1 - 7
In response to:

The Obamacare Abortion "Compromise"

Josh249 Wrote: Mar 21, 2010 3:15 PM
If the abortion problem in the Healthcare Bill can be addressed through an Executive Order, then what's to stop the Executive Order from being canceled or amended in the future to permit taxpayer funds to be used for abortions?

If we can legislate wholesale reform that affects the entire country through Executive Orders, then why bother having the Congress pass a law? Just let the Executive Branch take over the Legislative Branch---and pass the whole thing thru an Executive Order and eliminate the Congress.

and oh---because the healthcare bill already provides that it can never be repealed and its terms are not subject to judicial review, looks like the Executive Branch already has a good jump on taking over the Judicial...
In response to:

Single Payer/Government Run Health care

Josh249 Wrote: Mar 19, 2010 7:22 PM
We need to make sure that Ben Nelson will enjoy the very same quality of "healthcare" that will be forced upon all of us---by booting his sorry butt out of office in 2012.
In response to:

Single Payer/Government Run Health care

Josh249 Wrote: Mar 19, 2010 11:12 PM
For all of you who believe that this bill will prevent insurance co's from denying coverage based upon "pre-existing conditions"......

How do you square that with the provision in the bill that mandates that hospitals be punished for "preventable re-admissions?"

Hmmmm---let's see---you are 68, have a pre-existing condition and the hospital refuses to re-admit you for treatment of the same condition because it does not want to risk penalties imposed upon it...

You can fool some of the people all of the time...
Bill O'Reilly says there isn't a construction crew in NYC that will build the mosque. Not to worry, the Muslim enclaves in Michigan & Minnesota will bust their behinds to race to NY to do the job. Or better yet, how about the Bin Laden Construction Company that re-built the mosque at Mecca? Maybe the Obama administration & Congress can give them an earmark to get the job done & ICE can look the other way when they come to America for this "charitable" purpose. This mosque near Ground Zero represents the height of Islamist "supremacy," poking a stick in the eye of the Americans after so many were murdered by their likes on 9-11. Never forget: the word Islam does not mean "peace"-----it means "SUBMISSION."
In response to:

Bleeding Hearts and Jihadi Revolving Doors

Josh249 Wrote: Dec 30, 2009 10:34 AM
1. Remember how the detainees at Abu-Ghraib claimed they were "humiliated" by alleged acts exposing their genitals, because sex is such a sensitive matter to Muslims? Now that radical ones are hiding terror devices in their underwear,where do you think we should be looking now? They cannot have it both ways.

2. Obama cannot even UTTER the words "Islamist terrorist." Why? Nor will he release the reports on Maj. Hassan and the crotch-bomber to the Senate Intelligence Cmte, despite its repeated requests. Why?

Still think he's not a Muslim?
In response to:

Afterthoughts from the U.N. Address

Josh249 Wrote: Sep 25, 2009 10:30 AM
Face it, this President needs to grow a set.

He wants the major nations of the world to "lead by example" by disarming themselves of their nuclear weapons programs. Then,if any rogue state or nutcase organization that has obtained nuclear technology were to attack, all the "disarmed nations" will be caught with their pants down.

He is either too stupid or too naive to understand the balance of global power and deterrence, and is about as qualified as Bambi to lead the United States in its national defense.

What ever happened to "peace through strength?" No wonder the Brits call him "President Pantywaist."
In response to:

A Tackle Box Full of Race Bait

Josh249 Wrote: Sep 18, 2009 9:36 AM
Barack Obama should be offended.

Think about what is being said: the fact that 50% of Obama's genetic make-up is African---should operate to insulate this President from any comprehensive critique of or all public disagreement with his policies. It is as if Carter and others are implying, in a perverse way: "We all know he can't really do the job because he's black, so let's look the other way and not embarrass the poor guy by disagreeing with him."

On numerous occasions, Obama himself has stated that he invites "vigorous debate" on policy issues. Does he REALLY want to be patronized because of the color of his skin?
1 - 7
Monday, June 04 | 02:13 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 02:13 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 02:13 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 02:13 AM ET