« Another Benedict Arnold: Open Letter to ObamaCare Queen Sen. Olympia Snowe | Main | Obama: Victory Is Thine! »

Crickets...

Well, he got a dog. And took his wife out on a date. That's about all I can think of.

I really wish I could help you out on this one but you pretty much know Obama is a socialist. The sad fact is his policies on education and immigration reform are up next. We already have children singing about a man who has accomplished nothing beside being elected by the blind Kool-Aid drinkers of America.

So your "challenge" is to name an Obama policy that embraces the core platform and values of the Republican Party. Cute.

Do you recall that the electorate rejected the platform and values of the Republican Party?

Posted by: Anonymous at October 13, 2009 2:47 PM

Not the point. People apparently bristle at him being called a socialist. But actions speak louder than words. Clearly, he is.

Technically, Obama's a fascist.


Yes, Fascism and socialism are two sides of the same coin, but Obama has far more in common with Benito Mussolini than he does with Vladimir Lenin.



In fact, you could make the point (and I have) that Obama is the ideological equivalent of Mussolini.

Anon, not only does GoY laugh at the concept of GWB being a conservative, no where in the post does GoY mention "Republican."

Since GWB is not even President anymore, try to focus instead on answering the actual challenge he posted instead:

Can anyone name even one policy proposed, advanced, or enacted by the Obama regime that favors free enterprise and/or limited government?

Where's your moonbat defenders now, huh? Where's your moonbat defenders now?!

I know you guys hate the "Communist News Network" but thought you might be interested anyway:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

National headlines: Good Work! Embarrassing your own party.

Don't worry, I know you'll take it as praise.

But But... HE WON THE PEACE PRIZE.

Doesn't that count for ANYTING !!!
What's the matter with you people !!

Chapman is right that Obama isn't a socialist. Unfortunately, he's a communist whose speeches are full of socialist platitudes and whose policies are fascist bordering on socialist.
As anyone who has studied Marxism knows, fascism and socialism are intermediate steps to the workers paradise of communism.
America's economy has been fascist for years and the Obama regime is making the transition to socialism. Remember his campaign promise to "fundamentally transform America".
We're seeing the intentional destruction of the remnants of capitalism as spelled out in the Communist Manifesto to pave the way for unbridled socialism. However, that isn't the endgame, but just an intermediate step to collectivist utopia.

Do you recall that the electorate rejected the platform and values of the Republican Party?

I'm so far right I consider Bush a leftist and I've rejected the platform and values of the Republican Party. They rejected conservative and capitalist values a long time ago and adopted the same unprincipled values of pressure group warfare and identity politics as the Demoncrats.

Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise.

Hell, I can easily point out Bush/Republican policies Obama is keeping in place or accelerating:

- Taxpayer bailouts for well-connected political buddies, Check
- Complete lack of border enforcement, Check
- Kowtowing to China and Saudi Arabia, Double Check
- Massive subsidies for public education, Check

What I asked was, are there any Obama policies that are pro-free market and pro-limited government. Surely, if Obama isn't the radical Marxist I believe him to be, someone could come up with one pro-market policy advanced under his presidency.

Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise.

No, there will not be "free enterprise" under ObamaCare. Insurance companies will be more highly regulated than ever. The government will mandate what they have to cover. They will not be allowed to deny coverage. They will not be allowed to refuse claims. They will not be allowed to write new policies that do not conform to government mandates.

ObamaCare is not a "free market" plan by any stretch of the imagination.

"identity politics"

People throw this around like its such a bad thing. What do you think this site is if its not identity politics. A group of like minded people blowing steam out yer orifices. That's all you are.

And besides, that's just the political game we call democracy. The most voices carries the day.

We also know that under the Baucus plan, doctors who order more tests than the Government thinks is appropriate will be punished. However, there will be no punishment for lawyers who file too many malpractice suits.

Free market? I don't think so.

And besides, that's just the political game we call democracy. The most voices carries the day.

Three wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

"They will not be allowed to deny coverage. They will not be allowed to refuse claims."

