Rumor: Michele Bachmann considering White House bid

1. 89

   I am DB Cooperposted 14 years ago

   There are rumors floating around today that Minnesota representative Michele Bachmann is considering a 2012 presidential run. Bachmann is seen as a far right conservative and the polar opposite of Senator Al Franken, also from Minnesota.
   
   So what does everyone think of Bachmann's chances? Did anyone see her on Face the Nation this week debating Andrew Weiner? If that appearance was any indication, she could make for a very entertaining candidate. I love the crazy things that come out of her mouth when her poorly-formed arguments get her trapped in a corner.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      She's no Sarah....and that's NOT an endorsement of Sarah!LOL If Palin is no good, she is worse!

      replyreport
   2. 61

      lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I'd vote for her in a minute! How about a Palin/Bachmann ticket! Yes that would put America on the right track!

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         ...to nuclear Armageddon.  These twits are dangerously stupid.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Do you lefties ever tire of your demonizing scare tatics? Obama couldn't hold a candle to either of them!

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               
               
               He won't have to.

               replyreport
            2. 0

               Texasbetaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               ..except in every single poll out there right now.

               replyreport
   3. 60

      readytoescapeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      And as I overheard heard this morning on GMA, so is Roseanne Barr

      replyreport
   4. 0

      awesome77posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      She is not part of the blood line! Neither is Sarah Palin! The GOP would nominate
      
      Romney
      
      or
      
      Huckabee
      
      And any of them would lose by at least 5 points to Obama! Why? Because Obama has given the elite everything they wanted and he does it with a loving smile!

      replyreport
      1. 83

         lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yeah, but Obama gives to others as well. Just the fact that he mentions poor people and those who "have no bootstraps" is a gift from Heaven to me.
         And, he was right on in calling out the real people who destroyed this economy... Wall Street bankers.
         He has done a lot for a lot of people who otherwise would be ignored.
         
         We'll see if he uses those cajones I know are there.

         replyreport
         1. 58

            logic,commonsenseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            So why did he hire a Wall Street banker as his chief of staff?

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Texasbetaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Who constitutes the "elite"? The Wall Streeters are the girlfriends of the Republicans, who strip the regulation and oversight of said group. The bankers, the very same. The oil companies are beneficiaries, lawyers, pharmaceutical companies, chemical companies...it appears the richer of the rich always favor republicans and are courted as such. If you mean educated people are the elite, then thank you. Wouldn't you favor thinking people rather than greedy people who will destroy everything for a dollar?

         replyreport
   5. 59

      DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I admit it - I enjoy good entertainment. And that is why, in part, I hope some- one like Palin or Bachmann is run on the GOP ticket in 2012. I don't think the conservative powers that be would allow it though. The GOP uses Palin and Bachmann as their "glamor factor" - but I have to believe they do indeed realize how dumb these two people actually are. It would be suicide for the GOP to run either one of them against a sitting president. Even the most conservative supporters would soon realize that their "polictical gravitas" is about that of a senior highschool class president's. Honestly, debates would be painful to watch. Still, I might watch them in spite of myself...

      replyreport
2. 60

   Pandoras Boxposted 14 years ago

   Yay! Stupid women in charge! Woo-hoo!

   replyreport
   1. 61

      lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Neither one of them is stupid, that's for sure! Stupid is to assume that they couldn't do a better job than Obama and the democrats!

      replyreport
3. 59

   BillyDRitchieposted 14 years ago

   The media has tried to paint Michele Bachmann with the same brush they used on Sarah Palin, but they haven't been as effective this time.
   
   Anybody who underestimates Michele Bachmann does so at their own risk.
   
   Did I mention that conservative women seem to be hotter than liberal women?  I mean in this corner we have Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Elizabeth Hasslebeck....in that corner we have Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Rosie O'Donnell.....

   replyreport
   1. 89

      I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, because attractiveness is clearly what's important. During the 2008 election, when it was clear that John McCain wouldn't have a chance of winning if he chose another old white man as his running mate, a lot of people speculated that senior Senator Olympia Snowe from Maine would be his pick. Just two years earlier, Time Magazine had included Snowe on their list of Top Ten Senators. Instead, McCain picked relatively young and inexperienced former beauty pageant contestant Sarah Palin. The rest is history.
      
