"Franken's loud enough, he's rude enough"
Mike
Franken's loud enough, he's rude enough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
When Sen. Al Franken, Minnesota Democrat, was a comedian, he was never
that funny. Take the title of his book "Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat
Idiot" - that's some high-quality humor there. Clever, daring and yet
so second grade. But when Minnesotans elected him to the Senate, Mr.
Franken promised that those days were behind him and that he would
work hard to win over his colleagues. So far, his presence in the
Senate is making it a less civil place. If the old Mr. Franken were to
write a book about it, the title might be "Al Franken Is a Dirty
Rotten Liar."
Twice recently, Mr. Franken's obnoxiousness was on public display. On
Dec. 14, after having missed most of a talk by Sen. John Thune, Mr.
Franken tore into him, time after time accusing the South Dakota
Republican of being dishonest by claiming that the Senate bill would
hike taxes immediately while delaying the "spending benefits."
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own
facts," Mr. Franken repeated ad nauseam. However, the Senate newbie
didn't have a clue what he was talking about.
What justified all of Mr. Franken's yelling and boorish behavior? What
evidence did Mr. Franken have that Mr. Thune was wrong? His first
example is a regulation that starts immediately: a ban on insurance
companies imposing lifetime limits on benefits. Mr. Franken doesn't
understand the difference between government spending and the
government forcing businesses to spend money.
Mr. Franken's next example was a tax credit. Apparently, the simple
distinction between taxing and spending is too much for the "Saturday
Night Live"- educated lawmaker.
To compound Mr. Franken's rude and ignorant display, he refused to
allow the experienced Mr. Thune to help him understand budgeting
basics. The Republican offered to bring out a chart that he had
previously used to make things clear, but Mr. Franken wasn't
interested in facts as much as cheap attacks.
On Dec. 17, Mr. Franken followed up with a jab at Sen. Joe Lieberman,
Connecticut independent, preventing the senior senator from taking an
additional minute to finish his remarks, which is a routine request.
Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican known for crossing the aisle
to work with Democrats, said Mr. Franken's boorish behavior was
something that he hadn't seen in "around 20 some years" in the Senate.
Democrats eventually explained that they simply wanted to rush through
the health care bill and couldn't afford another minute. If this were
true, Mr. Franken should have explained himself at the time of his
remarks.
The list of such obnoxious acts is getting long.
During the summer, Mr. Franken reportedly savaged T. Boone Pickens, a
guest at a Democratic policy lunch, for helping fund the Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth five years ago.
There is too much partisanship already in Washington. With President
Obama completely ignoring his promises to work with Republicans,
senators such as Mr. Franken are making an already bad situation worse.
John A. Weeks III
<916c19b7-4696-4227...@v7g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
Mike <yard...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There is too much partisanship already in Washington. With President
> Obama completely ignoring his promises to work with Republicans,
> senators such as Mr. Franken are making an already bad situation worse.
Ummmm, how does one "work with Republicans" when they have opposed every
attempt that Mr. Obama has made to save the economy and provide health
care for Americans? It is the Republicans who are the obstructionists,
not Mr. Obama. And making the Republicans sit in the back of the bus
is a good thing--after all, look what they did to America when they
had the chance--got us into a false war and crashed the economy. Any
group of people that say that they hope America fails does not have
the moral authority to have a voice in how the nation is governed.
-john-
--
======================================================================
John A. Weeks III � � � � � 612-720-2854 � � � � � �jo...@johnweeks.com
Newave Communications � � � � � � � � � � � � http://www.johnweeks.com
======================================================================
Scott Smith
>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/27/frankens-loud-enough-hes-rude-enough/?feat=article_top10_commented
>
>Franken's loud enough, he's rude enough
I'm glad to have someone like Franken in office. I'm glad he doesn't
pull punches and that he says exactly what's on his mind (and the minds of
many of his constituents).
Personally, I hope he keeps up his "rudeness" to Republicans....they
deserve it. After years of Dick Cheney telling people to fuck off, turnabout
is fair play.
.
.
catpandaddy
"Scott Smith" <scott...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:6j5jj5tubqt5avpnp...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:49:03 -0800 (PST), Mike <yard...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/27/frankens-loud-enough-hes-rude-enough/?feat=article_top10_commented
>>
>>Franken's loud enough, he's rude enough
>
> I'm glad to have someone like Franken in office. I'm glad he doesn't
> pull punches and that he says exactly what's on his mind (and the minds of
> many of his constituents).
Headers trimmed.
I'm not sure I fully get the issue he has with the proposed regulation
banning the imposition of lifetime limits on benefits. Isn't this supposed
to be something both parties would be in favor of?
[Query for informational gathering purposes only.]
D.A.Tsenuf
"John A. Weeks III" <jo...@johnweeks.com> wrote in message
news:john-A16B13.2...@news-3.octanews.net...
> In article
> <916c19b7-4696-4227...@v7g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
> Mike <yard...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> There is too much partisanship already in Washington. With President
>> Obama completely ignoring his promises to work with Republicans,
>> senators such as Mr. Franken are making an already bad situation worse.
>
> Ummmm, how does one "work with Republicans" when they have opposed every
> attempt that Mr. Obama has made to save the economy and provide health
> care for Americans? It is the Republicans who are the obstructionists,
> not Mr. Obama. And making the Republicans sit in the back of the bus
> is a good thing--after all, look what they did to America when they
> had the chance--got us into a false war and crashed the economy. Any
> group of people that say that they hope America fails does not have
> the moral authority to have a voice in how the nation is governed.