Well duh, aren't those among the problems we already have with the status quo? Until they were facing a mountain of bad publicity an insurance company tried to deny coverage to a fat baby!

If denying fat babies insurance coverage is an example of the "free market", I'll take socialism thanks.

Great, here come the people running around screaming S-S-S-S-SOCIALIST and D-D-D-D-D-DEATH PANELS!!!

People in Wall Street ruined the economy when we gave them free reign. Obama isn't stupid enough to let them do whatever they please and create a new bubble.

"And besides, that's just the political game we call democracy. The most voices carries the day."

So the majority rules when it results in a liberal/fascist policy like Obamacare but must be shot down when a conservative policy like gay marriage in California or "We don't want Obamacare" or "We don't want the stimulus" or "We don't want Cap'N Tax"?

And you complain when we point out that liberals can't follow a simple line of logic.

I don't remember "We don't want Obamacare" or "We don't want the stimulus" or "We don't want Cap'N Tax" coming up for a vote where they won a majority.

Can you follow that simple line of logic?

No one will rise to meet the challenge because he is 100 % socialist. Obama and those who voted for this guy should be strung up or whatever the punishment is for treason.

Obama supports ACORN who supports free-market based, illegal-alien prostitution rings.

Well it didn't take long for a right wing fascist to show up.

His modest proposal? "String up" 66,882,230 Americans.

You people are really cynical:
BO stimulated the Detroit free market economy by giving people seed money for new crack deals.

Hmm, well let's see reform health care would allow actual small business to not provide health and instead direct the monies to improvements and expansion. Has proposed tax cuts to businesses who keep jobs here. Sound like he's throwing a bone to the free market while it stabilizes.

Well, he *did* let those Navy SEALs shoot some teen-aged pirates in the head.

Wait, I thought you wanted something anti-social...

Has proposed tax cuts to businesses who keep jobs here.

1. No such proposal has been submitted to Congress.

2. Even if he had done so, since he is proposing tax increases on other businesses, it would not have been a free market reform, but redistributionist socialism.

3. These kind of targeted tax cuts for specific behaviors are not free market.

SOW, apparently you missed Sen. Bill Nelson D-Fl, when he said today, that the public option will be put into the Healthcare Scam known as the Baucus plan? It was on at least one news network, his own words in his own voice while he was being interviewed. So, I know he said it.
So, yes the socialist plan is still in play. Please try to pay attention.

People didn't vote for socialism over free markets; they voted for the cool "black" guy over the wishy washy G.W. Bush (whose part was acted by John McCain). The Obamamedia lied about what he was about to get him elected, and they continue to do their job covering for the dismantling of the American free enterprise system.

The purpose of the current health plan is to make private health insurance so unprofitable for the insurance companies and so unaffordable to consumers that the public will acccept socialized medicine within a decade. The current proposal requires insurers to cover any pre-exisiting condition, while imposing token fines on indviduals who don't carry health insurance. What this means is that only the very sick will buy insurance, driving up costs to the insurers and causing rates to sky rocket. Healthy people will just wait until they get sick before they buy insurance. It's like waiting until grandpa dies, and then taking out a million dollar life insurance policy on him. How long will that system last? Obama said he wanted a single payer system, and that he understood it might take 10 or 20 years to get there. This is exactly what this plan does.

UpNorth, you should pay attention yourself.

I said: "Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise."

"Single payer" is the socialist Canadian plan. The "public option" includes participation by the insurance companies.

And, apparently, you missed the Queen of the House, SanFranNan, when she said that the health care bill that goes to Earbama for signature "must" contain a public option?
So, the dems certainly appear to be in the tank for Socialist Health Care, or should we not take them at their word?

It's hard to see how a system where the government forces you to buy insurance (and punishes you if you don't), severely limits the kind of policy you can buy, limits who you can buy it from, punishes you if your policy covers too much, and punishes your doctor if they think he's spending too much effort ... can in any way be called a "free market" system.

What do you think this site is if its not identity politics. A group of like minded people blowing steam out yer orifices.

