Watch out for Obama's latest propaganda cold deck
Irish Mike
After President Obama devoted much of 2009 to health care and global
warming�two issues far down Americans' list of concerns�the White House
says he will pivot to jobs and deficit reduction in his State of the Union
speech in a few weeks. The White House is considering dramatic gestures,
perhaps announcing a spending freeze or even a 2% or 3% reduction in
nondefense spending.
But Americans shouldn't be misled by the election year ploy: Mr. Obama
rigged the game by giving himself plenty of room to look tough on
spending. He did that by increasing discretionary domestic spending for
the last half of fiscal year 2009 by 8% and then increasing it another 12%
for fiscal year 2010.
So discretionary domestic spending now stands at $536 billion, up nearly
24% from President George W. Bush's last full year budget in fiscal 2008
of $433.6 billion. That's a huge spending surge, even for a profligate
liberal like Mr. Obama. The $102 billion spending increase doesn't even
count the $787 billion stimulus package, of which $534 billion remains
unspent.
Mr. Obama can placate congressional Democrats by arguing that all that
extra spending he has already crammed through can cover their spending
desires at least through the 2010 congressional elections. "
Irish Mike
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other
people's money."
Recession: When your neighbor loses his job.
Depression: When you lose your job.
Recovery: When Obama loses his job.
____________________________________________________________________�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
Mrs Iris Mike
> By Karl Rove
What is this obssesion? You come across as a real grade A a-
hole.Morning, noon and night you scan WND and White supremacy blogs,
just to cut and paste your unAmerican pap. Please don't say you're
saving America, because you should have been vocal during the previous
administration.
When will you be happy? When there is fighting in the streets? A
revolution? Ruination enough to be able to say, "I told you so"?
The one good thing is that as you gleem this crap, you cause a few
not to puruse your favorite websites, thereby depriving them of eyes,
clicks and revenue.
And why do you have your name after Rove's essay? As if you had
something to do with it? You're one of those a-holes who has trouble
giving credit where credit is due.
Keep posting though, the more you post the more you are associated
with this neo-con job movement with the results being anyone on the
fence will be disgusted with your behavior.
Little dick, insecure and obsolete.
ChrisRobin
> By Karl Rove
>
> After President Obama devoted much of 2009 to health care and global
> warming�two issues far down Americans' list of concerns�the White House
> says he will pivot to jobs and deficit reduction in his State of the Union
> speech in a few weeks.
Health care... "far down Americans' list of concerns?" Way to keep your
finger on the pulse, Turd Blossom.
_____________________________________________________________________�
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
hanks
Bravo!! Could not have been better said!!!
hanks
Jerry Sturdivant
"Mrs Iris Mike" <BeaF...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:74a4d445-3d80-4bce...@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
A big round of applause!
===============
Jerry
Jerry Sturdivant
Don't expect any reply. Just like I said. Mike is a Cut & Paste & Runner.
O-PGManager
> Health care... "far down Americans' list of concerns?" Way to keep your
> finger on the pulse, Turd Blossom.
Did Rush Limbaugh not vouch for the perfection of our system but a few
days ago?
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
______________________________________________________________________�
ChrisRobin
> Did Rush Limbaugh not vouch for the perfection of our system but a few
> days ago?
As long as his maid continues to deliver his daily Oxycontin, everything's
peachy.
----�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Mrs Iris Mike
BTTT
Clave
news:du6i17x...@recgroups.com...
> On Jan 7 2010 2:54 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:
>
>> Health care... "far down Americans' list of concerns?" Way to keep your
>> finger on the pulse, Turd Blossom.
>
> Did Rush Limbaugh not vouch for the perfection of our system but a few
> days ago?
Actually, he was specifically praising the Hawaiian system, which is far
more progressive and unionized than elsewhere in the country.
AAMOF, the Hawaiian system has been the model for much of the current
healthcare bills.
Jim
FL Turbo
You're just a little behind the times.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/lessons-from-hawaiis-health-care-system
From the Associated Press:
Hawaii Ends Universal Child Health Care 7 Months After Start
Saturday , October 18, 2008
HONOLULU � Hawaii is dropping the only state universal child health
care program in the country just seven months after it launched.
Gov. Linda Lingle�s administration cited budget shortfalls and other
available health care options for eliminating funding for the program.
