Speak Out: Shouldn't This Tell Him Something?

Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 12:05 PM:

"Where were we"

Caused him to lose his place on the teleprompter I see.

How did Bush engineer this I wonder?

Replies (106)

  • It was the "New world order" sending him a message.

    -- Posted by Airborne 95B on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 12:36 PM
  • Or maybe the Tea Party?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 12:44 PM
  • Dare I say a divine message?

    -- Posted by Maynard on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 1:19 PM
  • Spank,

    You left one little detail out. It was George Bush who had Christine O'Donnell put a hex on the seal causing it to fall from the podium.

    Next time we will know for sure when it floats around the room and hovers over the next one to be leaving the sinking ship which is the Obama Administration. ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 2:10 PM
  • You folks are overthinking this. It was a unionized government worker that hung the seal on the podium. Had to take a mandatory break before he/she got the adhesive on.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 3:10 PM
  • Nope your all wrong.

    More than likely it was ground movement from Our Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves!!

    -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 3:24 PM
  • Where are all of the OWs on this. Thought surely they would be weighing in on the topic.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 3:45 PM
  • Greywolf wins the prize. That's a good one.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 3:56 PM
  • You would think Germany would have gotten the Devine message when the Hindenburg blew up. Of course, Bush was responsible...except he wasn't born yet, but such details don't worry the Lefties. Maybe in a previous reincarnation? (Another rhetorical question).

    -- Posted by voyager on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 4:08 PM
  • I am laughing so hard- this has been the funniest thread yet! Kudos to all of you!

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 5:12 PM
  • Spank- be careful what you ask for!!!

    btw- How's your dog doing?

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 5:59 PM
  • Yes you do! Mine is doing ok, she isn't in pain so that is good.

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 7:13 PM
  • Who was on the UFO Rick? Who pulled the trigger... or waa it done remotely from Texas?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 8:30 PM
  • Oh come on Ike... surely that is not your best shot!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 9:37 PM
  • When I saw this I about fell out of my chair laughing. I am starting to feel embarrassed for Obama. It's a pole turtle thing.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 9:52 PM
  • Did ya'll see the news piece on CBS? (that's right I didn't say Fox.) CBS was showing all of the bad luck Obama has had.... fly in face, teleprompter fell over, mouse ran across in front of him, and now Presidential seal dropping to floor. For a moment it looked like it was straight from Monty Python.

    Hee hee hee Spaniard, really? That's your best shot?????

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 10:11 PM
  • I noticed he said.. was that "My"

    I wonder if anyone will catch ire for using made in China and imported by greedy globalist Wall street banker type cheap velcro.

    Probably just a witch's curse from a republican candidate.

    -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Oct 6, 2010, at 10:27 PM
  • If you listen carefully, you can hear the distinct sound of a shot gun with a silencer just before the seal fell from the podium. Ole Dick Cheney almost made another perfect shot.

    -- Posted by mytake1 on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 12:29 AM
  • "Some body back there's really nervous"

    Can you say "Election"

    -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 1:07 AM
  • For someone who has a camera on them 24/7 this stuff will happen. Just like Bush puked infront of the world leaders and had a show thrown in front of him.

    It is pretty funny though.

    -- Posted by futile_rant on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 2:18 AM
  • Futile, that was Bush I and Bush II

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 2:39 AM
  • Very funny thread and won't even try to top what has been said.

    I thought President Obama handled the situation quite well and with humor.

    -- Posted by RA on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 7:32 AM
  • mytake1- or Tommy Sowers

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 8:39 AM
  • Cadillacman

    Your absolutely right, I was being serious!

    -- Posted by GREYWOLF on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 2:52 PM
  • Sorry Spank,

    Caddy usually gives me my laugh for the day, but just not in the mood for him today.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Oct 7, 2010, at 4:35 PM
  • Ok here is the truth about the whole thing. It was the Jack links Sasquatch, the Loch Ness monster and Tom Cruise. They held a secret meeting on Dr. Evils volcanic Island and had the shadow government blast the seal off as a message to all who will not obey the "NWO".

    -- Posted by Airborne 95B on Fri, Oct 8, 2010, at 9:49 AM
  • You guys just don't get it. I am 99.9% positive that Bush did it.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Oct 8, 2010, at 11:55 AM
  • Spank_The_Tank wrote: "I can just picture him walking around the house chanting, "mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama"."

