On Wednesday afternoon, the House had just voted, 412 to 0, to pass H. Res. 1113, “Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother’s Day,” when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.
“Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote,” he announced.
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table Tiahrt’s request, setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.
This blog is 100% pro-mother. This is my mom, and she approves this message.
Man, that last paragraph is pure pander! (She’ll approve your message more if you call her tomorrow!)
The goals and ideals of Mother’s Day? Here’s the Mother’s Day Proclaimation, written by Julia Ward Howe:
Clearly not anything the modern Republican party wants any part of.
How fucking stupid are these people? First they vote for the resolution, then they vote against it. The flip-flopped against mothers!
The Republican obstructionism in congress has gotten so bad they’re now willing to sell their mothers to do it.
Why the surprise? They’d sell their own children if they thought they could make a buck (and/or get more power)
This morning I woke up to a cold, cruel reality: the first Mother’s Day since the passing of my own Mom last December. And it hurts. Adding insult to injury is this mess from the GOPukes.
OW, I know you don’t advocate violence here, but the following has to be said:
If there’s anyone who deserves to be hit in the face with a brick, it’s Todd Tiahrt.
All I can say is, as a non-Republican, I love my mother. I don’t know why John Boehner hates his mother so much, I don’t want to speculate, but I can only assume it’s because of how much he hates apple pie, baseball and America.
Yeah, I cracked up when I hear about it – vote for the resolution, then vote against it just to spite a Dem…
A truly boneheaded manuever if I ever I’ve seen one. Luckily for them the MSM will probably give it a pass
The Mothers Day proclamation that established Mother’s Day in the US:
“Now, Therefore, I, Woodrow Wilson, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the said Joint Resolution, do hereby direct the government officials to display the United States flag on all government buildings and do invite the people of the United States to display the flag at their homes or other suitable places on the second Sunday in May as a public expression of our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.”
Love and Reverence of Mothers. They voted against that.
Next up: resolutions to waste time and establish National Puppy Kicking Day.
Yeah, I cracked up when I hear about it – vote for the resolution, then vote against it just to spite a Dem…
Why couldn’t a Dem have crossed the aisle and slugged Tiahrt? Just this once?
Several times a year, we see news footage of a brawl in some overseas legislative chamber. We need some of that right here. F*ck parliamentary procedure…the pigs need to be reminded of their place. And the Dems should all be condemning this outrage from the mountaintops.
If there’s anyone who deserves to be hit in the face with a brick, it’s Todd Tiahrt.
I’ll bet it was kinda chilly at his house this morning.
“Why couldn’t a Dem have crossed the aisle and slugged Tiahrt? Just this once?”
Because Randy, then we’d be just like ol “Go F*ck yourself” Cheney… the dems are supposed to be the civil, rational ones.
For people that bitch about the unimportant stuff that Congress is always doing (especially in regard to pointless resolutions), it’s amusing to see you get your panties in a wad over this. I mean give me a freaking break with the “hate mothers” nonsense you bunch of crybabies.
Who gives a rats ass?
Jay,
Yes, its not the job of our legislators to put up innocuos bills or recognizing things that don’t pertain to law making, but you are really a dumb ass if you don’t somehow think the Republicans vote on this was outrageous and cynical at best.
Being a Republican, I tried to sell my own mother last week so I could have more money in my wallet for today. Unfortunately, I was unable to find a buyer willing to pay my asking price.
Next March I will also try to sell my young son before his birthday, to save money on the party. Because I am a Republican, and I hate mothers and children.
“For people that bitch about the unimportant stuff that Congress is always doing (especially in regard to pointless resolutions), it’s amusing to see you get your panties in a wad over this. I mean give me a freaking break with the “hate mothers” nonsense you bunch of crybabies.”
It’s no big surprise that you are too fucking stupid to understand the problem we have. I’m serious, Jay. You are without doubt one of the dumbest people I’ve ever dealt with online.
We don’t like it when the government wastes time like this. However, the Republicans supported the measure, then forces a re-vote that wasted more time, and then voted against it. So they actually wasted more time had they just voted for it in the first place.
Additionally, most are not saying, ‘Damn the Republicans for spitting on mothers nationwide!’ Most are saying, ‘How fucking stupid are Republicans for voting against this?’
Now you have two choices:
1.) You can run away from this debate and pretend it never happened.
