[ebuddy]

"Physician throwing softballs to Jackson not a physician at all"

Turns out a woman who claimed she's been a physician for 4 years is lying through her teeth.

A little girl at another townhall meeting asks; "As I was walking in I saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming healthcare. How do kids know what is true and why do people want a new system that can help more of us".
- Turns out she's daughter of Kathleen Manning Hall who has donated thousands of dollars to the Obama campaign with a list of friends that reads like a who's who of influential Democratic strategists, and who attended an invite-only eastern inauguration ball.

Is this the astro-turf everyone's talking about?

[stumblinmike]

No.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

No.

Well is it the busloads of ACORN volunteers going to the town hall meetings? There must be astro-turf somewhere.

[Demonhood]

the right stacks town halls with rude folks and you're really surprised/shocked/dismayed that the left responds by sending people with softball questions? really?

[Chongo]

More like planted questions. We find it funny that the kings of asrtotufing are complaining. Ask Ann Coulter or any number of conservatives who have been asked to give speeches about rent a mobs showing up and disrupting them.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Demonhood 

the right stacks town halls with rude folks and you're really surprised/shocked/dismayed that the left responds by sending people with softball questions? really?

Really? One or two people stand up to express their views and this is "stacking town halls"? Cry me a river. The left "stacking town halls" aren't even truthful about who the hell they are.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Demonhood 

the right stacks town halls with rude folks and you're really surprised/shocked/dismayed that the left responds by sending people with softball questions? really?

Considering the political climate,

dontcha think they might have better things to do....like i dunno....run the country and actually figure this scam out? Seems to me that if they were all that serious, they might actually put some effort into this bill and make it something worthwhile. More and more these people are beginning to sound like cheap car salesman, except they decide what I buy.


If they're at the town hall....who's steering the ship?

[besson3c]

Snow: congress is influenced by that their constituents want, and given that there is an abundance of FUD and misinformation circulating out there (and I'm not suggesting that any one person or group is responsible for this), I think it makes sense to conduct town hall meetings to try to steer the national debate into the realm of sane discussion. I'm also not suggesting that opposing any of the five proposed bills is insane, but go out there and get a sample of what people think is being proposed and what these ramifications might be, it's all over the map.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Snow: congress is influenced by that their constituents want, and given that there is an abundance of FUD and misinformation circulating out there (and I'm not suggesting that any one person or group is responsible for this), I think it makes sense to conduct town hall meetings to try to steer the national debate into the realm of sane discussion. I'm also not suggesting that opposing any of the five proposed bills is insane, but go out there and get a sample of what people think is being proposed and what these ramifications might be, it's all over the map.

So instead of fostering intelligent debate they simply condemn the most vocal and extreme of their opposition?

Ignore those with valid points and call the opposing viewpoints liars?

They're spending more time trying to do damage control then actually working on putting out something concrete that I can even give intelligent feedback on. I've simply come to the conclusion that they don't have any answers to the points raised, and want to shift the focus away from that.

It reeks of dishonesty.

[besson3c]

I'm not sure exactly what incident you are referring to Snow, but I was making a general statement. Planted political agents and moronic demonstrators on either side saying idiotic things is nothing new to politics.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Considering the political climate,

dontcha think they might have better things to do....like i dunno....run the country and actually figure this scam out? Seems to me that if they were all that serious, they might actually put some effort into this bill and make it something worthwhile. More and more these people are beginning to sound like cheap car salesman, except they decide what I buy.


If they're at the town hall....who's steering the ship?

Yes, I'm sure those are the very same people. The town halls are being positively flooded with covert Congressmen disguised as confused citizens.

[Big Mac]

I was just about to post a thread on the healthcare town halls!

Regarding Obama's town halls:
1. He completely fails to address the tough questions while making it appear he's covering all the angles. For example, in today's town hall he responded to concerns over the public option by listing and responding to three different objections that he claimed were the chief objections to the plan. In one of the responses, he explained that the public option would not crowd out private insurers because the legislation would make sure that there was an equal playing field, with premiums collected to fund the plan rather than having it funded by deficit spending. Of course, he failed to give any specifics on how the program would be held to a set budget and not allowed to run large deficits. The USPS, which the president likes to compare to the public option, runs multi-billion dollar deficits per year, but it's never going to be shut down. What possible cause does a rational person have to believe that spending on this new entitlement can ever be restrained?

He also doesn't ever address one of the most prominent concerns about the public option - namely that the 8% payroll surcharge levied on employers who don't provide insurance to their employees will create a perverse incentive for employers to dump their employees en masse on to government insurance because the cost penalty will be much less than the price of benefits most employees currently get. That's the backdoor toward single payer that they don't even want to acknowledge.