You're apparently too stupid to know what the term "identity politics" means. It means appealing to groups on the basis that you'll favor them over other groups, rather than pursue policies you think are good for the country as a whole.

For example, telling homosexuals that you will revoke "don't ask, don't tell" because that's what they want to hear, telling Hispanics you're all for the family, then telling feminists you're all for abortion, telling union members that you're all about jobs, and then telling eco-nuts that you'll crash the economy, if necessary, to protect the spotted cockroach (or some such). Does that remind you of any particular political party? One that lives in terror that its different components will one day find out what that party is saying contemporaneously to other components with diametrically opposed interests? Imagine union loggers and environmentalists in the same room, hearing the same speech. I'd buy a ticket to that.

For my part, I suspect that is the very problem that led to the demise of ...Air America. Bwahahahaha! Now I'll be laughing the rest of the day.

And besides, that's just the political game we call democracy. The most voices carries the day.

Yep. Just like the 2000 and 2004 elections were. And the 2010 elections will be...

People in Wall Street ruined the economy when we gave them free reign. Obama isn't stupid enough to let them do whatever they please and create a new bubble.

Obama isn't stupid enough? Sure he is. Look up where Wall Street's campaign contributions went in 2008. Enjoy.

(shakes head) Air America! (sniggers)

Hello UPNORTH, yoohoo!!

Yes, the public option is on the table, thank God!

The PUBLIC OPTION includes the OPTION for people to CHOOSE to use an insurance company plan.

In other words Obama has NOT taken the SOCIALIST route of cutting out the insurance companies completely by adopting a SINGLE PAYER plan.

Oh, by the way, Obama has also nationalized all student loans.

Do we still think he's not a socialist?

So your "challenge" is to name an Obama policy that embraces the core platform and values of the Republican Party. Cute.

Posted by: Too stupid to know who I am so I post as Anonymous at October 13, 2009 2:47 PM

There is nothing more American than free-enterprise and limited government. Thanks, Anonymous, for showing how far removed from America you are.

But the thing that really calls "Bullshit" on Sally's argument is that even in Great Britain, they still allow private insurance companies to exist. Would anyone deny that Britain has socialized medicine?

Actually, Great Britain has a single payer system that started in 1948.

http://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-by-date/

UH, SOW, if the government is writing insurance, with the power of the US treasury behind them, can the insurance companies compete? I doubt it. SO, in the end, it will end up a Single Payer System, because private businesses can't compete with the government.
And you really need to go back for a remedial class in US government. The president can't "propose" anything, he can't introduce a bill. That's up to members of the House and Senate.

Sally, just to provide some perspective, both the UK and FRG received Marshall Plan funds. The Germans invested theirs in production, thereby laying the foundation for the Wirtschaftswunder. The Brits consumed theirs in building tower blocks (housing projects) that they're now dynamiting, and the NHS (which Norman Tebbit famously said to be the second largest employer in Europe, after the Red Army).

Compare the economic performance of the two countries in the 30 years following the Marshall Plan. Until Thatcher undid some of the socialist damage, Britain was the sick man of Europe. And now you know why.

I would like to add that while a majority voted for Obama, they did so thinking he was a centrist, that he would bring people together and help the economy. If any of the bills that passed this year would have been in his official plans, he would never even have got the nomination from the Democrat party.

Sally, you ignorant slut,

Citizens of Great Britain are free to choose private insurance. In 2003, already 15% of the British possessed complementary insurances, tendencies rising. It is also possible, to take a full private insurance. Although these insurants do not use the services of the NHS, they do not receive tax reduction in return.

"Propose" was shorthand for the sake of the discussion, so exCUSE me!

So maybe this thread should be called 'Challenge: Show Me Where The Democratic House and Senate Are Not Socialist'.

Can the insurance companies compete? That will be their problem.

They currently try to maximize their profits by doing things like refusing to provide insurance for fat babies. How totally "free market" of them!

Now I'm off, see you later.

Well, if the government were to come up with a very limited system where the government only took care of the otherwise uninsurable... like people with high-risk pre-conditions... that might be workable. And, it would reduce the cost of insurance for everyone else.

