evaluate cheap-labor conservative claims like ‘liberals are destroying America.’
“In fact, cheap-labor conservatives have howled with outrage and indignation against New Deal liberalism from its inception in the 1930’s all the way to the present. You can go to ‘Free Republic’ or Hannity’s forum right now and find a cheap-labor conservative comparing New Deal Liberalism to ‘Stalinism’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives opposed virtually all of the New Deal, including every improvement in wages and working conditions.
“Cheap-labor conservatives have a long and sorry history of opposing virtually every advancement in this country’s development going right back to the American revolution.
“Cheap-labor conservatives have hated Social Security and Medicare since their inception.
“Many cheap-labor conservatives are hostile to public education. They think it should be privatized. … Cheap-labor conservatives opposed universal public education in its early days. School vouchers are just a backdoor method to ‘resegregate’ the public schools.
“Cheap-labor conservatives hate the progressive income tax like the devil hates holy water.
“Cheap-labor conservatives like budget deficits and a huge national debt for two reasons. A bankrupt government has a harder time doing any ’social spending’ – which cheap-labor conservatives oppose, and …
“Wealthy cheap-labor conservatives … buy the bonds and … earn … interest on the money they lend the government. …
“‘Free Trade’, globalization, NAFTA and especially GATT are intended to create a world-wide ‘corporate playground’ where national governments serve the interests of corporations – which means ‘cheap labor’.
“The ugly truth is that cheap-labor conservatives just don’t like working people. They don’t like ‘bottom up’ prosperity, and the reason for it is very simple. Lords have a harder time kicking them around. Once you understand this about the cheap-labor conservatives, the real motivation for their policies makes perfect sense.
“Remember, cheap-labor conservatives believe in social hierarchy and privilege, so the only prosperity they want is limited to them. They want to see absolutely nothing that benefits the guy or woman who works for an hourly wage.
“So there you have it, in one easy-to-remember phrase. See how easy it is to understand these cheap-labor conservatives. The more ignorant and destitute people there are –- desperate for any job they can get –- the cheaper the cheap-labor conservatives can get them to work.
“Try it. Every time you respond to a cheap-labor conservative …, look for the ‘cheap labor’ angle. Trust me, you’ll find it. I can even show you the ‘cheap labor’ angle in things like the ‘war on drugs’, and the absurd conservative opposition to alternative energy.
“Next, make that moniker –- cheap-labor conservatives –- your ’standard reference’ to the other side. One of the last revisions I made to this article was to find every reference to ‘conservatives’, ‘Republicans’, ‘right-wingers’, and ‘righties’, and replace it with ‘cheap-labor conservatives’. … If enough people will ‘get with the program’, it won’t be long before you can’t look at an editorial page, listen to the radio, turn on the TV, or log onto your favorite message board without seeing the phrase ‘cheap labor conservatives’ – and have plenty of examples to reinforce the message.
“By election day … every politically sentient American should understand exactly what a ‘cheap labor conservative’ is, and what he stands for.”
“Now if you stop right here, you will have enough ammunition to hold your own with a cheap-labor conservative in any public debate. … But if you really want to rip the heart out of cheap-labor conservative ideology, you may want to invest just a little bit more effort. It isn’t all that complicated, [just] a bit more detailed than what we have covered so far.
“Less Government And Cheap Labor
“‘Less Government’ is the central defining right-wing slogan. And yes, it’s all about ‘cheap labor’.
“Included within the slogan ‘less government’ is the whole conservative set of assumptions about the nature of the ‘free market’ and government’s role in that market ….
“In fact, the whole ‘public sector/private sector’ distinction is an invention of the cheap-labor conservatives. They say that the ‘private sector’ exists outside and independently of the ‘public sector’. The public sector, according to cheap-labor ideology, can only ‘interfere’ with the ‘private sector’, [which] is ‘inefficient’ and ‘unprincipled’. Using this ideology, the cheap-labor ideologue paints himself as a defender of ‘freedom’ against ‘big government tyranny’.
“In fact, the whole idea that the ‘private sector’ is independent of the public sector is totally bogus. In fact, ‘the market’ is created by public laws, public institutions and public infrastructure.
“But the cheap-labor conservative isn’t really interested in ‘freedom’. What he wants is the ‘privatized tyranny’ of industrial serfdom, the main characteristic of which is –- you guessed it -– ‘cheap labor’.
“For proof, you need only look at exactly what constitutes ‘big government tyranny’ and what doesn’t … cheap-labor conservatives are BIG supporters of the most oppressive and heavy handed actions the government takes.
“Cheap-labor conservatives are consistent supporters of the generous use of capital punishment. They say that ‘government can’t do anything right’ -– except apparently, kill people. Indeed, they exhibit classic conservative unconcern for the … possibility that the government might … execute the wrong man.
