« | »

Veterans Administration’s ‘Death Book’

From the Wall Street Journal:

The Death Book for Veterans


If President Obama wants to better understand why America’s discomfort with end-of-life discussions threatens to derail his health-care reform, he might begin with his own Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). He will quickly discover how government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care.

Last year, bureaucrats at the VA’s National Center for Ethics in Health Care advocated a 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices." It was first published in 1997 and later promoted as the VA’s preferred living will throughout its vast network of hospitals and nursing homes. After the Bush White House took a look at how this document was treating complex health and moral issues, the VA suspended its use. Unfortunately, under President Obama, the VA has now resuscitated "Your Life, Your Choices."

Who is the primary author of this workbook? Dr. Robert Pearlman, chief of ethics evaluation for the center, a man who in 1996 advocated for physician-assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill before the U.S. Supreme Court and is known for his support of health-care rationing.

"Your Life, Your Choices" presents end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions, much like a political "push poll." For example, a worksheet on page 21 lists various scenarios and asks users to then decide whether their own life would be "not worth living."

The circumstances listed include ones common among the elderly and disabled: living in a nursing home, being in a wheelchair and not being able to "shake the blues." There is a section which provocatively asks, "Have you ever heard anyone say, ‘If I’m a vegetable, pull the plug’?" There also are guilt-inducing scenarios such as "I can no longer contribute to my family’s well being," "I am a severe financial burden on my family" and that the vet’s situation "causes severe emotional burden for my family."

When the government can steer vulnerable individuals to conclude for themselves that life is not worth living, who needs a death panel?

This hurry-up-and-die message is clear and unconscionable. Worse, a July 2009 VA directive instructs its primary care physicians to raise advance care planning with all VA patients and to refer them to "Your Life, Your Choices." Not just those of advanced age and debilitated condition—all patients. America’s 24 million veterans deserve better…

Mr. Towey, president of Saint Vincent College, was director of the White House Office of Faith-Based Initiatives (2002-2006) and founder of the nonprofit Aging with Dignity.

This is from a couple days ago. For some reason it got very little play.

But it must be a hoax, anyway. Since the newspaper of record did not even mention it in their recent exegesis on the source of these “death panel” roots.

From the ‘Money & Policy’ page of the New York Times:

False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Some Familiar Roots


August 14, 2009

WASHINGTON — The stubborn yet false rumor that President Obama’s health care proposals would create government-sponsored “death panels” to decide which patients were worthy of living seemed to arise from nowhere in recent weeks.

Advanced even this week by Republican stalwarts including the party’s last vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, and Charles E. Grassley, the veteran Iowa senator, the nature of the assertion nonetheless seemed reminiscent of the modern-day viral Internet campaigns that dogged Mr. Obama last year, falsely calling him a Muslim and questioning his nationality.

But the rumor — which has come up at Congressional town-hall-style meetings this week in spite of an avalanche of reports laying out why it was false — was not born of anonymous e-mailers, partisan bloggers or stealthy cyberconspiracy theorists.

Rather, it has a far more mainstream provenance, openly emanating months ago from many of the same pundits and conservative media outlets that were central in defeating President Bill Clinton’s health care proposals 16 years ago, including the editorial board of The Washington Times, the American Spectator magazine and Betsy McCaughey, whose 1994 health care critique made her a star of the conservative movement (and ultimately, New York’s lieutenant governor).

There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure. But over the course of the past few months, early, stated fears from anti-abortion conservatives that Mr. Obama would pursue a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia agenda, combined with twisted accounts of actual legislative proposals that would provide financing for optional consultations with doctors about hospice care and other “end of life” services, fed the rumor to the point where it overcame the debate…

See how foolish we are to believe such nonsense?

We are such dupes.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, August 21st, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

95 Responses to “Veterans Administration’s ‘Death Book’”

  1. Rightshift says:

    This is no hoax, there is an actual document.

    See here http://www.werushdaily.com/forums/dittohead-stack-of-stuff/wsj-the-vas-death-book-for-veterans

    At the bottom of the post is a copy of “Your Life, Your Choices”… and it reads like a child’s school workbook. Disgusting!


  2. proreason says:

    Veterans are old and conservative, usually voting Republican.

    Illegal immigrants are young and liberal, usually voting Democratic.

    But that doesn’t have anything to do with why The Moron’s administration is advocating what the Bushhitler administration rejected.

  3. BannedbytheTaliban says:

    I guess the text of the Waxman legislation constitutes “out of now where” these day to the salons at the NY times.

    Then they walk the fine line of interpretation of said non-existing language:

    “There is nothing in any of the legislative proposals that would call for the creation of death panels or any other governmental body that would cut off care for the critically ill as a cost-cutting measure.”

    Tomato Tomayto…it is all in the intent. No there is no governmental body but there is a panel of government appointed doctors that will determine whether or not the 10-20% chance to increase your life span is worth it, than intimidate you into concurring with them. Of course it is not a far stretch of the imagination to assume the treatment will be more effective if you have a D on your voter registration card.

  4. Liberals Demise says:

    I’ll file this next to Health Care / Insurance Reform, TARP, Stimulus, Cash 4 Clunkers, Hope and Change, Cap and Trade, TARP II, $24 Million in Bonuses for Administrators at the Veterans Administration and your vote and voice mean something to us!!

  5. catie says:

    My brother, the attorney said “this couldn’t possibly be true”. I told him it is. He used to be a normal person then married a liberal. My parents and I do not know who this man is who now inhabits his body.

  6. jasper says:

    These articles have convinced me. Let’s shut down the fascist, government – run VA hospitals. The quadruplegic veterans can pay their own doctor’s bills like everybody else.

    If you’re against a governement takeover of health care, then I say let’s start by abolishing the VA.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Are you on LSD, boy?
      The fact is the gubmint runs this and it is in a shambles. That and the fact that Dinglebarry wants to run Health Reform without taking care of the crap that isn’t up to snuff! Would you let Unka Barry balance your checkbook right now? Would you let Barry in your wallet because that is where he is headed.

      Wake up and get sober!!

    • catie says:

      Well Jasper you almost got your wish. The messiah wanted to make vets pay their own bills on their own private insurance even though they were wounded while on duty. What makes you think he won’t ask them to take the red pill or the blue pill?” You really are sick with your “quadriplegic veterans can pay their own doctor’s bills like everyone else”! They were wounded while in service to their country for sh*ts like you.

    • Colonel1961 says:

      Jasper, you can’t see the forest through the trees. Everything the government touches is corroded by the presence of its bureaucracy. And, examining on the government’s healthcare forays, you can easily see that they are shoddy (e.g., VA) or rapidly going bankrupt or bankrupting the country (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid).

      And from a macro assessment, who does better: the Post Office or FedEx? Rhetorical, but the answer is FedEx – turning a profit with no government subsidies versus the Post Orifice which is losing billions of dollars in spite of huge government investments in their infrastructure, an ever increasing cost of postage, and a monopoly on First Class mail. What exactly do you not understand? Please, let me know…

    • proreason says:

      Gee Jasper, did we get a weewee bit angry there? Suggesting that American veterans be handed a death sentence isn’t exactly what I would expect from a compassionate liberal who loves nothing more than spending other peoples’ money.

      VA hospitals should be privatized, and funded by the American People should be increased.

      It’s one of the few noble things we do with tax money.

      But I like your core idea, jasper boy. Let’s shut down every department in the government except those that deal with National Security (which, yuk yuk, is actually AUTHORIZED by the Constitution), and those departments which taxpayers have funded for 40-50 years of their lives, and therefore will reap their returns or there will be an armed revoluion (like Social Security and Medicare).

      And then we should save trillions by privatizing the management of Social Security and Medicare. Just getting the overwhelming corruption of government out of it should reduce the costs by 50%.

  7. jasper says:

    It’s the principle! Are you a Conservative or not? Medical treatment should not be provided by a big brother government – that’s what the nazis did.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      What side are you taking? Because I want the other one!!

    • proreason says:

      “It’s the principle!”

      and the principle is: people who serve the country are fools and should be treated as such. Losing limbs is what they deserve.


      And thanks for reminding us that Universal Government run Health Care was one of the major tenets of the Nazi regime. That’s one of dozens of parallels between the Obamunism administration and your pal Adolf Hitler. A couple others are:
      – profligate government spending
      – egomaniacal leadership
      – disregard for the elderly and infirm
      – abuse of the law to gain and keep power
      – demonization of entire groups of people who are deemed to be bitter clingers

    • caligirl9 says:

      Care for our wounded and injured veterans is simply the military’s version of worker’s comp. And our veterans deserve better …

      It’s not a question of Big Brother care—it’s what any employer must do for his or her employees. Government included.

      Funny, though. Jasper’s argument is the same as that of my raging dem friends at work … and my reply is the same as most everyone here—because it’s worker’s comp and it’s OWED them, period.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      On that same thought, caligirl………….those that feel that Vets should pay for there own insurance should have to pay these same men and women for their freedoms they take for granted. I believe this would bring this argument full circle and your libwit worker pals(?) would probably appreciate the free ride they have been getting so far. What say you?

    • caligirl9 says:

      LD, you are absolutely “right!”

      Either way, via the VA healthcare system or private employer-paid for health insurance (read: the government pays for the policy which would be as comprehensive as what veterans currently receive under the VA system, for either active duty or retired military), our veterans deserve better. It’s not socialism, it’s simply what we are as a nation and what we should do to make up for the sacrifices those men and women voluntarily made to this country!

      As for those veterans who are/were not U.S. citizens, put them at the head of the line for citizenship. It’s the right thing to do.

      And notice no regular on this board made this an ethnic or “class” issue … until a liberal showed up and threw that idea out there.

    • jasper says:

      Could you explain why you guys spell it “gubamint” then? My friend, mpauline, asked Proreason why he writes it that way and he said that he did so because he is a racist.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Agreed, my Lady!!
      When it comes to those that stand where others FEAR …….. it shall never be about class, race, creed, nationality or sex. If you stand up for this country ………. ShAWinG …… to the front you go!

      Thanx caligirl9 ……….. your the bomb!!
      (as my teenagers say)

    • Liberals Demise says:

      You ‘friend’ mpauline? That explains a lot of your sniffing and baiting here.
      One of the citizens of our community lives down by the border and says that the people pronounce government gubbamint but it is not proreason!

  8. catie says:

    Sorry Jasper when people are injured in the line of duty, they deserve to be taken care of. This is a volunteer force and these folks are on the front lines for us. Don’t tell me that’s their “choice”. For some of us the call to serve is an important one.

  9. Colonel1961 says:

    And that’s a false dichotomy, jasper. I am a libertarian. Sorry to ruin your preconceived notion about the commenters here at S&L…

  10. jasper says:

    Hey Liberals Demise,

    Why did you write “gubmint”?

    Look, I think you guys misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was saying we could privatize the VA, and let all the veterans coming back try to get their own individual insurance policies. They private insurance companies are much more efficient and do a much better job of taking care of patients. I’m sure they would be happy to suspend their usual policies about pre-existing conditions and they’d happily sign up veterans who are quadruplegics out of patriotism.

    I’m sorry if I sounded sarcastic or something.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Man are you out there!!
      You really think that Wounded Warriors should find their own insurance to pay for lost limbs and f-cked up minds? (sorry Steve) You are not worthy of my time as you are a waste of time and space!!

    • neocon mom says:

      O.K., I’ll bite on your obvious sarcasm.

      First myth: that there are people who are “uninsurable”.

      But let’s take your first principle; eliminating the VA hospitals. Actually, it might be far more efficient to do so and guarantee payment of a private insurance voucher for all veterans. That way many won’t have to drive hours to a VA hospital, which may or may not be well run. Many vets are working folks and actually have to use vacation time for doc appts.

      As far as those whose medical needs are too excessive as to make them good candidates for insurance (those who are totally disabled), keep some state of the art treatment and research facilities, funded on a contract basis by government dollars. Heck, give the Mayo Clinic or the Cleveland Clinic, et al, a crack at it, since there are medical issues that veterans face more than members of the general population. As for when these folks need more immediate or basic care close to home, Uncle Sam should gratefully pick up the tab.

      Insurance companies don’t take care of patients, doctors do. Insurance companies pay the bills, and insurance companies don’t refuse to sell policies, they are simply priced accordingly. Have Type 1 Diabetes? Then an insurance company will sell you a policy that is very expensive, because you are going to cost them a lot of money. In states where they have something called “community rating”, everyone else pays for that expense in their policy so their insurance price is inflated. This prices many families out of being able to afford insurance. There are loads of free market solutions to these issues. If you are curious and you’ve heard of this thing called a “search engine”…

  11. catie says:

    I’m sure they’d be lining up for good PR in the beginning but then what? No, they were injured on our dime, we pay for them on our dime and we don’t ask them to go into that long good night.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      WE as a nation owe these men and ladies the best we have to offer and not the “Third World ” treatment they (me included) are getting by our gubbamint.
      What does it say when we have a closet Socialist Islamic President sleeping in the White House and said President wants Veterans to pay for their own insurance because it is “Patriotic”?
      I say “FUBAR”.

    • catie says:

      Exactly. Guess old Jasper missed that little announcement the messiah made while he hoped no one was listening.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Know what’s patriotic?
      Getting a job and being “RESPONSIBLE” for your own well being.

      All others …………………………………………………………… pound sand!!

  12. jasper says:

    Well, I mean, the nazis gave free medical treatment to their injured veterans too.

  13. jasper says:

    Ok, ok, wait, just hear me out.

    These veterans went out there and put their lives on the line to protect our way of life. They fought for freedom and that includes capitalism. The free market can take all of this government bureaucracy and end of life counselling and all this crap and make it work if we all just trust it as much as our warriors did.

    Also, I hate to say it, but some of these veterans have grown up in inner cities, you know, some of them aren’t even US citizens. Some are minorities that probably grew up in housing projects or whatever and a few of those bad apples are going to take whatever handouts they can get. If they paid something out of pocket they wouldn’t be tempted to overuse trips to the doctor.

    If we do it in a fair way, we should shut down the VA, which is a huge bureaucracy just like something from a communist country, and give the vets time to get their own personal insurance policies. A lot of vets are not going to be profitable for insurance companies, of course, but I’m sure they would step up and pitch in to help our wounded warriors.

    • catie says:

      I’m speechless. I think there is something wrong with you. SO what that they grew up poor in inner cities on in rural areas, so what if some legal alien joins the military like my neighbor did to get his citizenship? What did you do during the war Jasper? Tell them to pay out of pocket for their own injuries. You’re classic.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Jasper …….. step up and be a man for once in your life. Lace up those combat boots, pick up your weapon and hump into the face of danger and death. Then ……… if you come home …. whole or in pieces ……….. voice an opinion that will mean more to us than the BS you are spewing out now!!

      Freedom is more than words and cost more than lip service, pal!!

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Also, I hate to say it, but some of these veterans have grown up in inner cities, you know, some of them aren’t even US citizens.

      Yup, and while I was in, with many of these “inner-urbanites” they maintained their liberal ideals. Most of the time, when in trouble, they blamed someone or something else. They always said, “They should” instead of “Here’s how I’ll make it better for me by working hard”. The black troops always had a race issue. If one of them got weekend duty, they would whine and cry and run all over hell and gone saying that the supervisor was a racist. I once used the word “reneg” and got called out for using racial slurs. The black guys never volunteered their time or their effort to help out anyone.

      Now, with that said, there were some minor exceptions. But in general, the inner-city schlubs wanted a free ride even whilst inside the armed forces. When Friday afternoon came around though, they came out of the woodwork ready to par-tay.

      Really chapped my ass.

  14. jasper says:

    Would you guys want to have to go to the VA and be at the mercy of the government? Would you guys want welfare doctors?

    If it’s wrong for the government to do universal health care, then why isn’t it wrong to trust the governemnt to take care of our fallen heroes?

    And some of those few bad apple vets are going to treat the gubbamint healthcare just like the gubbamint checks they grew up on. Do you want that?

    • proreason says:

      becoming tiresome

    • Liberals Demise says:

      One last time…….the VA is run by the gubbamint. It is a failure across the board.
      Gubbamint Health Care will be more of the same. If the gubbamint can’t handle a measly $3 Billion Car scheme how in Gods’ little green apples will it run a multi – Trillion$$ Medical ponsi scheme.

      This is nothing more than the destruction of the Free Market System!

      But you go after the Veterans because they aren’t as likely to release their weapons because they are the defenders of the faithful and down troddin.

      Hence………. “DON’T THREAD ON ME!!”

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Have you ever experienced VA medical care like the veterans on this board have?

      Compared to a liberal blog, you will find that the people here actually speak from EXPERIENCE, not from theory. That’s one huge difference between the two factions.

  15. catie says:

    Yes, the VA generally sucks and that is a national shame but I don’t see you trying to do anything about it. I think you despise those who serve, especially what you deem “trash”. What branch did you serve in again? I think I missed it.

  16. jasper says:

    Exactly, Liberals Demise. Thank you.

  17. jasper says:

    I have a question for everyone on this thread.

    On September 11 our country was attcked by Al Qaeda and they killed 2,974 Americans.

    I admire the men and women of our armed services and I am grateful to them at least as much as the people who died in the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

    According to the Voice of America, 5,053 American servicemen and women have died in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Do you guys think that losing 5,053 American lives that way was better or worse than losing 2,974 on September 11?

    If you wanted to just do it purely by numbers, you could say that President Bush’s decision to go to war in Iraq, which cost 4,337 American lives, was 45.8% worse than Al Qaeda’s decision.

    • catie says:

      So now is the crux of your “argument”. Whatever? Don’t worry loser, there are honorable men and women who will stand in your stead while people like you and your sickening liberal ilk disgrace them as you do.

  18. Liberals Demise says:

    You will NEVER balls up so put your numbers and crayons up and go home. Mommy is calling you to put your folded clothes away in your basement!

    BTW……we are not fighting on “OUR” streets…… yet!!

  19. jasper says:

    Come on, Liberals Demise, our service men and women desreve your respect. Do not compare their deaths to crayons.

    I’m shocked at you.

  20. jasper says:

    No, but it is a dilemma for Conservatives, you know? A Conservative admires our soldiers and veterans more than almost anyone else, and rightly so. But Conservatives also don’t really want to acknowledge the deaths of American soldiers. I guess that, if one thinks about how many have died for their country, it undermines one’s faith in the war they were fighting in.

    Honestly, it is a weird dilemma because liberals harp on better medical care and psychiatric treatment and supplies and armor for the troops, and they always note how many have died. Conservatives seem to just say they are grateful to them. It’s like any criticism of the war effort – even if it’s intended to save our troops’ lives – sounds like criticism of the troops themselves.

    • Curmudgeon says:

      Your comparison of 9/11 deaths and deaths of soldiers in the war does not work, Jasper.
      1) Your comparison presupposes that there would have been no more deaths than those on 9/11, without any action on our part (Iraq & Afghanistan) to bring the fight elsewhere.
      2) There is a great difference between the intentional killing of thousands of civilians and the service and ultimate sacrifice of those who serve in our volunteer army.

      Your tendency to oversimplify and mentally denigrate the understanding and opinions of those who disagree with you shows through brilliantly when you talk about a conservative “dilemma.” There is no dilemma. We acknowledge the deaths of soldiers, and we actually care about them, but we also acknowledge the reasons we went to war, the reasons those soldiers chose to go, and we understand the resolve it takes to accomplish anything worth accomplishing.

      Also, you vastly mischaracterize the intention of liberal harping about troop conditions or deaths. If these concerns were actual concerns, they wouldn’t be stated hand in hand with opposition to our missions as if they were justification for surrender.

      Even we libertarians know that there are some few things that require centralization. We as a society are indebted to our veterans, and we should care for them. On top of that, we should care for them MUCH better than the VA has been doing, but our politicians lipservice doesn’t do much.
      If the government cannot even give good medical service to respected vets, a political expedient, why on earth would we trust the government to take on the population at large?

    • caligirl9 says:

      Okay I was going out of my way to not argue with the troll, ‘cause it’s just not worth it to try to persuade a lib to look at a different way of thinking.

      “…liberals harp on better medical care and psychiatric treatment and supplies and armor for the troops, and they always note how many have died.”

      No they don’t. I have a friend in Arizona, a proud veteran who served in Desert Storm who has PTSD. He came back and did time in the National Guard working alongside the Border Patrol as a medic. He then suffered a career-ending back injury that has progressed to a neuropathy—because he had to fight for his health care during Clintonmania.

      He’d been receiving better-than-adequate medical and psychological care during Bush II. But when the messiah took rule, this man’s disability rating went down (in other words, he was suddenly less disabled. resulting in a decline in the amount of disability pay this man was receiving) and the quality of his medical care went down.

      His neuropathy is progressing at an alarming rate and any day now he could find himself in a wheelchair. He can hardly leave his home because whenever he sees a person of Mideastern or Hispanic descent, he becomes uncontrollably angry and even verbally abusive, and he knows this and is powerless to stop this.

      I have yet another friend who is dependent on the VA system for his on-duty back injury (he served in Haiti) and he has to jump through hoops in order to get his simple little prescriptions to NSAIDS and pain killers renewed, or his three-times-a-year epidural steroids injection which keeps him able to work full-time. A simple thing really, made difficult by government paper pushers.

      Conservatives care deeply about the quality of medical care—or lack thereof—our veterans receive. They care deeply that our scarce medical resources are taken by illegal aliens who cross the border so they can receive free dialysis and heart transplants. We don’t criticize our troops—we criticize the government who expects them to do a job with minimal equipment and lackluster health care. They care deeply that veterans come home and are discarded and that the ones who gave their lives are quickly forgotten by politicians.

      Gah! This is like being at work! I have my own group of libs I can argue with if I choose to do so!

    • neocon mom says:

      Liberals want us to look at ourselves not as individuals that make choices, but as members of various victim identity groups. Liberals don’t harp on better medical care for our troops or better armor or equipment, when they mention those things it is strictly an attempt to try to make troops look like victims and/ or an attempt to embarrass the Bush administration or the military. They protest war, period. They don’t stop to weigh the moral implications of a conflict involving rules of engagement vs. one involving guerrilla warfare, insurgency or oppressive government putting its own people to death. Libs actually seem to believe that the absence of official conflict is peace.

      Cindy Sheehan dishonors her adult son’s decision to volunteer for service as she travels around the country, protesting U.S. military involvement. It’s a posthumous “I told you so, Casey”. If my son volunteers for the military and dies in the line of service, whether because of enemy fire or a horrible case of food poisoning, my heart would be shattered, but I would be proud of him and of his choice to put his life on the line for a cause greater than himself. Preventable tragedies happen each and every day, inside and outside of the military; the bitter facts of life don’t change because Uncle Sam is in charge. There is only so much that good intentions mitigate reality. War is Hell, and those brave enough to volunteer are doing so to preserve FREEDOM, freedom to choose whether or not to join the military and even freedom to sit on the sidelines and criticize everything.

      Thinking people can certainly disagree on whether or not this involvement or that one is/was worth the effort. There have been less controversial wars that have been conducted far less efficiently than the current conflicts. Mark Steyn’s 2004 Memorial Day column has it right:

      “But that’s the difference between then and now: the loss of proportion. They had victims galore back in 1863, but they weren’t a victim culture. They had a lot of crummy decisions and bureaucratic screw-ups worth re-examining, but they weren’t a nation that prioritized retroactive pseudo-legalistic self-flagellating vaudeville over all else. They had hellish setbacks but they didn’t lose sight of the forest in order to obsess week after week on one tiny twig of one weedy little tree.”

    • jasper says:

      Well, I’m a liberal, and I don’t want us to see ourselves as a bunch of victim groups. I’m not a victim in any way.

      You are well – informed, Neocan Mom, and I should look up more about free market solutions for getting medical coverage for people who can’t get insurance, as you suggest.

      If Americans had a way to get medical coverage for certain, they would be freer to start their own businesses, and that would be a boon for the economy. I know several people like that now, you ahve business plans but are stuck in their current jobs becaus they are afraid to lose their coverage.

      Also, thousands of Americans die because they do not receive treatemnet in time or at all because they can’t or they think they can’t afford it. An article I read said that uninsured people diagnosed with cancer are twice as likely to die within five years as those who are insured. That is awful.

      And I’ve had to tangle with my insurance company bureaucracy several times and I don’t see how any governemnt could do any worse in customer service, lost paperwork, or just dopiness than my insurance company.

      There are a lot of people in our country right now who are sick, scared, and terrified of being kicked off their insurance. Insurance companies have a strong incentive to deny benefits because they pocket the difference between what you pay and what you get. This system just seems ridiculous.

    • neocon mom says:

      Look, there aren’t people who “can’t” get insurance. There are people who can’t afford it. But as Thomas Sowell points out, what people can afford is often a matter of priorities. But in using the word “can’t”, you turn a bunch of people into victims who may just have to learn some tough lessons through failure. Aren’t we free to do that anymore?

      There are loads of people who qualify for Medicaid, which is completely free and comprehensive medical coverage. There is a children’s health insurance program funded by the federal government. Congress just very unwisely raised the limits on who can participate in this subsidized insurance program, but many still do not take advantage of “free” or “affordable” health insurance. Medicaid is retroactive–if a poor person has an accident and ends up needing treatment, he can sign up after the fact. I believe it goes as far back as 3 months.

      What can we do to make insurance more affordable?
      End a lot of government regulations that price people out of being able to afford insurance, end the tax incentive on employer provided coverage. Just give that money to the employee instead and have him buy his own coverage.

      End community rating, end the mandates on what insurance must cover, short of making sure that insurance companies don’t say they won’t cover something that happens on a Tuesday or some nonsense.

      We need affordable catastrophic coverage, policies that young people can buy, combined with tax free health savings accounts. In my reckoning, those policies shouldn’t cost much more than a term life insurance policy for a healthy young person. And the more people that are covered, the more people are covered.

      Scrap the med/mal system as it exists or instate “loser pays”. This will bring down costs for doctors as their malpractice insurance policies are astronomical (my OB/GYN dropped hers–it was $70,000 a year four years ago.) Krauthammer also has a great idea for a pool into which everyone pays, patients are awarded from the pool and any doctor who is guilty loses his license. You can find the details in the Washington Post in Krauthammer’s recent archives.

      There are also some great solutions that would involve employer-based care, in any case, any good free market solution calls for ending a lot of ridiculous existing government regulation. These regulations are the result of lobbyists, sometimes lobbyists for this or that health concern (people who want to “raise awareness” of this illness or that) or from the big insurance companies that are powerful enough to lobby, making regulations so stiff that they stifle competition.

      Insurance policies shouldn’t cover the “little things”, they should only cover the “big stuff”. Standard office visits should be paid out of pocket. This will bring down costs, because consumers will be involved in the transaction, not third party payers. And if docs don’t have to submit a claim to get each and every visit paid for, this will cut back on claims, which take hours of paperwork and labor to deal with.

      In response to your concerns about cancer victims, you should take note that we have THE BEST cancer survival rates in the world here in the U.S.

      Finally, you really have to ask how much worse a government bureaucracy can be than your private insurance company bureaucracy? You have obviously never dealt with the government. Most people end up hiring lawyers when they have to deal with a government bureaucracy, there are SSI disability lawyers, tax lawyers (among other paid tax experts). If your insurance company won’t pay for a procedure you may have other options. If we have government run healthcare and the government says they won’t pay, where do you turn? If you live in Canada, you come here.

      And you might take the time to research what it’s like for people in countries with government run healthcare, like the NHS in Britain. You only think it’s bad here because you’re spoiled…

    • catie says:

      You know, I want a bigger house. I think old Jasper the pig needs to pay for a bigger house for me. Also, what do you give to charity? Probably the same amount all loser libs give. Very little if any. They want the govt. to pick up the tab. How sad.
      Curmudgeon, this pig doesn’t get the volunteer vs people who died on 9/11. Hell, he was probably one of those libs who rejoiced at the Pentagon being attacked. Many of them did you know. Jasper was probably front and center.

    • jasper says:

      What do you see as the difference between someone who can’t get insured and someone who can’t afford it?

      It seems like the problem lies in the middle, with people who make to much for medicaid but not enough to afford $1500 a month because of their diabetes or heart disease.

      Do you think everyone who has a chronic disease should sell their house to get medicaid?

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      The short answer is “Yes”. Because medical care is not a right.

      I am diabetic and on one occasion, without insurance, I was admitted to a hospital. I was very well cared for. I got a bill. It was large. I am still paying it off.

      But I was never denied healthcare.

    • catie says:

      You know what they can get insurance if they wanted it. All states have something akin to medicaid that you can buy into. I hear this woman at my son’s Tae Kwon Do class complaining about it all the time. She has $1400 for Tae Kwon Do and sends her daughter to some gymnastic place that’s wildly expensive in Leesburg and yet whines about insurance. She’d rather spend the money on other things besides a descent health plan so she bought into this Commonwealth Care thing. Now she’s whining that docs don’t want to take it. Oh Really, welcome to my world. They don’t want to take Tricare because unless you’re a General it sucks. Maybe all liberals who voted for the messiah should spend 6 months on the plan that those who serve families have to be on. We pay for that too. It sucks but have at it. In 4 months you’ll all be crying for something else. Then it will be too late.

    • neocon mom says:

      Not being able to afford insurance as a working person can be solved in so many simpler, cheaper ways than the government trying to run a non-profit insurance company which will put all of the other insurance companies out of business. Then we’ll see the third world conditions start.

      There are any number of solutions. Ending community rating and allowing consumers to buy insurance across state lines would encourage competition and lower prices. For folks with type 1, etc., I would rather see the Federal government give these folks vouchers to help pay for private insurance than attempt to run a health program for them. For a small percentage of people, medical costs for themselves or their family can eclipse what they are able to make, even if they have excellent jobs. These people’s needs can be addressed without destroying the entire system. However, to think that the only way to fix things is to allow the government to take EVERYTHING over displays the stunning lack of creativity and curiosity that marks pretty much all liberal-left policy ideas.

  21. proreason says:

    Strange resemblence between the blogging styles of jasper and mpauline (from a couple of days ago).

    Looks like we’re on the nutter’s hit list.

    Up to this week, when you hit kooks like them back a few times, they ran off with their tails between their legs.

    Looks like the new strategy is for the fruitcakes to be relentlessly inane. Like playing ping-pong with a wall.

    The brain-washing is bone deep, plus now they’re bringing out the ones that have been lobotomized.

    Best strategy is to ignore them

  22. jasper says:

    Curmudgeon, would you be in favor of or against showing bios of all of the troops who have died on nightly television news? I think you would say it would be like propaganda against the war. I think that maybe one has to resolve not to think too much about the losses of our troops in order to feel good about what we’ve done in Iraq. That’s the dilemma I mean.

    What is the important difference between our Americans who were intentionally killed by terrorists and our Americans who were intentionally killed by Iraqi insurgents and Afghan tribesmen?

    • Curmudgeon says:

      I would have no problem with a memorial. I would have a problem with propaganda. However, I do not think the media, who overwhelmingly support Democrats, would be able to produce a memorial that was a true respectful memorial without seizing the chance to insinuate and propagate their worldview.

      Soldiers volunteer to protect civilians. They are trained and given support to accomplish that end. The difference between the purposeful murder of peaceful civilians and American soldiers dying in the line of duty is obvious. Do not pretend otherwise.

    • jasper says:

      Well maybe it’s less obvious to the kids of 9/11 victims and soldiers who grow up without their parents. Or the spouses who are widows and widowers. Or the parents who bury their children.

      Yeah, soldiers are tougher and have more of a fighting chance, but it’s just as much a loss to our country, if you ask me.

    • catie says:

      Again, who do you know? Maybe some obscure cousin or kid from school or neighbor. You’re an idiot. People die, people get injured in wars. Unfortunately more people die by murder in this country than die in war. Additionally, many people die in training accidents when we were in garrison. Until 2006, more people died without a war being on in active duty than died in a war due to accidents, etc. But of course that doesn’t fit your “I love the troops, I hate what they do”, template.

    • neocon mom says:

      What about the Americans who die each day keeping our streets safe? The boys in blue. How about the firefighters that risk and give their lives each day? What about the U.S. Marshals, the Coast Guard, the Border Patrol, the F.B.I., the C.I.A., the D.E.A?

      Where is your concern for those? Why aren’t you clamoring for them to have the finest equipment, health care, etc, to have memorial bios on the nightly news?

      Why did newspapers suddenly lose interest in the death toll after Obama took office? Especially with a sharp increase in the death toll in Afghanistan and what about the situation in Iraq with a sharp increase in sectarian violence? Where is Reid proclaiming it’s a civil war?

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      “That is why I am sad that the war in Iraq happened at all. I wish all of those soldiers were still with us.

      Yes, they are brave and loyal for going there and, yes, they have done a lot of good for the Iraqi people. But they were misused and their trust was violated by their leaders.”

      And thus, the best choice our president and his administration can make, is to pull out altogether and watch as all the work done by our soldiers goes down the drain. For the record, I didn’t want our forces going into Iraq at all but since that’s where they went, I had to say, “Well, let’s get the job done, get them to have a safe, secure, self-run country without the interference of tribal influences and their centuries of prejudice taking over” I felt it was a long shot and I also knew deep down that it would take decades.

      But I also instinctively knew that if we pulled out, that Iraq would go back into civil/tribal warfare and that Iran would feed weapons to the side it wanted to win. There’s a LOT more background that goes back a century…but for now that’s the sense of it.

      I get sick of people saying “I support the troops” when, in fact, they don’t. There used to be an expression in this country called “all in” coined from gambling, if you will. Few seem to know what it means anymore.

      Instead, what we have is the liberals who scream bloody murder about places like Mogadishu and the atrocities committed there and yell and scream “DO SOMETHING!” Yet the very second US troops touch the ground, the SAME liberals scream “foul”.

      An interesting point has been repeatedly made on this blog about NOW and other women’s rights groups and how they condemn the war in Iraq. Yet….previously, when Saddam Hussein was in power, they screamed bloody murder about the atrocities against women in that same nation and (yup, you guessedit) “DO SOMETHING!”. So Bush tried to “do something” and not alone, mind you, but with a HUGE (you talk about huge margins?) margin of support from the democrats in Congress, with Hitlery Clinton at the front of the line saying how necessary it was to go get rid of Hussein. Later, she claimed coercion and that they were all fed a pack of lies from Bush on the intel of WMD. Geez, pot meet kettle.

      And….boo freakin hoo also. The US military went there with very clear objectives…right wrong or indifferent…and they were meeting those objectives and establishing the peace and for THE FIRST TIME in the history of that region, ALL FACTIONS AND RELIGIONS had the same rights as everyone else.

      Yet, self-proclaimed do-gooder intellectuals here in the US somehow saw this as a bad thing?

      But now it all becomes a moot point as the Shiites, the Sunni and all the other factions retrograde back to doing what they do best: Hating and killing one another. It’s going to return to a thug-run dictatorship like all the other muslim nations in the region.

      The mind boggles.

  23. Rusty Shackleford says:

    And I’ve had to tangle with my insurance company bureaucracy several times and I don’t see how any governemnt could do any worse in customer service, lost paperwork, or just dopiness than my insurance company.

    —Think: “Department of Motor Vehicles”.

    Inside jasper, I think you may have the makings of a conservative if you believe that the free market has a chance. Perhaps you’re a conservative democrat and that’s not a bad thing. You have presented some interesting arguments but the people here have heard them all before. Much of it is based on hope and change and unfortunately, although altruistic ideals hold some merit, they rust quickly when exposed to the elements of reality.

    Hang in there.

  24. jasper says:

    You know, I used to love what Newt Gingrich said aboout the efficiency of for – profit systems, like how your credit card company knows in five minutes if you use your card in another state, but the INS can’t find someone who’s been working in the US for ten years. But his Congress didn’t implement any of those efficient privatized systems he spoke of.

    I just ask you to consider this – y’all had the last 8 years to come up with Conservative solutions to the health insurance problems in this country, and none of it got fixed. Several of those years you had majorities in Congress, also. So now that a candidate ran, promised medical coverage for everyone, got elected by a wide margin, and is trying to deliver, it is unbecoming for Conservatives to call him a nazi.

    Millions of American citizens voted for him, he won teh election, he is the President of the United States. He is a liberal member of the Democratic party in the USA, just like me, and he is not a nazi. LBJ declared war on Hitler, you’ll recall, and he was the last President to make any progress on helping Americans with their medical coverage.

    • catie says:

      Millions of stupid, racist people voted for him. Many of the liberal elites were thrilled at the opportunity to vote for a man of color without real regard to his true agenda. He is a man who voted against the”born alive protection act”, that told me all I needed to know about this man.
      I am sick and tired of harpies like yourself saying “it is unbecoming of Conservatives to call him a Nazi”. Where were you idiot when your ilk were calling George Bush a Nazi, Hitler, etc? No where. So Shut The F*ck Up. I am sick of you and your pals saying the only people who can protest are pukes like yourself. Most liberals don’t serve because they’re yellow and there are plenty of trashy people who can and will do it for them. You will not pick up a gun and stand at post will you? No, you’d mess up your manicure. I cannot stomach people like yourself. For you information, I know a number of people who died in the service of their country, one was one of our groomsman, another was a guest at our wedding. Additionally I know from experience that the VA sucks and that’s all the info you’re getting loser. You don’t care about those who serve, you only want their bios to further your freaking cause. You and your messiah are socialist pigs and feel free to turn me into the flag@whitehouse.gov.
      You make me sick.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      LBJ declared war on Hitler?
      Too many trips (oh yeah) to the bong, Jasper!

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Again, he did NOT get elected by a wide margin.

      And, Bush was preoccupied by a two-front war. Not an excuse but….he was doing what the American people WANTED…and that was voted on by an actual wide margin by democrats and republicans alike. His focus was on national security which…in a damned if you do, damned if you don’t kind of way, how do you measure the results? By not having another terrorist attack on US soil in 8 years. That’s how.

      But the American public is fickle. On September 12, 2001, they wanted BLOOD. And then, as we went on that pursuit, the parents of these fine soldiers were suddenly struck with the reality of what “going to war” actually means. People die. It’s an ugly thing….but not the ugliest of things.

      There were goals but as the American public quickly turned to who was winning on American Idol, they didn’t want to be burdened with the news of a war 8,000 miles away. Why? Because life as they saw it, remained relatively unchanged. But for the thousands of spouses and parents with ribbons tied around their trees at home, they knew. And they understood.

      Unfortunately, Ms Sheehan got sucked up into the liberal faux “support group” and became a pawn of their liking. When a person is grieving they are very susceptible to bad ideas. Ask any judge.

      And as to his being like a Nazi….compare Bush and his uptake on things or Reagan, or W’s dad and and then compare Obama to Nazi-ism…which means “National Socialism” and see which one more closely matches the model.

      jasper, you need to gain more experience, sir. Your eyes are, in fact open and I think you’ll see the reality of it in the future.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      LBJ declared war on Hitler?

    • catie says:

      LD, this is either public education at it’s finest or the example of an Ivy League education.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Don’t ask for his papers…………….

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      French statesman, Francois Guizot (1787?1874), Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; Not to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.

    • catie says:

      Again here from DU or Krazy Kos Kids? I never heard on liberal stand up and say anything other than nasty, naziesque things about George W Bush and those who serve in the military. I had to put up with shits like you coming on to my private property multiple times in HI while telling me they hoped my husband died. No, I do not like liberals. I have not called your messiah a nazi. He is a socialist, I believe racist and very nasty man. He has no decency. He cares not for the least amongst us. He is a pig as is the majority of his cabinet. Joe Biden is too stupid to know what is going on.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      How many dead and ACORN votes?

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      jasper, I have no respect for Obama, the person.

      The office, of course. But he is turning it into a sham. Stick around and read the articles here that come up for awhile, without posting any comment. (not that I’m trying to demand that you don’t). But I hung around here, reading, learning for about a year before saying a word.

      You will find articles here not posted by the mainstream media, the fawning worshippers of everything Obama. He is not my idea of a president and simply because he was elected doesn’t make him right. He abused his office from the very start. Demanding and scolding people during his campaign that “You can’t just run your thermostats up to 80 degrees and expect the rest of the country to pay for it” and not but weeks later, that’s exactly what he did in the oval office. He criticized private business leaders for flying to DC in their private jets, admittedly to ask for money, but then..he jets all over the world to apologize for the US…is that the thing a president who is respectful if the nation’s people would do? Additionally, he flew to Chicago not once but TWICE on a play-date with wifey-poo.

      Read what he says…then what he does. And even more, read how he lies and lies and lies. He DOES NOT have your best interests at heart. Read more and listen carefully, as I suspect you do and you will. He’s a snake in the grass.

      I am one who personally detests politics. Perhaps it’s a necessary evil but there are limits to how a politician operates. To say, “I will prohibit lobbyists from being in my cabinet” and then turns around and brings three of them on board.

      To say in 2006, during a union meeting, “I am a proponent of the single-payer system for healthcare” and then two weeks ago saying, “I have never said I was in favor of the single-payer system”.

      And those are just a few. There are more lies he’s told than perhaps any politician in history….

      So I ask you, as a critical thinker, would you buy a used car from this guy? If no, then how can you expect him to respectfully operate as chief executive of the US.

      By the way, Since WWII, on two presidents have NEVER served in the US military. Clinton and….Obama.

      Listen to his words. Watch his body language. Remember, he’s educated as a lawyer who tend to make things sound good. Or, more accurately, sound in a way given to persuade the listener.

    • catie says:

      What Rusty said.

    • neocon mom says:

      I was an on-the-fence (was still registered Dem) in the 2004 election. I wanted us to win the war (still do) and hated the direction the Dems were taking. Did not like John Kerry–my hubby turned down a paid position for the Kerry camp in WV because we simply could not get behind that snooty blowhard.
      I watched both conventions that year (like every year) and I felt hopeful about the future of the Democratic party when I saw Obama speak. He said all the right things–particularly his admonishment of the Democrat tendency to be hostile to Christians. He spoke of the importance of family. He had his two lovely little girls and wife come out on stage with him–he was the picture of the all-American centrist, ready to usher in a new era of politics, not by moving farther left or embracing ideology, but by an actual debate and exchange of ideas. I remember telling my father in ’06 that if the Democratic party had a chance to win the Presidency in ’08, it was with Barack Obama, even though he was new, he would be their man if they had a chance. I was right about him having a shot at winning, but dead wrong that the man was a centrist, and I have no doubt he was trying to paint himself as one.
      When I heard Jeremiah Wright, I knew Obama was a huge fraud. Liberation theology is anathema to true (orthodox) Christian doctrine. The church is an apparatus for power for these types (and they are on both sides of the political spectrum). I don’t know which is worse, actually attending such a church and subscribing to its false doctrines or pretending to be a part of such a church for 20 years.
      Obama is expert at saying one thing, doing another and benefits tremendously from a fawning, incurious press. America is a center-right nation; and when I really examined my heart, I knew that I wasn’t truly a liberal. When I look at what my Democrat parents taught me, on the whole, they taught me more conservative values than liberal hogwash. I feel sad for children whose parents take them to Waldorf schools and Unitarian Universalist (Obamatarian) churches. They end up so horribly confused about life, so mired in post-modern thought that they cannot tell right from wrong.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      God Bless You, MOM!!

    • pdsand says:

      “But his Congress didn’t implement any of those efficient privatized systems he spoke of.”

      Congress can’t implement private systems. I don’t know the perfect word, but the best I could come up with is that it’s an oxymoron. The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacles are a perfect example of why it doesn’t work.

      “What is the important difference between our Americans who were intentionally killed by terrorists and our Americans who were intentionally killed by Iraqi insurgents and Afghan tribesmen?”

      The ones killed on 9/11 didn’t know they were in a war and didn’t have a chance to fight back. The troops, who probably enlisted after 9/11, knew what they were getting into and went voluntarily. Plus their sacrifice has given us two strategic advantages, which I think validate their loss.
      1: We haven’t caught Bin Laden, but we have sent him into hiding and made it impossible for him to continue to operate and attack us with impunity, which is just as important to me as catching him would have been. I think everyone can agree that even if Bin Laden had been killed or captured early on, without the change we have wrought on the world through the GWOT, that Al Qaeda would have just picked a new leader and continued its war on America with impunity.
      2. By invading Iraq we set all these muslim terrorists and would be terrorists into such a frenzy over our occupation of a muslim country that their rage has been immutably focused on Iraq. They are compelled by their religion to attack us in Iraq, where they must fight our Soldiers and Marines, which is better than than them coming here and attacking civilians. So I’m sure some fence riding muslims have flipped the switch and become terrorists, ergo we are ‘creating more terrorists’. However they are irresistibly driven to fight us in Iraq. Whereas pre 9-11 there were very few actual terrorists, but we didn’t know where they would be or what they were going to attack. Since we are in a war with them and they will attack us, I’d rather it be in Iraq.

      “So now that a candidate ran, promised medical coverage for everyone, got elected by a wide margin, and is trying to deliver, it is unbecoming for Conservatives to call him a nazi.”

      I would oppose any health care reform, but I think we can all agree that the promises he made don’t particularly resemble the health care bills in congress. In fact many of the provisions he lambasted McCain and Hillary for supporting are in the bills now.

      I agree that nazi is a loaded word, and it is unbecoming to use it as an ad hominem attack. However, this health care bill will result in care being rationed and people literally being killed by the government. Even if it’s not in the form of a “death panel”, there will be a regulation, a committee, or an actuary table or chart somewhere that states that some medicine or procedures are too expensive for the government to pay for, and that in those cases care will be denied. And insomuch as the most likely victims will be senior citizens, coincidentally the generation that fought the nazis, then not only is this health care reform going to single out and kill a particular group, just like the nazis did, but it will also unfortunately be targeting the same people that the nazis wanted to kill so many years ago. It’s just too much. So I think some of us, not me mind you, but others can be forgiven for trotting out the old “n’ word.

      “Well, I mean, the nazis gave free medical treatment to their injured veterans too.”

      This is a tradition that in my amateur mind goes back to Napoleon transforming ‘L’Hotel des Invalides’ into a place of honor. It is our country’s duty and on our honor that we provide care to our veterans, and we have been doing it since before there were Nazis. To the extent that the government fails at this task is a great dishonor. I think the bureacratic aspects of the VA suck, but I am certain that the doctors and those who actually give care to the veterans provide the best care in the world. This of course goes on a sliding scale depending on how close the care the VA is giving is to the true mission of the VA. When we think VA, we’re thinking guys missing arms and legs. I honestly believe that amputees and people in other such horrible conditions resulting from being wounded are receiving some of the finest care available. When you wander off down the trail towards, say, getting an annual colonoscopy because you receive all of your care from the VA, well I guess you end up with AIDS.

  25. Rusty Shackleford says:

    * Main Entry: so·cial·ism
    * Pronunciation: ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm
    * Function: noun
    * Date: 1837

    1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
    2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
    3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done


  26. jasper says:

    You got me there. FDR. Sorry about that one.

    • catie says:

      Well I can see how you can easily make that mistake. I mean they both are known by their initials which are three letters. I can see why someone who is not an astute student of History could mix it up. Yeah, that’s a mistake anyone can make, well liberal could make.

  27. Colonel1961 says:

    Jasper: congratulations. You have presented one of the most rambling and incoherent series of comments I have ever read on S&L. You can’t contain a simple premise, support, and conclusion. You’re all over the map – as are most liberals. They ‘think’ in a hub/spoke fashion, i.e., non-lineal. As such, they make little or no sense. And, therefore, rarely can be persuasive or be persuaded.

    You beg the question when you say: ‘…Republicans had eight years to fix health care…’ That statement presumes that health care is broken/needs to be fixed. The majority of Americans are satisfied with their coverage, ergo, your false premise is nonsensical…

    Please, take a class in logic or critical thinking/analysis at a local college or university. It will help you out tremendously. Not saying it will change your politics, per se, but it will provide a rational foundation for your comments, which you are so sadly lacking

  28. canary says:

    Jasper, this is all Obama’s war now. Iraq troops were to be home in 6 monthes after he took office. What happened? As far as Afganistan he bragged he’d go in there get Bin Laden and win the war. To the DAV he promised 1st class health care to the vets, yet twice he’s tried to force people that can’t even walk to get their own health care.
    As far as you knocking the quality of soldiers, this has been the most educated army the U.S. has ever had.

    I do not understand your think about gubmit. I suggest you go to the library and check out Obama’s dreams and see all the “n” words he uses, all the quotes of making black people talk like their ignorant when ever they say anything or hold a conversation. He puts himself in a much higher league than all the other black people in Dreams, and that is far more intelligent then they are. He hates white people too. Obama is the one racist. He makes fun of ignorant black people in his book, and hates white people because of their skin. Obama is a bitter, whiny, angry, piece of nothing, who’s a good con. So, FO.

  29. catie says:

    Well it’s a bit late to be correcting your friends who called Bush a “nazi”. I don’t think it really matters to them.
    I did not call Obama a nazi. He is a socialist and sorry that disappoints you.
    If you think I enjoyed war or my husband does or anyone who serves/d do, you’re crazy. I take exception to Webb being a liberal-he’s like Spector, he goes the way the wind blows. He was pretty conservative when it helped him in that cause. He’ll flip again if it’s in his best interest.
    I don’t say “people die” lightly. I’ve seen people die, it’s not pretty. But perhaps you need to understand those who fight it are the ones who don’t want it more often than not but it’s our job and the job we signed up for. Sherman said “War is Hell” and Lee knew in his heart it wasn’t going to be a 30 day war as many of the young men who served under him believed. He had seen war and knew it wasn’t the glorious thing these young men imagined. The camaraderie that I shared though with the men and women I served with was a plus though and got me through many rough times. I was also in a sorority and while we were great friends, my close friends are the ones who still have my back who wore and in some cases still wear the uniform.
    I have respect for the Office, but not the man. I cannot respect a man who has no room in his heart for babies who are born alive during botched abortions. He has a problem with white people and not sure why since his white grandparents paid his way through the most expensive private school in HI, a school we could not afford to send our son to & my husband is a field grade officer. He surrounded himself with communist professors and others on the lunatic fringe. Certainly you cannot believe that Ayers and Dohren are part of the “mainstream”. I grew up outside of Chicago & know the thugocracy well.
    As Canary said, have you read either of his books? I have because I wanted to learn about the man. It was eye opening. You should read them. Remember old Peggy Moore who thought he’d pay her mortgage, gas, etc.? These are the type of blacks he’d never have anything to do with. Remember when he had Skip Gates & “stupidly acting” Officer Crowley to the Big House? He’s popping up the steps, while Crowley is helping Gates up those stairs. He’s probably never before heard a cross word about himself until about 18 months ago. He’s like a petulant spoiled child and reminds me in some ways of my own 5 y/o on somedays.
    One of the biggest mistakes Nixon made was starting the EPA but that isn’t the only reason I dislike Nixon.
    I’m sure Obama loves his wife and two daughters but I don’t think he or she really love this country too much.

    • proreason says:


      you are wise to not call Obamy a Nazi. Libwits are sticklers for words, and they can prove that since the Nazi party was disbanded in 1945, that it’s impossible for Obamy to have been a Nazi member. They win that argument hands-down.

      But the fact that there are dozens of parallels between the Fascists in power in Washington and the methods of the Nazis is indisputable.

      The proper way to phrase it is to call Obamy a Nazi wannabe.

  30. neocon mom says:

    One thing I realized during my long “conversion” to conservatism is that conservatives are already operating on a level which assumes so much of what you are rather sanctimoniously attempting to “teach” us. We have a different notion about human nature altogether. We may admire Reagan, Thatcher and Palin but strive to keep things in perspective. We realize the peril in celebrity and don’t confuse it with leadership. If we do, we are discredited.

    People don’t demonstrate their lack of racism by hiring people from various backgrounds. Don’t know whether you are that easily fooled or believe that we are. People demonstrate their good character by making decisions based on others’ qualifications for a position, period. It is impossible to know what criteria people use to make every decision they do. That is one reason why hiring discrimination lawsuits are difficult to win (but this has little to do with how often they’re settled out of court, another matter entirely.

    Bill Clinton attempted to use the argument that we just differ on how to solve problems, but it is more fundamental than that. We believe in liberty and personal freedom. We refute the lie that the gift and blessing of parenthood is a punishment or curse and that the unborn are more akin to disease than actual human beings. We think life is worth living, even though it can be really difficult because of war or violence or any other setback. We see the cult of victimhood (identity politics) for what it really is: foolish pride that foments anger, bitterness and personal destruction.

    You don’t get to control the language that others use. If you don’t like the discussion, take it elsewhere.

    The E.P.A. is the very model of good intentions, unforeseen consequences. The E.P.A. is one of the most powerful bureaucracies around, with the power to tie people up in costly proceedings and keep them from being able to build what they want using their own money on their own property. I met Edward Nixon once, and he admitted that as a geologist, it was he that encouraged his brother to start the E.P.A., but he didn’t foresee it becoming what it is today. A great cautionary tale for anyone advocating a government solution to most “problems”–when the government is involved, anticipate that the “cure” might be worse than the disease.

    Lastly, Jasper, remember what Gerald Ford said, “a government big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take it all away.”

    If people want to call Bush a “Nazi”, let them out their own stupidity. Personally I see more Mugabe in Obama than Hitler, but that’s not much of an upgrade.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »