Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > October > 22 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USSCHIP is another ‘polite fiction’ of entitlement
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The first beneficiary of the Social Security “Trust Fund,” Ida May Fuller, filed on Nov. 4, 1939.
She had paid $44 in “insurance premiums” and for that “investment,” she collected $22,888.92 over the remainder of her life.
The first baby boomer, Kathleen Casey-Kirschling of New Jersey, applied this month. She was the first of the 10,000 people per day who will become eligible for benefits over the next two decades.
By 2017, it’ll pay out more in benefits than it takes in from payroll taxes. Reform was to be a top priority of President Bush’s second term. Congress has refused to take it up. So the march toward insolvency continues. By 2030 fewer than two workers will support one retiree. It’s a trick on illegals; about the time they get settled and made legal, the bill’s coming.
The story never changes. In 1996, the director of health and welfare studies for the libertarian Cato Institute testified before the Senate. Said he then: “Even if Social Security’s financial difficulties can be fixed, the system remains a bad deal for most Americans, a situation that’s growing worse for today’s young workers. Payroll taxes are already so high that even if today’s workers receive the promised benefits, such benefits will amount to a low, below-market return on those taxes.” True then. Truer now.
Various terms at the start of this column are in quotes. There’s a reason.
Whatever you think of Social Security as a foundational element of retirement planning, the fact is that it began on a fiction. “The Social Security Trust Fund is really little more than a polite fiction,” observed Tanner. The fiction that it was an insurance program and that participants paid premiums that were accumulated in their names in a trust fund.
The dishonesty, it can reasonably be argued, was for a higher purpose — to convince determinedly independent Americans to buy into the notion of government dependency. It worked. And as the beneficiaries grew and voted themselves more of another generation’s money, it became a sacred cow that politicians dare not reform.
There’s a lesson here for Democrats and Republicans searching for a compromise on what is euphemistically called the State Children’s Health Insurance program for “the working poor who can’t afford insurance.”
It’s not an entitlement. Not now, anyway. But under the vetoed legislation, it becomes an entitlement, hugely expanded. The cost now is about $5 billion a year. The vetoed bill would have increased the cost by $7 billion annually, creeping into the middle class and inviting parents to drop private insurance coverage in favor of the government entitlement.
To encourage states to provide coverage to the neediest children first, the administration recently imposed a rule requiring them to enroll 95 percent of those already eligible — those in families with incomes up to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, or $41,300 for a family of four — before taking on the middle class.
A reporter for Newhouse News Service, Elizabeth Auster, examined Ohio’s program and why it has signed up only 76 percent of the eligible poor.
“The state faces problems ranging from technical questions about how to count the number of eligible children to sensitive cultural questions about how to enroll children whose parents resist government help,” Auster writes.
Ohio has a large Amish population and the Amish and Mennonites typically avoid government programs because of religious beliefs. Illegals are “leery of enrolling,” because they fear deportation. And other parents “are sometimes too proud to seek help from government or dislike dealing with bureaucratic paperwork requirements, ” she writes.
Auster quotes the director, Cristal Thomas: “I personally know some people who philosophically, just as a matter of pride, wouldn’t enroll in public assistance even though they would technically qualify.”
The Children’s Health Insurance Program is not just about children. In some states, half or more are adults. But just as with the Social Security entitlement, false terms are applied and concerted campaigns are mounted to nudge families into greater and often unnecessary dependency.
People, even the poor, who want to stand on their own should be encouraged. But, then, this program expansion is not about “children of the working poor who can’t afford health insurance.” It’s about creating another Social Security entitlement, this time for health care.
Permalink | Comments (139) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
Comments
By Rod
October 23, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this
We could have easily funded these programs for years and years to come – with the money Bush wasted in Iraq. Think of the Billions and Billions and Billions of dollars that were spent in Iraq for no reason.
Yeah, Bush preferred to kill Iraquis who had nothing to do with 911 – rather than be able to fund Health Care for Americans.
What an assssss.
By TW
October 23, 2007 8:10 AM | Link to this
Sadly, the Republican abortion of the past seven years has destroyed the credibility of today’s article. While the conservative argument should still be a key part of political debate, it is not. The new century conservatives, those charged with protecting the voice, sold their souls, and their credibilty, with the silence they provided during the destruction of our country…shame…
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 8:11 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. Ms. Auster, probably unintentionally assuming she is a beat reporter, documents the many good reasons to oppose significant expansion of the government SCHIP charity; alternatively, she proves the genius of the program administration, in promulgating the 95% rule, which otherwise seems reasonable on its face. Eligible people do not want the program for ideological or religious reasons. Eligible people do not want the program because they are self-reliant.
In the face of those strong countervailing currents, our leftist friends would impose a great increase in spending, to try to siphon-off people otherwise capable of supporting themselves, to put them on the public dole. This is conventional modern-leftist ideology; can anyone imagine democrats of the Scoop Jackson or Sam Nunn or John Kennedy genre trying to wean people away from self-dependency?
By Mrs. RepubLady
October 23, 2007 8:29 AM | Link to this
Thank you, Jim Wooten, for once again taking up this important topic. No health care for the children of people who make bad choices! If letting these children suffer and die is the good Christian way to keep more of my interest-based income in my own pocket, then I won’t lose any sleep over it. No money should ever come out of my pocket for anyone else in America, because I am a true patriot.
Jbmlaw is right about the misguided thinking of his “leftist friends.” (His leftist friends; not mine. If they don’t agree with me and Mr. Wooten they can die in the street with their tongues swollen fron dehydration like those lazy fornicating Katrina trash for all I care!) See you in church!
By LauryT
October 23, 2007 8:40 AM | Link to this
The Amish and Mennonite communities have always taken care of their own. To even entertain the notion that they should or could be assimilated into our government juggernaut is ridiculous.
The illegals shouldn’t BE here, why should ANY of them, including children, be given access to government programs that LEGAL U.S. TAXPAYERS are paying for?
I’ve been working and paying taxes since I was 15. 32 years of MY sweat and toil, only to find that the money probably won’t be there when I am ready to retire.
That’s just wrong folks. On so many levels it’s ridiculous. And people wonder why I’ve become a conservative, and will probably vote Republican next year.
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 8:42 AM | Link to this
I’ve never met Jim Wooten. I dont deserve to, me being an untouchable and him rubbing elbows with the ruling class. Should a journalist ever be part of the news that he reports? Paparrazi is where the line gets crossed the most. A Brittany Spears photo-op is secured only by news-worthy misdemeanors committed by the photographers themselves. (Brittany can really smile wide for the camera, cant she?)
The favorite phrase for Insurance Lobbyists is “dropped private insurance” when arguing against SCHIP. It’s the polite lie and the crux of the industry’s case. Wooten uses the phrase sparingly but drops it in the middle of a crescendo of evidence against the truth that poor children have no private insurance to drop. Wooten has been lobbied himself to use that phrase by some insurance-industry-sponsored General Assemblymen, and that’s where journalism ends and news begins. Wooten is part of the SCHIP story now. Smile wide for the camera, Wooten, you made page one.
By Phil
October 23, 2007 8:51 AM | Link to this
Entitlements!
How many entitlements does our government hand out every day? - Entitlements to poor, starving, malnourished people in other countries, - Entitlements to families that have been displaced by war, ethnic violence, etc. around the world, - Entitlements to companies (by looking the other way) who exploit low cost labor and sub-human working conditions to make a buck, - Entitlements to districts that elect the right politician, - …………………
I don’t think it’s possible to complete this list.
On a related topic, why is all the rhetoric focused on sources of tax revenue rather than sources of tax reduction? Balancing a budget requires work from both ends. And, don’t even get me started on the discrepancies between pay and “benefits” for some government employees/representatives and the average working-class person. For example, compare the pay someone such as a county/city manager gets versus the average household income in the given area. Perhaps we should start out-sourcing government jobs as well.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
Ahoy the SCHIP! Hoist this longboat!
Lock the seachest, maties! Batten the hatches. The natives here have no concept of ownership and theft.
See there? Even Barnacle Beak is plucking his pinfeathers in protest. He refuses to come down from the yardarm. At daybreak he sliced onto the Bosun’s Mate’s shoulder and squawked out: “Barney for Speaker! Barney for Speaker!”
Aye, that feathered fiend makes a better speaker than she.
I propose to weigh anchor at once, and set sail for the Gilberts before these savage bandits send a war party to steal our breadfruit. This bligh-ted island is not fit for a parrot, let alone sick children.
Let alone, indeed.
By Dusty
October 23, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this
Well, I do believe Mrs. RepubLady is married to RedNeck Convict. Oh sure. All Republicans are hard hearted villians out to let those poor children die on the street with their tongues swollen from dehydration. Yes indeed!!
