Tuesday, May 31, 2011

The 2012 Clown Brigade

I love Newt Gingrich.

Let us face s
ome serious and undeniable facts here. A politician as deliciously sleazy as the Newtster should be cherished - if only for the scads of unintentional comedy his very presence in the national limelight inspires. As you might imagine, I have been following Newt's presidential campaign - or what's left of it - with a longing I'm hard-pressed to describe. I soooo wanted him to get the GOP nomination in 2012 I could almost taste it. I was even contemplating sending the hideous old freak a check. I might as well not waste my money. It's very clear to everyone (except Gingrich of course) that he's not going to get his party's nod next year - or any year for that matter.

Did you catch his act on CBS's Face the Nation last week? This "fiscal conservative" could not explain to Bob Schieffer why he owed Tiffany half a million dollars. But that is the least of his problems. The "base" is pissed off at him - not because he is one of the most corrupt politicians of modern times - but beca
use he is on his third marriage. It's all over for Newt. Isn't it a Pity? Now, isn't it a shame?

Oh, but what a beautifully twisted campaign that might have been! Can you even imagine? As I speculated on this site back in March ("Newt the Hoot"), the fact that Newt is an apparently sane, relatively smart (compared to the rest of that party) white man, he would have needed a screamingly crazy black woman with the IQ of a turnip to "balance out" the ticket. Unfortunately there are no women of color within the Republican party with any degree of national stature. And since Butterfly McQueen is dead, this would have left either Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin as the ideal running mate. What a fun campaign that would have been to cover! But, alas, it was never meant to be. [SIGH].

But fear not! There is still much hope for the cause of political parody in America. The good news is that the remaining frontrunners seeking to be the standard bearer in 2012 for the "party of Abraham Lincoln" (GAG!) are all ripe for satire. This is too good to be true.

Bachmann/Palin Overdrive

Tied for second place in my "dream nominee contest" would be Fascist Barbie and the twit from the north country - the aforementioned Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann. The fact that the two of them are even taken seriously by so many people is all the proof one needs in order to understand that the wheels have come off America's national political dialogue - and why this once-great nation has become the laughingstock of western civilization. Bill Maher recently described Michele as the candidate for people who find Sarah "too intellectual". Wish I'd said that!

The possibility of either of these two nitwits being nominated is not quite as farfetched as you might believe. Due to the heavy presence of the half-wit/evangelical vote early in the primaries - particularly in Iowa and South Carolina - it's not improbable that one or the other could gain enough momentum to breeze into the convention hall with just the right number of delegates at the end of the summer.

The dilemma they face is that with both of them seeking the same prize, they will split the uber right wing/Nazi vote between them - with the spoils going to someone like that nasty "left wing socialist" Mitt Romney. They need to make some kind of deal between themselves - and I really hope that they
do. As a person who makes his name commenting on the train wreck of American politics, Bachmann or Palin at the top of the ticket would be a gift from Heaven. Okay, I'll level with you: I realize that this is a bit of a long shot but I can dream, can't I?

41. Bush
42. Clinton
43. Bush
44, Obama
45. Bush

Honestly, how idiotic w
ill we look if the above listing makes its way into the history books? We'll look like Land of the Assholes, don'cha think? And yet there are people out there who (with straight faces no less) are trying to convince Jeb Bush to go for it. To Bush's credit (and I can't believe I'm giving credit to anyone in that family) he has said over and over that he is not interested in running for president - in 2012. Say what you want to about the man, he's a lot smarter than his older brother - which is damning by faint praise, I realize. It is obvious to me that he has every intention of running in 2016 - running and winning. They are quite adept at stealing elections, those Bushes.

FOR TH
E RECORD:
A country stupid enough to ever send another member of that disgusting family back to
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will deserve everything that happens to it. Everything. Not that I'd mind though. I am one of the very few people who make under a-million-dollars-per-year who would benefit very handsomely from a third Bush presidency. During the last decade, the lower this country sank into the shit hole, the higher my stock rose. While George Dubya Bush may have been the worst thing that ever happened to this country, the half-witted little bastard was the best thing that ever happened to me. You say you want to send another Bush to the White House? Go for it, dude - and thanks!

This much is certain: Not since Franklin D. Roosevelt was challenged in 1936 by an obscure Kansas governor named Alf Landon has an incumbent president been in a more enviable position than Barack Obama will be in 2012. On Sunday's Meet the Press, Mitch McConnell implied that the Democrats should be careful what they wish for, that in 1980 they were aching to run against Ronald Reagan and that they lived to regret that wish. It's different this time around. As jaw-droppingly stupid as Reagan was, he at least had the sense to surround himself with smart people. That's not the case this time. That's far from the case. The truth of the matter is that most of these people just aren't that bright. I'll give you a juicy example of what I'm talking about:

"And so Ala
ska may progress, I will not seek reelection as governor."

Sarah P
alin
July 3, 2009

As I said at
the moment she made that remark, "What the ffff....DID SHE JUST SAY THAT???" You bet'cha!

Had she been speaking extemporaneously, I could have forgiven her for a harmless slip-of-the-tongue. But she was reading from a prepared text! And the extremely funny thing about it is that the little example of political oratory quoted above was approved by her handlers. No, these people aren't very bright at all. Obama must have picked up a little bit of that luck-of-the-Irish on his recent visit to Dublin. Top o' the marnin' to ya, lad!

Whatever happens and whomever gets the big prize at the Republican National Convention next summer, I am looking forward to the 2012 campaign like an eight-year-old kid looks forward to Christmas. This is going to be a revolution of laughs.


To paraphrase the Who: I've got a feeling 2012 is gonna be a weird year. Very weird indeed. I'm giddy. Forgive me.

Tom Degan
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

SUGG
ESTED VIEWING:

Hardball
with Chris Matthews on MSNBC

He drives me nuts sometimes (like the evening in October 2009 when he literally put Michele Bachmann on the political map) but Chris Matthews is just about the smartest son-of-a-bitch out there in the main stream media with respect to all matters political. If I miss an installment of Hardball, I'm the lesser for it.

SUGGESTED
READING:

A Good Life
by Ben Bradlee

The memoirs of the legendary editor of the Washington Post. I always thought that Bradlee wa
s one of history's more colorful and brilliant people. This book only reaffirms my opinion. A great read.

104 Comments:

At 6:18 AM, Anonymous Jossfan said...

Love it love it..Parah Salin isn't running she would have to take a huge paycut. By the way Tom,you're freaking me out. Who is that handsome young shaver in the middle row on the far right of that picture? He is the image of me.

 
At 9:13 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

I'm not sure who that is. Can anyone pick him out?

 
At 10:15 AM, Blogger Tony S. said...

Of all the Republican clown candidates for President, certainly the biggest clown of all is Tim Pawlenty the extreme Right-Wing ex-Governor of Minnesota who uses his boring demeanor to hide his vicious Right-Wing politics.

 
At 10:26 AM, Blogger Rain said...

I was reading this morning that Palin didn't stand a chance in New Hampshire even after she probably wins Iowa (assuming she runs) and the reasoning was because Democrats and Independents can vote in New Hampshire Republican primary. That is exactly why she might stand a chance. They don't want her. They want her to be the one running against Obama because they figure it'll be an easy victory in November. It happens all the time in states that make it easy to vote in either party's primary.

 
At 10:27 AM, Blogger charles moore said...

Tom, I have to hand it to you. You wrote such a fun article here that I just may have to rethink my stance and start reading the comments again. I am sure that all of the trolls will be out en masse, foaming at the mouth, shaking their fists and taking you to task for skewering their heros.

 
At 10:34 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Hey, Charles....

Can you send me a private e-mail? I need your address.

Cheerio!

 
At 12:29 PM, Anonymous Concerned Citizen said...

Can anyone here answer the following questions?

How did Bill Clinton use Social Security money to make it appear like he had a budget surplus?

Why are so many Liberals unaware of what Billy did to cook the books?

Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?

 
At 1:48 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

Concerned Citizen
For most of social security's history, monthly ss tax collections covered the bill, that is no longer the case.

Do you know who holds the largest amount of treasury bonds? If you guessed China, you would be wrong. It is the US Treasury Dept. The own at least 4 trillion in bonds that they wrote to themselves over the years as they "borrowed" any ss surplus. Essentially any ss tax that was not used was spent on other things and bonds were put into an account. Unlike an IRA where you have a cash or investment balance, they spent taxes with the promise that they can tax more in the future. Very ponzi like.

People think the US government is not a ponzi because the last check cleared. What would happen if the debt ceiling were raised but no one showed up to the auction to buy more US debt? Then the world would see the Madoff management in Washington. Then its only a question of who gets cut and by how much. That is text book ponzi.

