The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Republicans wary of Obama's public health care summit

  1. #21
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    Hopefully you'll beg my pardon, Buzz, if I don't wade into your uber-lib blogger Ezra Klein's tome...as I'm sure you wouldn't bother wasting your time reading a Rush Limbaugh manifesto on health care.
    Actually I do listen to conservative talk radio on my computer and iPod throughout the day through my Sirius Radio subscription. I don't limit myself to listening to and reading only those who I agree with. But, you're right, I won't listen to Rush.

    The other day I was in my truck listening to Fox Radio and there was a guy sitting in for John Gibson. He was saying that he loves Sara Palin, but he was poo pooing the idea of her ever being the Republican nominee for president. He felt that she lacks the vision that they need for a nominee. It was fun listening to the calls. People's heads were literally exploding that this guy could be so critical of her, because after-all, Sara is just so real. That was one common thread that ran through many of the caller's diatribes. Best couple of hours I spent on the road in a long time.
    Last edited by Buzz; 02-10-2010 at 09:16 AM.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  2. #22
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,315

    Default

    Bipartisan...LOL

    It's too bad that politics is all that matters! Most Americans are dealing with some level of distress while some are in real dire straits and all Washington can do is play politics.

    If someone comes up with a good ideal, it is in the best interest of the opposing party to make it fail. And then if a good ideal gets legs, by the time it works its way through the process, it does not accomplish its intended goal.

    The healthcare system has serious problems, but the lobist are controling the debate and process and both parties are bulkling to their pressure because they all get dollars from them.

    The banking system just failed, but the lobist are controling that debate too, and I really question if any meaningful regulation will come out of it either.

    I like most of Obama's agenda (please don't show your igorance and spew-out the latest Glen Beck demonization), but I question will he be able to move his agenda. To date, his batting average is not too good.

    Regarding the current healthcare debate, all I hear from my friends on the right is how they are going to regain power at the mid-term election. They are taking this play from the 1996 playbook, because healthcare is what gave them the majority back them. I was in their camp back then, and I watched them move an agenda that was not good for Americans as a whole, and America voted in 2008 that they had enough, but because people are feeling pain and the current adminstration can't releve it fast enough, they want to throw them out too.

    The reason the economy crashed so hard is because of the amount of leverage (debt) in the market. Having said that, that same leverage will make it rebound at an accelerated rate too. All of the indicators are showing that we have bottomed out and are on the verge of a recovery, and given the leverage argument I made above, it should be strong. Examples: you can only go so long with out replacing your car or dog truck; at some point you have saved to a point that you are comfortable spending some; housing inventories have fallen to a point that new construction makes sense; third world economies are buying our products in greater volume than American and Europeans; the stockmarket has recovered most of its losses, therefore, you are probablly considering another dog in training; people are refinancing their homes which is putting more money in their pockets; the dollar is strengthening and keeping fuel and food prices at bay; and there are many more examples.

    How much Washington is to credit for this I don't know, probablly not much. However, until the banks recover from their mismanagement, credit and capital will continue to be tight and the only thing that Washington affects is monetary policy that is allowing these banks to recover and capital they loaned the banks to avoild failures. Having said this, during Reagan's administration, we he did the same things to fix the banking crisis that occured in the 80s. Now this president inheritied the entitlement problem that we have been hearing about for years that would result when the boomers came of age, therefore it coupled with a weak economy has sent the deficit to the moon. This got ignored for years because it was not good politics to deal with it, because it meant spending cuts and higher taxes. Now the right that had the power to do something about it for the last 14 years is yelling the loudest for spending cuts and that would be the worst thing we could do right now. So think twice before you bring back the same failed agenda.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    Aint it amazing??
    The leftys had control of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch, the main stream network Media and the only thing they can do is blame Bush and the Republicans.


    It's pretty damned funny if you think about it............

    rk
    Didn't the Republicans have 6 years with control of Congress and the Presidency to come up with a health care plan? Did they even try to formulate one?

  4. #24
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    Didn't the Republicans have 6 years with control of Congress and the Presidency to come up with a health care plan? Did they even try to formulate one?
    They have formulated a plan. First, cast themselves as defenders of Medicare and equate HCR with death panels. Then come out with a plan to make far deeper cuts to Medicare than were proposed by Democrats.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  5. #25
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    Didn't the Republicans have 6 years with control of Congress and the Presidency to come up with a health care plan? Did they even try to formulate one?
    prescription drugs...
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  6. #26
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    prescription drugs...
    And that was one heck of a plan. With a cost of half a trillion dollars that was deliberately understated and never funded, and a program designed more to help pharmaceutical industry profits by paying prces for drugs that were higher than those paid by any other insurance payer.

  7. #27
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    I am not saying if it was good or bad. I am not defending it.

    Just responding to his query.

    Major legislation like the current version of the democrat’s health care proposal, that needs bribes to get passed, is, I am sure, good for the nation.

    BTW, is it possible that there is any understatement or unrealistic expectation of future conditions in this legislation?

    All your left wing hand wringing over republican support of government run health care is really heartwarming. Where was your support for President George W. Bush when he made an honest attempt to reform Social Security? Many of the proposals that he made were the same as clintons, in essence democrat proposals. He was front and center. No back room deals to get support. Democrats laid down like dogs. No participation at all.

    Politics anyone?

    Bunch of phonies.
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,887

    Default

    is someone in the legislative branch under indictment for taking a bribe on the health care reform bill?-Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, MA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    I don't know about that Paul. One very disturbing (to me) thing that surfaced during the whole Brown/Coakley race was this:




    If you google the names of the "Hosts" and "Co-Hosts", you will see many lobbyists and people in the Healthcare industry. Then google who those lobbyists have for clients, and it quickly becomes apparent that pretty much the whole Mass Congressional delegation is bought and paid for by those that would profit from healthcare "reform". Don't know if that holds true for the rest of the country or not.

    Just because someone is not indicted does not necessarily mean thay are innocent.....

  10. #30
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    I am not saying if it was good or bad. I am not defending it.

    Just responding to his query.

    Major legislation like the current version of the democrat’s health care proposal, that needs bribes to get passed, is, I am sure, good for the nation.

    BTW, is it possible that there is any understatement or unrealistic expectation of future conditions in this legislation?

    All your left wing hand wringing over republican support of government run health care is really heartwarming. Where was your support for President George W. Bush when he made an honest attempt to reform Social Security? Many of the proposals that he made were the same as clintons, in essence democrat proposals. He was front and center. No back room deals to get support. Democrats laid down like dogs. No participation at all.

    Politics anyone?

    Bunch of phonies.
    The core of his social security reform proposal was to privatize a portion of the program and to reduce benefits for the balance. The immediate impact would have been to "address" a future (20 years away) problem by creating a $1 trillion immediate funding gap for current benefits, and still not resolving the long term problem. What it would have done would have been to infuse the $1 trillion into the stock market, inflating prices dramatically. It was hard to view it as a solution. To promote his plan, Bush began to describe the immediacy of the problem by focusing not on when the social security trust would actually be insufficient to pay all benefits owed, but on when the government would have to begin paying back the money borrowed from social security to finance current operations.

    Clinton's solution, by contrast, was to dedicate the surplus in the budget to bolstering the funding for social security and then to begin a process of segregating the funds so that surpluses -- which we continue to have today -- could not be used to fund operating deficits. Instead, Bush used the budget surplus, the social security surplus, and new debt to pay for tax cuts from which almost all the benefits went to the top 1% of income earners. That certainly proved to be a brilliant strategy -- not.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •