Sheila Jackson Lee says the debt ceiling battle is raaacist

by editor on July 18, 2011

We knew sooner or later someone would say it. It was just a matter of who and when. The results are in and those of you who had Sheila “Today we have two Vietnams side by side” Jackson Lee (D-Mars) in the pool, come claim your winnings.

The Hill has the story:

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) on Friday strongly suggested that members of Congress are making it difficult for President Obama to raise the debt ceiling because of his race.

“I do not understand what I think is the maligning and maliciousness [toward] this president,” said Jackson Lee, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. “Why is he different? … In the minority community that is question that is being raised. Why is this president being treated so disrespectfully? Why has the debt limit been raised 60 times? Why did the leader of the Senate continually talk about his job is to bring the president down to make sure he is unelected?”

We realize the Democrats don’t know much civics – for example, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-Fantasyland) thinks the 3 branches are President, House and Senate – but the debt ceiling debate is a legislative issue to be decided between the Democrat and Republican legislators, not Obama and the raaacists.

As for the leader of the Senate thing… Harry Reid did work tirelessly to bring President Bush down, but they were from different parties. But since President Obama is from Harry’s party … maybe Harry’s just a raaaaacist.

- Written by Bonfire of the Absurdities

Source: The Hill

{ 276 comments… read them below or add one }

brian July 18, 2011 at 2:27 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Anyone call Obama a Chimp, Ms Jackson?

Olivia July 18, 2011 at 3:21 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Anyone call Obama a Chimp, Ms Jackson?
*******************
Yes,Brian, they have. Have you been hiding under a rock?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42656911/ns/politics-more_politics/t/gop-official-a-obama-chimp-email/

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/does-activists-obama-chimp-e-mail-characterize-the-attitude-of-the-tea-party/question-1695049/?link=ibaf&q=obama+chimp
http://emptysuit.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/michelle-obama-faces/

He and his wife have also been likened to gorillas:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2009_06_14_South_Carolina_pol:_Sorry_for_comparing_Michelle_Obama_to_gorilla/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/01/24/ad_obama_and_the_800-pound_gorilla.html

Let me remind you, too, that it’s more offensive to use old racially charged imagery on a minority that’s been targeted by those images, than it is to use them on someone who’s been privileged from birth (i.e., wealthy white Protestant male of northern European ancestry). Of course, those who harbor racist views and wish to indulge them here will probably leap to disagree.

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 3:45 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How about this, Olivia, you are a progressive feminist? What say you regarding the filth that passes for political discourse on HBO.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/17/bill-maher-michele-bachmann-and-anger-fcking/

So please feel free to feign your outrage somewhere else.

Olivia July 18, 2011 at 4:54 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How about this, Olivia, you are a progressive feminist? What say you regarding the filth that passes for political discourse on HBO.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/17/bill-maher-michele-bachmann-and-anger-fcking/
***********************
I don’t know, because I don’t watch it. I don’t have TV reception. What’s more, I don’t much care for TV or radio political shows that invite people to call in and give their opinions.

I did click on your link, and it sounded neither more nor less vulgar than some of the posts I’ve read on this board. In fact, less so, since the Bachmanns are husband and wife. You do know that married couples sometimes have sex, right? And that God is perfectly okay with that, even if it’s “angry” sex?

On the other hand, some crank on this board accused me today of performing oral sex on Michael Moore…..which is a little nastier than accusing a man of having sex with his wife.

And, oddly enough, I didn’t see you taking him to task for it, or accusing him of posting “filth.” Need I ask why you show such a double standard, while accusing ME of ” feign(ing) outrage”? ;)

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 5:13 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

You may have clicked on the link but you sure as hell didn’t read what occurred. Oddly enough the editor posted the story so you can read it over there. I know that you will excuse it as you rationalize like no other. It amuses me.

And, oddly enough, I didn’t see you taking him to task for it, or accusing him of posting “filth.” Need I ask why you show such a double standard, while accusing ME of ” feign(ing) outrage”? ;)

Didn’t see it but I do condemn it. You are so easy to insult and antagonize as it is, I would not have to go there and never would.

Ruben July 18, 2011 at 6:28 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

More evidence of WINNING!

Sidekick – 1
Olivia – 0

KimmyQueen July 19, 2011 at 8:37 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

More like

Sidekick – 100
Oliva – 0

LOL

hisham July 18, 2011 at 5:36 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

3rd!

RockingHorseGuy July 19, 2011 at 8:56 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Olivia’s stuck on Zero.

drb July 18, 2011 at 3:51 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Let me remind you, too, that it’s more offensive to use old racially charged imagery on a minority that’s been targeted by those images, than it is to use them on someone who’s been privileged from birth (i.e., wealthy white Protestant male of northern European ancestry).

So what your saying is that it is ok for the left to portray GWB in this manner, but not for anyone to portray any person of minority status in this way.

Nice double standard you have there.

Of course, those who harbor racist views and wish to indulge them here will probably leap to disagree.

Further you declare that anyone who disagrees with you is a racist.
Wow. Nice pre-emptive. Thanks for showing us that some people will see racism in just about everything, whether it really is racism or not.

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 4:27 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Olivia has been favoring us with her own brand of idiocy throughout this thread. She has been called on it repeatedly but she bobs and weaves and ignores most direct refutations. Your post, I think, best calls out her stupidity and narrow mindedness. You do this, of course, by using her own words and then offering up a nice response. Good on you!

drb July 18, 2011 at 4:31 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Thank you, Sidekick.

Olivia July 18, 2011 at 5:10 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Olivia has been favoring us with her own brand of idiocy throughout this thread. She has been called on it repeatedly but she bobs and weaves and ignores most direct refutations. Your post, I think, best calls out her stupidity and narrow mindedness. You do this, of course, by using her own words and then offering up a nice response. Good on you!

*********************
I love the upside-down, backwards Through-The-Looking-Glass world of the far right. I”M being accused of “narrow mindedness” because (1) I object to far right wing bigots likening the President and First Lady to apes, and (2) some poster here likes to imagine that I watch and enjoy some HBO show that I’ve never heard of? :D

You’re a riot, Kick. And, by the way, did you ever take a really good look at that icon you use in your posts? That raised left leg looks rather like a phallic symbol—-which is especially funny, given the context of this discussion. :D

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 5:25 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I am a riot, aren’t I? I am getting to you too. I have practiced martial arts for a long time and a sidekick is a very basic and effective kick. My avatar is a depiction of that kick. But a leftist perv would see it your way, I guess. As for the tv show; it does not matter whether you heard of it or not the content was clear enough. I saw the post that you must have deleted. I imagine you did so because you clearly did not read it carefully if at all. The “comedian” was talking about anger f***ing Michelle Bachmann not the Bachmanns having sex. Then a second panelist, who is gay, thought Rick Santorum deserved the same treatment.

Of course not a peep from the NOW crowd over the misogynistic comment (s). It goes back to what many of us believe here: the Left, especially the Far Left, have no standards.

Now regarding you performing fellatio on Michael Moore; I disagree with any poster getting that personal. You’re easy enough without having to go there.

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 5:31 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Sorry for the similar posts. I have various comments disappearing and reappearing. Anyone else having the same issue. Olivia, I withdraw my accusation that you deleted a post.