If they print money look up Zimbabwe.



TD
Obama in an enviable position? He will lose to anyone in that "brigade."

Read some news:
"Consumer confidence unexpectedly drops" AP UNEXPECTEDLY???

Home prices: 'Double-dip' confirmed CNN

As you know, I could go on.

Jug Ears is running a 12 trillion dollar economy into the ground. He will lose his job in 2012.

Sarah Palin can beat him.

You might as well inebriate yourself in unwarranted optimism. Dems will get routed in 2012 again, this time the Senate goes.

T-524

 
At 3:52 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Another Bush in the White House would prove that dumbed down 'Murakins" really do prefer aristocracy over democracy.

No matter how brain-dead and soul-less the Reich Wingers may be, they are all quite capable of parroting, "Tax cuts! Tax cuts! Squawk! Death tax! Death panels! Squawk. Commies! Commies! Squawk!"

All they need is some phony "folksy" aristocrat who knows how to smile and lie for the camera. Nothing more.

 
At 7:26 PM, Anonymous Lets Stop Hypocrisy said...

Tom Degan,

When are you going to rant with detail about the story of John Edwards campaign violations while running for president?

He really knew how to lie through his shiny white teeth while his wife was dying of cancer.

Will you once again put on blinders because Edwards is a Democrat?

 
At 7:37 PM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Let's stop hypocrisy....

I agree with your name and your sentiment. I would like to do a major mia culpa for you right here and now and present for you something I wrote on this site three years ago. No paragraph in my life have I regretted more than the followinf:

From "The Rant", Sunday, January 27, 2008....

"Am I missing something here? What the hell is wrong with the Democrats? For the first time since George McGovern thirty-six years ago, we have a Democratic candidate for the presidency who actually sounds like a Democrat. There's nothing vague about John Edwards' message - you know where he stands on every issue of any importance to average Americans. Unlike Barack Obama, whose heart is in the right place but who talks in poetic generalities, and Hillary Clinton - who is heartless - John Edwards has a definite, tangible vision of the new direction he wants to take America. Why isn't he catching on? Why are the American people so easily led - like sheep - by the corporate media? What in tarnations is goin' on here?"


Someone please shoot me.

Sincerely and regrettably,

Tom Degan

PS - WHAT THE FUCK WAS I THINKING????

 
At 9:43 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

So Edwards turned out to be another pretty boy slimeball, and possibly a criminal. Plenty of that ilk in DC.

All we had were his words back then, and those words happened to be to the left of Obama. He lied to his wife and others, but his opinions on the issues were far more on track with solutions to the Big Mess.

Bush and Cheney also lied and are very much criminals. Whose lies were fatal to hundreds of thousands?

They usually get elected before the real treachery comes out, and that is usually far worse for all of us than a guy who didn't even get elected, right?

 
At 10:56 PM, Blogger Peter Fegan said...

Great analysis. Wonder what your take on Mitt would be. Not that I would ever vote for him but with the exception of Pawlenty, he seems to be the only Republican NOT crazy.

 
At 11:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

J.G,
Coming to a state near you!


May 31, 2011
2 Iraqis in Kentucky charged with terrorism.
Two Iraqis living in Kentucky have been arrested on charges that they tried to send sniper rifles, stinger missiles and money to Al Qaeda operatives in their home
country, according to court documents unsealed Tuesday

But don't worry they wont hurt liberals.

 
At 1:36 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Peter Fegan....

Mitt Romney would be the ideal nominee for the Republicans. He could give Obama a serious run for the money. He's also the ONLY one of the current GOP contenders with an IQ higher than your average half-eaten box of Milk Duds.

There's just one teeny weeny problem:

The religious bigots and crazy people who long ago hijacked the "party of Abraham Lincoln" will never - EVER - nominate a Mormon. As the old Ringo Starr song says: "Pigs will fly and the earth will fry" before THAT ever happens.

Rahm Emanuel will be made chairman of the American Nazi party before THAT ever happens.

David Duke will be made head of the NAACP before THAT ever happens.

Isn't life beautiful?

Romney would be their ideal nominee. The problem is the fact that most Republicans are too dumb to figure out this ultimate of no-brainers.

Don't hold your breath.

 
At 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does the DNC list look like?

 
At 11:22 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Tom, you concluded your first paragraph with: Isn't it a Pity? Now, isn't it a shame?

Yes, it truly is. How we break each other's hearts. And cause each other pain.

Either way, the pain's just going to get worse.

 
At 12:32 PM, Anonymous Where's The Hope and Change? said...

Socialism is a great system until the people paying for the party get ticked off at the ones partying on their dime.

 
At 12:42 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Crony capitalism and corporatism is also a great system...for the aristocrats and plutocrats, but is fatal to democracy.

I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day. The economic elite will continue to prosper anyway.

 
At 4:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day."
Learn to speak Swedish, then move there if this is what you want.

 
At 4:30 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Ja, mein anonymous Sturmbannfuhrer!

After your Fourth Reich finishes off the last remnants of our democracy, Sweden will look quite free and civil compared to the fascist squalor your Party is bringing upon the US.

Authoritarians can never get it through their narrow little minds that democracy is compatible with socialism, not with Republicanism.

In fact Republicans are as opposed to democracy as fascists and communists.

Don't take my word for it. Open your eyes and see what's going down, from Union busting to the Patriot Act. This is fascism on the rise. The powerful elite have made the working people of America their enemies.

And heed the words of the enemies of democracy:

"I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” – Heritage Foundation co-founder Paul Weyrich

 
At 6:42 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Dave Dubya "I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day. The economic elite will continue to prosper anyway."
But they won't prosper as much. Having all of a smaller pie is better than most of a bigger pie, because what's the point of pie if the Common Folk get any?
You see, we have to privatize Social Security so that Wall Street can burn through granny's retirement like it burned through your 401K, and voucherize Medicare to free her from the tyranny of Unelected [Government] Bureaucrats (whose bonuses are based on them not getting bonuses) and giving her Liberty® under the tyranny of Unelected [Private] Bureaucrats (whose bonuses are based on how many grannys' claims they deny), which will save money because individual health insurance at 80, thanks to the Invisible Hand of the Free Market, won't be considerably more expensive than individual health insurance at 64 (and the savings will double, triple, even quadtuple if, um, the mild cost controls, or "Death Panels", of the Affordable Care Act are repealed along with the rest of Obamacare). Much as Medicare D is cheaper than Medicare (which is ideogically true, if not factually so), Ryanized Medicare will be cheaper than both. For the Producers. Whose taxes will be cut.
And we have to cut Red Tape. Like the EPA and CDC. Because the air and water are just fine and diseases should get to compete in the Free Market too. This will leave more money to build more prisons. Which we'll privatize. Because the Free Market earned the right to suckle on the sweet milk of the Public Teat.
And we need F35s. Hundreds of them. To counteract Al Qaeda's state-of-the-art AK47s and repurposed 105mm shells of uncertain vintage. But we have to cut the VA. Because we respect our troops too much to repair and maintain them after we toss them in harm’s way. And we need to stay Tough on Crime, with increased police power and decreased oversight, to protect us from all the crazy veterans with three limbs and PTSD.
And we can't cut so-called “subsidies” to Corporate Citizens like Exxon, because they're Producers and they've earned it and looking for oil is expensive and cuts into their profits, but we can take a wrecking ball to Medicaid, because if granny wanted to spend her final years in an retirement home she should've been better with the money that she never had, and Parasites like poor children who want luxuries like “breakfast” should've been wiser and chosen better parents. And also screw the blind and the mentally handicapped. Why should America’s Galts have to cover for their defects? They’re too busy saving up to pay the Death Tax that they’ll never pay to care about some lazy cripple.
We have to do all this so that the Producers will feel adequately compensated for not being among the huddled masses yearning to breathe free. And also Trickle Down. Or something. Oh, and we need to cut our other programs (see: scattered remnants of New Deal, "roads", "schools", "society") so that we can cut their taxes further. Because it worked so well over the last decade. Or two. Or three. Which will Fight the Deficit somehow. Shut up, that's how.

 
At 6:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day. The economic elite will continue to prosper anyway."

Over half of the economy is small business, your point doesn't hold much water.

 
At 7:33 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ MO ~ Fanned and Faved for last comment....Wait...you can't do that on here...can you?

 
At 7:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Patriot Act didn't President Obama (d) just re sign it? How is that the GOP's fault?

"democracy is compatible with socialism, not with Republicanism." Source please to support this or is this you opinion?

Paul Weyrich's quote, provide link to source source, I want to read the entire quote please.