2. The president has now on multiple occasions openly mocked ignorant seniors with his parodied remark that he says he hears so often, "I don't want government health care, but don't touch my Medicare." He thinks it's funny in pointing it out, but it seems quite rude to me.

3. John Stewart was one of the only personalities to lampoon Obama for saying the public option will work without killing private enterprise because the USPS competes poorly with UPS and FedEx. I give him credit for poking fun at the president for that boneheaded statement. But Obama has made similar statements illustrating that he accepts how poorly government currently runs the health care programs under its charge. He very correctly points out that Medicare and Medicaid, and Social Security (the Entitlements I hate with a passion) are by far the biggest contributors to the structural federal deficit and national debt. Yet, he wants us to trust that he and the $787B pork parade Democrat Congress are going to be able to craft a grand new entitlement program (what will amount to Medicare for all) that somehow won't run perpetual deficits, won't vastly exceed the cost projections currently being made, and won't end up doing many of the negative things that people fear it will do to health care in this country.

4. Obama never gets a tough, on-point question from the opposition. The questioners who oppose him throw him softballs. I have to imagine the questions are submitted ahead of time, and anyone who truly knows what he or she is talking about is filtered out.

Regarding Congressional town halls:
I was at my local Democratic Congressman's town hall on Tuesday. He too refused to take tough questions from anyone who had a real point to make. He largely echoed Obama, he made all kinds of unverifiable claims, and he even said how proud he was of his predecessors for their passage of the abominable pyramid schemes of Social Security and Medicare. This particular Rep is a dope, a liar and a coward, and when it was clear to me he would never take my question I started shouting that he was indeed a coward and liar. I hope my message got to him clearly.

[stumblinmike]

That was you? I saw someone yelling names at the Honorable Representative, and just dismissed it as a whacko off his meds. That was you?! Classic Mac!

[Big Mac]

Glad you heard me!

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm not sure exactly what incident you are referring to Snow, but I was making a general statement. Planted political agents and moronic demonstrators on either side saying idiotic things is nothing new to politics.

Very true.

Looks like nothing has changed at all.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Yes, I'm sure those are the very same people. The town halls are being positively flooded with covert Congressmen disguised as confused citizens.

I didn't know Obama was disguised as a citizen at his town halls.

You got the confused part right!

[Chuckit]

Obama's not the only guy in charge here. In fact, Obama is relatively unimportant when it comes to making laws.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Obama's not the only guy in charge here. In fact, Obama is relatively unimportant when it comes to making laws.

this is obama's bill, he's the single most important person behind it...not to mention the potus

[Big Mac]

Btw, the CBO projects that with a public option 9 million Americans would lose their private employer plans by 2014. If the Dems ram the public option through it will be humorous to see how far off that projection is.

[besson3c]

Big Mac: isn't one of the goals of this to make private health care less about employers? I dearly hope so...

[Big Mac]

You're missing the point. Employers are going to tell their employees they're going to be paying the new health care payroll tax to the government instead, and then employees will assume that since part of their benefit is now going to the government they should just hop on to the public plan. That plus the fact that the public plan will never be curtailed or shut down no matter how severe its deficits are and you have the destruction of private health coverage and the backdoor imposition of a single payer system, just like Obama said (a few years back) he envisioned doing over a number of years.

[besson3c]

So the government sucks at running health care, yet they will pose a threat to private health insurance? I think you have it backwards. In countries like Canada it is the public health care which is threatened by private insurance options.

You'll forgive me if I take your other doomsday stuff with a grain of salt knowing your bias.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So the government sucks at running health care, yet they will pose a threat to private health insurance?

Yes, in the same way Internet Explorer dominated the browser landscape for so long despite the fact that it's terrible. When you have the advantage of being able to give your product away at no visible cost and the power to shove it right into everybody's faces, it doesn't really matter what the other guy has.

[Big Mac]

Besson, you're only talking and not listening. It doesn't matter that government programs like Social Security and Medicare suck because they take up huge amounts of funding and are killing the country and the wealth of our and future generations. So to it won't matter if the public option sucks because it will be another huge entitlement drain sucking us down the crapper.

Btw, Chuck, I did mention the employer opt-out in excange for the 8%+ payroll tax issue as one of the major problems with the public plan that will provide a perverse incentive to employers to drop their current health benefits.

[Chuckit]

Oh, yes, you did. Short-term memory loss? I don't know.