2.) You can prove you are retarded by failing to grasp humor found in most of the posts above.
“Because I am a Republican, and I hate mothers and children.”
Well, they did vote against S-CHIP.
Apparently Jay doesn’t feel it’s important for the country to recognize and appreciate mothers. Also, Jay didn’t bother to read the article.
“Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill…”
Jay – if anyone is getting their “panties in a wad” it seems to be you, most of us are laughing at the ridiculous hypocrisy and emptiness of it…
“Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill…”
And the Democrats, if they had a miligram of a spine, half a testicle or any real ability to use power would be all over this. Buttonhole any “journalist” you can find and trumpet from the rooftops all of the popular legislation you would be working on and passing right now if it weren’t for the Ruthuglicans playing games to block it.
Talking points for each Sunday morning political show. Releases coming from every senior Democrat including the two running for President. All should be the same. The Republicans are obstructionist and totally to blame for not getting real work done that deals with real problems.
But, you know, if they did that? They just might offend somebody.
Who gives a rats ass?
Voters. The vote itself absolutely meaningless, you’re right, but doing this accomplishes nothing besides making the whole party look stupid. I keep reading this and keep thinking we’re missing something. By not choosing the path of least resistance, they went out of their way to put it in the news. I usually credit the Republicans with a bit more media savvy than this.
That’s about what you should be kvetching, Jay. Your party opens its mouth and inserts its foot for no good reason. Give it a little tough love.
Gonna be an interesting election year for Republican incumbents.
Well, they did vote against S-CHIP.
And you’re full of crap.
Republicans voted against HR 976 and HR 3963 (and Bush vetoed HR 976). But both of these bills were Democrat-led attempts to radically expand the S-CHIP program to an additional 4 million participants (most of them adults and families making well over 2-3 times the Federal poverty level).
On the other hand, HR 3584, which reauthorized and fully funded the existing program for an additional 18 months, was passed and signed by President Bush on December 21, 2007. The reason for the delay? The motion for HR 3963 had been delayed by the Democratic sponsored pushes for HR 976 and HR 3963.
So the reality is that Republicans voted to fund S-CHIP, while the Democrats held up funding in an attempt to expand the program.
You want to argue that S-CHIP should be expanded? Fine, make that argument instead of taking cheap shots.
Do a quick word swap and you have a headline that could have been ripped from 2005 or 2006 (prior to the Nov 2006 elections):
“Democrats, unhappy with the Republican majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill…”
They helped Bush V-E-T-O S-chip.
All they did was extend the coverage of current enrollment levels. In case you haven’t noticed, the economy is in the crapper. There are alot more uninsured children that would otherwise be eligible. You want to argue putting a bandaid on a gaping wound is FULLY FUNDING? Fine, make that point instead of regurgitating talking points.
They helped Bush V-E-T-O expansion of S-chip.
There, fixed that for you.
In case you haven’t noticed, the economy is in the crapper. There are alot more uninsured children that would otherwise be eligible.
Yes, the economy is down, but saying it’s “in the crapper” seems a little extreme.
And the expansion that was proposed by the Dems would cover adults (you do know they are different from children, don’t you?) and families making 200-300% of the poverty level.
You want to argue putting a bandaid on a gaping wound is FULLY FUNDING?
It’s your argument that the current program is a “bandaid on a gaping wound”, not mine.
“For people that bitch about the unimportant stuff that Congress is always doing (especially in regard to pointless resolutions) …”
You mean stuff like flag burning resolutions which republicans drag out every election cycle in the hopes of pummeling dems who believe in free speech? You know there’s stupid legislation cooked up purely to create fake controversies and then there’s innocuous puff bills like voting to affirm Mother’s Day and motherhood that should be no brainers for both parties. And in this case, the republicans blew it. And why? Because they’re whiny ass babies crying that the dems won’t play with them, as Boehner said: “The majority has taken, once again, their go-it-alone policy.” And where was their spirit of bi-partisanship four years ago? So to recap, the republicans are so petty they voted against a totally neutral, no-brainer mother’s day bill and we’re supposed to hold our tongues? Please.
Me: “Well, they did vote against S-CHIP.”
Dave in SoCal: “And you’re full of crap.”
Two points.
1.) You need to learn to recognize humor.
2.) You are a fucking hypocrite.
