Hey house, deem this!

31 replies [Last post]
TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005

I'm so pissed at this crooked, looney bunch I can't see straight.

Link

TinCan
TinCan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/29/2005
Add the presbo too

they're everywhere!

Link

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Obama is a liar out to destroy America

O's middle-class squeeze

Health reform will leave many of them newly priced out of a transformed market for health insurance.

The hardest hit won't be those earning more than $250,000 a year -- the group that he says needs to "pay their fair share." Rather, it's families whose combined annual income is around $100,000 who could be crushed under this plan.

Read on - The middle class is completely screwed. The spoils will go to the moocher class.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Welcome to my World

I hope we can make it to November.. We have to vote the House OUT.. It is time to start over..

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Caterpillar: Health Bill Would Cost Company $100 Million More

Caterpillar: Health Bill Would Cost Company $100 Million More

By Bob Tita, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

CHICAGO -(Dow Jones)- Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) said the health-care overhaul legislation being considered by the U.S. House would increase the company's health-care costs by more than $100 million in the first year alone.

In a letter Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) and House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, Caterpillar urged lawmakers to vote against the plan "because of the substantial cost burdens it would place on our shareholders, employees and retirees."

Caterpillar, the world's largest construction machinery manufacturer by sales, said it's particularly opposed to provisions in the bill that would expand Medicare taxes and mandate insurance coverage. The legislation would require nearly all companies to provide health insurance for their employees or face large fines.

The Peoria, Ill., company said these provisions would increase its insurance costs by at least 20%, or more than $100 million, just in the first year of the health-care overhaul program.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Kawfi

Had no idea that Caterpillar didn't provide health insurance availability to it's workers!

I don't believe that crap!

I don't know what expand Medicare taxes means. You mean raise the 7 1/4% contribution that a company makes for it's employees? Employee also make same contribution).

No "small" companies are required to supply availability to employees!
Small being under 50 employees, I think. Most retail would not pay into this. Just Macy for instance.

Such desperate sayings that aren't totally clear aren't helpful to people in need. The public eventually pays for all costs companies pay!

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

"The public eventually pays for all costs companies pay!"

Yeah, and the contributing public eventually pays for all the freeloaders too. That is what we have been saying all along about this "reform" BS, you nincompoop. We're tired of paying for the ones we already have to fund and now 30 million more get to get on board the old gub'mint train.

It might not matter to a non-contributor such as yourself though.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
MOV

Oh, I see. You are concerned about taxes going up not what corporations have to pay? Like Caterpillar?

The 30 million are mostly "on the train" now. Hospitals just fake the bills!
There is a much cheaper way to do the job!

Don't be jealous of anyone getting something reasonable!

After all, if others hadn't helped pay for Interstate highways, great armies, safe places to work, food decent to eat (most of the time), state parks, federal parks, all dams, all road supplements, all federal donations to education, most unemployment insurance, Medicaid to old and crippled folks and children, many hospitals grants, most university grants, and so forth...where would Georgia be?
Still mostly picking cotton with people from south of the border I would imagine.
I do contribute and have for many years, without malice.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

"The 30 million are mostly "on the train" now. Hospitals just fake the bills! There is a much cheaper way to do the job!"

Well, just a few questions for you Kool-Aid drinker.

If the 30 million are mostly on the train, why in the world would the bill COST $940 Billion??? Aren't the 30 million already being paid for? Wouldn't that just mean they would simply take it out of the left pocket and put it in the right pocket?

If the hospitals are the reason for all this, what does the bill specifically do to unearth those hospital cheats? Is that what the $940 Billion is buying, millions of hospital auditors?

If there is a cheaper way to do the job as you say, how exactly is $940 Billion in ADDITIONAL expenditures cheaper??? Used to be less outlay was cheaper.

Oh, one other thing you can work on in your spare time. Flip through that CBO report and find in black-and-white where the $1.3 trillion in savings figure is. Guess what? You won't find it. Neither did your Democratic shysters. They cooked that book themselves. Don't believe me? Look it up.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
MOC

Well, if I was the Independent Congressional Budget Office, I would raise hell with congress for saying anything about the savings if it weren't true!

About half of it comes out of Medicare and I don't doubt at all that there is twice that much waste there. Hell, the wheelchair guy on TV gets that many wheel chairs for people who don't need them! (like the fake handicapped stickers) Supplies furnished to people and billed to Medicare by companies who don't exist except in a corner somewhere with a phone and forms.

Hospitals and doctors performing tests and procedures far in excess of what is needed to avoid lawsuits and make the budget! (Same to the other insurance companies).

Want to know some others?