How many of THOSE children have you seen dying on the streets of America? Ten?? Five?? One?? That is what I thought. NONE. The children of America are “suffering” according to CDC. Yep, they are suffering from …OBESITY!!! Maybe it is all the food stamps, free school lunches, WIC program, etc. etc. that makes these children “dying on the streets” from obesity.
Mrs. RepubLady SHOULD go to church. They advocate “telling the truth”, something the dear Mrs. Rep’Liberal has not yet learned to do.
By ron
October 23, 2007 9:00 AM | Link to this
I agree with you Jim.Anyone working and paying taxes in this country should get nothing in return.Why take care of the elderly,they’re going to die anyway.Why should good money,money that can be used by the Republicans to finance the important war in Iraq,be used to take care of sick kids?Chances are good that they’ll never be well enough to get a job and help the war effort.Sick kids can’t even join up and fight.Who needs them?There isn’t one Republican that would allow his/her child to receive one penny of aid toward health care.They are all patriotic enough to let their children die rather than accept government funding.These are staunch people ,these Republicans,the kind we can be proud of.The kind that make you proud to be an American.Especially you Jim,right there in the forefront,pitching for them.Are you sending extra money to George?He needs it desperately.He’s thinking about attacking California next,and you know The Terminator lives out there.Good luck Jim.I’ll soon be drawing my ill gotten gains from social security.I hate to do it,but I need money money to send to George.
By Jim Norris
October 23, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this
Jim Wooten continues to demonstrate with acuity “How much he is out of touch with working Americans.”
By Just Nasty and Mean
October 23, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this
Look. This is AMERICA* people! Where are the free and the brave—ON WELFARE??? Afraid not! I am sick and tired, beyond belief, of picking up the well being of every lowlife slug that managed to be born in the USA—or Mexico, for that matter. This country and our freedoms, and our ability to protect both, came from industrious people collectively **working towards the same goal. Also, we have belched out generations of breeding brats that think they are owed my money just for being squirted out, alive, in the USA. Screw them! Get off your slug lazy a*******e$ and get a friggin job!
We are beginning to see a point where honest wage earners are fed up with carrying this dead weight along with taking care of ourselves and our own.
Its time we got back to what made this country great. Get to work! If you want to be a lazy bum, thug, druggie crackhead, Jerry Springer addict—get ready to reap your reward for your own bad choices.
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 9:22 AM | Link to this
Smile wide for the camera, Mr. Wooten.
I’m Hillary 08 I am. Hillary 08 I am, I am. I got married to hillBilly next door, he’s freed Willy seven times with ho’s and everyone was a monica, he wouldn’t flash a dorothy or a pam. I really hate my man I’m Hillary. Hillary 08 I am.
Second curse, he steals from my purse!
By Captain Freedom
October 23, 2007 9:24 AM | Link to this
Analchord,
When you refer to Ms Spears’ charming ability to flash a wide smile, do you refer to her facial horizontal smile or the vertical smile that resides a bit farther south?
THE Captain, along with other Enquiring Minds, want to know.
Oh, as to today’s topic…no government is better government, taxes bad, yay Ayn Rand, are there no poor houses, etc….
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this
Rod,
“We could have easily funded these programs for years and years to come — with the money Bush wasted in Iraq.”
Well, millennia anyway. Could we please keep these programs in perspective? That’s a bit like saying, “we could easily afford Tabasco Sauce for life if we sold the cars and the house and didn’t send our children to college.” These programs are what the fiscal committees call “budget dust”. They register on the radar, when they do at all, only for their partisan political signature.
By Steve
October 23, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this
I find it unfathomable that anyone would buy into this right wing tripe any longer.
Bush is asking for MORE billions of our tax money to fund a war that is doing what? NOTHING. Bin Laden is still managing his minions from afar, SIX YEARS LATER. Yet we are spending hundreds of billions a YEAR up to nearly an estimate TRILLION dollars on a war with a country that had nothing to do with 911??
Then Mr. Wooten has the gall to suggest that we shouldn’t help poorer American CHILDREN obtain access to a basic need such as healthcare??
I’m beyond astounded at the outright arrogance and bombastic tripe that is continually spewed from the mouths of “right wing” opinion writers who wear bow ties and look like Orville Redenbacher.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this
Dear Analchord @ 9:22, Weird Al has nothing on you, funny post.
By Truthifier
October 23, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this
Wooten is right. And in keeping with his truthiness, let’s have people start paving their own roads instead of acting like they are entitled to have the government do it for them. And building their own schools instead of acting like they are entitled to have the government do it for them. And forming their own armed militias instead of acting like they are entitled to have the government protect them. And running their own aviation system instead of acting like they are entitled to have the FAA do it for them. And inspecting their own food instead of acting like they are entitled to have the FDA do it for them. And insuring their own banks instead of acting like they are entitled to have the FDIC do it for them. And running their own mass transit systems instead of acting like they are entitled to have the government do it for them. And conducting their own foreign policy instead of acting like they are entitled to have the government do it for them. And having their own justice system instead of acting like they are entitled to have the DOJ do it for them. Why, the list of things that good honest Americans should be doing for themselves instead of acting like a bunch of entitlement leeches could just go on and on. Let’s just shut the whole system down and say every man for his own!
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this
While Hillary’s dreams were palatial, The response from the voters was glacial. When offered them Mother They saw Orwell’s Big Brother (Not to mention Bill’s forays fellatial.)
Rudi 08
Embrace the platform or walk the plank.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this
While Hillary’s dreams were palatial, The response from the voters was glacial. When she offered them Mother They saw Orwell’s Big Brother (Not to mention Bill’s forays fellatial.)
Rudi 08
Embrace the platform or walk the plank.
By anonymous
October 23, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
Riddle me this — Why is it that helping sick children of the working poor is too much for this society to bear, when we provide billions of dollars to help the sick children of the working poor all over the world? Not to mention, the subsidies the government gives to the agricultural sector. I mean, of course we all have to eat, but why are farmers entitled to federal assistance while sick kids aren’t? Then there is the government spending on things like basketball courts or museums devoted to things no one cares about in backwater towns. Isn’t it more important to make sure that a sick kid can go to the doctor before we do all of those things? It just seems like there are a lot of misplaced priorities.
By Just Nasty and Mean
October 23, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
Truthifier @ 9:32.
Every single one of your examples are the government supplying services to the people. Taxpayers pay into the government, and get a service in return.
What return to the taxpayers get by paying into entitlements?
For goodness sakes, man. Think past just the initial step of a logic path.
By Steve
October 23, 2007 9:41 AM | Link to this
Mr Wooten, is it entitlement to assist the children, elderly, and disabled of America? Or is it only about one’s personal income bottom line? Or is it about protecting corporation (corporate welfare, something GOP adores)? Is that entitlement ok?
The politics of ignorance and greed in this nation is our undoing. As we are a nation in decline.
By Anonymous
October 23, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this
Decades later, and we still have a few desperate holdouts screaming against the idea of Social Security and everything it stands for (i.e., a civilized society).
You LOST, guys. Get over it already. You’ve got a war, go vent your anger over there.
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this
Hillary 08
By Truthifier
October 23, 2007 9:46 AM | Link to this
What’s the difference between a “service” and an “entitlement” if your child is sick and you can’t afford to take them to the doctor? A dead kid seems like a big price to pay for semantics to me.
While I choose to use public transportation and not own a car, I’m not getting anything back from the money I pay into the highway system. But I’m not whining about it. Sometimes we all have to pitch in for the greater good.
Not wanting to help sick kids is what is just “nasty and mean.”
By Steve
October 23, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this
Forget out children now? Aren’t they the future adults of America? American’s future? Yeah, screw the kids. Screw health care needs for poor kids. It’s their fault they were born into poor families. I just want my damn tax break so I can upgrade to the 5 series BMW.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this
Americord, that’s creepy, that the phrase “dropped private insurance” is really a line from a script issuing from the Ministry of Propaganda, Insurance Industry Bureau.
I agree that participatory journalism’s all good until it crosses the line, but I’m not sure I’d demarcate it where you do, covering the news/becoming the news. I suspect it’s more to do with a hack becoming a flack.
Rudi 08
By Peter
October 23, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this
Well well well we have some funny stuff written already today…….seems like the wrongs are at it again defending not helping out our own AGAIN…….!!!!!!!!
I agree with Phil……… We have entitled so many around the globe, and forget to take care of our own!!!!
We have decided to become the international army, we have wasted sooooo much money helping others for military bases around the world, we give money to so many different countries, and loans that will never be paid back.
Please look at the disasters we have currently in the USA, water problems in Georgia, fires in California, bridges collapsing, our entire infrastructure in need of much help.
We have millions of Americans without health coverage, we have a Social Security System, that SHOULD have the money to pay the folks that paid into it.
So what do we have ???????? We have a BIG Government, BIG waste, and special interests getting what they want, and screw the typical American.
The Wrongs want to say we are fighting the enemy of Democracy, and the Terrorists, but just who are we beating by spending 500 Billion plus dollars in Iraq ?????