Right after that point, you wrote this…
“Do a quick word swap and you have a headline that could have been ripped from 2005 or 2006 (prior to the Nov 2006 elections):
‘Democrats, unhappy with the Republican majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill…’”
This session the Republicans have blocked more legislation than any other in the history of the country. Record-breaking level of obstruction. The previous session was the least productive in a long, long time, but not because of Democratic obstruction. If you think it is, I demand you supply the proof.
I can’t wait to see the TV ads “When —– was in office they voted against their own mother. Think what he will do to your mother if he is elected” pure gold.
It’s no big surprise that you are too fucking stupid to understand the problem we have. I’m serious, Jay. You are without doubt one of the dumbest people I’ve ever dealt with online.
Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnn……same old shit. Different day. You bore me CS.
We don’t like it when the government wastes time like this. However, the Republicans supported the measure, then forces a re-vote that wasted more time, and then voted against it. So they actually wasted more time had they just voted for it in the first place.
I see. So you’re annoyed, not that Congress wasted time, but that the GOP wasted more time. I see.
1.) You can run away from this debate and pretend it never happened.
Debate? What debate? The entire issue (if that’s what one wants to call it) is asinine.
2.) You can prove you are retarded by failing to grasp humor found in most of the posts above.
Haha. PUH-LEASE. The humor, my ass. If that’s humor it’s Dane Cook humor, which means it ain’t funny. Stop it. The pants shitting hysterics was 100% real.
Apparently Jay doesn’t feel it’s important for the country to recognize and appreciate mothers.
I suppose this is more ‘humor’ that CS was talking about. I recognize and appreciate Mothers. I’m just not a drone that needs Congress to do it for me.
most of us are laughing at the ridiculous hypocrisy and emptiness of it…
Laughing? I don’t see laughing. I see righteous indignation as if this was important.
This session the Republicans have blocked more legislation than any other in the history of the country.
And your source for this is?
Jay: What was your take on all the empty Support the Troops declarations that the GOP House delegation was passing in Aug 2004?
Were they somehow different?
Republican obstructionism: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/20/republican-obstructionism_n_77704.html
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12938.html
Jay’s stupidity: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infinite
Jay, since you need it spelled out–I’m laughing. I’m laughing hysterically. I find it incredibly funny that the Republicans took something that was stupid to begin with, and managed to do something even stupider with it.
Yes, a vote on whether or not We Love Our Mothers is a trifle. But what logical reason, other than pure spite, could Tiahrt and 177 other Republicans have to vote against it?
Two points back, CS:
1.) Explain how anyone is supposed to recognize that the statement “Well, they did vote against S-CHIP” is supposed to be humor and not taken at face value.
2.) And you are a fucking douchebag.
If you think it is, I demand you supply the proof.
But that statement was humor. Can’t you recognize it?.
“Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnn……same old shit. Different day. You bore me CS.”
You keep saying that, but you keep responding to me. That’s because you are…
a.) A fucking liar.
b.) Below the minimum standards to be considered human.
“I see. So you’re annoyed, not that Congress wasted time, but that the GOP wasted more time. I see.”
Yes. They are uses these tactics to prevent the Democrats from passing bills that the American people support.
“Debate? What debate? The entire issue (if that’s what one wants to call it) is asinine.”
I see you don’t know the definition of the word ‘debate.’ I’m not surprised for you are far too stupid to understand most words. This if why you are a conservative.
“Haha. PUH-LEASE. The humor, my ass. If that’s humor it’s Dane Cook humor, which means it ain’t funny. Stop it. The pants shitting hysterics was 100% real.”
Too stupid to understand comedic exaggerations used to make a point. Yes, you are a true conservative.
Midd.: “Apparently Jay doesn’t feel it’s important for the country to recognize and appreciate mothers.”
Jay: “I suppose this is more ‘humor’ that CS was talking about.”
Yes. It’s subtle, but I suspect he’s being facetious. … Facetious – adjective – humerous in a sarcastic way.
“I recognize and appreciate Mothers. I’m just not a drone that needs Congress to do it for me.”
And the Republicans voted for it. … and then forced a re-vote and voted against it, therefore wasting more than twice as much time while sending mixed messages. How can you look at the situation and think the Democrats are at fault here? I know, you’re fucking retarded.
“Laughing? I don’t see laughing. I see righteous indignation as if this was important.”
