Althouse: "It is noon, Jan. 20, 2013. Sarah Palin raises her right hand to be sworn in as the 45th president of the United States."

July 22, 2009

"It is noon, Jan. 20, 2013. Sarah Palin raises her right hand to be sworn in as the 45th president of the United States."

"Palin had won a decisive victory over the incumbent, Barack Obama. The country was still trapped in economic rubble, and voters had tired of Obama's campaign slogan, 'I Inherited This.'"

235 comments:

1 – 200 of 235 Newer› Newest»

John said...: You realize this was a piece of liberal commie Jew homosexual satire, right?; 7/22/09, 12:34 PM
MadisonMan said...: Oh, going for 200.; 7/22/09, 12:34 PM
TWM said...: If only it were so. The first paragraph that is. The rest of the thing is pretty lame. Supposed to be funny but missing by an Alaskan mile.

I don't know if it will be Palin or someone else, but unless things change big time, Barry's going down in 2012.; 7/22/09, 12:35 PM
MadisonMan said...: I did like the last line, however. And the fact that she was host of The Jerry Springer Show before running.; 7/22/09, 12:36 PM
Once written, twice... said...: With great humor the author captures the not so secret fantasy world of the right wingers who listen to conservative talk radio and posts to this site. You got to love it!; 7/22/09, 12:36 PM
Diamondhead said...: What a snoozefest that was. This guy needs to get out of the nursing home and find some different material.; 7/22/09, 12:38 PM
Diamondhead said...: "You realize this was a piece of liberal commie Jew homosexual satire, right?"

Yeah, it's a piece satire. This guy could teach Jonathan Swift a thing or two about satire.; 7/22/09, 12:41 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Painfully unfunny....about as bad as one of Senator Al Franken's comedy routines.; 7/22/09, 12:43 PM
traditionalguy said...: Let's see, 2012 is in 3 more years. By then Global Cooling should make Palin feel really at home in D.C. where she can heat her White House with piped in Alaskan natural gas. That was a strange article with more of a Chekov short story's feel that this coming change is inevitable. So maybe the wise old man just feels that way after witnessing only 6 months of Obama's Trojan Horse Administration. New York Jews are very perceptive men.; 7/22/09, 12:45 PM
Bart DePalma said...: Good heavens! In only six months, Mr. Obama has not only alienated the Tea Party conservative base of the country, but is also convincing his worshipful media base that he is Jimmy Carter reincarnated.

I will grant Obama one thing - he sure does work fast.; 7/22/09, 12:46 PM
Fred4Pres said...: And Andrew Sullivan spontaneously combusts from excessive uncontrolled rage while being a guest on Bill Maher's show Real Time.; 7/22/09, 12:49 PM
Jeremy said...: Bark - "Good heavens! In only six months, Mr. Obama has not only alienated the Tea Party conservative base of the country, but is also convincing his worshipful media base that he is Jimmy Carter reincarnated."

Based on what...something the head of your little dick told you?

Right wing drivel...as usual.; 7/22/09, 12:50 PM
Jeremy said...: Quitters never wing and winners never quit.

Pass this on to Princess Sarah.; 7/22/09, 12:51 PM
Roger J. said...: wow--a palin post--must need the hits on the blog!; 7/22/09, 12:54 PM
Bart DePalma said...: Jeremy:

If you missed all the Jimmy Carter one term failure references, go reread the linked snark column.; 7/22/09, 1:00 PM
Original Mike said...: and voters had tired of Obama's campaign slogan, "I Inherited This.".

Some of us are tired of it already.; 7/22/09, 1:01 PM
hombre said...: Whoa! Jeremy, et al's response time is down to less than half an hour.

Kos must be getting the marching orders out quickly these days.; 7/22/09, 1:01 PM
jag said...: Other news from Jan. 20, 2013:

PIGS FLY!; 7/22/09, 1:10 PM
ricpic said...: Will they be able to clear away the inevitable rubble in downtown Washington - created by rioting Obama voters expressing their legitimate rage - in time for Sarah's inauguration?; 7/22/09, 1:10 PM
TWM said...: "Good heavens! In only six months, Mr. Obama has not only alienated the Tea Party conservative base of the country, but is also convincing his worshipful media base that he is Jimmy Carter reincarnated."

Please, I knew Barry was Jimmy Carter on steroids long before he was elected.; 7/22/09, 1:12 PM
blake said...: Lacks...subtlety.; 7/22/09, 1:16 PM
Jeremy said...: Original Mike said..."Some of us are tired of it already."

YOU were tired of it before you even heard it.

But as you and others here know...he DID indeed "inherit" it.

You just can't bring yourself to admit Bush was an abject failure who buried us in debt and destroyed our country's reputation.

Keep on suckin', I'm sure your fellow wingnuts hold you in high esteem.; 7/22/09, 1:17 PM
Jeremy said...: elHombre - Empújelo encima de su asno, dickhead.; 7/22/09, 1:18 PM
Jeremy said...: 19th Ethics Complaint Filed Against Sarah Palin - Investigator Believes Palin Used Power For Gifts; 7/22/09, 1:20 PM
Mike Tanis said...: All the press attention is slowly but surely serving to legitimize Palin. After 3 more years of this it will seem entirely natural that she is a main contender. While her negatives may be high, Obama proved that the middle can be bought by smart packaging and marketing. And Sarah knows all too well the importance of a good campaign staff.; 7/22/09, 1:23 PM
TWM said...: "You just can't bring yourself to admit Bush was an abject failure who buried us in debt and destroyed our country's reputation."

Just for shits and grins, I'll admit this. Feel better?

Now, what the hell is Barry doing that is making it better? Increasing the debt by leaps and bounds with no results to speak of? Ruining a health care system most Americans are satisfied with? Being told off by Iran and North Korea?

And Barry hasn't done a thing he said he was going to do for the left either. Gitmo closed? Nope. Ending indefinite detention of terrorists? Nope. Ending wiretapping? Nope. Ending DOMA and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? Nope. An open government? Nope, he's not telling anyone anything about his negotiations with lobbyists and he's hiding as much budget bad news for as long as he can. End corruption? Nope, just ask the IG's that have been fired.

The Blame Bush bucket is about empty and his time is running out.; 7/22/09, 1:27 PM
Alex said...: That guy is delusional if he thinks only the tea-party crowd is alienated from Zero. 53% disapprove of ObamaCare.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/healthcare/july_2009/53_now_oppose_congressional_health_care_reform

These lefties are running VERY scared right now. They are sensing a Waterloo moment.; 7/22/09, 1:33 PM
Original Mike said...: But as you and others here know...he DID indeed "inherit" it.

This graphic rebuts your claim without an additional comment required on my part: U.S. deficit; 7/22/09, 1:35 PM
Jeremy said...: Original Mike - Are you saying there was no debt when Obama took office?

Are you also saying there was no surplus when Bush took over?

Even you're not that dense.; 7/22/09, 1:38 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - your excuse for Obama is "hey I got $500 debt and turned it into $4000 in 6 months!" Wee! Do you seriously think anyone cares about what he inherited when he deliberately makes it 10x worse? Now the litmus test will be Althouse. She is still delusional about his intentions.; 7/22/09, 1:40 PM
BJK said...: With the amount of flack that Palin is getting now, imagine if she were to have resigned "in disgrace" after the AK ethics board weighs in fully and ends up disallowing the legal defense fund.

Resign from being Governor....or go bankrupt trying.

I've said that I don't think she's getting the best political advice, but at the same time the same decision to resign that she's being chastized for may turn out to be her best decision since joining the national stage.; 7/22/09, 1:41 PM
Roger J. said...: Since the dems control the house senate and presidency, its hard to understand why the president's agenda is stalled--must be rove at work. Dem support of the obama policies is going to be inversely proportional to obama's poll numbers--which last I looked were trending down in almost all categories.; 7/22/09, 1:43 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Are you also saying there was no surplus when Bush took over?

Jeremy did you know that Bush inherited a $5 trillion national debt when he took over?

