Sunday, August 12, 2012

Mediscare 2012

Paul Ryan is an excellent choice for VP. To steal from Hairy Reid and Palooka Joe Biden, Ryan is clean and articulate, light-skinned, and he speaks "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."  What more could we ask for?

Romney made a serious choice and I commend him for now making this election a national referendum on our nation's future. Do we continue down the progressive path of ruin, ending up as the Argentina of the north?  Or do we face facts and begin dismantling the creaking, fiscally-unsustainable statist model?

From Paul Ryan's speech:
We won't replace our founding principles...we will reapply them!
We will honor you, our fellow citizens, by giving you the right and opportunity to make the choice:
What kind of country do we want to have?
What kind of people do we want to be?
I thank Mitt Romney for putting the all-important questions front and center. Finally, American citizens will be forced to make a choice.

Ryan's Medicare Problem

Trouble lurks, though. Paul Ryan could scare away older voters and moderates with his dangerous meddling with medicare. Here's some analysis from the Medicare Chief Actuary:
* In his analysis accompanying the recently released Annual Report of the Medicare Board of Trustees, Richard Foster, Medicare's chief actuary, noted that Medicare payment rates for doctors and hospitals serving seniors will be cut by 30% over the next three years
* ... by 2019 Medicare payment rates will be lower than under Medicaid. Mr. Foster notes that by the end of the 75-year projection period in the Annual Medicare Trustees Report, Medicare payment rates will be one-third of what will be paid by private insurance, and only half of what is paid by Medicaid.
* (The plan) cuts $818 billion from Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) from 2014-2023, the first 10 years of its full implementation, and $3.2 trillion over the first 20 years, 2014-2033. Adding in [...] cuts for Medicare Part B (physicians fees and other services) brings the total cut to $1.05 trillion over the first 10 years and $4.95 trillion over the first 20 years.
Slashing $5 trillion from medicare over 20 years!  That's unconscionable!  Anyone proposing such draconian cuts should be run off the national stage and declared unfit for anything higher than municipal dog catcher.

Ryan's problem?  No.  Obama's problem.  The above projections, stated by Medicare's chief actuary, are about Obamacare, not Paul Ryan's common sense plan.

Source:  Forbes - Ferrara

More Links:


68 comments:

Always On Watch said...

Paul Ryan could scare away older voters and moderates with his dangerous meddling with medicare.

To a certain extent, he will.

However, seniors are already dealing with the reductions in Medicare benefits and all the damn red tape, the partial effects of which took place on January 1, 2012, as part of ObamaCare.

LD Jackson said...

Paul Ryan will be able to articulate the differences between his plan and Obamacare. He has done it many times and he is able to do it again.

On another note, I can't wait to see him school poor Joe Biden in a debate. A fair fight, it will not be.

Z said...

Well, brilliant YOU with that "it's Obamacare" surprise. GOOD JOB.

and thanks for quoting my fave part of the first speech "We won't replace our founding principles...we will reapply them!"
That really says it ALL and says it so well. And I hope he says it again and again.

I think the older Medicare people are smart enough to hear Ryan's explanation and see what he's trying to do. Plus, most of them care about their grandchildren's future.
ANd, leave us not forget: Paul Ryan now will be heard. Even our Pravda media won't be misinterpreting or mischaracterizing in the purposeful misquoting, etc...he's VP CANDIDATE: they have to show tape, they have to quote correctly.

GOOD STUFF>

conservativesonfire said...

This is my reaction to Romney's choice of Ryan. You nay have seen this commment at other sites.

Romney just went up a notch in my book. This the type of decission I would expect from a good corporate He picked a man that is smart, knowledgeable, and will be an effective contributor to the executive team. They complement each other in many ways. Romney is a big picture gut and Ryan is a detail guy. Romney is a bit of an elitest and Ryan is not. Ryan has been in Congress since 1999. He has no home or even an apartment in DC. He sleeps on a cot in his office and after the last vote on Thursday each week he heads home where his pick-up truck is parked at the airport waiting for him. men are devoted family men. Romney might have picked someone who would havebeen more helpful in the campaign to get himself elected; but he picked someone who will be a great asset if he is elected. Neither man is as bold as I would like them to be on policy; but, all in all I think we have a pretty good teaam.