MOE define "common folk" for us.

"For the Producers. Whose taxes will be cut." MOE, now your getting real!

"Because the air and water are just fine and diseases should get to compete in the Free Market too." China is a great example of centralized governmental contr4o that you are asking for, except they have no EPA of CDC. How in the world are they making it with out them?

"The Free Market earned the right to suckle on the sweet milk of the Public Teat." Sounds like MOE thinks the only way for the tax payer to get their moneys worth is if government runs the systems. Looking for a place where that happens now.

"we need to stay Tough on Crime, with increased police power and decreased oversight, to protect us from all the crazy veterans with three limbs and PTSD." MOE wouldn't the better place to spend the move to provide the above would be along the USA's borders?

Final question, is Canada accepting immigrants from the USA who want to become citizens? If so what does it take to become apart of your Heaven? If not, why not?

 
At 7:42 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ dumbass
"I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day. The economic elite will continue to prosper anyway."

Over half of the economy is small business, your point doesn't hold much water.
Uh actually...yes. Yes it does...I don't even understand what yours is.

 
At 8:17 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Patriot Act didn't President Obama (d) just re sign it? How is that the GOP's fault?"
Are you assuming that "we" are not disappointed in Obama? Did you just get here? We (and, as usual, I speak for all liberals) have been disappointed in him since at least the flip-flop on telecom immunity.

"Paul Weyrich's quote, provide link to source source, I want to read the entire quote please."
I can do better than that. Instead of reading the words, listen and watch him saying them.

"MOE define 'common folk' for us."
Have you seen you? Like that but, in general, smarter.

"MOE, now your getting real!"
Lies! I'm always real!

"China is a great example of centralized governmental contr4o that you are asking for, except they have no EPA of CDC. How in the world are they making it with out them?"
I don't see what your point is supposed to be.
Government with cronyism, corruption and spotty enforcement of wildly lax standards? Texas?

"Sounds like MOE thinks the only way for the tax payer to get their moneys worth is if government runs the systems."
Oh, poppycock! It depends what the systems are.

"Looking for a place where that happens now."
Having the Medical Insurance industry acting as a middleman is more expensive than Single Payer (VA, Medicare, etc). So there's one.
Also, the US spends more per capita to cover less people than the rest of the civilized world. So, look at the rest of the world and there's two.

"MOE wouldn't the better place to spend the move to provide the above would be along the USA's borders?"
Exactly. It's the Mexicans. Dang them, comin' over here and, for the most part, quietly picking our fruit, plucking our chickens, pruning our trees and burping our babies! Congratulations. You're a moron.

"Final question, is Canada accepting immigrants from the USA who want to become citizens? If so what does it take to become apart of your Heaven? If not, why not?"
It depends. Are you a skilled worker? Will your home country torture or murder you if you return? Do you love hockey?

 
At 8:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MOE, so who do you think as a non American Citizen should run against Obama from the left?

"MOE define 'common folk' for us."
Have you seen you? Like that but, in general, smarter." Typical liberal tactic, attack the person never answer the question.

"Oh, poppycock! It depends what the systems are." Give us the systems?

"Looking for a place where that happens now." Give me the names of the countries.
"the US spends more per capita to cover less people than the rest of the civilized world." Also we have the best medical care in the world, just ask those who come here from other nations why they came here?

"It depends. Are you a skilled worker? Will your home country torture or murder you if you return? Do you love hockey?"

I guess the loving hockey bit prevents us from sending our illegal "skilled workers" from Mexico to Canada who you think are no problem in our nation..How rich of you. Are you ok with Canada's current immigration policy? Think USA should Have the same one?

 
At 10:45 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

Also we have the best medical care in the world, just ask those who come here from other nations why they came here? Seriously?? You really believe this?

Do you even google before you type?> (yep, in this day and age, that HAS replaced the old "do you even think before you speak?" line...)

HAHA side note...Captcha reads "get sic" LMAO! Appropriate?

 
At 11:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

United Kingdom

"The National Health Service is facing a £20 billion-a-year funding black hole that will threaten its founding principles unless the Coalition’s controversial reforms are brought in to prevent it, the Health Secretary has warned."


Solution to this problem is to
Increase taxes
or
further limit services

MOE, which one would you pick?

 
At 12:07 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mary, Mary,

Maybe you should Google before you spout out about how stupid some one else is about a subject!

Lets do a little test and see if you are as smart as you claim to be?
I'm going to list 10 numbers which represent the cancer mortality rate per 100,000 population of 10 countries. Then I'll list the name of ten countries. See if you can match them up.
I will do the same for mortality rates due to cardio issues.
CANCER RATES FIRST

Ten cancer rates for the nations listed below. Match them up.

1.133
2.147
3.142
4.120
5.132
6.135
7.154
8.131
9.143
10.135

Ten Countries

a.CANADA
b.Cuba
c.USA
d Russia
e.Japan
f.China
g.France
h.Germany
i.Italy
j.U.K.

Cardio rates, match them up to the countries listed above.

1.131
2.279
3.207
4.123
5.199
6.155
7.103
8.645
9.175
10.179

Ask MOE about a visit to a US hospital for care of a Canadian official, I guess he came here because it was cheaper? How many times have you gone to the UK, Canada or Mexico for medical treatment because it was superior their to ours?

 
At 12:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is also for you, Mary.

PART I
f you believe what you read in most news sources, Palestinians want a homeland and Muslims want control over sites they consider holy. Simple, right?

Wrong. In fact, these two demands are nothing more than strategic deceptions – propaganda ploys. They are nothing more than phony excuses and rationalizations for the terrorism and the murdering of Jews. The real goal of those making these demands is the destruction of the state of Israel.

The proof of the pudding is that prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, there was no serious movement for a Palestinian homeland. Why?

In 1967, during the Six-Day War, the Israelis captured Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. But they didn't capture these territories from Yasser Arafat. They captured them from Jordan's King Hussein. Why did the so-called Palestinians suddenly discover their national identity after Israel won the war. Why wasn't there a demand for a Palestinian homeland before?

The truth is that Palestine is no more real than Never-Never Land. The first time the name was used was after 70 A.D. when the Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared the land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it would be known as Palestine. The name was derived, we think, from the Philistines, a people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier.

Contrary to what Yasser Arafat told you, the Philistines were extinct by that time. Arafat liked to pretend his people are the descendants of the Philistines. Actually, the name was simply a way for the Romans to add insult to injury to the Jews – not only were they annihilated, but their land was renamed after people they had conquered.

Palestine has never existed – before or since – as a nation state. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their homeland. Who rejected that idea? The Arabs. The Jews could have no place in the Mideast. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Now, at least to Western audiences, Arafat and some other so-called "moderate" Arab leaders will tell you that it's OK for the Jews to have their homeland, too – side-by-side with the Arabs. Why wasn't it OK in 1948?

There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1 percent of the landmass.

But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough.

Arafat himself explained the ploy of negotiations with Israel in a 1994 speech in South Africa – in English. He's explained it in Arabic dozens of times.

First we create our own state, then we use that state to liberate all of Palestine. That's the goal. It's always been the goal.

Arafat and his supporters will tell you the reason a Palestinian Arab state is needed is because Arabs were forcibly removed from their property in the 1948 war. But listen to what the Arabs were saying about the refugee issue after that war.

 
At 12:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mary, PART II
* "The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish state. The Arab states agree upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem."
– Emile Ghoury, secretary of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, in an interview with the Beirut Telegraph Sept. 6, 1948.

* "The Arab state which had encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees."
– The Jordanian daily newspaper Falastin, Feb. 19, 1949.

* "Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders, who have neither honor nor conscience? Who brought them over in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their honor? The Arab states, and Lebanon amongst them, did it."
– The Beirut Muslim weekly Kul-Shay, Aug. 19, 1951.

* "The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.

* "For the flight and fall of the other villages it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs ... By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy."
– The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953.

There was no Jewish conspiracy to chase Arabs out of their homes in 1948. It never happened. There are, instead, plenty of historical records showing the Jews pleading with their Arab neighbors to stay and live in peace and harmony. Yet, despite the clear, unambiguous words of the Arab observers at the time, history has been successfully rewritten to turn the Jews into the bad guys.

The Arab states that initiated the hostilities have never accepted responsibility – despite their enormous wealth and their ability to assimilate tens of millions of refugees in their largely under-populated nations. And other states have failed to hold them accountable.

 
At 1:37 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

(Part 1, because my comment disappeared. Twice.)

Anonymous "MOE, so who do you think as a non American Citizen should run against Obama from the left?"
Sadly, no. Primarying a sitting president is a good way only to cut the support out from under him, and to have that president lose the election.