>
So when did Obambi invited the Republicans into the White House to discuss
the Health Bill.
Apparently your ideology prevents you from seeing the truth
Mike H
> "Scott Smith" <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6j5jj5tubqt5avpnp...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:49:03 -0800 (PST), Mike <yard22...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/27/frankens-loud-enough-...
>
> >>Franken's loud enough, he's rude enough
>
> > I'm glad to have someone like Franken in office. I'm glad he doesn't
> > pull punches and that he says exactly what's on his mind (and the minds of
> > many of his constituents).
>
> Headers trimmed.
>
> I'm not sure I fully get the issue he has with the proposed regulation
> banning the imposition of lifetime limits on benefits. Isn't this supposed
> to be something both parties would be in favor of?
>
> [Query for informational gathering purposes only.]
I dunno, ask the Democrats. The Senate Democrats stuck a loop hole
into their proposal allowing for some limits to be applied.
http://www.physorg.com/news179739324.html
Why someone might want to allow lifetime bans is to allow insurance
companies to limit their exposure. If insurance companies are not
able to limit their exposure on a particular plan they put forward,
logic would dictate that the plan put forward will then be more
costly, than a plan where they could limit their exposure.
One of the big problems with the health care debate is that no one can
really predict what will happen when any version of the plan is put
into effect. My guess is that in the short term, health insurance
costs will go through the roof and covered procedures will be cut
dramatically. In the long term, the cost of medical care should drop
and our nations growth in health care spending should level off.
notme
wrote:
Cross posting: ALWAYS an indication of a quality post. Not
'Franken reportedly savaged T. Boone Pickens, a
guest at a Democratic policy lunch, for helping fund the Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth five years ago.'
Why, you say her 'reportedly "savaged" T. Boone Pickens?
Because he helped fund the biggest bunch of liars never to have been
prosecuted for their slander and libel?
I'm shocked, shocked I say!
What a tool.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 091229-0, 12/29/2009
Tested on: 12/29/2009 12:20:35 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
Thomas T. Veldhouse
It's worth noting as well that the Republicans *did* submit *MANY* proposals
to the bill and *ALL* were ignored outright by the majority Democrats. So
much for thier promise to work in a bipartisan way, and for that fact, so much
for many of their promises [i.e. about entitlements/earmarks etc ... they have
all been bought and sold and don't represent their constituants in the
majority of cases, hence the Democratics statement about "giving up a few
Democratic seats" to get the bill passed ... isn't that wrong that a
representative went against those who he/she represents?].
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.
John A. Weeks III
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ... isn't that wrong that a
> representative went against those who he/she represents?].
Yes, it is very wrong. That is why the Republicans deserved to
be shut out of the legislative process for opposing the public
option despite polls showing that 65% of Americans favored them.
If just 5 GOP legislators would have taken their hands out of
the insurance company pockets and voted the way the people
wanted them to, we could have had a single payer system and
once again moved toward worldwide leadership in healthcare.
Scott Smith
>In article <7pv40l...@mid.individual.net>,
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ... isn't that wrong that a
>> representative went against those who he/she represents?].
>
>Yes, it is very wrong. That is why the Republicans deserved to
>be shut out of the legislative process for opposing the public
>option despite polls showing that 65% of Americans favored them.
>If just 5 GOP legislators would have taken their hands out of
>the insurance company pockets and voted the way the people
>wanted them to, we could have had a single payer system and
>once again moved toward worldwide leadership in healthcare.
>
>-john-
Well said, John.
.
.
Thomas T. Veldhouse
> In article <7pv40l...@mid.individual.net>,
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ... isn't that wrong that a
>> representative went against those who he/she represents?].
>
> Yes, it is very wrong. That is why the Republicans deserved to
> be shut out of the legislative process for opposing the public
> option despite polls showing that 65% of Americans favored them.
> If just 5 GOP legislators would have taken their hands out of
> the insurance company pockets and voted the way the people
> wanted them to, we could have had a single payer system and
> once again moved toward worldwide leadership in healthcare.
You assume of course that a single payer system is somehow beneficial.
And as for a representative not representing the people that he or she
represents; that is plain and simply *WRONG* and the ends never justify the
means.
By the way, I would go back and check the *poll* numbers (which are in no way
official by any means, but you know how to use them to your liking) and see
exactly what the support is. The people are waking up and realizing that they
can't afford all the bull shit entitlements and by God as my witness, if this
thing comes to life, you just wait and see if it really does pay for itself in
savings .... none of us are stupid and we *all* know that it will not. It
will just add to the debt for all the unfunded programs already promised but
not paid for.
Scott Smith
wrote:
>In mn.general John A. Weeks III <jo...@johnweeks.com> wrote:
>> In article <7pv40l...@mid.individual.net>,
>> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ... isn't that wrong that a
>>> representative went against those who he/she represents?].
>>
>> Yes, it is very wrong. That is why the Republicans deserved to
>> be shut out of the legislative process for opposing the public
>> option despite polls showing that 65% of Americans favored them.
>> If just 5 GOP legislators would have taken their hands out of
>> the insurance company pockets and voted the way the people
>> wanted them to, we could have had a single payer system and
>> once again moved toward worldwide leadership in healthcare.
>
>You assume of course that a single payer system is somehow beneficial.
It sure is for people who don't have insurance or who can't afford the
ridiculous costs of health insurance right now.
.
.