Jeremy do you know the difference between debt and a budget deficit?

Jeremy do you know the differece between a projected budget surplus and an actual budget surplus?

Quit screwing your dogs and crack open a high school general business book and get back to me. I'll be here.; 7/22/09, 1:43 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO said..."Just for shits and grins, I'll admit this. Feel better?"

Yes, it's nice to hear at least one of the wingnuts here admit to ANYTHING.

Obama inherited a dismal economy, and two ongoing wars, and regardless of Original Mike's silly graph Americans know exactly how we got where we are.

The reason the deficit is where it is, and will continue to rise is directly related to the massive housing slump, the bank failures, the sub-prime mortgage debacle, current and future unemployment woes, and many other factors. (All created under Bush's watch.)

Anybody who thinks Obama could have taken over and not pushed through the kind of initiatives he did is just repeating the same right wing drivel you can hear every day of week from Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly and most here.

And...then there's the total lack of any real alternative proposals from the GOP...the party that rates Rush Limbaugh as it's "leader."

Two years from now the economy will be in good shape, unemployment will be under control...and guess what...we'll have some kind of national health care, too.

Obama won...Johnny-Boy and Princess Sarah lost...and for good reason.; 7/22/09, 1:45 PM
Original Mike said...: I'm saying he wasn't hired to whine. He was hired to fix it. But the debt he is taking on is so much greater it makes what came before look like a rounding error.

And thanks for the compliment.; 7/22/09, 1:47 PM
Alex said...: I can see Jeremy is still engaging in neener-neener-ist triumphalism. Does he honestly think any of us are hurt by that? I'm practically giddy with excitement that Zero's approval numbers are tanking!; 7/22/09, 1:47 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: It is great to terrorize the left with the prospect of Gov. Palin as our next President. And I think that she would do a much better job that the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Blvd.

But right now, Mitt Romney seems to be the one on the upswing. The difference is that he actually understands the economic issues better than she does (and due to his background and history has the credibility too), and a lot better than does our current President and his lackey clown Biden.; 7/22/09, 1:47 PM
Alex said...: Bruce - it's a win-win for those of us opposing Zero. Either Palin gets in, or if not Romney. I'll take either one, a win for America. Frankly I think Palin can wait her turn in 2020 after 8 years of President Romney.; 7/22/09, 1:49 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Hey Jeremy, Original Mike's 'silly graph' is actually the White House Office of Management and Budget's silly graph.

The reason the deficit is where it is, and will continue to rise is directly related to the massive federal spending.

There fixed that for you.; 7/22/09, 1:50 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier - Let's talk apples to apples (debt versus deficit):

Bush inherited a budget surplus of $128 billion in 2001. (Budget experts projected a $710 billion surplus for 2009 when he came into office.)

But the deficit soon exploded, thanks largely to the Bush tax cuts — which accounted for 42 percent of the deficit.

When Bush left office, he handed President Obama a projected $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year, the largest ever.

As for the debt, when President Bush took office, it was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion.

Read more...blather less.; 7/22/09, 1:52 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: When Bush left office, he handed President Obama a projected $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year, the largest ever.

I was wondering how he came up with this, since my memory is less than half that, and then remembered TARP. Also, that budget that he is talking about? Written entirely by Democrats.; 7/22/09, 1:56 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier - I understand the graph and where it came from, but what does it have to do with what Obama "inherited?"

The same type of graph via the Bush White House Office of Management and Budget said that his "experts" projected a $710 billion surplus for 2009.

Did you buy into that, too?

Get that corn cobb out of your ass and instead of whining and bitching about anything Obama...think before you post the standard right wing drivel.; 7/22/09, 2:00 PM
Jeremy said...: Brucie - "Written entirely by Democrats."

Really?

And you base this on what?

No more Republicans in Congress?

Duh.; 7/22/09, 2:01 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - who controlled the Congress from 2007 onwards? Yeah I thought so.; 7/22/09, 2:02 PM
knox said...: Palin convinced Newt Gingrich to join her on the ticket as vice president by promising he'd really be in charge of the administration -- similar to the arrangement between Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.

ha ha hohoho heeeee! You're killing me! No, really, stop it!! Bush is stupid!! Hahahhahahaha! And Palin too!!! woo-eee!! Oh, my sides hurt...; 7/22/09, 2:03 PM
Alex said...: BTW did Obama play a different brand of politics when he had the most liberal voting record in the Senate from 2005-2008? That's when he could be bothered to vote at all.; 7/22/09, 2:04 PM
Jeremy said...: Hoosier - Check out the massive "Federal Spending" under Bush.

See how it stacks up to previous administrations.

"Under Bush, Federal Spending Increases at Fastest Rate in 30 Years"

Since 2001, even with record low inflation, U.S. federal spending has increased by a massive 28.8% (19.7% in real dollars)—with non-defense discretionary growth of 35.7% (25.3% in real dollars)—the highest rate of federal government growth since the presidencies of Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson.

This increase has resulted in the largest budget deficits in U.S. history, an estimated $520 billion in fiscal year 2004 alone. Furthermore, the projected spending for 2005 is a conservative estimate, since it doesn’t include at least $50 billion for the 2005 cost of the Iraq occupation.

President George W. Bush is now on his way to becoming the first full-term president since John Quincy Adams (1825-1829) to not veto a single bill.

The result is a congress that has been completely unconstrained in satiating its appetite for pork and corporate welfare.

From the massive increases in agricultural subsidies in the farm bill of 2002, to the new Medicare prescription drug entitlement of 2003; from the 47% increase in the defense budget, to the 80% increase in education spending, George W. Bush has demonstrated that “limited government” is not part of his political vocabulary.
(Independent.org); 7/22/09, 2:04 PM
Triangle Man said...: I don't have anything to say about the article, or about Palin, but I recognized the call to post from Althouse and wanted to do my part. Part done.; 7/22/09, 2:04 PM
TWM said...: "The reason the deficit is where it is, and will continue to rise is directly related to the massive housing slump, the bank failures, the sub-prime mortgage debacle, current and future unemployment woes, and many other factors. (All created under Bush's watch.)"

You conveniently ignore the Democrat's contribution to the sub-prime mortgage debacle, the bank failures, and the housing slump. Can you say Barney Frank? I knew that you could.

"And...then there's the total lack of any real alternative proposals from the GOP...the party that rates Rush Limbaugh as it's "leader.""

I don't listen to Rush so i will have to take your word on what he is saying, but the GOP has had an alternative health care proposal up there for a very long time. It's been totally ignored by the Democrats. Barry "I won" Obama isn't interested in the GOP's ideas. And pardon me, but the Democrats control both houses. It's not the GOP that Barry is having a hard time with, it's his own party.

"Two years from now the economy will be in good shape, unemployment will be under control...and guess what...we'll have some kind of national health care, too."

I am willing at this very moment to lay a nice bet with you that the first two things will simply not be the case and that the third one, while being true, will be a much watered-down version of what Barry wants. The Dems will have to pass something called a health care bill just to hold off the inevitable collapse of his presidency right now but it will be a shadow of the power-grab they want.

"Princess-Sarah"

Very sexist, but then you are liberal so that makes sense.; 7/22/09, 2:05 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: It's revealing that this hasbeen neverwas Bob Franken sees the need to take a gratuitous swipe at Palin with the Jerry Springer BS.

Elitist libs are scared shitless of plain spoken, common - sense populists. I wonder why?; 7/22/09, 2:06 PM
Scott M said...: My 18-year-old can write better satire.; 7/22/09, 2:08 PM
Roger J. said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/22/09, 2:15 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO - "
You conveniently ignore the Democrat's contribution to the sub-prime mortgage debacle..."

I didn't ignore anything relating to the Democrats.

They were also part of a Congress that dropped the ball, but if you're going to trash Obaam after 6 months in office, why are you denying the entire situation at hand developed under Bush's watch?