    I remember that song. I rewrote the lyrics to it:

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Abandoned by your daddy

    Abandoned by your momma.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Elected to high office with no record of achievement

    I look at our future with a sense of bereavement.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Raising the presidency to an imperial institution

    By tearing appart our beloved constitution.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Raising the deficit, raising our taxes

    Buying votes on the next generation's backses.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Borrowing our future with funds from the Chinese

    Turning your back on your party's lies & sleeze.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Filled your cabinet with tax cheats, and worse

    Spending trillions from an empty purse.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Your outlook on things is entirely too rosy

    You're being manipulated by Nancy Pelosi

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Surrounded by Communists and elements of the left,

    Calling 'compassion' that which is theft.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Took over Chrysler, GM, and the banks,

    Enriching the unions, so you can say 'thanks'.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Repaying those who funded your election

    With a massive dose of debt injection.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Our economy's on life-support

    Our industry's in trauma.

    mm, mmm, mm.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Fiscal restraint, it's clear you eschew it

    Three more years. We may not live through it.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Oct 8, 2010, at 1:47 PM
  • Rick, Caddyman is a him and not a her, for if him was a her, her would have called herself Caddywoman. If him is a him and not a her, us have it on his authority that Caddyman is a him and not a her. After all, him selected the name and him ought to know that him is not a her.

    On the other hand, us may be making a big assumption. Could it be him doesn't know what her is, does it?

    -- Posted by voyager on Fri, Oct 8, 2010, at 4:42 PM
  • "Three more years. We may not live through it."

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Oct 8, 2010, at 1:47 PM

    As you're well aware, things are not as you describe in your silly lyrics. For example, your mother dying is hardly being "abandoned." Kind of a sad attempt at humor.

    Up until now, I considered you the only conservative voice on these pages with intelligence and some modicum of fairness. Guess I was entirely wrong. Either that or you've been temporarily possessed by the ghost of Rush Limbaugh and infected with a massive dose of paranoid conservative pessimism. Sorry to see the rational SH go bad.

    You know as well as I do that the country will survive both of President Obama's terms in office. And will likely be in better condition for it. All of this socialist "gloom and doom" crap is exactly that.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 5:29 AM
  • Common you amaze me sometimes. Just when I thought you had no sense of humor what so ever you then throw in a little joke like saying Obama is going to have two terms. Not near as funny as Shapleys post but funny none the less.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 8:26 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "As you're well aware, things are not as you describe in your silly lyrics. For example, your mother dying is hardly being "abandoned." Kind of a sad attempt at humor."

    The lyrics were written about a year ago, in response to the drippy-sweet song lyrics a teacher had her young students singing entitled, as noted: "Mm, Mmm, Mm, Barack Hussein Obama."

    Mr. Obama's mother sent him to Hawaii to be raised by his grandmother. According to his bio:

    "In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Armour Dunham, and attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from the fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979.[21] Obama's mother returned to Hawaii in 1972, remaining there until 1977 when she went back to Indonesia to work as an anthropological field worker. She finally returned to Hawaii in 1994 and lived there for one year, before dying of ovarian cancer."

    So, yes, she was largely an absent mother and, thus, could be said to have 'abandoned' him.

    However, I do have to claim 'artistic license' for some of the lyrics - events had to be exaggerated or limited in order to fit them into the rime.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 2:28 PM
  • "So, yes, she was largely an absent mother and, thus, could be said to have 'abandoned' him."

    His mother sent him to school in the states, to live with her parents, while she continued a chosen career overseas. This is by no stretch of the imagination "abandonment." One might think your tendency to "exaggerate" for the sake of rhyming went more than a bit overboard.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 4:37 PM
  • Shapley, Shame on you for giving Common Obama Momma trauma!:)

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 5:43 PM
  • "possessed by the ghost of Rush Limbaugh"

    Did I miss something?

    -- Posted by Maynard on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 6:03 PM
  • His mother sent him to school in the states, to live with her parents, while she continued a chosen career overseas. This is by no stretch of the imagination "abandonment." One might think your tendency to "exaggerate" for the sake of rhyming went more than a bit overboard.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 4:37 PM

    So what do you call leaving your children behind because they are a hinderence?

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 6:06 PM
  • So what do you call leaving your children behind because they are a hinderence?

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sat, Oct 9, 2010, at 6:06 PM

    A recommendation for "career women" by the National Organization of Gals!

    HA!

    -- Posted by John in Jackson on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 12:01 AM
  • "...99.9% positive that Bush did it."

    "LOL! You got that right."

    "both terms" ?..LMAO"

    "...Obama Momma trauma!"

    "So what do you call leaving your children behind..."

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    It is obviously time to send these types of characters back into the realm of the ignored.

    They contribute nothing of substance. They are severely inflicted with paranoid pessimism about the future of our country. They appear to blindly follow their "beloved leader" the infamous "Kim Rush El" and seemingly have never had an original thought, at least not in the past few years.

    The absence of any further replies is called being ignored, which should make you happy, and provide more space for you to congratulate each other on profound nothingness.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 8:49 AM
  • Being ignored by you Common has to be the ultimate bummer, we may need to seek counseling. Perhaps we can get a group rate.

    Would you like to join us? Methinks you could use it. What with things not going so well for your Messiah at the moment and all.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 9:49 AM
  • Wow I'm glad we got that straightened out. I was thinking the absence of any further replies would be because you have no clue.

    Wheels maybe we can all meet and drink some of the Kool aid and that will get us through this "profound nothingness."

