The Young Democrats of Harford County invite you to a Pro Health Insurance Reform Vigil on Tuesday, September 8th, 2009 from 6 p.m. – 8 p.m. at the Harford County Courthouse in Bel Air.
Russ Kovach, President of the YDHC, offered the following description of the event:
The Young Democrats of Harford County is organizing a pro-health care vigil on Tuesday evening, September 8th as congress returns to D.C. This vigil is not intended to emulate the tactics and antics of the ‘tea-party’ type protests; rather I hope to get a crowd of those that support the initiative to have a quiet demonstration that there is a pro-reform majority out there, and that we can get our point across without disrupting meetings and denigrating public officials.
Kovach told The Dagger in a phone interview that the idea is to support the general process, rather than a specific piece of legislation. He expanded on his comments later in the following email:
This vigil is not an attempt to promote any one of the plans currently in committee specifically, rather we are demonstrating our support of the Health Insurance reform process. We recognize that our health insurance system as it stands now is broken, and reform is a must for millions upon millions of Americans. We support insurance reforms that will provide increases in access to meaningful healthcare, a position that I cannot imagine anybody being against. Sadly, the lack of meaningful discussion over the past several months has left more misinformation in the public than can be summarized in a short email, and many are fearful that rather then pass functional useful reforms, no bill whatsoever will be passed. We hope that demonstrations like ours will show that insurance reform is a must, that our current system is broken, and that there are in fact many people that support initiatives such as a public insurance option, protections for people with pre-existing conditions, and access to healthcare for people that can not afford meaningful private insurance is necessary.
Here’s the official notice from the Young Democrats of Harford County:
Pro Health Insurance Reform VIGIL
Now is the time… come support meaningful and functional health insurance reform by attending this peaceful vigil on the steps of the Harford County Courthouse.
Host: The Young Democrats of Harford County
Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Time: 6:00pm – 8:00pm
Location: Harford County Courthouse
Street: 20 West Courtland Street
City/Town: Bel Air, MD
Email: youngdemocratsofharfordcounty@gmail.com
That’s odd… I’d heard that one of the Young Democrats was sick and the other refused to protest alone…hmmm
VIGIL has such a religious overtone. Are they really Democrats?
Count me in as a religious Democrat. There are many of us, although our party’s leadership sometimes seems to forget that. At least our party doesn’t use and abuse us…
I do not think our party leaders forget it… rather they realize that there is a separation of church and state; and while their own sensibilities may in fact be influenced by their religious beliefs, they understand that government is not the place for religious legislation (not in our government anyway). Religion at its heart is a private belief system, and therefore the Republican party damages both itself and religions by making it such a political issue. The Democrats are right to separate religious mandates and political stances. Combining them is impressively un-American, and this is one of the things that makes our party so much more effective then the Republicans in the long run.
Conservatives have no problem with separation of church and state. We just take offense to things like the Govt paying artists for crucifixes in jars of urine, or radical gay activists ripping pages out of the bible and throwing them in the street. The total denigration of our belief system and the labeling of all Christians as insane blathering idiots because some guy on a street corner thinks that he is Jesus Christ. We resent that liberals will allow the teachings of the Koran in public schools, urging students to choose Muslim names for a day. We resent the “political correctness” of not calling Jihadists terrorists, but having no problem labeling and maligning average middle class Americans as domestic terrorists. Using that Alinsky tactic on fellow citizens who disagree with giving the Govt total say and control over our medical treatment. We simply want the system to be repaired incrementally where needed, not a total destruction and rebuilding all at once. By all means make sure that those uninsured are covered, just don’t destroy what is good in the best health care system in the world. We resent the president not recognizing a day of prayer for America, because it is Christian, but celebrating Ramadan with a White House dinner with honored Muslims. The put down of Christians as unintelligent as compared to the enlightened ones who are so sure that there is no God. We also believe that separation of church and state does not mean that morality and ethics need not apply. Be honest, the secularist in the Dem Party have waged political war on anyone of the Christian faith while bowing and scraping to Islam. Dems use Alinsky tactics to polarize Christians to advance secularist and socialist agendas, please try to control your indignation when we don’t appreciate it.
You ROCK!!!Thank you for stating your and my opinions so clearly. Peacenik
Proud Democrat – You are kidding, right. Cities across America, that are 100% Democratically controlled, are a testament to how effective your “impressively American” policies are. Substituting the “State” for God may make you feel righteous, but your deception is obvious to those who understand that one way or another, something will fill the religious need in your life. You have chosen State (wrapped in an argument of separation of church and state) over God and I believe that you’ve chosen the losing team in the long run.
You democrats should hold a Vigil. Pray that what you support is not corruption veiled in good intentions. I’ll pray that you fail, because I think that it is.
How Christian of you, praying that an effort to reform and expand access to health care fails.
That’s right! Praying for failure of fixing health care is the the work of the devil. Praying for success so that the 1 or 2 million people who really need help is will make me feel better. The problem is that when we look at the projected costs I wonder how much better anyone will actually be. But as long as we feel good then that’s all that matters. Screw those vile Republicans who insist on thinking. I feel in my heart that Nancy, Harry and Barrack can do a whole lot better job than anyone has been able to do recently. I feel it because they feel our pain.
Very insightful retort, Dave. In 17 words, you’ve revealed the entire depth of your thought on the subject.
Perhaps you can explain how you and your ilk have successfully turned Baltimore City into a shining example of your successful programs to help those who have less. Or will you just blame conservatives for oppressing poor folks and Christians for hypocrisy. I’m open to seeing your side. You just don’t have any real wins under your belt so show, do you?
Every time folks like you devise solutions based on feeling, regardless of the good intentions, other, powerful folks like Sheila Dickson or Pelosi corrupt it. You can’t do a good deed, friend, because those you call leaders find a way turn it, pervert it, and get themselves re-elected on it. You must be so proud. It’s not your fault, really – you are well trained to react viscerally.
Prove yourself a man and argue the merits.
August, as a Christian, I find it unChristian to pray for the failure of “universal” (even though the proposals aren’t quite universal) health care. I think this is a moral issue, supported by the scriptures and teachings of Jesus. That is my opinion, and of course I don’t believe you have to agree with my opinion to be a Christian. However, I do think we have a moral obligation to do something about the current health care crisis. To do nothing and just pray for the failure of proposed reforms seems to me to be immoral.
If you are arguing that legislation based on morals, feeling, good intentions, etc. never results in success, please see the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Good point, Dave! The civil rights act is a good example.
But, surely you can see how the notion of health coverage for the poor can and will be used by those in power right now to do great harm. I offer inner urban policy in totality as an example. The potential for harm clearly offsets the good it will do. We have a moral obligation to fight tyranny as well as help the poor. The health solution in its current forms represent a tyranny that will enslave far more people than the solution helps.
I will support a bill that provides a safety net for poor Americans, but not one which is a gateway for tyranny. I applaud your Christian sense, but please look deeper and search harder for the truth of it. This is a devil in disguise. This is the thief that comes in the night… Peace to you, brother.
My father has been in a “socialist” government run healthcare system for many years. He gets his perscriptions for $3, has ready access to doctors and has required surgeries in a timely fashion. All this in easy access in downtown Baltimore! He’s in the VA health system and loves it. He pays about $15 a visit. If he had private insurance (which he doesn’t because his former employer dumped all their retirees)he would be paying thousands for healthcare, if he could get it. Or he would be on medicare (another “socialist” system). Wake up, we’re about to become a country where some people (the poor, old, and vets) get government healthcare, and the rest of us will be bankrupt either trying to keep up with premiums or trying to pay medical bills without health insurance. Something needs to be done.