The reality is we are taking the monies set aside for social Security and spending it on pet projects, and entitlement programs.
We here in America we DO NOT take care of our own, unless there is money some how to be made. The health care industry is the Best example of this yet !!!
Our education and health care is NOT among the BEST in the world. The waste as was reported today in Iraq continues…
(CNN) — The U.S. State Department is unable to account for most of $1.2 billion in funding that it gave to DynCorp International to train Iraqi police, a government report said Tuesday.
No wonder most Americans are very tired of the Bush Administration.
I would really be impressed if someone told me the positives Bush has done for America during his time in office….. I have an open mind for someone with an intelligent answer ……
The funny thing is most Americans including MOST on this Blog will NOT come to grips with where the WAR money comes from…….Most will not agree or understand we are financing the WAR via the Chinese, and we are doing it as if it was a credit card, with an unlimited ceiling.
We will pass on to generations the bills created by this Administration’s made up WAR, no wonder the current Republicans running for President, DO NOT want to align themselves with Bush.
The funny part about Social Security is the saddest……… our elected officials in Washington DC, have been given such wonderful “Entitlements” of their own, they really are not worried about Social Security…….it doesn’t affect them at all…….when they are done, the the Millionaire elected members of both parties get to go home and collect amazing money for what they did, or didn’t do at Tax payers expense.
When the government officials have to live with Social Security as we do then PERHAPS we MIGHT see a change in the system.
I kind of agree with Bush in the fact that, if I was in control of that money, my personal monies I pay into SS, I would know what to do with it from a savings point of view…..
The real problem goes back to basic education, which this country lacks…..I honestly believe most folks would spend the money the are suppose to save……and then what will happen to them…..
The greatest example of this is the Current Administration’s waste…..they cannot save any money, and have a hard time accounting for what they spend…..why would we believe the typical American could do the right thing !!!!!!!
By Hypocrisy
October 23, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this
jblmlaw says “our leftist friends would impose a great increase in spending.” As I recall, spending by the federal government was greatly expanded under our far from leftist President and the preceding few Republican Congresses. Did anyone read about how Halliburton’s profits are skyrocketing? I guess that type of entitlement is ok.
By FalconFan60
October 23, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this
If the Social Security system failure isn’t reason enough for a Fair Tax then there never will be. With the Fair Tax EVERYONE pays taxes, not just honest, hard working Americans. The illigals have to pay as well. Until then, it doesn’t matter who is running this country, we’ll all be on welfare in retirement.
By Atlmom
October 23, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this
Yeah, back in the 40s, when my grandfather died, leaving my grandmother with two kids under 8, the welfare people came to my grandmother’s house to tell her about the great program of welfare. She told them to get out of her house, she didn’t need anything from them, she was going to keep working. She would never have taken the money.
Of course, she’s 97 and has been on Social Security for well over 30 years now. So at least at the moment, I’m not so upset about paying into the program, knowing that if that weren’t the case, I’d be supporting her (which I would happily do). But really - there is a solution to the supposed crisis.
RAISE THE AGE AT WHICH PEOPLE RECEIVE BENEFITS. Just make it for people who CAN’T work,not those who DON’T WANT TO work. Jeez - the life expectancy is well over 10 years beyond what it was when the program was implemented (back then, life expectancy was 65, now it’s over 75). So on average you’re going to be supporting people for at least 10 years (longer, really, based on stats I won’t go into).
Realistically - I have no problems at all helping people who are elderly and can’t work - but not those who are perfectly capable but just think they somehow ‘deserve’ this cause they hit 65 (now 67, I think).
And no, I’m not some 22 YO kid. I’m almost 40 and hope to retire in less than 15 years - CAUSE I’ve SAVED for it.
By FalconFan60
October 23, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this
There is an inherent problem with a government program that allows a person to pay $44 in taxes and reap $22,888.92 in benefits. Anyone that can’t see the problem is blind and ignorant. A Fair Tax would solve that problem.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
Anonymous @ 9:40,
Riddler, you’re missing the point. The welfare of children is not too much for this wealthy, goodwilled society to handle. In SCHIP, children’s healthcare is far beyond the ken of the timeserving petty bureaucrats who concocted this Rube Goldberg device that eats money at one end and craps it onto a few kids at the other.
Google the official program evaluation done for the feds by the American Institutes for Research. Or else look up SCHIP on CBO’s website. This program is a near perfect study in what happens when children are entrusted to Kafkaesque bureaucrats.
Anyone who cares about children, and that’s all of us except Nancy Pelosi, would blow up this little program and start afresh immediately.
By Steve
October 23, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this
Fair Tax and Flat Tax are both inherently flawed and do not solve the problem. Both hurt the middle class.
The problem is how we spend our tax money. Our priorities are screwed up.
By Dennis
October 23, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten’s columns are a prime example of “those who don’t get it.”
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By anonymous
October 23, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this
Fletcher, obviously you have done more research into the SCHIP program than I have done, so I can’t say that I disagree with your conclusions. While the program may have faults, perhaps some very serious faults, I happen to know two kids who rely on Peach Care and can say that while their mother would probably prefer to have private insurance she just can’t afford it so her children are receiving at least some measure of healthcare that they would otherwise be denied. I understand that policy wonks can dissect a program and find all of its flaws, but in the end we are talking about human beings who are not excel spreadsheets or powerpoint presentations.
By Shark Sammich
October 23, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this
upthread we heard:
“Then Mr. Wooten has the gall to suggest that we shouldn’t help poorer American CHILDREN obtain access to a basic need such as healthcare??”
Those children need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get themselves born to Cox employees with gold-plated lifetime family healthcare and retirement plans, damn it!
By Dusty
October 23, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
Fletcher @8:55
You are so absolutely poetic this morning and lotsa fun, not to mention fairly good sense. Good advice at 10:05 to “start afresh immediately” on S-chip.
But earlier, with your feathered friend story, you said something about leaving for “the Gilberts”. Did you mean Pitcarin? Oh well, who am I to mess with a good story?
By Steve
October 23, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this
Shark Sammich, I agree whole heartedly. Children need to learn to be more self sufficient and not be on the government dole. What are these children thinking, wanting better access to health care? The nerve!
By Shark Sammich
October 23, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
Oh, and Jim? The “I” in FICA stands for insurance. Federal Insurance Contributions Act.
Not “Federal Investment Contributions Act.”
That is my nice way of saying: Stop lying about the program.
And here’s another freebie from the clue fairy—when all you’ve got to run with is some hoary Cato Institute quotes, presented in a complete fact-free vaccuum?
Maybe it’s time to try a different topic.
By Sr. Ellen
October 23, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this
Dear Mr. Wooten:
Thank you for another fine piece on this important public issue. It may please you to know that The Cistercian Sisters, of whom I am one, read your column “religiously” every weekday at second breakfast.
Our discussion of this morning’s column was especially “spirited”. We thought that we should share our thoughts with you. Our Sister Evangeline, while not an Ohioan, was raised in Pennsylvania. Yes, we have Yankees here too! She knows the Amish and the Mennonites well. (Also, her sister in-law is a Hutterite.) According to Sr. Evangeline, the Anabaptists refuse government healthcare, and all forms of government assistance, out of an abundance of caution. They know that all gifts from Caesar come with strings attached. Because they strive to preserve their faith, they, like those of us here, take pains to avoid becoming overly “worldly”. Indeed, some in our own Catholic faith, including the Holy Father himself, have asked whether government provisions for health and healing are not a historic usurpation of our sacred Christian vocation. Perhaps only God knows.
Sister Evangeline wishes me to add: “After Katrina the Pennsylvania Mennonites were the first to arrive after the Army!”
Peace be with you.
By tony
October 23, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
It comes down to one thing,are we a christian nation or not? The righties love to throw that around and the sheep believe it. Its just talk.The funny thing is Wooten probably is one of the common people.I highly doubt he is making the big bucks working for the AJC. I bet he figures if I spew hate and call it right thinking. It will be my ticket out of here. He should be ashamed of himself.
By Dennis
October 23, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this
By Atlmom October 23, 2007 9:59 AM “Yeah, back in the 40s, when my grandfather died, leaving my grandmother with two kids under 8, the welfare people came to my grandmother’s house to tell her about the great program of welfare. She told them to get out of her house, she didn’t need anything from them, she was going to keep working. She would never have taken the money.
“Of course, she’s 97 and has been on Social Security for well over 30 years now. So at least at the moment, I’m not so upset about paying into the program, knowing that if that weren’t the case, I’d be supporting her (which I would happily do).”
If you would “happily do” then why aren’t you doing it?
Could we suppose that you are ok with your grandmother being on social security because she’s getting more out of it than you are, or will be, paying in?
And when it comes time for you to retire, will you too refuse social security, or will your rationale for taking it be, “I paid in to it”?