Olivia July 18, 2011 at 5:04 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Let me remind you, too, that it’s more offensive to use old racially charged imagery on a minority that’s been targeted by those images, than it is to use them on someone who’s been privileged from birth (i.e., wealthy white Protestant male of northern European ancestry).

So what your saying is that it is ok for the left to portray GWB in this manner
***********************
No, I didn’t say it’s ‘ok’ to liken anyone to a chimp.
***********************
but not for anyone to portray any person of minority status in this way.

Nice double standard you have there.

Of course, those who harbor racist views and wish to indulge them here will probably leap to disagree.

Further you declare that anyone who disagrees with you is a racist.
Wow. Nice pre-emptive. Thanks for showing us that some people will see racism in just about everything, whether it really is racism or not.
***************************
Wrong again. Stop twisting my words, and pay attention to what I’m actually saying.

Comparing a black person to an ape or monkey is far more offensive than doing the same to a white person. Why? Because calling black people subhuman, and comparing them to apes and monkeys, was a very common way of dehumanizing them back during the Jim Crow era. It’s a rather vicious reminder of an ugly past, an era when black Americans were deliberately disempowered, with the blessing of the government.

It’s along the same lines as referring to Jews as “vermin,” and drawing pictures of them with long, hooked noses and evil grins. Or burning a cross on the lawn of someone who’s a minority. Or making lewd remarks about the size of a female coworker’s breasts. NOT a smart idea, if you want people to assume that you’re not a flaming bigot.

Now, explain to me why you think you ought to be able to compare either Obama or his wife to an ape or monkey, without being regarded as a bigot. Because, if you’re taking this much trouble to argue with my post, I’ve got to assume that that’s what you want to do.

hisham July 18, 2011 at 5:39 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

3rd again!

Ruben July 18, 2011 at 6:29 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Olivia… LOSING!!!

I’ve gotta kick this Charlie Sheen habit.

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 5:08 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“…Stop twisting my words, and pay attention to what I’m actually saying.”

Olivia said while stomping her feet and clenching her fists. Sorry, but drb nailed you and you will just have to live with additional mockery and scorn being leveled at you. Or you could just go find another site that would welcome your social commentary.

Olivia July 18, 2011 at 5:13 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“…Stop twisting my words, and pay attention to what I’m actually saying.”

Olivia said while stomping her feet and clenching her fists. Sorry, but drb nailed you and you will just have to live with additional mockery and scorn being leveled at you. Or you could just go find another site that would welcome your social commentary.

***********************
No, thank you. Someone’s got to challenge you on your dishonesty and hypocrisy, and it might as well be me.

Sidekick July 18, 2011 at 5:15 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How am I dishonest and hypocritical? I cant wait for this.

hisham July 18, 2011 at 5:41 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

3rds yet again!

Ruben July 18, 2011 at 6:32 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Congratulations, Olivia… you’re managing to consistently finish 11th out of a 10 person race!

drb July 18, 2011 at 5:23 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Wrong again. Stop twisting my words, and pay attention to what I’m actually saying.

Good advice for you to follow as you just twisted up my post.

Now, explain to me why you think you ought to be able to compare either Obama or his wife to an ape or monkey, without being regarded as a bigot.

I worded my post very carefully. I did not make this assertion. That is in your head.

Because, if you’re taking this much trouble to argue with my post, I’ve got to assume that that’s what you want to do.

Thank you for showing that you are so arrogant that you think you know my mind and motives better that I know them myself.

I don’t think it is MORE offensive to display a person of one socail group in this way than it is to depict a person of another groud this way. To me, it is OFFENSIVE and DEHUMANIZING to depict ANYONE in this manner whether they are black, white, red, green, yellow, orange or purple, PERIOD.

Sorry but once again you lose. Thanks for playing.

Alberto July 18, 2011 at 5:50 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

When have you ever heard Jackson-Lee utter an intelligent thought? The only reason she is in office is because she comes from a congressional district that is predominately “minority.” The race card play should come as no surprise as she is an idiot.

Leonard W. Giddens Jr. July 18, 2011 at 7:04 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

This president as she calls him is tyring to give away the country. I don’t recall any other that has turned the NLRB over to a bunch of gangsters, the union thugs, this president is trying to flood this country with mexicans and who knows who else, while Americans are loosing everything, this president is a muslim that is set on turning our country over the the muslims, this president is a bigger liar than Bubba Clinton, this president coundn’t care less about ” African Americans” , this president has filed law suites against a state in this country for illegal leaches from mexico, this president supported the union thugs against a state in this union, this president does not know how to be president. If you are trying to say he is treated as he is because he is black, stick it up your nose. You are a complete idiot woman. I don’t know of any president that has ruled a law unconstitutional, this president thinks he is a king. Lady, go dig a hole and crawl in it.

Olivia July 19, 2011 at 2:11 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

This president as she calls him is tyring to give away the country. I don’t recall any other that has turned the NLRB over to a bunch of gangsters, the union thugs, this president is trying to flood this country with mexicans and who knows who else, while Americans are loosing everything, this president is a muslim that is set on turning our country over the the muslims, this president is a bigger liar than Bubba Clinton, this president coundn’t care less about ” African Americans” , this president has filed law suites against a state in this country for illegal leaches from mexico, this president supported the union thugs against a state in this union, this president does not know how to be president. If you are trying to say he is treated as he is because he is black, stick it up your nose. You are a complete idiot woman. I don’t know of any president that has ruled a law unconstitutional, this president thinks he is a king. Lady, go dig a hole and crawl in it.
*******************************************
No, thank you. As long as there are Americans gullible enough to swallow bigoted nonsense like the above, I’ll keep on speaking up to give them a reality check.

By the way, Obama’s administration has every right to file a lawsuit against a state that tries to defy federal immigration law. That doesn’t mean “he thinks he is a king,” nor does it mean that he has “ruled” on this issue. It simply means that he takes his oath of office—-in which he pledged to uphold the Constitution—–seriously. The “ruling” will be done by the courts.

That silly cliché about “union thugs” was fed to you by corporate shills—the powerful leaders who stand to gain the most by discrediting labor unions. And there will always be gullible fool to believe them, and vote against their own best interests.

The silly cliché about the president being a “muslim” (why is it that so few posters on this board know how to capitalize proper nouns?) is indeed bigotry, and every bit as ignorant and destructive as racist bigotry. The only difference is that, among the far right, it’s currently acceptable to hate Muslims, just as it was acceptable, 50 years ago, to hate black Americans.

The silly cliché about “flood(ing) the country with Mexicans” is as laughable as the rest of your hysterical charges. Illegal immigrants (who aren’t all Mexican, by the way) wouldn’t come here if employers didn’t hire them. That has nothing to do with Obama, and everything to do with shady business practices. But, hey, let’s make a scapegoat out of the president, right? After all, if you’re not above repeating ridiculous lies about him, why would you object to blaming him for dishonest private business practices?

poppajoe49 July 19, 2011 at 4:20 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“Obama’s administration has every right to file a lawsuit against a state that tries to defy federal immigration law.”

Well, how do you feel about them filing suit against a state that is following US immigration law? That’s exactly what he has done to Arizona.

