That's not what Reagan said, he claimed the ballooning federal deficit was
the single biggest disappointment of his presidency.
You are way off. The consequences extended into Bush 41's presidency, even
Clinton's, but it hit while Reagan was in office. It turned out that
deregulation that allowed S&Ls to do things formerly only banks could do--
but without the regulations banks are subject to--wasn't such a great idea.
Come to think of it, sweeping deregulation (or an existing lack of
regulation) often seems to precede a massive economic crisis--ain't it
amazing how it works out like that?
I recall. I liked Reagan, but I'm not willing to pretend some of his
policies didn't cause a lot of problems further down the road.
Not exactly. Reagan's power lay in his ability to peel away enough
Democrats from their party that in combination with Republicans they could
move legislation through Congress against the wishes of the party which
actually had a majority. But it's the White House that proposes budgets,
and the President who signs legislation, or vetoes it if he thinks it's a
bad idea. So there is no way to credibly claim that the staggering increase
in the federal debt over Reagan's presidency is something he had no control
Yes, rebuilding the military was a valid concern, but so was kickstarting
the economy, and health care. Why does military spending get a pass when
economic stimulus or keeping Americans out of the Emergency Room is
automatically something not worth borrowing for?
Kind of hard to reach across the aisle when the folks on the other side have
only one thing on their minds: the next election. It might amuse you to
read up on the tactics the Republicans used to pass prescription drug
legislation back in 2203, then get back to me about pushing through
legislation without reaching across the aisle.
Well, I see you didn't attempt to answer my other post.
The reason why the building the military was a big concern is because
that is one thing the Federal Government is supposed to be responsible
for--one of the few.
I am going to say it again: you can get and do and be whatever the
heck you want in this country, you just need to have the will do do it
and want it and be it. Nothing that is worth it is easy. I hate to
say it but you need to work for what you get. I am sorry there are so
many people out there who need more money to pay for health
insurance. I'm sorry there are so many people who are out of work. I
am sorry for a lot of things but this bill was not the right thing nor
was it the right time to do it.
Answer me this: If this damn bill is so freaking good, why in the
world are Obama and the rest of the high brass in Washington EXEMPTED
from it? Why aren't they forced to use it? That is glossed over.
Answer me this, too: Why isn't there any cost savings in that bill?
Real cost savings? Why didn't they work to reduce tort reform? You
talk about crooks, don't tell me lawyers don't do their fair share of
fleecing the health care system. Why didn't they look into intra-
state portability to naturally increase competition? Why didn't they
look into things like helping small business band together to buy
health insurance at a lower price? Why rip it apart?
And to keep this thread sort of on-topic like Robatoy said, Glenn Beck
is an example of somebody who was a down and out drunk who got himself
together and worked like a dog to get to where he is today. You may
not like his viewpoints nor his mannerism but you have to give him
kudos for remaking himself like a Phoenix.
Didn't see it yet, don't make assumptions without evidence.
News flash: this is no longer a largely agrarian society with a population
of two and a half million. Government has grown because we have a bigger
and more complex society--you don't have to like it, but that's the way it
is. If it bothers you enough then move to Somalia, they've done a dandy job
of getting government off their backs over there.
Hogwash, there are millions of people who are born so far behind the
eight-ball that's it's amazing they survive at all, and many don't. Some
people are able to drag themselves out of the deepest holes with hard work
and some luck, others never get lucky. Go tell some single mom working two
jobs to keep her kids fed and clothed that she just isn't trying hard
enough, then get ready to run.
I'm sorry the cost of health insurance has doubled in the past fifteen
years, I'm sorry health insurance companies absorb far more for
administrative overhead than in any other industrialized nation, I'm sorry
our taxes and our insurance premiums go to pay for ER treatment for the
uninsured instead of regular clinic treatment which is far cheaper, I'm
sorry Americans pay more for health care than anyone and yet have shorter
life expectancy that people in many wealthy nations....
Not the right time to do it? How many people are you prepared to see die
until you figure it's the right time?
The German army historically kicked the crap out of every European army they
met in part because they taught their officers and NCOs that in a bad
situation the worst thing you can do is nothing--better to try something
risky than just sit there and wait for some Russian to walk up and drop a
grenade down your shirt collar. You can't outwait trouble, you have to do
something about it.
So while I think the health care bill is flawed, and needs plenty of repair,
waiting another year or two, or five, or ten, simply wasn't an option.
Nixon wanted universal health insurance provided by employers, and that was
forty years ago. The system is broken, it handicaps American business with
crippling employee health coverage (it cost GM $1,200 less to build a
vehicle in Canada because they have govt. health insurance there), it kills
and sickens millions of Americans who can't afford insurance, it bankrupts
hundreds of thousands Americans every year. The Republicans controlled
Congress for a decade, and what did they do for health care other than an
unfunded prescription drug program that prevents Medicare from negotiating
lower drug prices as the VA does? We're supposed to leave it up to those
You're surprised that politicians take care of themselves? Have you only
recently arrived on this planet?
