Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

I gave you some content and you passed it by. I think we have YOUR number.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

I'm repetitive? I've posted maybe three times in this entire political forum.... hardly a blabbermouth.

Might it be you who is repeating himself like an annoying two year old who keeps asking for more cookies?

Were you one of those snot-nosed little brats in preschool, who arrived in dirty clothes and then whined all day?

When you grabbed the other kid's toys, did your mother, instead of correcting you, tell the other kid to SHARE?

Are you now one those arrogant pricks who thinks another man's wealth is yours?

Yeah, I think I've got your number......

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What almost all of the fools gloating over the probably/possible demise of the Aff. Healthcare Act do not understand is that there was unquestioned, indisputable, unanimous agreement among all the Justices and all counsel yesterday that Congress absolutely has the right to mandate health insurance as a condition of receiving health care.

The argument was all about the timing of when it can be required, with the so-called "conservatives" saying you can't force people to buy when they're young & healthy and don't need health care, but you can force them to buy it at the "point of sale" as a condition to receiving health care.

IOW, when you show up sick or grievously injured you can be forced to buy insurance before you're treated, only you'll be doing it from a high risk pool at wildly inflated prices compared to what you'd have paid if you bought it earlier along w/ everyone else mandated to have insurance before you need it.

So the smart alecks are completely missing the economic and systemic point and their gloating "big brother" attacks on Obama are utterly misplaced because there is no question (per the Court yesterday & counsel) that it is Constitutional to require anyone who wants health care to have health insurance.

I doubt that 1/2 of 1% of the haters have a clue about that (the level of ignorance in this country about the mandate and the health care system as a whole is just staggering to see).

Mop up your spittle, crazy person.

Had Congress been forthright about what they intended and called it a tax (which it was) this never would have been a problem. Alas, they didn't. And why? Because they wanted to ram it through Congress without a broad consensus and had to LIE (vis-a-vis the tax) in order to accomplish their goals. It serves them right to get smacked in the face (or ass. or both = same thing).

Stop fucking with the Constitution and assuming you're smarter than the electorate. You are arrogant assholes - look in the mirror and face your weaknesses. Consider not running again for an office to which you are obviously so poorly suited.

P.S. It is hilariously and delightful how shocked and outraged you libs are at the fact that you can't mug the Constitution. SO much fun!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

No it's not. You are extremely repetitive and you deserve the "blah blah blah".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

This is a childish response..... or simply a comment made by a poorly educated adult.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obama's reign as "benevolent" dictator, aka, community organizer, aka, idiot president bowing to tyrants..... is coming to a glorious end.

Yes, and we will have POTUS Romney who will reign as king and absolute ruler who will sit on the throne as he renovates his beachfront home with car elevator no less. If Obama is an idiot then Romney is a buffoon. Let them eat cake!

What Romney does with his own money is none of my business. My only concern would be that he tends to lean liberal, as shown by his own health care system in Massachusetts. Good docs have been fleeing that state faster than Obama's spiritual leader can say, "Goddamn, America." But, at least he understands basic economics and has actually worked in the real world. So, in comparison with the Saul Alisnky disciple currently stinking up the White House in a more profound way than even Clinton could ever master, I'll go with Romney. In the end, I'll go with the one who will steal less of my money.

That is my problem with the Republican party these days. It's all about me, me me. They are all too short-sighted to determine how to leave this country a better place for future generations, and only concerned with their own personal taxes. Guess what? If as a society, we are healthier, then we are all better off (more people working, starting small businesses, etc). If we start a war, then guess what? We need to raise taxes to pay for it, instead of creating a huge deficit for future generations. I am so sick of people complaining about their personal taxes, when they are also the first ones to complain if their roads aren't plowed fast enough. They want to live in a society but they don't want to pay for it.

LOL.... too funny.

goverment needs to compete like everybody else. no union automatic raises if its running a deficit make fewer people do more work for cheaper just like the private sector. give pay cuts just like the private sector. whats this "raise taxes " BS?. the goverment is making more money than eveer...they just keep expanding spening at a rate that can never be paid for with any amount of taxes. They lazy goverment culture and avoidence of any difficulty is not acceptable and will come to an end by the force of math and accounting.

Unfortunately, government doesn't have to realize a profit so it doesn't concern itself with efficiency or competition. Spending money someone else earned requires no understanding of economics or the essentials of how a free market operates. The larger the government the more waste and corruption, which generally goes unchecked. Government, by its very nature, will, if allowed, gorge itself on the fruits of the actual producers, until, as you say, the force of math and accounting render it inoperable.... just look at Greece.

Blah blah blah. Government does what the private sector will not do. If conservatives could privatize it, they would have by now. But they can't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What almost all of the fools gloating over the probably/possible demise of the Aff. Healthcare Act do not understand is that there was unquestioned, indisputable, unanimous agreement among all the Justices and all counsel yesterday that Congress absolutely has the right to mandate health insurance as a condition of receiving health care.

The argument was all about the timing of when it can be required, with the so-called "conservatives" saying you can't force people to buy when they're young & healthy and don't need health care, but you can force them to buy it at the "point of sale" as a condition to receiving health care.

IOW, when you show up sick or grievously injured you can be forced to buy insurance before you're treated, only you'll be doing it from a high risk pool at wildly inflated prices compared to what you'd have paid if you bought it earlier along w/ everyone else mandated to have insurance before you need it.

So the smart alecks are completely missing the economic and systemic point and their gloating "big brother" attacks on Obama are utterly misplaced because there is no question (per the Court yesterday & counsel) that it is Constitutional to require anyone who wants health care to have health insurance.

I doubt that 1/2 of 1% of the haters have a clue about that (the level of ignorance in this country about the mandate and the health care system as a whole is just staggering to see).

Mop up your spittle, crazy person.

Had Congress been forthright about what they intended and called it a tax (which it was) this never would have been a problem. Alas, they didn't. And why? Because they wanted to ram it through Congress without a broad consensus and had to LIE (vis-a-vis the tax) in order to accomplish their goals. It serves them right to get smacked in the face (or ass. or both = same thing).

Stop fucking with the Constitution and assuming you're smarter than the electorate. You are arrogant assholes - look in the mirror and face your weaknesses. Consider not running again for an office to which you are obviously so poorly suited.

P.S. It is hilariously and delightful how shocked and outraged you libs are at the fact that you can't mug the Constitution. SO much fun!!

Oh, you have it so backwards. This system does not thin out the uninsurable. Those people go onto Medicaid or Medicare. [/b]The younger ones are covered by employer plans (guess what, there is no such thing as "uninsurable" there).[b]

No, it's people in their 20's to 40's who think they can get by without it, who go untreated until they develop expensive health problems. Then, instead of getting thinned out, they get on the government health plans (either Medicare or Medicaid depending on when problems hit).

Lots of small businesses do not offer health insurance b/c it cost too much.