That’s cause you are dumb. You can’t understand the subtleties of language. You simply don’t have the mental agility to interpret anything other than in a literal way. This makes you dumb. This is also what makes you conservative.
Me: “This session the Republicans have blocked more legislation than any other in the history of the country.”
Jay: “And your source for this is?”
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/start-presses
If there are any words in there that you don’t understand, let me know.
“For people that bitch about the unimportant stuff that Congress is always doing (especially in regard to pointless resolutions) …”
Jay,
I think the issue is they voted to even vote on it. If they would have just voted “Nay” then there wouldn’t be an issue about frivolous bills, would there?
Dave in SoCal, I’m not sure what passes for acceptable editorial work in SoCal, but for the rest of the country, most people would do a minimum amount of research before trying to (erroneously) correct someone on a disputed point.
Bush vetoed the SCHIP reauthorization bill as sent to him by congress. It’s a fact, it’s in the record, and the republicans blocked various override attempts.
Once again, Jay:
“Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill…”
It isn’t about the content of any single resolution or procedure or bill for the Republicans. It’s about using anything and everything to bring congress to a halt. In this case their actions were so ridiculous and transparent that it brought a rare spotlight on their obstructionism. They voted against Motherhood!
It isn’t like when the Democrats were in the minority, and they used procedures and rules to stop specific pieces of legislation, even then, work was being done. The Republican minority now is using anything and everything brought before it to stall, prevent, delay, postpone and stop all business of the congress.
You want to argue that S-CHIP should be expanded? Fine, make that argument instead of taking cheap shots.
S-CHIP should be expanded.
Dave in SoCal: “Two points back, CS:
1.) Explain how anyone is supposed to recognize that the statement “Well, they did vote against S-CHIP” is supposed to be humor and not taken at face value.”
Because the person I responded to said, “Because I am a Republican, and I hate mothers and children.” And that was clearly a joke. (Right?) Context. You should look into it. I know you are a conservative and therefore have problems with the subtleties of speech and instinctively interpret everything literally, however, if you take the time to examine the context of the speech, you can see that a lot of people use a variety of literary devices to spice up their speech.
“2.) And you are a fucking douchebag.”
I’m also smarter than you, so I don’t care what you think.
Me: “If you think it is, I demand you supply the proof.”
Dave in SoCal: “But that statement was humor. Can’t you recognize it?.”
Doesn’t fit with the context.
Jay,
So the vote is still cynical and stupid. I already agree that these resolutions don’t really need to be in Congress, but to vote againsts this is somehow principaled? You can’t be that willfully ignorant. I trust you see my point, but I won’t hold my breath.
But what logical reason, other than pure spite, could Tiahrt and 177 other Republicans have to vote against it?
Like I said, I don’t care. It doesn’t matter to me. Whether people want to “joke” about it as CS claims (”JAY YOU STUPID FUCKING RETARDED DUMB FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCKING FUCKER FUCKHOLE FUCKFACE SUBHUMAN FUCKER FUCK!!!!” – CS the only person alive with an Internet version of Tourette’s syndrome) or not, it’s just pointless.
2.) And you are a fucking douchebag.
Cmon Dave in SoCal. Knock it off. You’re doing nothing but insulting douchebags when you compare them to CS. We don’t need that around here.
Bush vetoed the SCHIP reauthorization bill as sent to him by congress. It’s a fact, it’s in the record, and the republicans blocked various override attempts.
You mean HR 976 and HR 3963, the S-CHIP reauthorization and expansion bills? Did you miss the expansion part?
From the Library of Congress site:
H.R. 976
Title: An act to amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
H.R. 3963
Title: To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
Taken from the Congressional Quarterly summary of the subject:
“New funding for SCHIP was up for reauthorization in 2007, and Democrats announced plans for a huge expansion as part of a legislative agenda aimed at easing financial pressures on middle-class families. Initial proposals by leading Democrats such as John D. Dingell of Michigan, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York envisioned a near-limitless expansion of the program that might have cost as much as $100 billion over five years.
Bush rejected the Democratic plans as a massive expansion of government-controlled health care that would move millions of families out of private insurance. He proposed a much smaller SCHIP expansion — $5 billion extra over five years.
The first bill to make it to the House floor, a measure by Dingell and Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel , D-N.Y., combined a nearly $50 billion expansion of SCHIP with changes to Medicare, including spending cuts to Medicare Advantage, a Republican-championed program in which insurers provide benefits to seniors in place of the government.