There are, not enough in my view, but the CGO says it will reduce the
deficit. Republicans love to quote the CGO when they agree with it, lately
they're less eager to do so--what a surprise.
I thought Bush's proposal for malpractice lawsuit reform was a good start,
though I felt his cap was too low. If you ended up in wheelchair for life
with a feeding tube in your stomach because of a surgeon's blunder would you
figure only five hundred grand would cover that? However I agree that
really breathtaking punitive damages are counter-productive, awards should
be limited to actual costs of medical care, loss of wages and a reasonable
amount for pain and suffering, not awards running into the tens of millions
of dollars that primarily enrich lawyers.
You mean the way banks became able to pick and choose which state they would
base their credit card operations in so they could find a state that allowed
any interest rates the banks wanted, any fees and penalties they wanted?
Sure, that worked out great for the consumer, didn't it. The former
governor of Delaware has said he thought it was a fine idea at the time
because of all the banks that set up shop there; later, when he realized it
allowed the banks to fleece Americans he had a change of heart--too late.
You mean the co-ops Obama wanted?
Glenn Beck is someone with a history of doing anything to get ahead with no
regard for the harm he causes, and that hasn't changed since he sobered up.
I do not admire someone who will lie through his teeth and pander to
people's fear and prejudices in order to make money. I don't like it when
Michael Moore does it, and I don't like it when Beck does it. I've tried
watching Beck several times but I can't do so for long, he is so
transparently phony, and his overheated rhetoric is so childish (the
bulletin board with the pictures of Mao and Obama and Stalin side by side)
that it's like a bad comedy. It's depressing as hell to think that millions
of Americans are taken in by that little creep.
But considering that Harris just did a poll in which one in four Republicans
surveyed said they believe Obama may be the Antichrist, I guess we shouldn't
be surprised that Beck is able to find millions of angry morons to buy his
line of bullshit.
Oh, for Craps Sake! I just looked at your profile and I'm wondering
how the hell you ended up here with your bullshit. And the list below
is just your very short term stuff. Your posting history is
absolutely impressive. But I have ask a few questions:
1) Do you own a table saw? If not, a hand saw?
2) Given all of the groups you hang out with, why settle here with
3) Would you consider moving all of this kind of rhetoric over to
rec.outdoors.rv-travel. Those guys have already clobbered up that
group with endless OT and Non-OT political crap. You would be
welcomed with open arms.
500 billion barrels of tea rec.music.gdead 7 hours ago
(NDC) Virus Software rec.music.gdead 7 hours ago
500 billion barrels of tea rec.music.gdead 10 hours ago
O'Butt-hole in his own words... alt.guitar.amps 11 hours ago
OT: No taste for Coulter/Beck-style hate speech. rec.woodworking
11 hours ago
Tea Party energy policy alt.guitar.amps 20 hours ago
Major Sea Changes rec.woodworking 21 hours ago
24% of Republicans.... alt.guitar.amps 32 hours ago
Greatest instrumental rock guitarist ever? alt.music.who 36 hours
Everyone of you is mean rec.music.beatles 37 hours ago
And I'm wondering who is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read
I do not own a table saw, no room. However I have a circular saw, a jigsaw,
a reciprocating saw, and at least a dozen hand saws of which my favorite is
one of those Japanese pull-saws.
"Diatribe" being something you disagree with.
Or you could learn not to read threads that cause your spastic colon to
flare up. I don't use multiple screen names, sunshine, so you can killfile
me and never see a word from me again. Try it and see.
Geeze! So many misapprehensions in one paragraph.
* "... health insurance has doubled in 15 years" - So has everything else.
Money invested at 7% will double in TEN years.
* "... insurance companies ... more administrative overhead than other
countries..." - Insurance companies are one of the most regulated businesses
in the country. I'm sure that contributes greatly to the overhead.
* "... Americans ... have shorter life expectancy... than many wealthy
nations" - Life expectancy is not the best metric for measuring health care.
A) Many people die before the health care system can get involved: auto
accidents, executions, gang warfare, ordinary warfare, etc. B) Many nations
count premature infant deaths as "stillborn." We don't.
A better metric is life expectancy after diagnosis. Here the U.S. stands WAY
above most countries with most illnesses. For example, the five-year
survival rate for breast cancer is better than 90% in the U.S. compared to
56% in the UK.
Something less than, say, eight million.
We have medical tort reform in Texas. There is NO cap on pain and suffering
or economic loss. There IS a cap ($250,000) on punative damages. Medical
malpractice insurance rates have DROPPED every year for the past seven years
and we've seen about a 12% increase in the number of physicians practicing
in the state. Some counties where there wasn't even ONE OB/GYN eight years
ago now have several.
That's called "competition" (between the states).