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 9:58 AM
  • Mowrangler,

    Can we wait until after the election? I want to vote with a clear head. There are some Obama Zombies, with their me too votes, that I would like to help vote out. And I want to be thinking straight.

    Did you ever stop to think that "profound nothingness" might be preferable from Common?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 10:12 AM
  • Spank,

    Only one sleeping pill now, don't overdose! Maybe we will all need to get together on here this evening and sing Kumbaya and console one another.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 10:33 AM
  • The absence of any further replies is called being ignored, which should make you happy, and provide more space for you to congratulate each other on profound nothingness.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 8:49 AM

    If you cant take the heat get the heck out of the kitchen. Right?

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 10:34 AM
  • Regret,

    You don't seem to be taking this seriously. We are being ignored.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 10:38 AM
  • Spank,

    This sounds serious.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 1:08 PM
  • It is serious! WHY did this have to happen on a weekend? I can't call a therapist until tomorrow.

    I may have to go to the ER for a sedative.

    -- Posted by SpankTheTank on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 1:41 PM

    Spank,

    Don't forget to check on the group rate.

    We could get a "Pity Party" going and then everybody can see how miserable we are being ignored like this. This is almost at the level on the being ignored scale as forgetting your wife's birthdday... or your anniversary.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 2:16 PM
  • Don't worry about Common, there are plenty of fence posts for him to argue with.

    That is, if the fence post isn't a funny fence post.

    Serious? We need a few good progressives around so we know what last weeks talking-attact point instructions were.

    -- Posted by Old John on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 6:07 PM
  • While I may disagree with them, I find many of the "progressive" posters on here often interesting.

    -- Posted by RA on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 6:53 PM
  • RA, Interesting I like. Beating a dead horse, per say, as in a debate is useless. It would be better to say this is my opinion and I don't agree with yours, than to continue to try to prove a non valid point or change a truth.

    I don't disagree with every point liberals make.

    On one particular point I agreed with a liberal's point of argument but not with the main point being made. I did a poor job in that debate and stepped aside to listen in.

    Shapley clearly proved his point counter but as usual the poster continued to dig himself a bigger hole with soft derogatory and later attacts on everyone who disagreed. That particular poster took his toys and left only to return a month later with a different screen name until Wheels recognized him. Shapley and Wheels will remember but in the big scheme of things it is pretty regular behavior of some of our liberal friends.

    Again I remind myself and others that I read and write on these forums for entertainment and the chance I will learn something. And so far that's working well for me. If I offend anyone, by all means let me know or offend me right back. If I am stupid, let me know why and then call me stupid. ;)

    -- Posted by Old John on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 7:40 PM
  • "While I may disagree with them, I find many of the "progressive" posters on here often interesting."

    -- Posted by RA on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 6:53 PM

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    ...provide more space for you to congratulate each other on profound nothingness.

    Not a bad prediction, 13 posted comments from 9:49 am to 6:07 pm, none of which had any substance whatsoever. What these characters truly remind me of is the whiney, obnoxious kid on the grade school playground whose only retort to anything was, " I know your are but what am I?"

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 8:19 PM
  • You went to school? Are you saying I got character? Golly Gee, you aint such a bad guy after all! Can you predict us some lottery numbers?

    How's that for substance?

    -- Posted by Old John on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 8:33 PM
  • The words democrat and democracy is not in our constitution. A little research reveals democracy was nearly a vulgar foul word at the time of America's founding. As things evolved, the word liberal was a bad word, so the kind of thinking we now call liberal was labeled progressive to better fool folks. By the time people got wise to that label they had forgot about the word liberal so the progressives transformed into liberal.

    Remember Hillary declaring herself a progressive a while back? Do you remember the song of the 70s, The Name game?

    Now for common, If you go back and skim over this thread, you will see it was never intended to be a thread of substance. It did not have any substance execept the substance of the humor and fun that evolved.

    You jumped in with ridicule of our humor as was very well [between the lines] predicted within the pokes and ribbing of the OW's.

    Now what Rick and I discuss, I think, [not to imply we are wiser] is substance that I invite and look forward to your comments on.

    -- Posted by Old John on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 9:16 PM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "His mother sent him to school in the states, to live with her parents, while she continued a chosen career overseas. This is by no stretch of the imagination "abandonment."

    At first you said she died, and ignored the fact that the she yielded the raising of him to his grandparents.

    That meets the Webster's definition of the word:

    "1. a: to give up to the control or influence of another person or agent "

    Permenance is not a requirement under that definition. It is certainly adequate for poetic license.

    "Abanodoned by your daddy,

    temporarily placed in the custody of your grandparents in favour of academic pursuits by your momma" simply does not provide the metre necessary to keep the song flowing.

    Feel free to write your own song, if you don't like that one. But, as an artist, I reject any efforts by you to censor or alter the content of my creation...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 9:29 PM
  • I may have to go to the ER for a sedative.

