Important Article On republican Hypocrisy On Deficit

[Guest]

It comes from Forbes magazine, as we all know a left-wing publicaion.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/19/republican-budget-hypocrisy-health-care-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html

[Guest]

What will really make you mad is where all the people involved in cramming the prescription drug bill thru Congress in the late of night on the last day of the Congressional session a few years ago are now.

Many of the key Congressmen and staffers, as many as twenty of them, are now all employed in very high-paying jobs with PhRMA (Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers Association), the huge drug company lobbying firm. It was later reported that the bill that was eventually passed was actually written by PhRMA.

All this was revealed in a 60 Minutes exposé a couple of years ago. You still may be able to find it on the web. After I watched it steam was coming from my ears.

And it wasn't without forewarning. A long-time Congressman, a Republican from Tennessee as I recall, was quite vocal about how the cost of the prescription drug bill was being so misrepresented. He said in many articles and TV interviews, "...wait'll the public finds out what the real cost of this is." When the bill was going thru Congress, those pushing it provided estimates that the 10-year cost of the drug provisions would be $394 billion for the period 2004 to 2013. The ten-year cost has been re-estimated each year since the bill was passed in 2003. Most recent cost estimates almost triple the cost of the drug program to more than $1 trillion from 2010-21020.

Of course, President Obama is now being blamed for runaway healthcare costs as the result of ObamaCare. ObamaCare had nothing to do with the dramatic increases of government funding of prescription drug costs, of course. But I guess it just goes with the territory.

[Guest]

resident conservatives have to say about this hypocrisy. They're probably much more concerned with blaming Obama for all our problems.

[Guest]

No, it would appear to me that the attitude is "Stop blaming Bush!"

[Guest]

Gotta have that R VS D, no matter what!

btk

[Guest]

resident conservatives have to say about this hypocrisy. They're probably much more concerned with blaming Obama for all our problems.

Many conservatives were screaming about this issue at the time it was run down our throats. So don't even try to say the conservative republicans will not turn on a republican if they feel it isn't right.

Unlike the libs, who can see no wrong with ANY democrat. Example? ok...If a republican had done what Charlie Rangle had done, the party would have run the person out of office. Actually, it could be even less, of what Rangle did.

[Guest]

BlueHeronFan: After Rangel's censure they gave him a standing oviation. Now we have Maxine Waters subject of this Responsiblity Board and I bet she walks too. Heck they will probably appoint her Chair to the Ways and Means. And yet anyone who critics Obama are racist. Hmmmmmm

[Guest]

If a republican had done what Charlie Rangle had done, the party would have run the person out of office.

This is clearly in the running for the All-Time Most Fictitious Statement
ever made in the TOTV Political Forum.

[Guest]

This is clearly in the running for the All-Time Most Fictitious Statement
ever made in the TOTV Political Forum.

I could get into a lot of detail about plenty of misdeeds of Republicans, but why bother? For some here, it will always fall on deaf ears.

[Guest]

I don't deny that the RINO's running the Grand Old Party don't have much credence blasting Democrats for over spending, even though the Democrats have taken it to an advanced art form.

This is why the rise of the Tea Party which is in the process of transforming the Republican Party into the proponent of fiscally sound policy is so important. If the Tea Party is successful in it's efforts, the Democrats will have to adjust or fall into the trash bin of history.

People are craving the message the Tea Party is espousing and that is why the movement is so feared that the liberal spin machine is working overtime to ridicule the movements leaders because they have no coherent argument on the pertinent issues.

[Guest]

I don't deny that the RINO's running the Grand Old Party don't have much credence blasting Democrats for over spending, even though the Democrats have taken it to an advanced art form.

This is why the rise of the Tea Party which is in the process of transforming the Republican Party into the proponent of fiscally sound policy is so important. If the Tea Party is successful in it's efforts, the Democrats will have to adjust or fall into the trash bin of history.

People are craving the message the Tea Party is espousing and that is why the movement is so feared that the liberal spin machine is working overtime to ridicule the movements leaders because they have no coherent argument on the pertinent issues.

They don't have credible leaders and they don't have a developed message and that is precisely why they will not succeed. Five years from now The Tea Party (which really isn't a party just another fringe) will come up in conversation and someone will say, "Ah, the good old days." Then someone will start telling tales of the antics of Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, etc. We'll all laugh our butts off and order another round. Hopefully we'll even have some videos to enhance the moment.

... that is unless .... Richie, are you such a man? Do you have the fire in your belly? Do you have the dream?

Xavier

[Guest]

They don't have credible leaders and they don't have a developed message and that is precisely why they will not succeed. Five years from now The Tea Party (which really isn't a party just another fringe) will come up in conversation and someone will say, "Ah, the good old days." Then someone will start telling tales of the antics of Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, etc. We'll all laugh our butts off and order another round. Hopefully we'll even have some videos to enhance the moment.

... that is unless .... Richie, are you such a man? Do you have the fire in your belly? Do you have the dream?

Xavier

You don't get to pick Xavier, because you're still in the dark and cannot see. You deftly proved my point by attempting another "ridicule" attack and I thank you for the illustration on the dearth of meaningful liberal response.

[Guest]

Richie,

Is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?

[Guest]

I don't deny that the RINO's running the Grand Old Party don't have much credence blasting Democrats for over spending, even though the Democrats have taken it to an advanced art form.

This is why the rise of the Tea Party which is in the process of transforming the Republican Party into the proponent of fiscally sound policy is so important. If the Tea Party is successful in it's efforts, the Democrats will have to adjust or fall into the trash bin of history.

People are craving the message the Tea Party is espousing and that is why the movement is so feared that the liberal spin machine is working overtime to ridicule the movements leaders because they have no coherent argument on the pertinent issues.

by liberals. After all they nominated such esteemed candidates as Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Carl Palladino, etc. Really transformational figures. The Tea Party is home to some good people, I'm sure. It is also home to the wingnuts in our society, and those are the people that Trump, Palin and Bachman are appealing to. Anyone who thinks the Tea Party is going to transform American politics is wearing a tin foil hat.

[Guest]

Richie,

Is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?

...or an insult. He's big on the word "insult." Oh, oh, he likes childish, ridicule, idiot,... and ... and... attack too.

Xavier

[Guest]

Richie,

Is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?

Bugs, you're one guy I think who's not an idiot. Reread Xavier's and Actor's last couple of posts as they name people with their intention to convey that these people are ridiculous, or as "to be held to ridicule". Come on man, it's too obvious. Seriously.

[Guest]

Richie,

You know that I just get my jollies by a lot of my postings. Glad to know you do not think I am an idiot. My wife would disagree with you at times.

The golf course is calling me this afternoon and Urban Flats for dinner. Have a great day.

[Guest]

Bugs, you're one guy I think who's not an idiot. Reread Xavier's and Actor's last couple of posts as they name people with their intention to convey that these people are ridiculous, or as "to be held to ridicule". Come on man, it's too obvious. Seriously.

Now Richie, the polite words would be: "He suffers from "IDTenT" error syndrome."

Take your time, it'll come to you.

Xavier

[Guest]

Richie, you have consistently taken what you call a "conservative" viewpoint. And whether you think so or not, in fact you have been quite critical, even demeaning, of people who don't share your beliefs. Another poster here put is succinctly...
"...is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?"
But the back-and-forth difference of opinion makes me wonder where on the wide political array I stand...in your mind anyway. Here's some things that are important to me...
We need to cut federal spending and cut it NOW. That includes all the categories of spending that even the Tea Partiers seem to avoid speaking to...Social Security, Medicare and defense spending, probably all in a pretty big way.

Spending cuts should be aimed at balancing annual federal budgets within three years, not ten or more.

Revenues (taxes) need to be increased. The wealthy should pay more. Corporate loopholes should be eliminated. Maybe overseas corporate earnings should be taxed. Maybe there should be a VAT tax. I would propose legislation that every single dollar of tax increases go towards reduction of the national debt. That is, incremental revenues from tax increases should NOT be placed in the general fund for use in funding deficit spending by Congress. At the same time we need to cut federal spending, that which we do spend needs to be done more wisely. There should be increases in some spending--education and economic infrastructure as an example--while other social programs, unemployment benefits, duplicative programs and departments, should be cut. The kinds of cuts I'm suggesting aren't incremental single digit percentage cuts. We probably have to be thinking along the lines of eliminating entire departments of the federal government!
Every American--100% of all citizens, but not illegals--should have quality health insurance, funded by the government without a profit incentive built-in. The only way that can happen is by achieving a "payment for results" system rather than "payment for service". That can only be accomplished if there is a single payer for healthcare insurance claims. There's no chance that a long list of profit-motivated insurance companies can accomplish that on a coordinated basis.
Federal legislation must be designed that, at the same time every American has quality healthcare, the actual cost of healthcare in the U.S. must be reduced--or at least the rate of inflation stopped. This means that many healthcare providers will make less money or be less profitable. Maybe the whole concept of payment for service--by anyone, public or private--needs to be eliminated. Unnecessary and duplicative tests have to become the responsibility of the individual. End-of-life treatments must be severely limited. Changes like that--big changes. Healthcare providers that are effective and competitive will survive; those that aren't won't. And most of the providers will make a lot less money than they do now, more in line with providers are paid in the other developed countries of the world.Unfortunately, I don't believe that any of this can be accomplished by a heavily lobbied Congress that operates on a short-term election cycle. Some other form of governmental action will be required. Maybe Congress has to authorize and enable a series of commissions that will operate independent of the elected politicians to come up with a long-term plan to accomplish what I've suggested, with no input or control by the Congress. Does that vary from the form of government designed by the framers? Yes. But I don't believe for an instant that were the framers of our Constitution and system of government to return today, that they would embrace and support what our government has become.

So, Richie, when you take the side of the conservatives and happily castigate the liberals, how would you deal with me? What am I? A conservative? Partly. A liberal? Somewhat. Someone totally invested in the concept that our form of government is effective or will be effective in the future? Not for a minute.

So are my feelings and beliefs a "liberal ridicule attack" on conservatism? Or something else? If not a conservative or a liberal, other than being an idealist, what am I? How are you going to deal with me? Shallow ridicule won't work.

[Guest]

VK, I can't believe I would have to explain this to you but, no, you do not belong in the (politely put) less than substantive "liberal ridicule" group as you always, whether I fully agree with you or not, have reasoned (and long) answers.

I'm speaking about the people who in response to any post by a conservative engage in mocking the poster and the conservative personalities mentioned (or not mentioned, such as Sarah Palin who is brought up no matter what the subject) and without any thoughtful comment on the subject at hand.

I don't necessarily "castigate liberals", because they're liberals; I call out the ones on this post for their less than brilliant (to put it politely again) comments on the subject at hand (as in, non-existant) and the then usual shot at me.

I still am having a hard time believing I have to explain this to you, unless you're only reading my posts in response to the childish and unreasoned posts taking personal shots at me and not reading the posts I'm addressing.

I'm not going to take the time to answer the political and economic questions you asked, as I am a bit put off by this post of yours criticizing me and not addressing the obvious reasons, if you read them, for my prior umbrage.