Always On Watch said...

Z said: Paul Ryan now will be heard.

I agree.

The msm will not be able to ignore him now, nor to quote him as often out of context.

"Fasten your seat belts. It's going to a bumpy night," night being the ride from now till Election Day -- and possibly beyond as well.

Ducky's here said...

The guy made his staff read Atlas Shrugged.

Now beyond the sheer impossibility of completing that crap the act of requiring it indicates at least latent if not manifest sadomasochism.

So Mr. Rand may energize the fringe to find Governor Olympics more palatable but he's going to turn off the normals.

Ducky's here said...

... of course having a VP that reminds the fringe about everything they hate about Mittens might be counterproductive.

If it forces Mittens to be more strident it will further alienate the normals.

Ducky's here said...

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.

One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.

The other, of course, involves orcs."

- Paul Krugman

Shaw Kenawe said...

It'll be interesting to hear Ryan defend privatizing social security after more Americans learn he paid for his college years through social security benefits.

Then there's the very curious move by Romney to distance himself from Ryan's budget [which Romney's supported--"It's marvelous} as soon as he choose the guy for veep.

That particular flip-flop by Willard will not work.

The Obama campaign was hoping Willard would choose Ryan.

He's a better target.

Forced reading of an execrable novel? Oy.

Silverfiddle said...

Hee hee hee! It's got the lefties going already!

Shaw Kenawe said...

"Congressman Ryan has spent most of his adult life as a proud and fervent acolyte of Ayn Rand.

The atheist, pro-abortion-on-demand-through-the-ninth-month Ayn Rand.

The Ayn Rand who wove her deep contempt for religion and for people of faith into everything she ever wrote.

That Ayn Rand."

And THAT Paul Ryan. Or will he pull a Romney on his deeply held Randian beliefs?

SF: "Hee hee hee! It's got the lefties going already!"

Yes. It has. Now go read the electoral college count as of today, then tell us all how Ryan will help Romney win.

Silverfiddle said...

Any Rand vs Saul Alinsky... Hmmm...

Like a good lib, Shaw, you're talking horseraces and team sport politics, we're talking principles.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Apparently, Romney's AND Ryan's principles are fungible.

Rational Nation USA said...

Shaw, just curious, how much Rand have you actually read?

Joe Conservative said...

...whereas Obama's are not???

Rational Nation USA said...

Obie, master of illusions.

Sam Huntington said...

One word to describe the left in the scant hours following Romney’s announcement of his VP pick, is “bonkers.” There is no greater proof of this than Shaw’s spraying everyone with spittle.

Silverfiddle said...

Sam and Joe, Indeed.

A more burning question is how Obama can gut medicare, robbing it of $5 Trillion and have all the lefties bowing down to him, but Paul Ryan rolls out a plan similar to the sensible Simpson-Bowles report, and he's pushing grannies off of cliffs.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Huntington calls citing Ryan's worship of Ayn Rand and her philosophy, which includes embracing atheism and abortion up to 9 months, "spittle."

Minutes after making Ryan his veep, Romney disowns Ryan's budget, after, of course, endorsing it several times, even calling it "marvelous."

That's "spittle," in Huntington's world.

No, dude. It's the truth.

Romney owns Ryan and all his pretty little Randian worshippers.

Silverfiddle said...

If anyone thinks this election will turn upon libertarian novels, they're crazy.

But we are talking liberals here...

Ignore the substance and go for the smear. Forward! Into the abyss with Comandante Zero!

Shaw Kenawe said...

"Ignore the substance and go for the smear."

Smear?

Ryan himself has stated that Ayn Rand's writings and philosophy shaped his politics more than anything in his life.

Rand is a perfectly legitimate subject to examine if Ryan himself has stated she is his heroine in philosophy and political thought.

If you call that a "smear" then you must think Rand's influence on Ryan is something shameful and scandalous.

