Posted on 10/18/2013 by Juan Cole
1. The Cruz/Tea Party shut down of the US government cost the US economy $24 billion
2. As a result of the shutdown, fourth quarter growth will be only 2.4% instead of the expected 3%
3. 250,000 jobs will likely have been lost
4. Communist China took advantage of the crisis to push for a de-Americanized world
5. China renewed its push to dump the US dollar as the international reserve currency. That step would cost the US economy enormously.
6. The US ability to sanction Iran and Syria was weakened
7. Iran is now wondering if it can do a deal with Obama, given the gridlock in Congress
8. The shutdown helped the morale of the Taliban extremists fighting US troops and undermined the morale of American troops
9. The shutdown prevented President Obama from attending the summit in Indonesia of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) organization. Chinese President Xi Jinping took leadership of the summit instead. The US was prevented from showing leadership in the Pacific Rim.
10. America lost trust and soft power on the international scene.
Cruz and the Tea Party deeply harmed American law & values, and they are
much more dangerous than Edward Snowden (whom they consider a traitor but whom most Americans think did us a favor.) Snowden is in hiding in Russia. These guys are strutting around capitol hill, having much diminished it.
much more dangerous than Edward Snowden (whom they consider a traitor but whom most Americans think did us a favor.) Snowden is in hiding in Russia. These guys are strutting around capitol hill, having much diminished it.
6 & 8 are BS.
ReplyDeleteI would submit that Ted Cruz's stunt in the Senate, reciting "Green Eggs and Ham" into the record ...
ReplyDeleteHad more to do with raising revenues at Goldman Sucks than with the 'repeal' of the Affordable Care Act.
Goldman was having a 'tough' quarter, Ted did what he could to keep his "Community" bonus check, shall we say ...
.... Phat and Healthy.
ReplyDeleteMeet the 30 Republicans Slamming #Obamacare in Public but Requesting It's Funding in Private
It’s the height of hypocrisy: They call for repeal of the law but plead for its dollars on behalf of constituents.
Even before President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law, Republicans were vowing to repeal it. It’s no wonder, because polls showed that the basic elements of the ACA were quite popular, and there was a real danger that it would become more so as people found out that the plan denounced as a “monstrosity” by the National Republican Senatorial Committee would not trample on their liberties so much as help protect their health. Desperate to avoid this, the GOP-controlled House has voted no fewer than thirty-seven times to repeal Obamacare in the three years since it was enacted.
Now letters produced by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that many of these same anti-Obamacare Republicans have solicited grants from the very program they claim to despise. This is evidence not merely of shameless hypocrisy but of the fact that the ACA bestows tangible benefits that even Congress’s most extreme right-wing ideologues are hard-pressed to deny to their constituents.
As I reported here last September, Congressman Paul Ryan, who as Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012 called for its repeal, sent a letter requesting ACA money for health clinics in his district two years earlier. The Nation has obtained documents revealing that at least twenty other Obamacare-bashing GOP lawmakers have similarly pleaded for ACA funds on behalf of constituents.
Among them are Kristi Noem, a Republican lawmaker from South Dakota likely to run for the Senate next year, as well as Ohio Senator Rob Portman, who has been touted as a potential GOP presidential candidate in 2016.
In one of two letters sent by Portman to the Department of Health and Human Services, the senator requested ACA funds to help a federal health center in Cleveland, where the money could help “an additional 8,966 uninsured individuals” to receive ”essential services,” in his words.
DeleteIn Noem’s case, the congresswoman requested ACA funds to construct a community health center in Rapid City to provide primary services to the uninsured. Both Noem and Portman won office in 2010 campaigning vigorously against the law and have since worked to repeal it.
Though notably less transparent, the behavior of these GOP lawmakers parallels that of GOP governors like Arizona’s Jan Brewer, who blast the president’s health reform package while embracing the millions in Medicaid funds that it provides.
The letter writers include GOP rank-and-file Congress members, leaders and committee chairs, all of whom have supported the repeal effort.
David Valadao, for example, a freshman representative who campaigned last year on his opposition to Obamacare, requested funds in a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius two years ago for a program to improve “the general health” of the Fresno County area, which he then served as a California assemblyman.
Congressman Jeff Denham, a two-term GOP lawmaker who won his seat with support from Tea Party activists, penned a letter recommending the same application for Fresno County. The county Department of Public Health won the grant. Valadao’s and Denham’s offices declined to comment.
The Affordable Care Act authorizes an array of grants to local hospitals, community health clinics and doctor training programs, as well as public health initiatives to improve health and access to care. The billions of dollars in grants are awarded on a competitive basis, and lawmakers on the state and federal levels have sent letters endorsing applicants.
Texas Senator John Cornyn, the Republican whip, wrote to the Centers for Disease Control to recommend a grant for Houston and Harris County. Congressman Michael McCaul, a Republican and the chair of the Homeland Security Committee, wrote a letter praising the same grant request, calling the effort a “crucial initiative to achieve a healthier Houston/Harris County.” Senators Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Mark Kirk of Illinois and Thad Cochran of Mississippi also recommended grant request approval for public health or health clinic funding.
House Republicans and the Senate Republican Policy Committee have trashed the ACA’s Community Transformation grants as an Obamacare “slush fund.” In the letters seeking these grants, however, GOP lawmakers have heaped praise on their potential.