[besson3c]

Chuckit: what makes you think that there wouldn't be room for both? Each will ultimately be more practical for certain medical procedures, but there will also be plenty of gaps for both to fill. There will be people that are happy to pay more for certain things, and there will be several areas that the public option likely flat out won't cover at all. When have free market Republicans thought that options are a bad thing? It's not like their tax dollars don't already go to public health, they do. Whether the service is public or private, isn't the ultimate goal to drive down costs for all and not raise taxes?

Most of these concerns seem to be of the what if, could happen boogieman variety. I'm a little less nervous about all of this I guess because I grew up in Canada? A lot of stuff *could* happen. This could end up costing us more, but I don't think we should freak out about it until this proves to be true. Besides, sticking with what we have is already driving us into the toilet, where was all of this dire doomsday stuff years ago?

Big Mac: no dude, you're the one not listening, but I don't really wish to pursue this discussion with you because we both know it will be a waste of time. You are heavily invested in your opinions, and while I'd argue that I'm a little more open minded than you, I'm not interested in having your opinions rammed down my throat either. A genuine discussion I'm always open for, but sans dogma and self righteousness.

[Chongo]

For those who dare. HB 3200
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

[ThinkInsane]

Enough. Besson and Big Mac, settle this via PM or email or some other method that gets this little squabble out of the public forum. Any more will result in in infractions and a lot of deleting.

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Yes, in the same way Internet Explorer dominated the browser landscape for so long despite the fact that it's terrible. When you have the advantage of being able to give your product away at no visible cost and the power to shove it right into everybody's faces, it doesn't really matter what the other guy has.

not sure if that comparison is apt

since the insurance companies have the upper hand right now, they are the internet explorer of health care system.

oh and let's bring guns to a town hall...

edit: also, the public option is like open source.

[besson3c]

Yeah, WTF is up with bringing guns to a town hall? Can anybody here defend the rationale behind this?

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Yeah, WTF is up with bringing guns to a town hall? Can anybody here defend the rationale behind this?

Black folks are scary.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Yeah, WTF is up with bringing guns to a town hall? Can anybody here defend the rationale behind this?

Some people have concealed carry. It's on 'em. All the time. Did someone draw a weapon at a townhall meeting? I'm hearing the guy was legally carrying a handgun strapped to his leg. If the guy was illegally carrying a weapon, by all means I hope they throw the book at him. Enforcing the blasted laws would go a long way to reducing gun crime. I do not appreciate this in tandem with the Jefferson quote about refreshing the tree of liberty however, and he should've been held for questioning.

I mentioned this when Obama was first elected and I'll reiterate it now, God help us all if something happens to our President. Say what you will of his policies, he's very accessible to the public. I hope this Administration is doing everything within its ability to keep the psychotically stupid as far away as possible.

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I mentioned this when Obama was first elected and I'll reiterate it now, God help us all if something happens to our President. Say what you will of his policies, he's very accessible to the public. I hope this Administration is doing everything within its ability to keep the psychotically stupid as far away as possible.

in other words, no blood on my hands if someone in my party does something...bad

[besson3c]

Whether it is legal or not to carry a concealed weapon to something like that is besides the point, it was an incredibly dumb thing to do. For starters, anybody could have grabbed the gun and used it on anybody in attendance. There are a lot of crazy people everywhere. If you really feel like you will be at risk yourself and this worries you, maybe it would be best to not go rather than putting others at risk?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

That was you? I saw someone yelling names at the Honorable Representative, and just dismissed it as a whacko off his meds. That was you?! Classic Mac!

There's nothing "Honorable" about any of those ****ing idiots, get a clue.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by ironknee 

in other words, no blood on my hands if someone in my party does something...bad

Well, would you feel responsible if some Republican did something bad?

[ironknee]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Well, would you feel responsible if some Republican did something bad?

no because i don't believe in the fear and hate republicans have.

like going to all the hitler rallies and then finding out the killing of 8 million jews... klink, "i know nothing!"

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Some people have concealed carry. It's on 'em. All the time. Did someone draw a weapon at a townhall meeting? I'm hearing the guy was legally carrying a handgun strapped to his leg. If the guy was illegally carrying a weapon, by all means I hope they throw the book at him.

There are many government regulations limiting more inane things: I wasn't allowed to take my cell phone or mp3 player into the American embassy (Frankfurt) or immigration (SF). I was told this holds for all buildings of the federal government (something to do with terrorists I'm sure). If it's a government building, they have the right to limit certain things -- and banning guns makes much more sense than not allowing mp3 players.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

There are many government regulations limiting more inane things: I wasn't allowed to take my cell phone or mp3 player into the American embassy (Frankfurt) or immigration (SF). I was told this holds for all buildings of the federal government (something to do with terrorists I'm sure). If it's a government building, they have the right to limit certain things -- and banning guns makes much more sense than not allowing mp3 players.