    -- Posted by SpankTheTank on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 1:41 PM

    I thought you said laxative. My bad.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 11:01 PM
  • Spank, may be able to sleep after all, Looks like Common's ignoring us is over, or selective at least, like his memory.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 1:00 AM
  • "That meets the Webster's definition of the word:"

    "Abanodoned by your daddy,

    But, as an artist, I reject any efforts by you to censor or alter the content of my creation..."

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sun, Oct 10, 2010, at 9:29 PM

    You neglected the portion of the dictionary definition that says "give up completely" which was not the case.

    In any event, it was not my intention to censor or alter the content of your "creation." I recognize it for what is was, a somewhat self-indulgent, immature attempt at humor to entertain the PCP crowd. It was well written, but you had to magnify rumors and innuendo to a point that approached, and in some cases exceeded, disparagement.

    The really sad thing is that many of your readers will cheeringly respond, "yeah," "right on target," "that's the truth," "it must be true, SH said it." They will never see it as a joke, but rather utilize it as confirmation of their previously formed opinions.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 6:20 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "You neglected the portion of the dictionary definition that says "give up completely" which was not the case."

    No. That was a separate definition, identified as 1.b., I posted the complete definition under 1.a.

    "The really sad thing is that many of your readers will cheeringly respond, "yeah," "right on target," "that's the truth," "it must be true, SH said it."

    You sell the readers short. I think most can recognize the song for what it is.

    Here's the original song, by the way. Let's see if you can nit-pick it, as you have my parody thereof:

    "Mm, mmm, mm!

    Barack Hussein Obama

    He said that all must lend a hand

    To make this country strong again

    Mmm, mmm, mm!

    Barack Hussein Obama

    He said we must be fair today

    Equal work means equal pay

    Mmm, mmm, mm!

    Barack Hussein Obama

    He said that we must take a stand

    To make sure everyone gets a chance

    Mmm, mmm, mm!

    Barack Hussein Obama

    He said red, yellow, black or white

    All are equal in his sight

    Mmm, mmm, mm!

    Barack Hussein Obama

    Yes!

    Mmm, mmm, mm

    Barack Hussein Obama"

    My first question is simply: did he really say those things? Methinks they are paraphrased, at best, although they look to me as if he is being given credit for the words of others. Are you at all worried that the little children being made to sing it might actually believe those are his words, or do you trust the teacher to set the record straight?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO3NBqT3LBc

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 8:10 AM
  • I have to agree with Common on this, it was a lame and disrespectful attempt at humor.

    Secondly, Common is right that others on this thread will accept it as truth. They are Freepers!

    -- Posted by Reasoning on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 8:28 AM
  • Oh, you would!

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 8:48 AM
  • Rick,

    I think they are 'free-thinking persons', which the left finds to be wholly unsatisfactory.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 9:08 AM
  • "It was a lame and disrespectful attempt at humor" Could this be coming from the same group that calls the Tea Party Members.. Tea Baggers?

    Grandpa was right, Never buy a car from Honest John's Used Car Lot. If he has to advertise he's honest you better pass his lot on by. Just as Commonsensematters has no common sense and Reasoning is unable to reason.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 9:35 AM
  • Spank,

    I wouldn't hold my breath.

    After not having moxey enough to recognize this thread for what it was from the beginning, poor old Common probably sent all of his money to that Canadian Bank thread.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 10:57 AM
  • Oh, the book thrown.... think it might have been the Constitution, in the hope he would read it??

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 10:59 AM
  • "Here's the original song, by the way. Let's see if you can nit-pick it..."

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 8:10 AM

    OK, let's see, looking at the four actual verses.

    Verse 1 - Identifies the need for bi-partisan support to recover from a recession. That's true enough, I think it was President Reagan that said "It's amazing what you can accomplish if you don't care about who gets the credit."

    Verse 2 -- Equal rights in employment. That's easy to support.

    Verse 3 - Equal opportunity. That can be traced back to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

    Verse 4 - Equal treatment both under the law and under God. Also traceable back to the founding fathers and religious tenets.

    First of all, I don't see any claim that these are direct quotes, and were President Obama to be asked, I'm sure he would agree with the intent of the verses.

    There is certainly nothing dangerous or threatening in any of the verses. I would imagine the most people would support each of the individual attributes. As for children hearing this, I would consider it as innocuous as telling them that George Washington was honest because he admitted chopping down the cherry tree, or telling them that Abe Lincoln studied by fire light, and wrote with charcoal on a shovel.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --

    "You sell the readers short. I think most can recognize the song for what it is."

    Hopefully you are correct. Unfortunately, the more gullible and most vociferous readers will be the ones most likely to misconstrue your intent.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:07 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "First of all, I don't see any claim that these are direct quotes, and were President Obama to be asked, I'm sure he would agree with the intent of the verses."

    It says that 'he said', yet I cannot see that he has said those things. He has implied them in some of his speeches. Yes, he may agree to them if asked, but the song implies that he was already asked. His actions certainly have not shown any support for bi-partisanship. Certainly his misreprentation of the economy under Republican leadership indicates and his recent statement that there will be 'hand to hand combat' if Republicans win in November indicates that he does not agree with bipartisanship.

