JohnO

Here's what went down when Obama's biggest supporter was notified of Scott Brown's victory.

Viewer Rating: Graphic Language

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4aQCiRjvZY

Enjoy!

So you condemn an entire continent as a "hellhole" based on one visit. That's logical.

No I condemn it for being directly responsible for the deaths of 100's of thousands of Americans over the past century, consuming trillions of dollars of our wealth and thumbing their collective noses at us in gratitude. They have nothing I want and the communists and facists they nurtured still exist there awaiting their next opportunity. Screw them, I'll spend my hard earned money here thanks.

As Barbara Bush said to Al Franken, 'I'm through with you'.

But we hardly knew ya! Oh well.

I am not really in favor of a nanny state either, but I don't want it to be the enabling corporate rape state. Gotta be a happy medium in there somewhere.

You know I really don't like the use of the word 'rape' in this context as it cheapens the actual meaning which should never be done. It is particularly inappropriate in this case as the corporate entity needs a willing participant. And in this case both participants are lured by the same motive, greed. However I do agree a happy medium should be found that doesn't trample on the 1st Amendment.

Do you truly think Europe is a hellhole? Have you been?

Only once and I wasn't impressed. Though I might give Italy a shot one of these days.

Believing that certain nations have a superior model of a health care infrastructure is not equal to wanting to move "back" to a place that we aren't even from.

So when you say believing is that like a religious thing? Does it really matter if your not from there if you believe they have something superior that you desire? After all that's why our ancestors came here in the first place.

Do you read what people post? Ever?

I don't think I missed anything significant but I could be wrong.

I am certain that, well, I certainly hope, the above is hyperbole. That doesn't make it any less of a ridiculous statement. Do you really expect to be taken seriously after making such a pronouncement?

What? Did I miss a big story about everyone hopping back on boats and being welcomed back to the homes of their ancestors? Everything I read here makes it sound like the place to live. Seriously(???) why aren't people moving back if it's so great??

By the way my people were starved out by those people of whom you seem so fond.

Here the Washington Post, a known agent of the radical leftist agenda

On that we do agree!

Ya don't let a little thing like the Constitution get in the way of your coup.

 

What We Can Learn From the Europeans

By Jonathan Cohn

 

The result is frequently long waits for specialty care and, in some instances, no access to experimental therapies. One result is that, on the whole, Britain’s cancer survival rate is low relative to the rate in the United States—a point critics of universal coverage never fail to make.

 

That shows up in the cancer survival rates, which are very close to the rates in the U.S.

 

And if that sometimes means depriving people of long-shot therapies, funding the British system at higher levels—which, in effect, is what other European countries do—would make that less likely. (Whether that’s a good thing is another story.)

 

Americans have, more or less, the opposite perspective: Whether you’re talking about the people who provide health care (doctors) or the people who get it (patients), Americans are far more likely to favor aggressive medical treatment from the very beginnings of life to the very end. As a result, we will probably keep spending more—and treating more—than our counterparts abroad, no matter what kind of reforms we pass here.

 

But even if we’re unlikely to replicate the French, Swiss, British or Dutch health care systems here, we can still take some broad lessons from them. And by far the most important is that universal coverage, whatever form it takes, doesn’t have to mean putting up with less convenience or lower quality. On the contrary, universal coverage can actually make health care more convenient and promote higher quality, all while guaranteeing affordable access to everybody. That’s a pretty sweet deal. No wonder the Europeans wouldn’t give it up.

I read all perspectives on a subject that interests me. Your source actually supports some of my contentions. It also completely ignores two significant differences that impact healthcare delivery, population density and geography. Not to mention the cultural differences and expectations. There's a reason our ancestors left Europe and I don't see many of us signing up to immigrate back to that hell hole.

Hey, it worked for the tobacco industry and the mortgage industry

People have known that smoking will kill them for the past 50 years. TV and radio advertising was banned in 1971 and we still have 20+% of the population smoking. Anyone who took out a mortgage on a house they couldn't afford is just... The nanny state isn't going to protect you from being stupid.

"There's a sucker born every minute" was never truer than it is today. People open themselves up to scams in many more ways than they did in the past what with the internet, twitter, texting, iPhone, online banking, credit cards, etc. There's a very simple creed that will protect you in life if you follow it religiously. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Really? Private supplemental insurance is available in both Canada and the UK, and only a small percentage of citizens have enrolled – why? Because the vast majority rate the care they receive from the public plans as excellent, more than adequate, and in no way sucky.

And the vast majority of Americans rate their health coverage as excellent. The people I'm talking about are ex-pats that worked over sees for a number of years. They unlike you have a valid point of comparison.

"Britain has only one-fourth as many CT scanners per capita as the U.S., and one-third as many MRI scanners. The rate at which the British provide coronary-bypass surgery or angioplasty to heart patients is only one-fourth the U.S. rate, and hip replacements are only two-thirds the U.S. rate. The rate for treating kidney failure (dialysis or transplant) is five times higher in the U.S. for patients between the ages of 45 and 84, and nine times higher for patients 85 years or older.