      It seems the only people fooled by good looks are members of the Republican Party.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Oh my Mr. Cooper , you hit that one on the head. I have sometimes referred to Sarah Palin as the "Stiffy Factor" and the great "Hail Mary pass" of the McCain campaign. I recall it clearly the night Ms. Sarah was introduced to the world. And before she opened her mouth, I thought McCain might still stand a ghost of a chance. Of course minutes later, after she opened her mouth, I realized Obama had it in the bag...

         replyreport
   2. 59

      Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
4. 60

   Pandoras Boxposted 14 years ago

   Yeppers. Stupid HOT women in charge. Finally everything is going to be okay.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Better than stupid ugly women.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         True dat.

         replyreport
5. 84

   habeeposted 14 years ago

   Bachmann makes Palin look like a genius. What's up with Minnesota? I don't like Franken, either.
   
   Maybe it's the cold weather that freezes their brains. A friend of mine is from Minn, and he loves to tell the story of a time he tried to order dessert in a restaurant there:
   
   Don: Do you have pie?
   
   Waiter: Yah, ve haf two kinds of pie. Chocolate cake und donuts.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      It's certainly a land of extreme political views. Are there any moderates in Minnesota?

      replyreport
      1. 84

         habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I've wondered the same thing, DB!

         replyreport
      2. 61

         lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What's your definition of a moderate, someone that only believes in the constitution a little bit?

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Someone who doesn't let FoxNews dictate their views.
            
            Ever met one?

            replyreport
         2. 89

            I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            The constitution is not all-encompassing and is also open to multiple interpretations. It's not something that is "believed in" or "not believed in" like the Bible or the Koran or Santa Claus. The Supreme Court justices would have a lot more free time if the constitution was more thorough and clear in its meaning.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Actually it is pretty clear and no it isn't all encompassing but it wasn't meant to be. The judges wouldn' be so busy if the socialist democrats would stop trying to claim there are things in the constitution taht aren't there.

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I guess we have different definitions of "clarity".

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Well you're not alone, Obama has his own interpretation as well, one of which has already been declared unconstitutional.

                     replyreport
                     1. 83

                        lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        By a right wing-nut judge who was against reform in the first place. Ehhhhhh.....FAIL. Not impartial....very partial and un-objective.

                        replyreport
               2. 57

                  C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Actuall it's that part about the "common welfare" that's pretty UNCLEAR and is causing us a LOT of trouble!

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     No not the "general welfare" clause, but the "commerce clause" and actually if you look at the history you can see the intent behind both of these clauses and you can see that the "commerce clause" and "general welfare" clause have been misinterpreted on purpose in order to expand the role of government.

                     replyreport
                     1. 57

                        C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        No doubt in my mind in regards to intent. We agree. However it's clear to you and I but not to everyone.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           lady_love158posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Oh, I think it's clear to anyone that bothers to research it, but government has it's own agenda, it's an organism onto itself and seeks to grow to survive, and it's found ways to do just that.

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              Anything LL does not like is unconstitutional. Anything she likes - is.
                              
                              There's clarity for you.

                              replyreport
                              1. 76

                                 livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 Sad, but true.

                                 replyreport
                     2. 59

                        DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        And since we are speaking of literal interpretation, let's take a look at the 2nd Amendment. This amendment, dare I paraphase, talks about the right to keep and bear arms being necessary for a well-armed militia. In the 18th Century, a militia was essentially "deputized citizenry" - the everyday citizen who could be called on by his government to act as a soldier. It was in lieu of a standing army in other words - national defense on the cheap. And sure enough, that's what we had.
                        So those liberals, by your definition "those who interpret the constitution rathen than read it for what it is," actually enabled your Conservatives to twist the original words into a right for anyone (nearly) to buy firearms. Who would have thought?

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           "a militia was essentially "deputized citizenry""
                           
                           No it wasn't.
                           
                           Deputized includes taking an oath.
                           
                           A militia is just plain old everyday citizens.
                           
                           Don't put words into the constitution that are not there.

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              Plain old average citizens acting on behalf and under the call of their country - that's a militia. Without an oath, all you have is a vigilante group. And you can bet they were "sworn in." Anytime you take a position within a government or act on its behalf - civilian, military, etc. - you take an oath. Without an oath your actions aren't defensible.
                              I am not putting words in the Constitution that aren't there. I am telling you something, while perhaps not spelled out in the Constitution, is a nonetheless how a citizen becomes a soldier.

                              replyreport
               3. 59

                  DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  uh Lady Love, is there anything in that holy document that addresses police or fire protection? I have not been able to locate it; I fear both of these public services are "unconstitutional" based on your criteria. Might I suggest you do the honorable thing and forgo those services if you are so in need of them?

                  replyreport
6. 83

   lovemychrisposted 14 years ago

   If Bachmann-Turner-Overdrive is running for president, someone needs to ask her to explain how "Obamacare" will "bankrupt America"...cause I think that's a lie.
   
   She also needs to explain how it is that she took $250,000 from the "gangster" gvt for her private family farm.
   
   And her comment about "second amendment solutions".....she wants Minnesotans "armed and dangerous".....
   
   She sounds quite militant to me....so, if you all are scared of a Black Panther with a stick...surely you must be quaking in your boots over an armed group of militant Swedes?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Druid Dudeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      What's Bachman w/o Turner.  What? No OVERDRIVE!!!

      replyreport
   2. 83

      lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      "Harvard economist David Cutler argues in new paper released this morning that repealing the health law would reverse these gains and could destroy 250,000 to 400,000 jobs annually over the next decade. Eliminating the law would increase health care costs and cause employers to reduce wages and cut jobs for those employees who already receive minimum wage or are in fixed contracts. From the report:
      
      The baseline estimates show that 250,000 jobs will be lost annually if health reform is repealed. Annual job losses would average 400,000 using the greater estimate of 1.5 percentage point cost increases annually resulting from repeal.
      
      
      Employers may be anxious about some of the new requirements, but many are already benefiting from the law. A growing number of employers are taking advantage of the tax credit that allows businesses with fewer than 25 workers and average wages under $50,000 to deduct up to 35% of the cost of the premiums they provide for their employees and many are receiving money from the law’s reinsurance program, which assists employers with retiree health costs. In 2014, small businesses will be able to use the new health insurance exchanges to pool resources and lower costs by covering their workers through a larger risk pool. All this would free up dollars that could then be used for job creation.
      
      As Steve Pearlstein points out, “what’s particularly noteworthy about this fixation with ‘job killing’ is that it stands in such contrast to the complete lack of concern about policies that kill people rather than jobs.” “Repealing health-care reform, for instance, would inevitably lead to thousands of unnecessary deaths each year because of an inability to get medical care,” he says. “There is an unmistakable redbaiting quality to the “job-killing” rhetoric, a throwback to the McCarthy era.”

      replyreport
7. 84

   habeeposted 14 years ago

   I really like Huckabee as a person, but he doesn't have the $ or the backing of big business to run effectively. Romney has the money and the economic smarts, but I think his Mormonism will hurt him. Of course, most of the far-right sees both of these guys as too liberal or moderate.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Romney is missing a compassion gene. He went on a family vacation, and strapped his dog to the top of the car for the ride!!
      Plus, he presided over Romneycare...they would have to label him a commie socialist who wants to destroy America.
      
      Huckabee? Beneath that niceness lies something very mean, I think.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Huckabee's family also has a poor history with dogs. His son was fired from a summer camp for killing a stray dog. Huckabee has denied using his influence as governor to keep police from investigating the matter.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            The dog incident bothers me. I don't hold Huckabee responsible for what his son did, but I would like to know more about the investigation. I'm surprised that in Arkansas, animal cruelty is only a misdemeanor.
            
            Huckabee is already being smeared by the far right and the far left, however, with things I simply don't believe. I just read on a liberal blog site an article that says Huckabee is suggesting assassinating Obama on Twitter, for example.

            replyreport
         2. 58

            logic,commonsenseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Last time I checked the constitution, there wasn't anything in it about how your son treated animals.
            Not that I'd vote for Huckabee anyway.

            replyreport
      2. 84

         habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Why do you think Huckabee is mean? I'd really like to know.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Read this -
            
            http://www.mahablog.com/2009/11/30/as-g … an-others/

            replyreport
         2. 83

            lovemychrisposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            By Lee Fang on Dec 30th, 2010 at 9:35 am
            Responding To TP Report, Huckabee Group Fires Scam Artist Who Defrauded Foreclosure Victims
            