And by the way, if spending 940 billion causes more than that in charges to disappear, isn't that profitable?

It is all politics and just who will vote for the bill to get reelected. Many voters are simply afraid of the unknown or what they don't understand.

An eclipse used to scare the wits out of the uneducated! Torture used to keep the devil away from the church. People would fall off the edge of the ocean if they went too far. No one went to the moon, it is all fake.
The CIA or the Russians killed JFK. The Inquisition was necessary to scatter evil people. The Great Crusades served a great purpose. There are ghosts (real) and witches, and vampires.
"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man."

They just don't make Dems like they used to.....

alanf33
alanf33's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/31/2006
Gee, so if you don't want socialized medicine...

that means you are a eclipse fearing, flat-earther, uneducated moron? We are just afraid of the unknown? This is where the argument always goes for those fortunate liberals who have been properly brainwashed by the intelligensia. Get over yourself!

If this were good and honorable (and desired by the citizenry)then there would simply be a vote. Even with total control of both houses, the Dems have to resort to unholy deals and unheard of hijinks to squeeze this constipated mass out of the hole that is now our Capitol. And all along, these fools in the people's houses continue to make themselves totally irrelivant. This law will create 150+ new offices (of the Executive Branch) and any more changes to the healthcare system (and there will be more) will no longer require input from Congress. Input will be requested, of course for the sake of theater, but as we have seen with cap and trade, if the congress is not willing to do 'what is required' the new executive bueracracy will simply mandate it! Ain't it great...The United States Socialist Republic.

But then again, you are much more educated than I (or is it me?).

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Biden: "We're going to control the insurance companies"

The Citizen

BIDEN: Well, I yes. Some of them I say they say, well, Joe, look, man, I mean, you know, you guys haven't massaged this very well. And, you know, this thing has gone on so long, I don't know. And my response is, hey, man, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I'm telling you, you know, pre-existing, they're going to be covered. You know we're going to control the insurance companies.

Joe "Forrest Gump" Biden. What a complete, freaking moron this guy is.
It just goes to show how stupid Obama is to pick such a numbskull to be his number 2. Actually, the name "number 2" actually fits this guy.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Kawfi

Well, McCain picked Sarah Palin before President Obama got a chance.
Otherwise we would have McCain with Palin as #2!
I'm always trying to think what Palin would have been in charge of if she had been elected. Would it have been Fundamentalist unknown tongues problems, or the art of salmon fishing, or how to shoot elk from a state helicopter, or how to raise kids properly, or how to marry up, or just what?

I'm sure McCain would have sent her to Russia (she can see them from her back porch) and Israel to solve some of those problems.

Poor old John, he got old. I voted for him when he tried the first time to be nominated.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

"Poor old John, he got old. I voted for him when he tried the first time to be nominated."

Uhh, Bonker$.....you have claimed numerous times here that you voted for McCain this last election also.

Besides, I wouldn't call McCain old if I were you. He'd probably call you sir.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
MOC

You are confused. I could never vote for Palin in any capacity. I have made it clear several times I did not vote for McCain the last time.

I wish I could have and that he had won the first time.

I picked Obama the last election but I wanted Joe Biden as #1.

We had enough of ruination by any other republican bunch. John would have been OK but would have been hung by his own!

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Bonker$

Caught you in a lie again haven't we, in all your moralizing you said time and again how you were an independent and how you voted for McCain, remember this....
boo boo
Submitted by Bonkers on Thu, 08/21/2008 - 4:40am.

Well then it appears that you must vote for Obama.

I fail to see enough experience of any kind in him, myself.

I will vote for McCain because I am an Independent and do not vote party regardless of the candidate! All of the minor parties running have absolutely no chance.

Of course this might be another bonkers, you tell me.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

Ole Hutch already posted you saying you were going to vote for McCain. Well, let's see if you remember this little nugget from the archives:

Mike: Facts
Submitted by Bonkers on Wed, 10/29/2008 - 2:39pm.
Mike, I am an Independent and have already voted for John McCain this time. I supported him the last time he ran. I also voted for Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. I did not vote for Reagan. I voted for Eisenhower and Truman. I didn't vote for Chambliss this time.
McCain can get more done in the area of health care, education, and our debt than could Obama.

Gosh, those pesky archives that Cal saves really haunt us sometimes, don't they. It took 15 seconds to find this and I didn't even bother looking further to see how many more times you were caught lying about this.

I will say I really enjoyed your last sentence though.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
MOC and Hutch

2008 was a year and a half before much campaigning and the election!
Most of all it was much before PALIN!!

John really showed his age and senility during the campaign and with PALIN.
He really thought he would get all of the female vote and far rights and fundamentalists with her--poor judgement.