Credit cards are slightly different from health insurance; nobody was FORCED
to get a credit card.
Your income has doubled in the past ten years? Cool, congratulations. How
about your utility bills? The interest rate on your savings account? The
price of a cup o' joe?
Then why are other wealthy industrialized nations able to run their health
insurance with much lower overhead? Why does the AMA say that
administrative overhead in private insurance companies is three times higher
than in public health organizations?
American health care tends to be good at dealing with catastrophic illness
*if* you have good insurance. On the other hand if you have no insurance at
all, or if your insurance company decides to find an excuse to cut you loose
rather than pay for your treatment, then you have a problem.
Cute, just so long as you aren't one of them huh?
Sounds good to me. As I said, I'm in favor of such reform provided it is
That's fine if you believe that profit and only profit is the ultimate
arbiter. But in civilized societies we figure sometimes the public good has
to supersede private profit, that's why we have things like anti-trust laws,
banking and insurance industry regulation, fire and health
inspections--stuff like that. Of course there are those who would do away
such laws if they could.
Very true, although try renting a car sometime without one. Of course we
regulate all kinds of things people are not forced to get, but then if you
believe any kind of regulation is a bad thing then you won't find that
BTW, do you know which party once thought compulsory health insurance was a
New health insurance requirement ... was GOP idea
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Republicans were for President Barack Obama's requirement that Americans get
health insurance before they were against it.
The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that's been
around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill
and Hillary Clinton's failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days,
Republicans call it government overreach. [snip]
That's easy. If it smell like a pig then it must be a pig. The fact here is
there won't be enough doctors to deal with any of this bill.
Another easy answer. The Dems and Obama's agenda is to destroy the Insurance
Companies in order to move to Single Payer or Govt.Option.
My hope is that Beck is wrong, but what if he's right? When I look at the
folks the Pres. has surrounded himself with. I get a bit concerned that it's
all about a plan to fundamentally change this country for the worse. They
couldn't do it in the 60's when they wore tie/dye and no power. Now with
suits and ties and power watch out!!!!!
You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK !
Simple solution is to do what Robocop does, stick your head firmly in
the sand, or some other appropriately dark spot, and lock Beck off your
TV. Or, you could just close your eyes, cover your ears and whistle
Dixie so you have no clue whats really going on.
When I look at the
I don't worship anyone. Beck is great though, and so far, what he and
his team has uncovered and exposed for all to see awesome and
unchallenged, other than a few douche-bags calling him names and making
up shit about him. You don't know this because you have your collective
head stuck where the sun just don't shine.
Just that I don't subscribe to insane crazies like him.
Yeah, thats the ticket.
And that is MY choice.
Well yeah, so far. Is Beck on TV in your sorry ass country or has has
your government censored him as hate speech?
Are you, Jack, trying to MAKE me watch Glenn Beck?
Nope, you are a joke to me, I am trying to keep Free Speech alive so I
don't have to listen solely to Larry King, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and
other left wing, socialist organizations. Stick your head in the sand
all you want, but I want it to be by choice, not by some socialist,
collective government trying to control the people before the killing
What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you NOT understand?
Actually, I'm quite sure there's a corollary to Godwin's Law about
those who invoke "Socialism," or any variation on the word, repeatedly
in their posts ;-)
Although labeling IS easier than thoughtful and objective analysis.....
Actually, Godwin's law wouldn't apply if you used the word NAZI in a
discussion about NAZI's.
Labels are shorthand used in thoughtful and objective analysis rather
than long, tiring, repetitive descriptions.
For example, instead of labeling Obama as a "socialist", I could say
Obama, who favors a large, centralized government that controls the
means of production rather than capitalism, an economic system in which
investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution,
and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private
I find it much better just to use a short, descriptive label. YMMV, so
Got Change: More Government, More Taxes, Less Freedom!
When Obama became head of the Harvard Law Review he mightily pissed off the
"progressives" there by appointing many conservatives to editorial
positions--the progressives assumed he would do the exact opposite. Thus it
shouldn't have come as a surprise that when he became President he appointed
many people that liberals were not happy to see given high office. He kept
on a couple of Bush-era Republican cabinet members, he put prominent
veterans of Wall St. in charge of economic policy, he chose an EPA head with
a reputation of being heavily pro-business and so on.
But what do we hear from clowns like Beck? Obama has surrounded himself
with socialists if not outright communists, just wait, he's going to put a
hammer & sickle on Old Glory any day now. Sure, there has been at least one
appointee who maybe deserved that kind of accusation, that goofball Van
Jones--anyone from the 911 Truther camp shouldn't be trusted with a driver's
license much less a federal appointment. And the administration richly
deserves to be embarrassed over attempted appointments of people who had
neglected to pay their taxes properly, but that is hardly proof of them
being part of a left-wing plot, is it.
I don't know where this national obsession with conspiracy came from, but it
sure isn't a good sign of the mental health of the republic.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.