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this
Dusty, I know not yet of Pitcairn. Does it lie beyond the islands named for that scalawag from the Georgian colony of the Americas?
Many thanks for your compliment. ‘Tis Bligh makes me dance, by force of the lash. A stern and terrible taskmaster is he!
Bristol sailing.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this
I say we need a lot more “polite fictions”!
By Shark Sammich
October 23, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this
Sister Ellen gave us:
Our Sister Evangeline, while not an Ohioan, was raised in Pennsylvania. Yes, we have Yankees here too! She knows the Amish and the Mennonites well.
No, she doesn’t, not if she’s under the impression that the Mennonites who’ve delivered aid to the needy are some kind of survivalist, anti-government fruitcake brigade.
By Atico
October 23, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this
The first reply to your comments is such a typical Democrat talking point I would be ashamed to say what was uttered by “ROD.” These people are caught in the web of denial and deciet that is paramount to treason. Please Rod, furnish me with the numbers it takes to pay, and equip, a standing Army, and then subtract that from all the huge number you Demo’s use to bash the fight against the Terrorist in Iraq and Afganistan. I’m waiting.
Please take care of the poor kids for sure, but not the middle class.
By Shark Sammich
October 23, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this
“Could we suppose that you are ok with your grandmother being on social security because she’s getting more out of it than you are, or will be, paying in?”
Not this crap again…
Just wondering—how many of you would fret about collecting on (say) a car insurance claim because you will be collecting more in damages than you’d paid in premiums?
How many of you, if your home had been flattened by a freak tornado, would say, “Gosh, by my calculations, I’ve only put in a measly 20K or so over the years, and I stand to collect 200K to rebuild! That ain’t right”?
I’m willing to venture the answer would be “none,” but feel free to enlighten me otherwise.
Here’s the thing about insurance. It’s a shared burden. Some people don’t wind up “winners,” they die before they can collect. Some people have the temerity to live to a ripe old age and do extremely well for themselves, if you’re comparing what they put into FICA vs. what they’ll net out over several decades.
What of it? WTF is wrong with you people who continue to whine about SS, and want to “privatize” something that is working splendidly and which would require only minor adjustments to bring into solvency?
By Atico
October 23, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this
To all the leftist that had to go “personal” in their comments, I say, “you are the worst of the worst.” It seems impossible for the left to have a discussion without noticing their opponets crossed eyes, big ears, long nose, or some other defect of their opponet, to deflect from the true discussion. You lefties are very much a group of citizens that do not have the capacity to do the right thing in a discussion. Come out of denial and say hello to the real world. It will help your mental ability to stay focused.
By Anonymous
October 23, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this
Atico: You must be new here. May I introduce you to Buy Danish, Dusty, and (best of all) DullAndy/TFTT/Luckoduh?
By Sr. Ellen
October 23, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this
Dear Mr. Sammish:
I fear we fail to understand your meaning. Please do not think that we deride the Mennonites in any way. We consider them brothers and sisters in Christ, as witness their fine work in Louisiana, to which Sr. Evangeline referred.
We are in part a healing order, and carry a sacred obligation to demonstrate that the health of children is best attended to, as it has been for centuries, for the love of God and His image in their beautiful faces. And certainly not in the interest of a government check.
We venture to say that the Mennonites agree with this.
Peace be with you.
By catlady
October 23, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
Here is an example of a problem with Peachcare. A child in my class has been to the dr. 5 times in the last 3 weeks for a rash on her butt. Each time, Peachcare has paid for her visit, her medicines, etc. I suggested to her mom that she change her detergent—the dr had not mentioned that, she said. Now, if I, not qualifying for Peachcare, had done the same thing, it would have cost me out of pocket $150 plus the medicine copays. Heaven help us if I had no insurance at all!
Peachcare is a worthy program. However, it has been expanded well past its original intent so that it is now subsidizing middleclass lifestyle choices. No one on Peachcare is saying, “Do I pay the cable TV or provide health insurance for my children?” It also allows unlimited use of medical facilities. For most of us, that is a LUXURY. The same criticism can be leveled at Medicaid. There is no incentive against overuse, so you have the ER full of folks with a stomachache or a sore throat.
Peachcare is also unrealistic because parents do not start paying premiums until their child is 6 years old! I don’t know about you, but my insurance expects to be paid from the end of the first month after birth. I also have to pay extra for additional family members—there is no cap of 2 children’s payments like Peachcare. I also have extra premiums for dental and vision care, and caps and copays to go along with that. And don’t get me started about therapy! Peachcare covers it all, 100%!
Remember, American-born children of illegal aliens get Peachcare. And there are a LOT of them.
I think if the problems of this program were thoughtfully corrected, more folks would be in support of it. However, I would suggest throwing it open to every citizen child under 18 in the United States. With a sliding scale for premiums, of course. That would dissolve a great deal of the opposition, and we could truly say there is NO EXCUSE for your child not being covered.
By Anonymous
October 23, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
FalconFan60: If the Social Security system failure isn’t reason enough for a Fair Tax then there never will be.
Glad you admit it—there never will be. Social Security is a phenomenal success story, and the far-right nuts can’t stand it.
By Shark Sammich
October 23, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this
The sister wrote:
I fear we fail to understand your meaning. Please do not think that we deride the Mennonites in any way. We consider them brothers and sisters in Christ, as witness their fine work in Louisiana, to which Sr. Evangeline referred.
Hey, I figured as much, and I should be clearer. Both the Catholic and Mennonite relief services do laudable, outstanding work.
I guess I was guilty of reading between the lines in your original post. For the record, the majority of Mennonites are not Amish, nor old order Mennonite; they are very much of this world, they vote, they pay taxes, they support government social programs (or don’t—it’s a free country, after all).
They have very conservative and very liberal congregations. That’s all I really wanted to point out, and I’m not looking to start a flame war here.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this
Atico @ 11;04,
I wish to associate myself with your remarks.
Good call.
By Entitlements for all
October 23, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
The Iraq war is an entitlement for some. Bush said that it was too expensive to give $25 billion more to help children’s health care. One week later he asks for $47 billion more on top of around $170 billion he just received about a month ago for Iraq. I think he is trying to bankrupt this country before he leaves office.
In this country it is ok to give entitlements to big corporations but not to children, disabled poor and elderly. The defense companies and those associated with this war are getting rich.
By anonymous
October 23, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this
Atico and Glenn - Surely you don’t think that only the liberal son here make personal attacks? Have you read any of the attacks from conservatives? No matter where they are coming from,or whom they are directed toward, they are pointless. But don’t say it is the big bad liberals who are always attacking. There is plenty of blame to go around.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this
Truthifier,
May you never cross paths with Ron Paul…
By Dusty
October 23, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this
Dear Fletcher aka Christian @10:47
Have you already forgotten yon Pitcarin Island whose volcanic shores you broached when Bligh’s beastly bravado menaced your health and happiness?? The burning of the beautiful Bounty?? The surreptious S-chip?
How soon we forget!! (And Jim Wooten reminds us that every giveaway program soon becomes eternal entitlement, better know as “the taxpayer’s burden”.) Clear sailing, my friend, and watch the S-chipting reefs.
By tiem for the harsh but very fair truth
October 23, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this
Bugger … NO actual (real or anally imagined) death threats so far today, or even the merest hint of one!!
DAMN disappointing … What!!!???
This SCHIP subject is kind of old now. Illegal leech offspring, and of course ALL illegal (especially mexican type) leeches should NOT be eligible for ANY kind of benefits, including medical assistance in this country. If they get sick there should be an instantly enforced law that enables them and their illegal leech family to be immediately - forcibly if necessary - deported as public health risks!!
How’s about another clear thinking, patriotic article on Iraq as the usual doltish cut and run appeasing leftist vermin on here sadly aren’t quite in the usual rabid state of apoplexy about the superb military success of The Surge.
Nice to see HiTllary honing its Arkansas rapist like illegal fund raising skills at the expense of countless impoverished Chinese coolies in Nu Yawwwwk City!! And this hatefillardarsedbiiitch hasn’t even contested ONE primary yet. Same old despicably criminally venal Klintons!!!
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this
anonymous, that’s true. Lots to go around. Atico put his/her finger on it when he/she named the cheap dodge of argumentation ad hominem. But for my money Atico really, really put his/her finger on it (must’ve been the other finger) in making the point that, for the attackers, any difference will do.
In Greek mythology, somebody else’s club foot often serves the purpose. In most cultures it’s xenophobia, fear of the outsider, the Other. A hook nose or an out-of-state driver’s license, or an education or the lack of one, or any political opinion whatsoever will do. The main thing is, the beast must be fed. After all, it’s hard hereabouts to teach an old hound dog new tricks.
By getalife
October 23, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this
Another $46 billion wasted in Iraq, w wants to surge the war on drugs to waste more billions and zero for sick American kids.
