Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, June 22, 2007
David Limbaugh :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Left's Stranglehold on the Donkey
by David Limbaugh
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Putting aside the dismal state of the conservative movement's influence on the current political class, including far too many Republicans, and what must be done to remedy it, one hopes that so-called swing voters are paying attention to the leftward lunging of all Democratic presidential candidates.

If -- and this is a big "if" -- Republicans eventually get their house in order on immigration and other major issues, they might be able to capitalize on the extreme left's stranglehold on the Democratic Party.

The far left is not only calling the shots, it is boasting about it, and at this stage, the competing candidates don't dare step out of line, much less fight back against the extremists. For now, they are just doing as they are told.

If things had gone as Hillary Clinton had planned: dispensing with the annoying primary competition and proceeding to the crowning, she might already be pretending to be a reasonable centrist again. But curse Obama and John Edwards, who are forcing her to be honest to her true leftist convictions.

We witnessed the left's cockiness and the candidates' pathetic sycophancy toward it during this week's "Take Back America" conference in Washington, D.C. The event is being sponsored by Campaign for America's Future, a far-left group devoted to the recapturing of America for unmitigated liberalism.

Though Hillary has done a 180 on Iraq since she fell flat at this conference last year, she wasn't able to win over the audience this year by nodding to the troops even as she dissed the war effort and pledged "to end the war in Iraq and finally bring home the troops."

National Review Online's Byron York reports that while receiving kudos for indicting the Bush administration for its "stunning record of secrecy and corruption," Hillary was roundly booed when she said, "The American military has done its job" and "the American military has succeeded." She dare not praise the military in earshot of the "we oppose the war but support the troops" left.

Robert Borosage, the conference organizer, spoke the obvious, "We really do believe we're driving the debate right now. It's a historic turn, a repudiation from the last 25 years of conservative dominance."

The bullying leftists will not tolerate disobedience and will not quickly forgive defectors. Their power is far from limited to this week's conference. They're in full control now at Democratic Central. Their dominance can be seen in their success in intimidating the major Democratic candidates: Edwards, Obama, Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Bill Richardson -- so far, from taking part in the Fox/Congressional Black Caucus debates because of Fox's participation.

These liberals are not satisfied with mere posturing or ineffective performances. They've made it known they will not tolerate the Democrats' incompetence and half-measures toward undermining our war effort. They demand the whole enchilada.

Without question, they are forcing Democratic presidential candidates to commit further to the left than they should be comfortable defending in the general election. They are pressing for universal health care, immediate withdrawal from Iraq, shifting resources away from the military during time of war, re-handcuffing our intelligence agencies and otherwise compromising our proven successful methods against fighting terrorism and bolstering national security, declaring an end to the war on terror and reverting to treating it as a law enforcement matter, radical growth-suffocating action to deal with its highly debatable assertions on manmade global warming, wealth and production-punishing tax increases, advancement of the radical homosexual and pro-abortion agendas, further radicalizing the culture against traditional values, discouraging immigrant assimilation, adulterating the Second Amendment, using the government and academic institutions to suppress conservative speech and other assorted nightmares.

The pressure is working; fueled largely by the growing unpopularity of the war and conservatives' pronounced disappointment with President Bush over immigration and other issues, the Dem candidates are already much further to the left than liberal John Kerry was in 2004.

Since Democrats have come away unscathed and unaccountable for their duplicity in blaming their initial support for the Iraq war on President Bush's mythically alleged WMD intelligence distortions, they might feel bulletproof from having to account in the general for their current lurch toward radicalism in this pre-primary season.

Without minimizing the real and justified concerns of conservatives over the administration's immigration policy, which must be resolved, let it not be overlooked just how radical is the leftist agenda for America: They envision a completely different nation from that of mainstream Americans. Let it not be overlooked that these radicals, at this very moment, own the Democratic Party and all its movers and shakers.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read David Limbaugh's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Support the drive to the far left.
Thanks to the shift to the far left, Democrats are finally within reach of making the United States into the socialists paradise that the founding fathers intended it to be. The founders had a vision of a land where a centralized government would have total control over the citizenry, but they mistakenly permitted the people to retain a collection of rights. Fortunately, the New Democrats are about to correct this flaw, thus allowing the founders dream to become a reality.

As we have learned from our history, individual rights only serve to allow people to do things that are not in the best interest of the collective. For example, the right of free speech has allowed others to protest against government policies that are designed to help others. It is time to eliminate this improper policy, and the bolder New Democratic Party is just the entity that can do it. Within the year, the rights of talk radio jockeys will be absolved for the good of the collective, thus paving the way for government officials to rule the people unhindered. The citizenry lacks the skill to care for themselves, and wiser government officials need a free hand in dictating our actions without having to justify their decisions. Ergo, like a parent that silences a sassy todler, the far left knows that dissenters should, and will be silenced.


Hey LD: Don't forget
WE CONTROL YOUR CHILDREN. We will teach them to turn in mom and dad if they disobey party rules. Because it 'takes a village' to raise a child properly.

Iraq is driving America to the Left
The problem is that the continuing war in Iraq, with no clear end in sight, is pushing the entire electorate to the Left. Which makes the Leftism of the Democratic Party less objectionable to many than it used to be.

The Iraq War has soured much of the electorate, especially the key Independent voters, on conservatism itself. Further, it was the Left who were constantly warning since 2003 that Iraq was not going well, and their warnings were proven correct. Unfortunately. That has made the Left look more credible to the average voter and made the Right look less credible.

After the November 2006 election defeat, a lot of Republicans consoled themselves by saying that oh, well, the reason they lost was that Bush and the Republicans in Congress had abandoned conservative principles. (Now with immigration, some conservatives even have charged that Bush isn't a real conservative.)

But so far at least, no staunch conservatives have come forward to explain EXACTLY what a "truly principled conservative" would do about Iraq that Bush isn't already doing. (Except Ron Paul, and his ideas won't sell for many other reasons.)

And until there is a credible CONSERVATIVE position on Iraq that is not perceived as just "Let's support Bush," the public is going to vote Leftist by default.

tanabear, who suggests ....
".... that the problem with (the major) parties is that they are controlled by a very few ...."

Gets it only part way.

For the real (even more deadly serious than political careerism) problem with American politics is that there are no longer any Republicans in the game, all of the parts having long ago been cast to the lying, looting, thieving, RICO racketeering bloody gangsters who nowadays own operate and control not only the modern "Democrats" -- but the entire feral political machine.

And who, to add insult to injury, also comprise, effectively, the entire feral judiciary and whose ranks include every third, fourth, fifth and sixth-generation member of the parasite classes who, while seeing to the syphoning off of the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars that every year are lost to graft and corruption, draws a fat feral paycheck.

Nonsense
"They envision a completely different nation from that of mainstream Americans. Let it not be overlooked that these radicals, at this very moment, own the Democratic Party and all its movers and shakers."

As usual, this piece is full of falsehood and misrepresentations; only one needs to be addressed. That is the mainstream comment above. Our citizens have seen the incompetence, greed and simple arrogance of the Conservative movement and the Bush Regime. Running away from Bush now is far too late. We are the mainstream and your bankrupt idealology will have to go away regroup and try to rebuild its credibility.

Nilsson
Your ignorance about world-wide Islamofacism, already in charge in Europe, close to that in England and making frightening inroads in the U.S.. is sickening and scary. Your head is so far buried in the sand about this that your bleating is now laughable. No one could take seriously ignoring this terrorist threat, made even more silly by constantly coming back to "he lied" line. Get a new cause. And, using "blood and treasure" in your argument is a sure sign you've been taken over by the far left. Your kind (elites) will be among the first ones the Muslims line up against the wall for beheading when they take over.

Donkeys and Leftists
I wonder how many of the leftists donkeys wear those funny looking little hats muslims wear.

Are the leftists left over from the American Revolution and want their titles back?

Perhaps when they (left) burn the Constitution, Bill of Rights and control the airwaves (they already control the press)...the right? will either become left or muslim or both. This scenario is no longer on the horizon. It is happening in every city, town and country round the world

FromTheTop1
"Perhaps when they (left) burn the Constitution, Bill of Rights and control the airwaves (they already control the press)...the right? will either become left or Muslim or both. This scenario is no longer on the horizon. It is happening in every city, town and country round the world"

The sky is falling! Come on chicken little, isn't it time to focus on results and accomplishments? Your Bush Regime is or is coming awful close to violating the constitution, the Bill of Rights and controlling the press. Washington Times? FOX News? Stop crying you are MSM too....
Let's try and get the job of governing done and let's finally go get the terrorists who attacked us.
Let's try and get the job of governing done and let's finally go get the terrorists who attacked us.

Nilsson spews ....
'.... that ("they") will have to pull a much bigger scare to get us up on our hind legs next time. Iran? Russia? China?'

Which completely ignores the facts on the ground, that include, thanks to the execrable traitor, Cartah, that we have been at war with iran since 1979 and, thanks to the (can one even contemplate the possibility??!!) even more egregious (and not-to-forget, lying, looting, thieving, mass murdering, recidivist, co-serial-rapist) traitor, "Hot-Springs" Billy-Bubba Blythe Cli'ton, that psychopathologically-hesperophobic China, always and forever a potential enemy, is, at Pennies on the Dollar, now armed with several Trillion Dollars worth of American nuclear, rocketry, aerospace and computer research and development and hardware.

And since then president, Ronald Wilson Reagan, His Holiness, Pope John-Paul 2 and Lech Walesa brought it to its knees, dead and decadent Russia has chosen a short-arsed career terminated KGB colonel for its "president:"

What else to expect from that epidemically alcoholic crumbling Hell hole?

Eternal love?

Sam
"Everything will implode. The dollar, illegal immigration, massive unemployment, a captial flight from this country. It will be disasterous."

PANIC! BS sir. The dollar is crashing and that is a major reason oil is so high. We have devalued 30% so far with no sign of stopping. Capital left for the EU and other currencies long ago. China is almost single handedly holding up the value of the dollar as high as it is. You folks accused Clinton of selling the US to China but Bush actually did it. There was no illegal immigration flood under Clinton. Questions?

Black and White Brian
Please read my post above LMAO

Hal Donahue - You've been had!
There was no illegal immigration flood under Clinton. Questions? Huh Hal?


All these "guests" came in the past 6 years? Get real! That is the most idiotic statement I have seen so far on any forum.

Chuck
Show me the numbers. The Bush Regime created this problem when they turned on the spigot by not enforcing the laws against companies employing illegal immigrants. Before that it was "manageable".

Who are the Far Left
The continued failure to identify who is the far left is a giant Republican Mistake ie Gays, Unions, anarchists etc

fearmongering at it's worst
I hope at least some of you will recognize this cheap propaganda piece for what it is. But knowing many of you won't, let me help by translating for you:

L = Limbaugh
P = Phylo



L: They are pressing for universal health care,

P: Oh No! They might want to go to a health care system that is less costly and provides better care!

L: immediate withdrawal from Iraq,

P: All of the leading Democratic candidates have consistently talked about a responsible withdrawal in contradistinction to the Republicans who want to stay forever and bomb more Middle East countries into chaos.


L: shifting resources away from the military during time of war

P: Call us crazy but some of us think we would fight terrorists more effectively by increasing intelligence gathering and law enforcement rather than by dropping more bombs.


L: re-handcuffing our intelligence agencies and otherwise compromising our proven successful methods against fighting terrorism and bolstering national security

P: He means forcing the President to get warrants when tapping the phones of American citizens, retro-actively if it is urgent. It's called oversight, and some of us think that's a good thing. (Psst, when the Brits caught those terrorists a while back, they got warrants.)


L: declaring an end to the war on terror and reverting to treating it as a law enforcement matter,

P: That's a lie. As if democrats would simply ignore the whole idea of terrorism. Give me a break. The democrats believe that we need to improve intelligence gathering and we need to greatly increase the number of Arabic and Persian speaking translaters. And yes, law enforcement. What is so bad about law-enforcement exactly? How else are we going to catch terrorists on our soil? And yes, we need to work in co-operation with the law enforcement institutions in other countries so it would be better if they didn't hate our guts.