A state official said families were dropping private coverage so their
children would be eligible for the subsidized plan.
"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop
paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the
administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I
don�t believe that was the intent of the program." �
Hawaii lawmakers approved the health plan in 2007 as a way to ensure
every child can get basic medical help. The Keiki (child) Care program
aimed to cover every child from birth to 18 years old who didn�t
already have health insurance..
State health officials argued that most of the children enrolled in
the universal child care program previously had private health
insurance, indicating that it was helping those who didn�t need it.
The Republican governor signed Keiki Care into law in 2007, but it and
many other government services are facing cuts as the state deals with
a projected $900 million general fund shortfall by 2011�
Families with children currently enrolled in the universal system are
being encouraged to seek more comprehensive Medicaid coverage, which
may be available to children in a family of four earning up to $73,000
annually.
These children also could sign up for the HMSA Children�s Plan, which
costs about $55 a month�
Despite Hawaii�s experience, the expansion of SCHIP was still rammed
through Congress as soon as the Obama administration was sworn in.
Meanwhile Hawaii�s hospitals have losing money for eight years and are
going broke.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the Honolulu Advertiser:
Isle health care law questioned
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
A law enacted in Hawai�i in 1974 that requires employers to provide
health insurance for employees working at least 20 hours a week is
being cited by researchers who are skeptical of similar mandates being
suggested in the argument for universal health care.
The result of Hawai�i�s Prepaid Health Care Act has been that
businesses have relied more on employees who work fewer than 20 hours
a week and thus aren�t covered under the requirement, wrote San
Francisco Federal Reserve Bank research adviser Rob Valletta and
co-authors Tom Buchmueller and John DiNardo, both University of
Michigan professors.
The results of the research into health insurance coverage in Hawai�i
"imply that an employer mandate is not an effective means for
achieving universal coverage," they wrote.
"Although overall insurance coverage rates are unusually high in
Hawai�i, a substantial number of people remain uninsured, suggesting a
need for alternative approaches if universal coverage is the ultimate
goal," they said�
So the solution is obvious � stricter mandates from the Federal
Government.
By the way, the Heritage Foundation had challenged the idea of using
Hawaii as a model for any national system back in 1994.
Clave
news:068dk59jlaad5cfic...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 18:58:54 -0800, "Clave"
> <ClaviusNo...@cablespeed.com> wrote:
>
>>"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:du6i17x...@recgroups.com...
>>> On Jan 7 2010 2:54 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Health care... "far down Americans' list of concerns?" Way to keep your
>>>> finger on the pulse, Turd Blossom.
>>>
>>> Did Rush Limbaugh not vouch for the perfection of our system but a few
>>> days ago?
>>
>>
>>Actually, he was specifically praising the Hawaiian system, which is far
>>more progressive and unionized than elsewhere in the country.
>>
>>AAMOF, the Hawaiian system has been the model for much of the current
>>healthcare bills.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>
> You're just a little behind the times.
>
> http://sweetness-light.com/archive/lessons-from-hawaiis-health-care-system
>
> From the Associated Press:
>
> Hawaii Ends Universal Child Health Care 7 Months After Start
This part was poorly crafted, obviously, and the federal bill does not
contain anything like it.
BTW, S-CHIP works.
> From the Honolulu Advertiser:
>
> Isle health care law questioned
> Tuesday, June 30, 2009
I'm not surprised you allow perfect to be the enemy of progress.
Jim
da pickle
>> From the Honolulu Advertiser:
>>
>> Isle health care law questioned
>> Tuesday, June 30, 2009
>
> I'm not surprised you allow perfect to be the enemy of progress.
Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended consequences.
[And "progress" implies something "better," not just something "different."]
Clave
news:CM2dnVConLS...@giganews.com...
> "Clave"
>
>>> From the Honolulu Advertiser:
>>>
>>> Isle health care law questioned
>>> Tuesday, June 30, 2009
>>
>> I'm not surprised you allow perfect to be the enemy of progress.
>
> Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended consequences.
Yes, best we keep letting the insurance companies bleed us of our money and
lives.
Jim
Gary Carson
> By Karl Rove
>
Karl Rove complains about propaganda?
The next thing will be him complaining about irony.
----�
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
FL Turbo
No, we shouldn't do that.