    The second verse does not talk about 'equal rights' it talks about pay equity. He did sign a pay equity bill in January 2009, which, while not mandating pay equity, did make it easier to sue for 'wage discrimination'. However, his the women on his own Senate staff were paid lower wages than men in corresponding positions. Do as I say, not as I do, apparently.

    There was certainly nothing "dangerous or threatening" in my parody, unless you consider exposing the rampant borrowing and spending policies he is following to be so.

    I see you are perfectly willing to impose a different standard to that song than to my parady thereof. I expected no less.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:29 AM
  • I see you are perfectly willing to impose a different standard to that song than to my parady thereof. I expected no less.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:29 AM

    Hmmmmmmm!

    I was kind of hoping someone would call Common on that one. He is ignoring me... so I couldn't dfo it. ☻ ☻ ☻ ☻

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:33 AM
  • Who slipped that "f" into do?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:36 AM
  • Looking at today's editorial cartoons, I would say my 'lame and disrespectful' attempt at humour is pretty mild compared to the way political cartoonists seem to view those who believe themselves to be 'taxed enough already'.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 11:52 AM
  • Rick,

    Freepers are people who follow an ultra biased conservtive website, and accept everything posted, opinion or not, as gospel.

    Mowrangler,

    And I assume you are unable to wrangle. Oh my, is that reasonable. Could it be I am able to reason after all. That would make Mowrangler not only unwrangleble, but wrong too!

    -- Posted by Reasoning on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:10 PM
  • ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺

    Feeling any better about being ignored Spank?

    I recovered early. Slept so well I did not get up until nearly 10 am.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:10 PM
  • Reasoning can be faulty, no guarantee it is good, well thought out etc.

    -- Posted by RA on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:13 PM
  • anyone who's ever been married knows that being ignored isn't always a bad thing .

    -- Posted by ...Rick on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:13 PM

    Yes, a period of calmness and quiet goes along with it.

    And then there is the making up part of it!

    No expectations here though mind you.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:31 PM
  • No you are not able to reason at all. If you were able to reason you would realize that the Wrangler is a brand of bluejean. Which happens to be the brand that I wear. I guess your reasoning is flawed again.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:32 PM
  • Aren't Freepers people who follow an ultra biased liberal president, and accept everything he says as gospel? All the while waiting for the next freebie from him.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:42 PM
  • Spank isn't the 30 pack for celebrations?

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:43 PM
  • "His actions certainly have not shown any support for bi-partisanship."

    I watched President Obama when he visited the Republican "Retreat" early this year. He was clearly opening a wide door for cooperation. The negative response on the part of the Republicans was equally apparent. In my opinion it was their concious decision that any cooperation whatsoever with the President would lead to further successes for his administration and less support for Republicans.

    I am 100% convinced that had mainstream Democrats and Republicans gotten together they could have developed a less complex and better health care bill.

    As I have mentioned several times before, because the President had to rely almost entirely on Democratic votes, several concepts that were marginal ended up in the bill. The offer of bi-partisanship was always there. The republican response of "let's scrap everything and start again in a few years" was a "non-starter" from the beginning and they knew it would be exactly that.

    ---------------------------------------

    "...the women on his own Senate staff were paid lower wages than men in corresponding positions."

    I know you are very aware that staff positions are not paid with normal GS and Step ratings. What individuals get paid is contingent on what is expected of them, what extra duties they have, what experience they had, etc. etc. Of course there will be differences in pay. It is virtually impossible for staff personel to have exactly the same duties, if it were so, why have 2 of them?

    --------------------------------------

    "I see you are perfectly willing to impose a different standard to that song than to my parady thereof."

    I don't think I imposed different standards. One was a childish song for children and the other a childish song for adults.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:48 PM
  • "I am 100% convinced that had mainstream Democrats and Republicans gotten together they could have developed a less complex and better health care bill."

    It's kind of hard to get together when the dealings are done behind locked doors.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 12:52 PM
  • Your lost MOwrangler. Where do you think the name of the jeans came from?

    -- Posted by Reasoning on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 1:18 PM
  • "What individuals get paid is contingent on what is expected of them, what extra duties they have, what experience they had, etc. etc."

    Wonder what Monica Lewinsky was paid???

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 1:25 PM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "I am 100% convinced that had mainstream Democrats and Republicans gotten together they could have developed a less complex and better health care bill."

    The Republicans had put forth a number of bills designed to improve health care access and reduce costs. The Democrat-controlled houses of Congress would not allow them to come to the floor for debate. President Obama said, after meeting with the Republicans, that they had some good ideas, but no effort was made on the part of Congress to accept them, and Mr. Obama went right back to blaming the Republicans for that.

    The health care issue, however, came down to a clash of ideology. The Democrats were unwilling to accept anything that did not expand access to health care services as a 'right', whether through a guarantee of insurance services or the outright take-over the health care system (single payer). The Republicans, rightly so in my view, reject the idea of health care as a right, particularly if that involves the inclusion of insurance as such. That is a hard thing to reconcile.