"Typical liberal tactic, attack the person never answer the question."
I did answer the question. Statitistically, you're far more likely to be in the bottom, say, 60% than in the top 2%. Don't confuse liberal snark with question avoidance.

"Give us the systems?"
I did. In the very next section. Heck, while you're here add in Defense and emergency services.

"Give me the names of the countries."
Most of the First World.

"Also we have the best medical care in the world..."
You do. And you pay through the nose to get it. And it doesn't cover everybody. And the most frequent users of Emergency Rooms (the most expensive and least effective form of medical care, as it's catching a problem at the expensive end rather than the cheaper beginning) are from the uninsured.

"...just ask those who come here from other nations why they came here?"
"Because this hospital where I am at has a reputation for the best care, and my money is less important to me than my time."

 
At 1:37 AM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

(Part 2)

"I guess the loving hockey bit prevents us from sending our illegal 'skilled workers' from Mexico to Canada who you think are no problem in our nation"
And why would you do that? We don't send, say, illegal Lithuanians to the US instead of back to Lithuania.

"MOE, which one would you pick?"
Increase taxes, generally. Granted, I'm not an asshole. (Also, you're ignoring the cost of the US system. You pay twice what the rest of us pay. Whether it's out of your taxes or out of your pocket, you do pay. Those emergency rooms being used as regular doctor's visits aren't going to pay for themselves, for instance, and the rush to defund Planned Parenthood, which is a primary healthcare provider for a lot of women [and some men, too], will have wide-reaching consequences even beyond money)

"Ten cancer rates for the nations listed below. Match them up. 1.133 2.147 3.142..."
Highest 154/10,000. Lowest 120/10,000. Assuming that the US is the lowest it's spending double the average for a 22% improvement. Using WHO stats, it's spending a third more per capita more than Canada for a 4% improvement, or 40% per capita more than Switzerland (which has private hospitals and doctors with tightly regulated socialized coverage) to live less long.

"Ask MOE about a visit to a US hospital for care of a Canadian official, I guess he came here because it was cheaper?"
No. As I've said before on this site (and this page) he went for the best care and could afford it ("U S A! U S A! U S A!"). The guy's a millionaire. If you aren't, you go the other way across the border ("U S...A?").

 
At 2:26 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

Copyin' and pastin' a bunch of BS won't detract from how brain dead you are, and that is really being unfair to the brain dead people of this world. I really want to ignore your troll bait, but this is just too much.

Nice plagiarizing from hard core conservative/xenophobe/Obama birther/Evangelical Christian/failing journalist Joseph Farah's horrid article(s)...Got to give it to you, he IS Arab American, born in Jersey to Arab-American Parents (of Syrian and Lebanese decent...so his parents were probably Christian as well, Syrian and Lebanese Muslims tend to not get along very well, seeing as Syrians are mostly Sunni and the Lebanese are mostly Shi'ite, secular, or Christian, see even within the Arabs and Muslims, there are cultural differences that have the potential to spring different nations)...I guess all that mattered to you though, as far as reliability/integrity in a source when talking about this subject matter, was his ethnicity...You needed and A-rab, and goddammit you found one!..I'm glad he can relate to the Palestinian/Israeli struggle about as much as YOU can.....The fact that you felt the need to come from the last blog that Tom posted TO his newer blog, as some sort of continuation, to post further bullshit to try and "educate me," and that you chose to cut and paste this article, this one in particular to facilitate said "education" with, just shows us how clueless you are (and that you need to renew your Gamefly membership). Goodnight.

 
At 2:36 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ MO - Its only Medical "Care" if you actually get the CARE. If you can't afford it...pshh then it's just Medical (like what we called it in the Navy)....I think anonymouse meant to ask, "Who has the most advanced medical treatments?" or something to that extent...We have too much BS in our system to consider it the best Medical Care, and that is exactly why we are # 37...HOLLA!!!!

 
At 3:55 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Tom, you titled your post, The 2012 Clown Brigade.

You're referring to the conservative trolls who have invaded your blog in recent months, correct?

 
At 6:53 AM, Blogger Gypsy Bob said...

The 2012 Clown Brigade would be a hoot if we weren’t poised on the edge of a Double Dip Inflation in which the last dime will be rung from our pockets by the Uniparty Capitalist Elite. They control The Clowns and always get the last laugh…they chuckle while we writhe.

 
At 8:19 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amazing, absolutely amazing!
Mary, Mary you want sources you get sources. I provide sources that are documented but you instead of researching them for being the truth, you become lazy and attack the messenger. Why, because it detracts from what you have come to believe to be the truth. Face it little girl, you may just be wrong.
You tell me to at least Google for the facts before I post, I do and you have a problem with that, it wasn't the source you wanted.
I am not trying to educate you, I am trying to get you to be more liberal in your sources of history than you are now. Ask your professors about the newspaper articles I listed, challenge them and yourself to find out of they are true or just made up by the author whose good name you have assassinated.

MOE, seems like you agree that the US has the best health care on the planet, but you have to pay more to get the best. So do you want lower cost and less effective treatment?

For the record, I can not find any one heading north from the USA for medical treatment, can you?
Good one on the Hockey! I love hockey! I have skills "Napoleon Dynamite". Can I come into Canada to get free health care and free education? If so, I'll bring along a couple thousand of my illegal friends from the south of my border to enjoy the benefits of living in Canada. They love hockey too.

 
At 8:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Still waiting for the test results from the health car question I posted. Just 20 little matches to make to support the liberal concept that American has bad health care. Come on libs. surely you can figure this one out!

 
At 10:12 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

The liberal blog world has been rather quiet with regard to a certain congressman from New York. Mary, you profess a liking for chicken legs, thought you might have said something. Another big mouth POS biting the dust. Perhaps a republican can now win that seat as well.

 
At 12:16 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "...the author whose good name you have assassinated."
Joseph Farah? Really? Has the world gone mad?

"MOE, seems like you agree that the US has the best health care on the planet, but you have to pay more to get the best. So do you want lower cost and less effective treatment?"
Did you miss the "or 40% per capita more than Switzerland...to live less long"?

"For the record, I can not find any one heading north from the USA for medical treatment, can you?"
Did you miss the "...If you aren't, you go the other way across the border" from my same post?

"Still waiting for the test results from the health car question I posted."
"Highest 154/10,000...", which might not have been the answer you wanted, but it was the answer you got.

boltok "The liberal blog world has been rather quiet with regard to a certain congressman from New York."
Weiner's weiner? You do know who Breitbart is, right?

 
At 12:19 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ Trolltok - WTF? When have I EVER professed a LIKING for CHICKEN?? Have you seen Food, INC.??

Anyway...Nice to see that congress is focused on our country. Seriously, they are getting paid for this? MedicalCARE too? Way to facilitate the downfall of America, Social Networking and Main Stream Media! It's like a train wreck though...we just can't stop from viewing...

 
At 12:31 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ MO ~ if Breitbart is behind this Weiner's hard left leaning wiener attack, I really think that this will be his undoing (Breitbart's)...and that is very upsetting to me...(blatant sarcasm).....it's like when you give some one like him enough rope...they eventually hang themselves....

 
At 12:35 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

Who is Breitbart?

 
At 6:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MOE,
The quiz was not about the cost of medical care but the results of medical care.

Understand now? What country goes with which ranking?

 
At 6:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who is Mary?

 
At 7:16 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "MOE, The quiz was not about the cost of medical care but the results of medical care."
And my answer pointed out that, even using your limited stats and the assumption that the US is the best of those listed, it's spending considerably more for that improvement. In addition, I buttressed my argument with additional statistics that show "it's spending a third more per capita more than Canada for a 4% improvement" and "40% per capita more than Switzerland...to live less long".
If spending more to die younger is a success story, then feel free to bask in your success.
It's not "USA #1!". It's "USA #1!*", with the asterix leading to "* Note: USA 12th in lung cancer mortality for males, 16th in breast cancer.
In short, the US has premium pricing for pretty consistently middle-of-the-pack mortality rates.

 
At 8:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mary Mayhem said...
@ dumbass
"I'll take democratic socialism over authoritarian corporatism any day. The economic elite will continue to prosper anyway."

Over half of the economy is small business, your point doesn't hold much water. Uh actually...yes. Yes it does...I don't even understand what yours is.


Mary, half of the economy (i.e. GDP) is small business. Small business is NOT the "economic elite" and is NOT authoritarian corporatism. Does this make any sense for your "progressive" intelligence?

WHO IS THE DUMBASS?

 
At 8:44 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

And your point is?