“That silly cliché about “union thugs” was fed to you by corporate shills”

Tha union thugs aren’t the rank and file for the most part, they are the bosses! I used to be a union member, 2 different unions to be exact. They didn’t seem to give 2 whits about the rank and file unless there was a political statement or money to be made from it! What you need to be aware of is that the rank and file in the construction trades are mostly conservative thinkers and voters, in spite of what the AFL-CIO tells them to do. The people you see protesting against the changes the states are making to collective bargaining are teachers and government employees, those are the ones who have been spoiled with their cushy jobs, ridculous pay and benefits, and outrageous retirement packages, all at our expense. The trade unions have nothing near the packages that the government employee unions have.

“The silly cliché about the president being a “muslim” (why is it that so few posters on this board know how to capitalize proper nouns?) is indeed bigotry, and every bit as ignorant and destructive as racist bigotry.”

You are what you’re raised to be. Obama was raised in a Muslim country, went to a Muslim school, so I guess that makes him Jewish in your eyes!

Illegal immigrants (who aren’t all Mexican, by the way) wouldn’t come here if employers didn’t hire them.

OK, the point that they aren’t all Mexicans is valid, many of them are from countries that Mexico won’t let them in from! Why is it that Mexico can enforce a much stricter immigration policy than the US, but we are condemned for ours?
As far as them not coming if employers wouldn’t hire them, BULLSHIT!!
If they all were working and not collecting welfare, section 8, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. It might be different, but they come here for the free stuff, not work. If they are working, it’s just to suppliment the free stuff they are getting.

“That has nothing to do with Obama,”

BULLSHIT again! Obama is doing everything he can to stop the states from enforcing the law, thereby allowing new generations of welfare recipients and MS-13 members into the country!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 2:54 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“That silly cliché about “union thugs” was fed to you by corporate shills”

Tha union thugs aren’t the rank and file for the most part, they are the bosses! I used to be a union member, 2 different unions to be exact. They didn’t seem to give 2 whits about the rank and file unless there was a political statement or money to be made from it! What you need to be aware of is that the rank and file in the construction trades are mostly conservative thinkers and voters, in spite of what the AFL-CIO tells them to do.
**************************
If that’s true, then you’ve just validated my observation that the right wing is all about “I’ve got mine, scr*w you.”

They disapprove of “union bosses,” but choose to work in a union trade anyway? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you…… ;)

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 3:26 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Choose? Unless they live in a right to work state they do not always have a choice. Olivia, now you’re just being disingenuous.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:24 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

They disapprove of “union bosses,” but choose to work in a union trade anyway?

Disapproving of my union bosses is why I no longer work for a union! I am self employed and moved to a right to work state, but then you knew that, because I told you that 2 weeks ago!

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:40 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

hat trick!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 3:59 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

You are what you’re raised to be. Obama was raised in a Muslim country, went to a Muslim school, so I guess that makes him Jewish in your eyes!
********************
Since when did Hawaii become a “Muslim country,” Poppajoe? And since when does anyone who spends less than four years in a foreign country automatically embrace that country’s predominant religion?

<<Illegal immigrants (who aren’t all Mexican, by the way) wouldn’t come here if employers didn’t hire them.
***************************
OK, the point that they aren’t all Mexicans is valid, many of them are from countries that Mexico won’t let them in from! Why is it that Mexico can enforce a much stricter immigration policy than the US, but we are condemned for ours?
***************************
ARE we condemned for our immigration policy? I wasn't aware of that, to be honest with you. But, if we are, it might have something to do with the fact that this nation was built on immigrants. And, of course, that this nation is much wealthier and more powerful than Mexico, and therefore might be expected by some to be able to accommodate more immigrants.

Of course, I doubt most illegal immigrants consider any of this, when making the decision to enter and/or stay here illegally. In most cases, they're simply looking for a better life, and sneaking into the U.S., however dicey the chances of making it successfully, is the only real chance they've got. It's the same with the poor African immigrants who sneak into wealthier European countries. People do what they have to to put food on the table. And, as long as there's a prayer of finding opportunity in that wealthy foreign country to the north, there will always be desperate people wanting to try their luck.
******************************
As far as them not coming if employers wouldn’t hire them, BULLSHIT!!
If they all were working and not collecting welfare, section 8, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. It might be different, but they come here for the free stuff, not work. If they are working, it’s just to suppliment the free stuff they are getting.

*******************************
Uh huh. That sort of bogus stereotyping makes for dramatic talk radio ("stroking the pleasure centers of their listeners," as Brooks put it), but can you back it up with any sort of statistics? ;)

It seems highly unlikely to me that a lazy person would go to all that trouble and expense to cross the desert, sneak into the U.S., hide from immigration, and build a brand new life, just to get "free stuff." Especially considering how hard it is to qualify for "free stuff" without any identification, and how little "free stuff" can actually be had, even if one manages to fool the state. Stop and think for two seconds, Poppajoe. How hard would it be for you, for example, to sneak into a country like Sweden, find a place to live, and convince the government that you're eligible for government benefits? Does it make sense to you that a lazy person would even consider going to all that trouble? Of course not. But, hey, it's a lot more gratifying pretending that illegal immigrants are all lazy and shiftless, isn't it? That way, you can blame THEM for your own failure to prosper.

As I said, that's exactly the tactic taken by Germans back in the thirties. "It's their fault this country isn't prospering, so they need to be punished, and their homes, money and belongings given back to proper Aryan Germans!"

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose…….

“That has nothing to do with Obama,”

BULLSHIT again! Obama is doing everything he can to stop the states from enforcing the law, thereby allowing new generations of welfare recipients and MS-13 members into the country!
******************
Wrong. Obama's administration is objecting to a state law that attempts to supersede federal law, which is unconstitutional.

It is NOT a "given" that violating the civil liberties of selected individuals (those with dark skin and hair, who speak Spanish) is the only way to prevent "new generations of welfare recipients and MS-13 members" in the U.S. (Talk about bigoted stereotypes, by the way!)

In fact, your rationale is exactly that of gullible Germans in the late thirties. Having swallowed the propaganda that Jews were a blight on German society, they (gullible Germans) were ripe to swallow the notion that Jews didn't deserve a right to privacy, or freedom from discrimination. And, once that notion was made policy, the rest was easy.

We (those of us with brains) don't want to emulate that kind of tactics here in the U.S., Poppajoe. Once upon a time, people just like you in Germany argued, with just as much conviction as you have, "But you don't understand. These people are bleeding this country dry. They're taking jobs and wealth away from 'real' Germans. And they're imposing their foreign Jewish ways on OUR country. WE'VE GOT TO PUT A STOP TO IT! And, if that means violating their rights—-well, as far as I'm concerned, they don't HAVE any rights. If they don't like it, let 'em leave, and good riddance!"

The ONLY difference between nasty antisemitic remarks like the above hypothetical one, and the kind of stuff you're saying about Mexican immigrants, Poppajoe, is the era. It's now taboo to make antisemitic remarks, but not to rail against Mexicans. And, no matter how hard you try to gussy it up as patriotism, your attitude is pure bigotry. And your defense of such laws as Arizona's

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:31 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“Since when did Hawaii become a “Muslim country,”
INDONESIA you moron!

“since when does anyone who spends less than four years in a foreign country automatically embrace that country’s predominant religion?”
When it’s also the religion of your father and stepfather, and you’re looking for their approval.