Are you saying the Republicans haven't held the majority in Congress for 12 of the past 14 years? That Republicans didn't hold the White House for 8 of the last 8 1/2 years?

You can scream all you want about Obama, but you and I both know what he inherited...and he deserves a chance to do what he can before the local wingnuts say he's "failed.; 7/22/09, 2:18 PM
Jeremy said...: AJ Lynch said..."Elitist libs are scared shitless of plain spoken, common - sense populists. I wonder why"

"Elitist libs?"

Thanks Rush.

And when you say "plain spoken" what you should say is semi-literate. Princess Sarah is not exactly "plain" in any way, shape or form and her speaking abilities are poor to say the least.; 7/22/09, 2:20 PM
Dr Weevil said...: There's no shame in being a monoglot American, but such people should really not try to comment in languages they are too ignorant to get right.

Poor stupid Jeremy can't learn even when corrected. In a previous thread (scroll down to 7/20, 11:54am) he asked someone in what was supposed to be German why he was writing with a chicken in his mouth, because he fed 'cock' into an English-German translator program and didn't bother to check whether the answer he got meant 'cock' as in penis or 'cock' as in chicken. They're different words in German, as in most languages.

When I corrected him (1:11pm), I pointed out that Jonah Goldberg once made a similar mistake, telling the entire French nation to kiss his donkey, because he was too lazy to see whether his English-French dictionary was giving him the French word for 'ass' as in butt ('cul') or 'ass' as in donkey ('âne').

Undeterred by my warning, Jeremy makes exactly the same mistake in Spanish in this thread (1:18pm), telling someone to stick something in his donkey ('asno'). I'll let him try to figure out how to say 'asshole' in Spanish himself, since he's so interested in foreign obscenities. He also calls the guy a 'dickhead' in English. As the South African consul said in Lethal Weapon II, "who is the dickhead now?"; 7/22/09, 2:21 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy continues his habit of insults - "Princess Sarah". Does he honestly think he's convincing anyone here to become a commie-lib like him? Maybe he should be nicer.; 7/22/09, 2:22 PM
Hoosier Daddy said...: Hoosier - I understand the graph and where it came from, but what does it have to do with what Obama "inherited?"

Jesus Christ if you can’t figure it out then you’re dumb as a box of rocks. When you ‘inherit’ a budget deficit you don’t make it worse by spending more money thereby enlarging the deficit. Here’s an analogy even a moron like you can understand. Firefighters use water and not gasoline.

Hoosier - Check out the massive "Federal Spending" under Bush.

Jeremy do you even understand how this doesn’t help your case? Obama is on track doing exactly what you are blaming Bush for! Massive government spending that is increasing the budget deficit and the national debt.
Thank you for demonstrating that you are nothing but an ignorant partisan hack. Now go back to screwing your dogs.; 7/22/09, 2:23 PM
Alex said...: I'm tired of Jeremy. I want Althouse's clear, unambiguous mea culpa!; 7/22/09, 2:24 PM
Roger J. said...: I don't remember anyone on this thread suggesting the republican congress and Mr. Bush were frugal stewards of the public fisc--Which may explain in large part why both are unemployed, although Bush was, of course, term limited. That said, the democrats have apparently failed to understand the lessons the republicans were taught by the voters.

And as for Mr Obama's promises lets see: DOMA, DADT, rendition, guantanamo, signing statements, troops still in Iraq, not to mention the fact that July is the bloodiest month for US forces in Mr. Obama's Afghanistan adventure--and where, by the way, is Osama? Thought we would have nabbed him by now, although I will give the president until the end of his term time to capture him.

In foreign affairs, we have clearly carried the day by restoring our niceness. The Israelis have stopped building settlements, the Iranians have shut down their nuclear capacity, and the NORKS have disarmed; Mr Putin has come around to our way of thinking. Mr Obama is not doing too well on promise fulfillment it appears.

Of course if anyone really expected him to do all these things, they would be the kind of people that send money to Nigerian ministers to secure the money that is being held in escrow. Americans are the kind of people that make Bernie Madoff and three card monte sharks possible.

For cynics like me, I discounted all of of the president's campaign crap and now do not suffering at all from voter remorse; we got what paid for. democracy in action!

I will look forward to the mid terms to see how things develop.; 7/22/09, 2:25 PM
Original Mike said...: I was hoping you'd make an appearance, Dr. Weevil.; 7/22/09, 2:31 PM
Triangle Man said...: @TRO

Do you think the health care bill that Obama wants is what he campaigned on, or something else? It seems like the House proposal is more like Clinton's campaign proposals than Obama's.; 7/22/09, 2:34 PM
kjbe said...: weak satire, but I did snicker a few times...; 7/22/09, 2:35 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Others have already objected to Jeremy's contemptuous and contemptible "Princess Sarah", but calling McCain "Johnny-Boy" seems worse. I don't think much of McCain as a politician, but anyone who calls someone of McCain's age and military record 'boy' might as well put an 'Asshole behind wheel' bumper sticker on his car: it would send exactly the same message.; 7/22/09, 2:35 PM
Dr Weevil said...: P.S. Assuming of course that Jeremy ever sits behind the wheel of the family car, and doesn't have his mommy drive him places.; 7/22/09, 2:38 PM
bagoh20 said...: Is there anything Palin or McCain or Rick Astley could have done any worse than Obama has? I'm serious. Since he is doing so well, What could be done worse?; 7/22/09, 2:40 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr Weevil - Try this one out, asshole:

Saugen Sie meinen Dick.; 7/22/09, 2:41 PM
Jeremy said...: bagoh20 said..."Is there anything Palin or McCain or Rick Astley could have done any worse than Obama has? I'm serious. Since he is doing so well, What could be done worse?"

You mean over the vast period of time encompassing 6 months?

Duh.; 7/22/09, 2:42 PM
TWM said...: "You can scream all you want about Obama, but you and I both know what he inherited...and he deserves a chance to do what he can before the local wingnuts say he's "failed."

He's got his chance. No one is stopping him. No one CAN stop him if he can get his own party to help him. So don't talk tome about giving him a chance, talk to your guys.; 7/22/09, 2:43 PM
Roger J. said...: "Saugen Sie.... Given the subject matter, I dont think you need the formal construction--thats the trouble with those translator programs.; 7/22/09, 2:44 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr. Weevil - Original Mike wants to meet you.

Maybe you can bring Johnny-Boy and the Princess along.

You can all sing and dance and whine and bitch...

What fun!!; 7/22/09, 2:45 PM
Roger J. said...: Might want to try something like "saugts du..."; 7/22/09, 2:45 PM
former law student said...: As intros to dystopian novels, I still prefer It was a bright, cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. ...

But what the story really means is that there's a new Franken in town.; 7/22/09, 2:46 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO - "He's got his chance."

6 months.; 7/22/09, 2:47 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Poor stupid Arschloch Jeremy continues to flaunt his multifarious ignorance. Hint: 'Dick' does not mean penis in German. It means fat, and it means Richard, but it is not a body part.; 7/22/09, 2:48 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr. Weevil - Gee, sorry about that, dickhead.; 7/22/09, 2:49 PM
Alex said...: A nation can be destroyed in 9 months, I'm not willing to give Zero a cart-blanche to do anything he wants. I thought we lived in a democracy, not a dictatorship. Jeremy reveals his true colors - we should all just bow down to the mighty Barack.; 7/22/09, 2:51 PM
Roger J. said...: Dr Weevil: perhaps the term "foetzekopf" best describes our cunning linguist.; 7/22/09, 2:51 PM
Jeremy said...: Here's a real shocker:

WSJ: Concentration of Wealth at the Top is Draining Social Security

The pay of employees who receive more than the Social Security wage base -- now $106,800 -- increased by 78%, or nearly $1 trillion, over the past decade, exceeding the 61% increase for other workers, according to the analysis. In the five years ending in 2007, earnings for American workers rose 24%, half the 48% gain for the top-paid. The result: The top-paid represent 33% of the total, up from 28% in 2002.

The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund.