L: radical growth-suffocating action to deal with its highly debatable assertions on manmade global warming

P: Actually, liberals believe in the creative abilities of the American people to reduce CO2 pollution and increase efficiency and still grow the economy at the same time.

L: wealth and production-punishing tax increases

P: He means: returning to sound fiscal policy and a balanced budget.

L: advancement of the radical homosexual and pro-abortion agendas

P: He means: treating gay people like people and leaving reproductive decisions in the hands of the individual rather than the government

L: further radicalizing the culture against traditional values,

P: Who is a better representative of traditional values of faith and family: Hillary, or Rudi?


L: discouraging immigrant assimilation,

P: He means: allowing immigrants to maintain some of their traditions and language while gently assimilating to our culture, like many of our ancestors.

L: adulterating the Second Amendment

P: That's a lie. No one is talking about taking people's guns away.


L: using the government and academic institutions to suppress conservative speech and other assorted nightmares

P: Uh Oh, looks like somebody's been reading David Horrorwitz––and taking him seriously!


Come on Limbaugh, this isn't even good propaganda. It's too cliche and not very well thought out. You should really try to disguise your agenda a little better by sprinkling in some honesty and candor in there somewhere. Oh, and when you call every left wing organization "far-left" the term starts to lose all meaning, so you should use that term i bit more judiciously.

Phylo out.

paul
"The continued failure to identify who is the far left is a giant Republican Mistake ie Gays, Unions, anarchists etc"

Anarchists are all yours and the gays and unions are mainstream that may be your problem?

Stop polarizing the public....
with this nonsense about one party being coerced by the extreme left, the other being driven by the religious right.

There is no difference whatsoever in the alleged "two parties", both are controlled by the elitist propaganda machine that created the EU; that are creating the North American Union (NAU) or SPP (which is why unenforceable immigration laws are being considered); and who are working to create MEFTA (Middle Eastern Free Trade Area).

The entire globe is being positioned into three trading blocks, all under the Socialist umbrella of the UN and their puppetmasters.

Democrat, Republican, Libertarian = Rubbish!

We either vote in Constitutionally minded individuals (like Ron Paul) or we fade into the history books. Open your eyes David.

Phylo
LOL nice reply very nice. May I steal from it occasionally? LOL


Rob
Numbers please?

I said you are MSM too stop whining and I could list all your pubs too but why help.

Now, I was indifferent on the immigration issue. But watching the rightwing, propaganda, talk radio machine go into high gear, I am convinced that the issue is another rightwing attempt to distract from the real issues like you folks did with gays, god, guns, etc...

Then I went to a local anti immigrant rally in Scranton PA sponsored by Hazleton, PA and Mayor Barletta's group and saw that roughly half the rally supporters were skin head and neo Nazi fellow travelers. I am proud to say except for counter protestors about equaling the small pro crowd the event was ignored.

Yes Phylo, Genius
I wish I could've come up with a fictional conversation I had with Nancy Pelosi. Unfortunately for me; I guess, I don't have other voices rattling around in my head.

Argue your ideals against people who actually exist or get back to the kiddy table where you most likely belong.

Hal
Quit playing the game-- I make bold proclmations wth absoulutely NO FACTS, but I will hold you to finding the numbers to base your claims.

Lazy thinking like yours is what makes dullards into liberals to begin with.

Oh ahd, try to keep you citings based upon somebody with at least semi-reputable research.

I normally don't get this annoyed, but the poor arguments from our village libiots seems to be at levy-breaking levels today.

IGoCommando
LMAO "Argue your ideals against people who actually exist or get back to the kiddy table where you most likely belong."

This is the staple of rightwing, propaganda talk shows. Tell them to turn in their straw men too..... Phylo did a GREAT job saying how it REALLY is

funny
how sites like TH and other conservatives allow the continued drool spilling of the worlds Hals and Nilssons. Try going to DU or Kos and writing anything outside the party line. See how many seconds you will remain un-banned from posting.
Does that tell you two anything? Can you understand which argument can't stand the light of day? Can you see which group are the fascists?
No? I didn't think so. After all, you beleive the garbage you spread.
Understand how sorry we feel for you as you spew your so-called superior intellect.

yes, Pure Genius
Funny, I have just a sneaking suspicion Phylo's reparte wouldn't have flowed so darn smoothly if he wasn't arguing with a FIGMENT OF HIS IMAGINATION

Don't let your arm get too worn out with all your shoulder patting Hal.

Oh, and in regards to your previous grand claims about mainstream atitudes-- here's a number: Congressional Apprval Rating 24%-- Gallup. Yeah, the mainstream is just fawning over the left.



Rob
"Sites 0 evidence that universal health care is less expensive more efficient....let's see P..like ahhh Medicare? Should have given us a government program as an example of being less expensive and more efficient. Oh wait, he can't....it doesn't exist."

Well let's see we pay by far the highest cost for healthcare of any industrial nation. We have a high infant mortality rate; we are falling behind in longevity; our height is falling; our businesses cannot compete because of healthcare, where do you want me to stop? What we have does not work and costs too much. We had best do something - if you don't like universal healthcare come up with something that works better...

Thank God we don't Ban them...
..because there are a couple (two tops) of left-leaning posters on here that present logical arguments; actually backed up with facts, that force me to actually think about my positions. They elevate the quality of debate.

Neither of these two above are of that type.

Rob
"More intellingence gathering more Law enforcement., less bombing...Oh yeah, then when we do that what do we do. Fine them? Sue them?
Oh wait...our new translators can yell at them and berate them for being bad...that'll show em."

The above approach has worked repeatedly while what we are doing now to the best of my knowledge has never worked. They are only terrorists no different than the IRA, Bader Mein Hof Gang, the pirates of Tripoli....

Rob
"Immigrants maintain their language, traditions and gently assimilating....GEESH, Where's he get this stuff??? Oh P could you write that in Spanish so more of us could understand it???"

It is the simple truth although I question gentle. Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans and Eastern European Jewry were horribly prejudiced against and treated. I guess what is being said is that it is the Latino turn in the barrel

Rob
That is the way medical care is provided in third world nations and their health stats are worst than ours. Are you saying that is the way we should go - third world?

IRA
The biggest blow to the IRA was a renaissance of Ireland's free-market economy. When people are able to improved their lot in life and make money, they stop worrying so much about blowing other people up.

Have we heard anything out of the MSM about Islamic Rich-Kid Suicide Bombers?

When republlicans
run as conservatives and serve as conservatives, they win. That is one of "Rush's" favorite sayings and so true. History backs it up. If we get out there with our consistent message voters will have to look at the far left rhetoric and be scared, really scared. Reading comments like Hal's and his name calling,anger and sarcasm scares me. Think of it. One visit to a rally where he says he saw skinheads and he is more sure than ever that to be against the immigration bill is to be a similar creature to the skinhead.

Rob
"Gessh Hal what a great concept....I am totally enlightened now about fighting terrorism....I feel a great weight lifted off my shoulders.... Yep, I totally forgot about the IRA, Bader Mein Hof Gang and the Pirates of Tripoli attacking the Twin Towers. How could I forget that..."

A well organized band of terrorists attack the twin towers and then we go aid them? That is what the Bush Regime has done. Al Q is free and growing while we are disarming our military and abandoning our troops in the desert in the midst of a civil war. There is a reason we have not been attacked again. That reason is we are doing everything they want!

Don A WHO?
The fact is Gays are now a violent sex cult that are basically pedophiles and have now turned violent per a DC Detective on Bill O'Reilly last evening where they are recruiting our young girls, raping them if they resist and using guns . These Lesbian freaks are in all the big cities per the Detective. Gays should be locked up and treated for their violent(now) sexual intimidation of the general populous.

The foundation of the Democrat Party is now Gay's and Muslim terrorists that have infiltrated America in their 1500 hate spewing Mosques.

The fact is the Democrat Party is rapidly becoming a terrorist organization.

Pelosi, Murtha, Reid are a disgrace to all American's and should be in jail for their corruptive acts of bribery,personal serving ear marks and intimidation of Congress.

And you win the board troll of the moment Mr. Hal

Hal
You are missing half of the equation to your argument-- the free market will only succeed in health care (or anything for that matter) if the third-world masses actually have the means to purchase said care. When you live in Oppressing Socialist, Monarch, or Facist state, you are basically a serf with barely or no means to feed yourself; let alone luxuries like medicine.

We; as Americans, have a bountiful middle class, and have the means to purchase care. (The 'impovershed' in our country aren't all that bad enough either.)

edit
(The 'impovershed' in our country aren't all that bad off either.)

IGoCommando
"The biggest blow to the IRA was a renaissance of Ireland's free-market economy. When people are able to improved their lot in life and make money, they stop worrying so much about blowing other people up."

Some truth there and all the while the Brits hunted down the worst of them and killed or imprisoned them. A push pull.

The Bush Regime is only using a very limited military option and nothing else. It is yet another example of the basic incompetence of the administration and conservatives

paul
WOW that was so good I am going to share it with my friends. If you really believe a tenth of what you typed you need more help than I can give you

Rob
Good points. Let me help out on the health care thing.
If you want to see government efficiency in action in healthcare, look at the VA. The Dem's want to bring us Walter Reed like efficiency to all of us.

Hal, you mentioned that we pay more for health care than other industrialized nations. We get better care, too.

If you want to see an example of how good other health care systems are, look at Canada. If their system is so good, why are hospital parking lots in North Dakota and northern Minnesota full of Canadian cars? Oh, I know, those Canadians are so compassionate for the suffering of others that they are all visiting their American cousins.

Foreign government health care systems save money by controlling costs. That means they won't pay for the latest in medical technology because they don't want to pay for the R&D. Some countries use new technology that is not yet fully proven to be safe and effective. Remember the Thalidomide babies in England?

Another way they save money is by artificially limiting the wages of health care workers. Imagine skilled nurses making as much as burger flippers at McDonalds.

They also don't invest in new equipment or facilities. Most foreign systems give you a bed on a germ infested ward. No private or semi-private rooms here.

Yes, I can see the Dims have a much more "progressive" vision for America.

Phylo and Hal
Nice to see some things never change such as your IQ's.

Hal
Hal asks Phylo if he can use his statements once in awhile.Go ahead Hal STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES

Rob
The Germans have a competitive system as do the Brits to some extent. I know those systems and at various times have used them. By the way, do you know Americans are leaving here for medical care because they cannot afford it or get it in some cases. Now insurance companies are starting to send patients abroad. I said it is broke doing nothing is not an option. Myself I use socialized medicine that is excellent even though Bush is trying hard to kill it.

Phylo and Hal
Are off their meds again and dillusional as always. Phylo, when have higher taxes ever balanced a budget? Never, and don't try to say that the budget was balanced under Clinton. There's at least $75 Billion missing from that equation because of the non-sale of the analog communications spectrum.
Hal, don't you remember the old days of the military healthcare system when we didn't have a choice of where to go? I have personally sat in a waiting room for 8 hours to be seen as an active duty patient behind every other ad, dependent, and retiree. That was before the days of Tricare. Bring on universal healthcare and kiss Tricare goodbye along with all of the doctors in the system. Which brings me to the point: What doctor in this country would want to work under a government run healthcare system? How in the world would you pay them? And how would you finance it?

dollface
Let me add to your wonderful post. let's not forget the govt. will also not pay for any experimental technology. So all of the money we are being soaked for in adult and stem cell research will not be used. Let's not forget the experimenting the govt. has done in times past on the military. such as, the LSD experiments. I can see that happening on a grand scale. Then lastly there will actually be two America's. The wealthy, along with our illustrious politicians, will have top notch health care that they will pay for. The rest of us will get the leftovers and have no choice about it.

IGoCommando
"We; as Americans, have a bountiful middle class, and have the means to purchase care. (The 'impovershed' in our country aren't all that bad enough either.)"

The poor in many states are far better off than the middle or working class. The simple fact is many and I mean many cannot afford healthcare. Want the cost of that? They wait for care no physicals etc. The result is major medical problems they cannot care for and we wind up paying and the cost goes thru the ceiling and the people are unhealthy

We're empowering big government
To be honest, the Dems are using the big government that we Republicans have build and empowered since 2000. Sorry, but the CINOs that have taken over our party spend like Democrats; they just don't wish to tax for what they spent. Somehow, this is supposed to be fiscally conservative. I hope we real conservatives retake the party someday.

There are fissures in our party. Many Republicans, especially younger voters, are rebelling from the takeover of our party by big government, big spending social conservatives. This is no longer the party of Reagan, which celebrated limited government and optimism for America. Our party abandoned its roots, so its members are abandoning our party.

We were elected on the promise of LIMITED GOVERNMENT, especially at the federal level. Instead of that, we decided to spend and spend and spend some more. Then, we decided big government was fine, so long as it promoted a socially conservative agenda (one that Goldwater would not have even recognized, by the way). We don't like online poker? Rather than simply choosing to not play, we instead passed federal legislation mandating banks to comb through our financial transactions and mandating our ISPs nose in on our Internet sites (and also mandating that ISPs block access to certain sites, as is done by China and Iran). After all, we can't trust Americans to make wise choices, right?

In fact, Antigua just won the final appeal of their WTO case against the U.S. for our restricting of the Internet, and the EU joined the case. Check it out, at http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/20/business/gamble.php . They’re entitled to $3.4 billion in trade concessions, thanks to the Republicans who signed away our sovereignty, then decided the American people required government to control their decisions for them.

You want to see how bad Congressional Republicans are now with respect to limited government? The House Financial Services Committee had a hearing on June 8 to discuss the feasibility of effective regulation of Internet gaming. Hearing documents are on the committee website, at http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/ht060807.shtml ; the hearing webcast is at http://financialserv.edgeboss.net/wmedia/financialserv/hearing060807.wvx , as which the Republicans favoring prohibition were embarrassed.

Perhaps the social conservatives and liberals who believe big government is wonderful should form a new pro-government party. They can jointly spend like drunken sailors on programs like No Child Left Behind and the prescription drug program. The limited government (i.e., true) conservatives and pro-business real Americans can then take back the Republican Party. We’ll give rights back to Americans while enforcing our immigration laws (we're doing the reverse now). We’ll be pro-life, as our commitment is to respect the value of all individuals, and we’ll continue to keep government out of the lives of individuals. The funny thing is that this approach will result in improved morality and values. You see, our morals don’t come from Washington.

It's time for real Republicans to take the party back. Limited government is just that. There's nothing conservative about big government, regardless of how much one loves the laws it passes.

Everyone: Vote for freedom. Tell your Republican congressmen that they don't have to legislate everything they personally oppose. So-called big government conservatism isn't conservative. It's statist, and giving power to the state is a loser for freedom.

Allow me to translate
Hal: "Your Bush Regime is or is coming awful close to violating the constitution, the Bill of Rights and controlling the press. Washington Times? FOX News? Stop crying you are MSM too...."

Rob: "CBS News, NBC News, ABC News, CNN, MSNBC
LA Times, NY Times, Time Mag, Newsweek MAG, Wash times [sic -- Rob means the Post], Chi Trib,
SGF Chron..."

Hal: "I said you are MSM too stop whining and I could list all your pubs too but why help.'

HAL TRANSLATED: "I've just been NAILED on a ludicrous statement, but I've no comeback except superciliousness."

But thanks anyway, Hal, for not trying to pretend that Rob's list ISN'T leftist.

RetMSgt
There won't be too many doctors and nurses. They won't make the money that they are used to. What you will have is people who graduated by the skin of their teeth. Remember even the one that graduated at the bottom of his class is called "Doctor".

They are SOCIALISTS. Not liberals
When you talk of these people you must be precise in defining them because they live in the language and lie at every opportunity because it serves them to do so.

Failing to define them for who and what they are, allows them to escape the judgment of the public, such as it is, for failed socialist efforts in the past. If they are allowed to call themselves "liberals" or "progressives", they escape the deservedly negative and discredited label of "socialist."

The democratic party is not the party of our fathers nor their's. They are not liberal, for to be liberal is to embrace freedom and individual liberties, which has always been a primary principle and concept of our nation and it's people.

This concept is compatible with liberalism but never with socialism, it's extreme sister communism, or any other form of totalitarianism.

The socialists mean to jack up the radiator cap on our country and drive a new country in underneath. You can see this at every turn, every day, every time they gain power of any kind.

Their existence depends upon gaining control and the more they control the better but there is no better thing to control than the minds of the people (schools, media and entertainment) and money and the means of production. With the former comes the latter.

Any descent has the label of extremist applied to it liberally, although extremist in this case means of course, adherence to the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the principles of American liberty and opportunity. It is these principles which they seek to re-define and control.

The operative concepts here are socialist and totalitarian, not liberal and certainly not, progressive.

Dollface
"Good points. Let me help out on the health care thing.
If you want to see government efficiency in action in healthcare, look at the VA. The Dem's want to bring us Walter Reed like efficiency to all of us."

Wrong answer totally. I am a patient at Walter reed. Military and VA healthcare is first rate. What we are seeing is the Bush Regime trying to strangle it. Cutting funds, privatizing, closing... To my mind it is because it works and works so well.

"Hal, you mentioned that we pay more for health care than other industrialized nations. We get better care, too."

Wrong we do not. That is my point we pay FAR more than others and get less. Longevity, height, mortality are all indicators of quality of healthcare

Rob
Same here be well

TheEngineer
Why does everyone insist upon promoting and quoting Goldwater? Goldwter was not totally conservative. He was fiscally conservative but not socially conservative. Goldwater believed in Pro-Choice, and legalization of drugs. He got the conservative movement revived but it was Reagan who really gave it life. Alot of that pork spending was capitulating to the left which is a Bush policy. I guess they thought they could bribe them into loving him. Read the PIG book on spending. Quite the eye opener.

Lesbian Dyke Gangs
PHILADELPHIA -- Gang concerns brought parents and students together Wednesday at a West Philadelphia middle school. But the kind of gang may surprise you.

The gang is allegedly called DTO (for Dykes Taking Over) and made up of self-styled lesbian students

Girls Fear Lesbian Gangs


Girls at the Turner Middle School allege that the lesbian students are harassing them with gay remarks. The straight students say lesbians are bullying, groping and harassing them in gym and in the girl's bathrooms.

Lolo
Your comment makes it sound like nurses profit from the high cost of health care. That could not be farther from the truth.

Retmsgt
"Hal, don't you remember the old days of the military healthcare system when we didn't have a choice of where to go? I have personally sat in a waiting room for 8 hours to be seen as an active duty patient behind every other ad, dependent, and retiree. That was before the days of Tricare. Bring on universal healthcare and kiss Tricare goodbye along with all of the doctors in the system. Which brings me to the point: What doctor in this country would want to work under a government run healthcare system? How in the world would you pay them? And how would you finance it?"

I well remember those days and I do remember the huge improvement Tricare made. Now people are holding Tricare up as an example of a possible national system. Yes it makes me shudder.

What would I do? A basic healthcare system along Medicare lines should lower healthcare costs after an initial surge from identified illnesses. But I am far from a healthcare economist. That is why I asked for suggested solutions because what we have now is broken badly. As far as the supply of Doctors to the best of my knowledge there isn't a major shortage of doctors in any industrialized nation. I would rather have a doctor who was doing a job he loved than one just doing it for cash. My wife gave up a very high paying position to return to nursing. Why? She loves it dispite the abuse and system problems





Strangleholds
The radical left may have a stranglehold on the Democrats, but the radical right has a stranglehold on the Republicans. There's a tremendous need for a common sense middle way. A need for a Bob Dole, who could bring disparate sides to the table and forge reasonable consensus out of the extremist babel. Radicals are important. They frame the debate. But a frame only covers the edge. It's too bad so well-meaning people can't see the picture.

paul
What is it with you and lesbians?

macthemadman
The Democratic party is absolutely the party of my grandfather et. al. only improved a lot since the Dixiecrats became republican

We support the troops....?!?
Hal, Phylo, and the other delusional lefties can spew all the rhetoric they wish, but nothing they say can twist what happened at the so-called, "Take Back America" conference. The typical lefty comment, “We are against the war, but support the troops” (frequently said through clenched teeth and a grimace) nut jobs showed their true colors. Watch the tape, as soon as Schillary even mentions “the troops” all the moonbats began their booing.

Hey libs, guess what, no true American ever believed your “we support the troops” crap anyway.

These people make me want to puke...I have more respect for a terrorist than a traitor.

Hearing an Echo of the Past
__In this article Mr. Limbaugh calls it a stranglehold,has if it is choking the life out of the parties inhabitants. It is not choking the life out of the party dwellers,it's choking the life out of the parties original purpose. Its party dwellers,along with factions in tow,live,and breath,with ease.They embrace the liberal ideology of pure democracy,which puts a stranglehold on this republic.This embrace gives them security,and power,over the masses equalized in their thoughts,actions,and property. The "Take Back America" crowd is doing just that, taking America back to a time of oppressive rule. This is reflected in their past actions to strip our constitutional protections.Does the "Second Amendment" ring a bell, does their present "Hate Crimes" initiative,does their past stripping our military and intelligence abilities to balance a budget ring a bell? What about their embrace of all those human service programs,and their promises? The numbers benefitting from them has increased,not decreased according to their embrace.The lefts stranglehold is opposition to our freedoms,and liberties,of a nation giving the whole responsibility of the peoples protection.A reflection of the circumstances that led to a revolution to end this opposition.

Hal
I spent 14 years living in Europe and I've seen "socialized" or "government-run" health care....we don't want it here.

Btw, I've also spent hours waiting in military ERs....why, because it's "free"...everytime little Johnny has the snifles, mom brings him to the ER. If mom had to pay for it, Johnny would have got an aspirin and went to bed. What do you tink will happen when we have 80-90 million "little Johnnys"?

Hal
You wrote: "The sky is falling! Come on chicken little, isn't it time to focus on results and accomplishments? Your Bush Regime is or is coming awful close to violating the constitution, the Bill of Rights and controlling the press. Washington Times? FOX News? Stop crying you are MSM too....
Let's try and get the job of governing done and let's finally go get the terrorists who attacked us."

Hal this is quite laughable. You know if you wanted to stick to Bush has fouled up the Iraq war or something you might be plausibe there. But you constant regurgitation of libdrool talking points is beneath you.

First please prove how Bush has violated the Constitution and Bill of Rights? If he had actually done so by now there would be numerous challenges to him in SCOTUS and real discussions about impeachment rather than far left bleating. Please tell me exactly how any American's rights have been impacted by GWB. I don't expect they'll be seeing what books I check out of the library and checking the videos I rent would only be a Democrap tactic. And how many of your phone calls have they listened to Hal? And if they did (which they wouldn't unless you were receiving calls from a phone number outside the US known to be connected to terrorists).

I will agree that the results of his WOT have been mixed but what would you do? I mean you libdolts always complain we are not going after those who hit us but in the same breath you'll say we are drawing terrorists into Iraq? And your problem with that is? on top of that the MSM is always too happy to hurt Bush's efforts by exposing secret info on how he is fighting them - making his job that much harder. We are not sheep Hal, we can see what's going on. He isn't doing that well and you guys are helping to make sure of that.

And last but not least: To say that the right has the Washington Times and FOX News and act if that is a counterbalance to the rest of the MSM is ludicrous. You guys just cannot stand for there to be any conservative voices in this country at all.

I've said this before Hal: I always thought you were an intelligent guy but you have the same inate ability that all libtards have: to ignore history, revise facts, and spew talking points.

Hal 2
Should be "And if they did (which they wouldn't unless you were receiving calls from a phone number outside the US known to be connected to terrorists) what would they have heard that worries you so?

Hal, back up your claims
You said illegal immigration was "manageable" under Clinton, and ballooned under Bush. Bold statement, back it up.


You also said, among other things, we have a high infant mortality rate. Back it up. Numbers please. According to data I've found, we're 36th out of 208 ranked countries. Here's the link:

http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Infant_Mortality_Rate_aall.htm

Singapore's best rate is 2.28/1000, ours is 6.63/1000, and the worst country, Angola, is 192.5/1000. So your claim is idiotic.