    In essence, the Democrats believe that other people have the right to access people's pocketbooks in order to pay their bills. Republicans believe people should pay their own bills. What does a compromise provide? Access to only some of the money they seek in exchange for what? A delay of a few months before they come after more. That's not much of a compromise. Even by agreeing to such a compromise, Republicans would be succumbing to the notion that such a 'right' to other peoples' monies exists, thereby weakening their authority to ward off future claims.

    However, you dance around the fact that the Democrats were driving when the car hit the ditch, a fact that Mr. Obama clearly is hiding in his rhetoric regarding the upcoming elections. Nor is such rhetoric new, and it clearly points to an 'us vs. them' mentality that it contrary to the spirit of bipartisanship. You aren't going to win points at the bargaining table when you go on the air right before negotiations and denounce the people you're negotiating with, and then do the same when you rise from the table.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 1:57 PM
  • Lost???? I seriously doubt there is anything you can teach me about wrangling.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 3:09 PM
  • Wheels I think Monica got a new dress out of the deal.

    -- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 3:36 PM
  • Mowrangler

    If that is all she received, I bet that job left a bad taste for government employment!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 4:02 PM
  • Just a few final comments...

    "...health care system (single payer)."

    To my mind that is the best alternative. It is what I had since 1967, both in the military for 24 years and after I got out through Champus and Tricare. Actually while on active duty, I received socialized medicine (which would drive Rush up the wall if he realized it.) So I have absolutely no objection to a single payer system.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "The Republicans, rightly so in my view, reject the idea of health care as a right, particularly if that involves the inclusion of insurance as such. That is a hard thing to reconcile.

    In essence, the Democrats believe that other people have the right to access people's pocketbooks in order to pay their bills. Republicans believe people should pay their own bills."

    Why should the right to health care be treated any differently than the right to police protection and the right to fire protection. It is also the case that others have the right to access my pocketbook for police protection and fire protection. Obviously there are different ways of paying for these services in different areas, but the principle is the same. We as a country pay collectively for a number of services, health care should not be any different.

    As a matter of fact health insurance is no different. All policy holders pay in to the system, but only those who get sick get benefits. If I pay insurance premiums, and remain healthy, those who get sick are "accessing my pocketbook" because my premiums are paying a portion of their bills.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 6:14 PM
  • The liberals want a choice when it comes to the right to stop a beating heart and to end a life... but they do not want us to have a choice when it comes to our right to choose health car of not.

    Health care is not a right, in this country, I do not care how often a liberal repeats it. You have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That I believe in. Getting very tired of these do me goods telling me what is good for me and what is not.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 6:57 PM
  • As a matter of fact health insurance is no different. All policy holders pay in to the system, but only those who get sick get benefits. If I pay insurance premiums, and remain healthy, those who get sick are "accessing my pocketbook" because my premiums are paying a portion of their bills.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 6:14 PM

    There's no "matter of fact" there, csm. It's your opinion. Health insurance is no different than any other insurance. It's a bet, a gamble. Legalized gambling all throughout the states. If you don't want to play, don't because the house always wins.

    I for one do not want the "right" to free health care cause I can't afford it. Neither can anyone else in this country.

    Back on topic, I admire the pres for the presence of mind and could joke when this happened. I still don't agree with his policies.

    -- Posted by Knoblickian on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 7:45 PM
  • Cpommon

    From my bud Neal:

    "The deficit in 2007 was $160 billion. In the next year the Pelosi-Reid Congress took it up to $458 billion, and when President Obama came into office in 2009 it hit $1.4 trillion.

    The current 2010 projected deficit is $1.6 trillion, which will lead to a tripling of our national debt from 2008 to 2020."

    "If Obama had simply kept Bush's spending policies in place, federal deficits over the next eight years would be 60 percent lower. In 2018, we'd have a deficit of just $188 billion, instead of the projected $996 billion under Obama's budget."

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 8:03 PM
  • Health insurance is, or was until Obamacare, an option. One was not forced to join the 'pool'. Health insurance is a financial service, not a part of health care, and it exists to assist in making health care affordable to those in the 'pool'.

    How does it do that? It does that by excluding from the pool, or charging higher premiums to, those persons who have the highest likelihood of draining more from the pool than they pay in in premiums. The premiums are based on risk, those with the highest risk pay the most premiums. Those who move from risk the certainty are excluded. What is the point of having insurance if your premiums will equal the costs of care? Yet, to be 'fair' to the rest in the pool, those whose treatment is a certainty should be charged that way. Insurance is risk management, not welfare.

    "Why should the right to health care be treated any differently than the right to police protection and the right to fire protection."

    Police and Fire protection are implemented at the local level, and serve the community at large. The protect the general population, not individual citizens within their jurisdiction. If an individual needs personal protection, they are expected to pay for that out of their own pocket. They are police, not security guards.