“ARE we condemned for our immigration policy?”
Sorry, I forgot you don’t have a TV, radit, newspaper, brain, etc!
Vincente Fox condemned us for our immigration policy, all the while nobody from South America is allowed to legally enter Mexico!

“but can you back it up with any sort of statistics?”
Sorry, Adolf—-no can do.
I’m not going to scurry around collecting evidence to try to persuade you of something that you have no intention of accepting anyway. It matters very little whether you agree with me on this point—I don’t need your stamp of approval.

“Wrong. Obama’s administration is objecting to a state law that attempts to supersede federal law, which is unconstitutional. ”
WRONG, they merely created a state law that mirrors federal law, but since it doesn’t fit your nice, neat little package of prejudice, you will ignore the facts.

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:33 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

2nd 3rd…woot

IFTYS July 19, 2011 at 4:34 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

It simply means that he takes his oath of office—-in which he pledged to uphold the Constitution—–seriously.
*********************************

Sorry O, but if obama cared about the Constitution, he’d be refusing to support many of his own bills. After all, there is nothing constitutional about Obamacare. Forcing consumers to buy a product (health insurance), with the threat of government (fine or prison), is certainly unconstitutional.

poppajoe49 July 19, 2011 at 4:52 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Forcing consumers to buy a product (health insurance), with the threat of government (fine or prison), is certainly unconstitutional.

It certainly is Constitutional! It falls under the Commerce Clause, in the “For your own good” section, under the “we know what you need better than you do” subsection! ;-)

IFTYS July 19, 2011 at 5:11 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Jumping Jehosaphat. I finally see the Light and his name is Barack. Thank You poppajoe49, you have made it all so clear. I am a compete moron and the guberment will always take care of me because I am too stupid to take care of my own needs.

Hallelujah, Praise Jesus!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 2:56 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

It simply means that he takes his oath of office—-in which he pledged to uphold the Constitution—–seriously.
*********************************

Sorry O, but if obama cared about the Constitution, he’d be refusing to support many of his own bills. After all, there is nothing constitutional about Obamacare.
********************
Would you mind citing the legal precedents establishing that it’s unconstitutional and the rationale thereof?

Or are you just parroting that favorite line of poorly informed right wingers, “If it isn’t listed in the Constitution, then we ain’t supposed to do it”?

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 3:31 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Tell you what, Olivia? The burden of proof will fall on the administration to prove constitutionality of the insurance mandate. For now I believe one can make a case that it violates the 14th Amendment for starters and it certainly does not fall under any of the 18 enumerated powers. That all said, it may hold up since it will not be the first time that the government ignored the Constitution.

PS please do not tell us that it falls under the Commerce Clause. The government may try that argument but no where does that clause give the government the power to force a citizen to by a commercial product.

So even better than case precedent, I went right to the source for my argument. When this case is finally heard by SCOTUS, and if it rules your way, then the federal government can then force you to buy anything it deems necessary. You may even be forced to by a gun, Olivia, if those crazy bright wingers regain executive power.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 4:17 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Tell you what, Olivia? The burden of proof will fall on the administration to prove constitutionality of the insurance mandate. For now I believe one can make a case that it violates the 14th Amendment for starters and it certainly does not fall under any of the 18 enumerated powers. That all said, it may hold up since it will not be the first time that the government ignored the Constitution.
*****************************
Heaven help us, it’s yet ANOTHER right wing lay person who’s already convinced that he knows more about the Constitution than the judges who try such cases. Once again, that right wing propaganda machine pumps its listeners so full of self-esteem that they think they know it all. :D

You’re correct about one thing, Kick—-I’m sure this will be played out in court. But it’s rather arrogant of you to assume that, if the courts don’t reach the decision YOU want them to reach, that they’re “ignoring the Constitution.”
***************************
PS please do not tell us that it falls under the Commerce Clause. The government may try that argument but no where does that clause give the government the power to force a citizen to by a commercial product.
****************************
As I’ve stated at least 100 times here, Kick, I personally favor fully socialized medicine—–in effect, expanding Medicare for all citizens. So don’t even bother arguing with me about “buy(ing) a commercial product.” I don’t like the idea of health care being a commodity, to be sold for the biggest profit possible. Considering that we Americans pay much, much more per capita for health care than any other country in the world, that 50.7 million Americans still have NO health care plan, other than home remedies, Tylenol, bandaids and borrowing the neighbor’s stash of antibiotics; and that medical bills are still the #1 reason for personal bankruptcy in the U.S., that system isn’t working.

It’s the job of the government to ensure that the nation is kept in decent working order. And a nation can’t be in good working order, if a significant percentage of its people are walking around with undiagnosed and/or untreated medical and psychiatric problems.
*******************************
So even better than case precedent, I went right to the source for my argument. When this case is finally heard by SCOTUS, and if it rules your way, then the federal government can then force you to buy anything it deems necessary. You may even be forced to by a gun, Olivia, if those crazy bright wingers regain executive power
**********************************
Nonsense. First of all, my family has enough guns. (Did you really believe that silly right wing canard that all liberals are opposed to gun ownership?) Second, health care, no matter how far right laymen try to dress it up as a frill, is a NECESSITY…..and, no, “They can always go to the emergency room” is NOT a substitute (nor is it an affordable alternative).

THis is the part that the far right always tries to ignore—-the fact that you can’t magically will yourself to stay healthy and productive all your life. What we have is NOT working: the percentage of uninsured Americans keeps going up; the percentage of our income that goes to health care keeps going up (while income remains stagnant or decreases); and the consequences of untreated problems are bigger, more debilitating and more expensive health problems.

We can do better. Obama’s health care plan is a compromise, not a full solution. But, so far, I’ve seen nothing from the right wing, other than efforts to pretend that (1) health care is a luxury, (2) the only people who don’t have insurance are healthy young people who don’t want to pay for it; and (3) if people can’t afford to get sick, they’ll magically stay healthy.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 4:57 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Your argument is flawed let me explain:

“As I’ve stated at least 100 times here, Kick, I personally favor fully socialized medicine—–in effect, expanding Medicare for all citizens. So don’t even bother arguing with me about “buy(ing) a commercial product.” I don’t like the idea of health care being a commodity, to be sold for the biggest profit possible. Considering that we Americans pay much, much more per capita for health care than any other country in the world, that 50.7 million Americans still have NO health care plan, other than home remedies, Tylenol, bandaids and borrowing the neighbor’s stash of antibiotics; and that medical bills are still the #1 reason for personal bankruptcy in the U.S., that system isn’t work”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Much to chew on here…let’s go. Because doctors and nurses enter the market place to sell their labor, medicine is indeed a commodity whether you think so or not. To provide a universal coverage denies fiscal and economic reality-simply not affordable- and you are advocating capping health workers income and assume that will stand for it. There is a reason why doctors from overseas come here to practice and it is not to earn a “living wage” as a physician.

“that we pay more….” of course we do and like anything else that has a third party payer -college tuition and the loan industry- the costs are inflated and we have no real competition among insurance companies because they can not compete inter-state. Second and MOST important don’t be so naive to assume that costs will go down with the federal government administering health care. Only a deluded Marxist would think that central planning is more efficient.