You're probably using that CNN data, which is grossly flawed, right?

Icedog
Check the American Legion website they just thanked Pelosi for supporting veterans. You can stay in denial but know that right now the D's are the only ones taking care of the military and veterans. Bush ios stripping them of all support and help... Do your homework and lay off the Kool aide. Bush is disarming America

Lolo
Goldwter WAS totally conservative. Fiscal conservatism plus government out of your life = true conservativism. Government control of one's like = statism. I'm pro-life because I believe in individual liberty, which I believe is endowed upon us by God at conception, so I disagree with Goldwater there, but he was right otherwise.

Sorry, but the power social conservatives are giving the federal government today is the same power the government will use to control you tomorrow. For example, anyone here feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for refusing to hire a gay pastor? Anyone feel safe in saying the IRS could never revoke a church's tax exempt status for preaching that homosexuality is a sin? If you answered "yes, that cannot happen", are you certain that couldn't come to pass within 15 years? And, why shouldn't it. YOU ALL decided government has a right to involve themselves in issues of morality, and many Americans do think discrimination against gays is immoral. That's the power you're giving governemnt today!!!

As for spending, it seems the spending these days (from 2001-2006) has been spent by Republicans for Republicans. As a believer in the "Revolution of 1994", I never imagined it would have ended so badly.

Conservatism
What is a Conservative?
by Kevin Tuma


"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
- Ronald Reagan

A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away."
- Barry Goldwater

It's unsure whether or not we have had a real conservative in the White House since the Nineteenth Century. There were no conservative Presidents in the last century who were Democrats. There were no obvious Republican conservatives in the Oval Office, either. Eisenhower certainly wasn't a conservative. Nixon was openly socialistic. Ronald Reagan wasn't a conservative, either, at least in governance--although he espoused conservatism forcefully on a rhetorical level. Perhaps in that sense, we may define Reagan as a Rightist philosopher, like Robert Taft or Barry Goldwater. Unfortunately Reagan's beliefs did not transfer into presidential leadership--due in large part to the fact that Reagan was an anachronism, and he had already outlived the effective lifespan of conservatism itself.

Conservatism--in this day and age of flexible meanings for words--is mostly illusion. It retains a few free market platitudes, but for the most part, it is fakery. It has become a product label for an inferior substitute product, like the 80s label of "New Coke." Faux conservatism rules America. It bears very little resemblance to the real thing. Real conservatism will never rise from the ashes until we at least grasp what it stands for.

Before we define what conservatism is, perhaps we should define what it is not.

* Fascism is not conservatism. It is left-wing socialism with bombs and machine guns. Communism is essentially the same thing. There is no ideological gulf separating Communism and Fascism, facades aside.

* Capitalism is not conservatism. It complements conservatism, but does not override its principles. Conservatism is a political and social concept. The corporation is not more important than the Constitution.

* A Theocracy is not conservatism. It is a different state. Christians who empower tyranny in the guise of doing God's Will apparently never understood Christ's admonition of "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

* Neo-conservatism isn't conservatism, either. (See "Fascism," above.)

Inflammatory labels aside, I am not here to call George W. Bush dirty names. I am only attempting to clear up what is and is not a conservative. Apparently there is a great deal of misunderstanding of this concept, since conservatives have not held any real political power in our system for a long, long time.

Allow me to state what should, by now, be extremely obvious: GW Bush is not--by any definition--a conservative. Neither are Karl Rove, Bill O'Reilly, Bill Bennett, George Will, or a bunch of other people on Capitol Hill who apparently never guessed what their Oath of Office was supposed to represent. All these people are political moderates. And their President is a liberal.

Bush is a happy socialist who has yet to veto a single spending bill. He has maintained a massive post-Clinton bureaucracy without even giving lip service to reducing the size and scope of federal government. Bush has greatly expanded the government's role in our lives. He has thrown tidal waves of money at education, Medicare, and farm subsidies. He has monstrously inflated the government's police powers, in complete contravention to the Bill of Rights. He has racked up the biggest deficit in American history. A small tax cut or two, perched decoratively atop a towering mountain of free spending and federal expansionism, does not make the mountain into a conservative one.

Even John Kerry, a Massachusetts liberal ideologue, figured out that Bush isn't a conservative. People often allude to the fact that Bush and Kerry were both members of the conspiratorial fraternal organization "Skull & Bones." Skull & Bones is trivia. Of much greater importance to us is the fact that the two candidates had no real ideological differences. The bitterly fought race for the White House in 2004 was a contest between two liberal socialists with minor variations in their personal rhetoric.

There is no "right wing" in our system at present. The entire political spectrum is leftward oriented, and we are now seeing angry factionalism, like feuds between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

The artful pretense of GOP conservatism ended on 9-11-01. With a Great Cause to trumpet, Republicans were allowed to openly embrace federal power. Not too ironically, that was when most of the established news media stopped throwing brickbats at Republicans, and started tossing posies instead.

There are five ingredients necessary for real conservatism. These are fundamentals:

The first necessary ingredient for a conservative is a belief in smaller government. Particularly at the federal level. Statism is Leftism--an all-powerful, centralized government. Conservatives oppose this, embracing state's rights and a smaller, less centralized federal government. This is the foundational cornerstone of conservatism.

The second necessary ingredient for a conservative is a belief in national sovereignty and isolationism. Conservatives do not believe in foreign aid or foreign entanglements. They revere American sovereignty. Yes, conservatives do believe in a strong national defense--but national defense as mandated by the Constitution and the Monroe Doctrine. An invasive military empire is not mandated. Therein lies a crucial difference.

When Woodrow Wilson tried to get the US into the League of Nations, conservatives opposed him. When Franklin D. Roosevelt was aggressively lobbying to get the US into the Second World War, conservatives opposed him. Conservatives have scorned the UN. They are not practitioners of global military interventionism. Conservatives believe in defense of our national borders, not aggression---and real security based on not meddling in the affairs of other nations. Conservatives believe in "Fortress America"...not Pax Americana.

The third necessary ingredient is a belief in the Rule of Law---beginning with the Constitution of the United States. The Bill of Rights is basically sacrosanct. A conservative does not believe in a "living Constitution."

The only way a conservative would ever alter the Constitution would be by constitutional amendment. He would never seek to override it with power-grabbing legislation. The passage of the USA-Patriot Act--an Orwellian abomination, all the way down to its namesake--established pretty firmly just how many conservatives are left in Washington DC.

A fourth necessary ingredient to conservatism is a belief in traditional values. It is here that politics over such things as Roy Moore's Ten Commandments might come into play. However, traditional values, are, by their very nature, regressive. It is true that there is no constitutional separation of church and state, as commonly stated, but there is also Freedom of Worship, and a generalized restriction of government authority. Therefore no allowances exist for the federal government to dabble in the religion business one way or the other. Conservatives, being strict constructionists, would protect the religious rights of the individual without political aggression.

The fifth necessary ingredient to conservatism is adherence to principle. The stubborn instinct to stand firm on issues, and reject political expediency. Conservatives do not blow around philosophically in the breeze, like Republicans do on talk radio or on Capitol Hill. Conservatism cannot exist in the absence of an ideological backbone, because one of the basic philosophies behind conservatism is preservation of tradition.

The national leadership of the Republican Party has broken with all the above.

We should do away with the terms "paleoconservative" and "Old Right." These only tend to confuse terms, lending passive legitimacy to 'neo-conservatism'. A neo-conservative is not a conservative, any more than a bird is an amphibian. In the cold light of reality, there are no "paleocons" and "neo-cons." There are only a very few real conservatives and a bunch of Leftist Republicans who are fakes. Real conservatives, in power, are rarer than hen's teeth these days.

We do have one shining example of a conservative left in this country.

No, it isn't Patrick J. Buchanan, or any of his peerage. Pat is a well-educated, but self-deceiving, mainstream Republican. He is apparently more interested in selling books than taking a clear stand on issues. Intelligent, yes. Principled, no. (The same description also fits his mentor, Richard M. Nixon.)

The one prominent example of a conservative left in our system is a congressman by the name of Dr. Ron Paul. Unlike Bush, Paul is a real Texan as well as a real conservative. He is also widely known in libertarian circles--and he once ran for President on the Libertarian Party ticket. Because he runs under the GOP banner, he is frequently referred to as a "libertarian hybrid." Which is precisely to the point.

What is a conservative? A conservative is a libertarian who believes in traditional values.

That is not to suggest "libertarian" and "conservative" are synonymous. There is a large anarchist contingent within the libertarian movement--and anarchists are incompatible with a constitutional state, because they oppose all forms of government. So not all libertarians are conservatives.

But are all real conservatives libertarians? Yes.

icedog
"I spent 14 years living in Europe and I've seen "socialized" or "government-run" health care....we don't want it here."

I spent as long or close to it and still visit often. It seems to work better than what we have now....

"Btw, I've also spent hours waiting in military ERs....why, because it's "free"...everytime little Johnny has the snifles, mom brings him to the ER. If mom had to pay for it, Johnny would have got an aspirin and went to bed. What do you tink will happen when we have 80-90 million "little Johnnys"?""

Actually the military has the opposite problem. they hesitate to go. But as to What happens when we have 80-90 million "little Johnnys"? It is happening now. Stop bye your local ER and talk to the staff.... Numbers should actually fall if they could visit doctors offices anf who say free?

Universal Health Care in 1 Easy Lesson
From the Philadelphia Inquirer of June 21: "The long, short-tempered lines at Philadelphia's U.S. Passport Agency at Chestnut and Second Streets start forming at 5 a.m. and wind around the corner, at times stretching two city blocks. At 9 a.m., when the office opens, federal marshals escort the hopeful into the building in groups of 15...."

Now, for "passport," just substitute "Health Care," and imagine you need an appendectomy... or are in labor... or broke your ankle... or are having a heart attack... or....

Hal
You argue passionately but you don't know squat about healthcare. I am a doctor, a surgeon that provides anesthetic care in my office. I can't tell you how much time and money is wasted ordering and intrepreting unnecessary tests simply to protect myself from being sued should the unthinkable happen. This is called defensive medicine and it costs billions per year. Do you actually think that Medicare provides a good model? Doctors are forced by law to participate if they accept any other insurances? Is that fair? Is that democracy? To make things worse, Medicare not only pays pennies on the dollar, is decreasing reimbursements 40% over the next five years (and I mean that they pay less and less) but it places multiple, unreasonable preconditions and requirements on the providers that are nearly impossible to comply with. Further, Medicare costs aren't decreasing across the board, oh no, certain areas will see increases, likely those that lobbied the correct politicians. Do you think that the govt is capable of doing anything efficiently? Have you tried to simply get a passport in the last few months? Have you seen how the Canadians cross our border for medical care? You want a suggestion for a better system- get rid of the insurance companies altogether and promote the use of HSAs.

BrianR
I absolutely will not back the immigration data up. It is not my issue it is you extremists'. You get the data.

as far as medical: "You also said, among other things, we have a high infant mortality rate. Back it up. Numbers please. According to data I've found, we're 36th out of 208 ranked countries"

36th is a high mortality rate especially when we spend by far the most amount of money on healthcare. You don't think 6.63 deaths/1,000 live births one of the highest rates in the industrialized nations is high? Four more dead infants per thousand live births than Singapore? Then we value life differently and money for that matter

Hey, Hal, back up your claims
Or are you simply going to ignore what I wrote?

How convenient for you.

lolo
my wife has PHD. Runs a hospital, has some 2000 employees who report to her at some level, works 60 plus house a week for a very high five figure salary. For 20 plus years of education and 35 plus years of work experience I think she is grossly underpaid. She always wanted to be a nurse and affiliated with a hospital but would certainly like to see some fair compensation for her education and time of the job

Hal
I see, you made nonsense statements, and when you're challenged your answer is simply to say "it's not your issue". Translation: You were full of BS and you know it.

As to infant mortality, again you were full of it. I quoted the real statistics, you can't refute them.

The liberal "method" of argument. Very impressive.

CVN65
First of all I said the system is broke and all you just said confirms it. You doctors fail to clean your own house - we all know doctors you wouldn't take your dog to; insurance companies do not accept any risk any longer and finally the lawyers often fail to police themselves. No the system is broke.