DeleteCornyn writes in his letter that the grant would help “improve the health and quality of life of area residents.”
Congressman Aaron Schock, a Republican from Illinois, congratulated a local nonprofit for winning a Community Transformation grant, noting that the program will give “people the tools to live healthier and longer lives.”
The National Republican Senatorial Committee warns of Obamacare that “as this awful legislation gets ever closer to going into effect, the negative consequences are only becoming increasingly clear.”
But the NRSC’s chair, Jerry Moran, has hailed programs that exist because of it. In August, he attended a ceremony announcing a $4.7 million expansion of the Community Health Center of Southeast Kansas. A picture posted on Moran’s official Facebook page shows the senator in a suit with his foot on a shovel to break ground for the health clinic:
“That funding—that came from the Affordable Care Act, and he voted no,” says Krista Postai, CEO of the CHC-SEK clinics. She adds that Moran had been supportive of health clinics in the past, and she was disappointed to see him vote against the law that made her clinic expansion possible. Postai noted that her clinics are already improving lives with ACA funding, and that there are thousands of uninsured and disabled people in her community who now receive coverage and preventive care thanks to the law
https://plus.google.com/113630612440279083293/posts/AtcyHeyjj6A
1 - 10 ar BS
ReplyDeleteBecause the shutdown was so short.
DeleteAll will be forgotten in 2 weeks.
State your case, as to why dimwit.
DeleteArticulate it, if you have the cognizant ability to do so.
It is doubtful that you can.
It was ever done with regards to the religion of the Spanish people and US policies toward the Philippines.
Because ten days is 10 days, and two weeks is 14.
Delete. . . NEVER done with regards to . . . .
DeleteWhy the religion of the majority of the Spanish people should dictate US policies with regard the Philippines.
Farmer Fudd said it, then could not explain it.
Will we get a repeat of nonperformance?
Is this yet another case where Fudd's anal stimulations and erectile dysfunction become the topic of the day?
That was not what was discussed at the Editorial Meeting, did you sleep through that meeting, Fudd?
Or did your Skype connection go down, and you failed to mention it?
Desert Rat is an asshole. And a liar, misrepresents others and is a fraud, just like Quirk said.
DeleteIsn't that right, Rat?
desert ratWed Oct 16, 04:26:00 AM EDT
No doubt of that, anonymous
Never a bit of doubt.
.
I've been a professional asshole, have always done it pretty well.
It is a skill.
It is a skill
DeleteASK ANY VETERAN
There are no lies, no misrepresentations.
Quirk is a "Dick"
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe Republicans can look to history, to the Dixicrats ...
ReplyDeleteThe GOP and their "Tea Party" problem, is nothing new.
Today’s Republican Party, like the Democrats six decades ago, has had to come to terms with a demographic shift—one in which Hispanic voters are a crucial new element. We would be naïve to believe that the opposition to comprehensive immigration reform that features so prominently in current Tea Party politics is incidental to its appeal. (A 2010 survey of Tea Party supporters conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute found that fifty-eight per cent believed the government “paid too much attention to the problems of blacks and minorities”; sixty-four percent said immigrants were “a burden” on the country.)
The Tea Party–inspired eruptions that have recurred throughout Obama’s Presidency represent something more complicated than a reactionary backlash to the sight of a black President; they are a product of the way he so tidily represents the disparate strands of social history that brought us to this impasse.
The problem isn’t that there’s a black President; it’s that the country has changed in ways that made Obama’s election possible.
A half century ago, the Republican Party looked with envy at the youthful energy of the mass movements aligning themselves with the Democratic Party—until the 1968 Democratic Convention conveyed the pitfalls of grassroots politics. Today, it finds itself in a similar bind, caught in the narrow straits between movement and mob. John Boehner is not a Franklin Roosevelt; he’s not even a Sam Rayburn, and it’s his unenviable charge to corral elements that are, in effect, raging against math. The country regards the shutdown as a sign of government dysfunction, but for the implacable members of Boehner’s caucus, shutdown may simply be the ultimate form of limited government.
DeleteSixty-five years ago, the Dixiecrats spearheaded a movement toward the G.O.P.
The Tea Party is an echo of that same movement, save for one distinction: in 2013, the rebels have nowhere left to go.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/10/the-gops-dixiecrat-problem.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true
It's rat 'point and laugh' time and it's not even 10am.
ReplyDelete
Delete“It's all you think about, all you talk about, and all you want us to talk about.
What in the world would we call something like that?
Oh, yeah!
An obsession!”
Farmer Fudd, what happened?
DeleteYou were going to "Push" and get that Google sign-on issue resolved?
I guess that all that developed from the "Push" was another turd.
Will I have to get that Farmer Fudd sign-on, for you ...
... so as to authenticate your status as a dimwit?
rattie started it at:
Deletedesert ratFri Oct 18, 09:47:00 AM EDT
My TV dinner is done
Started what, Farmer Fudd?
DeleteA request for further explanation from you, that is where you think it was the "start"?
I think not. I have to disagree
It started when you said I had committed criminal acts.
When you stated Deuce destroyed evidence in a criminal investigation by the FBI.
That was the "Start" of it.