Overall, nearly 1.8 million Britons are waiting for hospital or outpatient treatments at any given time. In 2002-2004, dialysis patients waited an average of 16 days for permanent blood-vessel access in the U.S., 20 days in Europe, and 62 days in Canada. In 2000, Norwegian patients waited an average of 133 days for hip replacement, 63 days for cataract surgery, 160 days for a knee replacement, and 46 days for bypass surgery after being approved for treatment. Short waits for cataract surgery produce better outcomes, prompt coronary-artery bypass reduces mortality, and rapid hip replacement reduces disability and death. Studies show that only 5 percent of Americans wait more than four months for surgery, compared with 23 percent of Australians, 26 percent of New Zealanders, 27 percent of Canadians, and 36 percent of Britons."

here's the source for all you deniers. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_9_61/ai_n31875118/

Hi all,

Don't bother messing with your DVD.

The audio recording from the video is available from the official site since the release date.

Go to http://ashesofamericanmovie.com/site/

It says "Free audio download of all tracks with purchase of DVD".

You just need to insert the DVD into your computer then follow the instructions.

I used Down Them All to downloaded the audio to my puter. No need to insert DVD...

I don't understand: you are angry that the government could not anticipate the exact date of her death?

Stop acting like CNN. I'm no more angry than you. The point is if you were paying for this service out of your own pocket you would not make the same choice. That is what's driving up the cost curve in health care!

Correct, but presuming your employer is not a jackass, if your place of work were not paying for these healthcare costs it would presumably have more money to pay its employees in salary.

It's still an expense for the employer and I'm willing to bet that only a fraction would find it's way into salaries.

No, this is just a simple misunderstanding: I'm saying that you will not have to pay your Blue Cross (or whomever) fees on top of your new health care costs in conjunction with universal care. Yes, if you're paying $10 now you'll likely have to pay $13 later, so the total sum will be higher, but you will not be paying for a health care plan on top of a health care plan.

Hmmm and you know that how? The people I know that have lived under universal coverage all had private insurance as well because the government plan s*%$ed! With the private plan coverage they went to the front of the queue because the doctors and hospitals knew they would be paid equitably for their services versus the pittance offered by the government plan. Just listen to what our doctors say about Medicare payments.

Messiah's yap is not equal to "law;" a refresher.

So you disagree with what came out of his yap?

Another day, another Hell, let's look at what Obama is out there touting today:

 

And Obama set to propose to put a freeze on government not related to defense.

“Although the freeze would shave no more than $15 billion off next year's budget -- barely denting a deficit projected to exceed $1 trillion for the third year in a row…”

Yup he’s mad as hell and isn’t going to take it anymore! At that rate, not accounting for inflation, it will take roughly 73 years to balance the budget. And that’s change we can believe in?

Seeing as how he isn't submitting any legislation to back this up is he going to form a committee for recommendations or punt it over to Congress like he did with Healthcare in order to maintain plausible deniability when ultimately it goes no where?

So she got a hip replacement, knowing she was ill but certainly not knowing her outcome. Unless the government did this without her consent, or knew the exact date that she would die, I fail to see why this reflects poorly on the government.

And there in lies the source of our disagreement.

So your true medical expenses are another month of salary, and also constitute one-fifth of what you pay to the government.

No my employers contribution is not part of my "salary". I don't have the option to take that as income. I could refuse the benefit and keep the premium as salary but not my employers contribution. Get it?

You do realize that, under universal health care, you would not be paying those other health care expenses on top of what you are already paying, right?

That's a joke right? If you believe that they're not going to raise our taxes more than what we pay today then I've got a bridge just for you.

That was in a meeting - there were no bills passed - as a part of a Task Force meant to identify problems and discuss possible solutions. No laws were passed. Do you solve every problem you approach, completely, the first time you sit down to take a look at it?

No that was a proposal straight from the messiah's yap. In reality it's just more of the class warfare crap that he's been pushing forever. He is the most devisive President in history. I gotta tell ya that the "that was a meeting" line brought to mind the old Mickey Rooney movies where they would all gather round to talk about a probem and he'd suddenly exclaim "Hey kids, let's put on a show!" Obama doing a poor imitation of Mickey in this case.

why do you hate children?

You'll have to ask the three that I raised who show up at the house every few days with their kids to hang out with us.

No consent or anything? Like, the Feds just came in and replaced her hip? That's so James Bond.

 

More seriously: I'm curious to know whether it takes you two weeks to pay all of your health care insurance costs for the year, even the one your employer assumes (I'm assumimg you have health care through your employer), or does it just take one pay check to pay all of your out-of-pocket costs for the year? Some people are decidedly healthier than others; that doesn't mean they will always be that way. I'm pretty confident most of the taxes I pay go to programs I don't use, and likely never will; I'll also assume the same goes for you. Does this bother you? What are your opinions on health care costs in general? Do you think they're too high?