“Cheap-labor conservatives complain about the ‘Warren Court’, ‘handcuffing the police’ and giving ‘rights to criminals’. It never occurs to them, that our criminal justice system is set up to protect innocent citizens from abuses or just plain mistakes by government officials –- you know, the ones who can’t do anything right.
“Cheap-labor conservatives support the ‘get tough’ and ‘lock ‘em up’ approach to virtually every social problem …. In fact, it’s the only approach they support. As for the 2,000,000 people we have in jail today –- a higher percentage of our population than any other nation on earth –- they say our justice system is ‘too lenient’.
“Cheap-labor conservatives -– you know, the ones who believe in ‘freedom’ – say our crime problem is because … we’re too ‘permissive’. How exactly do you set up a ‘free’ society that isn’t ‘permissive’?
“Cheap-labor conservatives want all the military force we can stand to pay for and never saw a weapons system they didn’t like.
“Cheap-labor conservatives support every right-wing authoritarian hoodlum in the third world.
“Cheap-labor conservatives support foreign assassinations, covert intervention in foreign countries, and every other
‘black bag’ operation the CIA can dream up, even against constitutional governments elected by the people of those countries.
“Cheap-labor conservatives support ‘domestic surveillance’ against ’subversives’ [i.e.] ‘everybody but them’.
“Cheap-labor believers in ‘freedom’ think it’s the government’s business if you smoke a joint or sleep with somebody of your own gender.
“Cheap-labor conservatives support our … concentration camp down at Guantanamo Bay. They also support these ’secret tribunals’ with ’secret evidence’ and virtually no judicial review of the trials and sentences. Then they say that liberals are ‘Stalinists’.
“And let’s not forget this perennial item on the agenda. Cheap-labor conservatives want to ‘protect our national symbol’ from ‘desecration’. They also support legislation to make the Pledge of Allegiance required by law. Of course, it is they who desecrate the flag every time they wave it to support their cheap-labor agenda.
“Sounds to me like the cheap-labor conservatives have a peculiar definition of ‘freedom’. I mean, just what do these guys consider to be ‘tyranny’[?] That’s easy. Take a look.
“‘Social spending’ otherwise known as ‘redistribution’. While they don’t mind tax dollars being used for killing people, using their taxes to feed people is ’stealing’.
“Minimum wage laws.
“Every piece of legislation ever proposed to improve working conditions, including the eight hour day, OSHA regulations, and even Child Labor laws.
“Labor unions, who ‘extort’ employers by collectively bargaining.
“Environmental regulations and the EPA.
“Federal support and federal standards for public education.
“Civil rights legislation. There are still cheap-labor conservatives today who were staunch defenders of ‘Jim Crow’ … [a]pparently, federal laws ending segregation were ‘tyranny’, but segregation itself was not.
“Public broadcasting – which is virtually the only source for classical music, opera, traditional theatre, traditional American music …. This from the people constantly braying about the decay of ‘the culture’. …
“See the pattern? Cheap-labor conservatives support every coercive and oppressive function of government, but call it ‘tyranny’ if government does something for you ….
“Even here, cheap-labor conservatives are complete hypocrites. Consider the following expenditures:
“150 billion dollars a year for corporate subsidies.
“300 billion dollars a year for interest payments on the national debt … that are a direct transfer to wealthy bond holders ….
“That’s all in addition to the Defense budget – large chunks of which go to corporate defense contractors.
“Is the pattern becoming clearer? These cheap-labor Republicans have no problem at all opening the public purse for corporate interests. It’s ’social spending’ on people who actually need assistance that they just ‘can’t tolerate’.
“And now you know why. Destitute people work cheaper, while a harsh police state keeps them suitably terrorized.”
http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/55
#60 Coming from THE DUMB BUNNY who brags about animal sex (bestiality) all the time makes his comments useless, feckless, and worthless!
Stupid moron!
@62 Bestiality is normal among animals, putzbum. A horse fucking a human is as deviant as a human fucking a horse, know what I mean?
Shadegg’s option is much better than the “proposals” from the DUMMOCRAPTS. And it doesn’t add to the tax coffers. And it takes care of the preexisting conditions without all that guvmint intervention!
@56 The dumbest things Ben Franklin ever said were still way smarter than most of what you say on this blog.
ProudWithStickUpASS queefs…
There is no speculation. He provides the facts which explodes your silly leetle head. This is why Puddy loves using leftist pinhead rags to explode your “arguments”. Regarding monkey feces… your post is full of it.
This was discussed ad nauseum on HA Libtardos. Ask the arschloch for the original messages fool!
Hope your monkey feces are tasty.
To THE DUMB BUNNY…
You forget cheap labor DUMMOCRAPT fools like Nancy Pelosi , The Shaw Group, Loral, etc. etc. etc.