            "On Tuesday, ThinkProgress reported that former Governor and current Fox News personality Mike Huckabee has been starring in a new health reform ad campaign run by a political consulting firm owned by a notorious scam artist. The firm Huckabee’s group had hired is 949 Media Group, a company run by Derek Oberholtzer — a notorious scam artist who ripped off foreclosure victims. Before going into political work, Oberholtzer ran a company that promised aid to people facing foreclosure. But prosecutors from Idaho and the federal government found that Oberholtzer had systematically robbed his customers by charging them with fees ranging from $595 – $1,500 without doing a thing to help them with their mortgages. Responding to ThinkProgress’s report, Huckabee colleague Ken Hoagland sent Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times a statement indicating that they will fire Oberholtzer:
            
            Ken Hoagland, chairman of Restore America’s Voice said, “We have terminated the services of 949 Media after we saw a web report last night detailing prior complaints involving its participation in certain mortgage relief marketing activities.” Hoagland said that 949 Media was a subcontracting vendor “responsible for web consulting but was never tasked with any management or leadership role” within the growing national campaign, as originally reported. “We were unaware of the seriousness of the past issues with this vendor and we have taken immediate action to terminate the relationship. No public official working with us to repeal the healthcare act had any knowledge of nor relationship with any vendor or subcontractor,” said Hoagland.
            
            Over the years, Huckabee has been accused of using non-profits to enrich himself and his family. Although it is unclear if Huckabee receives any monetary gains from his latest venture, it is laudable he has at least distanced himself from a scam artist like Oberholtzer."
            ****
            I'm sure you all will say-" Well, look, he fired the guy!"
            But just remember how much of an issue you all made about Obama and his associations. Even if he just had a meeting with somebody, you branded him a terrorist, socialist, commie, muslim, Nazi, etc etc. "Pals around with terrorists"--remember?
            You will have to admit the same for Huckabee and the rest of the Repubs.

            replyreport
   2. 76

      livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The right is too fragmented to have a serious candidate in 2012.
      
      That said, Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann as the GOP nominee would make Obama's reelection campaign that much easier.

      replyreport
8. 75

   barryrutherfordposted 14 years ago

   re Michelle Bachmann
   
   I have just read her policy platform. I find her policy platform scary.
   
   If they were  adopted it would take America back to the 1950's
   
   I do not think America would want that.  -especially women

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Jillian Barclayposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Heard today that Bachman has been appointed to sit on the House Intelligence Committee. Does that make anyone else laugh? Or is it just me?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Paul Wingertposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I guess it doesn't take much to be appointed to the house of intelligence. That's not really laughable, but pathetic. Her or Palin would never get the nomination.

         replyreport
9. 59

   BillyDRitchieposted 14 years ago

   People tend to really attack those that they are actively scared of.  I'm certainly guilty of that when it comes to Nancy Pelosi and Prince Harry Reid, simply because I believe that while their policies are not only dangerous, they are also effective at getting their agendas moved forward.
   
   I would venture that the left feels the same way about women like Michele Bachmann (but of course they will never admit it....)

   replyreport
   1. 76

      livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed, but it's a different form of effectiveness. Bachmann is effective at propagating idiotic ideas to tens of millions of her IQ-challenged minions.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Oh, I forgot, only liberals are capable of any meaningful ideas.....silly me....

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You see how progressives really are now?
            
            They don't want to lead us to a better way they just want to shut down any debate and lead us over a cliff.
            
            Thats why they were kicked in the teeth last November, thats why if the republicans don't screw up we will finally be rid of their kind.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Trotting out the dolchstoss legende?

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Thats pretty funny coming from a supporter of propaganda.
                  
                  Republicans=Nazi, learn to deal with your loss.
                  
                  It will help when it happens again in 2 years.

                  replyreport
         2. 89

            I am DB Cooperposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            There have been some great conservative elected officials. Michele Bachmann is not one of them.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Yes, exactly.
               
               Michele Bachmann is the Republican James Traficant.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Really? I didn't know she was a convicted felon.
                  
                  A corrupt law enforcement officer.
                  
                  A disgraced ex-congressman.
                  
                  Oh wait, shes not.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     And she has better hair.....

                     replyreport
                     1. 76

                        livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        It would be impossible not to!
                        
                        Although their similar ability to fabricate loony theories is eerily similar. And Bachmann bests him in this respect, too.

                        replyreport
10. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    I know I will come off as some liberal middle aged hag -- which I am... but...
    It offends me to read repeated insults of female Democrats based on their looks. The comments I am talking about are NOT tongue-in-cheek. I have read (in these forums) some really ugly descriptions of Hillary Clinton, especially.
    That kind of comment is sexist and misogynistic.
    If a "candidate" like Sarah Palin makes her sexual attractiveness an issue (which no one can deny), that's her business.
    Hillary Clinton has never put herself out there as a beauty queen, but is definitely a brainy queen.
    Take a look at our past presidents. Not exactly matinee idol handsome, are they?
    Enough with judging smart people by their covers!