Taxpayer2: The statement that you made concerning the poor, old, and vets being the only ones who will have health care is one that is offensive to me. I have worked for over 30+ years and paid into Medicare and Social Security. I am on Medicare now, but must carry supplemental health insurance, which is extremely COSTLY. No one has ever handed me a free-ride and to this day I pay for my prescription plan, my dental plan and pay full price for my glasses. So leave the “old” out of your statement and leave the “vets” out of your statement. Someday you will be old and I wonder if you would like someone saying to you, when you are on Medicare – that it is socialistic.
I find offensive that I am paying for your social security and will not get any social security as it will be bankrupt.
Please! No one wants anyone denied health care. I personally am concerned about the particular Bill that has been submitted. Have you read it? If the concept is all that you are interested in and the content has no bearing, then I would understand. This particular Bill is so far reaching that it goes beyond reforming health care to giving the IRS access to your private bank accounts with the right to withdraw your money. It gives Govt total control over 17% more of the entire economy. Do you not see a pattern where the Govt has taken over banking, auto mfgr, now going for healthcare, and if Cap and Trade passes control of all U.S. energy. This is not what the Federal Govt was designed for by the Constitution. I’m glad that your father has had good experiences with the VA. Many haven’t, it seems to be determined by the nature of the ailment. Let’s start out by figuring how to incorporate the 15% of Americans who have no health care into Medi-Care, or whatever, and see how that works. Hopefully better than Cash for Clunkers. What is so wrong about being leery and hesitant about tearing the entire system down. Do you tear down a house to fix a broken door?
I’m not sure how you’re measuring the success of Cash for Clunkers to determine that it was a failure!
Anyway, I’m also not sure how this would give the Federal Government control over 17% of the economy. What percentage of folks would be on a government plan? If health care costs are 17% of our economy, 100% of the people would have to be on a government plan for the government to control 17% of the economy. That’s not in the proposal and that’s not happening.
I’m measuring success for Cash for Clunkers by the fact that the system was bogged down with requests. It was understaffed, it was underfunded, it had to have a special vote to allocate more funds, and it has yet to be able to re-imburse dealers for millions of dollars that could bankrupt them if they don’t get paid. How do you measure it’s success? As far as 100% being in the Govt health care plan, IF you have read the Bill you would have seen that it is designed to eventually have everyone transferred to it over a period of years, except govt employees and union members, who would have much better plans and not have to deal with the lines that us peons would be in. Read the Bill for yourself like I did, go to Congress.org and punch in H.R. 3200. I am NOT against people having health care, I am against THIS far reaching and unconstitutional Bill that gives Politicians, for the love of God, far more power and control over YOU than you should ever trust a politician to have.
Besides the obvious problems in managing the system, which should be a sign for those wanting government-managed anything, Cash for Clunkers is going to turn out to be a colossal disaster for the economy. People who were going to buy a car did buy one, some who were on the fence were pushed over by the plan and bought cars, and some who didn’t intend to changed their minds and purchased one. Due to the artificially increased demand, manufacturers are considering or have already increased production. However, sales will not be able to support any increase and will probably decline drastically.
The end result is three billion dollars of your money and my money was spent, sales in the near future will be below what they would have been without it, uhsold inventories will grow (necessitating layoffs), and a huge number of used cars that would have been available for those who can’t afford a new car will be sent to the scrappper. (All cars in the Cash for Clunkers program must be destroyed).
The “success” of Cash for Clunkers was a short term positive blip followed by worse results than if nothing was done. This was either gross ineptitude or intentional “ruling for the polls”.
Your father’s healthcare is not socialist, it is a benefit to the many men and women who have served our country in the armed forces. It is one very small percentage of Americans who access healthcare. Make no mistake, the VA model is broken, broken beyond repair and hopefully your father never has any serious health issues because if he does, I think he will wish he had private insurance.
The VA can’t properly run a hospital, let alone the entire system. The government can not do one single task efficiently, not one. The problems with socialized medicine are seen throughout the world, yet the left in this country think they have the magic solution. The same mistakes are made over and over again.
Remember one thing, you cannot alter human behavior, the main problem with the other socialized programs in the world is healthcare is over utilized because it is perceived to be free. And because it is not free, is is under funded, compare with the demand and the ones who need care cannot access healthcare. As I’ve said before, if milk, eggs and bread were free, you would never walk into the store and find them on the shelves.
Regarding our young democrat friends, as we have seen in our own lives as we get older, we realize the ways of the left are often naive and ideolistic and not the way the world works. Many of them will become more conservative as they grow older and have the opportunity to see how people take advantage of social programs, milk the system and show no initiative to improve their own personal situations while the rest of us are out working hard to support our families. How people inheriently look to the government for help and guidence instead of to themselves and a huge sense of entitlement is ingrained into the population and they become, on all accounts, realitively helpless. Once they see this, minds will mature and philosophies will change.
P.S. on cash for clunkers, some of those dealers who have yet to receive their money have not given title to the vehicles over to the banks until they do. This means that anyone who purchased a car, and had their trade in turned into a metal box, can not get their new cars registered until the titles are cleared up. They can’t legally drive those cars yet. That’s not success, that’s a typical govt bureaucratic clustertruck. What makes anyone think govt would be efficient is beyond me.
One of the guys I flew with in SE Asia sent this to me and it’s just too on point to ignore:
The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 – you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935 – you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 – you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.
The “War on Poverty” started in 1964 – you have had 45 years to get it right;
$1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to “the poor”; it hasn’t worked and our entire country is broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 – you’ve had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 – you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the “Stimulus”, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009, none show any signs working, although ACORN appears to have become a large and well funded part of our New American Government
And finally, to set a new record:
“Cash for Clunkers” was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! The program took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country, thousands who were given a taxpayer-funded down payment ($4500) will not be able to pay the monthly payments (wow, does this remind you of ACORN and mortgages?), and the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress’ generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.
So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record that proves that “services” you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?
20% of our entire economy?
With all due respect,
Are you crazy?
Although the subject is now moot, it is a failure of your government, not the idea of a national healthcare plan, that is the problem.
Over the weekend I worked on some date provided by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
on 12/9/09 the OECD produced a report on some 21 nations health care; you can view it here: http://www.oecd.org/statisticsdata/0,3381,en_2649_37407_1_119656_1_1_37407,00.html
The work I did was producing a graphic that highlighted the costs of each individual nation against an individual’s life expectancy.
The result: Americans pay 244% more per individual than nations with national health care, and have about 1 year lower life expectancy.
You can see my graph here: http://www.coledata.com/health.pdf
There are several reasons for the higher cost of US healthcare, but the primary reason is that it is fragmented, with every party needing a slice of the cake.
The top level is the insurer; they typically look for a 45% retention of premium (i.e. a loss ratio of 65%)to run their business. That’s a big chunk of your healthcare costs eaten right there!
Then you have the dreaded referral system; You go to your doctor with a complaint, he refers you to a specialist, the specialist determines you need hospital treatment, including an X-ray or MRI. Suddenly you have you doctor’s visit costs and margin, the specialist’s costs and margin, the hospital’s costs and margin, and even the X-ray or MRI is treated as a profit center.
I can’t disagree with your litany of governmental failures, and you forgot the biggest one, the IRS, but the evidence of the data I have been working on suggests that even the current health care bill does not go far enough.
Dishonest politicians and vested interests will ultimately make the USA a third world state.
Good points all, Dave Y. What makes anyone believe that the Federal government could do anything with health care but turn it into a complete disaster?
Congress has already provided us with ample evidence that they haven’t got a clue about how to reform health care. A serious matter like health care deserves far more thoughtful deliberation than having an un-read 1,200+ page bill rammed down everyone’s throats. What’s the hurry Nancy?
If you enjoy the MVA, the Post Office or VA hospitals, then you’re gonna love Obamacare!
The new agency that Mr. Obama’s health care plan will create will be under the IRS agency but will be a separate agency controlled by the IRS and run out of the IRS offices. The HR3200 bill states that the agency will acquire its info and store it on computer to be accessed by officials as needed. Think of the costs that would be involved with the creation of a new Health care organization/structure/data base/and please explain how this new entity will generate more efficient medical care? Beginning with the an infants’ birth, all the medical data that is generated must be contained—read recorded, sent, filed, distributed and who knows what else. This not acceptable.