Every one of your rants holds true for these fools THE DUMB BUNNY! How about Dem Labor Union Cadillac Health Care plans THE DUMB BUNNY? When you turn 65, you are ejected from them.
THE DUMB BUNNY shits…
Bestiality:
n. Sexual intercourse between a person and an animal. In a broader sense, any sexual activity or contact between a person and an animal.
So per THE DUMB BUNNY… it’s normal for animals to go after humans for sex. Who knew. Wait a minute… fricknfrack knew. She loves THE DUMB BUNNY commentary.
Whatamoron!
Of course ProudWithStickUpASS forgets this post and others Puddy has placed here on HA Libtardos over and over. Ask the arschloch for them. He has a full Goldy HA backup at home and he can easily find the links.
Also the ever moronic ProudWithStickUpASS didn’t pay attention to what Shadegg proposed. Look at the link the moron used @52. They are still claiming Trigg is Bristol’s baby on that idiotic site…
Per Microsoft Word, post#61 was a 2,151 word copy.
Thanks Goldy and Darryl for the baseline. We who think right now know how many words we can copy from a link without retribution from the “task masters”.
Hmmm…
Kraft Foods to lower sodium content in their foods. The timing is amazing…
2008 House
Total to Democrats: $73,500
Total to Republicans: $63,500
Kirk, Mark (R-IL) $10,000
Bean, Melissa (D-IL) $9,000
Goodlatte, Bob (R-VA) $5,000
Emanuel, Rahm (D-IL) $5,000
Blunt, Roy (R-MO) $5,000
DeLauro, Rosa L (D-CT) $4,500
Walberg, Tim (R-MI) $4,000
Hoyer, Steny H (D-MD) $4,000
Dingell, John D (D-MI) $4,000
Blumenauer, Earl (D-OR) $4,000
2008 Senate
Total to Democrats: $41,000
Total to Republicans: $61,500
Warner, Mark (D-VA) $10,000
Smith, Gordon H (R-OR) $10,000
Harkin, Tom (D-IA) $10,000
Durbin, Dick (D-IL) $10,000
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) $8,000
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $7,500
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) $7,000
Enzi, Mike (R-WY) $6,000
Pryor, Mark (D-AR) $5,000
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) $5,000
2010 House
Total to Democrats: $35,000
Total to Republicans: $20,000
Bean, Melissa (D-IL) $5,000
Clyburn, James E (D-SC) $3,000
Waxman, Henry A (D-CA) $2,500
Boehner, John (R-OH) $2,500
Scott, David (D-GA) $2,000
Peterson, Collin C (D-MN) $2,000
Lipinski, Daniel (D-IL) $2,000
Lee, Barbara (D-CA) $2,000
Latham, Tom (R-IA) $2,000
Emerson, Jo Ann (R-MO) $2,000
2010 Senate
Total to Democrats: $26,000
Total to Republicans: $27,000
Blunt, Roy (R-MO) $5,000
Reid, Harry (D-NV) $4,000
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) $4,000
Burr, Richard (R-NC) $4,000
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) $3,000
Dorgan, Byron L (D-ND) $3,000
Dodd, Chris (D-CT) $3,000
Bennett, Robert F (R-UT) $3,000
Thune, John (R-SD) $2,000
Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) $2,000
For blacks high sodium content is not good for us
Factoid: A “pity bonus” is the extra pay CEOs get when they don’t hit performance targets to earn regular bonuses.
http://tinyurl.com/y9m28fz
@67 I don’t see any refutation in your comment of what I said about cheap labor conservatives.
@68 Wow. Putz stuck the dictionary to me. Fucking wow. I’m wounded, no, I’m KIA.
Once again THE DUMB BUNNY doesn’t get it…
Most of your cheap labor conservative rant hold true for cheap labor DUMMOCRAPTS. They are just as cheap. Ask Pelosi why she uses illegal immigrants and non-union labor in her “industries” THE DUMB BUNNY. Oh wait a minute… you have 24 hour moronic Moonbat! memory malady.
IHTH, THE DUMB BUNNY!
News Alert: A woman was shot to death in a Federal Way church tonight. The shooter was her husband. He shot her multiple times in a counseling session.
Well THE DUMB BUNNY, you’ve been posting about goat sex since 2006, so we know where your “head” resides!
Did Puddy hear a TASTY?
A conservative is someone who supports universal gun ownership and opposes universal education.
Why would anyone vote for a conservative?
@77 I don’t see a connection between what I’ve said wingnut goat sex and where my head is at, putz. But then, you make a habit of connecting the wrong dots.
News alert: Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed is having surgery next week to remove a cancerous kidney.
Re 65
Almost certainly. Franklin was very likely a genius. His autobiography is great for someone who wants to know what a Renaissance man is, or just likes a good read. Poor Richards Almanac is a lot of trenchant fun.
I’m fully aware of where I stand in the cosmic order of things, firmly and inextricably in the realms of mediocrity. The names of Franklin, Jefferson, Adams and company will be in history books. Mine will be forgotten a few years after I pass on, sooner by anyone other than friends or family.
It doesn’t mean Benjamin Franklin was always right.
Exactly! That’s Stupes’ stupid behavior…
Otherwise known as batshit insane, right wing bullshit fantasies..
Max Rocka-lebowski?? An asshole???
EXACTLY!!!
And a miserable coward as well..
Once again the vicarious one arrives.
Such an arschloch.
Never an original thought!
To THE DUMB BUNNY…
Evidence of The DUMB BUNNY providing and connecting the wrong dots…
1) Haiti
2) Meaning of IF
3) Cuyahoga County Ohio
4) Stafford County Virginia
5) Plagiarizing others on “This is How it Works”
6) Cheap Labor Lovers – Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt, Bill Gates, Steven Ballmer, Warren Buffet, Larry Ellison, Steven Jobs all have cheap labor overseas and from previous links and posts Puddy demonstrated they are DUMMOCRAPT jockstraps
7) John Edwards – Yeah he was the progressives dream guy. Another NIGHTMARE!
8) Totalitarian editorial boards dictating business decisions to private companies – No problems when the NY Times does it.
9) Subletting space on his editorial page to foreign governments to raise money for his ailing newspaper – No problems when the NY Times does it.
10) Polluting threads with useless, off topic dots
11) Well, hypocrite that I am – Correct for a change.
12) Investing in oil company stocks – It’s a zero sum game.
13) Fucking cute fluffy female bunnies doesn’t seem to do that. – Another nightmare you posted
14) Drinking goat semen rots your brain. – Really? So why did you do it when you were younger? You claim an expertise here.
15) If we couldn’t discuss the wheelings and dealings of public figures until they’re “proven in court,” political speech would be put in lockdown in this country. – Then why the cow over Odumba and Tony Rezko? Then why the cow of Odumba and Bill Ayers?
16) One percent of the population owns nearly 35% of the wealth, and the top 20% owns 85% of the wealth. – Where is your concern over the super rich voting DUMMOCRAPT? See #6 again
17) etc. etc. etc.
Yeah right, THE DUMB BUNNY. You provide so many wrong dots on so many wrong topics. Your goat named proud is waiting for your “caresses”.
@46…ok, I agree with that.
@84…once again Racist YLB’s contribution is just below zero.
88 – And once again the bigoted coward is calling names with nothing to back it up..
What a contribution!
I got your contribution right here
spraypainted any churches lately ylb?
90 – Let’s see it.. Oops no where to be seen.. What a coward…
91 – Haven’t been inside a church in many years.. I’m all in favor of freedom of religion – as long as the religious don’t impinge on my freedom and the freedoms of others.
Now you on the other hand seem to be religious about being bigoted. You could be racist as well but I haven’t any conclusive evidence of that.
But you being a bigoted lout??? Oh my.. Tons of evidence on that score…
Man does it suck to be you…
“…It doesn’t mean Benjamin Franklin was always right….
Well, he was wrong when he advocated that representatives of legislatures should not be paid for their services. He thought they should do it as a public service. What he didn’t appreciate, at the time, was that such a policy would leave public service open only to the rich, or those who felt they could gain a business advantage through that position. Later in life he began to appreciate this point, and retreated from his earlier position.
@71: Puddy – the sodium “data” is way overblown. the only people who need to limit sodium are people who already have very high blood pressure. The actual data that matters is “high sodium foods” – and most of these foods are prepared food with additives. Adding some salt to food that is not prepared is not the same thing.
If you want to reduce blood pressure – eat plenty of fruits and vegies, eliminate prepared foods, eat less red meat and more fish. Also drink only water and green tea/coffee with no milk or sugar. Reduce/eliminate carbs and sugar intake – the liver makes these into cholesterol.
One of the problems in the inner cities is that it is hard to find fresh vegies…but there are plenty of fast food places and 7-11 junk food.
That’s nice correctnotright, but back in the day when blacks were still on the “farm” they still had hypertension issues and fresh fruits and veggies were very prevalent. Puddy will agree with fish. Unfortunately, blacks tend to eat lots of pork. It’s a cheaper meat. And we tend to develop hypertension earlier, probably dealing with “political reservation issues”.
From the AHA:
Within the African-American community, those with the highest rates of hypertension, are more likely to be middle aged or older, less educated, overweight or obese, physically inactive, and to have diabetes.
In 2006 the death rates per 100,000 population from high blood pressure were 15.6 for white males, 51.1 for black males, 14.3 for white females and 37.7 for black females.
Puddy knows you forgot but my step-brother is a cardiologist at NIH in Maryland. That’s how Puddy knows about this article. Very illuminating. Here is the article in Maryland.