It will continue.
I am going to dog your ass.
Today, tomorrow, ad infinitum until you apologize, profoundly and profusely.
There is a real resolve to do that.
And ...
DeleteYes, I am an asshole.
Everyone agrees with you.
DeleteIt is unanimous then.
Now if you could realize you are mentally ill and need some real help some progress might be made. But, it is a start.
Nope, no mental health problems ...
Delete... not at this end.
You may have some masochism issues, but that's on you.
Does no make any difference, in this fight against the fascists.
You can come to the table, acquiesce to the demands made by the Hegemony of Characters, or the Sanctions will continue.
Whether those demands are just or not. Whether those demands are fair, or not.
Makes no difference to the Hegemony of Characters.
You are part of the fascist cabal.
You can apologize, or not.
The Sanctions Regime stays in place, even during "negotiations".
I did not originally write Farmer Fudd as a masochist, you added that to the character.
Delete;-)
But you did confess to having a "mole" inside the AZ FBI. You said you SAW the complaint that I filed with them.
DeleteThat was against the law.
You said that the AZ FBI was investigating ME for national security concerns, you said this here on this blog!
That is a crime.
You are a criminal.
That is a fact.
As to whether you admitted to murdering civilians in Central America? Those posts were taken down, but as you said, the FBI/NSA has those pages.
Maybe that's why you refuse to travel on planes or trains that might require a passport or require you to pass a TSA checkpoint (apartheid amerika ya know).
Face it Rat, you bragging about your exploits are either you are a murderer or you are just a wannabe blowhard.
From what we can tell NOW?
You are a Cliff Claven of the blog, a worm tongue liar. A distorter and misdirector of words.
You change meanings in the middle of a sentence and are completely insane when it comes to rational conversation.
You stalk, you threaten, you abuse.
This is why I made that complaint to the AZ FBI about you. And we BOTH KNOW I did..
As of now? You have not been arrested yet. takes time for the feds to build a case.
Dont confuse lack of imprisonment with innocence as I am sure the Prosecutor in your county doesn't.
Remember they put Al Capone away on Tax Evasion.
I wonder what they will FIND on you?
"Confess"?
DeleteI had a conversation, about a fool in Ohio.
A fella that wasted the time and energy of the FBI.
No crime, there.
There is no law against writing, in the US.
You confuse the United States with the realities of life in Israel, quot.
Rant a way. it is cute and comical.
Call the FBI, again, if you want.
Waste more Federal time and money.
Makes no difference to me. I stand free and will remain so.
i welcome the investigations, as the last one vindicated me ...
... and Deuce.
I won't even ask for an apology, from you.
;-)
I don't think the shutdown hurt all that much. It slowed 4th qtr growth a bit, but, hell, the economy is in the toilet, anyway.
ReplyDeleteAnd, yeah, the pubs got themselves a big problem with the tea partiers. It's truly, a "can't live with'em, can't live without'em" situation.
Deemocracie is hard.
Nixon, he got the Republicans the South ...
DeleteHe go himself into he White House, for a while.
Created a "Regional" Party as the long term consequence.
Made the GOP ever more inconsequential, in the process.
The "March of the Demographics" is inexorable.
DeleteVirginia is becoming "Blue."
Colorado, and Nevada Are Blue.
One more Large state, and the Republicans are in for a long, long drought,
at the minimum.
You are forgetting about the conservative baby boom Rufus. Your side is aborting itself while the conservatives are having the kids.
DeleteI have a link to an article on this but I'm late already. Will try to remember to post it later.
There is no such article.
DeleteIf there is, it is a fiction and it will be debunked.
Even Arizona is going "Blue". Probably take two, three cycles more to complete the transformation
Arizona is getting "younger", "browner".
The whole country is.
You're hallucinating.
DeleteEvery 4 years the percentage of the electorate that's white goes down by 2 percentage points.
Florida is still considered a "swing" state, but Charlie Crist will be back in the Governor's seat in 2014, and those ungodly long lines in the Democratic areas will be disappearing by the 2016 Presidential Election.
DeleteOnce those lines are gone, it's likely that Fl will enter the column of Blue States; and that will be game, set, match.
Now, there could be discussion as to why.
DeleteCould be discussion on how to reverse the trend.
But denial, that is where Farmer Fudd and his cabal of fascists are standing.
And, no, they are not getting their feet wet, standing in Denial, we are not discussing that river in Egypt.
Yep, that's why I said "long, long drought," instead of "death."
DeletePolitical parties have been known to "come back."
But, I think in the case of the Republican Party, it might take a while - quite a while.
The "Farmer Fudds" started sinking deep into the "denial" quagmire with "unskewed polling.com," and plumdumputridpolling.com, and the such, and they're looking to be hopelessly stuck there for the foreseeable future.
DeleteEventually, though, some combination of "the passing of enough time, and an absolutely horrendous Democratic Candidate, and an exceptionally good Republican candidate" will manage to pull them back onto solid land.
What was it Trish, our Den Mother, told us ...
DeleteOh, yeah ..
The GOP was dead in the water for at least three Presidential election cycles.
Obama makes for one cycle, two more to go.
Neither party represents the interests of the majority of Americans.