We should turn that job over to the government.
The government is far better at doing that.
The government can send men with guns to take you to prison if you
don't buy their insurance.
Insurance companies can't do that job.
da pickle
>>> Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended
>>> consequences.
>>
>>Yes, best we keep letting the insurance companies bleed us of our money
>>and
>>lives.
>
> No, we shouldn't do that.
> We should turn that job over to the government.
>
> The government is far better at doing that.
>
> The government can send men with guns to take you to prison if you
> don't buy their insurance.
>
> Insurance companies can't do that job.
There are those that believe that more government is always better and those
that believe that more government is always worse.
I believe both are generally wrong but those that believe that (government
that exceeds the absolute minimum of interference with individual choice is
usually worse than government that allows a maximum of freedom of choice)
are generally correct.
The road to serfdom is filled with good intentions.
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:8ebhk55qal8edrefb...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 8 Jan 2010 07:34:05 -0800, "Clave"
> <ClaviusNo...@cablespeed.com> wrote:
>
>>"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:CM2dnVConLS...@giganews.com...
>>> "Clave"
>>>
>>>>> From the Honolulu Advertiser:
>>>>>
>>>>> Isle health care law questioned
>>>>> Tuesday, June 30, 2009
>>>>
>>>> I'm not surprised you allow perfect to be the enemy of progress.
>>>
>>> Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended
>>> consequences.
>>
>>Yes, best we keep letting the insurance companies bleed us of our money
>>and
>>lives.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>
> No, we shouldn't do that.
> We should turn that job over to the government.
>
> The government is far better at doing that.
Read up on the PUC and what they do.
Jerry 'n Vegas
FL Turbo
<jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote:
>"FL Turbo"
>
>>>> Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended
>>>> consequences.
>>>
>>>Yes, best we keep letting the insurance companies bleed us of our money
>>>and
>>>lives.
>>
>> No, we shouldn't do that.
>> We should turn that job over to the government.
>>
>> The government is far better at doing that.
>>
>> The government can send men with guns to take you to prison if you
>> don't buy their insurance.
>>
>> Insurance companies can't do that job.
>
>There are those that believe that more government is always better and those
>that believe that more government is always worse.
>
Personally, I will give the Liberal/Progressive faction a little slack
there.
I think there is at least some point where they would reject some
further expansion of government control.
Unfortunately, in the current political climate there does not seem to
be any instance of them objecting to any specific expansion of
government control.
It's all full speed ahead on more control via EPA regulations on CO2
(classifying CO2 as a "pollutant"), taxing energy usage, Socialized
Medicine, further takeovers of the banking system, domestic car
companies, ever more public debt, yadda, yadda.
>I believe both are generally wrong but those that believe that (government
>that exceeds the absolute minimum of interference with individual choice is
>usually worse than government that allows a maximum of freedom of choice)
>are generally correct.
>
It's gotten so blatant that even some serious Conservatives are
starting to believe that the current administration is working towards
implementation of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the_clowardpiven_strategy_of_e.html
February 07, 2009
The Cloward/Piven Strategy of Economic Recovery
By Nancy Coppock
Using borrowed money for a band-aid bailout of the economy should seem
backwards to most people. However, it likely is a planned strategy to
promote radical change. Those naively believing that President Obama
is simply rewarding his far-left base, and will then move to the
political center, must wise up.
The assumption that Obama will need the nation to prosper in order to
protect the 2010 mid-term election incorrectly assumes that he esteems
free market capitalism.
He does not. Rather than win through superior ideas and policies, the
Democrat plan for success in the mid-term elections is to win by
destroying political opposition.
Obama adheres to the Saul Alinksy Rules for Radicals method of
politics, which teaches the dark art of destroying political
adversaries. However, that text reveals only one front in the radical
left's war against America.
The Cloward/Piven Strategy is another method employed by the radical
Left to create and manage crisis.
This strategy explains Rahm Emanuel's ominous statement, "You never
want a serious crisis to go to waste."
The Cloward/Piven Strategy is named after Columbia University
sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Their goal
is to overthrow capitalism by overwhelming the government bureaucracy
with entitlement demands. The created crisis provides the impetus to
bring about radical political change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally, I'm highly suspicious about deep, dark Conspiracies, but
sometimes a guy just has to read and observe current events, and say
"Hmmm".