In May, the government said the Social Security fund would be exhausted in 2037, four years earlier than was predicted in 2008.; 7/22/09, 2:53 PM
TWM said...: "Do you think the health care bill that Obama wants is what he campaigned on, or something else? It seems like the House proposal is more like Clinton's campaign proposals than Obama's."

Actually, I don't think this is what he campaigned on. In fact, I know it isn't. Because had he campaigned on it, he probably would not have been elected.

What's scary to me . . . and to most Americans . . . is the way he is rushing this through. Why not take this slow? Take the time to build the best possible plan? This isn't like the so-called stimulus bill that had to be done immediately in order to save the economy. (How's that working out, by the way?)

Instead we get a rushed, hodgepodge bill that no one, including Barry it seems, understands.

This scares people and it should.

Oh, and Jeremy, he has a chance NOW. He can do things correctly. You keep saying "6 months" like we don't have a right to patriotically dissent yet. Well, we do get to bitch and piss and moan now. Everyone does.

Again, your side controls both houses and the WH so he doesn't have to convince any "wingnuts" as you love to call us of anything.

He has it made. All he has to do is get the Democrat-controlled House and Senate to pass a bill and send it to his desk. No need for any GOP help.

Like I said, he has his chance now and he better use it now because in 2010 things are probably going to change for him and not in a good way.; 7/22/09, 2:53 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr. Weevil - Roger wants to cum along.; 7/22/09, 2:54 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Jeremy is as dishonest as he is stupid. His 2:04pm comment talks about an estimated 2004 Bush deficit of $520 billion. The quoted and unlinked words were apparently written in 2004. What happened in the five years since? Anyone who followed Original Mike's 1:35pm link knows that the deficit peaked in 2004 around $400 billion, and shrank rapidly thereafter until the banking meltdown last fall. If it had continued the trend line, which looks very much like a sine curve, we would be heading into surplus this year or next.

Looks like supply-side economics actually worked. Bush cut taxes, which caused a short-term deficit, but the economy boomed so much that even his and Congress' reckless spending could not keep the deficit from shrinking after the first few years of expansion.

Now maybe last fall's banking meltdown was somehow caused by Bush, but if so, I'd like to know just how he rather than (e.g.) Barney Frank caused it.; 7/22/09, 2:55 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO said.."Actually, I don't think this is what he campaigned on. In fact, I know it isn't. Because had he campaigned on it, he probably would not have been elected."

You must be referring to "no nation building" or "compassionate conservative."

You're right.; 7/22/09, 2:55 PM
former law student said...: the call to post

You mean this?

http://www.audiosparx.com/sa/archive/Sports/Horse-track/First-Call-Bugle-Horn-Horse-Race-Call-to-Post/342417; 7/22/09, 2:56 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - you should be less concerned about the rich and the GOP and more about your Blue Dogs.; 7/22/09, 2:56 PM
TWM said...: "You must be referring to "no nation building" or "compassionate conservative."

You're right."

Jeremy, you have a talent for misdirection. You should be a magician.; 7/22/09, 2:57 PM
bagoh20 said...: " Jeremy said...

bagoh20 said..."Is there anything Palin or McCain or Rick Astley could have done any worse than Obama has? I'm serious. Since he is doing so well, What could be done worse?"

You mean over the vast period of time encompassing 6 months?
"

Why yes, yes I do. What's the matter it's just a question? What could he do worse? C'mon it's a wide open softball pitch.; 7/22/09, 3:01 PM
Alex said...: BTW 6 months has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is demanding 1000 page health care bill be passed RIGHT NOW or ELSE. If this were Bush, Jeremy would be crying foul and demanding deliberation!; 7/22/09, 3:03 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO said..."Jeremy, you have a talent for misdirection. You should be a magician."

It's really not about "misdirection," but the fact that campaigns and campaign promises are changed after elections. Everything you said could be said about every politician on the planet.

Are you denying that or do you just want to continue the whine and bitch fest?; 7/22/09, 3:03 PM
bagoh20 said...: Jeremy's stated purpose here is to educate right wingnuts:

When listening to the teacher I just see Mr. Garrison:

http://www.southparkstuff.com/images/stories/epiimgs/epi901/epi901img05.jpg; 7/22/09, 3:04 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex said..."BTW 6 months has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is demanding 1000 page health care bill be passed RIGHT NOW or ELSE."

Yeah, "rushing" into some kind of affordable health plan for all Americans...after only about 16 years since the last real debate is really irritating.

Duh.; 7/22/09, 3:04 PM
Jeremy said...: bagoh20 said..."Jeremy's stated purpose here is to educate right wingnuts..."

Finally, you get something almost right.

I'm not as much trying to "educate" as correct and bring people back to reality.

Bitching and whining will not help our country get back on track.; 7/22/09, 3:07 PM
TWM said...: "It's really not about "misdirection," but the fact that campaigns and campaign promises are changed after elections. Everything you said could be said about every politician on the planet."

Agreed, all politicians say one thing and do the other to a certain extent . . . BUT . . . Barry said he was the exception to this rule. He campaigned on that as a matter of fact. Everything was going to be different. No more corruption. Open government. The end of all the Bush-era rights violations. Equality for gays. Etc. Etc.

So you'll have to excuse me when I am a little taken aback to find out he wasn't what he claimed.

I wonder why you aren't equally taken aback.

Then again, those were campaign promises too so under the bus they went like all campaign promises.

Hope and more of the same.

"Are you denying that or do you just want to continue the whine and bitch fest?"

Actually, I enjoy a good whine and bitch fest as you obviously do as well.; 7/22/09, 3:08 PM
Roger J. said...: "Bitching and whining will not help our country get back on track.

Arbeit mach frei; 7/22/09, 3:08 PM
Synova said...: "With great humor the author captures the not so secret fantasy world of the right wingers who listen to conservative talk radio and posts to this site. You got to love it!"

Well, I'm glad someone thought it was amusing.

My amusement lasted right through "I inherited it". After that my supposed "secret fantasy world" was more of a "gawd this is stupid" than anything else.

Of course those intellectually better than myself thought that "A Handmaids Tale" was brilliant cautionary literature and that Erica Jong was brave to point out to an Italian publication that Dick Cheney was bringing the National Guard home in order to lead them down Pennsylvania Avenue if Obama won the presidency.

The really COOL thing about imaginary realities is that when they change no one has to apologize or feel foolish.; 7/22/09, 3:10 PM
TWM said...: "Yeah, "rushing" into some kind of affordable health plan for all Americans...after only about 16 years since the last real debate is really irritating.

Duh."

You and I both know he is rushing it through because it is widely unpopular among voters and is only going to be more so as more and more of them become aware of just how bad it is.

He knows it is doomed and along with it his presidency (he said so himself) if he doesn't get it passed now.

I would almost feel sorry for him except I like my health care, along with the vast majority of Americans, and I want to keep it.; 7/22/09, 3:12 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Jeremy still hasn't explained why he tried (2:04pm) to 'educate' us with an estimated 2005 budget deficit of $520 billion when the actual deficit turned out to be around $320. A 62.5% overestimate is pretty gross, and that estimated deficit did not happen, as we now know. Why does Jeremy pretend that it did? Is he stupid, dishonest, insance, or some combination of two or more of the three?; 7/22/09, 3:12 PM
Jeremy said...: Roger - But don't you have to have a job before you can work?; 7/22/09, 3:13 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr. Weevil - I don't buy into any of your numbers.

Quit whining.

Little baby.; 7/22/09, 3:14 PM
bagoh20 said...: Since no Obamites answered my question: "What could have been done worse in 6 months?"

I'll assume nothing could have. I agree. Thanks.; 7/22/09, 3:18 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO - How long should Obama wait?

The last debate was about 16 years ago and we have 30-40 million Americans without health care, the highest costs in the world and with unemployment rising as it is, how many more will lose their coverage?

The only reason you and others here are bitching about it is because you evidently have coverage through your employer or can afford to pay.