It is likely he won't be back after the next election.

I don't lie. I do change my mind some. I owe no party or wrong-headed people any loyalty.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Wow Bonker$

"2008 was a year and a half before much campaigning and the election!"

Someone is either a pathological liar or in no position to call John McCain senile. Here are a few facts and dates in the timeline for you Bonker$:

This is 2010.

The presidential election was held in November 2008 (almost 17 months ago)

Early voting was held in Fayette County from September 22 thru October 31. Oh, that also was in 2008.

(Hint: I believe if you get someone to help you count backwards, a year and a half before the election, "much campaigning" might fall somewhere in 2007, not 2008)

The post Hutch referenced where you announced your intention to vote for McCain occurred on 8/21/2008.

The post I referenced where you announced that you HAD already voted for McCain occurred 10/29/2008. (Hint: that fits nicely in the early voting envelope)

Might I remind you that you opined in that same post that McCain would do better than Obama on health care, education and debt!!! What happened??? Hmmmmm?

Now, were you lying on 8/21/2008 when you said "I will vote for McCain because I am an Independent and do not vote party regardless of the candidate!?"

Or, were you lying on 10/29/2008 when you said "Mike, I am an Independent and have already voted for John McCain this time.??

Or, were you lying on 03/20/2010 when you said "I have made it clear several times I did not vote for McCain the last time."???

Remember Hutch mentioning all your moralizing on here? Remember the other day when you said "I'll never understand selfishness and prejudice as long as I live."????

Remember when I replied "Isn't that ironic? I'll never understand stupidity or a sense of entitlement as long as I live.???

I need to add another one to mine. I'll never understand a caught liar digging the hole deeper as long as I live.

Bonkers
Bonkers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2010
Mountain out of mole hill!

Let me just clear this up without years being mentioned.

When McCain ran for president the first time I helped in his campaign---even helped sell his book.

I considered voting for him this last time but his own party didn't like him, and Palin came along.

I voted for Obama, the only other viable candidate.

I wish he had been the man I knew the first time.

All this has nothing to do with what party I am. I am neither!
You spend too much time trying to find something menial to fuss about and try to fool people.
National government about such things as wars, health care, states paying their own bills, and everyone being honest about how much they want from Washington, is what is important.

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Bonker$

The fact is you got caught lying AGAIN. You can say one thing and then another, but the fact remains that you got caught lying, of course unless you were lying to begin with, your call. You went on and on about how you had voted for McCain so just man up and accept the fact that we caught you yet once again. I'll let you have this, you lied the first time or the second time, you decide.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Bonker$

Tell you what Bonk, since you are ill-equipped to admit you were caught lying......let me author an excuse-filled admission for you that would rival one Obama's spokesperson would release:

"Many of you may know that I blog here under multiple aliases. I like to deny doing this, even though it has been well documented. It is in that same spirit of never admitting something unless you have to, that I would offer this mea culpa. I have been able to fool the local election officials with the same legerdemain utilized here. I have multiple voting aliases as well. The facts are this: as Bonker$ I voted for Barack Obama. As $dollar I voted for John McCain. So you see, I really did not lie. I'm just an old man who forgets who logged in when and who voted for who. Now, will someone help save an old fart from that mean old Hutch and MOC? Thank you for understanding. Signed, Bonker$, $dollar, etc. etc."

Feel free to use this if you want. Your friend, MOC.

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Bonker$

What a liar you are. You can change your mind (such as it is) but you can't change history. (much as you try)

bowser
bowser's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/07/2005
oops

oops

bowser
bowser's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/07/2005
Kawfi's Caterpillar another straw dog

I know you love to cut and paste Sludge Report headlines, Joe, but c’mon, don’t leave out the good parts!

Reading beyond what Joe posted, we discover that the "cost" to Caterpillar turns out to be a reduction in the corporate welfare it now gets in the form of subsidies granted back in ’03 – you know, when the GOP controlled both the White House and Congress. Instead of being tax-free, the subsidies would be taxed, according to the article. My God, the humanity!

Also if you do a little research you’ll find that Caterpillar’s net profits in the past three fiscal years have totaled about $8 billion, and that in 2009 the compensation packages for its top several officers exceed $55 million. Nothing wrong with any of that but it puts the $100 million "cost" in a little better perspective -- not to mention kind of makes you wonder why we are subsidizing them at all.

Anyway, here’s the relevant section of the Dow Jones article that Joe didn’t post if anyone is interested:

“The company said the potential extra costs would primarily come from provisions to tax the federal subsidies the company now receives for providing prescription-drug benefits to retirees and their spouses.