Mustang said...

I’m trying to understand why anyone would come to a conservative blog, insult the blog owner, ridicule readers/commenter’s, and then imagine they have somehow persuaded us to accept the leftist view of America.

Silverfiddle said...

Mustang: Leftwingers can't win on the issues and substance, so they launch mudball fusillades.

Of course he's read Ayn Rand! He's also read the Bible. Go make something of that. And don't insult us with the Catholic nuns and bishops hate his plan canard. Who cares? They're clergy, not God.

And if you're going to bring them up, then you must agree with them on contraception and Obamacare, right?

So cut the crap and talk about the issues. Should we reelect someone who will gut medicare of $5 trillion?

Answer me that.

Z said...

There's a difficulty for liberals to focus. Our kids in public schools learn now that George Washington had slaves with the implication nothing he did was worth anything. We've all seen that in the comments we get from liberals.
When we were children, we learned he had slaves and the context of the situation. Teachers didn't teach us to write someone off when so much good outdid the bad.

Robt Byrd was a Klan recruiter for years, but he's a champion of the Left. George Washington's now one of those Founding Fathers who represent all that's bad in America?

We're going to start insulting young men to whom Social Security was available because their father died when they were 15 and somehow suggest he doesn't deserve the vice presidency for that? WOW

We'll now be attacking what he READS because he's so squeaky clean there isn't anything else? REALLY?
Since when did AYn Rand become the evil one because lefties don't agree? amazing.

Go back to reading your copy of DREAMS OF MY FATHER, where your hero tells us how he picked radicals as friends. That's the president we've got today. Congratulations.

Oh, but maybe they're not REALLY RADICAL because YOU don't think they are... right? :-)

Rational Nation USA said...

Hear, Heat!! Well said Z.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Z,

You did a magnificent job of contradicting yourself in your last 5 paragraphs and made my point. Brava, and thanks.

Always On Watch said...

Duck,
The guy made his staff read Atlas Shrugged.

Big deal.

Others here may not agree with me, but I found that book a slog and too stilted in many ways.

I read somewhere that Ryan somewhat repudiated Ayn Rand because her staunch atheism. I think that the repudiation was relatively recent.

When one looks at Paul Ryan's personal life, one should be able to see exactly why he was attracted to self-sufficient individualism: the death of his father (Ryan at age 16 found his father dead in the bed) and the family's taking in of a grandmother with Alzheimer's.

Always On Watch said...

Shaw,
It'll be interesting to hear Ryan defend privatizing social security after more Americans learn he paid for his college years through social security benefits.

I believe that he collected those benefits only 2-3 years.

At least he didn't go out and WASTE the money, did he? He paid for college.

Always On Watch said...

Z,
We're going to start insulting young men to whom Social Security was available because their father died when they were 15 and somehow suggest he doesn't deserve the vice presidency for that? WOW

I couldn't agree more with your statement. And, as usual, I have a personal anecdote (one of the advantages of being so damn old). Back in a minute to tell that story.

Always On Watch said...

My cousin was born with osteogenesis imperfecta (aka brittle bone disease) -- a mild form, thank God, but still hideous and costly in every respect you can imagine. My uncle had to work three jobs (one full time job with the federal government and two part time jobs) so that my aunt could stay home to tend to a fragile child, who weighed so little that he looked like a starving child from a Third World country. Naturally, my cousin could not attend school regularly -- yet another problem requiring my mother and grandmother to step in and do tutoring.

Then, suddenly, when my cousin was only 7 years old, his father died. Of the chickenpox! Complications set in, including encephalitis.

Yes, my cousin collected survivor's Social Security benefits until he was 18 years old, I think. Those benefits went down the rat hole of medical bills. If only there had been enough left to pay for his college education! There wasn't. Besides, no college would accept a disabled student back in 1961.

Just sayin'.

Always On Watch said...

Hey, Shaw! If Obama had done the same (with survivor Social Security benefits), would you be bitching about it or praising him? Ask yourself that question honestly.

Shaw Kenawe said...

