moonbattery.gif


« Open Thread | Main | Chimp Attack Serves as Pretext to Loot Taxpayers »


November 5, 2009

Republican Health Care Reform Plan Would Save Money and Reduce Costs

Posted by Gregory of Yardale at November 5, 2009 10:20 AM

Well, we can't have that can we?

Their (Republican) plan, which relies on interstate competition, HSAs, and tort reform, would only cost $61 billion in the first ten years of the plan...

So, it would reduce future deficits by a minimum of $1,339,000,000,000 compared to the Neo-Marxist Democrat plan. What else would it do?

CBO anticipates that the combination of provisions in the amendment would reduce average private health insurance premiums per enrollee in the United States, relative to what they would be under current law-by 7 percent to 10 percent in the small group market, by 5 percent to 8 percent for individually purchased insurance, and by zero to 3 percent in the large group market.

So, it would reduce deficit spending by almost a trillion and a half, and it would make health care more affordable, without any abortion funding, death panels, or cuts to MediCare.

To reject such a sensible, affordable plan, the Congress would have to be run by spendthrift idiots who don't care about the debt as long as they expand government power.

Unfortunately....


Comments

Go here:
http://gop.com/12truths/
Think this will get any media attention?

Posted by: bjd at November 5, 2009 10:42 AM


Live streaming video of GOP rally against health care scam

Sizeable crowd rallying in Washington against Obamacare / Pelosicare schemes. Organized by U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann and various Tea Party groups.

http://interactive.foxnews.com/livestream/live.html?chanId=3

Posted by: Bill at November 5, 2009 10:46 AM


Wait! I thought the Republicans had no plan???

I thought they were just the party of "NO!" I thought they just wanted the status quo! I thought their plan was that you shouldn't get sick, and if you did, you should die quickly!

You mean... the Democrats and the media LIED to me???

I'm going to go lie down for awhile...

Posted by: Mr. Right at November 5, 2009 10:53 AM


This is so sick. Republicans have plenty of offers, all the while, Obama, our joke of a president, chants about how nothing is offered from the right. They can't defend themselves! What a pathetic, stupid excuse for a man, pretending to be president. "Look Soros! Ah can president all by mahself!"

Posted by: Jay B at November 5, 2009 11:32 AM


Yeah, but the liberal plan allows for murdering babies at taxpayer expense for a mere $1.34 trillion more.

That is priceless to liberals.

Posted by: Jimbo at November 5, 2009 11:50 AM


The CBO also states that by 2019 we would have 52 million uninsured, and that it will only cover about 3 million nonelderly uninsured people. The democratic plan covers 36 million. This also from the report.

"CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the amendment’s insurance coverage provisions would increase deficits by $8 billion over the 2010–2019 period."

So, you are either a liar, or cherry picking.

Posted by: Ghost of Wellstone at November 5, 2009 12:05 PM


Anon is the CBO counting on amnesty for illegals in those figures? If they are then you are cherry picking too. Also please point out in the Constitution where it says every American and illegals are entitled to government healthcare.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at November 5, 2009 12:11 PM


I honestly believe that in order to fully understand where the left is coming from with respect to healthcare, one must have portions of his, or her brain removed and replaced with bullshat. The Republicans plan makes more sense than anything I have seen thus far; however, it makes too much sense, which is why it will be rejected and criticized for being too racist.

Posted by: obamasux at November 5, 2009 12:32 PM


It would be nice if we could provide free health care for everybody. But we simply cannot afford it. Why are Goatse and his ilk so eager to bankrupt the country just to prove a point?

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 12:36 PM


Well yes, the Rebublican healthcare plan will cost a lot less, but as a consequence it would be infinitely shitter than Obama's plan.

Posted by: Aquartarkus at November 5, 2009 12:58 PM


Why are Goatse and his ilk so eager to bankrupt the country just to prove a point?

That is the entire point.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 5, 2009 1:07 PM


Well yes, the Rebublican healthcare plan will cost a lot less, but as a consequence it would be infinitely shitter than Obama's plan.

How is it "shittier"? You're forgetting that the "uninsured" are a transient lot, just like the unemployed. As today, there would be people who could afford insurance but choose not to because they would prefer to spend the money elsewhere.

Like Gregory said - the GOP plan gets the job done without the death panels or the through-the-roof spending. You're going to sit there and tell me that it's worth $1,339,000,000,000 to cover an additional 33 million people - and force them into a public option like the Dem's want to do to boot?

Nah!!!

Here's an idea. If you left-wingers are really all that concerned about the "uninsured," why don't you write to those pablum-puking moonbats who currently run Congress. Tell them, "Write a plan which covers all those uninsured and leaves the rest of us the hell alone."

Posted by: hey you guys at November 5, 2009 1:26 PM


Oh what, you mean something like the NHS?
Yeah, we have universal healthcare, it's awesome, you don't have to pay or anything.

Posted by: Aquartarkus at November 5, 2009 1:34 PM


Not sure why this site takes to adding a name to your text? I may be using Ghost of Wellstone's computer, but I am him.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 5, 2009 1:39 PM


Not sure why this site takes to adding a name to your text? I may be using Ghost of Wellstone's computer, but I am him.

Freudian?

Posted by: Ghost Of Irony at November 5, 2009 1:47 PM


Yeah, we have universal healthcare, it's awesome, you don't have to pay or anything.

So where does the money come from? That's right, income and payroll taxes. People do have to pay for it.


Actually, only taxpayers pay for it. You probably are a net consumer of government services, hence your enthusiasm for the statist gravy train.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 5, 2009 1:49 PM


33 million added to healthcare.
20 million illegals+
5 million young that don't buy insurance+
5 million rich that pay for it themselves=
30 million that don't deserve or want healthcare.
The republican plan adds 3 million to healthcare.
Let's see 30mil + 3 mil = 33 mil. Badabing, there you go all 33 million taken care of.
*Please note these numbers are not scientific. :)

Posted by: Farmer Ted at November 5, 2009 2:10 PM


CBO says:

The Republican bill will eliminate $68 billion from the deficit.

The Democratic bill will eliminate $104 billion from the deficit.

The Republican bill will extend coverage to 3 million more people and leave 17 percent without insurance.

The Democratic bill will extend coverage to 36 million more people and leave 4 percent without insurance.

Posted by: Lao at November 5, 2009 2:19 PM


The problem with the Republican health care reform is akin to to the same things we saw during the Bush years; spend a whole lot of tax payer's money and no one gains but the wealthy. $61 billion and the uninsured continue paying higher premiums while very few who can't afford it will have it. Under their plan, uninsured Americans would increase to 52 million by 2019 while Big Insurance still enjoys their freedom to drop folks at will. In short, it's the same message the GOP has been saying- just don't get sick and if you do, die quickly.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 2:23 PM


The problem with the Republican health care reform is akin to to the same things we saw during the Bush years; spend a whole lot of tax payer's money and no one gains but the wealthy. $61 billion and the uninsured continue paying higher premiums while very few who can't afford it will have it. Under their plan, uninsured Americans would increase to 52 million by 2019 while Big Insurance still enjoys their freedom to drop folks at will. In short, it's the same message the GOP has been saying- just don't get sick and if you do, die quickly.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 2:27 PM


The problem with the Republican health care reform is it doesn't bankrupt the country and create enormous new health care bureaucracies.

What Andy actually meant.

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 2:34 PM


Actually cost of PelosiCare: $1.8 Trillion.

How the hell do you guys propose to pay for that?

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 2:36 PM


V the K at November 5, 2009 2:36 PM

magic unicorn dust

Posted by: Moonbat Skullcracker at November 5, 2009 2:43 PM


V the K, how typically trollish of you to explain "what Andy actually meant". But to answer your question, eliminating the tax break for the most wealthy picks up the tab, not to mention the actual savings it creates. What is it again the the GOP plan does?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 2:53 PM


And, the Republican health care bill will lower premiums for the healthier but will raise premiums for the less healthy, thus driving them out. Those getting lower premiums do so as a result of less sufficient coverage. In the mean time, more than 50 million people will have no insurance whatsoever.
But hell, we're getting such a sweet deal for a measly $60+ billion.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 3:13 PM


Sounds like either way, those of us with coverage are better off if nothing is done. Why should we be punished by increases in our costs and/or reductions in our coverage in order for the others to be covered in some way? HEALTH CARE COVERAGE IS NOT A RIGHT. Health care is a product/service, requiring the effort of the people involved, plus supplies they own. How can anyone have a right to the property of another? Get that through your head, and the solution, a pure market, becomes obvious.

Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at November 5, 2009 4:45 PM


Not quite, Mandy420666. On this planet, waiting months or even years longer for a treatment the Czars decide on is considered "lower premiums". "Higher premiums" are extending insurance WITHOUT killing babies or elders, or even bankrupting our great great great great great grandchildren.
Mao, for lack of a better phrase, your facts are plainly and simply wrong. Do some friggin' research!

Posted by: Some Guy at November 5, 2009 4:49 PM


Yeah, we have universal healthcare, it's awesome, you don't have to pay or anything.

HAHAHAHA!!! You think you don't have to pay for health care?

You know nothing, and I mean nothing about economics, do you Aquatarkus.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 5, 2009 5:05 PM


Some Guy trolling for VK, what part of people being sent home to die because they lack insurance on this planet do you fail to comprehend. Or do you care?
It's interesting that my facts are wrong based only on your say so alone. That's rich.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 5:07 PM


To leftist drones like Andy, "the wealthy" are a bottomless pit of money, all there for the taking with no negative consequences. ANY social program, no matter how huge, can be paid for by bumping up their taxes. It's like magic. It also fill the need for leftists to get in a little class warfare, so it feels good.

Hey Andy, ask the state government of Maryland how that worked out for them.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 5, 2009 5:17 PM


eliminating the tax break for the most wealthy picks up the tab

Show me that math.

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 5:22 PM


Alphabet Soup of Health Care Delusions

No, there is nothing bipartisan about it.Republicans literally have been shut out of the House legislative process and no major Republican ideas were allowed into any of the current bills. This legislation is solely about the expansion of government, without consideration for any market or individual mechanisms to save costs and expand coverage.

The legislation also will be disastrous for senior citizens. The bill enacts $426billion in cuts to Medicare and other federal programs and $572 billion in tax increases (apart from the mandate tax), much of which will fall on seniors.

The bill also will lead to de facto rationing, most of which will fall on seniors, as "bending the cost curve" leads to bureaucratic decision-making and guidelines as to the worth of a life later in life relative to the cost of care.

I really hate to use the word "lying" because it is so overused. So I'll say that AARP is not being "fully accurate in its presentation, as it must be aware" when it makes such statements in its press release and public relations campaign.

Posted by: SK at November 5, 2009 5:39 PM


Cutting $1.8 trillion tax break for the top 1% wealthiest over 10 years = ?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 5:48 PM


So, the top 1% of U.S. citizens will pay $1.8 Trillion in more taxes? Is that what you're constantly saying, Andy? Just curious, that doesn't seem like a viable economic plan, at all.
I'll grant one thing, but on each of the plans. Whatever the government does, it never, ever comes in at or under budget. So, if CBO says it'll cost $1.8T, are we safe in assuming that it'll actually cost more? If the R plan will cost $60B, is it safe to assume that it'll cost more? I would think that in either case, it'll cost more.
So, inevitably, those with, will have to carry those without, creating more in the dependent class. So, this isn't about health, or care, it's just about control and giving to a particular constituency.
As to your post at 5:48pm, the savings are illusory. Those with the money will not pay, it'll get passed down the line, always has been, always will be. That's why they have lawyers and accountants that work for them. How well have "millionaire's taxes" worked in Maryland or New York so far?

Posted by: UpNorth at November 5, 2009 6:11 PM


Well, in the world of real math, not "empty leftist rhetoric math," raising taxes on the job producing-segment of society doesn't come close to paying for Obama's spending.

Even the most basic inspection of the IRS income tax statistics shows that raising taxes on the salaries, dividends and capital gains of those making more than $250,000 can't possibly raise enough revenue to fund Mr. Obama's new spending ambitions.
Consider the IRS data for 2006, the most recent year that such tax data are available and a good year for the economy and "the wealthiest 2%." Roughly 3.8 million filers had adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 in 2006. (That's about 7% of all returns; the data aren't broken down at the $250,000 point.) These people paid about $522 billion in income taxes, or roughly 62% of all federal individual income receipts. The richest 1% -- about 1.65 million filers making above $388,806 -- paid some $408 billion, or 39.9% of all income tax revenues, while earning about 22% of all reported U.S. income.
A tax policy that confiscated 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning over $500,000 in 2006 would only have given Congress an extra $1.3 trillion in revenue. That's less than half the 2006 federal budget of $2.7 trillion and looks tiny compared to the more than $4 trillion Congress will spend in fiscal 2010. Even taking every taxable "dime" of everyone earning more than $75,000 in 2006 would have barely yielded enough to cover that $4 trillion.

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 6:20 PM



Upnorth, the top 1%'s tax break that was scheduled to expire in 2010 simply, uh, will do just that. Any questions? You have better suggestions? If so, how?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 6:23 PM


So VK, you trying to dispute that the Bush/GOP tax cuts don't equate to $1.8 trillion over the next decade? Time to bail out and send in a troll ain't it?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 6:28 PM


I think what anyone who isn't a retard can see I'm saying is that the country is practically bankrupt as it is, we have the second highest corporate tax rates in the world, we're printing money to cover the deficit as it is, and this seems like a really stupid time to slap another $1.8 Trillion+ in new entitlements on top of it.

As the WSJ analysis shows, screwing the rich (never mind the immorality of forcing other people to pay for your health care) isn't going to come close to closing the deficit.

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 6:45 PM


I can't help wondering VK, why you're so adamantly opposed to Dem's plans vs Rep's. What do you propose? More tax cuts to the rich? That failed. Less tax cuts? That would make you a RINO now wouldn't it? What about that unemployment extension vote? Hard for that small tent to provide shelter ain't it?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 7:02 PM


Well, Andy, I've explained repeatedly why I oppose $1.8 Trillion in unnecessary bloated government spending. If you are too much of a retard to understand, that isn't my problem.

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 7:08 PM


V the K,

You're wasting your time. Andy is one of the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers I've ever seen. In all the time he's been here I've never seen him take a single position that wasn't absolutely lockstep with the Democratic position.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 5, 2009 7:30 PM


Evil Otto, very true. But he does usefully illustrate the inability of the demonrats to answer any substantive question. e.g. "How are you going to pay for these massive entitlements when we already have huge deficits?" "Take money from rich people." "There isn't enough." "So? Take more."

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 7:35 PM


I understand and appreciate your position on the $1.8T spending. I'll not engage in your childish name calling rhetoric.
You've failed to express why repealing the $1.8 trillion tax break for the most wealthy wouldn't work. We all know, that tax gift didn't work. It would pay for the health reform bill. Or is it that a health reform bill is only good if it's a Republican bill, regardless of how god awful it is?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 5, 2009 7:38 PM


It WOULD create a lot of growth in the economy, if it were left alone. Otherwise, why should it be tasked to "pay" for anything new, when there's already so much debt that needs to be paid? You remind me of my wife (RIP) who saw any available money as a curse that needed to be disposed ASAP, and any spent on something tangible as an "investment". That is not a viable fiscal policy, and fortunately I don't have to go back there personally. Would that we didn't nationally.

Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at November 5, 2009 8:21 PM


Posted by: SK at November 5, 2009 9:27 PM


I can't help wondering VK, why you're so adamantly opposed to Dem's plans vs Rep's. What do you propose? More tax cuts to the rich? That failed.

Curious how you think tax cuts for "the rich" were somehow "a failure." Data? Math? Logic? Links?

Crickets chirping.

Seems to me that when it's been tried, it's been a roaring success - 1961, 1982, 2003, etc. Each time, economic growth has followed. It's not hard to understand why - these so-called "rich" include a lot of small and mid-sized businesses (who file personal tax returns only) and are in a position to expand and hire workers if the government isn't constantly coming along with its hand out.

This isn't hard to understand, annoying troll.

Posted by: hey you guys at November 5, 2009 11:45 PM


2003 a "roaring success"?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 6, 2009 6:19 AM


You're wasting your time. Andy is one of the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers I've ever seen. In all the time he's been here I've never seen him take a single position that wasn't absolutely lockstep with the Democratic position.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 5, 2009 7:30 PM

Evil Otto, very true. But he does usefully illustrate the inability of the demonrats to answer any substantive question. e.g. "How are you going to pay for these massive entitlements when we already have huge deficits?" "Take money from rich people." "There isn't enough." "So? Take more."

Posted by: V the K at November 5, 2009 7:35 PM

Both wrong as I've mentioned on several occasions that I'm pro-life and pro-gun. I mainly post to point out lunacy and unhinged post, comments, and innuendos that are so prevalent here (death panels, tea party=grassroot, Obama=terrorist, etc). The things that you can't justify logically so you just spin a non sequitur or nonsensical question to me in order sidestep and continue with your nonsense.
That's the case here. We all know that the GOP bill does nothing for health reform. It's simply another bill of nothing from the party of NO that cost $61B. You can't logically argue that so you do what you do best and demand to know how Dems are going to pay for their bill and thus opening up another argument that you feel you might have something to work with. And you call me the troll?

Posted by: andy42302 at November 6, 2009 7:16 AM


It's interesting that when one troll becomes silent, the entire gaggle seems to disappear as well. And I use the word "troll" in its true meaning.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 6, 2009 3:35 PM


Both wrong as I've mentioned on several occasions that I'm pro-life and pro-gun.

Never seen it. Quite frankly, I don't buy it.

And does that imply the Democratic party is anti-gun?

I mainly post to point out lunacy and unhinged post, comments, and innuendos that are so prevalent here (death panels, tea party=grassroot, Obama=terrorist, etc).

You mainly post to blame George Bush for everything. And I mean everything, including sunspots, reality TV, the Yankees winning the series, and mildew stains. Nothing is EVER the fault of Democrats. I couldn't even get you to admit that both parties were to blame for the current mess.

You're a drone, Andy, an unthinking partisan drone. They tell you what to believe, and you believe it without doubt. Your faith in this administration is almost religious.

The things that you can't justify logically so you just spin a non sequitur or nonsensical question to me in order sidestep and continue with your nonsense.

"Logically." You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You want logic? Here is irrefutable logic: this program will cost much more than is being claimed. MUCH. MORE. Why? Because government programs like this ALWAYS cost much more than it is claimed. Back in 1965, Johnson claimed Medicare would cost twelve billion in 1990. Real cost? $110 billion. Cost now? $259 billion, and rapidly climbing. Medicare fraud and waste costs taxpayers $60 billion a year.

So tell me, Andy... why the hell should we believe their cost estimates?? Why, in fact, shouldn't we believe this program will cost two, three, or more times what they claim? History shows the truth:

THEY. ARE. LYING.

Even if the wealth could be taxed out of their $1.8 trillion with no side effects to the economy (something which is not possible), it will not be enough, because the real cost of this miserable, bloated monstrosity will be several times $1.8 trillion dollars. So where is that money going to come from, Andy? Tell me.

What I want out of the GOP is one thing, and one thing only: to stop this. I personally don't give a damn what they have in their plan, whether or not they even have a plan, or whether health care gets reformed any time soon. I WANT THIS STOPPED. I want the Democrats stopped in their mad spending, and then I want the Republicans stopped when they take power from your side in the next elections and start spending money like they did during the Bush administration. Which they will.

If you want to prove that the federal government can handle health care, show me. Fix Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid so that they aren't going to bankrupt the frikkin' economy. until then (and face it, they have no intention of even trying), there's only one answer: NO.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 6, 2009 4:42 PM


Posted by: andy42302 at November 6, 2009 3:35 PM

Oh, give it a rest. Some of us don't have your seemingly unlimited time to troll this blog. We have jobs.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 6, 2009 4:44 PM


Otto, you still ran from the issue. This thread and my comments pertained to the GOP bill that's basically a $61B blank piece of paper. It helps very few of the uninsured that are increasing to about 50 million. Insurance costs are climbing to a rate several times of inflation. It's soaking up the take-home income of the majority of the American people and threatening to break the federal budget. People are being sent home to die.
You want to label me as a political hack yet you and your clones cheer a bill that does nothing simply because it's your side presenting it. You cheer "death panels" as if that was a legitimate argument simply because "your side" came up with it. You can't debate rationally because there's no rationale to your talking points. So all you can do is come back with what's wrong with the Dem's bill while silently agreeing with the GOP's nonsense.

What a bunch of chickenshits.


Posted by: andy42302 at November 7, 2009 5:33 AM


Baghdad Andy:

Otto, you still ran from the issue. This thread and my comments pertained to the GOP bill that's basically a $61B blank piece of paper. It helps very few of the uninsured that are increasing to about 50 million.

What part of I DON'T CARE ABOUT THE REPUBLICAN'S PLAN was unclear to you? Did I use words that were too large? I was calling YOU on your religious faith in the Democrats, Andy. You believe what they tell you without question.

Insurance costs are climbing to a rate several times of inflation. It's soaking up the take-home income of the majority of the American people and threatening to break the federal budget. People are being sent home to die.

Holy crap. You claim health care is "threatening to break the federal budget, yet you want to massively increase federal responsibility for health care?

I can't even imagine the level of cognitive dissonance it takes to keep your mind from collapsing.

You want to label me as a political hack yet you and your clones cheer a bill that does nothing simply because it's your side presenting it.

I swear, Andy, you don't even read what anyone writes. I'm going to repeat what I wrote, you sub-literate tool:

What I want out of the GOP is one thing, and one thing only: to stop this. I personally don't give a damn what they have in their plan, whether or not they even have a plan, or whether health care gets reformed any time soon. I WANT THIS STOPPED. I want the Democrats stopped in their mad spending, and then I want the Republicans stopped when they take power from your side in the next elections and start spending money like they did during the Bush administration. Which they will.

Exactly what part of that indicates I'm "cheering" the GOP bill? Hmm? Tell me. Deconstruct that and show me the cheerleading.

And, yes, you are a political hack. You're the biggest drone we have commenting here, a lock-step leftist who absorbs everything he's told by the corrupt leadership of the Democrat party. And then you come here and expect us to buy your crap... why, I'm not sure.

You cheer "death panels" as if that was a legitimate argument simply because "your side" came up with it.

I did? Where, Andy? Please tell me.

You can't debate rationally because there's no rationale to your talking points.,

Spare me, little robot. Time and again your arguments are taken apart. It's easy to do, because you clearly can't be bothered to read what anyone writes. You accuse others of using talking points, when that IS. ALL. YOU. DO. Every comment you make is just a backup of standard-issue Democrat talking points, regurgitated without thought or criticism.

So all you can do is come back with what's wrong with the Dem's bill while silently agreeing with the GOP's nonsense.

(sigh)

Reading, Andy. Reading. It really is an important skill to have in life.

What a bunch of chickenshits.

Oh dear, a pathetic, unthinking, hate-filled leftist drone doesn't like us. Whatever shall we do?

Other than revel in your hate, I mean.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 7, 2009 7:40 AM


The topic of this thread is "Republican Health Care Reform Plan Would Save Money and Reduce Costs". My response is that it will do nothing other than cost over $60 billion.

You say you don't care. Fair enough. Obviously we both know where we stand on health reform so why are you and/or VK changing the topic away from what the Reps have proposed?

I thought that such threadjacking that you and/or VK are spewing was no longer allowed.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 7, 2009 8:07 AM


When you make a claim, Baghdad Andy, we're allowed to call you on it. Don't think you can suddenly turn into a thread Nazi, continually screeching about how our comments are "off topic" in order to draw attention away from the failure of your arguments and your utter inability to even read what others write. You're no stranger to threadjacking, so for you to whine about it when you can't handle opposition is hypocritical.

And typical.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 7, 2009 8:35 AM


You can't debate rationally because there's no rationale to your talking points.,

Spare me, little robot. Time and again your arguments are taken apart. It's easy to do, because you clearly can't be bothered to read what anyone writes. You accuse others of using talking points, when that IS. ALL. YOU. DO. Every comment you make is just a backup of standard-issue Democrat talking points, regurgitated without thought or criticism.

Uh, okay, so I respond to a thread such as this claiming that the GOP's bill is total BS. Your (and the multiple clone trolls) respond with "I don't care" but "Andy is one of the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers I've ever seen" and "Oh, give it a rest", and that I blame GWB for"sunspots, reality TV, the Yankees winning the series, and mildew stains". That's taking the argument apart? In who's world? And this is consistent with every time I post. You've never debunked anything as your only ploy is to distract. Do you honestly believe that a person of reasonable intellect cannot scroll through this and see what a complete blind fool you are.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 7, 2009 8:39 AM


You are correct on 1 issue Otto. When you dissect a post in order to respond, cherry pick statements and give gibberish and insults, only to end in a long winded diatribe, I usually don't bother reading it. I've come to learn that it always ends with you dodging the issue and creating your own spin. Same ole same ole. Once again, that's exactly what you've done.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 7, 2009 8:59 AM


Looks like Andy finally read what I wrote. It's about time.

Uh, okay, so I respond to a thread such as this claiming that the GOP's bill is total BS.

Much as the Democrat's bill is. You don't understand that, do you?

Your (and the multiple clone trolls)

Don't use words you don't understand.

respond with "I don't care" but "Andy is one of the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers I've ever seen" and "Oh, give it a rest", and that I blame GWB for"sunspots, reality TV, the Yankees winning the series, and mildew stains". That's taking the argument apart?

(sigh) No, those are INSULTS, and richly deserved ones, Kool-Aid Man. The other parts, the ones you ignored, the ones about how the Democrat's bill will actually cost several times what they are claiming, that's the "taking your argument apart" bit.

I notice you made no attempt to disprove that. You know the truth, don't you? Somewhere, in that inert mass of gray goo you laughably call your brain, you KNOW they're bullshitting you. You know that the costs of this program will spiral out of control, just as every other massive federal program does. However, your faith requires that you not acknowledge this, and so you desperately twist, ignoring arguments to the contrary.

Except that you can't ignore reality, Andy.

In who's world? And this is consistent with every time I post. You've never debunked anything as your only ploy is to distract.

Projection, Andy. Look it up. You're accusing me of the very sins you commit.

Do you honestly believe that a person of reasonable intellect cannot scroll through this and see what a complete blind fool you are.

And your definition of "person of reasonable intellect" is "someone who agrees with Andy." You accuse others of being blind to distract from your own blindness.

Andy, you're a sad little person. You've been reduced to petulant whining, and I'm loving it. Your irritation is like a fine wine.

Every time I read one of your comments, Kool-Aid Man, I'm reminded of a quote by Martin Luther: "So tenaciously should we cling to the world revealed by the Gospel, that were I to see all the Angels of Heaven coming down to me to tell me something different, not only would I not be tempted to doubt a single syllable, but I would shut my eyes and stop my ears, for they would not deserve to be either seen or heard."

To you this is just some partisan game... Democrats vs. Republicans. Democrats are good and truthful. Republicans are evil liars. In your worldview, the Democrats truly want to help people get health care, and their program won't become a massive budget-breaking bureaucratic nightmare. And you won't allow any contrary points of view to penetrate the armor you've built up around your beliefs. That's why you're here. You don't care what we think. We're heretics. We dare to question your leftist lords and their plans. So you comment here not to change anyone's minds, but to vent your own seething hatred for unbelievers.

Now, I know you're desperately hitting "refresh" every few minutes, hoping I'll respond (despite claiming in a previous thread I was "insignificant" and that you didn't care what I thought), but I have other things to be doing than argue with a religious fanatic like you. See you 'round, Kool-Aid Man.

Posted by: Evil Otto at November 7, 2009 9:15 AM


In response to your last paragraph, I'm working this morning so hitting refresh to this window is no big task. It's a mundane morning and I'm mainly waiting on some paperwork to be faxed in. I'm also following the House vote on Twitter. I found myself thumping a bottle cap earlier just to watch it spin. It too was insignificant. Have a good weekend.

Posted by: andy42302 at November 7, 2009 9:37 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)