But that isn't what they're doing, is it?

Can anyone name even one policy proposed, advanced, or enacted by the Obama regime that favors free enterprise and/or limited government?

As president-elect, he accepted a huge advance, and signed a multimillion dollar book deal. He worked as a volunteer while writing other books which he gave no credit to the ghost writers on. He never paid more taxes than he absolutely had to, and always gave as little money to charities as he could. He made real estate and other money making deals which netted him massive personal profits. Any time he could get others to pay for his own personal pleasure he did. He has stood by one of the most repulsive women any one of us could possibly imagine being chained to and actually reproduced with her.

In his personal life he is a very staunch fiscal conservative, family supporting, dedicated husband.

However, in his professional life...Fascist.

Obama is a narcissistic, self-serving, demigod who will do anything to promote his own interest and legacy. Dare we say sociopath?

At last, something you and I can agree on. You are off! "Shorthand for the sake of discussion"? Seriously? I took you at your word, and now I find out that you didn't really mean what you posted?
And the government will try to "maximize" the appeal of their plan by giving it to illegal immigrants and those who, by their lifestyle choices, don't pay for it now. But, it's ok to force productive citizens pay for their health care?
But, go ahead, answer GOY, "Can anyone name even one policy proposed, advanced, or enacted by the Obama regime that favors free enterprise and/or limited government? Name just one. Anybody. One policy, that's all I ask". Bet you can't.

AH! I GOT ONE!!

He said he believed marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Not that I think he'll stick to it.

HA!

Wellstone! Be a man you frickin pussy.

Hey! Tossing Salad out west! Screw you too!

Roughly 50 comments in, still waiting. C'mon, liberals, this should be easy.

He said he believed marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Note he didn't say anything about wookies.

Did maybe Eric get one there? Or, were Obama's fingers crossed when he said that?

Video! I want the VIDEO!

Oh, I can easily make a case for Obama not being regarded as a socialist. There are plenty of people out there, for example, who think he isn't progressive enough. They think that, even after all of this, he's still on the payroll of some giant corporate conspiracy.

In other news, some people really are incorrigible.

So your "challenge" is to name an Obama policy that embraces the core platform and values of the Republican Party. Cute.

Do you recall that the electorate rejected the platform and values of the Republican Party?

Posted by: Anonymous at October 13, 2009 2:47 PM

So your "response" to the challenge to prove Obama isn't a socialist is to say "he won" ?

Scintillating.

"And besides, that's just the political game we call democracy. The most voices carries the day."

Posted by: Anonymous at October 13, 2009 3:15 PM

The United States Of America was never intended to be a Democracy. The Founders created a Constitutional Republic with a representative Government. Much of it has been diluted and subverted in the centuries since, in favor of the mob rule known as Democracy.

Oh, I can easily make a case for Obama not being regarded as a socialist. There are plenty of people out there, for example, who think he isn't progressive enough.

I could raise the dead if I really wanted to, I just don't feel like it right now :P

At any rate, that wasn't the question. You were asked to show where he is not a socialist. I wish I could say 50+ posts in with no credible answer was a surprise but...

There is not doubt in my mind, Obama is a Socialist. The proof is in his actions. You can't believe his words at all.

Oh, I know mine was a non-answer. I never doubted for a second that he was a left-wing radical. I hope you'll forgive me for not arguing a case we all know is a hopeless one.

To mince words, yeah, socialist. Like father, like son.

They currently try to maximize their profits by doing things like refusing to provide insurance for fat babies. How totally "free market" of them!

Posted by: Sally Out West at October 13, 2009 5:19 PM

Lol.

If you're worried about refusal of care, a simple google search should set you straight:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7RNWN&q=nhs+refuses+care&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

There are close to 5 million hits there so that should keep you busy for a bit.