I do not want a fully socialized medical system but as a medical doctor you know damn well the money being wasted by the lack of preventive medicine. You are part of the problem sir and I suspect you know it. I asked when I first came on here on a means to provide universal healthcare. Answer?


Hal
Our infant mortality rate has risen with the increase in drug use....we used to be able to test and punish pregnant mothers who smoked crack...but liberal judges put a stop to it and now more babies die. Another liberal "accomplishment"...congrats.

pt 2
...why would a lib care about infant mortality rate anyway? You guys kill millions without blinking an eye.

LOL, Icedog!
Touche!

Hal 3
Again with the spew: "Well let's see we pay by far the highest cost for healthcare of any industrial nation. We have a high infant mortality rate; we are falling behind in longevity; our height is falling; our businesses cannot compete because of healthcare, where do you want me to stop? What we have does not work and costs too much. We had best do something - if you don't like universal healthcare come up with something that works better..."

Let me try to help you since I work with hospitals and medical groups nationwide and have some understanding of their industry: We pay the highest costs for two reasons: 1. we have the best healthcare in the world and the majority of serious medical innovation comes from American medical and pharmacutical R&D - costly undertakings. 2. Our goverment, the very people you expect to save the system, force our healthcare providers to provide free healthcare to ilegals who use emergency rooms like the family doctor's office. No matter how compassionate people like you want to be in doling out free healthcare to the less fortunate, the costs of doing so still exist and must be borne by those who actually pay for it. It doesn't suddently become free because Uncle Sam is involved. It's like windfall profit taxes you libiots want to put on the oil companies, who do you think will actually be paying it? Wake up Hal. maybe if we freed up their ability to drill for oil and build refineries we could actually improve the supply and reduce the prices at the pump. But you guys won't have that either. No common sense in your arguments at all.

It's the same thing with businesses and healthcare. Libdolts want to offer free care to everyone who doesn't have insurance and/or force businesses to pay for insurance for their employees. Again I ask: who is going to pay for all of that and how will that decrease the cost of healthcare?

What we need Hal is for government to get OUT of healthcare and put the decisions in the hands of the providers and the patients. You know let the marketplace decide, foster competition, pay for services, the kind of thing libtards hate. After all the evil drug companies will screw the little guy with nary a concern about going out of business when they are found out. Typical libdolt, you think the government can fix everything when in fatc they are the least likely to do and in fact it is more likely they will make it FUBAR. Can you name one thing the government can do better than private markets?

Issues w/"conservatism"
Thanks to The Engineer for his interesting, if lengthy, post above.

I had two issues with this section: "The second necessary ingredient for a conservative is a belief in national sovereignty and isolationism. Conservatives do not believe in foreign aid or foreign entanglements. They revere American sovereignty. Yes, conservatives do believe in a strong national defense--but national defense as mandated by the Constitution and the Monroe Doctrine. An invasive military empire is not mandated. Therein lies a crucial difference."

First, national sovereignty and isolationism are two different matters. They deserve separate discussion.

Second, the Monroe Doctrine is the opposite of isolationism. You can, perhaps, defend this excpetion -- but then "isolationism" is not a key component of conservatism. As Sherlock Holmes said, "I never make exceptions. An exception disproves the rule."

Hal
I will first apologize since my posts will seem disjointed. The first was written in quick breaks over an hour and just posted. After reading more of your posts I do have to comment on one. You wrote that you would rather see a doctor that loved his work rather than is in it for the cash. This is an oversimplification. Believe me, nobody makes it through college, grad school and residency for 12-14 years just for the money- you have to love it or you will leave. The cost of all that education (and all the time lost in the production of income) is astronomical. I knew doctors graduating in Boston that were already 250K in debt, before residency! Do you know what that loan payment is over 30 years? About 2400/month. That is a mortgage, car payment and 401k savings, gone for their entire career! So, put in those terms, the high pay now HAS to be there or nobody could be a doctor. Further, I have worked in VAs and on AD in a Navy hospital and am now in private practice. I can tell you that doctors work a LOT harder in private practice, not just in seeing more patients for more hours but in going the extra mile to keep people happy. If I don't they will go to the other guy in town. Have you ever seen that attitude from the clerk at the DMV? Competition and choice are the hallmarks of a free society. This is the best, most innovative health care system in the world, driven by a desire to be the best but also to produce a profit.

BrianR
I agree with your med stats which I think are horrendous but you don't but we agree on that data. As far as immigration goes not my job to provide the data I didn't make the original claim

Confluence of issues
The impact of illegal immigration on healthcare stats.

12-20 million illegals, of which Latinos are at least 40%, which equals a minimum of 5 million Latinos.

Latino illegals are of shorter stature than the average American, and 5 million out of the population of 280 million = app 2%, enough to influence that stat, particularly if the discrepancy is large (it is), so the influence is disproportionate to the percentile.

They also are typically of the undereducated and unskilled demographic, which have a significantly higher infant mortality rate. Again, enough to influence that stat, perhaps (probably) disproportionally.


Hal, you DID make the original claim
You claimed in your 8:27 AM post that there was no flood of illegals under Clinton. YOU raised the issue.

Either back it up, or withdraw the claim.

Thanks
for the excellent post The Engineer.

Good News for Conservatives
Hahahahahaha, I say let the foolish socialist Democrats govern, they are falling apart. Hillary Clinton is cold, shrill, and polarizing. A new surve by Rasmessian (sp?) found that of the likely voters 47% said they would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances. And Newsweek a very liberal magazine says she has a bad likibility problem. She is fooling no one, and the country is tired of Bush and Clintons, they want someone new.

The House is creaking. The Congress has an approval rating of 23%. Democrats that were elected in Republicans districts are facing up hill battles against strong conservatives next year. Pelosi is a disaster for the Democrats.

But this is the best news, big labor hates this immigration bill as so other moderate Democrats. There is a split in the party between the far moonbat left and the moderates. I have an old political science teacher who is a stong hard core Democrat. She voted for Bill, Gore, and Kerry. She helped get McCaskill elected and even voted for our loser former governor Bob Holden. She told me that she hates Hillary and would rather vote fro Fred Thompson! She is a good indicator of how more moderate Democrats will vote.

2006 may have been a disaster for us, but 2008 isn't so rosy for the socialist either.


CVN65
First, I have a few surgeon friends and I liken them to the fighter guys in aviation so a salute to you. You highlight several problems but education is a major one. I know the hours etc and the VAST majority of Docs are there because they want to be but you must know the ones who are there because it is the family business and no other reason. No one should graduate from school with over huge debt. We waste huge amounts of talent. In our day school was affordable barely. Now? I am not at all sure. Having owned and/or operated several businesses I know what you mean about private practice. But that actually is why I asked the question Our system is broken we pay too much and get too little for all the reasons good and bad we both know about. My question is how do we come up with a new system? My thoughts are government minimal healthcare coverage then a civil on top of that. But that is just a thought. Do you agree something should be done?

good point Drew
as both parties put more and more emphasis on being afraid of the other party, someone with a common sense, stay out of the absurd fray, stance is going to look awfully refreshing to everyone.

Well, Charlie
He'll always have an "answer", but the answers certainly aren't "proving him right".

Not that I can see.

The Left's stanglehold
...on the donkey? I disgree. The donkey is the CREATION of the left. Always has been. What is actually happening is that, especially in the last forty years, the Democraps have become progressively more open about their Marxist worldview.

the left
when the missus klinton gets elected and engineers her workers paradise, it won't be merely a question of where she will find the tax dollaars to run it, where will she find the workers to do the job. With the removal of incentive to accumulate wealth who will do more than the bare minimum. But the dims have the answer. Bring all of mexico, latin america, the ME and asia here as they will do all the jobs that americans no longer will and do it at cut=throat wages.

Wasted Time and Effort

You guys and Gals spend time debating this issue and that issue as if you can influence someone. What you should do is recognize the Democrat Party and the Radical Left are Communist to the core. If they have their way, you will fund through your hard work every Socialist program historically associated with that ideology. You will become subservient to the state, worship at the altar of Marx, and watch as the things you love and cherish such as your house and property are seized. The very same people (their children and grandchildren) that took over Russia are trying to do it here. They refuse to accept the notion Communism is a failed ideology--they argue it failed due to poor leadership. Your lack of identification of the problem is so profound that if not for the Armed Forces of this country, you would be living under the banner of the Hammer and Cycle. Fortunately for you the Armed Forces are still loyal to the Republic and each other. There has recently been some rumblings about more of them getting Commissions in the services in an effort to undermine military loyalty. They are patient--they now control most of the courts, the MSM, many of our Universities, the ACLU, the Democrat Party, the Federal Reserve ( all 12 Banks), the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Hollywood, and the labor unions. They have convinced most Americans that: Christianity is for the weak minded and only Evangelical or Traditionalist adhere to this biblical myth; secularism is the wave of the future; progressivism and socialism are not Communism; Conservatives are to be boycotted (debates) and ignored (Fairness Doctrine) on social issues; children can be spiritual but not religious; and public schools must be in session longer so your children can be taught more thoroughly what the Liberals want them to know. Political Correctness was in full force in Russia from 1917 until the wall came down--it is a combination of Marxism and the ramblings of Freud. Welcome to the real world Comrade.

Hal
Nobody wants to see children kicked out because their parents can't pay. Part of the problem is govt subsidies in education- every time they go up, tuition rises the same percentage. Tort law is another problem, as I pointed out before. Another issue, rarely mentioned, is the exhorbitant price for medical equipment. I am looking a piece of turing with an in-line brass valve that costs probably $10 to make but is sold for over $450 because it is for an anesthesia machine. On the other issue, preventative medicine helps but you can't force people to get physicals, stop smoking, etc. Most people don't go to the doctor "until it hurts". We overpay for medicine because people are kept from the real costs by insurance and govt. coverage. By converting to HSAs people will actually shop around and spend their money much more wisely. If all of my patients had these, I could hold the line on prices for at least five years because of 1. I don't have to adhere to any ridiculous or arbitrary insurance company rules, 2. I don't automatically lose 30-40% of my fee, 3. I get paid now, not 3 months from now and 4. I can employ 2 fewer people to do the same work since I won't have to duke it out with the companies all day every day. I think that insurance companies are an abomination- they do not care about any patients nor do they provide care- they are banks and only interested in the bottom line. They do not answer to anyone and they can't be sued for denying coverage. If you want to change something in the health care system, here is a good place to start. I have to get back to work. Nice chatting.

BrianR
So I did but it was in reaction to the general comment in the article etc. But this should cover my claim: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4654257,00.html

Sorry and thanks

Hal
When you settle down a bit you actually become a little more reasonable.
You may despise him, but Newt has an exceptional book entitled "Saving Lives and Saving Money" He can be quite irritating, but has an exceptional research organization put together and is a very organized, understandable writer.
The book underlines the essence of most of the problems, addresses the real culprits and offers workable solutions for our healthcare system.
He offers third party pay and the lack of an acceptable quality control system necessitated by protection from mal-practice vultures as the two big problems.
As anyone in industry will attest to, quality control is accomplished by identifying problems down to their root cause and then developing a strategy for control.
Any system that logs mistakes or problems becomes a direct line to the mal-practice courtroom for healthcare providers.
Being on the fringes of the medical profession (manufacturer of orthotic devices) I see both the total greed of the industry and the absurdity of how Medicare operates.
One last observation; I find it hilarious to think someone will go into a large debt over a car or more frivoluos consumer items, but somehow cannot pay for a test that may save their life, because insurance won't pay for it.
It is a testament to how distorted the third party pay system has become.

CVN65
"If you want to change something in the health care system, here is a good place to start. I have to get back to work. Nice chatting."

Same here and thank you

Kuwull
LMAO "When you settle down a bit you actually become a little more reasonable."Thank you I think LOL.

"He offers third party pay and the lack of an acceptable quality control system necessitated by protection from mal-practice vultures as the two big problems."

Those are two or all if you mean insurance as third party pay. Have you read CVN's comments. For the most part I think they are spot on target. HSA's may well be an excellent part of the answer.