By time for the harsh but very fair truth
October 23, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
just to clarify folks, that should be:
hatefilledlardarsedbiiitch
sorry for the inadvertent typo.
By Dusty
October 23, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Catlady@11:21
You have given us another view of a problem with Peachcare or any form of socialized medicine, the overuse of “free” care.
My five children are now adults, but they never went to a doctor “five times in three weeks” for something that sounds like diaper rash. I doubt that the mother of your pupil would have either, if she had to pay for it herself.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this
Dusty, dear Dusty,
I will carry our friendship with me across these frightful seas. I know not yet of Pitcairn, but fear I know too much of the lash and the stocks. We set out for Polynesia, but even I, navigation officer of this vessel, cannot guess where Bligh will take us. The possibilities dance in my fever dreams nightly. Bligh seems feverish also. Barnacle Beak fears him most, and has refused hardtack for two days.
May a fresh breeze be ever at your back.
By time for the truth
October 23, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this
Dusty
U are too kind. Fletcher Christian’s descendents are rampant paedophiles and several have been found guilty in a string of fairly recent court cases of systematic incest/child rape etc … actually in a New Zealand Court as PitCairn can hardly try such cases. Even the Mayor of the island Steven Christian was found guilty.
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1151&id=1237872004
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this
For the record, the 11:52 is the funniest thing I’ve ever seen on this blog. It’s so delicious it’s Rudilicious!
By Dr Coles
October 23, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this
American citizens have paid into Social Security all their working lives. Congress gets 15 percent of all the wages in America. 50 percent die before they can collect there paid for benefits. Who is the bad player here? It’s not the American citizen. It’s the incompetent congress. No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for.
By Wango Tango
October 23, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this
San Diego is on fire and people have fled their homes to the NFL stadium there.
Does that sound familiar? Well, only sort of. There is no shooting, no fighting, nobody going without what they need to get by, no incompetent governor and mayor at the helm, and certainly no blaming Bush. In fact, the Governator is visiting the victims while the fires are still burning. How long was it before Blanco visited the New Orleans survivors in the Superdome? Oh wait, she didn’t. Regarding New Orleans and Louisiana, kudos to The People for getting that incompetent slug out of the governor’s mansion and putting in a Republican [an Indian at that] in one huge slapdown. Now, since there is competence in state and local government disaster preparedness in Khaleeforneeeia, there is silence from the wingnut moonbats on the left and their myrmidons in the main stream media about Bush. For now at least anyway.
Rock ‘n Roll, Nugent, and guns 4ever!
By Dr Coles
October 23, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Kids have health care. The needy already have health care. The U.S. is not a socialist state. The government caused the problem with health care in America by over socializing medicine to the extent it is not completive, and we want to exacerbate the problem? U.S. Capitalism refers to an economic system in which the means of production are all owned and operated for profit, and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market economy. It is the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as “legal persons” or corporations to trade capital goods, labor, land and money (see finance and credit). See http://www.InteliOrg.com/
By time for the truth
October 23, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
presumably Glenn the xenophobia U speak of equally applies to illegal mexican type leeches and the happily much smaller number of legal mexican reconquistador types who gleefully shun yanKKKee society/culture and refuse to learn to speak the langauge and listen to La Raza - The Race radio station. Many other ethnic types who move here similarly refuse to integrate/speak the language etc.
Doubtless U equally condemn the indigenous ‘wagon burning’ Apaches and Sioux and Pawnees for their aggressive often murderous tribalism - focusing on their “differences” centuries before Chris Columbus took the Spanish shilling and floated over the pond!!
The point is that trying to legally impose ‘civilised’ tolerant behaviour on folks will never ever work. Thankfully fairly harsh, often now very biased - at least in practice against white folks - laws, will usually prevent the worst outrages but its how folks think/feel that really counts. It has to come from within the folks, not by govt dicktat, a policeman’s gun/warrant or NY Slimes edict.
By Osama luvs Dems
October 23, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/7103.html Apology NOT ACCEPTED, MISTER Stark, you unhinged democrapper flaming lib. You libs never can and never will get your emotions under control and step in it & put a foot in the mouth every time you open that trap door of yours. That goes for Harry Reid as well, who is now taking credit for the increase of charity funding. This is outrageous! Vote ‘em out in ‘10!
By No Laughing Matter
October 23, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this
It can be reasonably argued that the dishonesty of the government was “for higher purpose-to convince determinedly independent Americans to buy into the notion of government dependency.” Even for you, Jim, that is a large load of hogwash. What an assinine statement. Even if anything else in your column made sense, which is debatable, unsupported idiocies like the one above undermine it completely. Someday, you should try to construct an argument that uses facts and logic rather than thes moronic, unsupportable generalities and emotional attacks.
By Truthifier
October 23, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this
Actually, I would love to meet Mr. Paul. While I don’t agree with many of his policy positions, I appreciate that he is able to present them in a thoughful and respectful manner without resorting to petty personal attacks. Unlike many of the candidates for President, the Congressman presents himself as a gentleman.
By time for the I really do PROUDLY hate liberals truth
October 23, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this
Wango Tango
a Glock 17 and Magnum .357 greeting from a fellow warrior for the truth.
Bet the lefty scum on here IGNORE your very telling point. One which occured to me last night as I watched Fox News footage of a few limousine liberal mansions incandescently adding to global warming in Malibu. At least Malibu and San Diego won’t export a massive crime wave to the rest of the USA if the folks have to relocate, although celebrity cocaine sniffing and shrill noise pollution will certainly go up in some places.
By Rick in Lawrenceville
October 23, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this
A vote on a new DREAM ACT for illegal aliens is coming up AGAIN in Congress tomorrow morning.
Our TAX DOLLARS will be used help illegal alien ‘kids’ (up to 30 yrs. old!) to go to college and gain citizenship.
They will take seats in colleges that should be going to our own children. We have paid taxes all our life and yet our children will not see the fruits of our efforts.
America’s neediest children can’t even get health insurance, yet congress wants to GIVE COLLEGE and US CITIZENSHIP to illegals!
Toll Free Capital Switchboard 1-800-828-0498; when operator answers ask for your senator and leave a message with the aid/staffer who answers.
www.capsweb.org - send free faxes from your computer www.numbersusa.com - send free faxes www.congress.org - emails www.senate.gov - emails
Join NUMBERSUSA (numbersusa.com)!
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
time for the truth @ 12:14. Oh, I wasn’t referring to things that are true, e.g. all the things you name. Not even to epithets, you talking piglet. (Boo!) Rather, I meant to refer to false distinctions that are quite deliberately nihilistic. Presumably they’re a species of lies. My best friend David is a Chink. So’s my sister in-law. It’s a nasty word for something, but nonetheless for something true. Saying that a fellow has a club foot — and we all know what that means: he must be the one who murdered the chieftan — and so therefore must be exposed to the elements or stoned until death…saying that sort of thing, is what I mean. In a word, scapegoating.
I almost wish that pandering biggot Joseph Campbell were still alive to verify that this dynamic all but defines the human condition itself. Except that he was so insufferably correct, politically, that he undoubtedly wouldn’t have been able to name it for what it is. Oh well, perhaps that foolish liberal’s puppy-eyed sycophants Bill Moyers and George Lucas could explain better than I.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
Dear hypocrite @ 9:54, exactly how much non-defense spending has our democrat congress proposed to cut? (Answer: more than you would guess. Last week they proposed to abolish the office that monitors Labor Union corruption – seems the office has brought so many charges in the past two years, it has made it difficult to funnel money to the democrats. Otherwise the democrats have only expanded spending. Thanks for noticing.)
Dear Sister Ellen @ 10:30, a thoughtful essay. Maybe if we could persuade you to post more often we would see less vitriol?
Dear OLD @ 12:19, I respectfully disagree, in part. Stark undoubtedly crossed the line, but his apology was unconditional and directed to the appropriate injured-parties. While that does not dispose me any more favorably toward leftist politicians – thus I agree with that portion of your post - I think it appropriate to move on to more substantial issues.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 12:50 PM | Link to this
Dusty and Tea for Two,
Must the since of the children be visited upon their forefathers?
Now you must excuse me. Barney is plaintive again. He cries out for kiwi fruit.
By FalconFan60
October 23, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this
I am not a “far-Right” nut as someone on this accused me of being, however I’m not narrow-minded either. Social Security has worked well for many, not all. My point is we shouldn’t be paying for an illegal to be living here any more than a person that pays $44 should draw over $22,000. That my friend is wrong any way you look at it and the end result is people of my age group (over 45) that may truly NEED SS won’t have anything to draw after paying in for most of their lives. Are you that stupid not to see what the future holds? The current way of paying taxes is as flawed as any when you have to create new taxes or increase taxes to cover spending. The Fair Tax system would work. It would only take intelligent and open minded people to make it work. Something you are not on either point.
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 12:53 PM | Link to this
Dusty and T** for Tat,
Blast! The SCHIP took a hard pitch and upset my quill. The bird is covered in ink, and now I must blot and correct the log: I meant to write “sins”, not “since”.
By getalife
October 23, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
Corporate welfare is a trillion dollar “entitlement”.
Hell, Blackwater is socialized slaughter of innocent people and they did not even pay taxes.
But Jim shows his true “compassion” for sick American children.
Jim and his ilk are truly sick.
Geez.
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
Hillary 08.
I’m Hillary 08 I am, Hillary 08 I am I am. I got married to the Billy next door, he’s freed Willy seven times with ho’s, and everyone was a Monica, he would flash his Willy at a Pam, I really hate my man I’m Hillary. Hillary 08 I am.
Second curse, he likes his nurse
Hillary 08
By FalconFan60
October 23, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this
Another thing…..I seriously doubt anyone submitting an opinion would really say take SS benefits from a sick child or a family that truly needed help. But we don’t want to finance people that won’t work, or are here illegally, or who are drawing checks on their dead grandmother and have been for years. That is the bottom line. People that need help and people that pay into the system, not greedy thieves.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this
Hi, jbm. What you got against good old vitriol?
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this
Americord,
Are you referring to the Surgeon’s mate? Indeed I do like him, a fine-bottomed boy, and obedient by all accounts. Alas, I’m saving myself for the fabled lassies of Polynesia.
As for your curse on me, I’ll travel the wide open sea. And should Bligh get any worse, we’ll find him a nautical hearse! Ha-*hah!
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Dear Glenn @ 1:07, occasionally my dementia reflects itself in the form of Bush-like conservative compassion. Don’t worry, it will pass.
By deegee
October 23, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this
catlady, you missed your calling. You should be hosting infomercials on how to cure everything that ails you with a dose of vinegar and some herbs. Did it occur to you that the mother of the child with the alleged case of butt rash might not have wanted to divulge all of the details of her child’s medical condition to a teacher with an agenda? Assuming that it was truly a benign case of butt rash, and your recommended treatment was satisfactory, what does that say about the quality of medical care available to us? Are the doctors that bad or are they intentionally churning appointments similar to the way that stockbrokers churn their clients’ accounts? Medicare also entitles one to unlimited medical care with the doctor and specialist of choice. I wonder what it would do to the old folks if Medicare was run like an HMO?
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this
CNN just interviewed Bill Clinton who offered this excuse for Monicagate: “If Monica had stayed quiet, I’d have gotten out of that mess, yet, on the other hand, if she had a bigger mouth, I wouldn’t have stained her dress.”
That explains everything.
Hillary 08.
I’m Hillary 08 I am. Hillary 08 I am, I am. I got married to the Billy next door, He freed Willy seven times with ho’s and everyone was a Monica, he wouldn’t flash his willy at a Pam. I really hate my man I’m Hillary, Hillary 08 I am.
Second curse, he just flashed a nurse!
Hillary 08
By Fletcher
October 23, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this
Truthifier, getalife, jbm —
I’d asked for jbm’s take on Ron Paul’s proposed mega-FISA-cleanup because, as posted by getalife, it was hilariously “vague and overbroad”, as the beagles say. And so utterly impractical that it sounded like one of Emperor Norton’s decrees. (That would be Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico, a friend of Sam Clemens and the very first San Francisco loonytoon.)
Yes, Rep. Paul is a gentleman. He’s also, for someone of his age and training and experience, astonishingly naive. Dangerously so. I chose a lame way to suggest a mtg. of Truthifier and Paul (mmmn, how Bunyanesque) because it would be fun for the two to haggle, Truth as an apologist for government and Paul for the opposing counsel. Nice match-up, eh?
Rudi 08
By Dusty
October 23, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
fletcher@ 12:53
Thee doth sound a bit on the scurvy side of the S-chip. Since I cannot make sense nor sins of thy scintillating syllables perhaps you could get barny to blabber the birdseed of your baloney. Hey hey!
But Pitcarin appears on the horizon. It also appears that future fortunes on the lucious island are formidable. Kinda like the approach of a super S-chip for poor $80K families and their unhealthy 25 year old children who are down to their last lotto ticket. Oh the horror of it all!! Sharks have it better.
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 1:45 PM | Link to this
Jim’ explains FDR’s rise to power very well today. In the 30’s America came very close to a socialist-communist takeover of the government. It was a damn near thing. FDR smelled a way to compromise with TVA and Soc. Sec. and a “New Deal”. Think about those words: our government had to make a “deal”. You dont make a deal unless you compromise.
He basically told all 150 million americans, “Deal, or New Deal”? - Wooten brings up a topic that deserves debate: Can we make chumps out of the illegal aliens by forcing them to pay for the baby boomer’s retirement? If there was ever a reason for the Mexicans to stay underground, it’s by making them the social security fall guys.
Social Security fall guys: Now there’s a topic. Wooten’s column works today on so many levels. It’s rich with debate topics, yet the bloggers here can only facebook, myspace and chatroom.
Who blogs here? Real round-tablers, real spreadsheets, real independent thinkers…real uberpundits!!!!
hillary 08
By James
October 23, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this
Please no more Rebublicans in 08. Unless you want to distroy America. Because the GOP is doing a good job of that now. They want billions more taken from our childrens healthcare and sent to corporate america and to Iraq.
By Sr. Ellen
October 23, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this
Dear “jbm”:
Your kind message found me upon our return from afternoon prayers. I could not agree more about the need to rinse the vitriol in this “blog” with a lavage of the agapic reason bequeathed us by the Creator in His own image.
As the Summa shows us, if we cannot know the mind of God, at least we can know and share His love. It has been said that our manifest love of freedom mirror’s God’s own. As the other Founding Fathers noted, this heaven-sent patrimony includes the precious liberties to reason, and to speak out. In fact these liberties are obligations also — and within that paradox lies the mature freedom that can come only from responsibility. Any other kind of freedom is immature. It is mere license.
It delights us to think that we might be of service not only in the World, but also in the cyber-world. To “shed some light” on the subject. Again, thank you for your suggestion. We will pray about it this evening.
Pax Christi
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 1:56 PM | Link to this
Rudi 08!
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this
James, you quite underestimate this magnificent and exquisitely flawed nation. We are now, and always have been, quite capable of child-rearing and war-making at the same time. Can you indicate an instance in which taxpayer resources were withheld from children in favor of the military?
Incidentally, we also have proved ourselves capable of building complex devices that convert our treasure into children’s services that — when they materialize at all — emerge as the kind of “services” which systematically sicken, stupefy and otherwise abuse children. Do you want to augment such services with funds captured from the Department of Defense? Wouldn’t you rather we purchase services that are not counterproductive?
By deegee
October 23, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this
We allow 73 year olds to drive our kids around in school buses. And you think that we should be working longer in order to solve the social security solvency problem? How about getting mouth to mouth and a new set of teeth from an 80 year old EMT?
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/northfulton/stories/2007/10/19/DeerBrief1020web.html
By Hypocrisy
October 23, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw - I never suggested that the Democrats were going to cut spending. I was calling out the hypocrisy of those on the right for criticizing the expansion of government spending when it happend on the watch of a Republican President and Congress. You know what I meant, but are choosing to respond to what you wanted me to have said, rather than what I actualy said.
By jdm is a condescening...
October 23, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
Hypocrisy, you have just described jbm’s posting history in a nutshell.
By Me
October 23, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this
With all this outsourcing that’s going on, why don’t we lay off the entire Congress and send their jobs overseas?
By deegee
October 23, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this
“Bush promises aid to victims of California wildfires.”
What? They don’t have insurance? They live on the most expensive real estate in the country. Why do they need a federal handout?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21435512/
By time to emasculate the queer lovers in social services
October 23, 2007 2:48 PM | Link to this
As a proud secular right wing conservative even I am DISGUSTED by this mindless anti-Christian bigotry, in rural sodding Somerset of all bloody places. Two more decent, selfless folks it would be hard to find!!
Regrettably shrill hectoring f aggotty buttock bouncing queers have taken over numerous social services all over the liberal infested world … this is just another sickening outrage and as ever its the most vulnerable kids who suffer!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?inarticleid=489285&inpageid=1770
By GayGreyGeek
October 23, 2007 2:56 PM | Link to this
Hypocrisy @ 2:21
Welcome to JbmWorld - where pointing out that someone is a neocon is somehow anti-Semitic, where the past 6 years have been ALL THE DEMOCRATS’ FAULT even though all three branches of the federal gobmint were controlled by the Taliblicans, and where it doesn’t matter what you write because the response will be to what Jbm wants you to have written.
In other words - Jbm is nothing more than your garden-variety neocon wingnut, just like the “If you disagree with us YOU MUST HATE FREEDOM! WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?” crazies on Faux News.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this
Dear hypocrite @ 2:38, if I follow your argument, you allege my hypocrisy even though I criticized Republican big spenders then and now, but you are not a hypocrite because even though you were or were not silent then on the level of expenditure, you are free to condemn the Republican past and ignore the inconsistency of your argument with democrat present. Truly a dazzling line of thought, my compliments, even if it does not gain my intellectual respect.
Note to all, am I the only one totally charmed by the gentility of Sister Ellen? To the extent that this blog is supposed to be more than mere politics (but also ethics,) I’m certain we have not seen a more efficient demonstration of the decency of a Christian heart.
Dear me @ 2:45, you call to mind one of the aphorisms of conservative godfather WFB, in that given the choice, he would prefer to be governed by the first 400 names in the Bronx telephone directory.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this
Dear GGG @ 2:56, I understand that you understand neither Podhoretz nor Buchanan’s epithet – my allegation of Jew-bating does not apply to the willful morons among us.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this
AnalOne, I’ll pick up your gauntlet. First let’s dispense with the Leuchtenberg thesis about FDR’s having saved capitalism. Thanks, FDR! Ahwright Ahwreddy. Fugeddabowdit.
Next, I’ll tip my hat to your smart and fresh and more than half-serious riff on the term “New Deal”. Rudilicious. Had it not been for the popularity of the American proto-fascistic socialists, notably Huey Long and Father Coughlin (apologies to Sr. E.), FDR would not have been able to get Wall St. to sign off on the Deal. (FDR well knew that TR, in a similar situation vis-a-vis labor and the barons, had managed to play the situation like a fiddle.) So the wingers were the indispensable idiots. And folks here mock wingers!
It’s like you say, tassel, I got no quibble with Jim’s fine column. He does us the really vital service of pointing out how cynical they can be, who begin “million” with “T”. He even gives three examples of Orwell’s “political uses of the English Language”. You pointed out a fourth, one which Jim himself helps to disseminate. Our protection against such “feats of nomenclature” rests importantly with such as Jim, be he Republican or Green, so you’ve done the deed of the day in calling him on it.
He was especially smart to point out that vote-buyers come and vote-buyers go, but demographics never come as a surprise. FDR was as cunning as his successors were pusilanimous when it came to the great macro-level sweeps, which the latter chose to sweep. Jim, and you, are right also to put Beaners into this pot. (Mira, vato, just shifting my metaphor, OK?) Their appointment with Naturalization is the least of the reasons why they need to hit the history books. Meanwhile, let’s keeping overlooking their stolen SS#’s so we can keep withholding that portion of their wages. Can we help it if we’re lucky?
I have two minor gripes, one with Jim and the other with you. Jim just lacks the savoir faire to come out and call for an end to SCHIP, just as he hears only what he wants to hear when Sonny’s boys whisper to him about the Orgone Box they’ve invented for school reform. As to you, landlubber, I disagree with the accusation that we are ducking the issues Jim raises. I think, however self-servingly, that the Cistercians’ swing at Jim’s slow pitch about the Amish & Mennonites amounted to a homer. Go, Sisters!
Rudi in 08
P.S. And if you promise to pull your head out and take that chord from around your neck, sometime I’ll tell you a revealing story as told to me personally (!) by FDR’s eldest, the late Congressman James Roosevelt, all-time champeen name-dropper.
By Redneck Convert
October 23, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this
Well, somebody should put Sister Dusty back on her meds. I don’t like being compared to this Ms. Republilady or whatever. She makes fun of conservatives and I don’t. Can’t Sister Dusty see the diffrence?
By Hypocrisy
October 23, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw - You continue to obfuscate. I have not expressed an opinion on any level of expenditure. I am expressing my belief that it is hypocritical for Republicans to criticize the current Democratic Congress for excessive expenditure when the Republican President and the recent Republican Congresses have greatly expanded the federal budget. I’m not seeking your intellectual respect, I’m just pointing out a fact. Your circular arguments may fool some here into thinking you are a great mind, but I will beg to differ. I may be more plain spoken (or written, as it were) but I will stand on the validity of my claim about right wing hypocrisy.
By my oh my
October 23, 2007 3:22 PM | Link to this
Was it a “polite fiction” of entitlement when Jim Wooten lived in public housing as a child? Funny how people will turn on the poor once they no longer number among them. Jim, I know PLENTY of people who are vehemently opposed to public housing, yet there you were as a poor child in need of shelter and the government provided it. I suppose you would rather have lived under a bridge and let the market take care of you?
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this
Dear hypocrite @ 3:17, you allege circular logic, but you are only one so demonstrating. You begin with a false assumption - that conservatives ever ratified or approved in any way the seemingly uncontrolled spending of republicans from 2002-2006. Then when we similarly criticize democrats you allege hypocrisy. Is it possible you do not know the meaning of the word?
By Analchord
October 23, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this
How can you tell which right thinking blogger is gay? Easy! He’s the flaming nick jacker.
hillary 08
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this
Hypocrisy @ 3:17,
Will Rogers, when asked for his reaction to a newspaper review in which a critic derided his easel paintings as “lunch counter art”, replied, “Well, it is a kind of ‘lunch counter art’, I reckon, but then ‘art’ is so vague, and ‘lunch’ is so real.”
You’re right, we rightists are hypocritical for not sitting on Bush harder to knock off the spending spree. But they “hypocrisy” derives from the Greek prefix hypo, to lessen, and krise, or crisis. The GOP did it pusilanimously, to get out of a series of political binds. It’s inexcusable cowardice. But its motive was to lessen the crisis of the moment.
Democrats, on the other hand, do it for just the damnedest of reasons.
By GayGreyGeek
October 23, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this
RC @ 3:14
As we have all seen countless times, Dusty’s head is so firmly attached to the sphincters of Bush and Cheney that she can’t see anything, much less any type of “difference”.
By Art Sammish
October 23, 2007 3:36 PM | Link to this
How can you tell which blogger’s gay? That’s easy. He’s the one who’s bow-tied up, Tuckered to the Max.
By Hypocrisy
October 23, 2007 3:36 PM | Link to this
jblmaw you just said “You begin with a false assumption - that conservatives ever ratified or approved in any way the seemingly uncontrolled spending of republicans from 2002-2006.”
Are you suggesting that Democrats were actually running the government during that period or that the Republicans who were in charge of the government and ramped up the uncontrolled spending are not conservatives? I suspect the latter, to which I would actually agree. I would argue that many Republicans in Congress are not actually “conservatives” but rather “moral authoritarians” who really are only interested in policing the private lives of citizens as opposed to fiscal austerity. Perhaps our disagreement is with my generic use of “Republican” to mean “conservative.”
I have no issue with Democrats wanting to expend federal tax dollars. That is what they are for (the dollars that is). Too many people think of the federal government as some otherworldly organization that has nothing to do with. The truth is that we have a government made up of citizen representatives who supposedly represent the values and goals of their constituents. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people as a famous Republian once said.
By GayGreyGeek
October 23, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw @ 3:26
Sorry, but you dance with them that brung ya.
Neocons like yourself worked hard to put the Republicans into office, and kept them there for 6 years. The Republicans are Your People. Embrace them. They’re yours.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this
My O My @ 3:22,
Bet Sister Ellen would’ve taken Jim in. Would you have done?
Personally, I’d leave him to the elements unless he recanted on SCHIP and school funding. But that’s me. I never went in much for Southern hospitality.
…uh, where’d that last word come from…
By DJ
October 23, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this
Wooten is another ‘polite fiction’ of a compassionate conservative. But right-wing apologist and ideological zealot is more like it. Yawn, yawn, yawn. As if ANYONE - Wooten included (and his favorite house boy JBMLAW) did NOT make it to where they are witn no help from anyone (and I bet if you look into enough laws, regulations, statutes, tax breaks, etc, you’ll find that some of the help they received along the way was from - ghasp - the government). Say it ain’t so!
The Republicker party is truly the “small tent” party.
By my oh my
October 23, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
Glenn, I would have let Sister Ellen give all the hospitality she wanted to give to poor little Jim. I don’t like house guests.
By Tent Pitcher
October 23, 2007 4:03 PM | Link to this
I pitch a BIG tent.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this
Mei Oh Mei,
“Dassa gootwong!”
Rudilicious.
Rudi 08
By getalife
October 23, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this
“Presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani hired a Catholic priest to work in his consulting firm months after the priest was accused of sexually molesting two former students and an altar boy and told by the church to stop performing his priestly duties.
The priest, Monsignor Alan Placa, a longtime friend of Giuliani and the priest who officiated at his second wedding to Donna Hanover, continues to work at Giuliani Partners in New York, to the outrage of some of his accusers and victims’ groups, which have begun to protest at Giuliani campaign events.”
Have fun with that one freaks.
Geez.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 4:50 PM | Link to this
getalife, if we assume his guilt, which someone here recently suggested is simply not the thing to do, then what can you say about these predators who would betray their sacred charge to protect the children entrusted to their care, these scheming narcissists who think only of their own prurient pleasures, these homosexuals?