DeleteI’m anti-big power. I don’t know if that’s populist or not.- Brian Lamb
I could have Whackadoodle cursing by 10:45 but for the readers won't do it.
ReplyDeleteBesides I've got stuff to do.
out
Yeah, I've got to take another shit.
DeleteThen go to Walmart and buy a new pair of slippers.
Since I haven't "shit my slippers," lately, I think I'll wander over to Arkabutla, and see if the crappie have started biting yet.
DeleteProbably still a couple of weeks early, but it's a beautiful fall day out there, and getting out of the house will probably do me some good. later.
ReplyDeleteBloomberg -
Treasuries rose, pushing 10-year yields to the lowest in 12 weeks, amid speculation the partial U.S. government shutdown this month curbed growth and will spur the Federal Reserve to keep buying bonds into next year.
here is a fellow that does not attribute Mr Obama's "success" to "Luck"
ReplyDeleteKarl Rove: Obama set a trap for GOP with shutdown
"Barack Obama set the trap. Some congressional Republicans walked into it.
As a result, the president is stronger, the GOP is weaker, and ObamaCare is marginally more popular."
When your opponent has only one play in his book, it is not hard to "set a trap".
DeleteEvidenced in microcosm, here at ".The Libertarian"
Rufus: Every 4 years the percentage of the electorate that's white goes down by 2 percentage points.
ReplyDeleteAnother three hundred years of air travel and there won't be any "white" folks anywhere. Race, like indigenous languages, will be an artifact of the pre-technological era.
Take Race out of the equation on the global stage?
DeleteI can't think of a downside :)
Although the genetics of mixing will develop new challenges for the medical field, I think.
DeleteRacial differences may well remain on the world stage, Dman.
DeleteBut in the more affluent nations, where affluence equates to mobility.
The racial lines will become ever more blurred.
The case of the Kardashian girls and their mates illustrate the trend.
The President illustrates the trend.
Ted Cruz and his wife, illustrate the trend.
But in the Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia, there is not much affluence, less mobility.
Even in Europe ...
A report that Ötzi the Iceman has 19 genetic relatives living in Austria is the latest in a string of surprising discoveries surrounding the famed ice mummy. Ötzi's 5,300-year-old corpse turned up on the mountain border between Austria and Italy in 1991. Here is a rundown of the latest on the world's oldest Alpine celebrity, and some of the other remarkable things we've learned about Ötzi.
(Read "Unfrozen" from the November 2011 issue of National Geographic magazine.)
1. The Iceman has living relatives.
Living links to the Iceman have now been revealed by a new DNA study. Gene researchers looking at unusual markers on the Iceman's male sex chromosome report that they have uncovered at least 19 genetic relatives of Ötzi in Austria's Tyrol region.
The match was made from samples of 3,700 anonymous blood donors in a study led by Walther Parson at Innsbruck Medical University. Sharing a rare mutation known as G-L91, "the Iceman and those 19 share a common ancestor, who may have lived 10,000 to 12,000 years ago," Parson said.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131016-otzi-ice-man-mummy-five-facts/
Even in European Occupied Palestine ...
DeleteIn desperation, the soldier contacted Yad La’achim, an organization which aims to promote and safeguard Israeli apartheid by “saving Jews from assimilation”. In her message to the racist organization, sent anonymously on Facebook, she expresses the hope that it can help her prevent this awful violation of apartheid from happening in the future “by talking some sense into these young women”.
She said:
Hi, I speak with true pain, as a soldier working at checkpoints and every Friday night Jewish girls pass through in minority cars [common euphemism for Arabs].
I would be glad if you could come and stand with me at the checkpoint for at least an hour and try to appeal to the hearts of these poor Jewish girls…
Every time I see such Jewish girls, I try to hold up the vehicle and check the background of these Arabs [euphemism gone], and in between I take the Jewish girls aside for a short talk (which doesn’t always help).
So perhaps you will succeed, because it’s really painful to see the daughters of Israel going with these Arabs.
Yad La’achim responded via Facebook (highlighted) by saying:
Translated into English, courtesy of +972 Magazine, it said:
“God willing, we have contacted the charming soldier and from now on she will report to us on every such girl, after she checks her ID.”
More Arab Jews are being propagated, seems that there are some folks in Israel object to it.
Nature has its' ways ....
Nature has its' ways ....
DeleteI thought I read somewhere on a Jewish site that the numerical value of G_D is the same as Nature.
If it's true that would be most interesting in some people's eyes.
Who is it, Dman that asserts the numeric value of the letters, the words?
DeleteHas not Nature always been personified as Deities and Concepts ...
Earth Mother, counterpart of the Sky Father
Mother Nature, a common metaphorical expression for the Earth and its biosphere as the giver and sustainer of life
Mother Earth (deity), a Slavic deity
Gaia (mythology), the Greek goddess personifying the earth
Terra (mythology), the Roman goddess personifying the earth or land
Mother goddess, the Earth Mother
Pachamama, a pan-Andean concept and deity
I believe it was the Hebrews.
DeleteGiven by divine inspiration?
I'm probably showing more ignorance on this subject than I should.
Is what we have in that report just a numeric substantiation of Paganism in the "Old Testament"?
DeleteNever thought of that. heh.
DeleteWhat we wish, we readily believe, and what we ourselves think, we imagine others think also.