    Now, I have stated here and elsewhere that cities, counties, and states are free to enact health care provision on their own, as they do police and fire protection, if their charters or constitutions permit it. On the federal level, however, it is not constitutional. Where such protection is provided, however, it should be done through the construction and staffing of health care facilities which provide services to the general public, not through payments, via insurance or directly from the treasury, to individual citizens.

    By the way, there is no 'right' to police or fire protection. it is is service provided by communities to those citizens who opt to live in the community, and pay taxes for the purpose. The case in Kentucky of the refusal of the fire department to provide protection to a residence outside the jurisdiction, and who had not the paid the requisite fee for extra-jurisdictional coverage, illustrates that quite clearly.

    The others do not have the 'right' to access such protection. They have the authority (not to be confused with the 'right') to impose taxes and provide services within their jurisdiction, by vote, and you have the right to move out of their jurisdiction, if you do not wish to have pay for such services. Another good argument for subsidiarity - it allows the existence of service-free zones for those who wish to escape them. "Universal coverage" negates that freedom.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 11, 2010, at 10:41 PM
  • A few counterpoints...

    "One was not forced to join the 'pool'."

    However, medical facilities, unlike Kentucky fire departments, are not allowed to permit people to die on the ramp of their emergency room.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "Health insurance is a financial service, not a part of health care..."

    It may well be a "financial service" but it is integral to the system. I won't go broke, if I don't buy stocks, but I could go bankrupt if I go to the hospital without health insurance.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "The premiums are based on risk..."

    They are that of course. But they are also based on profits, supporting huge bureaucracies, and conscious efforts to not pay for services. Insurance companies are one of the few industries whose business model is to not deliver what the customer paid for. I realize that their policies specify what they are supposed to deliver, but this is why private insurance is such a ineffective method.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "On the federal level, however, it is not constitutional."

    So millions of Americans must go without normal protection from health problems because the founding fathers were not farseeing enough to recognize that by in almost 200 years there would be a health care crisis in our country. As alluded to earlier, the "pool" is the secret. Local governments don't have a large enough pool to make health care work, the federal government does.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 6:05 AM
  • Human beings have had a "health care crisis" ewver since they crawled out of the cave. So what else is new?

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 6:19 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "So millions of Americans must go without normal protection from health problems because the founding fathers were not farseeing enough to recognize that by in almost 200 years there would be a health care crisis in our country."

    A health crisis largely caused by government meddling in health care. Health care seemed to be much more affordable before the government decided to make it so...

    The founding fathers were far more farseeing than you give them credit for being. They provided an amendment process to allow changes to the Constitution, if they are needed. I'm not convinced it's needed. However, merely proclaiming something a 'right' is not a part of the constitutional process.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 7:56 AM
  • Hey... we are back on topic!

    Spank,

    There is definitely an art to choosing the right beer. While I do not drink a lot of it, I like a cold one now and again. I have made it to the point where I would rather have just one good beer occasionaly. Amd I do not mind the taste of Stag by the way. Prefer it to Bud actually.

    We go out to eat ever so often to a place that has about 120 beers on the menu. There is a Belgium Beer (Not Budwiser) that I like that is 14.7% alcohol. A little pricey... but a little dab will do you.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:06 AM
  • Raymiond E.Norwine last weekend came up with some concoction brand labeled Moosejaw. The taste was gawd awful and had the kick of the Moose. Smelled like the Moose, too.

    According to Raymond, its saving grace was it was cheap.

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:07 AM
  • Rick,

    Didn't see your post before posting myself. Come on now... Stag is the meal in a bottle. ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:09 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "As alluded to earlier, the "pool" is the secret. Local governments don't have a large enough pool to make health care work, the federal government does."

    That's actually a mistaken notion. The rule of large numbers only states that the statistical evaluation of a group behaves more like the estimates the larger the pool. There is a practical limit to the size of the pool, and it is well below the 350,000,000 population of the United States.

    Ultimately, the members of the pool will pay into to the pool every penny that will be paid out. The larger the pool, the more that are paying into it, but also the more that are paying out. At some point in sizing the pool, you max out the benefits of increasing it.

    For example, let us say I want to go into the insurance business. To keep it simple, I will only only insure against one particular affliction, which affects an estimated 1 in 10,000 people each year. Estimated costs of treatment are $25,000. Since this is a business, I expect to make a profit, let's say I want to make $10,000 per year for every 10,000 people covered.

    In theory, therefore, the annual premiums would equal the payout plus the profit, divided by the number of recipients, or 35,000/10,000 or $3.50 cents per insured person. Now, If I have only 10,000 people in the pool, the rule of large numbers says my estimates are not really very valid, which is to say that 1, 2, or even 10 of my covered people may be so affected, and I will not have collected enough money to cover my payouts. Thus, I have to increase my premiums to cover that contingency. Let us say that my calculations estimate that a maximum of 10 people out of 10,000 could be afflicted, I thus have to increase my premiums to ten times the payout plus the profit, (250,000 + 10,000) divided by the number of enrollees, (10,000), making my premiums $26 per annum. The closer my enrollees' illness falls to the estimate, therefore, the more profitable I am. That is, if only 2 out of 10,000 are afflicted in a particular year, I will make $210,000 that year.

    Now, logically, I would use that excess profit to build up a buffer, which would allow me to lower my premiums or offer dividends to my enrollees once the buffer reaches a satisfactory level of 'cash on hand', say $250,000 (ten times the estimated payout, sufficient to cover one year of maximum deviation.

    Now, if I increase my enrollment to 100,000, it is expected that my pool will behave closer to the statistical estimate, and the amount of 'buffer' can be reduced. However, I still expect to payout $25,000 for every person that contract the illness, expected to be 1/10,000 of my enrollment, and thus my minimum premium is still going to be $3.50.

    At some figure, say 1,000,000 or 5,000,000, the pool will begin to behave almost exactly the same as the statistical estimate. Above that point, there is no cost advantage to having a larger pool. It still costs me $25,000 for every 10,000 enrollees, so there is no savings. All 1,000,000 or 5,000,000 still have to pay in the same $3.50 per annum to meet the payout-plus-profit that was targeted.

    There will always be deviations, and thus a certain amount of cash-on-hand must always be maintained to cover those. Additionally, the statistics change over time. While the 1 in 10,000 figure may be valid today, in five years that may become 1 in 8,000 or 1 in 5,000, and my premiums will have to be adjusted accordingly. My current premiums will have to be sufficient to cover such changes over time, as will my cash-on-hand reserve.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:22 AM
  • 90 proof = 45% alcohol.

    Not supposed to drink it out of a water glass!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:32 AM
  • I've heard there's a pork chop in every can.

    Common, If private medical insurance is based on profits supporting a huge bureaucracy, and that displeases you, why would you support health care based on your tax monies going to the mother of all bureaucracies which is the federal government?

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:33 AM
  • Because Old John, it is the "Socialistic" way. The government will take care of all of your problems in the eyes of a true liberal.

    I might have believed that until I got big enough to realize that the government was not going to clean the cow manure out of the stables and that I better get cracking and get it done before Dad got back.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:38 AM
  • Commonsensematters wrote:

    "Insurance companies are one of the few industries whose business model is to not deliver what the customer paid for."

    Another myth, of course. They are actually trying to ensure that they pay only what the customer paid for, as many customers expect more than their money's worth from the service, and some medical providers have used the traditional inefficiency of insurance companies to 'pad their bills' in an effort to recoup losses from others.

    People have a tendency to view theft from insurance companies (a.k.a. 'fraud') differently than, say, theft from their neighbor. Thus 'honest' people have been known to file false claims, and hospitals have been known to tack on charges, when insurance companies are involved in the payment process. Insurance companies work hard to reduce such fraud, and it upsets people to find their claims to be in question.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 11:51 AM
  • Spank,

    I'm happy to see you have good taste in beer.

    I myself prefer Miller's corn beer to AB's rice beer.

    BTW: Mil Best has always been labeled a premium beer. With the new packaging, it is just more prominent. And yes, although ice beers are very smooth (due in part to the impurities being removed) gotta be careful, they will sneak up on you quick.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 12:19 PM
  • Spank,

    Try the bars in South Beach Miami.

    $9.00 a pop for a 12oz longneck.

    For a guy such as myself who prefers just plain old American Lager, no beechwood aging, no foo-foo flavors added, no calories taken out, just beer as it was meant to be, can't beat Miller High Life.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 2:18 PM
  • I don't know if this is right or not but a buddy told me his Dr said if insisted on drinking beer, Stag was a better choice because it had no sugar in it.

    Unlike the major brands of cola, it seems beer brands popular change with locality and age groups.

    $8 for a beer? May sound like a good deal to some if the price of coffee I saw in the store keeps going up. $12+ for 34oz Folgers?

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 3:47 PM
  • A good choice Rick. Guiness also produces Smithwick, which is a little milder and a very good beer.

    Gave a friend a bottle of Guiness one day and he kind of sipped out of it for a little while and then announced, I cannot drink this stuff. His wife pipes up with... if Karl ********* cannot drink it, it is not beer.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 6:15 PM
  • Spank, My grandmother didn't drink coffee but "Pop" did. She would boil the coffee in a metal pan, serve the coffee and then strain what was left through a cloth. She spread the grounds out on the back of the wood stove until dry.

    Next day the process was repeated. Once a week a fresh coffee was added.

    I asked what that taste like and she said, don't know, Pop never complained or said much about stuff like that, but he always went to work early and I think they had a coffee pot at the depot.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 7:02 PM
  • Old John,

    Had a brother-in-law who called that skeered water.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 8:47 PM
  • Wheels, I knew a guy that never met a stranger. He would stick out his hand offering a firm grip and ask, are you skeered? I only ask because you're shaking.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Oct 12, 2010, at 9:02 PM

Respond to this thread

Posting a comment requires free registration: