Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 1:13:16 PM   
Lostkitten3


Posts: 179
Joined: 10/17/2008
Status: offline
I like this one better...hee hee!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF5Kdm4Eu6w&feature=fvw

(in reply to lynk09)
Profile   Post #: 221
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 1:13:42 PM   
begmeformore


Posts: 32
Joined: 9/30/2008
Status: offline
i voted the old way ,write in . yes i voted for myself

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 222
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 3:23:45 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
Obama receives 65,000 letters a week

WASHINGTON: Barack Obama receives a whopping 65,000 letters every week, making it a Himalayan task for his White House staff to read all these letters and then short list a few of them for the US President to respond personally.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ET-Cetera/Obama-receives-65000-letters-a-week/articleshow/4853467.cms

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 223
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 3:27:13 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
U.S. Unemployment-What Lies Ahead.

Unemployment in the U.S. which has already reached 9.5% is predicted to hit 9.6% when the next jobless figures are released. If this wasn't bad enough everybody from Obama and Geithner to Roubini predict that job losses will only get worse and probably cross 10% by the end of the year. They are expected to peak at about 10.6% sometime next year and decline gradually thereafter. This gloomy prediction comes amidst signs that the economy may be bottoming out.

http://econ-intel.blogspot.com/2009/08/us-unemployment-what-lies-ahead.html

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 224
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 3:38:21 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
Online Job Demand Holds Steady in July, The Conference Board Reports


Online advertised vacancies inched up by 700 to 3,295,500 in July, according to The Conference Board Help-Wanted Online Data Series (HWOL)(TM) released today. Nationally, online job demand has been relatively flat over the last several months after sharp declines in December 2008 and January 2009. Nationally, there were over four unemployed looking for work for every online advertised vacancy, as the number of unemployed increased even as the number of advertised vacancies held steady.

http://www.marketdigest.biz/online-job-demand-holds-steady-in-july-the-conference-board-reports.html

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 225
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 3:48:43 PM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
LOL. Darrell Issa? Yeah, that's a credible source. He's about as discredited as Darwin is. Except in the eyes of some right-wing ideologues.

Issa is an extremist ideologue with an extensive criminal record, even by Congressional standards (multiple car thefts, gun crimes). Unfortunately, I live in his district, which by and large is just as ideological.

And as for the actual matter:

- The first stimulus came from Bush. It was a half-hearted attempt, but it was a stimulus nonetheless.
- The economy was in a freefall since September 2008, four months before Obama took office (and two months before he was even elected).
- Bringing down the rate of job loss is a success. When your house is burning down, reducing the size of the fire is a success before you can start rebuilding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
"I thought the outdated and discredited Keynesian economic theory behind your
effort was misguided and I opposed the stimulus. Unfortunately, recent economic data
has validated my opposition.-The U.S. economy lost 433,000 jobs in June, bringing the
unemployment rate to 9,5Yo.b These job losses come on the heels of other declining
economic indicators, and bring the total number of American jobs lost since President
Obama took office to over 2.6 million."

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 226
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 4:08:33 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

LOL. Darrell Issa? Yeah, that's a credible source. He's about as discredited as Darwin is. Except in the eyes of some right-wing ideologues.

Issa is an extremist ideologue with an extensive criminal record, even by Congressional standards (multiple car thefts, gun crimes). Unfortunately, I live in his district, which by and large is just as ideological.

And as for the actual matter:

- The first stimulus came from Bush. It was a half-hearted attempt, but it was a stimulus nonetheless.
- The economy was in a freefall since September 2008, four months before Obama took office (and two months before he was even elected).
- Bringing down the rate of job loss is a success. When your house is burning down, reducing the size of the fire is a success before you can start rebuilding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
"I thought the outdated and discredited Keynesian economic theory behind your
effort was misguided and I opposed the stimulus. Unfortunately, recent economic data
has validated my opposition.-The U.S. economy lost 433,000 jobs in June, bringing the
unemployment rate to 9,5Yo.b These job losses come on the heels of other declining
economic indicators, and bring the total number of American jobs lost since President
Obama took office to over 2.6 million."



Issa couldnt start an Oversight investigation on his own.
The first stimulus came from a Democratically controlled Congress. It was a law, not an executive order. You can whirl like a dervish, but it doesnt spin into anything else.
"Freefall" is a quite an exaggeration, and if anything the stimulus exacerbated it.
Bringing down the job loss isnt a success when the POTUS and his best advisors said it wasnt going to.

BTW, did you ever respond to my comments on your ridiculous "Germany" post? Or was that someone equally unable to make a factual point if it doesnt support their worldview?

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 227
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 6:48:27 PM   
MmeGigs


Posts: 706
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481
The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue.


I don't often rely on annecdotal evidence. One can come up with annecdotes that will "prove" just about any point one wants to make. The numbers I cited came from a Harvard study. Study Casts Doubt on Claims That the Medical Malpractice System Is Plagued By Frivolous Lawsuits http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2006-releases/press05102006.html

quote:

The authors reviewed 1,452 closed claims from five malpractice insurance companies across the country. They focused on four clinical categories: surgery, obstetrics, medication and missed or delayed diagnosis, areas that collectively account for about 80% of all malpractice claims filed in the U.S. Specialist physicians in each of these clinical areas reviewed the claims and the associated medical records to determine whether the plaintiff had sustained an injury from care. If an injury had occurred, the physicians judged how likely it was to have been due to medical error.

The reviewers found that almost all of the claims involved a treatment-related injury. More than 90% involved a physical injury, which was generally severe (80% resulted in significant or major disability and 26% resulted in death). The reviewers judged that 63% of the injuries were due to error. The remaining 37% lacked evidence of error, although some were close calls.


quote:

Finally, the authors found that the claims that did not involve errors absorbed a relatively small piece of the costs of compensation. Eliminating those claims would decrease the system’s compensation and administrative costs by no more than 13% to 16%.


That works out to less than 0.1% of total health care spending that could be saved by eliminating frivilous lawsuits. I don't think that's enough to solve the problem of high health care costs, do you?

I would agree that something should be done about frivilous lawsuits. Doctors may be prime targets for these, but anyone who owns a business or a home or a car may be a target for a false personal injury claim. However, when it comes to addressing overall health care costs, it is a distraction. There are more effective ways to cut spending on malpractice that have been seen to actually work in the real world.

quote:

Anesthesiologists used to get hit with the most malpractice lawsuits and some of the highest insurance premiums. Then in the late 1980s, the American Society of Anesthesiologists launched a project to analyze every claim ever brought against its members and develop new ways to reduce medical error. By 2002, the specialty had one of the highest safety ratings in the profession, and its average insurance premium plummeted to its 1985 level, bucking nationwide trends. Similarly, feeling embattled by a high rate of malpractice claims, the University of Michigan Medical System in 2002 analyzed all adverse claims and used the data to restructure procedures to guard against error. Since instituting the program, the number of suits has dropped by half, and the university's annual spending on malpractice litigation is down two-thirds. And at the Lexington, Ky., Veterans Affairs Medical Center, a program of early disclosure and settlement of malpractice claims lowered average settlement costs to $15,000, compared with $83,000 for other VA hospitals.
http://www.slate.com/id/2145400/


(in reply to Maverick481)
Profile   Post #: 228
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 6:55:48 PM   
MmeGigs


Posts: 706
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Ask your ObGyn about his premiums, MmeGigs...just dont be in a compromised position and near any instruments when you do.


Maybe the ObGyn's ought to do what the anaesthesiologists did.


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 229
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 7:30:44 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs


quote:

Finally, the authors found that the claims that did not involve errors absorbed a relatively small piece of the costs of compensation. Eliminating those claims would decrease the system’s compensation and administrative costs by no more than 13% to 16%.




I guess what is "relatively small" is in the eye of the beholder. Earlier in that link it said that the average cost of getting the claims through the litigation progress, including claims without merit, was about $52k. So a "loser pays" law would reduce the overall cost of litigation by 13-16% of $52k. or about $7,500 per year.

That means that for every law suit without obvious merit was not pursued because loser pays, that money could be diverted to providing coverage for 1 to 3 of the uninsured people in the country. Does that "solve" the health care problems? No, but it goes a helluva long way toward solving one of the perceived problems.

And again, the actual costs of insurance and litigation are not the the only costs of the current tort system.

"79 percent of doctors report that they've ordered more tests than they would based only on professional judgment due to litigation fears, according to a Harris Interactive Poll.

The American Medical Association lists 21 states as being in a "medical liability crisis."

71,000 drug lawsuits have been filed in federal courts since 2001 -- and have outnumbered asbestos, tobacco and auto safety lawsuits since 2002.

45 percent of U.S. hospitals reported that the liability crisis has caused a loss of physicians and/or reduced coverage in emergency departments."

Reduce litigation and you eliminate some unnecessary tests and procedures, lower drug costs, and improve emergency care coverage. More of the talking points criticizing the current system.

Sure...lets throw money at the problem and hope it miraculously finds its way into the right hands to accomplish something. Or...thoughtfully examine where costs can be cut and where money can be spent, and then see what is affordable. In 7 months of an administration and 4 months or so of deliberations by Congress it is simply not possible that the more rational of the two approaches is being taken. And if tort reform isnt addressed, it is money down the drain.

(in reply to MmeGigs)
Profile   Post #: 230
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 9:11:24 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

My brother was an optometrist, not even a doc. His malpractice premiums were ridiculously high even before he had a settlement. A patient came in, was referred to an MD immediately for glaucoma. The guy didnt bother to go, and 2 years later sued my brother, and despite having clear contemporaneous records of the referral, his insurance company settled well into 5 figures.



If the insurance company settled they settled for a reason.



Bingo..they settled to avoid the costs of litigating a frivolous law suit THAT NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN FILED IF "LOSER PAYS"



If you scroll up and read the link I posted earlier on this page you will find an opinion on frivolous lawsuits that contradicts what you are saying.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 231
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 9:52:37 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


You want to have a link war, go for it. Before you waste everyones time, though, let me remind you of Nancy Pelosi's asinine comments that cause Republicans to change their vote, and the Dems refusal to vote on it without having a sufficient number of Republicans to share the blame


I can't have a link war with you Willbeur because you never post links to back anything you say.

But I am very, very proud that you finally learned how to use the quote feature.

Hopefully Google will be next.


quote:



So, you would like to give OB credit for the Dow recovery, but not note the drop after the election in anticipation of his inauguration? Dont count on a "steady climb to 10,000" anytime soon. And of course you will dismiss it, but in my weekly conference calls with 2 of the top investment advisory companies in the country, the recent recoveries are a direct response to struggles getting health care and especially Cap and Trade passed, both of which were discounted heavily into stock prices causing a good portion of the drop.


Of course we can't give Obama credit.  Just like the eight years of a prosperous economy had absolutely nothing to do with Clinton's economic policies.

But I'm a little confused on the latter.  What exactly are you saying?  That the difficulties in passage of both are boosting stock prices? 

If so, then you are arguing against yourself.  On one hand saying Obama's campaign proposals, before he was even elected, caused the market to drop and then saying uncertainty over the passage of these bills is causing the market to rise?


quote:



If your attention span cant reach back 2 posts, it isnt worth my time to 'splain it to you Lucy.


I definitely wouldn't want to waste your valuable time Willbeur. 

You're obviously a very busy and important guy doing very busy and important things.

quote:


LMAO If in your mind there is a difference between confidence in "the overall health of the financial system" and recognizing that the economy is sound and we are experiencing a market correction reflecting the business cycle, youve reached new depths in creative interpretation.


Really?

So then you don't think this id the worst recession since the Great Depression?

And if so, then why did Bush, after he made his "everything is fine, just a market correction" speech move to take such drastic measures as the takeover of AIG and the bank bailouts?


quote:


And then back to your usual intentional misinterpetation of my plain words to make a snarky comment. My post addressed taking credit for the effects of a stimulus package that has barely been implemented. It says nothing about whether a stimulus package can ever stimulate the economy long term.

Ducks in a pond.


This from someone who has made those types of comments to practically everyone on this board, including me twice in this post alone.

One tends to receive what one gives.

But I'm glad you realize the stimulus has barely been implemented, but it does raise the issue of why Fox News and every conservative has already labeled it a failure?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 232
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/4/2009 10:15:44 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

Man, nothing has changed around here.....

>At a recent town hall meeting, a man stood up and told Representative Bob Inglis to “keep your government hands off my Medicare.” The congressman, a Republican from South Carolina, tried to explain that Medicare is already a government program — but the voter, Mr. Inglis said, “wasn’t having any of it.”<

--Paul Krugman

Reminds me of the CM MBs.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 233
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 12:43:06 AM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
Conservatives organize to shout down congressmen at town halls

The American people have apparently forgotten how to use their indoor voices. For a few different elected officials, that's meant their trips home recently have been interrupted by encounters with agitated citizens, people who have something they want to get off their chest. Loudly.

Two weeks ago, Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., was shouted down and saw his town meeting hijacked over the question of the president’s birth certificate. Watching the crowd force Castle to recite the Pledge of Allegiance instead of talk about healthcare can make you want to laugh and cry at the same time.

Then, two days ago, Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, had his meeting with constituents overrun by people protesting healthcare reform and chanting, “Just say no!” There’s apparently a loose affiliation between this “mob,” as Doggett called them, and the infamous Tea Partiers of several months ago. At the very least, the “Just say no!” crowd, with its hammer-and-sickle-adorned anti-government posters, draws obvious inspiration from the winter anti-tax rallies.

And on Sunday, Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius presided over a tense public meeting at a packed Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Questioners raised the standard complaints about the government being incompetent to run any sort of healthcare plan. Said one audience member -- who sounded a bit like the Castle meeting hijacker -- to the applause of the audience and the barely-concealed eye-rolls of Sebelius and Specter:
I look at this health care plan and I see nothing that is about health or about care. What I see is a bureaucratic nightmare, senator. Medicaid is broke, Medicare is broke, Social Security is broke and you want us to believe that a government that can't even run a cash for clunkers program is going to run one-seventh of our U.S. economy? No sir, no.

But the nastiest booing was reserved for Specter, when he revealed that he wasn’t going to read the entire piece of legislation when it came to the floor. The senator tried to explain that his staff would split it up, because otherwise the process would take too long. This is, apparently, outrageous.

The truth of all three meetings -- in Delaware, in Texas and in Philly -- is that there were probably at least as many supporters of the Obama administration in the room as there were opponents. That is almost certainly the case when considering the congressional districts as a whole of Mike Castle and Lloyd Doggett, as well as the state of Pennsylvania (and certainly the city of Philadelphia). But it’s not hard for an angry few to derail a meeting, especially when they're so much more interested in confrontation than conversation.

In addition to the disrupting these three meetings, protesters have surrounded Rep. Tim Bishop, D-N.Y., forcing him to rely on a police escort to escape to his car. They've also hung Rep. Frank Kratovil, D-Md., in effigy. A leaked memo from a volunteer with conservative group FreedomWorks entitled "Rocking the Town Halls -- Best Practices" advises exactly this sort of behavior. (The man listed as author, Frank MacGuffie, denies having written the memo on behalf of FreedomWorks.) The memo tells protesters to spread out to appear more numerous than they are and maximize disruption, reminding them, "Try To 'Rattle Him,' Not Have An Intelligent Debate."

That's probably why there's so much bad information in play here. Just as the president was, in fact, born in the United States, no proposal on the table actually has the government running one-seventh of the economy. We already do ration healthcare, as Sebelius pointed out (to applause). Nor is it the least bit unusual, despite the booing, for senators not to read the full text of legislation. Sometimes a sneaky little earmark or amendment does squeeze through, but nobody is going to trick Congress into passing a law requiring that we pull the plug on ailing seniors or refuse treatment to kids with cancer.

Still, this is the kind of thing that spooks elected officials. To see that, you don’t need to look any further than otherwise moderate Republicans looking over their shoulders at Mike Castle, and then refusing to admit that Obama is constitutionally qualified to be president.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/08/03/meeting_shouting/

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 234
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 4:24:17 AM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
And again, the actual costs of insurance and litigation are not the the only costs of the current tort system.

"79 percent of doctors report that they've ordered more tests than they would based only on professional judgment due to litigation fears, according to a Harris Interactive Poll.


That makes no sense. If a test is unnecessary in their professional judgment, and the doctor is right, there is no risk of a lawsuit from skipping that test.

And if the doctor was wrong, his professional judgment apparently wasn't all that good - i.e., it's a legitimate malpractice claim.

I for one am glad that "litigation fears" prevent doctors from cutting corners with "unnecessary" tests that turn out not to be so unnecessary after all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
The American Medical Association lists 21 states as being in a "medical liability crisis."


Ummm... There really IS a problem here: the malpractice insurance companies have indeed raised premiums, but based on investment losses, not lawsuits. In any case, in the big scheme of health care, it's still a tiny amount.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
71,000 drug lawsuits have been filed in federal courts since 2001 -- and have outnumbered asbestos, tobacco and auto safety lawsuits since 2002.


Vioxx. Need I say more? OK. Fen-Phen. Zicam and Tylenol (although those lawsuits haven't been filed yet). Are you seriously arguing that those lawsuits should be restricted?

In a country of almost a third of a billion people, that's less than 9000 lawsuits per year, and many of them were combined into one. BTW, you really shouldn't compare it with a group of lawsuits that peaked last century. Asbestos was phased out in the 1970s, and the Ford Pinto lawsuits also are ancient history. Even the Ford Explorer lawsuits predate your time frame.

In any case, you consistently use data artificially inflated (in this case, by using the total of about eight years, instead of an annualized number), and try to argue away the one number that matters: less than 1% of health care dollars are related to lawsuits.


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 235
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 5:12:37 AM   
MmeGigs


Posts: 706
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Or...thoughtfully examine where costs can be cut and where money can be spent, and then see what is affordable.


That's what I was suggesting. Anesthesiologists saw their malpractice costs plummet when they developed ways to reduce errors. Spending on malpractice at the U of Mich dropped by 2/3. In addition to the drop in costs, fewer errors means fewer injured patients. Getting rid of all frivilous suits might decrease spending on malpractice by about 1/6, but tort reform can't get rid of all frivilous suits so won't present that much in savings. It also does nothing to decrease medical errors. Which seems to be a more effective way to deal with the problem of malpractice costs?

If I recall correctly, Obama is in the "reduce errors" camp. Seems a reasonable stand to me.




(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 236
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 8:27:19 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Or...thoughtfully examine where costs can be cut and where money can be spent, and then see what is affordable.


That's what I was suggesting. Anesthesiologists saw their malpractice costs plummet when they developed ways to reduce errors. Spending on malpractice at the U of Mich dropped by 2/3. In addition to the drop in costs, fewer errors means fewer injured patients. Getting rid of all frivilous suits might decrease spending on malpractice by about 1/6, but tort reform can't get rid of all frivilous suits so won't present that much in savings. It also does nothing to decrease medical errors. Which seems to be a more effective way to deal with the problem of malpractice costs?

If I recall correctly, Obama is in the "reduce errors" camp. Seems a reasonable stand to me.






Do you really think those steps arent being taken in all areas of practice already?

(in reply to MmeGigs)
Profile   Post #: 237
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 3:53:01 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
GREENBACKS FOR GRANNIES AND OBAMA WILL BE DOING IT EVERY SUNDAY
Stewart: Fox News Instigating Town Hall Disruptions - Video

On Monday night, Comedy Central host Jon Stewart drew a direct line between recent disruptions at congressional town hall meetings and a certain GOP-favoring network. And he’s not alone in believing that fake outrage is behind the recent, high-profile confrontations.

Showing a clip from a recent town hall attended by Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Health and Human Services chief Kathleen Sebelius, Stewart highlighted a Fox talking point that was repeated by an off-camera woman.

“You want us to believe that a government that can’t even run a cash for clunkers program is going to run 1/7th of our U.S. economy?” she rattled into the mic to a growing chorus of cheers. “No sir! No.”

“Does every town in America have one of those ladies?” asked Stewart. “Or has that lady been going around to every town?”

http://planetgreen.com/


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 238
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 3:59:16 PM   
Brain


Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline
This is the right link, sorry I goofed

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/04/stewart-fox-news-instigating-town-hall-disruptions/

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 239
RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As P... - 8/5/2009 4:12:45 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

GREENBACKS FOR GRANNIES AND OBAMA WILL BE DOING IT EVERY SUNDAY
Stewart: Fox News Instigating Town Hall Disruptions - Video

On Monday night, Comedy Central host Jon Stewart drew a direct line between recent disruptions at congressional town hall meetings and a certain GOP-favoring network. And he’s not alone in believing that fake outrage is behind the recent, high-profile confrontations.

Showing a clip from a recent town hall attended by Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Health and Human Services chief Kathleen Sebelius, Stewart highlighted a Fox talking point that was repeated by an off-camera woman.

“You want us to believe that a government that can’t even run a cash for clunkers program is going to run 1/7th of our U.S. economy?” she rattled into the mic to a growing chorus of cheers. “No sir! No.”

“Does every town in America have one of those ladies?” asked Stewart. “Or has that lady been going around to every town?”

http://planetgreen.com/




Yeah,because one of the protestors happens to watch FNN that makes the whole thing driven by FNN. Nonsense. They report on them, they have never encouraged or promoted them.

(in reply to Brain)
Profile   Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

3.191