Wanted to scream at Shepard Smith today when he was berating his guest that this health care plan is not government control. Obama has stated that this Health Insurance Exchange must be in any legislation he signs concerning health care. However, it is the establishment of this mechanism that places health care plans in semi-control of the government. Only government approved plans can be offered regardless the provider. Government approval is essentially government control. That is the first phase of socialization, the foot in the door. Eventually private plans will not be able to compete with federal plans that do not need profit to survive.

"Well, if the government were to come up with a very limited system where the government only took care of the otherwise uninsurable... like people with high-risk pre-conditions... that might be workable. And, it would reduce the cost of insurance for everyone else.

But that isn't what they're doing, is it?"

DING DING DING! That is the CORRECT answer! Why doesn't the Republican party propose this fix? It would demolish the leftist argument that some people can't get insurance so we have to screw things up for the vast majority who do. Maybe the government could even work with charitable health care organizations to make it happen.

I hope you'll forgive me for not arguing a case we all know is a hopeless one.

My apologies, then, my internet sarcasm detector must be broken :)

He didn't make his Cabinet nominees pay fines on their 'missed' taxes. That's withholding money from the government, SO not socialist!

Posted by: Strap-on Sally at October 13, 2009 3:10 PM- "Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise."

Would such an act rule out Hussein as a Socialist? If so, why?

Posted by: Strap-on Sally at October 13, 2009 3:10 PM- "Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise."

Further- Would such an act rule out Hussein as a Communist? If so, why?

Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise.
Posted by: Sally Out West at October 13, 2009 3:10 PM

...which will drive private insurance companies out of business anyway.

Can you show me where he is on record actually opposing a single-payer public option?

No? Because I can show you proof of the exact opposite.

Sorry, Sally. You lose....again.

People throw this around like its such a bad thing.

If you don't think it is "a bad thing," then clearly you have no understanding of the phrase. It refers to policies or programs which refer to race, color, or religion, rather than the individual. That is not what we're supposed to be about in this country.

What do you think this site is if its not identity politics. A group of like minded people blowing steam out yer orifices. That's all you are.

Then maybe you should leave. I'm pretty tired of your kind showing up on these blogs, telling us what jerks we're supposed to be because we aren't in favor of a socialist takeover of the healthcare system.

Posted by: Ghost of Wellstone at October 13, 2009 4:11 PM

Posted by: Sally Out West at October 13, 2009 5:19 PM

Get a fricking life, you two. Seriously.

Oh, I can easily make a case for Obama not being regarded as a socialist. There are plenty of people out there, for example, who think he isn't progressive enough.

Yeah, and there are "plenty of people out there" who think the moon is made of green cheese. What's your fucking point?

That really is the problem. Such people as you describe aren't thinking at all. They're feeling.

In other news, some people really are incorrigible.

You appear to be one of them.

Posted by: Narrator 1 at October 13, 2009 6:48 PM

Remember what I said to the other two losers on this thread? About getting a life? It goes double for you.

I agree, Cylar, it gets very tiresome. I don't have time for them, I scroll through them. Why do they come here? Do they think they're going to gain converts? Plus, you get Meh, who throws insults in his posts as well. We're going to somehow see the light and become commies? Rock-ribbed conservatives like us? Why do they waste their time?

Greg o' Y, I can't rise to your challenge. Only in his personal life is king zero a big fat greedy capitalist pig, grabbing everything he can to hoard for himself. Including getting a $350K do-nothing job for his shrewish wife.

Earbama

** giggle **

Didn't this thread invite commentary from those who support Obama?

Why am I not surprised that even then, some of you won't read commentary from our side?

Karin complains about someone (on the left) throwing insults.

Pot meet kettle. Look at the abuse that Sally has been subjected to in comments from your side. I didn't see any abuse coming from her, just some commentary that your side requested. Fortunately, she left before the slime hit the wall.

By the way, to summarize:

Original request: "Can anyone name even one policy proposed, advanced, or enacted by the Obama regime that favors free enterprise and/or limited government?"

Sally's Point: "Obama is NOT proposing a single payer health care system like Canada, the insurance companies will still be involved. So, Obama has rejected a socialist model in favor of insurance company free enterprise."

The counter to that revealed what "free market" and "limited government" means to some of you:

Free market = absolutely unregulated.
Limited government = no government involvement whatsoever.

"They will not be allowed to deny coverage. They will not be allowed to refuse claims."

To which Sally responded: "If denying fat babies insurance coverage is an example of the "free market", I'll take socialism thanks."

Anyone happen to recall what recently happened with the "free market" financial system?

The current health insurance system doesn't do the job. The "free market" had it's chance and has failed the American people. Naturally, you will claim that implementing some needed government control is "socialism".

Please read the last paragraph if nothing else, I answer the original question, but first...



Eric at October 13, 2009 5:34 PM
Why is marriage between one man and one woman anti-socialist? Since when did religion have anything to do with economics?



For those that claim Americans got dupped into voting for Obama, you must not have taken any time to listen to any of his debates or read any of his website material. During the campaign he was for Health Care Reform, the Bail Out and expanding civil rights to gays and lesbians. Show me one thing that says otherwise....if you voted for him not knowing his policy stances, YOU are the dumb one.



As for one anti-socialist policy of Obama that has been proposed of passed:
-Travel restrictions lifted to Cuba (freedom to travel where the consumer wants, Capitalistic)
-Orders responsible withdrawal from Iraq (stop spending our money to help other people, which was socialist. Once we are out they will fend for themselves, very Capitalistic)
-Expanding SBA programs allowing small business to borrow more and have access to more resources (helps the small biz, but I'll agree with those who say this is actually socialist, in a in a true capitalist society corporations should have all the control and money and benefits right? so never mind)
-Release Presidential records (freedom of information and all, helps journalists, news media is the bedrock of democracy and capitalism)
-Boost private sector involvement in space flight (ironically used Stimulus fund to accomplish, but still giving work to the private sector over government, so still capitalistic)
-Reverse restriction on stem cell research (it is very socialist and fascist to tell people what they can and cant do right? so this advances free market, which is Capitalistic)



Do that help you out a little?

Cylar, you on the right consistently contradict yourselves. Many of you go onto tirades about how bad a public option/single payer system would be, then state "...which will drive private insurance companies out of business anyway." Which is it?

Further, your ilk also makes claims that left leaning blogs do not allow conservatives and then carry on that "Then maybe you should leave. I'm pretty tired of your kind showing up on these blogs, telling us what jerks we're supposed to be because we aren't in favor of a socialist takeover of the healthcare system." Double standard appears to be a pre-existing condition on the right.

There's a difference, Goat. The DU or Huffpo will BAN FOREVER a conservative, or anyone not Obama Asskissery enough. The cons blogs do not ban. Doesn't mean we have to read you. Double standard my ass.

"Release Presidential records (freedom of information and all, helps journalists, news media is the bedrock of democracy and capitalism)". Does that include the "Presidential" records of the president? You know, his grades, papers, thesis(thesi?) from college, Occidental College records, appointment logs, stuff like that? After all, if he's all about helping "journalists" set the record straight, where better to start than his own records? Or is it ok to release records of other presidents, but not the current one?
And, after the surge brigades are withdrawn from Iraq, the troop level will be what it was. Where's the withdrawal there?

"Anyone happen to recall what recently happened with the 'free market' financial system?"

No, I don't. What "free market financial system" are you talking about? We haven't had one in America for a century, so I know you're not talking about the American system. The American system failed spectacularly BECAUSE of the non-free-market system created by socialist big-government pimps. Ever heard of SEC, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac, for instance? Their overlords were ... who? Their purposes were ... what?

We haven't had a "free market financial system" in over a century?

We've been living in a socialist paradise all our lives?

Bush supported socialism? Reagan supported socialism?

Well waddayaknow!

Releasing Presidential Records, this has to do with records WHILE he is President. I won't wade into the issue of his past records, which is indeed a different story. Official emails and presidential visits for starters are now public information, amongst other things. True he did release some info that his predecessor never did but this is specifically about new records that Obama creates as President in official duties.

Also the withdraw was promised, and is slowly happening; troops are much less in a fighter/policing mode and much more in training Iraqis mode. Again the question was
Can anyone name even one policy proposed, advanced, or enacted by the Obama regime that favors free enterprise and/or limited government?

so it does meet the criteria.

So, Earbama IS withholding his records, and you acknowledge that he is? Who gives a rip about what he does in the WH? WE know about all the dipsticks he's hung with, who've visited him and Meeshell Ma Belle. How about he releases the transcripts of his meetings with Gordon Brown, Nicholas Sarkozy, King Abdullah, official duties perfomed as representative of us? He has yet to do that. And, I do grant you that he is proceeding, with GWB's withdrawal plan for Iraq. SO, nope, he's still 0 for 2009.

No, sludge hammer, I didn't say that W or Reagan supported a socialist system, although they certainly inherited one. Go read it again, and in the context to which I responded.

You insinuated that last years bubble burst was the result of a laissez faire system. I respond that in a true free market system, none of these atrocious loans that were the basis of last year's collapse would have occurred because no sane banker would have proffered the loans in the first friggin' place.

They were forced on the industry at the point of a gun, at the insistence of a stupid, idiotic, liberal government, and aided and abetted by an endless array of politicians on both sides of the aisle who commanded "keep pouring gas on the fires!"

Hell, when one of the government-mandated oversight commissions tried to raise a big red flag in 2004 about Fannie, the crap-eating democrats turned it around and called it a "political lynching of Franklin Raines," racist pigs that they are. http://tinyurl.com/3nkrp7

Now the same government idiots who created last year's collapse are brewing up yet another ponzi scheme called "healthcare reform."

And you sit there rooting it on. No doubt in 10-20 years, when this one bursts and takes down another generation of Americans, you'll blame it all on W and Reagan. Anyone but yourself.

The US should have a system like Taiwan
Under this model, citizens have free range to choose hospitals and physicians without using a gatekeepers, Working people do not have to worry about losing their jobs or changing jobs because they will not lose their insurance.
Most preventive services are free such as annual checkups and maternal and child care. Regular office visits have co-payments as low as US $5 per visit. Co-payments are fixed and unvaried by the person’s income.
Every enrollee has a Health IC smart card. This credit-card-size card only contains a kilobyte of memory that includes provider and patient profiles to identify and reduce Insurance Fraud, overcharges, duplication of services and tests. The physician puts the card into a reader and the patient’s medical history and prescriptions come up on a computer screen. The insurer is billed the medical bill and it is automatically paid.
Patients and doctors alike are very satisfied with NHI. Satisfaction has been in the 70 percent range. However, at the beginning of 2006, satisfaction decreased to the mid-60 percent range because the program needed more money to cover its services. Since then, satisfaction has gone back to the 70 percent range.
Taiwan has the lowest administration cost in the world of 2 percent
Taiwan spends a little over 6 percent in GDP and less than US $900 per person...less than half what the US spends
One problem that Taiwan faces is rising health care costs. Taiwanese don't bring in enough money to pay for all the services they offer. But Taiwan's politicians are reluctant to increase premiums: they're afraid the voters will punish them.
What they need to do is to increase their spending from 6 percent to , say, 8 percent. A modest increase and Still a far cry from the 15-16% here in the US

The US model is unsustainable. The US spends more than twice what other countries spend on health care per citizen. 15% of gdp. That is way too much to be spending on health care. And year after year the cost of healthcare far outstrips the rate of inflation.
Either we make changes now....or else and enraged consumers will force more drastic changes down the road.
For me, I say let the US system keep going down the road it is going...to the point where we are paying 3 or 4 times what the rest of the world is paying and healthcare costs are eating up 20-25% of gdp.
At that point you won't have too many Americans left won't be looking at the health care system other countries like Taiwan with envy.

Bg3my2 cpdjuqqflhwg, [url=http://pmlkghphafrp.com/]pmlkghphafrp[/url], [link=http://uopdqfcdwkgp.com/]uopdqfcdwkgp[/link], http://upwobaeawxvv.com/