 
At 8:46 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

MO,
You got that right. Greed Uber Alles!

To the person asking who the dumbass is:

I understand Mary draws more attention than I do, and that's fine. She's used to it and can easly handle all you guys with half her brain tied behind her back.

Actually, the Dumbass is most likely the one who completely misses the point, and the person who originally made it. There seems to be more than one such type lurking behind anonymity. I wasn't referring to small business. I was referring to the corporate Big Money boys who buy congressmen, senators and presidents. And I followed up with "In fact Republicans are as opposed to democracy as fascists and communists."


But I suppose that doesn't make any sense at all to the radically narrow mind of the Right Wing authoritarian follower.

So there's no need for me to indulge in any further response to anyone who needs to ask who the dumbass is. I'm pretty sure most of us already know.

 
At 1:20 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Excerpt from Greenspan's "The Age of Turbulence" addresses much of what I read on this board. Though he's referring to Latin American economies, I think it applies pretty broadly to a lot of what I hear. Words in brackets my editorial additions.

"Economic populism seek reform, not revolution. Its practitioners are clear about the specific grievances to be addressed, but its prescriptions are vague. Unlike capitalism or socialism, economic populism does not bring with a formalized analysis of the conditions necessary for the creation of wealth and rising standards of living. It is far from cerebral. It is more a shout of pain. Populist leaders offer unequivocal promises to remedy perceived injustices. Redistribution of land [wealth] and the prosecution of a corrupt elite who are allegedly stealing from the impoverished are common cure-alls; the leaders promise land [money, jobs], housing, and food for everyone. "Justice" is also coveted and is generally redistributional. In all of its various forms, of course, economic populism stands in opposition to free-market capitalism. But this stance is fundamentally wrong, and is based on a misconception of capitalism. I and many others, both inside and outside the region, would argue that economic populists have a better chance of achieving their goals through more capitalism, not less. Where there has been success - where living standards for the majority have increased - more open markets and increased private ownership have played a crucial part."

 
At 3:27 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ Harley - I don't think Obama is Mugabe/Chavez/et al.... and we aren't an LDC.

Greenspan was addressing the LDCs and LLDCs and how they need to become more like us with capitalism and free trade instead of socialism (so our cores can align to exploit peripheries), because if they don't, their economy will go to shizzle and their central banks (if they have one) will default leaving the (very, very friendly, if you know what I mean) people over at the IMF to bail them out... but not without excessive red tape like corporatizing, privatizing, castrating and hanging the US/EU...oooops...I mean IMF flag where the country's flag used to be....That is if the IMF even gives a shizzle...The IMF will bail them out if they see a potential for fiscal responsibility/economic growth/their own utilitarian gain...
As for the things that the populous wants...well, they just don't drop out of the sky without, you know, a lot of "John Galt style" hard work, child labor, outsourcing, maquiladoras and various other forms of LDC exploitation first.... OR.....(option 2)

We will pull an " el Presidente Allende" on your country's ass via the CIA,

either way, you will go Capitalist when we say you will!

...But...it's true, when an authoritarian dick-tater (or group of shitty policy makers...or corporate assholes) promises shit to his populous, that have been oppressed because of colonialism (or class warfare), and that same dick-tater (et al) doesn't have the resources,...and then starts up with the subsidies and handouts and crap like that to try and keep those promises.....and it causes the ENTIRE economy to default and collapse...that's bad! A symptom, though.

I don't think any of us are against capitalism...We are very much for the reform of our current capitalist system and international economic institutions, and for the regulation of capitalism...and very much against the neo-liberal exploitation of the LDC's and LLDC's by EDCs...

I personally think that it will take a damn Alien invasion, or something of that global magnitude, for everyone to pull their heads out their asses and realize we are one race on one planet, blinded by consumerism and ideology, and we are quickly reaching our max carrying capacity. Kinda puts things into perspective. Bye Earth, Hello Venus II.

 
At 7:14 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

Another story of liberal benevolence for the poor.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/chelsea_residents_protest_planned_xqkPre4UvChHc2zKjirsAP

 
At 8:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Answers to the health care quiz.

Ten cancer rates for the nations listed below. Mortality per 100,000.

1.133 a.CANADA
2.147 b.CHINA
3.142 c.CUBA
4.120 d.FRANCE
5.132 e.GERMANY
6.135 f.ITALY
7.154 h.JAPAN
8.131 i.Russia
9.143 g.UK
10.135 USA

Mortality rate per 100,000 for cardio

1.131 a.CANADA
2.279 b.CHINA
3.207 c.CUBA
4.123 d.FRANCE
5.199 e.GERMANY
6.155 f.ITALY
7.103 g.JAPAN
8.645 h.RUSSIA
9.175 i.UK
10.179 j.USA

Is it fair to say that the USA has the only none govt paid for health care system on this list? Would it be fair to say that the results listed may be caused more by life style that health care? IE: Japan's low rate of cardio deaths due to small % of red meat in their diet.
Would it be honest to say that in single source govt operated health care systems, while the bill to the patient may be less than in the USA, the differance is made up in the form of taxes of other people and sources?

Is it fair to think that in the USA people have a say in their health care choices? Can the same be said about the other 9 nations?

 
At 8:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I don't think any of us are against capitalism." Mary Mary.

I know you haven't been paying attention to what some have posted here to make that statement!

 
At 1:01 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Would it be honest to say that in single source govt operated health care systems, while the bill to the patient may be less than in the USA, the differance is made up in the form of taxes of other people and sources?"
That is the problem? You don't like paying for other people?
1. No man is an island
2. You are already paying for other people. Where do you think hospitals get the money to pay for all the uninsured/under-insured who use the ER, Hogwarts?

"Is it fair to think that in the USA people have a say in their health care choices?"
That all depends on what you consider "choice" to mean. Seriously.
Also, is it fair to say that Americans over 65 love themselves some Medicare and that those in the VA like it almost as much and that those on Medicaid like that almost as much?

 
At 1:08 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Wups. The end of "Would it be honest to say that in single source govt operated health care systems, while the bill to the patient may be less than in the USA, the differance is made up in the form of taxes of other people and sources?" got forgotten. By me.
To wit:
No. No it would not. Cost overall divided by people. "Per capita".
Socialized care turns out to be consistently cheaper. Single Payer, too (Medicare/VA).

 
At 1:17 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ MO and the people like both of my younger sisters...both have their college educations, both have certifications beyond college education which is supposed to get them a descent job...both supposedly went into a lucrative market (GIS mapping, city planning and the health care industy...pffff), both work full time (for barely above minimum wage), and neither one has health insurance...both qualified to get back on my dad's heath insurance when the new health bill passed, but my dad just got laid off, 6 months before was supposed to retire...so neither one has insurance now...and when they get sick or need medical care...they have no choice either...they can only wait until it gets bad enough (one has a pretty bad condition, you might have heard of it, it's called asthma, so she walks around humid-ass south Louisiana without her allergy meds, corto-steroids or rescue inhalers...she uses primatine mist which will be taken off the shelves as of Dec 31 because it kills people) and take it to the ER....which we all pay for....But...neither one qualifies for any gov't program...go figure....

 
At 1:20 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

IF ONLY i could take her to the VA with me and let them treat her, since I never use my benefits anymore..

 
At 3:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"That is the problem? You don't like paying for other people."
MOE as always you are dead on and since "no man is an island," why don't you pay for my health care insurance?
Lead with your wallet, not your mouth.
And since "no man is an island" can I have more of Canada's oil, but at a much lower than world market cost?
Lead by example, give me the stuff you earned, free or at least cheap. Why should I have to work as hard as you have had to to get where you are?
Let's talk about more sharing, Mary Mary, how's school going for you? As smart as you say you and as hard as you work, your grades must be very good! I am, by your own post's, not as smart as you are and really cant work as hard as you do, so can I have 33% of your GPA and 33% of your credits earned to date?
I beleive you served in the Navy, if so you may be getting VA benefits? I didn't serve, but since and you have something I need can I have 33% of your VA benefits?

After all "no man is an island".

BTW MOE, for the last time my health care quiz was NOT about the cost but if you would take the time to read it you will see it was about the results of the health care offered by 10 countries, not the cost, got it?

 
At 5:45 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ anonymous - Everyone has a right to healthcare...everyone has the right to obtain an education-- no one has the right to sit on their ass and have some one else go to school for them while they do nothing but take credit for it...your analogy is ridiculous...try again...

If they'd let me, I'd put everyone in the US on my VA benefits...oh wait we tried...it was the single payer health care plan.....