She consented.

Two weeks to pay my premiums and out of pocket expenses. My employer pays half. But I'm only talking about comes out of my salary. My employer also has to match SS/Medicare/Medicaid. I'm at an age where I'm using more services. I've paid into these programs for 40 years and it doesn't bother me a bit. What bothers me is the attitude that we're just going to have to pay more. I pay enough thank you. Health care cost are high but government has never shown that it can run a program without bankrupting it (SS & Medicare) because they continually pass unfunded mandates to bribe voters. Hell look at what Obama is out there touting today, "doubling the child care tax credit" and not a word of how he's going to pay for it. That's what bothers me!

You really don't want anyone to take you seriously, do you?

Sorry, did I insult your binky?

Regarding my above emphasis:

Which is it, a statement of fact or of opinion?

 

So according to the above, the following was an opinion? "As far as the uninsured go about a third of them can afford insurance but choose not to, another quarter are below the poverty line and qualify for SS/Medicare, another quarter either can't qualify for or cannot afford insurance and the remainder are illegal aliens."

Unless I include quotation marks it is my informed opinion.

You guys should take a closer look at your paystubs. They take much more than Fed Income taxes from you every week. Add up the Fed Withholding +

Fed MED/EE + Fed OASDI/EE + State + Local Withholding and tell me what % it comes out to. The crazy income numbers you guys are throwing around just proves you haven't got a clue what the government is stealing from you. Which is why we have turned the old proverb on its head.

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

CBS, NBC , PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shiveringgrasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green.'

ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, We shall overcome. Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-AntAct retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ants food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.

The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.

Let's try this again, "factcheck.org is a mouth piece of and funded by the left so it is hardly an unbiased representation of the facts" is a statement of fact and opinion. That doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be used as a source. It was auctioneer69 that stated that the information at factcheck.org supports some of my contentions. Just given the way this little discussion has evolved any source I put up will just generate more of the same kind of foolishness so what's the point? My opinions are formed from a variety of content and sources. The facts and figures are everywhere help yourself to them or not.

Medicare is proof positive that the government cannot run a universal health care system. It already takes me 5 months to payoff my tax bill every year. Yes that's every penny I earn for 5 months! It takes me 2 weeks to pay my health insurance bill. Now they say they're going to lower costs if I just pay more taxes. They really think we're idiots. Do you really think the Federal governemnt is going to provide health care for less than it costs me today? Remember these are the guys that buy $600 hammers and $2,500 toilet seats. They are also the guys that did a hip replacement on my bed ridden terminally ill mother in-law with 4 weeks to live. Give me a F%$king break!

Are you unwilling or unable to cite the source of your numbers? Which is it? As speed racer said, you must have gotten them from somewhere. Why the refusal to post the source?

You're missing the point. This health care debate has been going on for over 2 years now. If you don't already know that the uninsured are not a homogeneous group then you should first get educated on the topic. And just so we’re clear here I am not an educator, I’m just another idiot offering opinions on a message board. Someone here has already posted a source at factscheck.org so you can start there if you like. There are all kinds of academic, media, government and health industry research available that you should seek out and read as well in order to draw your own conclusions.

The vocal “wisdom” coming from the people sounds suspiciously similar to the sort of “wisdom” that dribbles from Glenn Beck’s frothy lips, which, in fact, isn’t wisdom at all – it’s warmed over right wing hysteria delivered by a political hack who has watched Network a few too many times.

Well it was first espoused in Jeffersonian liberalism and the Jacksonian push for universal manhood suffrage, later to be resurrected as Democratic pluralism which has been the mantra of the left for the last 70 years and codified in the mission statement of the ACLU. So if you're correct about Beck's dribbles it's basis is firmly grounded in left wing rhetoric rather than 'warmed over right wing hysteria'.

The fact of the matter is special interests and corporations tend to support the incumbent. Incumbents only remain incumbent with the support of the people. All the money in the world isn't going to get you elected if you're not doing the will of the people. Obama is proof of that today. He has spent trillions trying to buy support for his agenda and the people aren't buying it. Many seem to have more faith in some piece of legislation that has so many loop holes it resembles a block of Swiss cheese than in the wisdom of the people. Don't sell the people short. There is great wisdom in the founding fathers words; Congress shall make no law prohibiting or abridging the freedom of speech.

Fight like hell in support of someone elses right to speak, particularly if you disagree with them, for someday you may need their support in kind.

Things you can kiss goodbye in about two Congressional elections or so:

* Environmental regulations

* Product safety regulations

* Food safety regulations

* Any other regulations a corporation thinks gets in the way of it making more money

Sure corporations are going to attract more customers and make more money by poisoning the environment, killing, maiming or poisoning their customers by creating unsafe products and by selling diseased infested foods.

Is that really your point?

I hate the Jets but I hate the Colts more!

J - E - T - S

Jets Jets Jets