AOW, are you missing the point on purpose?

Ryan took the benefits due him when his father died and used them to put himself through college. Good for him.

Why does he want to end that for others?

That's the point, not that Ryan was the beneficiary of a safety net.

What would he have done had it not been there, or had it been lost through private investments in the stock market crashes--like the one in 1987--or 2008?

Ryan wants to privatize Social Security.

Shaw Kenawe said...

AOW: "I read somewhere that Ryan somewhat repudiated Ayn Rand because her staunch atheism. I think that the repudiation was relatively recent."

Were you as accepting of Ryan's recent repudiation of Rand because of her atheism as Mr. Obama's repudiation of Rev. Wright?

Think about it, then get back to me.

Shaw Kenawe said...

SF,

Ryan said Rand made him who he is, not the Bible. Keep pretending this doesn't mean anything.

This is Ryan in his own words about his total devotion to Rand and her philosophy. He declares it shaped who he is:

"I grew up on Ayn Rand," Ryan told the Atlas Society, a group of Rand devotees, in a 2005 speech. "That's what I tell people ... you know, everybody does their soul-searching, and trying to find out who they are and what they believe, and you learn about yourself ... I grew up reading Ayn Rand, and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are, and what my beliefs are."

Always On Watch said...

Shaw,
Were you as accepting of Ryan's recent repudiation of Rand because of her atheism as Mr. Obama's repudiation of Rev. Wright?

Not really. As you know, I think that Obama is a scoundrel and a liar.

However, I didn't bother doing any research to speak of regarding Paul Ryan until he was named the VP candidate.

I'm not a "Randoid," but I'm not rabidly anti-Rand either.

As for Wright, well, I don't pay much attention one way or the other. Certainly I haven't harped on Obama's association with Wright. I'm more interested in the policies that Obama has instituted and his behaviors while in office.

The book Amateur includes some interesting info about Obama-Wright. Don't know if that info is true, however.

AOW, are you missing the point on purpose?

I'm not missing the point, IMO.

1. How much of the "safety net" does the Ryan plan really remove?

2. I wonder if we have figures showing how child recipients use the Social Security death benefits.

What would he have done had it not been there, or had it been lost through private investments in the stock market crashes--like the one in 1987--or 2008?

Found another way, perhaps, as self-reliance seems to be a theme with him.

I found "another way." Neither of my parents died when I was young, but most of the spare money went for the care of my grandmother (pre-Medicaid). I understood the financial situation.

Goodbye, Julliard, to which I had been accepted! I began working at age 14 and still kept up my studies and received a two-year full ride via my high school's scholarship fund. So, I went to a commuter college. Living in the D.C. Metro area, we have several good commuter colleges.

PS: You still haven't answered my question.

Always On Watch said...

Mustang,
It's trolling and thug tactics.

And rude, as well.

Always On Watch said...

Oops!

Dated December 2011:

Lie of the Year 2011: 'Republicans voted to end Medicare'


Republicans muscled a budget through the House of Representatives in April that they said would take an important step toward reducing the federal deficit. Introduced by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the plan kept Medicare intact for people 55 or older, but dramatically changed the program for everyone else by privatizing it and providing government subsidies.

Democrats pounced. Just four days after the party-line vote, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a Web ad that said seniors will have to pay $12,500 more for health care "because Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Rep. Steve Israel of New York, head of the DCCC, appeared on cable news shows and declared that Republicans voted to "terminate Medicare." A Web video from the Agenda Project, a liberal group, said the plan would leave the country "without Medicare" and showed a Ryan look-alike pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff. And just last month, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sent a fundraising appeal that said: "House Republicans’ vote to end Medicare is a shameful act of betrayal."

After two years of being pounded by Republicans with often false charges about the 2010 health care law, the Democrats were turning the tables.

PolitiFact debunked the Medicare charge in nine separate fact-checks rated False or Pants on Fire, most often in attacks leveled against Republican House members.

Now, PolitiFact has chosen the Democrats’ claim as the 2011 Lie of the Year....