Shall we say that it was their Christianity that made them do it? Their very Catholicism?
By Compassionate Liberalism
October 23, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this
Look at what the POS Anti Radical is posting at the Luckovich blog:
{{{{By Republican Family Values October 23, 2007 10:29 AM Thompson’s daughter, Elizabeth “Betsy” Thompson Panici, 38, died in 2002 of an accidental drug overdose, according to the Nashville, Tenn., medical examiner’s office. She had been diagnosed as suffering from a bipolar disorder. Drop Dead Fred is so ashamed of his parenting and his druggie daughter that he’s gotta LIE about the cause of her death!}}}}
Getting a good hearty laugh in over a death of a mentally ill person, isn’t that sweet?
That ain’t all:
{{{{By Can’t Fool God March 27, 2007 10:18 AM WASHINGTON - Presidential spokesman Tony Snow’s surgery to remove a small growth showed that his cancer has returned, the White House said Tuesday. You can fool the American people for awhile but you just can never fool God. Snow must have a little conscience left, so the maker is calling his marker now instead of waiting til he is standin fore the pearly gates. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Gonzales and the rest of the criminal cabal probably won’t get notice like Tony Snow has, they’re on an express ride to hell!}}}}
Isn’t it nice to see a liberal all happy and joyous over someone else’s cancer.
Tell us how much you care for the disadvantaged again, democrats.
Sick.
By Truthifier
October 23, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this
Glenn, pedophile and homosexual are two VERY different things. But maybe you were being sarcastic and I missed it.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this
Dear Hypo @ 3:36, there are four “poster boys” for the era of big “Republican” government from 2001-2004 - the education bill, the steel import quotas, the agriculture bill, and the department of homeland security. If memory serves - i.e., I am making this up as I go - the first three actually had more democrat votes than republican. The DHS, however, is admittedly a republican leviathan. I do not particularly blame republicans, other than the President, for the lack of fiscal discipline from 2001-2004. I do blame Congressional republicans for 2004-2007; while there were no emblematic spending excesses during that period, there were a million earmarks. Congressional democrats are now proving the republicans were pikers there, too.
By Hypocrisy
October 23, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw you are ridiculous. The Republians were the MAJORITY party and therefore controlled the agenda of the Congress. They held the Speakership. They held the Majority Leadership. If the Republicans didn’t want a bill to get through Congress it was not going to get through. If the President didn’t like a bill he could veto it. How can you seriously suggest that the MAJORITY party had no role in legislation that passed? Of course some of the bills were supported by Democrats. But AGAIN..my point is that it is hypocritical to criticize big spending and then vote for it. The Democrats who voted for the bills were likely not then turning around and criticizing big spending. You really need to take the partisan blinders off man. You sometimes make a good point and are obviously of above average intelligence, but all of that means nothing if you will never ever ever concede that your grand GOP has a hand in anything that is “bad.” I’m done with this silly argument with you now.
By GodHatesTrash
October 23, 2007 5:09 PM | Link to this
Having the drunken w******* Hillbilly Fred for a pappy might drive any decent person crazy. Poor thing.
With regard to Tony Snow, it looks like God is scheduling a trash pickup.
Soon.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this
YES!!!! Truthifier! You got it. No surprised that you mistook me for one of the intolerant ones. I hope my pen pal getalife knows I was kidding. I trust he was kidding. My point was the futility if not perniciousness of these deliberate categorial errors.
Does anybody blame Rudi for this sordid little affair? Is Rudi supposed to be a practitioner of Canon law now? Does anyone suspect he’s something other than a straight gu, comfortable in his own skin, who has a lot of gay friends and wanted to help his friend who married him? Is the guy running a bordello out of Rudi’s basement or something?
If you folks want to raise the whole issue of celibacy and pedophilia in the Catholic Church, ask Sister Ellen. Not my thing.
By jbmlaw
October 23, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this
Dear hypocrite @ 5:05, if I understand your argument, the democrats are hypocrites because they cannot/will not end the war in Iraq?
By cranky old man
October 23, 2007 5:34 PM | Link to this
Just Nasty and Mean wrote:
“What return to the taxpayers get by paying into entitlements?”
Well, a few possiblities come to mind:
Healthy citizens who can be kept that way much cheaper via preventive medicine than remedial medicine. If you don’t have to choose between paying the mortgage and getting your kids regular check-ups, you are more likely to get the check-ups.
Emergency rooms used for their intended purpose, meaning you won’t have to wait three hours to get help if you are bleeding to death.
The ability to switch to a better job without having to consider the relative merits of the medical plan of your prospective employer vs. your current employer.
Increased international competitiveness of that shrinking number of American businesses who are currently footing the bill for practically everyone. I suspect the most vehement opponents of “socialized” medicine, who are quietly paying the most to lobbyists to fight this, are companies like WalMart. They are essentially getting a free ride right now. Sure they may offer insurance to their employees, but it’s too expensive to buy on the meager salaries they pay, and it doesn’t cover enough of the cost of medical care to make it worth the price.
Even though the current proposal for SCHIP calls for raising cigarette taxes to pay for it, I don’t think anyone really believes that will be the long term funding method. I suspect this will evolve over time to cover the entire population, and the funding method will end up being something similar to medicare or social security - part paid by employers and part paid by employees.
By Art Sammish
October 23, 2007 5:42 PM | Link to this
Yeah, I second that. Let Snow melt. Let the trash collectors come and orphan his kids and leave his wife a widow. That two-faced cancerous shyster needs to clear the scene, NOW. He used to work for Bush, you know.
By Glenn
October 23, 2007 5:57 PM | Link to this
By time,
Thanks for the link @ 2:48. Great Caesar’s ghost, how much more messed up can things get? Where in Hell is the Church of England? Where, in Hell is the Church of England?
By Uncle Karma
October 23, 2007 6:17 PM | Link to this
You’ll burn for your words at 5:09, Satan’s Trash. Like a pathetic terrorist you think “God” is on your side. You ID’d the wrong god, Lucifer’s disciple. May you eventually suffer for your words as well as the thing that posted those comments earlier on another blog. You’ll get what’s coming to you, Satan’s Trash, you inhuman epitome of the rabid left in this nation. You’ll get what’s coming to you, thing. In time. Oh, in time. Jehovah has a way of getting even. It’s not our way here on earth. Vengeance is His. And vengeance shall bring you misery and suffering. So let it be said. So Let It Be Done.
Amen.
By Rev. Abernathy
October 23, 2007 6:37 PM | Link to this
YES-suh! YESsss!! Tell it! Yes, Lawd! TESTIFY! A-men! A-MEN!!!!
By Just Nasty anfd Mean
October 23, 2007 6:53 PM | Link to this
Let’s net all this out:
Taxpayers shouldn’t be providing free insurance and medical services for:
-Illegal aliens -High income families of up to $84,000 -“Children” up to 24 years old. -An expansion of neverending entitlements that we cannot afford. —Government competition with the private sector. —A significant expansion of government into an area of unproven need.
If someone can convince me any of the above makes sense, I’ll support Pelosi’s bill.
By Morrigan
October 24, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this
Atlmom Just how do you suggest old people find work? Tell me which companies eagerly hire old people at salaries that allow them to support themselves.
FYI, I saved for it too. Then the housing market wiped out any profit I might have made on the sale of my house, and I’m still paying the mortgage while I don’t even live there - because I can’t sell it. Then I was out of work for so long that I began applying for $8/hr mall jobs. So much for my 20 years of IT experience.
I know a lot of people don’t plan their financial lives and I have no patience for those who EXPECT others to give them money. But don’t assume that everyone who CAN work, DOES.
BTW, since you can support your grandmother, shouldn’t she be off Social Security? After all, she doesn’t need it.
By Ghost
October 25, 2007 8:41 AM | Link to this
I am 45 years old. When I was growing up we were poor. My pants would have patches on them and sometimes be too short. My shoes were just that…shoes and inexpensive at that. We did not have health insurance for everyday needs, only for major problems. We went to the doctor as much as the next folks and found a receptionist, and aid and the doctor. There were not five staff members supporting each doctor. Then along came the politicians and they saw a “fix” for this problem. So they tinkered with heathcare and tinkered some more until we have a crisis because they have stuck their hands in something they had not clue about to begin with. Why is it that the folks you see in the doctors offices these days have shoes and clothes on that cost more than what the doctor would make in a day after paying his staff and insurance. Then scream about how much he makes all the while wanting someone to pay for their care. Most Americans would gladly help our fellow man (illegal or poor) if so much of their paychecks didn’t go to such a wasteful inefficient mess that government programs are. I challenge you all to stop and just think about how most of these problems originated. Some of you may not be very happy with the answer. The TRUTH does not have a left or right…..just right or wrong!