As for the other benefits? My GI Bill? I paid for that. My post 9/11 GI Bill, I don't pay for, but I think it's safe to say I earned it and I'll keep it to myself, even though Congress is making it hard...Geez Trolloholics Anonymous...even fascist dictatorships honor their militaries with certain perks.

 
At 7:46 PM, Anonymous Representative Andrew Weiner said...

Mary Mayhem,

I have seen your pictures on The Rant. Could you post your email address so that I can send you a picture?

Your progressive friend who fights for social and economic justice,
Andrew

 
At 8:35 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "MOE as always you are dead on and since 'no man is an island,' why don't you pay for my health care insurance?"
Why don't you reform your healthcare system?

"Lead with your wallet, not your mouth."
I do lead with my wallet. Every year I pay my taxes, with very little complaint. Those taxes, among other things, pay for whatevercountryitisthatIamin's socialized healthcare.

"Why should I have to work as hard as you have had to to get where you are?"
Obviously. Because only lazy people get cancer. You've torn the very walls of reality asunder.

"BTW MOE, for the last time my health care quiz was NOT about the cost but if you would take the time to read it you will see it was about the results of the health care offered by 10 countries, not the cost, got it?"
Congratulations. You continue to make my point for me:
"Ten cancer rates for the nations listed below. Mortality per 100,000.
1.133 a.CANADA
...
10.135 USA"
Similar outcome, but one spends considerably less per capita.
"Mortality rate per 100,000 for cardio
1.131 a.CANADA
...
10.179 j.USA"
Worse outcome for the US, with similar diets (we both loves us our Whoppers).

 
At 8:42 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ Little Conservative Twitter Trolls - Don't you mean "so I can make it look like I am sending you a picture (harassment) of "married" Congressman Weiner (defamation), with the intent of creating a scandal and disrupting congress (cyberterrorism)?

No. No you many not.

 
At 9:59 PM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Notice how Weiner's weiner is on everyone's lips* instead of Clarence Thomas' conflict of interest?



* It's okay to giggle.

 
At 12:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Everyone has a right to health care...everyone has the right to obtain an education" Really, find these rights in the US Constitution for me please. They are not there!

"Every year I pay my taxes, with very little complaint." Good for you MOE,so do I, but now I want you to pay more taxes and pick up my tab, after all no man is an island. Whats the matter MOE?
Don't you like paying for other people's health care?

"Why should I have to work as hard as you have had to to get where you are?"
Obviously. Because only lazy people get cancer. You've torn the very walls of reality asunder. @ MOE.

Never said lazy people get get cancer, that's something you just made up to avoid the beating your taking on this issue of taking care of me with your money.

MOE: Health care quiz explain the results for Cuba and the UK if it's all about the cost? Its the service you get not the price you pay.
MOE, when is Canada going to pass laws like we have in the USA setting up sanctuary cities where I can live as an illegal as it is done in the USA? I want to get free health care for the rest of my life in Canada, can I do it there like it is done here by illegals?
Remember, no man is an island, so stop being so greedy Canada, open your borders to we conservatives who have seen the light and want single payer health care, I am worn to a nub from working all my life.

Mary Mary "no one has the right to sit on their ass and have some one else go to school for them while they do nothing but take credit for it...your analogy is ridiculous...try again..."
Gee I'm not sitting on my ass, Ive worked hard all my life, paid high taxes all my life but I am not as smart as you are Mary Mary, so do get a better job and not have to works so hard I need a 3rd of your GPA..to level the playing field if you will, kind of like wealth redistribution but we will call grade redistribution. If one is ok, what is wrong with the other?

 
At 1:22 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ Troll "Everyone has a right to health care...everyone has the right to obtain an education" Really, find these rights in the US Constitution for me please. They are not there! They are called human rights. You have the right to wipe your ass, be it with toilet paper, leaf, papyrus, or hand. Do we need to amend the constitution and put that in there as well?

 
At 1:44 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Good for you MOE,so do I, but now I want you to pay more taxes and pick up my tab, after all no man is an island. Whats the matter MOE? Don't you like paying for other people's health care?"
I do pay for other people's healthcare. Other people in my country. In my country's healthcare system. If you were here in whereveritisIam, I would in fact be paying for your healthcare. And you'd be paying for mine.
And together we wouldn't be paying all that much more than one average person in the US pays now.

"Never said lazy people get get cancer, that's something you just made up to avoid the beating your taking on this issue of taking care of me with your money."
I'm sorry. I thought you'd realized by now that I'm pretty much just making fun of you. While still citing facts. My talents are legion.

"MOE: Health care quiz explain the results for Cuba and the UK if it's all about the cost? Its the service you get not the price you pay."
It's both. You're paying more for not proportionately better results. A lot more.

"MOE, when is Canada going to pass laws like we have in the USA setting up sanctuary cities where I can live as an illegal as it is done in the USA?"
What does that have to do with healthcare? Becoming Canadian isn't all that hard. You can apply as a skilled worker or a refugee (it helps if your home country plans to harm you should you be sent back).

"I want to get free health care for the rest of my life in Canada, can I do it there like it is done here by illegals?"
Illegals in the US, as far as I'm aware, generally only get ER care, where they do the legal minimum and kick you out on your ass. The Emergency Room is better for bullet wounds than it is for non-emergency care. Hence the name.

"Remember, no man is an island, so stop being so greedy Canada, open your borders to we conservatives who have seen the light and want single payer health care…"
"In 2001, 250,640 people immigrated to Canada, relative to a total population of 30,007,094 people per the 2001 Census. On a compounded basis, that immigration rate represents 8.7% population growth over 10 years, or 23.1% over 25 years (or 6.9 million people). Since 2001, immigration has ranged between 221,352 and 262,236 immigrants per annum".

"...I am worn to a nub from working all my life."
No you aren't. You're wasting your days arguing in bad faith on the internet. If someone deserves a vacation, it's your mother.

 
At 2:26 AM, Blogger Dearest Friend said...

No scaring me with the 3 Bushes (how do you write that? Bushes? Bushs? Just wonderin'!) Maybe that's why I had that bizarre dream about three scary older men that I locked in a room of my old house before calling 911 because they scared me so bad...threatened to do awful things! I am honestly not making this up. I woke up before I picked up the telephone to dial 911 - how Hitchcockian.

So now let me get it straight, Paul Rever was protecting the 2nd amendment while warning the British of...what? And he did it by ringing bells and blowing whistles, apparently. That poor horse of Mr. Revere must've had to have serious downtime after that ride.

Listen, my children, and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere,
On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-Five;
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year.

Maybe someone needs to at least read a little Longfellow!

No more Bushes in or around the White House please! The Republican party - who really need to rename themselves so Lincoln can rest in peace and no longer have his name attached to those dunces. Hell, he lived at a time when he could actually SPEAK to veterans of the Revolution and knew a lot about what happened there.

The ghosts of the great Massachusetts women like Abigail Adams, Mercy Otis Warren and their revolutionary 'sisters' should take turns slapping some sense into Sarah's empty head.

 
At 3:05 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ DF...Her wig would fly off. The Paul Revere page on Wikipedia is protected due to "excessive vandalism," so I can't go in and add anything snarky to the "myths and legends" section like I did to the Concord, NH Wikipedia page's History section. Curses! Ok... Summer break over. Back to school for Mary Mayhem...later Rant.

 
At 10:38 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, in reply to a comment that Mary made about everyone having a right to health care, you said:

"Really, find these rights in the US Constitution for me please. They are not there!"

So, let me get this straight -- if it's not in the original framework of the U.S. Constitution, as written in 1789, then it's "unconstitutional"?

(A word to the wise: Be careful where you walk, because you may step in it.)

 
At 10:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My talents are legion"@ MOE, in your own mind.

 
At 11:26 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Illegals in the US, as far as I'm aware, generally only get ER care, where they do the legal minimum and kick you out on your ass. The Emergency Room is better for bullet wounds than it is for non-emergency care. Hence the name."

MOE
What's it called in Canada, so when my buddies and I move to one of the many sanctuary cities in Canada, we will know what to ask for?
Cant wait,moving to a country where Health Care is by law a RIGHT, even if I don't belong there and cant pay one Canadian penny for it.
How many million more people can you accept MOE before the Canadian health and education system becomes over loaded and breaks down?

BTW I'm guessing you have never been to a ER in the USA. The ER's where I lived in the inner city were not filled with bullet repair needing residents. Because the ER was free, most there were not life threating isses but as simple as a cought to a bloddy nose to yes wounds, from gun shots to falling down steps to closing a door on a finger. Me thinks you were generalizing just bit there MOE and I'm sure it was done in good fun.

JG said "So, let me get this straight -- if it's not in the original framework of the U.S. Constitution, as written in 1789, then it's "unconstitutional"?

Yup JG that is exactly what I wrote and that is exactly what the Constitution was set up to do. To allow the STATES to provide for their citizens not the federal govt.
Unless amended by Congress at this point in history there is no provision in the Constitution where the RIGHT for health care is listed.
The fact is the Constitution was written to limit what is now called the Federal government's impact on the citizens and the states who make up the USA. It was not written to expand the power of the Federal Govt. But to limit it!
Example: MASS has single payer health care, the merits of which are not the issue here. Federal Govt can not force the other 49 states to enact same law. Which allows the citizens the FREEDOM to express their favor or disfavor of the law by either moving to or from Mass.
When the Federal Govt forces all states to have a government provided health care system, it could be argued that such requirement is a violation of the freedom of choice, IE to get way from or get to the service.

Interestingly with the issues of wavers to select groups, the case is easily made that "OBAMA CARE" is NOT constitutional. Reason, why do some groups get wavers and others do not? How is that equal treatment for all. Where in the Constitution are the powers of the Federal Government given to
enforce a law on just some groups of citizens and not others regarding health care? What would I and those who share my zip code have to do the be given a waiver?
MOVE TO CANADA? All right dude, here we come!!!

 
At 11:43 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

Here is a text of a letter I received two years ago from my brother Jeff. He asked me to forward it to the American people:

"As an American who has been living in Europe for most of the last 20 years, one who has visited doctors numerous times in four different countries, whose two children were brought into this world in European hospitals (France and England), who has himself spent a week in a public British hospital, and who underwent an operation in a private British clinic, I think I can say a thing or two about health care in Europe.

"Our out of pocket expenses for the births? Zero. Even though in France my wife spent 5 days in the hospital after the birth of our first daughter, which is standard by the way.

"During the three years we lived in England, we never once paid for medicine for our children. Children get drugs for free in the UK. Visits to the GP are free for everybody.

"My expenses for the week in the NHS hospital? Zero.

"The cost of the operation in the private clinic? Zero, it was covered by my work insurance, as was the post-op physical therapy I needed.

"In Western Europe you would never be forced to sell your home in order to pay for your medical bills, as happens all too often in America when catastrophic illness strikes and the insurance company decides that your condition was 'pre-existing'.

"The quality of the care? Mostly good. French hospitals are excellent, even the food is decent. The food at the NHS hospital was beyond awful, but then again most English food is pretty bad (though they do have great Indian food). At night, they were understaffed, but I am guessing that, apart from that place where Dr. House works, most American hospitals are understaffed at night, too.

"In short, in the US, you pay more, get less, and die younger than we do in Europe. What part of that don't you understand?

"My fellow Americans, you have nothing to fear except those who would use fear to keep you enslaved to the myth of the might of the American health care system."

Jeff Degan


Something to think about.

 
At 11:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MOVE OVER MOE, I'M MOVING ON UP!

Today, very quietly, the Treasury released its latest refunding announcement, in which it disclosed it would issue another $66 billion in 3, 10 and 30 Year notes next week. The irony of course is that the US is and continues to be at its debt ceiling limit (or just $25 million short of it), at a total of $14,293,975 million. Furthermore, as was also disclosed by the Treasury, this gross issuance will also be the net amount added in marketable debt, as upon settlement on June 15, there will be no redemptions of maturing bonds. Which simply means that the continued "disinvesting" (which is merely a polite word for plundering) from intragovernmental debt, also known as retirement accounts, is about to kick into high gear. As a reminder, the only solution that Geithner currently has to run the government, at least until August 2 when even this runs out, is to slowly drain the debt in non-marketable accounts, in the form of Suspension of G-Fund and ESF reinvestments, as well as the Redemption and suspension of of CSRDF Investments, measure which when combined will provide a short-term buffer of $232 billion. Yet for all practical purposes, what is happening is that retirement accounts are now being seriously plundered, and if the unthinkable were to happen, and the debt ceiling would not rise, not only would the US be in technical default, but various retirement funds, which already are underfunded, would find themselves even more severely in the Red. As the chart below shows, the total amount of intragovernmental debt currently outstanding, has dropped to levels last seen in early April, even as total debt has continued its steadfast move higher. The scary thing is that by the time August 2 rolls around, the current total of $4.608 trillion in various Trust Funds, will drop to well about $4.4 trillion, or an implicit 6% underfunding in 2 months merely to keep the bloated government operating for a few more months.

 
At 12:48 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "BTW I'm guessing you have never been to a ER in the USA. The ER's where I lived in the inner city were not filled with bullet repair needing residents. Because the ER was free, most there were not life threating isses but as simple as a cought to a bloddy nose to yes wounds, from gun shots to falling down steps to closing a door on a finger. Me thinks you were generalizing just bit there MOE and I'm sure it was done in good fun."
Are you a goldfish? Did I not say "...the most frequent users of Emergency Rooms...are from the uninsured"?

"The fact is the Constitution was written to limit what is now called the Federal government's impact on the citizens and the states who make up the USA. It was not written to expand the power of the Federal Govt. But to limit it!"
The Constitution expanded federal powers. If they wanted a weak federal gov't, they would've written something else, like "Articles of Confederation", and the papers promoting it would've been the Anti-Federalist Papers.

"Reason, why do some groups get wavers and others do not?"
You'll find that the waivers fall in to three groups:
1. Those like the SEIU (which has amusingly become somewhat of a rightwing bogeyman) who in part represent low wage groups (McWorkers) that don't work enough hours to get coverage.
2. States that have better coverage (the ACA sets a minimum standard, from which the states can improve. Yes, the states don't have to do "Obamacare". All they need is something better, instead)
3. Connected corporations. Because it's the motherfuckin' USA, where any common corporate citizen can pull himself up by his bootstraps, out of the gutter and on to Main Street, and ask his congressman for a little help from Uncle Sam in exchange for a little extra put back in to the congressman's war chest. (see GE, another amusing rightwing bogeyman)

 
At 2:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MOE, you also said,
"The Emergency Room is better for bullet wounds than it is for non-emergency care. Hence the name."

"The Constitution expanded federal powers." You are wrong, it was written to define and limit the powers of central (federal) government. Read it sometime.

SEIU,,you mean the Thugs united for socialism? Isn't it interesting that the majority of non Govt jobs created in May were by McDonald's. And isn't it interesting they have been granted a waiver from OBAMA CARE? Just wondering how you view that in light of the promises made by current President when running for office in '08 to create "real jobs" not just burger flipping jobs.
MOE,,I'm not kidding now. I'm looking into a way of creating an "underground railroad" from the USA's southern boarder to it's northern border for those who want to access to Canada's health care system. It sounds just to wonderful to not take advantage of.
Oh, and by the way "Socialized care turns out to be consistently cheaper. Single Payer, too."
Then why do all the govt run medical services need more money to operate each year? Show me a budget where their request is less from the previous year. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN!

Is the Canadian govt spending less per person or more for the service? Is the Canadian citizen paying more in taxes since the government take over of their Health care?

MOVING ON UP MOE, TO THE ROOM AT THE TOP. GONNA GET A PIECE OF THAT CANADIAN PIE!!!

 
At 5:05 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous 'The Constitution expanded federal powers.' You are wrong, it was written to define and limit the powers of central (federal) government. Read it sometime."
Try reading what I said for comprehension. Then argue against that.

"SEIU,,you mean the Thugs united for socialism?"
See what I mean about "rightwing bogeyman"?
...
Testing: SOROS!!!
Results: test sucessful.
...

"And isn't it interesting they have been granted a waiver from OBAMA CARE?"
Which I literally just covered. If you aren't going to pay attention, I see precious little reason to continue.

"Then why do all the govt run medical services need more money to operate each year?"
Because healthcare in general is going up faster than inflation. The good news is that Medicare is going up slower than the rest.

"Is the Canadian govt spending less per person or more for the service? Is the Canadian citizen paying more in taxes since the government take over of their Health care?"
Now you're just being ridiculous. Every year we print money that's a little bigger.

 
At 6:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If you aren't going to pay attention, I see precious little reason to continue." Is the Canadian govt spending less per person or more for the service? Is the Canadian citizen paying more in taxes since the government take over of their Health care?"
Now you're just being ridiculous. Every year we print money that's a little bigger."
What is ridiculous is MOE a Canadian thinking they are funny.

Moving on UP, MOE and bringing lots of skilled workers with me. Gotta have some of that free Canadian health care pie.

 
At 9:34 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous "Is the Canadian govt spending less per person or more for the service? Is the Canadian citizen paying more in taxes since the government take over of their Health care?"
Sure. I fail to see how your tu quoque isn't any less of a logical fallacy, though.

"What is ridiculous is MOE a Canadian thinking they are funny."
Oh, you.

"Moving on UP, MOE and bringing lots of skilled workers with me. Gotta have some of that free Canadian health care pie."
Enjoy.

 
At 10:42 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you replied to my question about the Constitution, as originally written in 1789, with:

"Yup JG that is exactly what I wrote and that is exactly what the Constitution was set up to do. To allow the STATES to provide for their citizens not the federal govt."

C'mon, Anonymous, I warned you not to step in it...and still you did. Amendment XIII (the abolition of slavery) was not included in the Constitution originally; nor was Amendment XIV (civil rights). These effectively took the power from the states and placed it with the federal government. Are you saying this is wrong? And what about Amendment XIX (women's suffrage)? This wasn't in the original document either. Is this also unconstitutional?

Additionally, Article I, Section 8, follows: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare [bold type my own] of the United States..."

This is where the government derives the power to implement social programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) that conservatives like yourself hate so much. Well, hate 'em all you like -- they're legal, and more importantly, they're the right thing to do.

 
At 10:58 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous, you stated at 11:46 a.m.:

"As the chart below shows..."

What chart? Did you forget to include the chart?

Anonymous, do you ever bother to reread what you write? Apparently not. Also, when citing another person's work, it's proper (not to mention, legally correct) to cite your source and give credit. In other words, stop stealing other people's work and claiming it as your own. (Oh, I forgot, you're a conservative. That's what you do best.)

 
At 2:43 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

Bingo JG. The amendments and constitution are just postcriptive rights. They inserted the common welfare clause because prescriptive rights are impossible to tally up and quantify in a document. The drafters were most likely thinking, in good faith, that universal human rights wouldn't be a debatable or dividing issue amongst us. In fact, they were probably thinking that this very attitude is what separated our nation from British opression, the old world, and gave us the right to break free, yet here we are, centuries later, and yes, basic human rights are now debatable and dividing us, not only globally, which is to be expected, but within our own state. Our four fathers are seizing in their graves.

 
At 2:48 AM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

*proscriptive not postscriptive

 
At 9:05 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Thank you, Tom, and please thank your brother. His analysis and experience of the western European heath care system, as compared to that which we endure in this country, coincides exactly with what friends in Germany, France, and Norway have told me.

But Anonymous, I'll concede my disapproval of the health care reform bill as approved by Congress last year. Like you, I'm against it -- but for entirely different reasons. Whereas you're against it, undoubtedly because it originated from a democratic president (because I'm positive you have absolutely no clue what the bill contains), I disapprove of it due to its individual mandate that forces citizens to purchase private insurance.

It's the epitome of the commingling of state and corporate power to protect private interests. That, my simple-minded friend, is the tragic essence of corporatism.

 
At 9:24 AM, Blogger Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

"Fascism should more properly be called 'Corporatism' because it is the total merging of corporate and state power."

-Benito Mussolini

Something to think about this merry Sunday morn.

 
At 2:21 PM, Anonymous boltok said...

TD, does JD have any thoughts on rationing??? Or does rationing not exist if it did not affect him?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/251988.stm

 
At 5:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

boltok, the real question is does JG have any thoughts at all?

 
At 5:30 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Boltok, try actually reading a page that you link:
"The media hype over the anti-impotence drug Viagra forced the issue out into the open.
The government has restricted the circumstances in which people will be prescribed the drug."

"One of the most controversial rows over rationing concerns beta interferon, a treatment for multiple sclerosis.
The full effectiveness of the drug has yet to be established, and because it is very costly - approximately £10,000 per patient per year - some health authorities are reluctant to allow doctors to prescribe it."

"There are two studies that show the drug extends a patient's life by a year, but this is not enough evidence to justify prescribing it for everyone with ovarian cancer." (emphasis mine)

But then, you aren't actually here to argue in good faith, are you?

Lastly, private healthcare has rationing too. They won't pay for unproven treatments either. And if it's expensive, see "rescission".

 
At 7:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bet this would NEVER happen in Canada! Bet the homeless would be given free health care as well. Bet there are loads of sanctuary cities for the homeless and the illegals who are in Canada. In fact I would be surprised if there were any homeless in Canada, since it is the most wonderful place in the world to live.

By Susan Jacobson, Orlando Sentinel
(JG, note writer of article given, so what are you gonna bitch about this time?)

"Members of Orlando Food Not Bombs were arrested Wednesday when police said they violated a city ordinance by feeding the homeless in Lake Eola Park.

Jessica Cross, 24, Benjamin Markeson, 49, and Jonathan "Keith" McHenry, 54, were arrested at 6:10 p.m. on a charge of violating the ordinance restricting group feedings in public parks. McHenry is a co-founder of the international Food Not Bombs movement, which began in the early 1980s.

The group lost a court battle in April, clearing the way for the city to enforce the ordinance. It requires groups to obtain a permit and limits each group to two permits per year for each park within a 2-mile radius of City Hall.

Arrest papers state that Cross, Markeson and McHenry helped feed 40 people Wednesday night. The ordinance applies to feedings of more than 25 people.

"They intentionally violated the statute," said Lt. Barbara Jones, an Orlando police spokeswoman.


Police waited until everyone was served to make the arrests, said Douglas Coleman, speaking for Orlando Food Not Bombs.

"They basically carted them off to jail for feeding hungry people," said Coleman, who was not present. "For them to regulate a time and place for free speech and to share food, that is unacceptable."

Orlando Food Not Bombs has been feeding the homeless breakfast on Mondays for several years and dinner on Wednesdays for five years.

Police had not enforced the ordinance while the court battle continued. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta ruled that city rules regulating how often large groups of people can be fed in a park do not violate the Constitution.

The penalty for violating Orlando's ordinance is 60 days in jail, a $500 fine or both.

Arrest documents state that Orlando Food Not Bombs received permits and fed more than 25 homeless people at Lake Eola Park on May 18 and 23. Coleman said the group rejected the permits.

On May 25, Orlando Food Not Bombs illegally fed a large group of homeless people, the police report states. The group on its website called for members to show up that day and defy the city ordinance, according to the report.

Officers said they found a press release on Markeson when they arrested him stating that group members planned to defy the ordinance Wednesday.

Bail was set at $250 for each person arrested. Cross and Markeson were released from jail early

Thursday. McHenry wants to stay in jail and let the legal process take its course, Coleman said."

 
At 7:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

£10,000 what is this in dollars?
Canadian,US and Australian?

 
At 7:39 PM, Blogger Modusoperandi said...

Anonymous, here, let me google that for you.

 
At 8:06 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

[LOL] That's great, Modusoperandi!

Here's your next assignment. Can you make them think? If you can pull that off, my hat's off to ya'!

 
At 8:28 PM, Blogger Mary Mayhem said...

@ Shitstain - What was your convoluted motive behind posting this article? Are you proud that this happens in the US? It sounds like you are!
If there is a place where this kind of thing doesn't happen, then we (the US) need to be as much like "that place" as possible. If "that place" happens to be Canada, so be it! If we can't make this happen, well then in the words of Liz Lemon, "I want to go to there!"

 
At 9:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

what do we want free stuff, when do we want now!

 
At 3:47 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Damn dirty American liberals want their healthcare for free. Just like those filthy foreigners in Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the UK get their healthcare. For free. Or $3,357, $3,895, $3,588, $3,837, $2,454, $2,992 per capita, respectively.
But "numbers" are so passe; liberal tricks ginned up in a vain attempt to force reality to conform with itself. Especially since the US spends $7,290 per person.
And also that is rising faster than the others. Ignore that, too.
But don't ever forget that a ton ("eh tonne", in Canadish) of Canadians run across the border for US healthcare. A whole 0.5%! Ignore that most of those are either Snowbirds (retired Canadians who for some reason have lost their love for, and immunity to, winter) and a bunch were travellers who were injured, leaving 0.11% who actually went to the US for a medical procedure.

 
At 3:48 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

Wups. That should be "for a whole 0.5% of medical procedures..."

 
At 5:29 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

wups is just the start of it.

 
At 6:35 AM, Anonymous MO is an Idiot said...

Healthcare rationing in England.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/7908742/Axe-falls-on-NHS-services.html

 
At 7:08 AM, Anonymous Modusoperandi said...

News Flash: Deficit Hawks' "Austerity Programs" Disproportionately Effect the Poor, the Elderly and the Sick

 
At 2:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

World ends tomorrow at noon
minorities, women and childen effected most

 
At 8:56 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Liberalism: Ideas so good they have to be mandated!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home