Do you not care about your fellow Americans who are less fortunate?; 7/22/09, 3:20 PM
Jeremy said...: Bago-Shit - Your logic is breathtaking.

Obama has been President for 6 months and all you and others here do is bitch, bitch, bitch...and whine.

Tell me all about the alternative proposals from your side of the aisle.; 7/22/09, 3:21 PM
former law student said...: "Blas mir einen" will work.; 7/22/09, 3:21 PM
Triangle Man said...: @TRO

Part of his campaign was health care reform. His proposed plan during the campaign was not a single-payer system, did not include a mandate requiring individuals to have coverage, and did have a public option ("the same plan that Senators get"). My question was whether you think this is the plan he really wants, or is aiming for something different. The House plan seems to reach further than Obama wanted by including mandated coverage.; 7/22/09, 3:22 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Check out the 'About me' category in Jeremy's Blogger profile: "All around delightful, engaging, educated, personable, fun, funny, romantic, fit, and liberal human being".

How much of that is accurate? I'm pretty sure he's a human being, and he may be 'fit' (physically, at least), but the rest is obviously false. Unless laughing at him rather than with him makes him 'fun' and 'funny'.; 7/22/09, 3:24 PM
Triangle Man said...: Jeremy,

The reason people (not the partisan hacks) are bitching about health care reform is that they think 1) they are going to end up paying a lot for it and 2) it is going to result in poorer care.; 7/22/09, 3:24 PM
chickelit said...: Saugen Sie meinen Dick.

Gott im Pimmel was hast Du gesagt?

FLS: shouldn't Blas mir einen be Blas mich ein?; 7/22/09, 3:27 PM
TWM said...: "TRO - How long should Obama wait?"

Well, in terms of working up a bill that at least everyone can read and understand, I would say he should work on it for a full year, don't you? I mean it IS only 1/6th of our economy we are talking about and I think it might deserve more than a few months discussion and research.

BTW, you keep talking like we have been debating health care for 16 years. We haven't. It was last discussed in any detail 16 years ago not consistently for 16 years. There is a difference.

"The only reason you and others here are bitching about it is because you evidently have coverage through your employer or can afford to pay.

Do you not care about your fellow Americans who are less fortunate?"

The fact is that 90% of Americans are covered under health care plans now. Barry's own numbers show that only 7% more will be covered by this new government run plan. A plan that will raise taxes and result in poorer quality care and rationing for everyone.

Why should 90% of Americans suffer just so he can say he insured 7% more?

What is it with Democrats anyway? Instead of making things better for everyone you just want to make everyone equally miserable.; 7/22/09, 3:28 PM
Jeremy said...: WHY THE RUSH???

Six-in-ten Americans—59.3 percent—receive health care through their employer.

Employers are shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month—just last month employment declined by 663,000—and the number of uninsured Americans continues to rise.

Forty-six million Americans lacked health care coverage in 2007, when the national employment level peaked and before the current economic recession officially began. Today, that number is markedly higher as many workers who have lost their jobs have also lost their employer-provided health insurance.

Employers have shed 5.1 million jobs in the last 15 MONTHS.

2.4 million workers have lost the health coverage their jobs provided since the start of the recession, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

More than 320,000 Americans lost their employer-provided health insurance in March alone, which amounts to...

...approximately 10,680 workers a day.
(Center For American Progress); 7/22/09, 3:28 PM
Jeremy said...: Pollo Loco - "God in the cock which you have said?"; 7/22/09, 3:29 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO - "The fact is that 90% of Americans are covered under health care plans now."

That's bullshit.; 7/22/09, 3:29 PM
Original Mike said...: Ah, doesn't the plan go into effect in 2013?; 7/22/09, 3:30 PM
Shanna said...: The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund.

You are aware that people who get paid in the top tax brackets have to pay more ss taxes than someone who makes, say, 30k, right? So, tell me how the heck that makes SS broke? Those people are paying way more than anyone else, relative to what they are getting out. They should be applauded for helping shore up the system, if this is really about math.

Jeremy - you should be less concerned about the rich and the GOP and more about your Blue Dogs.

Thank goodness a couple of my state politicians have some sense. They may ultimately cave, but they are making some headache’s for the president.

I heard a while ago from dem’s in my office, that all the southern dems were getting passed over for spots in the administration and were getting sort of pissed. Hmm, wonder if that kind of thing might come back to haunt him?; 7/22/09, 3:33 PM
TWM said...: "Part of his campaign was health care reform. His proposed plan during the campaign was not a single-payer system, did not include a mandate requiring individuals to have coverage, and did have a public option ("the same plan that Senators get"). My question was whether you think this is the plan he really wants, or is aiming for something different. The House plan seems to reach further than Obama wanted by including mandated coverage."

Call me a cynic, but I think he wants to socialize health care in the USA along the lines of the Canadian system. He campaigned on something different from that but only because he knew he would not win if he had told the truth.

I also believe Pelosi and her group want a government program.

As to who is willing to compromise more on that I don't know. Probably Barry as he has a lot at stake in getting something passed, even if he has to give up a government plan.

But frankly, I don't know what the guy is about. He's a suit of clothes to me and goes with whatever lie that makes him look good at the moment.; 7/22/09, 3:34 PM
Roger J. said...: Point of order, please! TRO: I am assuming that 90 percent figure includes medicare and medicaid along with private insurance?; 7/22/09, 3:34 PM
Der Hahn said...: Synova said...

The really COOL thing about imaginary realities is that when they change no one has to apologize or feel foolish.

Synova, for some people, they NEVER change.; 7/22/09, 3:34 PM
chickelit said...: Just tryin' to help you out a little there Jeremy. Why don't you run your German slurs by me before you put them out there.; 7/22/09, 3:35 PM
Jeremy said...: Triangle Man said..."Jeremy, The reason people (not the partisan hacks) are bitching about health care reform is that they think 1) they are going to end up paying a lot for it and 2) it is going to result in poorer care."

I realize that, but the system is so out of control right now, it's hard to imagine it being any worse.

People constantly scream about how horrible care is in Canada and Europe, but based on my own experience traveling through Canada and Europe for years on business and pleasure, that's is just not true.

I've had many, many conversations with friends and business associates and I've never heard a discouraging word about their health care. They don't wait ridiculous periods of time for health care, they wait about the same period of time that Americans do.

And they always asked me the same question: Why do Americans pay so much for so little?

Can YOU explain why we're the ONLY industrialized nation on the planet that does NOT have a national health care plan for its citizens? Are we to believe we're the only ones who are right...and everybody else is wrong?

C'mon...; 7/22/09, 3:37 PM
Jeremy said...: Shanna - "So, tell me how the heck that makes SS broke?"

Maybe because they don't contribute to SS?

Duh.; 7/22/09, 3:38 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - why are you whining to us about it? Go whine to the Blue Dogs.; 7/22/09, 3:40 PM
Jeremy said...: hanna - "...the payroll tax ceiling hasn't kept up with the growth in executive pay. As executive pay has increased, the percentage of wages subject to payroll taxes has shrunk, to 83% from 90% in 1982....

The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund. In May, the government said the Social Security fund would be exhausted in 2037, four years earlier than was predicted in 2008....

The ceiling, which is indexed to the average growth in wages, is $106,800 in 2009.."; 7/22/09, 3:40 PM
Michael said...: Jeremy, I beg you to please stop using the term "wingnut" it is so very last year.

We are now, sadly for you, moving from the bushitler era into the Oblahblahblahma period.

Welcome to the majority.; 7/22/09, 3:41 PM
Big Mike said...: Prediction: by the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2012 Barack Obama will have stunk up the place so badly that even Jeremey will vote Republican.

You read it here first!!!; 7/22/09, 3:41 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex - I have problem with the Blue Dog Democrats, it's their right to vote anyway they want.

But I also think they'll fall in line.

And anyway, I have two Black Dog Democrats.; 7/22/09, 3:42 PM
Alex said...: Yes on November 2012, Jeremy will pull the lever for... Sarah Palin!; 7/22/09, 3:42 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy said:

"But I also think they'll fall in line."

I wouldn't be so sure of yourself sport. You wanna bet?; 7/22/09, 3:44 PM
Jeremy said...: Michael - If you think wingnut is so last year, you need to read more of the comments posted here.

And, yes, I know how it hurts to be thrown into grouping of such silly, uneducated people...but that's what you get.

Wingnut.; 7/22/09, 3:45 PM
TWM said...: "TRO - "The fact is that 90% of Americans are covered under health care plans now."

That's bullshit."

I saw that number earlier today and I can't find it but I did find a 2008 number that showed that 15 percent of Americans have no coverage.

So strike 90% and put in 85%.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus
/f-news/2284157/posts

Of course that does NOT count the Americans who choose not to be insured but can afford it if they wanted - up to 18 million by a Census Bureau count. Nor does it include about 10 to 12 million illegal aliens in the country. Nor does it include those who don't have insurance but DO have access to health care for emergency services. Also, it doesn't factor in people losing health insurance for a short while but getting it back after they leave one job and get another.

http://briansullivan.blogs.\
foxbusiness.com/2009/06/16/are-46-million-really-without-health-insurance-in-america-yes-no/

Fact is most Americans have good to excellent health care and they don't want to lose it to some government program.; 7/22/09, 3:46 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex - I'll bet Obama gets a health care bill through.; 7/22/09, 3:47 PM
TWM said...: "Point of order, please! TRO: I am assuming that 90 percent figure includes medicare and medicaid along with private insurance?"

I believe so, yes, but coverage is coverage.; 7/22/09, 3:48 PM
Shanna said...: Of course those intellectually better than myself thought that "A Handmaids Tale" was brilliant cautionary literature

God that book was paranoid and dumb. And then ending was stupid as hell. Why do people love that book?

Why should 90% of Americans suffer just so he can say he insured 7% more?

Not to mention that half of that 7% is probably 20somethings who don’t feel like getting health insurance because they are unlikely to get sick.; 7/22/09, 3:48 PM
Alex said...: IF Obama gets a bill through it will be without the provision that makes private plans illegal. You can count on that. Current plan = DOA. You can take that to the bank!; 7/22/09, 3:49 PM
Alex said...: ObamaCare for illegal aliens:

http://michellemalkin.com/; 7/22/09, 3:50 PM
TWM said...: "IF Obama gets a bill through it will be without the provision that makes private plans illegal. You can count on that. Current plan = DOA. You can take that to the bank!"

I think any plan that has a government option is dead. And there are other things in it that are killers as well.

He'll get something through. He has to or as he said himself his presidency is over. So the Dems will cut out the crap and hopefully pass something that looks good in the headlines but doesn't do much if anything substantive.

At least I hope that's the way it goes.; 7/22/09, 3:53 PM
Shanna said...: The ceiling, which is indexed to the average growth in wages, is $106,800 in 2009.."

Yes, thank you for making my point. Those people are paying payroll taxes on the full 106k (so they are paying more than they would be if they were making less than 106k), but when they retire they are only one person. They will not be getting more back from social security than they put in, so who the hell are they the one’s getting blamed? They are not the one’s bankrupting the system.; 7/22/09, 3:56 PM
Alex said...: Of course McCain, Snowe and Specter could always save the day for Zero and clutch defeat from the jaws of victory...; 7/22/09, 3:56 PM
Jeremy said...: TRO said...""IF Obama gets a bill through it will be without the provision that makes private plans illegal."

There is no such provision.

READ the BILL:

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.

(a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE DEFINED. -- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ''grandfathered health insurance coverage'' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 [2013] if the following conditions are met:

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT. --

(A) IN GENERAL. -- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

(B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED. -- Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day.; 7/22/09, 3:57 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: From 1973 to 2009, the payroll taxes (Fica & medicare) went from
11.7% & a salary cap of $10,800 to 15.3% & a salary cap of $106,800.

So the maximum tax paid in 1973 was $1,264 versus a maximum tax paid in 2009 of $16,340.

The salary cap grew by 980% and the maximum tax paid grew by 1200%.

But according to Jeremy, the systems are facing insolvency because too many people make more than the salary cap.

Coincidentally, Joe Biden joined the Senate in 1973 so I guess we could blame him.

I estimate 1973 was also around the time Althouse joined the full-time workforce. Many people in her age group have felt the brunt of the growing salary cap and the increased rate. Heh.; 7/22/09, 3:58 PM
garage mahal said...: ObamaCare for illegal aliens:

http://michellemalkin.com/.

That settles it!; 7/22/09, 3:58 PM
Jeremy said...: Shanna - You're not the brightest bulb on the block are you?

THIS has nothing to do with what was paid on the way UP:

The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund. In May, the government said the Social Security fund would be exhausted in 2037, four years earlier than was predicted in 2008....

The ceiling, which is indexed to the average growth in wages, is $106,800 in 2009.."; 7/22/09, 3:59 PM
Jeremy said...: AJ - "But according to Jeremy, the systems are facing insolvency because too many people make more than the salary cap."

Actually it's directly from an article in the Wall Street Journal.

You know, that bastion of liberal thinking.; 7/22/09, 4:00 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - I won't read your Obama/Pelosi bill, not a single paragraph. I don't trust a single word that comes out of their mouth or any bill they propose I should swallow. They are the enemy and I will oppose them with every fiber of my being!

Now you should defend to the DEATH, my right to dissent.; 7/22/09, 4:01 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex + Michelle Malkin = D-U-M-B; 7/22/09, 4:01 PM
Alex said...: Michelle Malkin is a very trust source and I would not put down that smart lady. Anyone who does is a racist.; 7/22/09, 4:01 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex - "Now you should defend to the DEATH, my right to dissent."

I do.

I just don't defend your right to comment on something you haven't or can't read.

Duh.; 7/22/09, 4:02 PM
chickelit said...: That settles it!

Garage: It's all part of creating a permanent democratic majority. So far, it's working brilliantly.; 7/22/09, 4:02 PM
TWM said...: "TRO said...""IF Obama gets a bill through it will be without the provision that makes private plans illegal."

There is no such provision."

Actually, Jeremy, I did not say that. I was quoting someone else. That said I do believe that at some point it did make them illegal in the bill. It may have been struck but I am pretty sure it was there.

Doesn't matter. If there is a public option there is no way private plans will be able to compete. It will destroy private insurance as we know it and result in tanking 1/6th of our economy. (Or is it 1/5th? I can never remember.)

That's why the Blue Dogs and the Dem governors and increasingly everyone with any sense is starting to fight it.; 7/22/09, 4:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeremy,

Social Security benefits are capped just like contributions. Someone who made a million dollars a year before retirement gets exactly the same as someone who made $106,000. Below that threshold it's a flat tax on income and the benefits are adjusted accordingly.

The system was explicitly designed that way so that FDR could peddle it to the public as a savings plan rather than a welfare handout, back in the dark ages when Democrats actually had a little pride and self respect about such things.; 7/22/09, 4:03 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex said..."Michelle Malkin is a very trust source..."

Say what?; 7/22/09, 4:03 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - you have to defend the right of my dissent, unqualified. No conditions allowed. I am a patriotic American, and how DARE you question my patriotism!!!!; 7/22/09, 4:04 PM
Dr Weevil said...: If Jeremy 'doesn't buy' any of my numbers (3:14pm), perhaps he could provide his own. So far the numbers for Bush's deficits he's given us come from a 2004 estimate of what would happen in 2005, with nothing about what actually did happen. If Jeremy has a better set of numbers than the one Original Mike linked to, he needs to provide them. Anything else would be shamefully dishonest.; 7/22/09, 4:04 PM
Shanna said...: The growing portion of pay that exceeds the maximum amount subject to payroll taxes has contributed to the weakening of the Social Security trust fund.

Insults aside, you just looking at this completely differently than I do. I start from the idea that as originally conceived, SS is you paying into a system until at some point you take that money back. Now obviously, somebody didn't do the math right and that isnt' working, but it's absurd to blame that on the people who are more than paying for their own portions, as those above the cap are.

SS would not be insolvent if those who received it paid enough to cover their own portion. Read AJ's post for figures.; 7/22/09, 4:04 PM
Jeremy said...: Skookum John - I understand.

I quoted a Wall Street Journal report,

Why not take it up with them?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124813343694466841.html; 7/22/09, 4:05 PM
bagoh20 said...: 100% of Americans have health care. They just don't all have insurance, and still will not under this bill.

If this is wrong, where are all the bodies? In fact, since I'm acquainted with many illegal aliens, I can say 100% of them also get medial care when they need it, for free.

All I want is for everyone to pay something to reduce the average cost, and for everyone to have the right to treatment, as they do now, and to insurance which they don't all now.
It does not need to be overhauled unless your real objective is taking power away from the people.; 7/22/09, 4:05 PM
Jeremy said...: Shanna - I quoted a Wall Street Journal report,

Why not take it up with them?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124813343694466841.html; 7/22/09, 4:05 PM
Jeremy said...: Bag-Oh-Shit - "100% of Americans have health care."

Oh, okay.

Can we assume you're counting emergency rooms?; 7/22/09, 4:07 PM
Shanna said...: And aside from what I've just said, it is patently absurd to state, as you did, that more people are making more money, and thus paying more into SS, and that is what is causing the system to have less money. Really?

Honestly, do some math.; 7/22/09, 4:07 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr Weevil - Oh, okay.

Bush kept everything under control. He left Obama with a huge surplus and no debt.

Duh.; 7/22/09, 4:08 PM
traditionalguy said...: NEXT ON AGENDA FOR OBAMA: Did you know that there are Americans without cars, while the wealthy have many cars that they do not drive? It doesn't matter that people can get free rides or take subsidised public transportation. Social justice demands that we pay for equality of cars as a fundamental American right! If we must pay for disabled persons to get everything re-designed for them, then the monetarily disabled deserve to get everything we have too. THEREFORE all money is hereby confiscated by Congress pending a socially just re-distribution run by a few close insider friends of the former Governor of Illinois.; 7/22/09, 4:09 PM
Alex said...: As usual the libs want to move the goalposts. Now they want to soak the rich to pay for this "universal health care". Interesting that the American people aren't biting? I mean Ed Shultz is SCREAMING on Air America right now about this - but who's listening?; 7/22/09, 4:09 PM
Jeremy said...: Shanna - For Christ's sake...it came from the article I posted.

It appeared YESTERDAY.

Write the Wall Street Journal a fucking letter and tell them where they're wrong.

I'm sure they'll retract the entire story and apologize.; 7/22/09, 4:09 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy - yeah emergency rooms count as health care. Too fucking bad.; 7/22/09, 4:10 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex said..."Now they want to soak the rich to pay for this "universal health care"."

Yeah, why can't we make the poor pay for this?

They're the one with all the...oh, wait...

Never mind.; 7/22/09, 4:10 PM
Scott M said...: Throughout all of this back and forth, here among other places, I have not heard hide-nor-hair of two issues.

1) What happens to people, like Yours Truly, who manage their entire health care through the use of a HSA? I do all the work, I pay all the bills, and, for my trouble, I get my deposits into that account tax free.

What happens to me then? That dovetails into my second question...

2) How does this massive overhaul either protect or expand liberty? From the party that's supposed to be all about individuals and their personal freedoms (stay out of my bedroom, stay out of my uterus, stay out of my hemp plot, etc) get by with reducing personal liberty?

I heard one of the Dems being interviewed by the afternoon host on Sirius Left (Mark something, I believe) and when a caller asked the congressman pointedly about penalties for not participating, the actually said, "we're going to ask everyone to enroll in" this or that, and in the same damned breath listed the penalties.

"Ask" in the Democratic party, apparently, means, "do it or we'll fine you".

Liberty, indeed.; 7/22/09, 4:11 PM
Jeremy said...: Alex said..."Jeremy - yeah emergency rooms count as health care."

For the uninsured.

Right?; 7/22/09, 4:11 PM
Alex said...: Jeremy you just admitted you want to soak the rich to pay for single-payer. Busted. Commie-bastard.; 7/22/09, 4:12 PM
Jeremy said...: Scott M - Get rid of your insurance and move.; 7/22/09, 4:12 PM
Shanna said...: I can't read the article, it requires a subscription. Oh well. So long, folks.; 7/22/09, 4:12 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Jeremy lies again (4:08pm). That's not what I said, and you know it, Jeremy. Now you've trashed the only set of deficit numbers provided on this thread. Either provide better ones while explaining how they are better, admit that you're just making shit up, or just slink away quietly and leave the conversation to the grownups. Your choice.; 7/22/09, 4:13 PM
Jeremy said...: Is there any chance I can purchase some of the terrific drugs many here are obviously taking on a regular basis?; 7/22/09, 4:14 PM
Jeremy said...: Dr Evil - I'm just trying to settle you down. You're getting all worked up, and based on most of your comments, I have to believe you're running low on meds.

R-E-L-A-X-X-X-X...

Or, hey, maybe Ex-Lax is in order?; 7/22/09, 4:18 PM
Roger J. said...: Shanna: you can read the comments which are quite informative.; 7/22/09, 4:20 PM
Scott M said...: @Jeremy

Scott M - Get rid of your insurance and move

You obviously didn't read carefully. I have a health savings account. I essentially pay cash out of that account for all of my, and my wife's, and my three (soon to be four) kids. It works beautifully and the various docs love it. In fact, we get serious discounts for doing it this way.

If I'm reading you correctly, though, your advice to someone who's legitimately concerned about this is to move? Move what and where? Out of the country?

Really? That's your intellectually honest response to HSA's (which are a burden on no one).; 7/22/09, 4:21 PM
Dr Weevil said...: Oh, look, Jeremy's projecting again, accusing others of mental illness or constipation for simply asking him to defend something he's written. I'm feeling fine, Jeremy, what's your problem? If the linked chart of Bush deficits is wrong, why can't you link to the right numbers? Are you incapable of arguing competently and honestly?; 7/22/09, 4:24 PM
chickelit said...: Pollo Loco - 'God in the cock which you have said?'

Didn't like that Jeremy? How about:

"Im Pimmel es gibt kein Bier, darum du säufst es hier..."; 7/22/09, 4:25 PM
Alex said...: Scott M - HSA are a Bush/GOP invention and thus must be slammed/derided and blasted to oblivion. If Zero didn't create it, Jeremy has no interest. HSAs are a great thing.; 7/22/09, 4:26 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I did make one one mistake. They took the salary cap off of Medicare tax rate so the maximum tax paid is higher than I stated for 2009.; 7/22/09, 4:27 PM
chickelit said...: Yeah, why can't we make the poor pay for this?

They're the one with all the...oh, wait...

Back in the day, the poor used to pay with whatever they had. Nobody should expect anybody to work for them for free.; 7/22/09, 4:31 PM
Ben (The Tiger in Exile) said...: President Gingrich?

Sold.; 7/22/09, 4:38 PM
Big Mike said...: @Jeremy, the "wonder drug" is called truth serum. You should try it some time.; 7/22/09, 4:43 PM
bagoh20 said...: I don't know who posted it, but there was a great post recently asking why this universal care idea does not apply to legal representation which is similar to health care in a lot of ways. Govt. provided lawyers with no private hiring allowed. I'm sure they will get right on that. Oh yea and if your case is too hard to defend you just lose to save money.; 7/22/09, 4:46 PM
bagoh20 said...: ". The average wait time for bypass surgery in New York is 17 days -- compared to 72 days in the Netherlands and 59 days in Sweden.