Why not Health and Human Services?
It does not matter where it is… these people will oppose it because the program is promoted by Democrats, and worse yet, by an African American Democrat. This has nothing to do with socialism, taxes, or any sort of logic. These fights are the result of racism and mis-education. Get real people. The counter-protesters tonight said nothing constructive, rather it was all a fight against socialism, abortion (huh?), death panels, the IRS having your tax records (huh?), and even a woman with Medicare holding a sign telling us that Medicare is socialism. These people are not arguing from a point of logic… they are all trying to instill an visceral hatred of anything Democratic, especially if it is a black man proposing that Democratic ideal. How pathetic.
Who are you to call me a racist. And what’s this crap, Abortion (huh?). You idiots have somehow turned killing babies into the moral high ground and being against killing them evil. Don’t tell me what I find offensive about this Bill. I have already explained clearly and intelligently what I dislike about it. Know what I think, I think you don’t like anything a white person says. I think that the REAL racist is YOU. I think that you are not smart enough to counter my arguments so you’re trying to Alinsky me to throw me off the argument. Typical liberal bullcrap when they have no answer to real questions. Save your racists comments for when you’re with your friends talking about white people.
Ten points to ProudDemocrat for a well played race card!
I admire your ability to throw it down with no justification, no support and no facts to back it up. Anyone who is against Obama’s plans MUST be nothing but a good ol’ hood-wearing, noose-tying racist, even if they would oppose identical policies proposed by a cracker. What else could it be?
I guess I should go kill myself now that I know that I, too, must be a racist since I oppose much of the President’s agenda and policies. That what I get for judging a man by the contents of his character, not the color of his skin. I guess I was just having a dream.
I am truly glad that you use the handle “Proud Democrat.” All of your writing so far indicates that you are just another one of the dupes who got told to be a democrat and has no idea what it means. Go to Art and Anne’s democrat cult and sip the kool-aid with the rest of your friends
ProudDemocrat –
What’s pathetic and reckless is your false charges of racism as an effort to promote your agenda.
People who oppose a government takeover of health care are within their rights to question the socialization of health care/insurance, abortion funding, rationing, reimbursement reduction in Medicare, personal medical/financial privacy, elder counseling protocols, increased taxation, patient/insurer penalties and funding for subsidies.
Joe
Ho hum, ho hum, ho hum… more of the same, more of the same… all talk, no answers, no vision, all hatred, and unadulterated fear. Tell me… why is abortion a moral issue, but the lack of health care (and the countless thousands of deaths is causes, not to mention injuries and suffering) not? We have the ability to end the health insurance crisis with a stroke of the pen (and yes, it will involve government and taxes… this is the government OF THE PEOPLE, WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT, YOU ARE FEARING YOURSELF!!!). Your fight against health care reform, if successful, will plant more people that abortions ever could.
ProudDemocrat –
I’m calling you out on your deplorable false charges of racism.
The fact is that folks against a government takeover have legitimate and reasonable concerns that they are expressing. We want health care reform, just not the kind of government control that has been offered thus far.
Joe
Joe,
Much of the hatred towards the President is certainly based in racist fears. How else do you explain conservative rallies, speeches, etc. where the speakers would continually say “Barack HUSSEIN Obama” (with a large emphasis on the Hussein)?
Of course people who disagree with him should not be labeled racists just because they disagree with him, but it is also “deplorable” to feign outrage at every mention of race. Is this something that cannot be discussed?
Matt makes a good point on one of the other posts on this blog: “I haven’t heard a right-leaning protestor explain why Obama is so much worse than Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. When people start suggesting ludicrous conspiracies, that make it sound like the president bent on ruining our country, rational folks are left trying to understand the extremity of that suggestion. It’s hard to interpret it as anything other than being about fear that a black man is the leader of the free world, and that that scares the crap out of some people, so they’re suddenly screaming about taxes that they’d been quietly paying for years under Republican administrations. I’d feel much better if someone on the right could explain how I’m wrong in this.”
ProudDemocrat asks a good question that no one responded to…those who are against this plan…what is your plan? I haven’t heard one. Health care is in desparate need of reform; if you are someone who is lucky enough to have health care right now, I’m sure you’ve noticed your costs going up and up and up. Not to mention the financial situations of hospitals because of treating the uninsured, the people who go broke because of a medical problem, the people who lose their lives when medical conditions could have been prevented or treated better with earlier care. Making accusations of socialism isn’t a plan. Or do you just not care about the sustainability of our current medical situation, or our country’s ranking as 46th in infant mortality according to the CIA World Factbook (with more infant deaths than such countries as Cuba, the UK, Canada, France, and Sweden…you know, countries with that terrible socialist health care)?
Just read the news. Our wonderful leaders want to fine us over $3000 for not having insurance. Have to love the idea. Take money from people who can’t afford to spend the money in the first place. I hear they are opening a new debtor’s prison wing at the detention center in preparation.
I must have missed the article in the Constitution that said that the citizens of The United States must purchase health insurance or face monetary fines? Would somebody be so kind and point me to that section?
Oh! Using the Constitution to make your argument? YOU RACIST !!!
Come on, you know full well that it is in the same section that grants the right to privacy for individuals and groups. That’s also the same section where the mandate for federal financing of abortion is spelled out.
YOU MUST HAVE COVERAGE FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, THAT IS GREAT, BUT YOU ARE PAYING HIGH PREMIUMS FOR THOSE WHO DON’T AND RECEIVE HEALTH CARE FROM EMEGENCY ROOMS. MAKES SINCE TO ME TO MAKE THE PLAYING FIELDS EQUAL. I WOULD LOVE MY PREMIUMS TO BE REDUCED. I COULD VACATION MORE OFTEN, WOULD’NT YOU?
TED,
BE OPTIMISTIC, CHANGE FROM WHAT WE ARE USED TO IS NOT EASY TO ACCEPT. IT IS GOING OT TAKE SACRIFICE FROM EVERY AMERICAN, BECAUSE WE WERE LIED TO AND STOLEN FROM. DO NOT LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY. THE REASON IS CLEAR EVERYONE IS A VICTIM BECAUSE OF THE PRIOR DECISIONS MADE BY PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS. IT IS WHAT IT IS, PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS.
During the fight that has ensued over the health care issue I have watched many twisted faces of hatred shrieking they want their country back. The emotion shown by these people is palpable. They are clearly frenzied in the desire for a return to the country they feel is now lost. Those are the faces of Selma and Little Rock during the fight for civil rights. A seething anger that meant then, as it does now, a frustration caused by the challenging of the white supremacy status quo.
That does not mean that all of you who are against Obama’s plan are flaming racists, but some of you are. Deny all you want, but the emotion I see in some back then as well as now is primal. They are facing the (for them) painful reality that in 20 to 30 years whites will be a minority in this country. And that, if all you felt you had going for you was that you were caucasion, you now have nothing.
Tami –
You are making a racist statements that are beyond the pale and without foundation. You should be ashamed.
Joe
Joe,
Actually, I don’t think Tami is making racist statements. She is not accusing anyone in particular of being a racist. She is comparing the anger we all see now to the anger displayed during the civil rights movement.
At some point you will have to stop hiding behind statements like “beyond the pale,” which you use to try to shut up anyone who wants to talk about racism and to avoid talking about the issue. Of course you don’t have to stop using these statements, but at some point the discussion and the country will move on without you.
Don’t waste your time, Joe. That kind of twisted, warped logic can’t be debated rationally.
Calling something “without foundation” but not backing it up with at least one concrete example is not rational debate, brother.
Matt –
Tami’s own words are example enough –
“Those are the faces of Selma and Little Rock during the fight for civil rights. A seething anger that meant then, as it does now, a frustration caused by the challenging of the white supremacy status quo.”
“They are facing the (for them) painful reality that in 20 to 30 years whites will be a minority in this country. And that, if all you felt you had going for you was that you were caucasion, you now have nothing.”
Joe
Can you please explain how they are enough to demonstrate your point? I don’t get it.
Matt –
If you can’t read Tami’s words and understand their racist content then I can’t help you.
Joe
Oh, come on, man. I’m being serious here. I’m not plyaing games. I just want to know what you think, and you’re not telling me by just quoting someone else. Don’t back down. Explain what you mean. I beseech you.
Dave –
The charges by Tami are absolutely calling people against our President’s programs racists. She does not name any particular racist, but maligns the group as a whole because there must be at least one racist in their ranks.
It is deplorable, shameful and racist of Tami to indict the folks that disagree with President Obama of having racist elements.
Joe
Joe,
Very well. Please explain the differences between Obama and Clinton, Carter, etc. Why all the hatred now? Clinton’s health care program was undercut by lies and disagreement, but for the most part the debate was quite civil. Why is this debate so full of hatred and charges of Obama trying to ruin America, etc.? The health care bills proposed and being debated are less “socialist” than Nixon’s proposal, and many of the tax rates are lower than Reagan’s. How exactly is Obama trying to ruin the country? Let’s not forget the birthers, the folks bringing guns to the town halls, etc.
Yes, Dave, thank you kindly. These are exactly the questions I am looking for answers to.
Joe,
By the way, calling someone a racist (whether true or not) does not make the accuser a racist or the accusation racist.
Dave –
You must have missed Tami’s statements –
“Those are the faces of Selma and Little Rock during the fight for civil rights. A seething anger that meant then, as it does now, a frustration caused by the challenging of the white supremacy status quo.”
“They are facing the (for them) painful reality that in 20 to 30 years whites will be a minority in this country. And that, if all you felt you had going for you was that you were caucasion, you now have nothing.”
You can continue to defend the indefensible, but Tami’s statements depict her beliefs.
Joe
Racist does not mean that someone talks about race or ethnicity.
racist/racism
–noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
Dave –
It’s Tami’s statements that are patently racist –
“Those are the faces of Selma and Little Rock during the fight for civil rights. A seething anger that meant then, as it does now, a frustration caused by the challenging of the white supremacy status quo.”
“They are facing the (for them) painful reality that in 20 to 30 years whites will be a minority in this country. And that, if all you felt you had going for you was that you were caucasion, you now have nothing.”
Joe
Joe,
How is that showing hatred or intolerance of another race or other races? How is it based upon or fostering a doctrine of discrimination? How is it involving the idea that her own race is superior and has the right to rule others?
Tami is “calling out” many displaying hatred in the extreme conservative movement as racist. This doesn’t make her or her statements racist.
Dave –
How many times do you need to read Tami’s own words?
“Those are the faces of Selma and Little Rock during the fight for civil rights. A seething anger that meant then, as it does now, a frustration caused by the challenging of the white supremacy status quo.”
“They are facing the (for them) painful reality that in 20 to 30 years whites will be a minority in this country. And that, if all you felt you had going for you was that you were caucasion, you now have nothing.”
Joe
Joe,
You can keep pasting her comments as many times as you want. I’ll read them every time, but you have yet to show that they fit the definition of racist, while doing nothing to actually address or debate the content of what she said.
The next time someone having no foundation to do so calls me a racist, I will call them a child molester. If debate has devolved to the point where we can level these horrible charges with no logic or proof, then let’s have at it.
Phil,
I’m pretty sure nobody’s called you a racist.
What sign were you holding last night? Be honest; then I can let you know if you need to start calling me a child molester. How pathetic.
I was home last night and I don’t recall holding any signs. I will ensure that my blinds are closed if I do so in the future.
If you don’t call people racists who are simply disagreeing with a person’s politics, morals and ethics, and care not about their ethnicity or skin color, you need not worry that I will call you a child molester.
On the race issue- I will say I heard more than one anti-reform attendee scream to the pro-reform side that they should “go behind the courthouse and pickup your checks. They are signed by Al Sharpton.” I have to assume that was a racist comment- it made no sense. Also at one point in time I was toldalso that because I was on the pro-reform sign that I “don’t deserve to hold an American flag”. However, I’m not that mad. I mean if I counted all of the anti-reformers them subtracted the ones that looked like they were old enough to be on Social Security, and the ones that were holding campaign and other non-issue related signs, there were just a few anti-reformers. I appreciate all of the pro-reformers for coming out. I respect all of the anti-reformers, I would just caution you to really think about where you get your information and who is behind it.
All in all, health care reform in one shape or form is on it’s way- and I am glad that it is happening on my generation’s watch. This younger generation has started to get fired up. I love it. Here we come.
I looked at the people on the Pro side and thought that they looked like us, they were middle class, obviously working citizens who believed in their stand. I’m a former firefighter and as I saw the fellow in his BCFD t-shirt, I thought, “that’s my brother over there”. I didn’t hear the “behind the courthouse” quote, I arrived a little later. I did hear the “flag” statement and I was offended that that was said to the good Americans on the other side. I said something, too, and it stopped. I think that as I stood on my side standing for my opinion, and looked at the “Pros” doing the same, I think that I was never prouder to be an American. The funniest thing was that I had no sooner gotten into my car at the public lot than the owner of the car right next to mine walked to his. It was the fireman, I got out, introduced myself as a former firefighter, we shook hands and I apologized to him for that flag comment. I respect the “pros” for being passionate enough to be there, I don’t think you are evil, or communist, or I don’t know what, I just think that we disagree on HR3200. I just don’t understand why we can’t just give the uninsured coverage and not drag down the entire system all at once. The Cong Budget Office has said that HR3200 is unaffordable. Why can’t we fix health care incrementally? If someone calls me a racist or anything else without answering my question, I am done with this thread.
We could do something radical and go to the Dutch or Swiss system or something like those!
Bruce,
Thank you for your thoughtful response to this thread; I think I can safely say that Democrats feel civil discussion of this sort has been sorely lacking from the ‘oppose reform’ side of the argument. While clearly I do not speak for all pro-reform advocates, I think it is safe to say nonetheless that those of us that strongly support reform recognize that any of us, under current law, can be dropped by our insurance companies at the time when we most need them. We have all paid in one way or another for our health insurance. If an emergency God-forbid does occur, the last think any American should worry about is whether or not the insurance will pay for their medical treatment and recovery. We feel this is unfair and un-American.
The only reforms discussed by the Democrats in Congress (as discussed in President Obama’s speech Wednesday evening) that directly affect the system as a whole is the enactment of legislation that makes it illegal to drop a person for conditions that arise while under coverage (and similarly make denial of coverage due to a pre-existing condition illegal. With all due respect, I cannot find how this in any way is going to “drag down the entire system all at once”. In fact, the system is clearly being dragged down as it stands now, and the change I just described will help (with other aspects of the bill) thwart that downward spiral (it hurts everybody when a person without insurance racks up countless thousands of dollars of medical bills, goes into bankruptcy, and in general is forced to be a non-productive member of society as a result of a treatable condition)! Frankly, many of us cannot understand how any American can be against these changes.
The public option seems to be the only REALLY contentious aspect of the proposed bills. This is the portion of the bill however that would do exactly what you suggest in your post. In your post you queried: “I just don’t understand why we can’t just give the uninsured coverage”. The public option is designed to do just that. Again, many of us cannot understand how anybody can be against this. We are talking about protecting fellow Americans, and NOTHING in my view can be more patriotic than that!
Finally there is the idea of morality. I hate that even the Democrats in Congress are talking about a very slow phase-in of reform (however I was heartened that the President indicated an emergency gap-filling program for young people that lack insurance and the ability to pay for it). People are dying, or having their lives permanently damaged as a result of lacking health insurance. My personal sense of morality tells me this is wrong. We believe appropriate health care is a right. As much of a right as freedom of speech, assembly, to be a part of a church as we see fit, and any of the other rights guaranteed to us. The bills in Congress are going to add to our list of rights, again, many of us cannot understand how any American can be against this!
The only argument against these changes that seems to make sense is that they are expensive changes. I agree they are; but I think we all must remember a quote on many bumper stickers: Freedom isn’t Free. This is of course true, maintaining those rights of citizens that define freedom cost money. Military defense, fire protection, police protection, and yes education and health care are all necessary and expensive realities of life in the United States in 2009. We should not deny or delay moral imperatives because they are expensive, and that is why so many of us feel that this reform process must occur, must occur correctly, and must occur now.
Thank you again for a reasoned argument (it is refreshing)!
Russ Kovach
President, Young Democrats of Harford County
Russell, thank you for your civility. The Congressional Budget Office, headed by a Democratic Appointee has said that HR 3200 is financially unsustainable. Bottom line is that it doesn’t matter how many Republicans oppose this Bill. Your Party owns the House and the Senate. Every Repub could vote against the Bill and the Dems still have enough (60)votes to pass it. So, guess who is really holding up immediate passage? Democrats! So if it fails, it will be because your own Party was divided on it. BTW, the quote “Freedom Isn’t Free” refers to the blood and lives of our servicemen who gave the ultimate for our freedom. It certainly does not pertain to out of control spending by either Party. Actually poor form to use it in that context. I look forward to meeting you, shaking hands, and each continuing to exercise our Rights as Americans to further our beliefs.
It’s quite politically advantageous for Republicans to just be obstructionist on this and most any issue until the 2010 elections. Because the Democrats are in power in the House, Senate, and the White House, to the uninformed public any bill or reform failures look bad on them, even if it ends up being lies stirred up by Republicans that defeat legislation.
BOH: Where do you get off telling anybody how they can use their 1st amendment rights? Seems to me we can use ‘freedom isn’t free’ any way we want to. This is the problem with you Republican / Libertarians / Teabaggers: you promote an idea as long as it suits you, but then defy that same idea when it is difficult (kind of like fighting healthcare by saying the government should not be making my healthcare decisions, but then trying to get the government to tell a woman what she can do with her own body). Pathetic.
ProudDemocratic –
It is amazing how brazenly brave you are under the cover of anonymity. You are a disgrace.
Joe
ProudPervert, I stand corrected, you’re right, we do have that 1st Amendment right. Sorry.
JC, you are correct: I do not want anybody I know to realize I spend time on here trying to argue with somebody that fights attempts to save American lives.
It is a waste of time I realize to try to argue with such a cold person, but then again, there is some little part of me that I suppose thinks maybe, just maybe, somebody will see something written here and realize how demented the anti-reform people are. And maybe, just maybe, that will be the one person who’s vote makes a real difference for some uninsured American that otherwise would be dead if not for their new ability to choose a publicly funded insurance option.
Sorry… but the healthcare of Americans is more important that the teabagger agenda. Lives are more important than taxes.
Russell;
I also appreciate the civility of the discussion of this tiny piece of the thread. The rants and name calling do little to foster anything. You and I disagree on every point that you made.
The Federal Government has not shown one single thing that it can do efficiently and correctly with the exception of killing people. That said, I do not trust any of those folk inside the beltway to fix much of anything. Brian Wilson refers to that piece of geography as the “logic free zone.” I have said before and will restate here; the first step in solving a problem is defining the problem, then finding out how the problem started and then modeling, or group testing or something to find out if a solution has been found. What exactly is the problem that the folks in LogicFree are trying to solve? Please, for God’s sake don’t say the cost of insurance. That is exactly like saying that the problem with a person is that he or she has a fever. The problem is that the person has an infection. I am as serious as a heart attack when I pose this question; what is the problem to be solved? No one can answer that because they are far too busy tossing blame and accusation. The problem with our health care system (system meaning every single entity involved, including the patient)is extremely complex. Yes it has gotten too expensive. Is that because the doctors and hospitals are charging too much? Maybe a factor is that they have to overcharge to make up for the deadbeats who they have to carry. Maybe it’s the fact that they have to hire a huge staff just to keep up with government mandated paperwork. Maybe it’s because they have to pay so much for malpractice insurance. I hope you’re getting my point.
Possible solutions are many, just like the possible causes. A reasoned approach would be to take this entire matter out of the hands of the 545 people who are part of the problem and into the hands of a small select group who are interested in being a part of the solution.
In the words of our own Dutch Ruppersberger; “It’s all about end game” and end game is defined by him as getting reelected. That is the real end game for for 536 of those in a place of responsibility. It has absolutely nothing to do with the right thing for the right reason.
Dave
Russ Kovach –
An ill-conceived and vague solution put forth by President Obama which he claims will cost $900 Billion, based on fantastic assumptions is no way to reform health care. The President claims he will save billions by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse, when government has never been able to perform this feat before.
Too many promises and too few details, a cheer leading session will not be enough to make up for flaws of the President’s incredible plan.
I urge the President to include Republicans in honest dialog that can result in thoughtful and productive reform that won’t burden the American people with tax personal/business increases and unsustainable federal deficits.
Joe
You must be insanely blind if you think that the president has not been trying to include Republicans. Heck, the Democrats have leaned over backwards to include Republicans in this process. The Republicans have just been too willing to encourage the useless raucous of the ‘tea-party’ type protests to be constructive, and now they have sidelined themselves as a result. Wake up and smell the coffee… the Republicans are not interested in being included, rather they are dead set on obstructing any useful process of reform.
ProudDemocrat –
Your fiction is entertaining but still untrue.
Joe
Untrue? If the Dems were not trying to get useful perspectives from the Republicans, the reforms would already have been passed. It should be noted that the Democrats do not strong-arm in the way the Republicans do… the Congressional leadership does not hold committee positions and such over the head of members if they do not vote the way the leaders would like (the Republican party does do this). In this way, the Democratic party is FAR more democratic than the Republican party, and open to a variety of views.
I wonder how many Republicans would vote for the reforms if the public option is dropped. Even with the only portion of the bill that Republicans routinely attack dropped, I would bet money two or three Republicans vote for it. You know this to be true, and this demonstrates that the Republican position on this process is about scoring a victory against the president and Democratic party, not about doing what is right for the American people.
Sadly, my points above are true, and most certainly not entertaining. The reality is that your fellow Americans are dying. You would rather have them die than pass an insurance reform that has any potential to raise your taxes. You are a sick deranged man, un-American, and unpatriotic to be sure. You mind as well just go out and run people over with your car… the effect would be the same as your political agenda.
You might as well just go out and run people over with your car… the effect would be the same as your political agenda.
ProudDemocrat –
Don’t get unhinged, your party has all three branches of government and they have made it abundantly clear that conservative voices of both parties are unnecessary.
Democrat leadership has threatened to push their partisan health care reform through by using the Budget Reconciliation process whereby they would not need any Republican votes.
The rest of your insulting diatribe is not worth a response.
Joe
It is Democratic leadership, not “Democrat leadership”… do not lecture me on respect and then be derogatory yourself. Then again, that is what I should expect from people with such self-serving ideals.
ProudDemocrtic? –
Democrat or Democratic an age old question of what should the “Democrats” be called, which we will not resolve in this forum.
It’s poetic ambiguity.
Joe
Apparently you lack the understanding of English language necessary to properly use the terms Democratic Party and Democrat.
If my ‘diatribe’ is not worth a response, then why have you responded?
They do not need any GOP votes anyway since they are completly marginal after running the country into the ground. Attempts to reacvh out to them have failed.
The truth comes out at the Tea-bagger march on DC… “We want a constitutionally limited government, the government our founding-fathers wanted”. That government that the founding fathers wanted included slavery. How ignorant… this country is heads and tails above where it was in 1787 when our constitution was founded (thanks overwhelmingly to government protections like those proposed by the Democrats in congress today)!
ProudDemocratic –
Again you demean yourself by using a vile sex term invective, if you are unaware Taxed Enough Already = TEA as in TEA Party.
In terms of the Constitution it is the embodiment of our values as a nation and we should have no law federal or state that is not Constitutionally grounded. Our branches of government are structured through checks and balances to ensure the Constitution is upheld and not usurped.
You must have slept through your history classes since the Republican Party was born out of the Anti-Slavery Movement and gave us Lincoln. Republicans have a deeper and richer history in successfully fighting for civil rights for all when compared to Democrats.
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200502180737.asp
Joe
And you CLEARLY have slept through your history classes to even begin to bring up the Republican party of 1860 and compare it to the Republican party of today. If I were alive in 1860, and had my perspectives of today, I would be a Republican for sure. Anybody who knows US history is aware that after Teddy Roosevelt the Republican and Democratic parties made a massive switch in ideology. Lincoln believed in a more powerful central government and government mandated rights of equality, perspectives the Republican party of today fights against. I have read 8 different books about Lincoln, at least 15 books about the civil war and the neonatal Republican party, and nearly as many books about our country’s founding and early political parties. I can say with good confidence that if Lincoln were alive today, he would be a Democrat. I cringe whenever a modern Republican brings up the specter of Abraham Lincoln… he stood in direct opposition to what you stand for, and you soil his name by using it to promote your close minded ignorant views.
ProudDemocratic –
The history of civil rights advancement and the Republican Party speaks for itself and you can’t bring yourself to admit that on matters of civil rights the Democrat Party has not only failed, but tried mightily to stop them.
Joe
I whole-heartedly recognize that the Republican party of the 1800s was much more progressive and forward thinking (in terms of race relations in particular) than was the Democratic party of the time. As I had indicated, I would be a Republican if alive at that time with my current views. But only a blind follower would fail to recognize that the Republican party of 1870 is NOT the Republican party of today. The two parties are ideologically opposite. The Democratic party of today has a much better record on race relations than does the Republican party of today, and that is what is important. Since the 1950s, nobody can fairly claim that the Republican party has been progressive with race relations. Only a blind fool would suggest that today’s Republican party promotes the best strategy for correcting the racial inequalities of our past.
I forgot to mention that this switch in ideology was completed when the Democratic party (finally) dumped the southeastern racist conservatives like Strom Thurmond, who, as I am sure you know, quickly migrated to the Republican party. The decedents of that switch are now the headliners in the most strongly Republican region of our country. The southeastern Republican stronghold is fed by racism (you are blind if you think otherwise), and is the biggest reason why we ever had the likes of Reagan and King George I and II.
ProudDemocratic –
I’ll see your Sen. Strom Thurmond and I raise you with a Sen. Robert Byrd former KKK member.
Joe
I agree… Sen. Byrd’s past is highly disturbing and I am very regretful that anybody with that sort of past is in elected office. The big difference between Byrd and Thurmond: Byrd renounced his past, recognizing the error in his ways (and he has voted progressively on race issues since the 50’s). Thurmond jumped out of the party rather than switch his voting or ideology. Byrd fixed the problem, Thurmond and his Republican progeny continue their racism.
ProudDemocratic –
The Republican Party with GOP Chairman Michael Steele, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice is what?
Joe
Sounds like someone wants to let everyone know that he knows 4 black people. By the way don’t count mike steele- he’s one of the whitest black people in the Republician Party. Clarence Thomas- are you sure you want to bring him up? I hope that your not soley relying on Condi for your point. She is a strong well educated person, but she helped propagate W’s lies. In all Joe, not to be confused with me- since I have been out of my computer room today (and the last century) the only person you have is Colin who by the way supported Obama. He also stood up against your party by being against a constitutional amendment banning flag burning. He stated that he fought so that people had the right to burn flags if they wanted. He’s on my side Joe. By the way- I thought you weren’t going to talk to us anymore since we played the race card? Go back to listening to Rush on the radio to get your talking points. The rest of us will be fixing our system and getting our country back in order after 8 years of mismanagement by King George and his cronies. If you guys would have been forward thinking enough to convince Colin Powell to run for president, then we may not be having this conversation. I have a feeling that you thought a black man wouldn’t win the primary, let alone the office. I will have the last laugh for the rest of at the least this term. However, I think that we got it for the next 40 years. Put that in your corn cob pipe and smoke it. Sorry to everyone, this guy has been making me so mad for so long. It’s not hood to bottle it up, I know. Joe, none of us will take you serious until you admit that the system is broken and offer a solution that is acceptable to the MAJORITY of Americans. By the way- are you on Social Security or Medicare?
Joe –
You seethe with hatred. I hope you can overcome your emotional distress.
I do wish you well.
Joe
Say JC, why are you not in DC with the rest of tea bag throwers? Also, why don’t you all stand up for what you believe in, and just not pay your taxes this year? I would love to see you try that one!
I propose a series of solutions to save money and not bring us further into debt.
1. Let disabled vets use Medicare and close the VA hospitals. Let our servicemen use whatever hospital they choose. Currently the hospitals have to keep specialists on staff for 3 or 4 appointments per month. Let our servicemen choose their hospital.
2. Let people purchase insurance across state lines. Currently, the risk pool is not large enough to provide affordable insurance premium rates.
3. Let me keep the option of not having health care. Do not tax me for not providing health care for my workers. If they want health care, let the free market lead them to a new job. We don’t need to write laws that include everything. Let’s have some faith in people.
4. The reason that preexisting conditions are not covered is because moral hazard exists. When people can apply at any time and receive care, they will only get it when they are sick. Using the items listed about, let’s help the private insurance companies provide insurance competitively so everyone can afford it.
For those that can’t afford it, than we can help them with subsidies. If they are able to work, however, they should have to work to receive care. Entitlements lead people to sedentary lifestyles.
Not bad Join Us but the idea of reducing cost absolutely requires that everybody participates.
Please JC do not confuse hatred with frustration. I am willing to agree to disagree that you are wrong.
ProudDemocratic –
Why weren’t you in Minnesota singing the praises of a government take over of health care?
Joe
I will be in DC tomorrow, and was in Bel Air last Tuesday. More so, I am curious as to why you continue to lie about the health reform legislation? At the very least you can simply tell the truth. A public OPTION is nowhere near tantamount to a ‘government take over’, however I have to admit that I would prefer a true single-payer system (sadly, that is now at all what is being proposed here). The amazing thing about all you teabaggers is that you fail to realize that with the government involved in something, there is actually some recourse, we can actually talk to those that impact our system! With for-profit Wall Street traded corporations, we have absolutely no control over our healthcare providers whatsoever. We do not have an honest option to forgo health insurance, and we do not, in most cases (including mine), have complete control over which doctors we want to see. A government-run health insurance system would increase my options with health insurance. You of course have no care whatsoever about our freedoms however, you just want to sit here and type to the three people reading your posts about the big bad evil government. You should continue to do so. Perhaps one day you will make a difference. I seriously doubt it, but miracles do happen I suppose…
(sadly, that is noT at all what is being proposed here)
ProudDemocratic –
Hard to say what is being proposed by the President?
In fact you don’t know what President Obama has in mind since HR 3200 is unlikely to move forward and he has been vague on what’s next in his $900 Billion proposal.
We do know he is uninterested in real tort reform, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines and tax deductibility reform. Heck, the President doesn’t need health care reform to reduce waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare/Medicaid he can do something today.
Joe
JoeC,
And what is the proposed health insurance exchange?
Dave –
I don’t know what President Obama’s vision is for an exchange, but if he simply allowed interstate sale of health insurance it would allow the 1300 exiting insurance providers to compete.
Joe
JC you say this as if BCBS, Kaiser, and Aetna are not national organizations. This idea of yours is already in practice, and our healthcare system is screwed up nonetheless. Get real, we need a public option; really we need single payer universal healthcare, but the PO is the best alternative considering the misinformation out there and the fear mongering of the bullcrap FOX news nation and their legions of extreme b-s throwers that blindly follow everything they hear from FOX, RL, GB, SH, and others. And you call those that are trying to bring healthcare to Americans nazis… obnoxious.
ProudCrudeDemocratic –
You can’t buy across state lines from the various licensees of BCBS or any other health insurance provider.
Joe
Yes you can my dad lives in MD and has DC BCBS
Cdev –
I was unaware DC had become a State?
Joe
It is not a state but it is a seperate entity of BCBS called the National Capital!
Cdev –
You’re wrong.
Try having your dad buy an individual plan in Utah or if he is employed by an employer based in MD have that employer buy a company-wide plan in Wyoming.
Joe
Cdev and Joe Caruso;
Actually just about every state has a BC/BS. Ours is called Carefirst Blue Cross. Several years ago they merged with National Capitol and Delaware BC/BS. The new entity was supposed to share networks and plans. Delaware doctors would not accept Maryland rates and the entire thing imploded. Md and DC are still affiliated andin fact the Carefirst Bluechoice product originated in DC and is a very popular HMO. Even though yu can use your Md BC anywhere in the nation it will be considered “out of network” and you’ll pay through the nose. Being able to purchas any plan from any state would sound good, but let’s not forget that each state has a fairly large staff in their insurance administration and their jobs are really important!
WJZ just aired a story on TEA baggers from Harford County preparing to protest in D.C. They interviewed one man who couldn’t even put a coherent thought together on his reason for going to D.C.
Where were the protests when George Bush was spending tons of money for the Iraq War? Where were the protests when former Governor Ehrlich imposed his “flush tax” to our water bills? Oh that’s right, the TEA party doesn’t care when Republicans spend wastefully and tax. But if Democrats do it, it’s socialism and big government.
TEA is nothing more than a joke now.
Actually, none of us even knew what the vile term teabagging even meant. We had to be taught that term by the Left who routinely partake in that form of perversion. I’m sure you can educate us on other perversions that we are not familiar with, but please keep them in the privacy of your bedroom.
Yes, I am a liberal, so therefore I must be a sexual pervert. Makes total sense…
Dave –
Way to go attack the offended group.
You can’t defend the use of the vile terminology being used to insult Tea Party protesters.
Joe
Joe C,
What the heck are you talking about? I’ve never once used the phrase you take offense at, and I don’t plan on defending it. I do take offense at the idea that somehow it is liberals who introduced sexual perversion into the world.
HDGReader –
Why you are brave calling your fellow citizens by a vile sexual term. You should be very proud of yourself, congratulations.
Joe
JC, I think you need to get over your ‘vile sexual term’ reply to everybody who says ‘teabagger’. If you do not want people to call you a teabagger, then stop holding pansy protests where you throw teabags into the street or hold them up and shake them around like a woman at an English tea-and-crumpets social. The term fits, and we will continue to use it!
ProudCrudeDemocratic –
And you too are brave calling your fellow citizens by a vile sexual term. You should be very proud of yourself as well, congratulations.
Joe
ProudDemocrat: “teabagger”, “pansy protests”, “shake them around like a woman”?
Fine intellectual discourse and yet another example of my earlier obsevation that the vast majority of namecallng and obscenities come from the left. You hit homosexuals and women with that little rant – who’s next?
the republicans have brought nothing to the table that would in effect change the cost dynamics in the marketplace. the offer lip service to bring cost cutting changes to the table If they really believed that there is a need for health insurance change they would have done so if the past 8 years. In fact, health insurance as well an environmental regulation is not something that republicans believe in. They believe that the free market knows best, even in the middle of this financial market mess, and that the market is best to self-regulate….what a crock!!!!.
when private parties are left to their own devices, profit and greed rule, public service and goodwill become a marketing gimmick to rein in more profits at the expense of inferior products, services and quality. Market players need to be held accountable to provide safe,economical and consumer friendly products to everyone (the consumer) in the market place.
the public option in health care will bring balance to the marketplace, ceo’s make millions of $$$$ and premiums keep going up at double the rate of inflation, while they cherry pick who participates in their health insurance plan.
Dave Yenson I respectfully disagree, the goverment can not do a decent execution with out bungling.
Sorry Vet, I forgot about executions. I was thinking more about the manly art of warfare and the less manly art of screwing up.
Semper Fi my friend.
If we were more civilized, the government would never do an execution to begin with. But then again, you are all not interested in civilized, hence your opposition to saving the lives of your fellow Americans by supporting health reform.
When you say execution, PD, are you talking about ending the life of someone who has committed a heinous act and forfeited the right to exist in society, or the other, more common execution that takes place daily and is morally justified by the left?
Interesting choice of wording. The government should have no ability to tell any citizen what to do with their own body, whether it be an inmate or a pregnant woman. Those decisions are between a doctor and patient only. It is amazing to me that first off somebody who claims to be ‘pro-life’ is so quick to put a person to death, and that those same people who also so often claim that the government should not control our lives turn around a try to convince the government to tell a woman what to do with her own body.
And those same people will try to pass a law applying soley to one person forcing her husband to ignore her final request and personal decision as to end of life issues.
I agree with PD for the first time. “The government should have no ability to tell any citizen what to do with their own body” However, if the government begins to fund the function, in this case abortion, then the government gains the right to make the rules and will in fact tell the recipient exactly what to do.
Proud Democrat,
I suggest that you switch to Sanka and start breaking the Prozacs in half. You’re making a fool of yourself. You may have a good point or two to make, and I would be happy to listen, but you’re just babbling now.
I happen to agree with you that health care insurance and ensurance needs big change; I also have some disagreements philosophically, economically and structurally, with components of what the president and congress have proposed so far. I also believe that much of Obama’s speech the other night was disingenuous. Does that make me a lunatic or a panzy?
And you and I both know that real reform is dead-on-arrival in the senate because senators from both sides of the aisle (including Max Baucus) are beholden to those with a very entrenched interest in the status quo.
How about we find some common ground: Go Ravens! Let’s hope the Chiefs’ offense has good health insurance.
Rocco,
Interesting points. But I have 2 questions for you:
Is Medicare a public option?
Are there millions of people who are happy with their medicare coverage?
“taxpayer”
question 1-medicare is not a public option as it is defined by the oponents because there isn’t a private option in providing health care for the retired.
question 2- most people that have medicare are happy with it.
Question for you…are those with no health insurance happy with no health insurance? or would an affordable option to health care make them unhappy? I don’t think so.
Rocco… you are correct in your suggestion of course, but these people on here that we are arguing with do not care about basic human descency, and certainly do not care about the people that would be happy with a public option. They only care about their own tax liability; this is pretty much the entire Republican party platform, and they are bying it hook, line, and sinker.
ProudDemocratic –
You’re a high-minded liberal/progressive that has no restraint when it comes to taxing people. People have a right to the fruits of their labor and government already taxes the productive folks in our country too much as it is.
Conservatives want health care reform that makes sense, doesn’t destroy what does work presently and is fiscally responsible. And we want Medicare/Medicaid fixed first, not part of some speculative, misbegotten omnibus plan.
Joe
That is EXACTLY what President Obama is saying!!! For crying out loud, stop spouting Rush and start listening and thinking. In your last statement, you absolutely made the case for what so many teabaggers are calling ‘Obamacare’ (as disrespectful a slur as anybody saying teabagger). How sad that in reality it does not matter what we are discussing, it matters only that it is a Democratic president that is proposing them.
SadCRUDEdemocratic –
You are pitiful and I feel sorry for you.
Joe
Fair enought… I decided yesterday to just throw pretty much anything I wanted on here, as there are only about 20 people that seem to post on Dagger, and most of them have lack the caring or foresight to look further than their own pocketbooks. Our country is significantly lower taxed than any other industrialized nation, and as a result we have more separation of wealth, the worst healthcare of any industrialized nation, and in many cases an educational system that lacks the materials necessary to function. All of these would be fixed in an instant if we stopped worrying about marginal tax rates, and fairly raised the funds necessary to keep important, life-saving, life-giving, and life-quality augmenting programs fully funded. Sadly, because of the likes of JC and others like him that post on dagger, we will never have this. Generations of our grand kids will suffer because of the short-sightedness of people like them.
ProudDemocrat –
What a specious argument that higher tax rates would bring greater prosperity to all. Especially when higher tax rates would yield less tax revenue and cause investment capital to flee the country.
Government growth is not economic growth, in fact government growth is a drain on the economy. If your premise were true we should model ourselves after Cuba and the former USSR.
Joe
JC says “igher tax rates would yield less tax revenue and cause investment capital to flee the country”. This is the long since discredited philosophy called trickle-down. Insantity = doing something over again the same way and expecting a different result. Trick down gave us the economic collaps of 2008. Democratic policies brought us the greatest period of growth any country has ever known from 1950 – 1969. Even the Republican presidents that served in that time period knew it. Our current tax system makes the rich weathier, the poor poorer, and the social safety net challenging to maintain.
ProudDemocratic writes “Democratic policies brought us the greatest period of growth any country has ever known from 1950 – 1969.”
What a pile of horse manure and complete fabrication of Democrat accomplishments.
Especially when the Reagan tax cuts were followed by America’s longest peacetime economic expansion in history up to that point, which led to the creation of over 20 million jobs.
ProudDemocratic you are a true believer in that government is the salvation of the citizenry and by transferring wealth from the producers to the non-producers we will have prosperity for all. It is simply a liberal/progressive anti-capitalist rant that defies accepted economic theory…a fantasy of the far-left.
Joe
It really comes down to one side not trusting the market, and the other side not trusting the government. In my opinion, despite past stumbles, it’s easier to manage market abuses than it is to manage government abuses.
Hey ProudDemocrat;
What is your definition of wealth? Any discussion of economics requires that we be using the same meanings.
Proud Democrat should note that one of the biggest tax cuts for the rich in this country’s history (percentage wise) was done by JFK… so even JFK noted that cutting taxes on the rich brought about better economic conditions.
Come on question, Don’t start confusing the poor soul with facts. You know that single and small minded persons can’t deal with facts.
Proud Democrat,
Where do you get your statistics on taxes? The top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of the federal income taxes. The poor do not pay taxes. The top 10% of wage earners paid 65% of the federal income tax. You want to reach your hand into the hardworking pockets of Americans and force them to pay more because they work harder and are more sucessful? If you think we should pay more in taxes, why don’t you pen a check to Uncle Sam? I already pay too much and what we do pay, most of it is squandered.
But as you say let’s do something over and over again and expect a different result so I guess we are going to continue to fund the NEA, ACORN and PBS…..that’s ok with you I guess?
I am curious about your occupation. I know you are not a business man or a business owner. My guess is you work for the governemnt in some fashion, or a teacher. Maybe member of a union, who has been convinced that corporations are evil for holding down the little man. In my mind you and people like you are socialist and thieves who want other people to pay our share of taxes but aren’t willing to pay your own. A flat tax system would be equitable. I just can’t figure out why you insist on a system that penalizes the sucessful?
Communicator –
The SadCrudeDemocratic can’t know of what you speak and he can’t know John Galt.
He only knows vitriol and scorn for taxpaying producers.
Joe
The Communicator:
Can you define “wage earner”? It seems like your stating only people who receive wages (hourly or salary) as opposed to people who are paid by their shares, dividends, ownership or other non-wage style ways. I’m not accusing, just asking so I can get a grip on what you are saying.
Joe, wasn’t it the large deficit Reagan ran up that caused the expansion. Check the numbers. I think he doubled it.
Saul Alinski would be proud of the uses of his lessons here!
Go Dagger !
Susan –
Food for thought –
“Ronald Reagan’s legacy was a fascinating mixture: lower inflation and higher deficits; lower taxes and higher levels of government spending; less unemployment and bigger trade deficits; fewer strikes and more government jobs; reduced economic regulation and expanded social regulation; the deepest recession in half a century and the longest peacetime recovery ever.
A few numerical comparisons help make the point. Real GDP declined by one-half of 1 percent in 1980, President Carter’s last year, and rose 3.9 percent in 1988, President Reagan’s last year. The CPI rose 13.5 percent in 1980 and by 4.1 percent in ’88. The prime rate dropped from 15 percent in 1980 to 9 percent in 1988. Real median family income rose from $34,200 in 1980 to $37,000 in 1988. The unemployment rate declined from 7.0 percent in 1980 to 5.4 percent in 1988.
On the other hand, the budget deficit rose from $74 billion in 1980 to $155 billion in 1988, while the trade deficit rose from $15 billion to $129 billion during the same period. And, contrary to widespread belief, the portion of the population below the poverty line was 13 percent in both years. One more set of numbers: Real national wealth rose from $11.9 trillion in 1980 to $14.2 trillion in 1988.
Warts and all, the Reagan presidency was a high-water mark for the American economy, especially as measured by the more positive attitude that most Americans had toward themselves, their society, and the future.”
Source * Murray Weidenbaum, chairman of the Center for the Study of American Business at Washington University in St. Louis, served as chairman of President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers, 1981-82.
Hmmm… “chairman of President Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers”, there is an unbiased assessment of the Reagan legacy if I ever saw one.
SadCRUDEdemocratic –
Hmmm…you are sad pathetic wretch if I ever saw one. You are some kind cyber-bully! A troll without equal.
How nice for you to hide under the cover of anonymity and insult your neighbors and fellow citizens. Something you wouldn’t likely do in close-company or if your name were known on this forum.
You are the bravest troll on the Dagger.
Joe
Ha… JC realizes I am correct and cannot find a good Rush-minded response, so he stats calling people names! How classic.
P.S. How did you know I live under a bridge? I do not tell many people about that.
AS PD and a few others continue to suggest that a more Utopian state would include a much higher tax bracket for us really rich people. (That’s making something between $50,000 and $150,000 per year.) A thought for all; Perfect socialism or Marxism has at its core the thought of “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” The fatal flaw with this type of thinking is that it puts all of society into the two categories of the worker and the needy. Notice that it requires that all perform at least up to their abilities. Real life, in this country and all others who have dabbled with social programs has taught us that there is a third class who only need and never perform. Cold hearted folks like me refer to this group as the “parasite group.”
Now class the question for today is; what percentage of the population can belong in the parasite group before the producing group quits and become parasites too?
Where is John Galt?
Dave Yensan –
The left is unable to know “Who is John Galt”.
Joe
Iknow Joe. And that bothers me most of all.
The left does know that Randian Objectivists are the cartoon version of social darwinists.
Tami –
The leftist central planners dismiss both Rand and Friedrich von Hayek thereby dooming us to economic peril. Free market capitalism is not the genesis for our economic roller coastering it is government interventionism that does.
“Pennies do not come from heaven. They have to be earned here on earth.” – Margaret Thatcher
“To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.'” – Thomas Jefferson
Joe
The far left better worry about ACORN. Lots of loose cannons there that will soon be looking to plea bargain.
http://www.daggerpress.com/forum/havre-de-grace/acorn/#p253
Thats right because ACORN is representative of the countries critical issues right now..Afghanistan heating up, economy, and health care (whether your are for or against it)! Get your eyes back on the issues at hand and don’t be like a dog with a fetch stick…ruff ruff Richie.
The Tea Party denegrates public officials? Since all of Harford’s public officiala are Republicans, why would you object?