The people who were carrying the weapons openly were well within the laws of their state. Agree with them or not, they did nothing wrong and were simply exercising their right to bear arms lawfully.


They were NOT allowed to carry weapons inside, as when the secret service enters a venue it becomes a federal site where weapons are banned. Scary as it might be to have one show you a gun, isn't it a helluva lot scarier knowing someone there probably has one you don't see?

I don't see those people as doing anything more than making a political statement. I don't quite agree with them on how to go about doing it but I respect that those who did, made sure they were within the law when doing it.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

The people who were carrying the weapons openly were well within the laws of their state. Agree with them or not, they did nothing wrong and were simply exercising their right to bear arms lawfully.

You misunderstood my post and there is no reason to go on a rant about people in favor of gun regulations or whatnot. All I was saying is that there are laws and regulations that may limit these things on (certain) government property. As far as I understand besson's initial comment `let's bring a gun to town hall' sparked all of this. I'm not saying anything about carrying guns outside of town halls. I'm specifically talking about bringing guns (concealed or open) to such events.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

So is this incident officially considered 'fishy'? Quick, someone report it to the whitehouse!

This just in: I overheard someone today exercising their 1st amendment rights. Is that considered 'fishy' along with the 2nd? Anyone could have overheard that dangerous talk. There's a lot of crazy people. Better not to talk than put people at risk of hearing something fishy.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

The people who were carrying the weapons openly were well within the laws of their state. Agree with them or not, they did nothing wrong and were simply exercising their right to bear arms lawfully.

The guy with the assault rifle actually said more people should show up in public with guns. Count me out.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

You misunderstood my post and there is no reason to go on a rant about people in favor of gun regulations or whatnot. All I was saying is that there are laws and regulations that may limit these things on (certain) government property. As far as I understand besson's initial comment `let's bring a gun to town hall' sparked all of this. I'm not saying anything about carrying guns outside of town halls. I'm specifically talking about bringing guns (concealed or open) to such events.

That was hardly a rant, but an elaboration on reported facts straight from CNN.

I wasn't arguing against you.

[ironknee]

with signs like, "i want my america back."... ie i want white presidents back

plus guns= not a good thing

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

There are many government regulations limiting more inane things: I wasn't allowed to take my cell phone or mp3 player into the American embassy (Frankfurt) or immigration (SF). I was told this holds for all buildings of the federal government (something to do with terrorists I'm sure). If it's a government building, they have the right to limit certain things -- and banning guns makes much more sense than not allowing mp3 players.

Whether I agreed with you on this point or not, it's not relevant to the discussion. I suggested that if a man were carrying a gun along with a sign implying violence, he should've been held for thorough investigation. I mentioned that if he did break any gun laws, the book should be thrown at him.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by ironknee 

in other words, no blood on my hands if someone in my party does something...bad

I can appreciate how everything must be compartmentalized into an (R) or a (D) for the simpleton mentality, but my statement did not imply a party. I have a country. I did not say "God help the Republican Party if something were to happen to our President", I said "God help our country..."

The psychotically stupid have nothing to do with political philosophy or dissent, rather an unhealthy mix of ignorance, hatred, zeal and paranoia. From the Holocaust museum incident, we know that these behavioral disorders often debut as flame-baiting trolls on internet forums ironknee.

It's never too late brother. You have to want to be happy man.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Whether I agreed with you on this point or not, it's not relevant to the discussion. I suggested that if a man were carrying a gun along with a sign implying violence, he should've been held for thorough investigation. I mentioned that if he did break any gun laws, the book should be thrown at him.

You wrote about permits and stuff: whether they have concealed carry permits or not may not be relevant: if they are in a public building where weapons are prohibited, then they have to respect that. Bringing weapons to a Giants game is probably also prohibited -- and nobody is crying foul, they're trampling on my Second Amendment rights.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

You wrote about permits and stuff: whether they have concealed carry permits or not may not be relevant: if they are in a public building where weapons are prohibited, then they have to respect that. Bringing weapons to a Giants game is probably also prohibited -- and nobody is crying foul, they're trampling on my Second Amendment rights.

If he brought his weapon into a public building where weapons are prohibited... what did I say? Throw the book at him. Is this the case? As far as crying "foul" over Second Amendment rights, you've not seen me do this. What exactly are you arguing and who with? It kinda seems like you're force-fitting a rant here.

If you want to argue something this badly I suppose I could oblige, but...

[OreoCookie]

I had the impression you were arguing along those lines. Since you're saying that this was a misunderstanding on my part, then I agree, let's not create an issue where there is none.

[BadKosh]

Looks like Barney Frank wants to be a game show host. He sure sounded that way at his town hall meetings.