Patients with serious illnesses such as cancer face much longer odds of survival in government-run health care systems. In the United Kingdom, the five-year survival rate for patients diagnosed with breast cancer early on is 78 percent -- compared to 98 percent for similar patients in the U.S. "

From: Peter Pitts, president of the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest in New York City and a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration associate commissioner.; 7/22/09, 4:52 PM
Alex said...: bagoh20 - so given the real stats how do the slurpers get away with saying US health care is inferior to all those wonderful single-payer systems? I'd rather be bankrupted and alive, then a full savings account and DEAD!; 7/22/09, 4:54 PM
Synova said...: HSA's *are* a great thing. Pre-tax savings accounts to pay for all of those regular and *expected* medical expenses, check-ups, tests, etc. Leave the *insurance* for medical issues that are a risk but you might never need. Like all *other* insurance.

Make it easier for cash-and-carry clinics to operate for people with minor illnesses or injuries, to keep them out of emergency rooms.

Put severe limits on malpractice suits... *severe* limits. If a doctor outright kills someone they can be tried in criminal court and go to jail. If a patient dies because life is risky and shit happens their family doesn't need to be made millionaires while the rest of us pay for it.

But hey... none of that involves the government getting bigger or satisfies the fairness concept of "one size fits all" so it's not at all acceptable, even if it would do more good and cost far less and wouldn't break the inherent incentives to research and develop new or better drugs and treatments.

(Also... not having a CAR is a huge inequity that directly impacts people every single day. Try getting a job when you have to tell them you have to rely on others for transportation!); 7/22/09, 4:56 PM
Alex said...: Synova - you know why libs hate HSAs? Because that's tax revenue deprived to the government to fund their dream programs.; 7/22/09, 4:58 PM
Alex said...: bagoh20 - we're supposed to believe that health care is THE ONE precious holy service that needs single-payer. Forget about shelter, food, legal representation, electricity. It's just health care! Of course once Zero takes over 1/6 of the economy, he'll move in on the rest of it. This would be just "getting started". A New New(Raw) Deal.; 7/22/09, 5:00 PM
Howard said...: Palin winning on '012 is a wet dream of the wimp limp bible bangers as they follower her off the cliff onto the evolutionary scrap-heap.

Osama Obama is just playing DC two-step, getting all of the lame-ass left-wing pipe dreams flushed down the sewer to be forgotten by '012...

then, poor Jeremy won't be able to sit down for a year after the royal reaming from his own party never having received his promised reach-around.; 7/22/09, 5:04 PM
BJM said...: Let's try to ignore the irony challenged troll, shall we?; 7/22/09, 5:12 PM
Alex said...: I just read an old, old article that HSAs are bad because they don't cover catastrophic care and won't encourage people to engage in preventive care.; 7/22/09, 5:16 PM
Jeremy said...: Howard - You appear to know quite a bit about those "reach-arounds."

Are you bunking with Alex and Hoosier?

Who leads when you dance?; 7/22/09, 5:20 PM
BJM said...: Howard, oddly enough a friend made a similar remark recently. That Obama was clearing left-wing weeds and we won't see his agenda until 2013.; 7/22/09, 5:21 PM
Jeremy said...: BJM said..."...we won't see his agenda until 2013.?

Yes, it's being kept in a secret vault in Kenya.

And the wingnut parade marches on...; 7/22/09, 5:23 PM
The Dude said...: Heh heh - Jeremy called someone gay. Isn't that precious. Soon he will move on to requests for oral sex. Then Titus will appear and tell us of the enormous Jeremy he just took. They are the two best commenters, evah!; 7/22/09, 5:23 PM
bagoh20 said...: Alex, I think the idea is that you would get low cost catastrophic insurance in addition to your HSA. Since HSA is basically paying for your own care, i would expect those people to be very careful about prevention. That's how I see it. For someone like me who likes to live dangerously and has preexisting stuff HSA just won't help. I need to just keep my insurance going no matter what. Which means if needed I will sacrifice all luxuries to keep it. That's MY responsibility.; 7/22/09, 5:25 PM
chickelit said...: If Obama really wants a "big government" solution to healthcare costs, why not subsidize tuition for doctors and nurses ala post Sputnik funding of science education? This would lead, as it did for science, to a glut of very talented practitioners.; 7/22/09, 5:27 PM
Alex said...: bagoh - but what about having an iPhone, premium cable subscription AND 60" plasma TV? one shouldn't have to choose between those necessities and medical insurance.; 7/22/09, 5:35 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: It is interesting that Jeremy keeps citing the section of the bill that really does point out a big part of the problem with the current version of ObamaCare.

The way it would work, under the bill, is that your health care plan could be grandfathered up to five years. After that, its gone. You would be stuck with one of a very small number of approved plans. And, you could add dependents to your plan during those five years. I am not quite sure though if that means that I could bring my domestic partner along, without marrying her, which we are trying to avoid. Probably not, even though it is allowed right now.

So, no, you might not lose your current plan IMMEDIATELY. And that, I think is the proposition that Jeremy keeps pushing. But you will eventually, and may possibly do so immediately, depending on your employer, insurer, etc.; 7/22/09, 5:37 PM
Howard said...: Well BJM, your friend is obviously a genius. Clinton did this by accident and came up with the turd-way politics that is just a domestic version of Nixon/'s trilateral diplomacy. Clinton's turn to the right resulted in the most popular and fiscally responsible conservative administration since Eisenhower.

Jer: Touche. A wee bit to close to the mark for my fragile ego. No one can compete with you head to head. I like how the facts, figures and talking points roll off your fingers like buttah. Having your nose buried in a crack must make it sooo easy to see the big picture in a reality-based community setting.

You are absolutely spot on that it's no Kenyan secret that Obama wants a second term. The tough part for him is the fact that he won't be compared to the imbecile Bush in '012. I'm afraid that guys like you might be coyote ugly at that point.

The USA is a conservative country. Mainstream Democrats that control national elections are by and large conservative. Keep repeating: California voted for Prop 8! I'm concerned that you are too drunk on the milky nektar to realize that Rahm views you as cannon fodder... exactly at the same level as the Princess Sarah minions.; 7/22/09, 5:47 PM
Alex said...: Howard, I don't agree with Prop 8. However, look at what's happening in CA:

* cutting social programs
* cutting back union funding
* can't pass tax increase on the wealthy

How can this be happening in ObamaNation?; 7/22/09, 5:51 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: As for HSAs, you may be fine as long as your grandfathered high deductible plan stays in force. But it appears from my reading of the bill that high deductible plans will not be qualified. One problem with them appears to be how routine care is handled. The bill seems to ban cost sharing (but seems to allow co-pays) in the basic policy of qualified plans.

I need to reread things a bit, but I also question from my previous reading whether the high deductible plans used by HSAs would ever be qualified, due to their high deductibles. Heaven forbid that a medical insurance plan wouldn't provide first dollar coverage.

At a minimum, qualified plans will apparently have to cover routine care, as well as maternity, well baby, and well child care. And these are places where money has traditionally been saved with HSAs and high deductible plans.; 7/22/09, 5:57 PM
Synova said...: "Alex, I think the idea is that you would get low cost catastrophic insurance in addition to your HSA. Since HSA is basically paying for your own care, i would expect those people to be very careful about prevention."

I would think that the possibility of a major sickness would promote preventive care. The idea that catching something early is better than late isn't rocket science after all. Who is going to tell herself that it's not worth getting a mammogram because it's all the same difference anyhow to remove a lump or an entire breast?

People don't go for tests who DO have all those tests covered by insurance. It's not an issue of paying for it most of the time, it's denial or not wanting to bother.

With an HSA you've got money for tests the same as if you paid into an "insurance" policy that covers everything like that (since there is no chance you won't need check-ups and tests you pay in just as much as you would need to pay for them yourself *anyway*.)

And then get catastrophic coverage for those things that might NOT happen but might anyway... car crashes or cancer or broken bones or a complication during pregnancy or delivery... where it makes sense to go in with others and pay so if you're the unlucky one that gets sick or injured you're covered.

*Insurance* isn't meant to cover routine maintenance.; 7/22/09, 5:57 PM