Hal, the article you linked
if you've read it, actually says the illegal alien flood goes back into the Clinton years. It actually REFUTES your claim.


BrianR
I take it as where she says the last five and then she goes out to eight or nine as to mean the vast part of the illegal immigration problem especially from a rightwing paper like the Rocky Mount paper. Was there illegal immigrantion hell yes there always has been LOL. The vast majority of the problem has been under the bush regime though.

Hal
Yeah, I've read CVN's stuff and agree.
My oldest daughter just finished med-school and is off to Ft. Lewis for her internship/residency. Dad got her through Baylor, but the 400k for med-scholl was a bit out of my range! Uncle Sam paid the tab so she has a few years of the Army to deal with.
Her current plans are to stay Army as long as the mal-practice scene stays as is, or get out with x number of years experience if it staightens out.
I know too many orthotists and docs who would be making more in the Army than they can clear in their own practices. I do much better gross to net than the average doctor.

Hal
I just read the link you offered to Brian as proof that Clinton upheld our laws on illegal immigration.
Please cite a part of the article that proves your point?




Kuwull
If you know any other Doc's let me know I can sign them up. The Army needs them badly. I was just discussing this at Walter Reed Tuesday.

Do you really agree that that our kids should graduate with all this debt? I think the country is losing billions by not educating our people.

Near as I can see the Docs are now working for the insurance companies.

Well, Hal, do the math
That's exactly what she says, which means the problem goes back into the Clinton administration, directly refuting your assertion.

another problem
with third party (insurance company) pay is government limits insurance company profit by percentage. Therefore, the only way to increase profit is to increase gross. This means the insurance companies want and need the huge loss payouts in order to have an excuse to raise rates for profit. Ever wonder where the absurd saying, "it's cheaper to pay than fight" came from? It's never cheaper to invite more frivolous suits by paying, rather than fighting, unless you actually want those extra frivolous suits.
Ever wonder how, on earth, the same party has the trial lawyers and insurance companies as donors?
Welcome to the big shell game, you paying fools.

Also, Hal
The person quoted in the article is a Clinton drone, if you'll note.

Hal
you keep upping government grants, loans, et.al., you keep ending up with higher and higher tuition. Proven point, don't work.
Same thing with medicare, keep the government out of business, it doesn't know how.
As far as all the debt for students goes, it is what it is. I paid the bill for my kids so they wouldn't start life with all the debt, however, if I didn't have that luxury, I would have steered them to the loans. Btter to have a debt with the ability to pay,than face a life of poverty.
Problem is, when you start wanting the government to pay for everything, those who worked to pay for their own are robbed to pay for the lazy. How is that more fair than the system we have?
Nothing griped me more during those years than not having all my daughters' college expense as deductions for taxes, because I also had to pay for a few lazy jerks kids while paying for mine.
All you're going to get with socialism is no incentive for anyone to work and the same total collapse you've gotten every other time it's been tried.
The russian mafia runs russia because they were the only ones who supplied what the people needed and were in a position to take control when the old regime fell. As cute as Hillary thinks her Sopranos commercial is, it sends a cold chill down my back.

Who Cares?
Why should you guys care if the Democratic Party is being pulled farther and farther left? And if the bloggers, and far left people then so be it. You guys act like Talk Radio has not pulled Republicans further and further right, which it has. This is a completely worthless column to read because it states the obvious, and it states something that you guys shouldn't spend time debating because it is pointless.

DOM
then why waste your time with that post?

Dom
If you think this article is so "pointless" and "worthless" then why are you reading it and complaining about your self inflicted misery?

If you don't like the articles at TH then don't stay here and suffer on our account, just go back to CodePink where you belong.

All intelligent posters out there
Simply ignore Hal and Phylo, it is not worth even bothering to read their tripe. It saves time to scroll past their complete lunacy and attempt to create their own facts. You can't convince them that they are wrong no matter how many facts you use. The are beyond hope, uneducably mentally retarded!!

MyOpine
Excuse me, I do not inflict misery on myself, and I certainly don't agree with everything Code Pink does. Well, I wouldn't complain about it if you guys would actually publish something with a little substance. David Limbaugh is one of my least liked columnists, and his brother his wrong all the time too. Conservatives run out of things to write about so they just ramble on and on about worthless stuff.

Thanks for your concern, Dom
But I LIKE wasting my time this way. It feels good, and it's fun.

"Feeling good". Isn't that the liberal philosophy? You should be able to understand that.

BTW, I doubt talk radio has dragged any opinion anywhere, as it's merely a reflection of the majority philosophy of the country that simply hasn't had an outlet until now, as the MSM -- which is unabashedly liberal -- has traditionally refused to give it a forum.



Dom
Like I tried to say;
No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read or listen to the Limbaughs nor will your dislike of what they say serve to silence them.

If you don't like it here you don't need any special permission to take yourself elsewhere.

MyOpine
I am not trying to silence the Limbaughs, I am just saying that he writes columns about worthless things.

Then why do you read them, Dom?
And further, waste your time making that observation in a comment, if it's a waste of time and worthless?


BTW, Dom,
I consider the stuff at MoveOn, KOS, and Huffington a total waste of time.

Hence, I don't waste a minute of my day there, ever.


This should wind you up LOL
"WE WOULD RATHER DO BUSINESS WITH 1000
>>ALQAEDA TERRORISTS THAN WITH ONE SINGLE AMERICAN"
>>
>>This sign was prominently displayed in the window of a business in
>>Philadelphia. You are probably outraged at the thought of such an
>>inflammatory statement.
>>
>>However, We are a society which holds Freedom of Speech as perhaps
>>our greatest liberty. And after all, it is just a sign.

BrianR
From the sound of the posts you’ve been answering, it sounds like you were dealing with half a donkey. I’ll let you decide which half Hal & Phylo represent.

The rest of the story..
You may ask what kind of business would dare post such a sign.
>>
>> Answer: A FUNERAL HOME
>>

MyOpine
Hi hope all is well with you

"Immigration, particularly illegal immigration, has in the last five to eight, nine years really become a national phenomenon," she said."

Is the part I thought and think supports my position. It may (a rightwing paper remember) have started under Clinton but ity becams a problem under Bush.

Hal
the numbers are too small but let's expand the clientelle. Include hamas, hezbollah, the palestians, Why limit it, let's just state followers of the cult of peace

Kuwull
"another problem..."

Amen I agree entirely the system is completely broke....

Kuwull
"As far as all the debt for students goes, it is what it is."

Now here is where we differ in a big way. I look at the WWII GI bill where we the taxpayer payed all the bills and gave them spending money to go to college. A huge "welfare program" or "communist program" folks here would say but guess what? It was the best INVESTMENT we ever made with returns far exceeding the costs spent and one of the main reasons we became the leader of the free world - all those scientists, doctors, machinists etc.

That is what is happening with our competition all over the world.

wildwest
"the numbers are too small but let's expand the clientelle. Include hamas, hezbollah, the palestians, Why limit it, let's just state followers of the cult of peace"

?????

hal
the funeral home

wildwest
LMAO Good one but hell where would we stop from there we could go to other rightwing organizations and then look out,,,,

hal
you might be right. the libwits are so used to lining up and acting like sheep, they might think the line to the funeral parlor is just another handout line and there will be free goodies when they get inside

Repubs/Cons: FEAR THE DONKEY!!!
you gotta hand it people like the Limbaughs, Coulters, Medveds & Malkins, etc.

These people have managed to make quite a comfortable living in the right wing media by bashing and criticizing all things left, liberal, and democrat.

They have managed to convince their loyal followings that the leftist, liberals and democrats are the enemy to well being of the Unites States and that conservatives and Republicans only have the answers to the salvationm, financial solvency and security of the country.

I believe a lot of their attacks on the left,libs and democrats is based on paranoid delusional fear, a defensive inferiority complex
and fear of progressive change for the future.
Republicans/Conservatives are alway looking backwards and trying to turn back the clock to the "good ole days, when everyone KNEW their place".

A good bit of their problem seems to be the fact that liberalism has dominated american politics, society, and the way the u.s. government is operated for the last centurty with conservatism having it's rare moments of dominance in the last twenty years or so with the reagan republican revolution and the gingrich
contract with america and take over of congress.

Whats scaring the heck out of repubs cons is all of that conservative progress, power and influence is slowly slipping away from them as the country reverts back to its natural state of liberal dominace.

The republican party is in disarray. They have a very unpopular Prez Bush presiding over a equally unpopular Iraqi War which he insist of "stay the course", "surge" and "win at all cost" strategies, which fly squarely in the face of the opposition of the vast majority of the american public.

Then you have Prez Bush driving a wedge right down the middle of the Republican Party and his conservative base, with his insistence on passing a "amnesty" immigration reform bill into law. It has turned into a nasty inter-party fight with REPUBS/CONS calling for Bush's IMPEACHMENT for not enforcing existing laws.

So with all this negativity going on for republicans its ironic that d. limbaugh writes a column like this that is nothing more than "fearmongering" propaganda against the left. he really doesnt want to write about the troubles of the right..it's to hurtful because he knows dems are in the drivers seat for elections 08. he knows and his reader know they have to:

FEAR THE DONKEY!!!

wildwest
The fundies are the sheep. It is they that march blindly along saying exactly what they are told. I mean just look at the Gay issue, the creationist issue and now the immigrant issue. All lock step drinking the kool aid

Left Angle
Donkeys are worthless, stupid, stubborn, animals who serve no useful purpose whatsoever.

georgtwin: the donkeys purpose..
is to kick the H*ll OUT OF REPBS/CONS...LOL

Georgetwin
Left angle got you there you must admit LOL

hal donahue:...that was to easy..lol
he set his ownself up..

Hal - Left Angle
Not a bad line I admit. However, check any livestock auction. You can buy your weight in donkeys out of pocket. My description of donkeys was not meant as an insult, it is the TRUTH about donkeys.

hal
we are probably both right. Both sides have their fair share of indocrinated who would readily line up for what ever is proposed

Georgetwin
You are casting aspersions upon the intellect of donkeys.

One more time
Have a look at these poll numbers from Gallup:

http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070621biv.gif

The trend line for voter dissatisfaction with the incumbent government is increasing steadily, in parallel with their concern over Iraq. No other issue correlates as well.

What voters want to hear is a solution to Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. They're not going to care about labels like "far left" or "Christian right" this time. If we're at war on Election Day, with Americans risking and giving their lives in combat, all voters care about is electing officials who know how to deal with that war. It was the deciding issue in 1944, 1952 and 1968, all wartime years.

So the issue remains: What would a truly principled conservative President do about Iraq, starting in January 2009? Without that answer, voters will give Hillary a try even if they have doubts about her. Trying to go negative on her by painting her as an extremist won't be enough.

It wasn't enough for Carter, the last highly unpopular incumbent, to go negative on Reagan in 1980 and paint him as an extremist. There were many Democrats who didn't agree with Reagan on some things, who nevertheless voted for him in 1980 anyway because they had totally lost faith in Carter who had essentially admitted he had no solution to stagflation. And so the voters figured what the hell, let's give somebody fresh and different a chance. And the result was that Reagan won a national landslide.

The argument "I admit we've done a bad job but my opponent will be even worse" has NEVER worked in American politics.

SteveL
Such polls are misleading in that they fail to site the specific reason for dissatisfaction.

Many are dissatisfied because they think the war is not being pursued agressively enough.

You are wrong about the reason for our Governments small approval percent however.
That is mainly due to the "Give America To Mexico" program.
Amnesty?

wildwest
both right to a point. The fundies are like sheep and on the left there are so many herds that it is often to tell who is marching where LOL

MyOpine
WHAT INTELLECT!

MyOpine
Hope you are well

"Many are dissatisfied because they think the war is not being pursued agressively enough."

From what I have seen most folks have gone well past that point thru FUBAR and into get us out of there

"You are wrong about the reason for our Governments small approval percent however.
That is mainly due to the "Give America To Mexico" program. Amnesty?"

From what I am hearing is it is simply the next god,guns and gay issue to distract from the state of the country. Who knows might work but I do not think so....

Georgetwin
I was refering to the donkeys at the auction.