Since the Medicare drug program was enacted in 2003, Caterpillar and more than 3,500 companies that already provided drug benefits for retirees have received tax-free subsidies from the federal government as an incentive to maintain their drug programs.

The subsidies average $665 per person covered under a company-sponsored prescription program, according to benefits consultant Towers Watson, which recently completed a study on the health-care legislation's effects.
Watson Towers estimates federal taxes on the drug subsidies would amount to $233 per person receiving drug benefits under such programs.

About 40,000 Caterpillar retirees receive company-sponsored drug benefits, which are more generous than Medicare's drug plan, in which recipients are required to pay some out-of-pocket expenses.

Proponents of subjecting the drug benefit subsidies to federal income taxes argue that Caterpillar and other companies are already able to deduct health care benefit costs, including the drug program, from their taxes as a business expense.”

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Bowser

The drug benefit was a government mandate, so they should have paid for it.
Now, they are insisting that Caterpillar pay for something government mandated - that's fascism!!

My gosh, man - you're almost as dense as David's Mom!

bowser
bowser's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/07/2005
Oh Joe

You hurt me so with the grade school barb..."You're stupid just like that other person who disagrees with me!"

People can judge the Caterpillar story for themselves.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
How Does Dems' Health-Care Reform Bill Reduce Deficit?

Here's a transcript of an exchange between MSNBC's Chuck Todd and the somewhat literate Rep Jim Clyburn, provided by the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web's James Taranto:

Chuck Todd: Can you explain how you get a trillion dollars in deficit reduction? I mean, the CBO didn't make it very clear. Do you feel like you understand how it is this bill somehow reduces the deficit by a trillion dollars in those out years?

Clyburn: I think I do. What we are squeezing out of this system--remember, Medicare is a big part of this. We're extending the life of Medicare by nine years, and if you're taking the waste, fraud and abuse out of this, the savings that you get there will come as things grow. Savings will grow. You look at the community health centers. Savings will grow more in out years than in the first few years. So I believe--well, that's my assessment, and that's the way I'm explaining it to members. I hope I'm right.

Savannah Guthrie: But Congressman, you know, speaking of actually the first 10 years, I think when ordinary Americans look at this and they hear this is a bill that will cost $940 billion but will reduce the deficit $138 billion, they don't understand how those two things go together. Can you just explain how you have to spend almost a trillion dollars to save $138 billion?

Clyburn: Well, because--sure. If you look at, as I said, the kind of savings that you build into the system, what it will save the federal government when you get people into these private insurance plans--the cost-shifting, all of that, out of the system. So if you got 32 million people coming onto insurance plans, that's 32 million people coming out of emergency rooms; that's 32 billion [sic] people that you don't have to pay for in all the cost-shifting that takes place in the system. When my wife had bypass surgery, I looked on her bill. We paid $15 for one aspirin. Then that takes all of that out of the system, and that's how you get that kind of savings, when you multiply that by the number of people that are getting primary care out of emergency rooms, you won't be doing that. That's the kind of stuff.

Heck, who needs the CBO? It's all so clear now! Clyburn: just another idiot democrat towing the party line, but doesn't have a clue as to what he is voting on or talking about.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Medicare fix would push health care into the red

Rollback of Medicare cuts to doctors, if added to health care bill, push it into the red.

On Friday March 19, 2010, 6:33 pm EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congressional budget scorekeepers say a Medicare fix that Democrats included in earlier versions of their health care bill would push it into the red.

The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that rolling back a programmed cut in Medicare fees to doctors would cost $208 billion over 10 years. If added back to the health care overhaul bill, it would wipe out all the deficit reduction, leaving the legislation $59 billion in the red.

The so-called doc fix was part of the original House bill. Because of its high cost, Democrats decided to pursue it separately. Republicans say the cost should not be ignored. Congress has usually waived the cuts to doctors year by year.

Do you think our lying 'president' and his minions in the democrat party will report on this? Heck no, they won't. They won't because Obama and the democrats are nothing but a bunch of scheming liars. I sure am looking forward to the "Neutering in November" that is sure to follow.

normal
normal's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/11/2009
What happened to Obama

Final Health Bill Omits Some of Obama's Promises

You know I voted for him. I believed what he said for some unknown reason. What happened to him when he got in the white house. Now his promises dont mean a thing. Great role model for our youth. Hey kids learn how to lie from your elected officials. And your promises dont mean a thing anymore.

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Moving into Stage 7

The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From great courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage.

Looking forward to the 'Neutering in November' that the socialist Obama and the democrat party will experience in about 8 months.

Recent Comments