The uninsured number (inflated likely) is a moving target. People move in and out coverage everyday. It is a fallacy to assume that there is a permanent class of uninsured. Secondly, a catastrophic policy for a young healthy person is cheap. Why is it my problem someone chooses an $80 iphone plan and a $100 Direct TV subscription over health insurance. I make budget decisions everyday.

Your last sentence is just a bunch of hyperbolic bullshit so I will move on…

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Nonsense. First of all, my family has enough guns. (Did you really believe that silly right wing canard that all liberals are opposed to gun ownership?)”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It was a point about what the government could be able to do if they can force us to buy a commercial product. You knew that but were just being a pain in the ass.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“Second, health care, no matter how far right laymen try to dress it up as a frill, is a NECESSITY…..and, no, “They can always go to the emergency room” is NOT a substitute (nor is it an affordable alternative).”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My wife is a nurse, so don’t hand me the layman crap. Our friends are doctors and we talk frequently about this issue. It may be a necessity but it is not unaffordable for a healthy person. IMO, many healthy people (especially young adults) opt not to insure to buy other things. For the truly indigent, there are remedies for them via Medicaid and charities.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“THis is the part that the far right always tries to ignore—-the fact that you can’t magically will yourself to stay healthy and productive all your life. What we have is NOT working: the percentage of uninsured Americans keeps going up; the percentage of our income that goes to health care keeps going up (while income remains stagnant or decreases); and the consequences of untreated problems are bigger, more debilitating and more expensive health problems.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
False premise as usual from you. I do not think that I will be productive nor healthy forever. In fact, I do know that statistically I will likely use a great deal of medical resources at the end of my life. What I don’t by into is the notion that without the federal government, managing health care can not be done. I am a free market advocate and I believe that is where the the solutions lie. The government can not ever be more efficient than the private sector. Period.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 5:11 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“MOST important don’t be so naive to assume that costs will go down with the federal government administering health care.”

Sidekick, thank you for setting me up!
When has the government EVER done ANYTHING more cost effictively than private enterprise?
Answer, NEVER!!
To save Oblivious the trouble.
Translation: The government sets up multi-level bureaucracy whenever it institutes a program, that way it can ensure its survival at the expense of the taxpayer.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 5:20 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Hayek and others talk about the fallacy that the state can have an efficient command economy. They argue that it is an impossibility because the State can never have enough information to make proper decisions over something as vast as a national economy. I fully agree.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 5:31 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“They can always go to the emergency room” is NOT a substitute (nor is it an affordable alternative).”

Unless you’re low income, or here illegally.
Every hospital emergency room I have ever been in has a poster on the wall that tells you if you cannot afford your bill, there is a sliding scale based on your income that you will be billed according to.
The difference is picked up by their overbilling the insurance of everyone else.
If your hospital doesn’t have this poster, then you work for a private hospital that isn’t required to do this, and you make too much money anyway!
To deny this just shows your typical liberal move of omitting all the facts that don’t fit your argument.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 6:26 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“They can always go to the emergency room” is NOT a substitute (nor is it an affordable alternative).”
*************************
Unless you’re low income, or here illegally.
Every hospital emergency room I have ever been in has a poster on the wall that tells you if you cannot afford your bill, there is a sliding scale based on your income that you will be billed according to.
The difference is picked up by their overbilling the insurance of everyone else.
If your hospital doesn’t have this poster, then you work for a private hospital that isn’t required to do this, and you make too much money anyway!
To deny this just shows your typical liberal move of omitting all the facts that don’t fit your argument.
***************************
No, you’re missing the whole point, Poppajoe.

That point being that:]
1) ER treatment is NOT free.
2) No, hospital emergency room are NOT required to say anything about “sliding scale.” They are required by federal law to provide medical screening and emergency stabilization, and patients who can’t afford to pay are encouraged to contact the billing department.

Some specific conditions—for example, type 2 diabetes and renal failure—-may qualify for charity care. Others receive no special deal at all, except a suggestion to put the bill on a credit card.

Hospital bills are not suggestions. They’re bills, like any other bill, and the patient is expected to pay them, just as he’d be expected to pay any other bill. If he doesn’t, they get turned over to collection agencies. The only differences, in fact, between a hospital bill and other kinds of bills, are (1) you don’t have to pay anything up front, and (2) they can’t cut off service if you don’t pay. Otherwise, the consequences for stiffing the hospital are the same as they would be for stiffing any other company.

…..and, most important point of all……
3) Emergency treatment is NOT the same thing as ongoing health care.

Let’s pretend, for the sake of discussion, that you’re an uninsured person who’s been experiencing fatigue and a bad headache for several days. You go to the ER and are immediately diagnosed with hypertension. I start an IV on you; give you an IV antihypertensive that (with or without other medications ordered) gets your blood pressure down from 215/110 to 147/92.

When it’s time for you to be discharged, I hand you the doctor’s instructions, which include following up with whatever doctor is on call that day. That doctor is required by law to see you, within 96 hours of your ER visit, regardless of your ability to pay. (That doesn’t mean he won’t charge you for an office visit—-just that he can’t refuse to see you.)

You also get a prescription for blood pressure medication—-2 weeks’ worth. It’s expected that, within those two weeks, you’ll find a doctor to treat you, who can extend the prescription. If you can’t afford to pay up front to see the doctor on call, and don’t come up with a doctor who WILL see you within that time, then your blood pressure will go right back up again, and you’ll be back where you started. Or worse, since continual high blood pressure will eventually damage your arteries and heart, eventually leading to serious health problems, disability and/or death.

Do you see where I’m going with this, Poppajoe?

Can you see WHY I’m saying that the ER is not a substitute for ongoing health care?

By the way, it’s a right wing myth that illegal immigrants get better health care treatment than U.S. citizens. Standards of care are the same across the board, regardless of gender, age, national origin, sexual orientation or ability to pay.

Barb R July 20, 2011 at 8:09 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Good gawd, womyn, can’t you say ANYTHING in under 10,000 words???!!!

;)

Barb R July 20, 2011 at 8:12 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Follow my example, please, in how to make your point clearly, concisely and in as few words as possible:

Turds!!

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 10:57 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“1) ER treatment is NOT free.”

It is for you if you qualify, it just gets pushed onto the backs of those that have insurance or the ability to pay their own way.

“2) No, hospital emergency room are NOT required to say anything about “sliding scale.” They are required by federal law to provide medical screening and emergency stabilization, and patients who can’t afford to pay are encouraged to contact the billing department. ”

And that is posted in the ER. The point is, everyone knows the score, the posting is just a formality.

3) Emergency treatment is NOT the same thing as ongoing health care.

No, it isn’t, but that doesn’t stop the illegals and indigent from using it as such.

“By the way, it’s a right wing myth that illegal immigrants get better health care treatment than U.S. citizens. Standards of care are the same across the board, regardless of gender, age, national origin, sexual orientation or ability to pay.”