Granted they both operate mainly by instinct but the donkey from the auction can be taught.
The political donkey is incapable of learning.
You have seen that attempted here at TH enough times to know it is futile.

Left Angle
"the donkeys purpose..
is to kick the H*ll OUT OF REPBS/CONS...LOL"

What's the difference. We have a pack of socialists in the Republican Party too. You are free to kick them all you want. They're easy to spot really, just look at the ones running around hollering for amnesty, more big government managed trade agreements, nuking Iran, selling off our infrastructure, etc. Yes, one big happy socialist/communist hog wallow. In fact, I invite them to move over to the Democan party, where they belong.


and another clinton
won't get away with "worst economy in the last 50 years" again.
Hal - "From what I am hearing is it is simply the next god,guns and gay issue to distract from the state of the country."

A distraction from the "state of the country?"
The left needs that distraction. Any admission of the real state of the economy and the demos go down in smoke.
"I'm fine but all my neighbors must be broke" ain't playin no more.

Kuwull
"A distraction from the "state of the country?"
The left needs that distraction. Any admission of the real state of the economy and the demos go down in smoke.
"I'm fine but all my neighbors must be broke" ain't playin no more."

Hey even your own are tearing your party apart. This Bush Regime will go down in history as an incredible debacle that hopefully we survived....

Hal
You seem to be VERY poorly informed.

I don't see how anyone who has seen the Amnesty scam discussed here at Town Hall can be as naive as you pretend to be.

I am sure you know as well as we do that this "Amnesty" bill would destroy the American banking system right along with America's basic infrastructure. It would destroy the Dollar and eventually collapse our idiot Government because no one will be able to pay taxes.

You are too young to know the death, suffering and misery a depression causes.
This "Amnesty" will affect the entire World, not just America & Mexico.
Step back and look at the entire picture.

SteveL
You wrote:

"The problem is that the continuing war in Iraq, with no clear end in sight, is pushing the entire electorate to the Left."

But the poll you linked in a later post shows that fewer than 40% think Iraq is the most important issue facing us. So how can Iraq be driving "the entire electorate to the left"?

Has it occured to you that some of those who think Iraq is the most important issue are supporters of the war?

The graph also shows that dissatisfaction was at or near 50% at the start of 2003, which was before the Iraq war. So even if the entire additonal dissatisfaction since then is due to Iraq, there must have been some other cause for roughly five-sevenths (or 71%) of the current dissatisfaction.

Why is there no line on the graph for illegal immigration? Does no one consider this our biggest problem, or did Gallup simply decide not to offer their interviewees that option?

These are the kinds of problems we encounter with polls, and these questions make it impossible to reliably draw simple conclusions such as "it's Iraq".

Party elites
tanabear points out that elites in both parties are either ignoring or riding roughshod over their base.

I find this observation very interesting considering that the elites in the Democrat party are the left-wing fringe; much more liberal than the base, and the elites in the GOP are the moderate RINO's; again, much more liberal than the base.

So can we conclude that being an elitist and ignoring the base is a symptom of being more liberal than your base, regardless of the party?

MyOpine
Actually I have not paid that much attention sorry to say. These are all arguements I have heard befoe. As far as the value of the dollar we have devalued WELL OVER 30% already and the real value of the dollar is completely in China's hands.

"You are too young to know the death, suffering and misery a depression causes."

I am but I am old enough to have heard the tales first hand.

I am not sure if this is good or bad but ity is just possible that the world would avoid a collapse of the US economy. All this economic talk simply ignores the MASSIVE debt the US assumed in Iraq. Immigrants could actually could be the force to save us.

But like I said I have not followed it all real closely and I am willing to listen

wiseone/MyOpine
From what I have seen, heard and read, the immigrant issue is not one of party. It seems to be one of embracing change or abhorring change. That is a personality issue while party etc isn't as clear cut.

Blowing Off Conservatives
The Democratic Party might be a captive pet creature of the far fringe looney Left, but there's been a big downside. The Republicans as a party & many individual GOP pols feel virtually obligated to play Richard Nixon's stoopid little Pol Sci 201 game of assuming there's a vacuum in the "middle' and trying to rush into it positionwise. That's how RINOs & "kinder gentler conservatives" get spawned.

There's something very naive about saying one position on a given issue can be represented by a point near the left end of a horizontal line, while the converse position might be indicated by a point on the right end, then diagramming candidates' positions on that line. What's silly is to assume that (1) the middle of that line must represent some meaningful rational compromise position on that issue, & (2) there is actually a segment of the population who would support it because they don't support either of the opposing views.

Many issues are inherently dichotomies and lack meaningful middle positions. On abortion, for example, either a child is killed or it is not. Solomon illustrated how ridiculous the notion of such compromises are where a human life is potentially involved.

Furthermore, just because 20% of the electorate don't support either side of the issue as reflected in votes for 2 candidates for 2 institutional parties, it doesn't follow that they favor some compromise position between the 2 choices. Such a "moderate compromise" position might be logivcally impossible, & in any event those undecided voters are more likely to simply be confused or apathetic or perhaps support even more extreme positions.

Therefore this little fad of "moving to the middle" is nonsense as a concept in most cases, & as a real political strategy. I fear that IMCO, the explanation for GOP behavior is much simpler: most career politicians & government people abhor true conservatism. It limits their power & control of our lives, it forbids them to buy off special interests with government power, it imposes accountability and responsibility and respect for the real rights of citizens, it says the government should be doing certain things and refraining from doing other things. That's why there are so few Congresspersons of Presidential candidates consistently talking the talk and walking the walk.

Hal
I don't believe I stated or implied that immigration was a party-line issue.

I am simply questioning the validity of the Gallup poll linked by SteveL. One of my reasons for doing so is that it seems to me that illegal immigration should be on that graph somewhere since it has been a very hot topic lately.

SteveL
The Carter analogy is a inaccurate one whereas the incumbent is not running this time so a vote either way is still a vote for change. Then it was a choice to vote for the worst president ever or someone else. This time the second worst isn't running. IMOH though, Shillary's negatives are far too high to allow her to get elected. When 47% say they definitely would not vote for you - that is too much to overcome. If you had mediocre favorables but very low negatives you have a better chance. While I do worry the dems could win the WH this time, I would be surprised if its her. I hope no matter what happens we get no more Bushes and no more Clintons.

Don't Tread on Me
Good post.

I particularly liked your conclusion that conservatism is anathema to pols that desire power, regardless of their party or their position on the political spectrum.

Hal
ILLEGAL immigrants do not contribute to our society, they only take.
They have forced hospital facilities to close.
When illegals use facilities and do not pay, that cost is added to bills of people who do pay and escallates the cost of medical treatment.

Making these illegals lawful citizens will simply move them to higher paying jobs, flooding the labor market with cheaper labor to compete with native Americans while the next crop of ILLEGALS come here to work the low paying farm jobs that have just been vacated.

New home starts are already slowing.
Forclosures are already a problem.

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/11163/1/374/

Have any idea how many families this has already broken?

How long can it continue to worsen before banks begin to fail?
That "Amnesty" bill would greatly escallate America's financial ruin.
Business would collapse, then other Nations who depend on our economy and Nations dependent upon their economy, etc., like a row of Dominoes.

Don't Tread On Me
I disagree strongly. It often is a question of what can be done versus doing nothing. The take it or leave it attitude often covers doing nothing. Abortion? What can we actually do? Stop unwanted pregnancy? Then let's at least do that.

I so often find the far right and the far left want to stay pure. The result reminds me of the piano player in the whore house,,,,

Hal (again)
You wrote: "From what I have seen, heard and read, the immigrant issue is not one of party. It seems to be one of embracing change or abhorring change. That is a personality issue while party etc isn't as clear cut."

Apparently you don't see much, hear much from anyone outside you political sphere, nor do you read much. This is not about "embracing change or abhorring change" or any "personality issue". You are just soooooo superior aren't you? What hooey! Hal, you are reading out of your liberal playbook again. I've warned you about that. It makes you look dim. Contrary to libdrool belief conservatives are not against change. I would venture that a number of conservatives have made significant contributions to change in America over the years. Let's talk honestly about the immigration thing Hal - not a bunch of talking points.
1. we don't want America overrun by ILLEGAL immigrants who are unskilled, can't or won't speak English, and have broken the law to get here. Why do you always want to make that a fault of ours? Immigrants in the past hasd their entry controlled and they became assimilated because they were required to do so. Why is that now frowned upon? You had to learn English, have access to a job, take a citizenship test, be tested or be vaccinated for disease, and your had to swear allegiance to the US. Why is that now considered wrong and too much too ask by libs? Why are people who want it to be the old way considered racists?
2. Shouldn't America be able to decide who can come to our country? Why wouldn't we be looking to import more educated and more valuable immigrants into our society who will make more immediate and significant contributions rather than those who will simply tax the society or fail to be taxed by it? (Don't libs love taxes?)
3. Isn't it libtards who are always saying that conservatives are meanies and that they are just plain unfair? Tell me Hal: How is giving 12 million illegal immigrants (with more on the way) the ability to jump ahead in line of the people waiting to enter by following the rules fair to them? Or us?

I am unclear why it is exactly you or any other American would be for amnesty to illegals. I wish someone could explain it to me. To me it's like libs being against a missile defense shield. Why would anyone be against that? The only reason I can think of is libs like people to be dependant on them - that is where their power comes from. If Republicants think these illeglas are going to vote for them if they go along with scamnesty - they are stupider than I thought. Why they are almost like Dems.

MyOpine
"ILLEGAL immigrants do not contribute to our society, they only take.
They have forced hospital facilities to close.
When illegals use facilities and do not pay, that cost is added to bills of people who do pay and escallates the cost of medical treatment."

You are correct on the medical portion and we have been flooded with illegals for at least the last six years. It ha shelped to reduce labor cost and "alter" labor stats. I guess where I am coming from is they are here and if they are legal they will begin to pay. A false comment but just related to me by a WWII Italian American veteran. He says hell Hal WOP means without papers... We have the problem how do we fix it?

"Making these illegals lawful citizens will simply move them to higher paying jobs, flooding the labor market with cheaper labor to compete with native Americans while the next crop of ILLEGALS come here to work the low paying farm jobs that have just been vacated."

There is the catch Myopine. This Regime has failed at everything. We have had unprotected borders since we became a country. Now because Bush is incompetent we much change every thing? I think not.. Let's enforce our existing laws

New home starts are already slowing.
Forclosures are already a problem.

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/11163/1/374/

Have any idea how many families this has already broken?

Actually yes I do. But this is as much a factor of debt from Iraq as illegal immigrants.

How long can it continue to worsen before banks begin to fail?

I am surprised many have held out this long. We are living in a house of cards but illegals are just a tiny fraction of the problem

That "Amnesty" bill would greatly escallate America's financial ruin.

True

Business would collapse, then other Nations who depend on our economy and Nations dependent upon their economy, etc., like a row of Dominoes."

Actually this may be wrong. We may c oollapse but the rest of the world may slow but not follow. I regret you do not fully realise the extremely dangerous financial position this regime has put us in. I see illegals as a small part of the problem and a way to distract us from the real issues - unlimited wild spending

bobbit
HUH?I never said conservatives were against change did I?

"we don't want America overrun by ILLEGAL immigrants who are unskilled, can't or won't speak English, and have broken the law to get here."

Why not? That is the stock 99% of us come from.

"Why do you always want to make that a fault of ours?"

If the Bush regime had been competent my guess is this whole immigration "problem" would not exist


bobbit
"Immigrants in the past has their entry controlled and they became assimilated because they were required to do so. Why is that now frowned upon?"

That is a fairy tail. Do you have any idea of how many Irish Immigrants walked from Canada because they were too diseased to enter NY harbor? That is with every immigration wave. Please do some studying of our past? It really is awesome

bobbit
"Why are people who want it to be the old way considered racists?"

Two reasons:

1. Your old ways never existed in practise
2. Every time I go to a rally the nazis and the skin heads make up half the crowd. You judge people and groups by their fellow travelers

bobbit
"Shouldn't America be able to decide who can come to our country?"

Yee

bobbit
"Isn't it libtards who are always saying that conservatives are meanies and that they are just plain unfair? Tell me Hal: How is giving 12 million illegal immigrants (with more on the way) the ability to jump ahead in line of the people waiting to enter by following the rules fair to them? Or us?"

Fair? You, a conservative, is talking fair LMAO???? But seriously it isn't about fair it is about the millions of people your regime let in the country. What is the best way to fix the problem and get on with business

Hal
I agree with you about the wild spending.
Bush is ALMOST as bad as a Democrat.
Big Government & wild spending are not Conservative things.

As to impoverishing the American middle class so america has only the very wealthy and the very poor like 3rd world Countries have, I am very much against that.
You do not seem to understand the scope of our Illegal problem. You equate it with a few ship loads of Europeans.
Try to think in terms of TWELVE MILLIONS JUST TO START!
Making them legal and importing their extended families?

You keep trying to turn everything into a Bush Bash.
Please try to remember who forced people to hold their nose and vote for that RINO.
http://www.kerrystreason.com/index.html

Hal
"You judge people by their fellow travelers"?
Do we then judge you by NAMBLA & ACLU?

MyOpine
Touche' LOL

But I am serious look at the turn of the century papers WOW! The problem was near as bad or worse percentage wise.

You know I keep hearing this all you want to do is bash Bush. I even earned another letter to the editor to an Op Ed I did about treatment of veterans. The simple fact is that Bush has been responsible. We did not enforce hiring illegal immigration hiring by companies - guess what we rolled out the red carpet. Bush is in charge he is responsible and I hope Congress watches everything he does just like it did Clinton.

I am prejudiced toward immigran ts in general. They are risk takers and generally very hard workers. Like our own ancestors. Do we have a problem yes can it be fixed yes. Will it be "fair" almost certainly not to all.

Georgetwin
I just got back and saw your post to me regarding Hal -- BTW, which half I do not know -- and also noticed that ole Hal never did acknowledge that his comment about the whole illegal alien invasion taking place on Bush's watch was pure BS.

Typical lib: pin their ears to the wall with facts and documentation and they quickly change the subject, ignoring the fallacies in their mindless assertions.

No wonder they need the Fairness Doctrine. No one with half a brain, or who knows how to operate a radio, would ever listen to that drivel. That's why they fail in the true marketplace of ideas.

The other problem for them: much of their constituency is a very undesireable ad dollar demographic. Who wants to place ads at a radio station listened to by poor people and illegal alines, none of whom have a dime to spend on anything?

LOL

MyOpine
""You judge people by their fellow travelers"?
Do we then judge you by NAMBLA & ACLU?"

I just today learned that it was the ACLU who got Ollie North out of his felony conviction on a legal technicality. Everyone hates the ACLU but I sure want them there.

NAMBLA I think is yours. Isn't that a branch of the Catholic Church or at least the priesthood?

Sigh sorry cheap shot

LeftAngle,
I saw your post deriding Limbaugh, Hannity et al for making mega-bucks criticizing liberalism.

I know you think this is unjust. It made me envious.



I spend HOURS every day criticizing libs. I want to cash in!

BrianR
Hey Brian welcome back

Here is my 3 PM post:

"Immigration, particularly illegal immigration, has in the last five to eight, nine years really become a national phenomenon," she said."

Is the part I thought and think supports my position. It may (a rightwing paper remember) have started under Clinton but ity becams a problem under Bush."

Hal, again
The quoted person in that article was a CLINTON DRONE, so obviously no conservative. You call the paper "right wing"; why did you then reference it?

And when you do the math, the article was dated a couple of months ago, which puts the nine years firmly in the middle of Clinton's administration.

Instead of weaselling aroubnd on this, you'd earn a lot more credibility chops if you just admitted... you... were...wrong!

I know that's TOUGH for libs to do, to admit they were ((((strangle)))) wrong.

Hal
These are not the same brand of illegal we used to get.
Mexico ships us all their undesirables.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52091

This adds to the cost of a Government that is already TOO EXPENSIVE!

And much of the price is paid in American lives & blood.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/02/more_americans_killed_by_illeg.php

Do you begin to see the problem now?

BrianR
Nope not at all.

I am trying to remember the data but you will know it... Clinton prosecuted over a thousand companies in 1999 for hiring illegals Bush prosecutes four? Surely that says it all?

Well, Hal
I was all prepared to give you kudos even for saying you had "misspoken". Instead, you keep making the same old same old, another unsubstantiated reiteration of the same nonsense, even after YOUR OWN SOURCE was proven to rebuke your assertion.

Pathetic, and worse yet, you put me in the position of having to defend Bush, whom I despise probably as much as you do.

I'll tell you what, Hal
If this is the way you reported to your senior officers when you were in the AF, no wonder the military was in such sorry shape back during our war.

Nothing but CYA, BS, and lies.

No wonder we lost.

Glad I was an NCO. I never trusted the officers of that time; you're a great example of why.

Hal
I would need to see proof of anything the ACLU ever did besides persecute Boy Scouts and Christians on behalf of pedifiles.

NAMBLA is strictly a supporting branch of the Democrat Party.
Democrats seem prone to support pedifiles, see;?
http://hollycrud.com/2006/10/nancy-girl-wants-old-gays-with-young.html


And next time you want to compare Conservatives with Nazis, consider how close that shoe fits YOU!
http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist

MyOpine
The last ref is beneath you. Although it could be true there are no sources to primary data. All I know is when Mayor Barletts od Hazleton, PA, referred to as ST> Louie on skinhead sites, was asked in court to show proof that illegal aliens caused more crime and a large portion of Hazletons, this Santorum clone with all his resources could not do it.

Now a personnal tale. After I returned from SEA I was a city policeman here while I worked my way thru college. When I was a plainclothes cop I was assigned to the detective bureau. What I saw there watered my eyes. The arrest books went back to the 1860's. You could see wave after wave of immigrant. First the Germans. then the Irish, Italians, Poles, Eastern Jews each wave had high arrest rates for robbery, murder prostitution etc. Do you see what I am getting at?

BrianR
Ahh come on what pray tell was wrong with my answer now? Was I wrong? Yes. As a generality no but I did not say it was aenerality.

Simmer down. Defend Bush? Come on you helped create him LOL

No, Hal, you flat-out won't
accept responsibility for the fact that you lied about when the illegal alien invasion occurred.

You made what you thought was a killer statement, throughout the day I've proven it as at the least unsubstantiated, and you keep weaselling around trying to avoid admitting that you made something up out of whole cloth.

You ABSOLUTELY remind me of the junior officers running around in the field in 1969 and 1970 -- when I was in Nam -- only worrying about their "body counts", and lying their azzes off about the whole damned thing.

Calling in "I saw him with an AK!" reports over the net about totally fictional VC.

I'm just disgusted.

Hal
Now that you see the problem, try to place it in perspective. Scale those few ship loads of illegals up to about 12 million.
AND; Yes we do have the Mexican Mafia here too.

The way I read the XIII Amendment we could ease the pressure on our penal system by simply selling violent criminal illegals into the slave market. They can handle up to 11 million per year.
http://islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=679&Itemid=66

That might encourage a few violent foreign criminals to go home while they still can!
They come here for the express purpose of abusing our liberties to victimise Americans. This would be a just punishment

I remember VERV WELL
the lack of integrity of the Officer Corps of the Vietnam era.

If you were an enlisted man or NCO, you had to be in a body bag, or damned near, to get recommended for any award other than the "I was there" medals.

If you were an officer who even sniffed the front lines, you were considered inadequate if you didn't walk away with at LEAST a Bronze Star for Inconvenience.

You guys made me sick then, and I see things haven't changed much.


My fathers (deceased biological and living step-) both were NCOs in WW2 who worked their ways up the ranks to career officerdom. They'd have been even more disgusted than I am. And that's a difficult level to reach.



BrianR - "VERV" ?
You made a glaring mistrake Brian and see?
I did not tease you about it!

BrianR
"You guys made me sick then, and I see things haven't changed much."

Sorry your attempt at disrupting the military and me failed LOL. I was an E-4 in those days. Now have a good weekend and be well

MyOpine
"The way I read the XIII Amendment we could ease the pressure on our penal system by simply selling violent criminal illegals into the slave market. They can handle up to 11 million per year."

I hope you are not serious. I have seen slaves etc. I think 10 camels would buy a prime girl or boy. Seriously this is not a topic to be fooled with and is still a damn serious problem

No, Hal,
you turned into an officer born of that era. Further, your whole claim to any validity in your posts on miltary matters is your resume as an officer in the AF.

I was originally slated to go to OCS, and after I saw the skinnies of the era, declined. I was more interested in my integrity, deeply bound into the reason I ENLISTED. Is your next excuse that you were a mere draftee?

Do you know no shame?

Nice try at obfuscation again.

And you are apparently signing off, but we're not done yet, bud.

YOU I've leveled in my sights.

BrianR
Go to sleep you need rest. Good lord willing and the creek don't raise I will be back yet again LOL. And I do mean it be well
Good nite

Hal
There are gangs of Mexicans who come here for the purpose of gang raping teenage girls.
Mexican pedifiles come here to rape small children.
Can you think of a more fitting punishment?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50441

Or do you think Americans should tolerate this?




Can't wish you the same
Lame attempt at condescension.

I hope your sleep is troubled by the lies you tell.

Of course, you're a lib, so fat chance.


That was aimed at Hal the BS Artist

BTW

Yep, Tana
No Prez since Reagan has even TRIED to enforce IRCA 1986 (Simpson-Mazzoli).

CVN65 says
"... We overpay for medicine because people are kept from the real costs by insurance and govt. coverage. By converting to HSAs people will actually shop around and spend their money much more wisely."

Bingo. That is at the root of the problem. Poor Hal writes as though the American medical system is a free market system -- and it's NOT. CVN65's listing (see his posts above) of the various regulations he has to comply with, and the limits on his compensation for various services, all have their source in one entity:

Medicare.

Medicare launched the trend for the federal and state governments to price medical services, dole them out based on the decisions of government bureaucrats rather than physicians and patients, and still insulate the patients themselves from any direct interaction with the costs of the process.

Insurance companies are assuredly a hindrance to the best medical care, but they take their cue from Medicare and from state health care bureaucracies. Insurance companies couldn't get away with their shenanigans if government didn't already regulate the entire industry, for all practical purposes, for anyone who can't afford to just pay a big fee in cash for health care services.

Just about the whole camel is already under the tent, folks. Medicare, and state health care regulation, ARE socialized medicine. Don't think that you're not on Medicare yet -- effectively, you are, if ANYONE but you and your doctor intervenes to decide what procedures and medications you're eligible for.

You know, a lot of people have dissed military medicine in my hearing as "socialized medicine," because you don't pay a fee for it. But it's not socialized medicine at all, for this simple reason: there's a very limited population that can walk into a military hospital and demand care. Illegals can't, for example. They can't even get on base.

Try saying that about any civilian hospital. The problems of cost in our health care system weren't created by the market, they have been created by the intervention of government: through Medicare and its state-regulation offspring, through the "standard" they conveniently set for skinflint insurance agencies, through the illusion they create that medical care is "free," which increases the demand for it, and through spiraling civil liability costs for the medical profession.

As with everything we buy, we are paying the cost of a host of government programs and regulations with each remittance to a health insurer or health care provider. We want the bureaucracy, the regulation, the averaging of costs for them as well as for the actual medical care over all insured patients -- this is what it costs. It WOULD cost less to just go pay the doctor $100 when you need to see him, but then a whole lot of people would be out of a job.

Yep, Tana
No doubt.

Hal Donahue asks that I ....
.... read his delusionally fantasized absolute bloody drivel about the (lying, looting, thieving, mass-murdering, co-serial rapist) recidivist and treasonous Cli'ton "administration" whose treasons and other high crimes and misdemeanors during the eight awful years of the Hot-Springs Billy-Bubba Blythe's only-incidental once-white house besquatting and bemanuring apparently escaped his attention.

But for which all of the rest of us and what little remains (Australia and perhaps Israel) of the rest of the once free world will, in blood and treasure, be paying for decades to come.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone: