Health Care

[loserbob 11]

tdslf1, If you combine all the other networks, except fox news, they don't add up to the viewers they get. Obviously people watch what they agree with. When I watch MSNBC, I can't take their commentators for more than 5 minutes before I am pushing my remote. The majority of Americans watch FOX. It is pretty amazing how much intelligence you grant to yourself. You feel that you are superior intellectually to more than half of the population in this country because you don't watch Fox news and they do? The people in the country you live are pretty stupid. huh?

Ill go back to what Howard Stern said, He is the way he is(offensive) because people who hate you are more apt to listen to you!

[tdslf1 0]

The sum of Fake Noise watchers and sum total of their ratings:

Republicans + the coo coo for coco puff audience who believe everything they hear + observers of the death spiral of imagined news(like me) + uncritical thinking skilled = Faux News ratings.

[pattygreen 5]

Well, if the republican nuts in Texas don't want to fill out the census, I say great. Because for each one that doesn't, Texas loses $12,000 and that's more for the rest of us. They're just cutting of their nose to spite their face. [end]

Texas population=24,782,302

Are you trying to say that if everyone in Texas chose to not fill out their sensus, that $300 million dollars would be withheld from them?

I personally think that everyone should fill out their census. The 'race' question should be left empty, though.

I think that at this time, government should not be giving the states any more money. They should be stopping the spending! The city of Waterbury, near me, has announced a mill rate increase on homes, and they are already paying more than any other place in CT. They did this to keep from laying off government workers there. (teachers, city employees, etc.) Well, I say cut some paychecks in half, forgo the raises, lay off some people, get rid of the outrageous pensions. There are sooooo many things that the governments can do to cut spending, but it takes guts to cut your own throats. Hey! The private sector jobs are doing it. I didn't get my annual raise this year or last year. Yet the government employees still got theirs.

My son got a job as a census taker. He already has a full time job in the evenings, but decided to do it during the day because it's temporary. He's getting paid $19.50 an hour! That's right! $19.50 plus mileage. That's more than an LPN makes, and they have to go to college and pay an awful lot for their education. The Nerve!!!! Anyone can walk from door to door and ask questions. That's more than double the minimum wage! Do they really have to pay soooo much! Well, that's the government. It's not their money!!

[pattygreen 5]

Ill go back to what Howard Stern said, He is the way he is(offensive) because people who hate you are more apt to listen to you!

Definitely wrong! Everyone that I know watches FOX news because they feel the other news stations are too liberal. They can't stomach them. FOX Rules!:biggrin:

[LeighaMason 19]

Well, if the republican nuts in Texas don't want to fill out the census, I say great. Because for each one that doesn't, Texas loses $12,000 and that's more for the rest of us. They're just cutting of their nose to spite their face. [end]

Texas population=24,782,302

Are you trying to say that if everyone in Texas chose to not fill out their sensus, that $300 million dollars would be withheld from them? Why does everything have to be all or nothing with you?

I personally think that everyone should fill out their census. The 'race' question should be left empty, though.

I think that at this time, government should not be giving the states any more money. They should be stopping the spending! The city of Waterbury, near me, has announced a mill rate increase on homes, and they are already paying more than any other place in CT. They did this to keep from laying off government workers there. (teachers, city employees, etc.) As well as firemen, police, etc. Well, I say cut some paychecks in half, forgo the raises, lay off some people, get rid of the outrageous pensions. Yeah! What do we need firemen, police, teachers, Water service, sewer service, etc. for anyway? There are sooooo many things that the governments can do to cut spending, but it takes guts to cut your own throats. (I'm not really interested in cutting my own throat) Hey! The private sector jobs are doing it. I didn't get my annual raise this year or last year. Yet the government employees still got theirs.

My son got a job as a census taker. He already has a full time job in the evenings, but decided to do it during the day because it's temporary. He's getting paid $19.50 an hour! That's right! $19.50 plus mileage. That's more than an LPN makes, and they have to go to college and pay an awful lot for their education. (Maybe they should go be census takers instead, what is stopping them?) The Nerve!!!! Anyone can walk from door to door and ask questions. That's more than double the minimum wage! Do they really have to pay soooo much! Well, that's the government. It's not their money!!

Cutting teachers, police, fireman, etc. pay in half? You think thats a good idea? Now I have heard everything.

[tdslf1 0]

Fake Noise definitely has the ignorant masses. Every person I know watches everything. The more news you watch the better the bulls..t meter works. See the difference?

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Well, if the republican nuts in Texas don't want to fill out the census, I say great. Because for each one that doesn't, Texas loses $12,000 and that's more for the rest of us. They're just cutting of their nose to spite their face. [end]

Texas population=24,782,302

Are you trying to say that if everyone in Texas chose to not fill out their sensus, that $300 million dollars would be withheld from them?

I personally think that everyone should fill out their census. The 'race' question should be left empty, though.

I think that at this time, government should not be giving the states any more money.

Yes, that's exactly what I am saying. The federal taxes that we pay go to the federal government. Then it is the job of our elected congressmen and senators to bring that money back to our state. It's the federal government's job to give the money back to the states. There are some states that get way more money back than they pay in federal taxes. Why don't you find some republicans who represent those states and ask them if they think THEIR district ought to get less money? See what their answer is. As a matter of fact, ask any of the republican congressmen in YOUR state if they think their district should get less federal funding. Let us know what you find out.

Edited April 9, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[pattygreen 5]

Cutting teachers, police, fireman, etc. pay in half? You think thats a good idea? Now I have heard everything.

Cutting every state worker's pay is a great idea. So is cutting their pensions and cutting their benefits and raises. Why should gov. employees get raises when the majority of Americans in the private sector were not able to get them due to the economy? The poeple who work for the government ALWAYS make far more money than those doing the same job in the private sector, and they get better benefits and pensions. I am only pointing out more government waste.

Tell me, why should a census worker get paid $19.50 and hour? Does it require a special skill? NO! The reason is because IT'S A GOVERNMENT JOB!!!!! But, as usual, the sheer nonsense of it will get your support for everything the government does.:biggrin:

When you comment on layoffs of government workers as being ridiculous, you sound like if we laid a few of them off, it would be detrimental to society. Talk about everything being all or nothing! If there are 6 street dept. men working on one crack in the road, one fixing it and the other 5 just hanging around watching, then we can let a few go. But God forbid you should have to decrease your spending anywhere to meet the budget.:mad: Liberals! Tax and Spend! Tax and spend!

Naugatuck, where I live, is closing one of their old schools and doing some reconfigurations so they can stay within their budget. Some of the townspeople are putting together a petition to stop the closing of that school. It's been the school they and their own kids have attended forever it seems, and they don't want it closed. People just don't want to sacrifice and give up anything to save a buck. They think that money grows on trees. Liberals in general are like this. They want everything for nothing and expect everyone else to pay for it.

[pattygreen 5]

David Crockett, Charity, and Congress

See this link for a great story about Davy Crockett entitled "Congress, Liberty, and the Constitution". In it you will understand the conservative view for not wanting BIG Government. Notice the farmers response to the congressman. "it's not the amount of Charity .... It's the principle.

Edited April 9, 2010 by pattygreen

[pattygreen 5]

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the Government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the Government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right: to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive, what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution."

"

[LeighaMason 19]

David Crockett, Charity, and Congress

See this link for a great story about Davy Crockett entitled "Congress, Liberty, and the Constitution". In it you will understand the conservative view for not wanting BIG Government. Notice the farmers response to the congressman. "it's not the amount of Charity .... It's the principle.

More lies and deception. Stick to reality please.

"The authenticity of this speech is questioned, however, since the Register of Debates and the Congressional Globe do not contain transcripts of speeches made on the House floor, there is no way to know whether the speech is authentic." --Wikipedia

[pattygreen 5]

We need to remember that all gov. programs need to be paid for through increasing taxes, borrowing, or creating money (which ultimately drives up the prices of all goods and services). Americans now seem resentful about paying the heavy bills, and businesses complain that they are over regulated and overtaxed by government agencies.

Yet, when it is proposed to reduce public expenditures, various groups of citizens object to the reduction of the benefits they receive from the government. The people can not seem to agree on which programs the gov. should undertake and which ones should be cut. Yet, when asked, many would say that they favor a free market economy without excessive governmental regulation and interference.

It is important that we cherish our free market system and steer our nation away from socialism, or anything that would take us a step closer to it. 2 reasons why: 1. It has proved to be highly productive, supplying great quantities of goods. Since it has worked so well for us, we need to ask why we would change it for some other sort of economy that may not work so well. And, 2. Americans pride themselves on beiong a free people, and there is a strong connection between economic freedom and other forms of freedom. When people lose their economic freedoms, they will also lose their civil and political liberties.

[pattygreen 5]

More lies and deception. Stick to reality please.

"The authenticity of this speech is questioned, however, since the Register of Debates and the Congressional Globe do not contain transcripts of speeches made on the House floor, there is no way to know whether the speech is authentic." --Wikipedia

Whether it is authentic or not is irrelivent. The principle behind the story is what I am trying to portray. Anyone could have had that conversation with a congressman and if that congressman had any morals and was willing to uphold the Costitution no matter the cost to him personally, then he would be considered for my vote.

[tdslf1 0]

Another person hypnotized by the cultural manipulators, rethuglicans. Did we have this much debate about spending before Obama came along?

I am going to make a prediction. Palin half deck shy, Newt master manipulator of the ignorant, Mitt spin doctor extraordinare especially about leadership in Mass healthcare, Pawlenty the most unforgettable politician ever, will all, if they decide to run, cut each others throats in a run for the white house gates.

Palin will emerge as the real dumb one like the character on the boat in Splash with Tom Hanks. Katie Courics interviews will be on an endless loop, billed as "Retards Fantastic" highlights. Mass healthcare will hang around Mitts neck like a skin rash. People will forget who the hell Pawlenty is and Newt will double down on his brand of hypnosis for the slow and dangerous then low and behold ....the biggest loss in rethuglican history again.

Let anyone of them run and we can declare a solid victory. I hope that Bachman throws her hat in the ring. If she has 1/4 the brain she will stay away from the real people with her apocolyptic brand of Beck communication and continue to deal with what she knows best..rilling up the fear and garbage talking points. She more than anyone will never be anything other than a two block two street hustler.

Know your role, I say.

[pattygreen 5]

Most people would be more than willing to help out their fellownman in times of trouble. And this is good, as it should be. But to say that it is the governments job to do this for us is what I dispute.

like he said: It is principle.