Much more at the above link.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"Hey, Shaw! If Obama had done the same (with survivor Social Security benefits), would you be bitching about it or praising him? Ask yourself that question honestly." --AOW

If this is the question you refer to, I happily answer that I would be praising not Obama's hypothetical case nor Ryan's real case, but the real benefits Social Security program would have and has given to both men.

My question was what would Ryan have done without S.S. or if the investments had been lost in financial downturns by privatizing it.

You say he would have found a way because you did. Speculation at best.

There are 300+ million Americans in this country. Everyone's story is different. Speculation on how others WOULD HAVE faced hardships is just that, and doesn't solve present problems it just pretends to.

Jersey McJones said...

Even if the cuts to Medicare as proposed (remember, it's up to congress to actually make those cuts - they are not automatic)by the ACA materialized, that would still be far better than Ryan's plan to essentially destroy the program. Block granting has been a disaster for most federal programs that have been rearranged that way.

On top of that, block granting would only add to the unsustainable health care annual inflation rates, as the health care industry knows no state boundaries. The ACA gives the impetus for the federal gov't to come up with future solutions to the inflation problem - like the public option, the Medicare buy-in, Part-D negotiation of drug prices and domestic pricing, and so forth. Those are real ideas, not silly, easy-sounding bullshit as proposed Ryan and his sleazy, silly, un-serious ilk.

JMJ

Silverfiddle said...

Congratulations Shaw, you get the Mrs Canardo award for bringing irrelevancies to obscure a discussion of the facts.

You liberals commit a fatal conceit, that if the government doesn't do it, it won't be done.

Ryan and others are not talking about destroying people's benefits, they are talking about privatization and real streamlining by taking the government bureaucrats out of it.

But keep blabbering trivialities you lefties, and we'll get on with the adult conversation of how to put the fiscal house in order.

Silverfiddle said...

Yeah Jersey, let's keep spending trillions more per year that we don't have...
talk about "silly, easy-sounding bullshit'

That describes the entire liberal agenda.

Jack Camwell said...

So now we're playing the name game with the budget cuts?

Jersey, explain to me how a block grant is any different than a budget cut?

Both will reduce the amount of money going into the programs.

Block grants haven't worked so well because there's no incentive to practice medicine more efficiently. The healthcare industry just keeps hoping that enough people will get mad enough to get the money flowing again. Little do they know, the money still won't be flowing with Obama's proposed cuts.

Budget cuts, block grants, ACA . . . none of this will work until we fix the fundamentals of how medicine is practiced in America. The only reason that France stays afloat with their universal healthcare is because the industry itself--the practice of medicine--is heavily regulated by the government in order to drive down costs.

As long as money remains the primary method of controlling healthcare costs, it will never happen and we'll just be stuck in this endless Twilight Zone episode.

I swear to God, Post-Modern American politics is like freaking Groundhog Day.

I'm A Concervitive Hear Me Roar said...

Please listen to what this Priest states immediately after his opening prayer.
Then you will know why this is being shared and hope is that you will share with your friends.
Stick with this thru the first few comments……you will be PLEASANTLY surprised... (some of you will anyway!).


http://www.stthomasmore.org/parish-clergy/video/invocation

Ducky's here said...

@Z -- Our kids in public schools learn now that George Washington had slaves with the implication nothing he did was worth anything
-------
That's a pantload.

I'm sure they teach a sterilized version of American history at your "Christian" school but the version of American history pitched by the red heifer crowd is as patently false as the Exodus story.

Jack Whyte said...

By all means, if we cannot defend against a man’s cogent argument, let us demean him for daring to read a book. The left is vile. Why do the left oppose Ayn Rand? The simplest explanation is that Rand gave us an accurate prediction of the progressive left. She suggested the fight to preserve free market capitalism would be long and dirty. She demonstrated there is no other alternative to this, beyond our tacit agreement for enslavement to the dictates of progressive ideology. This was not lost on the left, who now sling their filthy arrows toward a man who understands what it must take to correct our errant course. They do so not because of mountains of evidence demonstrating that progressivism works; they do it because it is their purpose to destroy America, and anyone who stands in their way.