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       "Not exactly matinee idol handsome, are they?"
       
       Well, one of them was.

       replyreport
    2. 76

       livelongerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       That's because Republicans nowadays will only support a female politician - even one of their own - if she looks like a beauty queen. Men's looks are irrelevant.
       
       It helps explain why Sharron Angle and Meg Whitman lost this past November...and why Nicki Haley won. (To say nothing of Palin and Bachmann's popularity)

       replyreport
    3. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       You mean comments like "Hillary Clinton reminds me of the back end of a Mack truck"?
       
       I stand by that one....
       
       Joy Behar fell out of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down?
       
       Indeed.....

       replyreport
       1. 59

          BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          And I'm not sure Hillary is that smart or she wouldn't have just assumed the Presidential nomination was hers for the taking.
          
          Treating primary season as a victory lap wasn't the brightest of moves, now was it?

          replyreport
          1. 61

             Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Or thought anyone would believe the whitewater files were in the closet.
             
             And she wasn't beat with an ugly stick, they used the whole damn forest.

             replyreport
       2. 59

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Coyote ugly? Wile E.

          replyreport
    4. 61

       Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Why is it only misogyny when its directed at democrat women?
       
       This is why we don't take democrats serious and why they never retain power.

       replyreport
11. 59

    Evan G Rogersposted 14 years ago

    The only person who deserves a vote for president is Ron Paul.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Even if that were true, can a 107 tear old function effectively in that role?

       replyreport
12. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    True, but they didn't have matinees back in 1776, Jim
    Nice horse, too!
    
    

    replyreport
13. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    That is my point, LL. Men's looks ARE irrelevant. And women's looks should be irrelevant, too. Look at female leaders around the world. Are they judged on their looks? Hell no!
    America is just so damned backwards.
    This preoccupation with "beauty queen candidates" on the Right is disturbing. It really is a throwback to the 1950s (Anita Bryant, anyone?).
    I guess I should be satisfied that it's one problem the Left does NOT suffer from. We don't care how our candidates fix their hair. We care what's under the hair. (Actually, we have even been known to elect candidates with NO hair like Jerry Brown!)

    replyreport
14. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    Yes, BDR. Those are exactly what I mean. Does it make you feel like a bigger man to hurl what are basically redneck insults at our Secretary of State?
    Have you graduated from Wellesley College?
    Have you graduated from Yale Law School?
    Are you a multi-millionaire?
    Have you served as First Lady of the State of Arkansas?
    Have you served as First Lady of the United States?
    Have you served as Senator of the State of New York?
    Do you hold a position of global power and command respect from heads of state around the world?
    If you cannot answer "yes" to all of these questions, then you got absolutely nothin'on Hil.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       "Do you hold a position of global power and command respect from heads of state around the world?"
       
       What makes you think they respect her?
       
       Insults are hurled at Sarah Palin everyday, so why should we care what offends you?

       replyreport
       1. 59

          DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

          But Sarah's not that bright...

          replyreport
          1. 61

             Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Compared to whom?
             
             A president who knows that a majority of citizens do not want his health care law?
             
             He can read, he is told everyday by many on tv and the radio it is not wanted.
             
             Yet he refuses to acknowledge that fact.
             
             That is beyond arrogant it is just plain stupid.

             replyreport
             1. 59

                DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Actually slightly over 50% of the nation likes/wants the invidual elements of the bill/law. The watered-down version that passed into law is almost identical to McCain's healthcare reform proposal during the past campaign.
                I work deep in this industry  (healthcare/insurance) - part of the reason I don't show my real photo and part of the reason I have very little personal information on my profile. And I see the "inside" of this industry and know first hand how "reform" was spun by my industry's lobbying power into something "evil." It was all by design let me assure you. You see there are literally trillions of future dollars at stake for the health insurance companies. They know that the private insurance business model can't work and they realize it won't last - they never tweeked the current "catastrophic" service delivery model to reflect the fact that PEOPLE ACTUALLY GO TO THE DOCTOR BEFORE THEY ARE ABOUT TO DIE these days. That's actually how you prevent high claims down the road, but the short-term costs (health maintenance) actually  bankrupt the current system model. It's called marginal utility, and it is exactly why private health insurance at affordable rates doesn't work, can't work for healthcare unless we return to the 1950's - when the current business model was born. You either raise premiums or you cut service - it's business 101 and very fundamental. Ask an actuary sometime how the model works. The industry's own "inside" predictions put its remaining lifespan at about 20 years. But, in that 20 years, there is a lot of money to be made, again, trillions of dollars. So, in short,  they have decided to ride this pig into the ground. And, instead of current reform which would actually EXTEND the lifespan of private health insurance but lessen profits over the long term, they, the healthcare insurance industry, have opted to shoot their wad in the relative short-term (the next twenty years.)
                So my friend, you and your anti healthcare reform wogs are actually putting the nail in the coffin of private health insurance. Leaving it or returning it to the pre-Obama days just speeds up its eventual death. Obama's plan, what was signed into law, was crap - but it was better smelling crap than anyone else has ever shat out. And no matter what rhetoric you want to spout, it does indeed give the industry a shot at survival albeit a slim one. Oh sure, there will still be private healthcare insurance available, but it will be ultra pricey and tailored specifically for the wealthy. But again, if you have money none of this is or will ever be an issue, will it? There will be small mutual companies that cover the "gap" not paid by the eventual public option, but affordable private health insurance for the middle class will be a thing of the past. And the funny part, well not really, is the very "party of business" will have played a seminal role in putting them in the ground. But then again, they know that - the short-term is just too good to care..

                replyreport
                1. 59

                   Doug Hughesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   You don't realize when you talk to Jimmy, you are talking to a medical expert. He's a nurse who explained recently that the 59% increase the BCBS Wellcare hike is obviously justified because BCBS is for a nonprofit company.
                   
                   Jimmy needs to know that Wellcare trades on the NYSE & made 16 Billion in gross profit 2009. Nonprofit my achin' arse.
                   
                   I can't figure out if the misinformation put out by wingnuts is deliberate lies or they are really that dumb.

                   replyreport
                   1. 59

                      DTR0005posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      I don't normally gets this fired up, but damn ... Can any rational individual not suspect there's something rotten  afoot when all of this money to change public policy is changing hands? Beer anyone? loll

                      replyreport
    2. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Not just Sarah Palin but her children were relentlessly attacked for any and every reason you can fathom.
       
       I guess such cheap shots are only allowed if it is liberals taking them at conservatives.
       
       BTW, Hillary rode Bill's coattails into power....anybody that tries to tell you otherwise is selling something....

       replyreport
15. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    It is mysogyny when it is directed a women. Period.
    I simply haven't seen alot (read: ANY) bashing of GOP or TP women here on the the forums based on their looks.
    Correct me if I am wrong.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Whatever you say.
       
       Seen threads galore thrashing Sarah Palin and commenting on her looks.
       
       MM I simply don't care what is offensive to people who offend others.
       
       Sorry...no I'm not

       replyreport
16. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    This is a no-brainer, even for you, Jim.
    They MUST respect her because she represents the UNITED STATES, the greatest, biggest, baddest and most powerful nation in the world.
    The heads of state ALWAYS respect the Secretary of State, even if she happens to be a beautiful Republican like Condie Rice!

    replyreport
    1. 78

       Buffoonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       So true, madam.  I've been reading this thread and I'm pretty much for all you posted, but this most of anything else.
       
       In any sort of civilized country, and even in most uncivilized ones, the position these fellows hold are what garners respect, not WHO occupies them.
       
       The USA has happened to have three very interesting women as Secs of State. I do believe, and excuse me for this personal assumption, the only country in the world where the looks of these three important women made any sort of headline is in their own turf, the USA.
       
       Those comments diminish the person but also the position, basically one is insulting their own institutions, which apparently are only good when someone of their liking is occupying them. Disrespectful and totally antidemocratic. Never mind misoginistic etc

       replyreport
17. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    Show me one forum post saying Sarah Palin looks like the back of a mack truck or fell out of the ugly tree or got hit with a forest of trees?

    replyreport
18. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    Sarah Palin's children were thrown under the media bus by their mother. I have never, ever seen a candidate so shameless in seeking the spotlight, not only for herself, but for her
    pregnant teen daughter.
    If you look at other candidates and presidents, their kids are off limits. The media may not like it, but they respect that cone of privacy.
    If the media threaten to NOT pay attention to a Palin child for more than 5 minutes, there's Sarah creating more reasons to focus the spotlight back on her family.

    replyreport
19. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    As to Hillary riding Bill's coattails to power -- no doubt she did. But let's be real. Bill Clinton has not been in "power" for over a decade. Whereas his wife has served in the US Senate and is now Secretary of State.
    She has her own coattails now.
    It's pretty impressive that a First Lady is able to parlay her husband's experience -- notwithstanding the fact that her husband was impeached -- into her own political career. Touche, Hillary!

    replyreport
    1. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Let's not forget Slick Willie's other dalliances which she conveniently overlooked lest she lose those magic coattails.....Birds of a feather, I guess....

       replyreport
20. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    I think I have offended Jim and he has left the forum.
    See you later, Jim!

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       All this talk of Teabagger women has caused him to need some "alone time"...
       
       He'll be back in 30 seconds.

       replyreport
    2. 61

       Jim Hunterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I went to work.
       
       Some of us are not hubpage Millionaires.
       
       Or are we?
       
       Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

       replyreport
21. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    She is hardly the first political wife to have a philandering husband.
    I could suggest the "power dalliance" between George W Bush and Dick Cheney (and not even "go there" about the rumors about W and Condie) that Laura Bush had to endure as FL.
    The difference is, Hillary got something out of the deal.
    Her husband continues to do philanthropic work around the world -- with Bush, Senior, in fact.
    And Hill got SOS position.
    There are a variety of reasons she lost the 2008 primary. Her husband was definitely seen as a loose cannon and Americans desperate for something "new" looked at Hill & Bill as a package deal and going "backwards."
    It is what it is. SOS is a good use of her talents.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Rumors about Bush and Condi...is that really the best you've got?
       
       Time to move on....nothing to see here....

       replyreport
22. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    Is it really true that the founders of the Tea Party were unaware of the modern meaning of the term "teabagger?"
    Don't they have vetting for that kind of unintended consequence?

    replyreport
    1. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       The Democrats were the ones who brought it up.
       
       Ignoring the historical significance in favor of a gay sexual term....typical.....

       replyreport
       1. 59

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          You guys embraced the term until someone pointed out its other meaning.  Sorry, but your homophobic mantra doesn't change the facts.  You screwed up, deal with it.

          replyreport
23. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    What exactly is it you want to argue about, BDR?
    Get into a pissing contest as to which party has the most philandering husbands? Power corrupts and is an aphrodisiac.
    It's well known.
    Do you really care that much about a BJ in the Oval Office?
    Is that your measure of a good POTUS?
    Ok then.
    Time to change the subject.

    replyreport
24. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    http://www.nndb.com/people/205/000024133/
    
    Little is known of Rice's personal life, except that she has never been married. She is reportedly a good ice skater and a knowledgeable football fan, and she dated the Denver Broncos' Rick Upchurch while she was attending the University of Denver. She once owned a house and shared a line of credit with another woman, Stanford co-worker and documentary filmmaker Randy Bean, although the nature of their partnership remains unknown. More recently, she occasionally has football executive Gene Washington on her arm when she attends State Department events, but their relationship is described only as "cordial". At a dinner party while Rice was National Security Advisor, she referred to President George W. Bush as "my husband" before abruptly correcting herself.
    
    Hello????

    replyreport
    1. 59

       BillyDRitchieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Well, if you insist on applying that line of reasoning, then President Obama is a Muslim since he once slipped and referred to "my Muslim faith".
       
       You're making your stand on very shaky ground here.
       
       (And no, Barack Obama is NOT a Muslim)

       replyreport
25. 75

    Mighty Momposted 14 years ago

    THANK YOU for bringing facts and reality into this issue. Greed is such an ugly motive, isn't it?

    replyreport
26. 60

    sir slaveposted 14 years ago

    liberals  everywhere are cheering miss bachmann on to crack that glass celing and become the first female presidential nominee ever.  what an easy win for the president.
    and what a entertaining show for the rest of us!!

    replyreport
27. 61

    jokeapptvposted 14 years ago

    im all for her! Im tired everyone fighting.
    Lets All work for american jobs,health care thats affordable, not forced! And lets Take all The sex talk back to the house and out goverment. Get goverment out of our lives. And stop tearing down american women. Cant we send a good example for our kids. Fighting on tv,tearing each other down is getting us no where.

    replyreport