I never said better, I said free! Although, free is better, it still falls on the backs of others to pay for it, that is why insurance is billed ridiculous rates for things like aspirin. That’s why I just got a notice in the mail today for my father in law that shows assigned claims of:
Amount Charged $350.00
Medicare Approved $143.83
Medicare Paid Provider $115.06
You may be billed 28.77

If he had regular insurance, they would have been charged the full amount, that is how hospitals get the money to take care of Medicare, indigent, and illegal patients.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 5:51 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“As I’ve stated at least 100 times here, Kick, I personally favor fully socialized medicine—–in effect, expanding Medicare for all citizens. So don’t even bother arguing with me about “buy(ing) a commercial product.” I don’t like the idea of health care being a commodity, to be sold for the biggest profit possible. Considering that we Americans pay much, much more per capita for health care than any other country in the world, that 50.7 million Americans still have NO health care plan, other than home remedies, Tylenol, bandaids and borrowing the neighbor’s stash of antibiotics; and that medical bills are still the #1 reason for personal bankruptcy in the U.S., that system isn’t work”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Much to chew on here…let’s go. Because doctors and nurses enter the market place to sell their labor, medicine is indeed a commodity whether you think so or not.
***********************
In that case, every service that involves employing people—-police departments, local charities, public libraries, state legislatures, fire protection—–is a “commodity.” But it doesn’t necessarily follow that they all have to be sold for a profit, does it?
**********************************
To provide a universal coverage denies fiscal and economic reality-simply not affordable- and you are advocating capping health workers income and assume that will stand for it. There is a reason why doctors from overseas come here to practice and it is not to earn a “living wage” as a physician.
*****************************************
It’s affordable in other countries, Kick. I simply refuse to buy the excuse that we’re incapable of succeeding where so many other industrialized nations have succeeded. Ever stop to think that, if we eliminated all the money we’re paying out to middle men, health care would be much more affordable? Ever stop to think that we’re paying hugely inflated prices for basic supplies and services and medications, which makes our health care costs up to 10 times higher than those charged in other health care systems?
*****************************************
“that we pay more….” of course we do and like anything else that has a third party payer -college tuition and the loan industry- the costs are inflated and we have no real competition among insurance companies because they can not compete inter-state.
*********************************
Another bogus argument, If health insurance companies could compete interstate, they’d all relocate to whichever state has the fewest regulations. Then they’d all compete for the most desirable consumers—–the young, the healthy, the affluent—–just as they do now. Meanwhile, those who have the most trouble getting insurance right now—-the less young, with existing health problems and modest incomes—-would still be left out in the cold. Meanwhile, the insurance companies, by dodging as many regulations as possible, would be even more empowered to deny claims.

In short, your proposed solution is no solution at all for those who need insurance. But it surely would be a boon to the insurance industry, wouldn’t it? Odd how right wing arguments always seem to be about enriching private businesses, at public expense.
*********************************
Second and MOST important don’t be so naive to assume that costs will go down with the federal government administering health care. Only a deluded Marxist would think that central planning is more efficient.
*********************************
It’s been more efficient in other countries, Kick. I’ve witnessed it. I’ve used it. I’ve paid for it. And I”m in a better position than most to be able to compare quality of care. That’s not being “a deluded Marxist” (why must you far righters always destroy your arguments with silly name calling)—-it’s making observations, rather than swallowing GOP propaganda.
*********************************
The uninsured number (inflated likely) is a moving target. People move in and out coverage everyday. It is a fallacy to assume that there is a permanent class of uninsured.
*********************************
Not necessarily true. I see patients every day who have never been insured, who have absolutely no idea how to go about getting a doctor; who don’t understand the difference between an emergency room and an outpatient clinic. Use your head, man! People who are unqualified for any sort of work other than low pay, no-benefits jobs, don’t get offered health insurance. Others, who work for small businesses, get passed over because the boss is afraid their past history will drive up the cost of the company health care plan. Still others are stuck in that no-man’s-land: they make too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but can’t afford to pay for insurance, subsidized or otherwise.
**********************************
Secondly, a catastrophic policy for a young healthy person is cheap. Why is it my problem someone chooses an $80 iphone plan and a $100 Direct TV subscription over health insurance. I make budget decisions everyday.
***********************************
A catastrophic policy isn’t the same as health insurance, Kick. The vast majority of health problems are noncatastrophic in nature, especially in a young and otherwise healthy person.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Nonsense. First of all, my family has enough guns. (Did you really believe that silly right wing canard that all liberals are opposed to gun ownership?)”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It was a point about what the government could be able to do if they can force us to buy a commercial product. You knew that but were just being a pain in the ass.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++No, I’m not. I’m not buying your silly rationale. Government has been “forcing” drivers to carry car insurance for many years; have they “forced” these same people to buy any nonnecessities, that are not related to public safety?
************************************************”Second, health care, no matter how far right laymen try to dress it up as a frill, is a NECESSITY…..and, no, “They can always go to the emergency room” is NOT a substitute (nor is it an affordable alternative).”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
My wife is a nurse, so don’t hand me the layman crap.
*************************************
My boy, marriage doesn’t automatically bestow clinical expertise on one’s spouse. I don’t care what your wife is—-you’re not a professional in the medical or any medically related field.
***********************************
Our friends are doctors and we talk frequently about this issue. It may be a necessity but it is not unaffordable for a healthy person. IMO, many healthy people (especially young adults) opt not to insure to buy other things. For the truly indigent, there are remedies for them via Medicaid and charities.
***********************************
Well, first of all, Medicaid costs money—-which translates into higher taxes. Are you prepared to accept higher state AND federal taxes, to foot the bill for these uninsured people?

Second of all, if you’re really such good friends with these doctors, you ought to realize that Medicaid offers only very meager reimbursement to physicians, regardless of presenting complaint or diagnosis. You also ought to realize that doctors are required by law to accept only a certain number of Medicaid patients per year. After they’ve met that quota, they can (and usually do) refuse to see any more of them. So a person on Medicaid can easily call 20 doctors’ offices or more, before finding one that accepts Medicaid. There is absolutely nothing the patient can do about this. Even if s/he could scrounge up the cash to be self pay, it’s illegal to accept cash from a Medicaid patient. Medicaid patients don’t qualify to be seen at free clinics, either (assuming there’s one within reasonable walking or driving distance). So Medicaid is no panacea.

Ditto with charities. Most charity clinics accept federal funding—they couldn’t get by without it. Again, are you prepared for tax hikes, in order to ensure that charities pick up the slack that the government and insurance companies can’t or won’t handle?

So what happens to Medicaid patients who can’t find a doctor who will see them? They either go without, or they end up in the ER. Next time you go to the ER with a worrisome problem—say, a kidney stone or appendicitis or sky high blood pressure—-remember, as you’re sitting in that waiting room for an hour or more, that one reason you’re having to wait is all the uninsured and Medicaid patients with stuffy noses, minor rashes, crying infants and toothaches, who are taking up much of the staff’s time and examining rooms. Most could be treated for much less cost at a clinic. In fact, some wouldn’t need treatment at all, if they had a regular doctor they could call and ask for advice. And keep in mind that these people are bringing very little revenue into the hospital—-one of the reasons that hospitals serving poor communities keep closing down. It’s a vicious cycle.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“THis is the part that the far right always tries to ignore—-the fact that you can’t magically will yourself to stay healthy and productive all your life. What we have is NOT working: the percentage of uninsured Americans keeps going up; the percentage of our income that goes to health care keeps going up (while income remains stagnant or decreases); and the consequences of untreated problems are bigger, more debilitating and more expensive health problems.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
False premise as usual from you. I do not think that I will be productive nor healthy forever. In fact, I do know that statistically I will likely use a great deal of medical resources at the end of my life. What I don’t by into is the notion that without the federal government, managing health care can not be done. I am a free market advocate and I believe that is where the the solutions lie. The government can not ever be more efficient than the private sector. Period.
**************************************
You believe that because it’s been drilled into your brain by right wing media heroes, who are more interested in shilling for Big Business than in doing right by the government. But it’s not necessarily true, and the evidence of that (again) is our hugely expensive, inequitable and inefficient profit-driven health care system.