Always On Watch said...

FACTS:

1. Medicare is in dire trouble -- no matter how you look at it.

2. If Medicare and other benefits for the elderly or the disabled collapse, YOU will be turning YOUR own home into a nursing home -- as I have done here in my own home: hospital bed in the living room, bedside potty, diaper changes (for a while), etc., before Mr. AOW qualified for Medicare and before he improved.

LET ME TELL YOU THAT CAREGIVING CAN BE A LIVING HELL AND WELL NIGH IMPOSSIBLE WITH DEMENTIA!

Caregiving means either (1) spending big bucks for home health aides to come in (2) AND/OR leaving the workforce yourself to do those tasks, thus giving up your own life.

Always On Watch said...

PS: Nursing homes cost between $6000 and $20,000 a month. Medicare doesn't pay for that kind of long term care.

Always On Watch said...

Jack,
As I have said before, I'm no "Randoid."

But it is precisely what you said that makes the Left hate Ayn Rand.

Jack Whyte said...

Three years ago, David Gauthier-Villars compared US healthcare proposals with those long in place in France. He told us that health care was in such a crisis, the French were then moving more toward the system employed in the United States. One cannot help but wonder what the Congress and president were thinking, then, when they overwhelmingly passed Obama Care (before reading it). We can only suppose, by not reading the proposed legislation, by refusing to debate it, by ignoring all the warnings from managing actuaries and minority party politicians, the left had some other agenda in mind beyond solving health care concerns.

Does anyone even remember why the left demanded radical reform? It was that 50 million Americans did not have health care insurance. It was a damn lie. Twenty million of the people counted were illegal aliens. Half of the remaining 30 million elected not to cover themselves or their families. So we opened the door to the most massive tax mandate in our entire history for the sake of 5% of our total population. Brilliant. No one listened to Paul Ryan then; maybe they’ll listen to him now.

Silverfiddle said...

Jack Whyte:

Thank you for the excellent and concise summary!

Yes, yes, yes! The "solved" a 5% problem with a 100% "solution," and that is progressivism in a nutshell, and it explains our frightful national debt.

Jersey McJones said...

Jack,

You asked, "Jersey, explain to me how a block grant is any different than a budget cut?"

Well, I don't see a comparison there either. A cut is a cut. Block granting is spending no matter how you at it. Two different things.

Block grants, and Devolution in general, have been failures, IMHO.

Here's a recent look at the subject:

http://ccf.georgetown.edu/all/block-grants-success-failure-the-judge/

I see failure. State governments are misrepresenting, subverting, and corrupting the these federal laws, with all intent and purpose thereof.

The block grant idea seemed good some years ago, but maybe it's time to take a look at it's actual consequences.

JMJ

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jersey: State governments are misrepresenting, subverting, and corrupting the these federal laws, with all intent and purpose thereof.

Yeah, it's the job of the corrupt federal government to carry out such important rip-offs.

Jersey McJones said...

Silver, why are you so eager to give more power to more corrupt and less accountable people? The proof is in your face, but you simply refuse to see it. Some things are better left more local and some things should be more universal. Is it really just one way or the other for you? If you conservatives win the day, should I start looking for appropriate housing? Like a cave?

JMJ

Silverfiddle said...

I'm just facing facts Jersey. You should try it sometime.

Z said...

Ducky "I'm sure they teach a sterilized version of American history at your "Christian" school but the version of American history pitched by the red heifer crowd is as patently false as the Exodus story"

No, we teach the truth, both sides of everything...we don't indoctrinate, we teach kids to think and live well. Shocking to you, I know. I wish THEY DID indoctrinate a bit more; I think it's a shame leftists feel that's a good thing and conservatives simply won't do it on grounds of decency.
"Patently false?" Thanks, god.

Shaw, Obama REPUDIATED Wright? Yes, how long after everyone else in America learned what Wright had been saying for the twenty YEARS the Obamas attended, had him over for dinner as they were very good friends, talked, etc? You don't really believe Wright only denounced our country when Brother Obama was away, DO YOU?! :-)
Nobody was shocked in the videos of his saying GD AMERICA....but OBAMA?! :-)

Jersey McJones said...

But Silver, these states are DIVERTING 44% of the "block grant" funding to other things, and the numbers of those affected keeps rising. What the fuck do you not get about that???

It's corrupt, and unconstitutional. The federal government should carry the responsibility for what it does. Shifting responsibility from the payment to third, fourth, or fifth servicers only makes for obfuscation of corrupt activity. You can't pretend to understand free markets and modern nation states and yet exclaim, "the free market always does it better." It doesn't. And you can't claim that devolution will answer every governmental problem. It's been pretty thoroughly proven wrong.

JMJ

Ducky's here said...

The whole truth on the right, z?

That's like finding an English language channel on high dial AM.

Ducky's here said...

Does anyone in their right (and I do mean right) think that Obama attended church for twenty years? You really think this man is religious?

Please, bore me later.

Wright served one purpose. He made Obama black enough and Harvard made him white enough. Remember, like most contemporary politicians he is amoral and his conduct is controlled by elections.

If you really want to dig up some revealing dirt check out the 300,000 hack job Michelle had that was eliminated after Barack left Chicago politics.

Mittens or Obama. Circle the drain fast or faster. The country's political system is broken. The two party system is a disastrous joke.

Silverfiddle said...

"It's corrupt, and unconstitutional."

You've just described about 80% of all government, Jersey.

All this collecting money here, raking some off there, and then siphoning more over here and doling it back out is a system that invites corruption.

Hack said...

It blows my mind that leftists pounce on a VP candidate reading Ayn Rand as the most radical thing imaginable while dismissing the PRESIDENT'S own infatuation with "the marxist professors", Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis. It is also telling, after reading this thread, how none of the libbies have even tried to defend the Medicare cuts in Obamacare as evidenced by the statistics in the original post. Gotta love it!

Z said...

Ducky, oh yes...the whole truth; all sides. Shocking to you, is it?

As for Obama? He said it, I didn't. Keep protecting the hero you 'can't stand' :-)

FreeThinke said...

Choosing Paul Ryan is the best thing Mr. Romney has done to boost his lackluster campaign to date.

My only objection is that Paul Ryan is too good, too smart, and too talented to be effectively "benched" for at least four years in a job John Nance Garner colorfully described as "not worth a bucket of warm spit" -- only didn't say "SPIT." ;-)

~ FreeThinke

FreeThinke said...

"If you conservatives win the day, should I start looking for appropriate housing? Like a cave?"

Much more apt to be a dungeon, Jersey, -- or the Stake.

~ FT

FreeThinke said...

The criticisms emanating from the left are nothing more than a BLIZZARD of BULLSHIT, a TORRENT of TURDS and a CASCADE of CRAP.

The STENCH is overpowering.

Notify the EPA and have these people cited for polluting the atmosphere with toxic waste then carted away to the nearest re-education center..


~ FreeThinke

Always On Watch said...

Over at Forbes:

Why the Democrats' 'Mediscare' Attack Won't Work Against Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney

Very brief excerpt:

...As to the supposedly draconian nature of Paul Ryan’s Medicare cuts, they’re only exceeded by the severity of the Medicare cuts in…Obamacare....

Go read the whole thing if you're interested in the topic.

Always On Watch said...

Hack Wilson,
Point well taken!

Always On Watch said...

Duck,
I'm sure they teach a sterilized version of American history at your "Christian" school...

Even if so, so what?

The public system concentrates on opining and slants Left -- if not dipping deeply into revisionism.

FreeThinke said...

The Public School system has become nothing but a Propaganda Mill for the Statist-Internationalist Agenda -- and jungle in which African-American savages may run wild with apparent impunity.

DISMANTLE PUbUC EDUCTION and replace it with Trade Schools and for the hopelessly recalcitrant -- FORCED LABOR CAMPS.

Get human detritus OFF the STREETS, and put it to WORK.

~ FreeThinke