When Bush vetoed the bill, House Democratic leaders delayed an override vote in an effort to build pressure on Republicans to support the bill. That effort was unsuccessful, and the override failed in mid-October.
Democrats then drew up a bill (HR 3963), with changes intended to draw enough new GOP votes in the House to override a veto. But they did not consult with House Republican leaders on the new bill, and it ultimately drew less support than the first. The leadership waited in hopes that tinkering with the bill would win more GOP votes, but eventually gave up and sent the bill to Bush, who vetoed it in mid-December.”
HR 3584, which was passed, was an extension of funding for 18 months. No expansions.
As I noted previously above, if you want to argue that S-CHIP should be expanded beyond current amounts, then feel free to make that argument.
Now what was that you were saying about “a minimum amount of research before trying to (erroneously) correct someone on a disputed point”?
I’m also smarter than you, so I don’t care what you think.
Sounds like someone’s self-esteem is being threatened. “But-but-but I’m SMARTER than you, Dammit!” Do you need a hug, CS?
And don’t worry, I couldn’t care less about anything you think or say either.
Me: “If you think it is, I demand you supply the proof.”
You demand that I supply proof? Demand? Or else what? Are you going to hurl yourself to the ground and throw a massive hissy fit until you get your way? Be sure to pace yourself.
Like I said, I don’t care. It doesn’t matter to me.
People who don’t care don’t come back to the conversation.
I will continue laughing, as now we have entered a moment of Escheresque beauty, in which you seem to be defending a defense of an indefensible position while simultaneously declaring you have nothing to defend.
S-CHIP should be expanded.
Damn, now THAT’S a compelling argument!
You demand that I supply proof? Demand? Or else what? Are you going to hurl yourself to the ground and throw a massive hissy fit until you get your way? Be sure to pace yourself.
Translation: I have no proof or empirical evidence, but I’ll screech to the high heavens like a fucking harpy until you people accept my assessment as true.
And the expansion that was proposed by the Dems would cover adults (you do know they are different from children, don’t you?) and families making 200-300% of the poverty level.
With rising health care costs, and reduction of employer benefits, families that make 2-3 times poverty level income can’t necessary afford health insurance. As for the adult comment, you’re basically saying it’s OK for people to die once they turn 18. Nice going.
Dave, why do you hate America?
Damn, now THAT’S a compelling argument!
Thank you, thank you very much. Rebuttal?
H.R. 976
Title: An act to amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
H.R. 3963
Title: To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.
What could be wrong with that?
Bush rejected the Democratic plans as a massive expansion of government-controlled health care that would move millions of families out of private insurance.
Oh, now I see.
What a bunch of mother haters!
Thank you, thank you very much. Rebuttal?
Oh I agree that the program should be expanded to cover children who are not already covered under existing programs or don’t have private insurance.
What could be wrong with that?
Bush rejected the Democratic plans as a massive expansion of government-controlled health care that would move millions of families out of private insurance.
Oh, now I see.
Yes, we can’t have people paying for their own health insurance, can we? Much better to have the government (via taxpayers) pay for it all. And besides, you know how much more efficient government bureaucracies are than the private sector. \sarcasm
Translation: I have no proof or empirical evidence, but I’ll screech to the high heavens like a fucking harpy until you people accept my assessment as true.
You mean like the proof or empirical evidence that CS offered to back up this statement (the one that I was responding to):
This session the Republicans have blocked more legislation than any other in the history of the country. Record-breaking level of obstruction. The previous session was the least productive in a long, long time, but not because of Democratic obstruction.
And you seem to be mistaking where the screeching was coming from. I wasn’t the one demanding, DEMANDING proof. And I don’t expect you to “accept my assessment as true”, nor do I really care whether you do.
As for the adult comment, you’re basically saying it’s OK for people to die once they turn 18. Nice going.
No, that’s what you’re saying I’m saying. And as long as an 18 year old can walk into an emergency room, they aren’t going to be dying from lack of medical insurance any time soon. Or didn’t you know that ER’s don’t require insurance to provide medical care? Again, if you want to argue that coverage should be expanded (even to cover adults) then make that argument. But spare me the bullshit “you think it’s OK for 18 year olds to die” comment.
Jay: “Like I said, I don’t care.”
I think this is a lie. You obvious care, or you wouldn’t be posting about it, repeatedly. By the way, I like how you insulted me but never bother to discuss my points.
Dave: “Sounds like someone’s self-esteem is being threatened.”
Not by you. It amazing how many conservatives are delusional when it comes to their intelligence.
Dave: “You demand that I supply proof? Demand?”
Yes. Post proof or shut the fuck up.
Dave: “You mean like the proof or empirical evidence that CS offered to back up this statement (the one that I was responding to):
‘This session the Republicans have blocked more legislation than any other in the history of the country. Record-breaking level of obstruction. The previous session was the least productive in a long, long time, but not because of Democratic obstruction.’”
I posted a link, if you had bothered to check. But no, you are far too fucking stupid to do that.
So Bush vetoed the bill and then signed an inadequate bill. He must be proud.
Of course, this is the same president that vetoed his own Iraq funding bill.
I think this is a lie. You obvious care, or you wouldn’t be posting about it, repeatedly.
Actually, I don’t care about the vote. My responses are secondary to that particular part of the entire discussion. You’re claiming that people are being ‘humorous’ about it. I don’t think that’s the case. Do a Google search on “gop vote against mothers” and returns dozens of links to blogs and such where people are practically spitting on their screens in anger.
Democrats caterwauled for weeks about the media focusing on Jeremiah Wright, but what are Democrats interested in? Mothers Day votes and Cindy McCain’s tax returns.
By the way, I like how you insulted me but never bother to discuss my points.
Sorry, I couldn’t see past all of your tourette’s outbursts.
It’s allright Jay. You support a party of mother haters. There’s no shame in that.
Well, OK, there is actually.
Doesn’t this mean the House GOP is breaking one of the 10 Commandments?
“…but what are Democrats interested in? Mothers Day votes…”
Good grief, only Jay could see a negative over Democrats being interested in a resolution supporting Mothers Day.
And as long as an 18 year old can walk into an emergency room, they aren’t going to be dying from lack of medical insurance any time soon. Or didn’t you know that ER’s don’t require insurance to provide medical care?
…Wow…you’re a complete moron. ER treatment expenses don’t magically disappear, for one thing, someone has to pay for it. And of course, that ends up being the tax-payers.
Secondly, you can’t get preventative care from an ER, or medication for that matter. ER care is just that, emergency care. Fucking dumbass.
“Actually, I don’t care about the vote.”
Yet you are talking about it. A lot.
“Do a Google search on ‘gop vote against mothers’ and returns dozens of links to blogs and such where people are practically spitting on their screens in anger.”
Dozens. Dozens? Dozens on blogs on the internet. Wow. I can’t believe you find that impressive. By the way, how many of those are making the same point we are; i.e. The GOP voted against Mother’s Day in order to waste more time and prevent votes on more important subjects.
“Democrats caterwauled for weeks about the media focusing on Jeremiah Wright, but what are Democrats interested in? Mothers Day votes and Cindy McCain’s tax returns.”
Two points…
1.) Cindy McCain is helping fund her husband’s campaign, so her financial records are just as fair game as any other candidate. The only difference is, she files separately so we don’t know anything about her. For that matter, John Kerry was attacked for marrying a rich woman, so if Teresa Heinz Kerry is fair game, why isn’t Cindy?
2.) That’s a rather incomplete, and misleading list. But you’ve never let the facts get in the way of your political beliefs.
Me: “By the way, I like how you insulted me but never bother to discuss my points.”
Jay: “Sorry, I couldn’t see past all of your tourette’s outbursts.”
And that makes you stupid, Jay. And you are proud of being a fucking idiot. Ignorant and proud of it is one of the cornerstones of being Sub-Human.
Zython: “Fucking dumbass.”
See, at some point you have to insult these people, because they are so insult=worthy.
…Wow…you’re a complete moron. ER treatment expenses don’t magically disappear, for one thing, someone has to pay for it. And of course, that ends up being the tax-payers.
I never said it was an efficent or better way to provide health care, I was merely responding to your dipshit comment “you’re basically saying it’s OK for people to die once they turn 18″.
Way to shift the goalposts (again). My original (and only) point was that “Republicans voted against S-CHIP” was a false statement.
Secondly, you can’t get preventative care from an ER, or medication for that matter. ER care is just that, emergency care. Fucking dumbass.
Yeah, no shit Sherlock. My wife is an ER doc so I suspect that I have a better understanding of the services that are provided there (and their cost as well as likelihood of being paid for) than you do. So why didn’t you try to make that as a point instead of your patently stupid “18 is OK to die” comment? Probably because trying to dismiss someone as a heartless bastard or a moron is much easier than, you know, debating an issue.
Dumb. Fucking. Shit.
“I never said it was an efficent or better way to provide health care, I was merely responding to your dipshit comment ‘you’re basically saying it’s OK for people to die once they turn 18′.”
If you can’t get preventative treatment and medicines, you will die younger. For that matter, in many cases by the time the medical issue is at the point where the ER will treat it, it is too late. You can’t sure cancer in the ER. I can’t believe we have to explain this to you.
A healthy population is a productive population. It is in your best interest to make sure people can get medical treatment BEFORE it requires a trip to the emergency ward. Not only that, but S-CHIP is actually cheaper than private insurance, which is good news.
I posted a link, if you had bothered to check. But no, you are far too fucking stupid to do that.
You mean that press release and report from ‘Campaign for America’s Future’?
From the wiki entry for Campaign for America’s Future (CAF):
“an American political organization of progressives. Its main issues of concern include the environment, energy independence, health care reform, Social Security, and education. The Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel, AFL-CIO president John Sweeney, and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa serve on its board of directors.
Within the Democratic Party, it often serves as a counterweight to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).[1] CAF argues that the Democratic Party should draw sharp contrasts with the Republicans and advance a progressive agenda.”
Sure. No bias there. Totally neutral and all that.
Hey, you know that report they trumpet? That “huge story”? That “historic story”? Turns out it’s not available on the website. Which you would have known if you had bothered to check. But no, you are clearly far too fucking stupid to do that.
Which means you didn’t read it either, you just took the CAF press release at face value.
See, at some point you have to insult these people, because they are so insult=worthy.
When you don’t have facts on your side, I guess that flinging feces is really all you have left.
Yes, we can’t have people paying for their own health insurance, can we?
My point, Dave, was that it would take away from insurance companies profit margin. In our fascistic society, that would be a bad thing.
but what are Democrats interested in? Mothers Day votes
Hey, your team brought it up in the first place.
If you can’t get preventative treatment and medicines, you will die younger. For that matter, in many cases by the time the medical issue is at the point where the ER will treat it, it is too late. You can’t sure cancer in the ER. I can’t believe we have to explain this to you.
You’re not explaining anything to me that I don’t already know (and probably in more depth than you).
You keep laboring under the false impression that I’m arguing against expanding S-CHIP or that I’m somehow against people getting taxpayer-funded medical care in general. I’m not against either.
Did you miss this sentence in my last comment?
“My original (and only) point was that “Republicans voted against S-CHIP” was a false statement.”
My point, Dave, was that it would take away from insurance companies profit margin.
Then why don’t you argue for medical insurance reform? Change the insurance industry so that more people can afford good and reasonably-priced coverage. Allow everyone to get the kind of “group rate” discounts that big companies do. Turning health care management over to a government bureaucracy should be the last resort.
In our fascistic society, that would be a bad thing.
And right here is where you and reality part company.
And for the record, I would not doubt that Republicans have blocked more legislation the last 2 years than the Democrats did in the 2 years before that. Although whether it rises to the level of “record breaking” is probably debatable. The R’s don’t seem to be handling this whole “minority” thing very well. The Mother’s Day vote is a good example.
But it’s not like the R’s are doing something that the D’s never did. That’s like one thief saying he’s the more honest person because the other thief stole way more stuff than he did.
“Sure. No bias there. Totally neutral and all that.”
So you are saying their bias somehow affected the math. I’d love to see you prove that. If you think they are bias, you have to prove it. Otherwise you are ignoring evidence you don’t like, simply because you don’t like it. And that is bias.
“Which means you didn’t read it either, you just took the CAF press release at face value.”
No, I read excerpts of it from other sites.
“You’re not explaining anything to me that I don’t already know (and probably in more depth than you).”
So you are intentionally being this stupid.
“My original (and only) point was that ‘Republicans voted against S-CHIP’ was a false statement.”
Actually, you have made several other points since then.
“Turning health care management over to a government bureaucracy should be the last resort.”
Why? Explain how a company looking to make a profit can handle this better than the government looking to improve the health of its citizens?
“Although whether it rises to the level of “record breaking” is probably debatable.”
Really? You’ve given no evidence to support your case.
“But it’s not like the R’s are doing something that the D’s never did.”
That’s a logical fallacy. It’s a matter of degrees. The Democrats were never this bad. Never.
So you are saying their bias somehow affected the math. I’d love to see you prove that. If you think they are bias, you have to prove it. Otherwise you are ignoring evidence you don’t like, simply because you don’t like it. And that is bias.
I’d love the opportunity to see their math, but as I noted above, it’s not available. I am “ignoring evidence”, not because I don’t like it, but because you have failed to produce it.
Really? You’ve given no evidence to support your case.
And neither have you. Saying “I read excerpts of the reports on other sites” hardly qualifies.
So you are intentionally being this stupid.
Your inability to understand that my argument is “The R’s did not vote against extending S-CHIP” and not this mythical “The current health care system is the most wonderful one possible and is without flaw and everyone gets the exact care they need at the cheapest cost” is an indication of your stupidity, not mine. I’ve tried to explain it several times.
Why? Explain how a company looking to make a profit can handle this better than the government looking to improve the health of its citizens?
You’re kidding, right? Okay, first off, private businesses have an incentive to provide a decent product or service at a reasonable price or they will not survive the marketplace. The government does not. Businesses make their profit by driving their costs lower than what they can charge for the product or service. The government, as a monopoly, can pay lip service to keeping costs down. Why not? What is their incentive to do otherwise?
If you need more examples of how private businesses are more efficient that government, then here is good place to start.
I do like how you added the wording “looking to improve the health of its citizens” to make the government sound much more compassionate. Yes, I’m sure everyone in that enormous health care bureaucracy would all be focused on one thing: giving American citizens the best health care possible. You’ve apparently never interacted with a government bureaucracy before (SSA, IRS, DMV, etc.) or known anyone employed by one.
Now the burden’s on you. Please explain how the government can handle health care better (such as more efficiently or at a cheaper cost) than private businesses can.
Wrong Dave. In a couple of areas.
Republicans have blocked and filibustered more legislation in the Senate in one year than any other congress has in it’s entire 2 year term. Look it up.
Next, private businesses do not have an incentive to provide a decent product at a reasonable price. Particularly across an industry like insurance. What they have an incentive to do is maximize their profits. And then you explain how they do that! By driving their costs lower than what they can charge for a product or service. How do they do that? 1. Raising the price of what they charge for their service at a far greater rate than inflation. 2. Lower the cost of their service or product. AKA, denying coverage, withholding payments, and passing a share onto its consumers.
As a fact, government does keep costs lower than private business in the health care industry. They do this by having a fraction of the administrative costs that insurance companies have, and by taking out the profit margin. I’ll further back this up by pointing out that the US pays out the most money by far for its health care and is behind nearly every industrialized nation in the level of care that buys.
And its funny that you complain about dealing with the SSA. Alot of the SSA’s backlog is caused by private insurance companies forcing its customers to apply for social security disability before they will pay for temporary disability supplemental claims.
Another interesting fact for you, governemtn in the US pays a larger percentage of the nation’s health care costs than private insurance does.
Then why don’t you argue for medical insurance reform? Change the insurance industry so that more people can afford good and reasonably-priced coverage. Allow everyone to get the kind of “group rate” discounts that big companies do. Turning health care management over to a government bureaucracy should be the last resort.
I’m all for insurance reform. And I admit, I have to agree that govt. intervention should not be the first go-to, but the entire insurance industry consists of nothing more than organized crime leaders and racketeers.
You cannot convince me that medical insurance is nothing more than a protection money shakedown.
There is no incentive for them to drive down prices and provide better service or coverage. I really resent the idea of some shmoe in an office telling my doctor what he can treat me for and how, or saying I can only have this many of this pill a month. I resent the fact that virtually every insurance claim is automatically denied, and that they just hope you give up and go away. Or die, whichever comes first.
And right here is where you and reality part company.
How so? You don’t think this administration is looking out for Corporate America more than American citizens? Do you think the whole Medicare D bullshit is fair to the elderly?
Obviously, I don’t think we live in a fascist state, but we keep inching towards it.