>The road to serfdom is filled with good intentions.
>
Yes, that it is.
FL Turbo
WTF is that?
Public Utilities Commission ?
If that isn't it, I have no idea WTF what you're talking about.
You got me on that one.
da pickle
>>Read up on the PUC and what they do.
>>
>
> WTF is that?
>
> Public Utilities Commission ?
>
> If that isn't it, I have no idea WTF what you're talking about.
>
> You got me on that one.
Pee you, see?
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>I think there is at least some point where they would reject some
>further expansion of government control.
>Unfortunately, in the current political climate there does not seem to
>be any instance of them objecting to any specific expansion of
>government control.
Then you must have been asleep the entire time liberals were railing
against the Patriot Act because of the excessive powerit gave the
government.
--
~ Seth Jackson
MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Jerry Sturdivant
"FL Turbo" <noe...@notime.com> wrote in message
news:3ahhk513olab6m8kg...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 11:11:40 -0600, "da pickle"
> <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"FL Turbo"
>>
>>>>> Jim, you do not seem to understand the concept of unintended
>>>>> consequences.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, best we keep letting the insurance companies bleed us of our money
>>>>and
>>>>lives.
>>>
>>> No, we shouldn't do that.
>>> We should turn that job over to the government.
>>>
>>> The government is far better at doing that.
>>>
>>> The government can send men with guns to take you to prison if you
>>> don't buy their insurance.
>>>
>>> Insurance companies can't do that job.
>>There are those that believe that more government is always better
>> and those that believe that more government is always worse.
> Personally, I will give the Liberal/Progressive faction a little slack
> there. I think there is at least some point where they would reject
> some further expansion of government control.
Such as the GOP's desires in the Patriot Act. Or more laws on Marijuana. Or
a Constitutional amendment on what you can and can't do with an American
flag. Or a Constitutional amendment 'controlling' more women's rights. Or
more rules on gambling on line. Or more rules on Doctor Assisted Suicide.
Prostitution. Smoking.
Just what is it the conservatives DON'T want the government to control?
> Unfortunately, in the current political climate there does not seem to
> be any instance of them objecting to any specific expansion of
> government control.
Ah! So you ARE talking about conservatives.
Jerry (a liberal) 'n Vegas
FL Turbo
<hitme...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 12:31:05 -0600, FL Turbo <noe...@notime.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I think there is at least some point where they would reject some
>>further expansion of government control.
>>Unfortunately, in the current political climate there does not seem to
>>be any instance of them objecting to any specific expansion of
>>government control.
>
>Then you must have been asleep the entire time liberals were railing
>against the Patriot Act because of the excessive powerit gave the
>government.
Sure, that was when Bush was President.
Today, it's a different story.
Now, Obama and the Demos are in power.
Now they don't rail against it at all.
The Demos are far too busy coming up with new and improved ways of
extending Federal power over the Citizens.
Can't let a crisis go to waste, ya know.
Pepe Papon
<jer...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Personally, I will give the Liberal/Progressive faction a little slack
>> there. I think there is at least some point where they would reject
>> some further expansion of government control.
>
>Such as the GOP's desires in the Patriot Act. Or more laws on Marijuana. Or
>a Constitutional amendment on what you can and can't do with an American
>flag. Or a Constitutional amendment 'controlling' more women's rights. Or
>more rules on gambling on line. Or more rules on Doctor Assisted Suicide.
>Prostitution. Smoking.
>
>Just what is it the conservatives DON'T want the government to control?
Taxes.
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 23:24:43 -0800, Pepe Papon
><hitme...@mindspring.dot.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 12:31:05 -0600, FL Turbo <noe...@notime.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I think there is at least some point where they would reject some
>>>further expansion of government control.
>>>Unfortunately, in the current political climate there does not seem to
>>>be any instance of them objecting to any specific expansion of
>>>government control.
>>
>>Then you must have been asleep the entire time liberals were railing
>>against the Patriot Act because of the excessive powerit gave the
>>government.
>
>Sure, that was when Bush was President.
>
>Today, it's a different story.
>Now, Obama and the Demos are in power.
>Now they don't rail against it at all.
>
>The Demos are far too busy coming up with new and improved ways of
>extending Federal power over the Citizens.
In other words, the Democrats favor health care reform.