One picture is worth a thousand words, Kick—and this link provides both, as a microcosm of what’s wrong with our current system: http://www.roanoke.com/health/wb/170780

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 6:19 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I made my case, history is on my side and you are too wedded to your ideas to go any further. Pointless to go on with you re: healthcare. You simply are not able to grasp that it is not affordable witness every broke country with national care and central command economies fail every time. You are a Marxist, I am a free enterprise advocate. There will never be common ground found with us.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 6:25 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

In short, let the market be truly open Re: health care/ insurance and watch the prices come down Sadly, since most doctors peg their rates to Medicare, the system is already so badly fouled thanks to the government. It probably can never be free market unless Medicare is pushed down to the states with bloc grants. Probably pretty unlikely. Anyway, I’ve had enough of your anecdotal tripe. Next time when you write that much, cite something to back up those endless claims that you make.

David Bishop July 20, 2011 at 6:28 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I followed your link. What is wrong with people volunteering their time to help the poor?

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 11:01 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Because she isn’t getting paid for it.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:33 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Would you mind citing the legal precedents establishing that it’s unconstitutional and the rationale thereof?

Sorry, Adolf—-no can do.

I’m not going to scurry around collecting evidence to try to persuade you of something that you have no intention of accepting anyway. It matters very little whether you agree with me on this point—I don’t need your stamp of approval.

RockingHorseGuy July 19, 2011 at 9:05 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“That silly cliché about “union thugs” was fed to you by corporate shills”

Sorry, sweetie. I’m a union member, I know a thug when I see one. And no, I’m NOT a member of a government employee union. I have some pride.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 2:59 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“That silly cliché about “union thugs” was fed to you by corporate shills”

Sorry, sweetie. I’m a union member, I know a thug when I see one. And no, I’m NOT a member of a government employee union. I have some pride.
*********************
Translation: “But that’s different, ’cause I’M the one reaping the benefits. ‘Thugs’ are union leaders who get benefits for OTHER people, especially minorities that I don’t like.”

Your excuses are as transparent as glass, mon petit chou. ;)

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 3:11 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How did you read that into that post?

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:37 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How did you read that into that post?

She’s Karnak the Magnificent.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:14 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Oblivious, here’s a quarter, go buy a clue!

If you knew ANYTHING about Unions it would be amazing!
The benefit packages that we get in the trade unions are COMPLETELY SELF FINANCED!!! Medical and retirement funds do not use public money to pay them. There is a separate account for each person, and their funds are placed in there according to how many hours you work, just like a 401k. You get to manage your funds and whatever is in your account when you retire is what you get to draw from.
Therefore, no unfunded liabilities!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 4:25 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Oblivious, here’s a quarter, go buy a clue!

If you knew ANYTHING about Unions it would be amazing!
The benefit packages that we get in the trade unions are COMPLETELY SELF FINANCED!!! Medical and retirement funds do not use public money to pay them. There is a separate account for each person, and their funds are placed in there according to how many hours you work, just like a 401k. You get to manage your funds and whatever is in your account when you retire is what you get to draw from.
Therefore, no unfunded liabilities!
**********************
Poppajoe, how do you suppose union members afford those separate accounts?

They get paid A LIVING WAGE, that’s how! And how did they manage to get a living wage? BY BEING IN A UNION!

Do you seriously think that a nonunion tradesman, who’s making, say, $13 an hour with no benefits, can afford to “self finance” ANY medical or retirement fund? :D

I think it’s YOU who need to get a clue, Poppajoe. Again, you’re biting the hand that fed you, while comfortably telling yourself “I’ve got mine,” and condemning those who want and need the same benefits YOU’VE enjoyed.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 4:29 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

So, one must be in a labor union to get a “living wage”? An organization that you must tithe roughly 10% of your income? An organization that kills off its host companies and therefore its membership? Olivia, you are being obtuse again.

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:41 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

4th 3rd…

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:48 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

By the way, speaking of jobs…………

After the Packers v. Bills game, Buffalo released quarterbackTrent Edwards.

During the Packers v. Eagles game, the Packers injuredPhiladelphia quarterback Kevin Kolb. Philadelphia then had to play backup quarterback Michael Vick.

During a playoff game against the Eagles, the Packers injured Michael Vick and another backup was needed.

After the Packers v. Cowboys game, Dallas fired Wade Phillips.

After the Packers v. Vikings game, Minnesota fired Brad Childress.

Four weeks after losing to the Packers, the 49er’s coach,Mike Singletary, was fired and replaced.

During the Bears playoff game, the Packers injured Jay Cutler and backup Todd Collins forcing the Bears to go with 3rd string quarterback Caleb Hanie.

Question:

Is it just me, or did the Packers create more jobs than Obama last year?

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 5:39 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Yes, but they used SEIU thug tactics to do it. Look at that injury rate!

danybhoy July 20, 2011 at 8:08 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

The Packers will always create more jobs then anything Obama will ever do. As a Bears fan who was born & raised in Minnesota, I have to say when I visited Lambeau Field last May when I was in Green Bay for a concert, I had a blast. They have a tour, & I did that, & it was really cool. They take you throughout much of the stadium, including to the playing surface. I really do want to catch a game there, & I have a couple of friends who would be game for that.

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:36 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

hat trick

poppajoe49 July 18, 2011 at 7:21 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Jackson Lee (D-Mars)

Sorry ed, but if men are from Mars, and women are from Venus, then Sheila Jackson Lee is from Pluto! Just ask Walt Disney.
I would say she was from Uranus, but she doesn’t make that much sense.

Hellen July 19, 2011 at 12:00 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Like Shirley Q Liquor says, “she gots nostrils so big, you could use them for cupholders!” lol….she is such a moron…..an embarrassment to Houston!!!!!

Olivia July 19, 2011 at 2:14 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Like Shirley Q Liquor says, “she gots nostrils so big, you could use them for cupholders!” lol….she is such a moron…..an embarrassment to Houston!!!!!
**********************
I’d say you”re all struggling awfully hard to heap juvenile insults on her.

Maybe because you KNOW there’s a grain of truth to what she’s saying, and lack the courage and honesty to admit it?

poppajoe49 July 19, 2011 at 4:01 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Hellen, Houston has so much to be embarassed about that Sheila is just another pimple on their butt!

LibsMakeMeLaugh July 19, 2011 at 4:22 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I live in Houston & yes she is an idiot. Unfourtunately democrat district boundries keep getting redrawn to include more & more minorities (common tactic by libs to stay in office). We all know most minorities are taught to vote for anyone with a “D” behind their name.

IFTYS July 19, 2011 at 5:02 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Hey Hellen & LibsMakeMeLaugh, have you ever wondered why blacks vote for democrats?

This is the same democratic party that foisted and fought for enslaving black people in the 19th century, did the same thing in the 20th and into the 21st centuries – shackling to black population to hopelessness and dependency on the Democratic Party. Back then, it was through physical force. Today, it is through political force as any black person not towing the liberal line is branded an Uncle Tom or a porch monkey of the white man. Democrats are the ones that run failed minority urban schools, failed minority urban cities, have replaced the father with the government via welfare, etc. The list is endless, but there is only one result – the lifelong dependency of the black community on the Democratic apparatus via social programs specifically designed to shackle them.

So one has to ask, why blacks vote for democrats? And in light of this question, one has to wonder why the black community vote for other blacks that continues to enslave their own community. Reminds me of the Jews in WWII who worked for the Germans in the concentration camps. Shelia Jackson is doing the work of those bad “white man” back in the 1800s, enslaving her constituents. And what’s worse, she is making a buck from doing it.

RockingHorseGuy July 19, 2011 at 9:09 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

The difference is, back in the slave days, and the Nazi camp days, the prisoners knew that the turncoats were actually against them. Now, through the wonders of the public schools, they actually VOTE for the idiots!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 2:51 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

The difference is, back in the slave days, and the Nazi camp days, the prisoners knew that the turncoats were actually against them. Now, through the wonders of the public schools, they actually VOTE for the idiots!
*********************
How many posters here went to public school?
Can any of you answer honestly?

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 3:12 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

And the point of that question….?

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:20 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

How many posters here went to public school?

I went to Catholic school from K-8, then went to public school for high school.
High school is where I got my pro-abortion ideas, and my idea that Carter would make a good President. It was a herd mentality, everyone wanted to be liked, so we all went along with whatever indoctrination was being taught.

drb July 20, 2011 at 4:27 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I went to Catholic school from 1st-7th grade, then dad quit paying for it (he left 3 years prior) and mom couldn’t pay for it so it was public school there after.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 4:39 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

I went to Catholic school from 1st-7th grade, then dad quit paying for it (he left 3 years prior) and mom couldn’t pay for it so it was public school there after.
***********************
Given your own circumstances, I guess I could see why you would be in favor of school vouchers (if you are).

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:20 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Are you pretending to know my mind again?
Considering I have said nothing what-so-ever on the subject of school vouchers…why yes, yes you are.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 4:33 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

went to Catholic school from K-8, then went to public school for high school.
High school is where I got my pro-abortion ideas, and my idea that Carter would make a good President. It was a herd mentality, everyone wanted to be liked, so we all went along with whatever indoctrination was being taught.
*******************
No true liberal would ever confuse the concept of being pro choice with being “pro abortion,” Poppajoe. I strongly suspect either that your above claim is a crock, or that you were basically apolitical in high school.

But I do believe one thing about you: that you had (and still have) that herd instinct. You parrot the same lies about liberals that I hear promoted by the usual right wing suspects. And, even though you’re actually interacting on this board with a real live liberal every single day, you still keep parroting those lies about us, instead of listening to what we’re really about, how we really live, and what we really believe in.

That suggests that you’re still letting yourself be swayed by propaganda, and still uninterested in going straight to the source for information.

poppajoe49 July 20, 2011 at 4:45 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“But I do believe one thing about you: that you had (and still have) that herd instinct.”

Then you’re a bigger idiot than I give you credit for.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 5:14 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“No true liberal would ever confuse the concept of being pro choice with being “pro abortion,”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Orwell would be proud of that nuanced rationale. Whatever helps a liberal sleep at night, I guess.

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:45 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

2nd hat trick! woot! Thanks for the assists, Poppa and Sidekick

Babydoll102187 July 20, 2011 at 10:21 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

“No true liberal would ever confuse the concept of being pro choice with being “pro abortion,”

Would you care to elaborate on the difference? I find this statement of yours confusing.

drb July 20, 2011 at 10:40 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Oh it isn’t so confussing really. If you think abortion should be legal but not necessarily the best option then you can say you are pro-choice. If you think some one SHOULD have an abortion for whatever reason then you are pro-abortion. If you think abortion should be illegal then you may be called both anti-choice and anti-abortion

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 10:54 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Oh, Drb. You are spending too much time with Olivia : P

drb July 20, 2011 at 1:23 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

nope…I live in NC ;)
I’m surrounded by them.

Babydoll102187 July 20, 2011 at 2:31 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Ah! Thank you Drb! It all makes sense now :)

drb July 20, 2011 at 5:43 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

5th 3rd!!

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 3:14 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

This is the same democratic party that foisted and fought for enslaving black people in the 19th century, did the same thing in the 20th and into the 21st centuries – shackling to black population to hopelessness and dependency on the Democratic Party. Back then, it was through physical force. Today, it is through political force as any black person not towing the liberal line is branded an Uncle Tom or a porch monkey of the white man. Democrats are the ones that run failed minority urban schools, failed minority urban cities, have replaced the father with the government via welfare, etc. The list is endless, but there is only one result – the lifelong dependency of the black community on the Democratic apparatus via social programs specifically designed to shackle them.

So one has to ask, why blacks vote for democrats? And in light of this question, one has to wonder why the black community vote for other blacks that continues to enslave their own community. Reminds me of the Jews in WWII who worked for the Germans in the concentration camps. Shelia Jackson is doing the work of those bad “white man” back in the 1800s, enslaving her constituents. And what’s worse, she is making a buck from doing it.

******************
Translation: “If I feign concern for black Americans, could I get away with flinging a lot of bigoted insults at Sheila Jackson Lee?”

Now, suppose you tell me all about YOUR ideas for stopping the “shackling” of black Americans. While you’re at it, maybe you’d like to explain why you’re singling out BLACK Americans, when in fact there are more white Americans than black receiving benefits from government social programs. How come you’re not worried about THOSE recipients being “shackled”? What about social security and Medicare recipients? Are they being “shackled” by “Nazis,” too?

I’ll look forward to that list of suggestions you have for “liberating” black Americans. I’ll be especially intrigued to see if any of your suggestions are actually designed to benefit the poor, rather than just the usual ploys to benefit yourself and reward the nation’s wealthiest and most powerful. So far, I’ve yet to see a right wing suggestion that WASN’T about sparing themselves expense, inconvenience and social responsibility.

PsychoDad July 19, 2011 at 7:19 pm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Aw quit pickin’ on Livvy, she’s just a girl!

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 5:15 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

You don’t know that for certain, Psycho.

Olivia July 20, 2011 at 6:32 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Author: David Bishop
Comment:
I followed your link. What is wrong with people volunteering their time to help the poor?
************************
Nothing whatsoever. Bleeding heart liberal that I am, I would have been there myself, if it had taken place near where I live.

What’s wrong with it is the fact that, in the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the world, hundreds or thousands of people are having to drive across 3 states and sleep in their cars for 1 or 2 nights, just to get affordable dental care or to have a worrisome mole removed.

We can do better, David. We MUST do better. Do I really need to spell it out any further to you?

David Bishop July 20, 2011 at 6:38 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

The problem is we aren’t the wealthiest nation in the world. We are one of the poorest.

Sidekick July 20, 2011 at 9:23 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

And only by a thorough redistribution of wealth can we do better, right Olivia?

RockingHorseGuy July 20, 2011 at 9:31 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Finally. I knew if I just worked hard enough, long enough, I would get my just rewards. THIRD!

deepthinker July 20, 2011 at 8:25 am

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Folks some times its just best to ignore ignorance.