DeleteJulius Caesar
The Cruz/Tea Party shut down of the US government cost the US economy $24 billion
ReplyDeleteBut we made some of that back when people pulled into the ranger station at Olympic National Park and were given a $125 ticket for "Violation of Closure". Because the role of the government is to make your life miserable.
Rufus: One more Large state, and the Republicans are in for a long, long drought
ReplyDeleteYou know what happens in prisons when there's only one gender for a "long, long drought" ? The inmates divide along male-female principles and you're right back to a two party system once again. Same thing will happen when there's nothing but Dems. So party on.
.
ReplyDeleteQuirk is a "Dick"
More sad whimpering from the misbegotten.
Quirk is a preternatural force for good above and beyond your ken. He is like the wind, riding the cyber waves, fighting and defeating evil and ill-logic in all its forms. He shines the naked light of truth upon the petty mewlings of his antagonists and watches as they shrivel in their inconsequence. He is the never-ending enemy of the false prophets and deceivers, the fanatics and the plagiarists, the liars and the inane, the bully and the boring. His battle is never ending as he fights the forces of evil such as Tetrahedron Publishing, Google-Rat, and the rest of their sordid ilk.
In short, Quirk is a swell though imposing guy.
.
Quirk admits to being a preternatural "Dick" ...
DeleteOne that when swollen is imposing,
pre·ter·nat·u·ral
adjective: preternatural;
1. beyond what is normal or natural.
Another new word for the vocabulary.
i wouldn't use "short", "swollen" and "imposing" in a single sentence about dicks, but then that sentence it isn't mine.
Deleteswollen being used, in the critique, as it is an accurate and descriptive synonym for the effects of swelling.
A twisting of words, to suit my editorial needs.
;-)
.
DeleteGoogle-Rat once again displays one of his les endearing qualities, his inability to read and understand the written word and an innate inability to form the proper relationships between them.. We can speculate on the causes, dyslexia, English as a second language, a mediocre education, ADHD or some other learning disorder. I hesitate to call him just plain dumb but I believe we can all agree that he is what is referred to in todays PC society as 'special'.
The fact that he had to look up the meaning of the word 'preternatural'? Telling.
:)
The fact that he has developed the ability to use a dictionary? A positive sign.
.
.
Delete"...less endearing..."
Must adjust the sensitivity on the keyboard.
.
Whackadoodble didn't even know the meaning of "preternatural"?
DeleteWhat a stupid professional asshole.
Shows he hasn't read Thoreau, too.
Nor Poe.
Fingures
Everyone can now agree Whacky is a SPA..
DeleteThe use of the dictionary, was for Farmer Fudd.
DeleteHe lacks the cognizant ability to look for himself.
I know, because Farmer Fudd is my creation.
He was designed to be a fool, an educated fool, but one that is in the throes of "Old Timers"
A bigoted fascist that cannot keep a thought in his head.
"Fingures" ...
i would assume that was "Figures".
Delete"It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word."
This story is descriptive of the lengths the FBI will go to ...
ReplyDeleteTo obtain evidence, in the prosecution of destruction of evidence, and in the pursuit of ...
.... US citizens that promote terrorism.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/york-man-arrested-terrorism-case-20611897
A New York man sought to join an al-Qaida group in Yemen, conspired to commit murders overseas and tried to destroy evidence when he realized he was under investigation, authorities said after his arrest Friday.
Marcos Alonso Zea, 25, was arrested at his home in Brentwood on Long Island and was held for an initial court appearance in federal court. He was charged with conspiracy to commit murder in a foreign country, attempting to support terrorists and al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, and obstruction of justice.
There are "real" bad guys out there, quot had the chutzpah to set the FBI to chasing desert rat's tail, wasting their time.
It was my DUTY, as an American citizen to report a crime if I thought I witnessed one.
DeleteI did my civic duty to alert the AZ FBI that you are a treat to the common peace.
I saw your threats as real. I reported you.
You are now even FURTHER on their radar.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThat was a "Good Thing" that you did, quot.
DeleteBecause after, what now, three years ...
... it is obvious that the only one who saw a threat, was you.
When the FBI investigated, which they did ...
by reading the "O"riginal blog entries from the Google servers
There was no basis for further investigation.
No need to even investigate and find out who at the IP had posted to the blog.
There was no threat made.
Just like with Iran.
Threats are imagined, but are not real.
".The Libertarian", a microcosm of the world
Paranoia ... is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion.
DeletePeople with paranoid personality disorder are characterized by having a long-standing pattern of pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others.
DeleteWhich leads us back to Masada ...
DeleteThe Israeli veneration of mass suicide ...
Whether that veneration illustrated a Social Pathology
Now we have an illustration of paranoia, in an individual Israeli passport holder.
Is their collective "fear" of Iran just another illustration of a Social Pathology.
One that is aggravated by their cultural narcissist obsession with suicide, genocide, mass murder and identity politics?
Their cultural confusion about their Ashkenazi ancestry?
Your projecting what you wish to see.
DeleteA threat was made by you. I reported you. I still think you are a danger to civil society.
You harass and stalk and threaten others.
YOU do not KNOW the status of the investigation that is ongoing about you. Typically "perps" dont.
What makes you sure the FBI is not watching you? Lack of an arrest?
So now you are an expert at being a detective and a prosecutor.
Absence of your arrest doesnt mean you are not a threat to people. It just means that the there is not a strong enough LEGAL case against you.
Being not arrested is not the same as not guilty.
How many criminals are walking the street, know to the authorities but the case is not strong enough to warrant an arrest?
No your threats were made and were real.
Hence MY REPORTING you was a civic DUTY.
You may apologize at any time for threatening my life.
desert ratFri Oct 18, 04:45:00 PM EDT
DeleteWhich leads us back to Masada ...
The Israeli veneration of mass suicide ...
Your knowledge of the Jewish people and their culture sucks.
But I shall attempt for the 400th time to share a thought with an anti-semitic blowhard such as you.
L'chaim
Learn it, understand it, embrace it.
Shove your stupid low information crap up your ass and have a nice weekend, and thank the Jews for giving it to the world.
Rat: Is their collective "fear" of Iran just another illustration of a Social Pathology.
DeleteRat here tells the Jews and Israel that their concerns about a nuclear armed iran are "just another illustration of a Social Pathology."
Amazing.. Such hubris.
Tell us General Rat, how long have you been leading the world in Iranian Intel? How many troops do you command? How many in the think tank that you have on your bottom lands do you employ?
Tell us oh expert Rat why iran is a figment of a threat?
I guess those centrifuges are spinning cotton candy?
Tell us about Iran General Rat, tell us how we are wrong in having any sense of fear about a nuclear armed mullah led Iran
Inquiring minds want to know since you are so much smarter than the DOZENS of nations in the world that DO see Iran as a threat, INCLUDING America.
Rants just exemplify your paranoia, quot.
DeleteNot even going to read 'em.
if you want to call the police, again.
Go ahead. Do what you will.
IBut, since you brought up Israel ...
Israel, that secular and socialist state that was built upon ...
... the Three Pillars of Apartheid
The first pillar “derives from Israeli laws and policies that establish Jewish identity for purposes of law and afford a preferential legal status and material benefits to Jews over non-Jews.”
The second pillar is reflected in
Delete“Israel’s ‘grand’ policy to fragment the OPT [and] ...
... ensure that Palestinians remain confined to the reserves designated for them ...
... while Israeli Jews are prohibited from entering those reserves but enjoy freedom of movement...
... throughout the rest of the Palestinian territory.
This policy is evidenced by Israel’s extensive appropriation of Palestinian land,
which continues to shrink the territorial space available to Palestinians;
the hermetic closure and isolation of the Gaza Strip from the rest of the OPT;
the deliberate severing of East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank;
and the appropriation and construction policies serving to carve up the West Bank ...
... into an intricate and well-serviced network of connected settlements for Jewish-Israelis ...
... and an archipelago of besieged and non-contiguous enclaves for Palestinians.”
The third pillar is
Delete“Israel’s invocation of ‘security’ to validate sweeping restrictions on Palestinian freedom of ...
... opinion, expression, assembly, association and movement [to] mask a true underlying intent ...
... to suppress dissent to its system of domination and thereby maintain control over Palestinians as a group.”
As for threatening your life ...
DeleteYour comedic skills are a tad shallow.
Like your reading and comprehension skills.
Call the FBI again, I double dare you!
Comedic paranoia, from an entire country full of people that do not who they are.
Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically Europeans
Little wonder then, that A. Hitler was one of them.
He had the blood of the Ashenzai flowing in his veins, A. Hitler was a petty Europeon Ashenazi
Another of those, what was it you have called them ...Self-loathing Ashenazi?
Like the Ghetto guards in Warsaw, aye?
The first commander of the Warsaw ghetto was Józef Szeryński, a Polish-Jewish police colonel.
Millions of Europeons, living a lie in Israel.
DeleteLittle wonder then that they are fucked in the head.
Venerating mass suicide.
Engulfed in mass hysteria and paranoia.
Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically Europeans
No blood ties to Israel, nor to Moses
None to Abraham.
Not part of the 13 tribes of Israel
Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically Europeans
The Arabs are as "Jewish" as the Ashenazi.
DeleteHerod the Great was more Jewish than the Europeon Ashenazi ...
... he may have been an Arab but at least he built a Temple in Judea.
Herod was an observant Jew, according to the histories.
DeleteBibi , he is a Secular Jew, according to Wiki.
That would make Herod a tad "more" Jewish than Bibi.
Observant vs Secular.
Observant has the lead, seems easy enough to ascertain that, even for a Gentile.
What are the odds ...
DeleteHow many Ameros should go on the table ...
What are the odds that ....
... quot is one of those Ashenazi ....
.... that he is an Affinity Jew and not Jewish by birth or bloodline ...
What happens when generations of lies are exposed ....
Let's watch quot and find out, aye.
I've got some popcorn!
desert ratFri Oct 18, 10:39:00 AM EDT
ReplyDeleteThere is no such article.
If there is, it is a fiction and it will be debunked.
Even Arizona is going "Blue". Probably take two, three cycles more to complete the transformation
Arizona is getting "younger", "browner".
The whole country is.
WASHINGTON SECRETS
Study: Conservative baby boom will shift nation further right
BY PAUL BEDARD | OCTOBER 16, 2013 AT 9:11 AM
TOPICS: WASHINGTON SECRETS REPUBLICAN PARTY CONSERVATISM
Photo - AP Photo
AP Photo
A baby boom among conservatives could push the nation's politics further right in the coming decades, especially since liberals aren't having as many children, according to a new study of online dating habits of conservatives and liberals.
The study featured in a Harvard University Shorenstein Center review of recent surveys released Tuesday on how political polarization of the nation is impacting Washington's budget talks is the first to challenge left-leaning pundits who have claimed that as the white population shrinks, the GOP will become marginalized.
Instead, the study in the authoritative journal Political Behavior, conducted by scholars from Brown and Penn State University, suggested that liberals could be the endangered species in the coming decades as conservatives, typically white, have more children than liberals. And those children, this study and others show, commonly follow the politics of their parents.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!
Deep in the study, “The Dating Preferences of Liberals and Conservatives,” the authors cite indications that conservative families are having more children than liberals and that could change the political tilt of the nation, according to their simulations. And, they added, it could happen faster than their tests show.
“If conservative couples have more children than liberal couples, as some studies report,” they wrote, “unless birth rates change, and liberals become more politically engaged at higher rates than conservatives to offset the population difference, the simulation may not fully capture the speed with this assortative mating might exert a noticeable effect on political outcomes.”
Their study looked at 2,944 people using an unidentified dating website. They picked five men and five women from 313 zip codes.
The scholars said that while those using the dating site didn't seek liberals or conservatives outright, they did through other characteristics such as race, tobacco use and age.
For example, most conservative daters were white and they preferred other whites. They also liked to date those who “share their relationship status.” And they preferred to date somebody who shares their tobacco usage.
Liberals, meanwhile, were more likely than conservatives to date out of their own race and were more open to somebody “who does not share their body type.”
The study concludes: ‘We find that both liberals and conservatives appear to gravitate toward those like themselves on a variety of demographic dimensions that are likely correlated with political preferences.”
Eventually, they suggest, the politics of the couples merge and feed the growing polarization of the nation that dates back to the 1960s when the streaks of political polarization today in America began to appear.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.
The first sentence of the missive, makes it clear this is an "opinion" piece, not a factual report....
DeleteA baby boom among conservatives could push ..
Could being the operative word. one that means it also "Could not". It is an opinion.
Then the missive later uses the word ...
. . . suggested . . .
Again, an opinion without basis in fact.
... according to their simulations ...
Climate change models, revisited ...
So, Farmer Fudd's article is debunked.
It does not report on any science,in does not reference any reality, it reports on the bigoted opinion of the author and those that would cite it as reliable.
Wow, SPA, there is such an article, and it isn't fiction, it is a STUDY and 'the study featured in a Harvard University Shorenstein Center review of ...'
DeleteAre you ever a stupid professional asshole.
out, things to do
A baby boom among conservatives could push the nation's politics further right in the coming decades, especially since liberals aren't having as many children, according to a new study of online dating habits of conservatives and liberals.
DeleteAnd they aren't having as many children because they believe in, and promote, abortion. Dern Mormons and Catlicks gonna take over. There goes the neighborhood.
Meanwhile, there's the DATA. Latinos - the fastest growing segment of voters. Followed by Blacks, and Asians (not necessarily in that order,)
Deleteand, losing ground every cycle - Whites.
No "could bes." No "suggests." No "might bes." No "possiblies"
Just Empirical Evidence.
The story does not document a conservative baby boom.
DeleteIt does use "racial stereotypes" to attempt to make it's point.
The scholars said that while those using the dating site didn't seek liberals or conservatives ...
Then the piece makes an unsubstantiated assumption ...
... most conservative daters were white and they preferred other whites...
This after stating that the dating site did not track "conservative" or "liberal".
This is another opinion piece in the pursuit of justification of the denial of reality.
Using pseudo scientists an unsubstantiated studies and "simulations" to deny the facts.
Anothe piece of psudo science debunked, using the words of the report, itself.
No ouside research required.
A weak piece of political gibberish, written for the fascist Fudd's of the world to hold tight to their chests ...
Using pseudo scientists and unsubstantiated studies and "simulations" to deny the facts.
Delete
DeleteMen in general are quick to believe that which they wish to be true."
Fudds are quick to believe what they wish to believe is true.
Fools like him will grab at any straw to justify their own failings, little matter the absurdity of it to rational men.
when data contradicts theory, drop the theory.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFarmer Fudd, like a typical fascist, attempts to misquote ...
Deletedesert ratFri Oct 18, 10:39:00 AM EDT
There is no such article.
If there is, it is a fiction and it will be debunked.
...
The was no "article" just a collection of opinions.
They have been debunked.
.
DeleteThe was no "article" just a collection of opinions.
They have been debunked
Once more rat proves his inability to read, understand and interpret the English language. He compounds this with delusions of grandeur.
Of course there was an article. Having the rat say there was no article doesn't make it so. The article describes reviews of scientific studies put out by reputable institutions.
The author is reporting on a review put out by Harvard on a study from the journal Political Behavior, conducted by scholars from Brown and Penn State University. In some instances, it is difficult to tell if the author is offering his own opinions or if he was passing along the opinions of one or more of the individuals in the chain, but in most cases he is merely reporting on the review from Harvard.
So, Farmer Fudd's article is debunked.
Nonsense. You have 'debunked' neither the article nor the science that was being discussed. You haven't even read the source documents. You haven't a clue as to the scientific rigor that went into the surveys or the conclusions drawn. You have no way of determining if the author was meticulous in passing on the content of the Harvard review or if Harvard's review of the original data was reasonable. All you are offering us is a (choke!) OPINION.
Using pseudo scientists and unsubstantiated studies and "simulations" to deny the facts.
Pseudo scientists? Unsubstantiated studies?
Harvard? Political Behaviour? Brown? Penn State?
This from the moron who offers us conspiracy theories drawn from the pages of the Tetrahedron Publishing group.
How can you make such an ignorant remark without looking at the source data?
It does not report on any science,in does not reference any reality, it reports on the bigoted opinion of the author and those that would cite it as reliable.
Bigoted opinions? Need I say more.
You haven't a clue as to the political persuasion of the people at Harvard who did the review of the study. You don't know the views of the people who conducted the surveys. Having never looked at the review from Harvard or the study you automatically assume they are bigoted. Not having read the source documents, you have no way of knowing if the author interpreted them properly. Yet you are willing to call him a bigot.
I have no way of knowing whether the study has anything legitimate to offer. Frankly, I could care less. I have not looked at the source documents. I have no intention of doing so. And I, just like you, don't know what the totality of the conclusions drawn in the article are but merely those sections the author selected to highlight.
However, until you check out the details and come back with legitimate arguments against them, you have debunked nothing, merely offered us what has proved in most cases to be your less than reliable opinions.
.
.
But, Q, there was no data from the study.
DeleteThe study was not quoted.
All there was ...
An interpretation of the study done at Harvard.
Which, just being from Harvard, does no substantiate its validity, let alone the fact there was no link to the study, which could be evaluated.
ll there was, the authors interpretation of someone else study.
That is not science, that is not data or anything else, but an opinion.
The article, if we are to elevate to that level, is pure opinion, and has been debunked, at least until you or Fudd or someone else presents the data, unadulterated, from the Harvard study.
You do know, Q, that the Arctic ice has melted away, by now.
DeleteI think it was a Harvard study that made that prognostication.
News Flash ...
The ice is still there, perhaps that pseudo scientific "study" was flawed.
If wish to hold that opinion piece near and dear, to your heart, Q.
DeleteGo right ahead.
AnonymousFri Oct 18, 02:25:00 AM EDT
DeleteDesert Rat is an asshole. And a liar, misrepresents others and is a fraud, just like Quirk said.
Isn't that right, Rat?
desert ratWed Oct 16, 04:26:00 AM EDT
No doubt of that, anonymous
Never a bit of doubt.
I've been a professional asshole, have always done it pretty well.
It is a skill.
Since "Conservatives" are white ...
DeleteGuess that means "Liberals" are non-White
.. and since Whites on an actual basis have more abortions than "non-Whites", it stands to the logic of the piece that Conservatives have more abortions than liberals
Besides, the study may not have been done at Harvard, it was written about in a Harvard "Review".
I do believe that Mr Obama edited a Harvard Review. Your position is that anything that was published, in that Harvard Review, was correct? Just because it originated in a Harvard Review, edited by Barack Obama?
Which seems flawed thinking, to me
You credit the source, a Harvard Review, with an authority it does not carry on its own.
DeleteUnless Barack Obama's status in your own mind has improved, his scholarship and integrity exemplifies Harvard Reviews. ....
Hold that repor, near and dear Q.
It may help with that rash.
[;-)
Poor Farmer Fudd, he takes two disconnected quoes out of context and tries to build a coherent theme.
DeleteThere were no lies or misrepresentations.
Yes I am an Asshole.
The three items can not be conflated or are they synonymous.
The fascist Farmer Fudd Fails again.
Fascists usually do.
Delete“A truth that's told with bad intent
Beats all the lies you can invent.”
On this day in 1009 the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a Christian church in Jerusalem, was completely destroyed by the Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, who hacks the Church's foundations down to bedrock. In 1851 Herman Melville's Moby-Dick was first published as The Whale by Richard Bentley of London. In 1944 the Soviet Union began the "liberation" of Czechoslovakia. The following year the Soviet nuclear program received plans for the United States plutonium bomb from Klaus Fuchs at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. In 1954 Texas Instruments announced the first Transistor radio. In 1967 the Soviet probe Venera 4 reached Venus and became the first spacecraft to measure the atmosphere of another planet. In 2007 a suicide attack on a motorcade carrying former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto killed 139 and wounded 450 more. Bhutto herself was not injured.
ReplyDeleteThe story does not document a conservative baby boom.
ReplyDeleteIt also makes the deeply unfounded implication that the children of conservative parents will also vote conservative, and so on, until the third and fourth generation. What's the first thing a kid does when he or she goes to Uni? Throws his or her parent's religion and moral values in the trash along with the empty beer cans and boxes of Dominos pizza.
.
ReplyDeleteBut, Q, there was no data from the study.
The study was not quoted.
Must I accuse you of being lazy too?
Look it up?
Had you said, "I think the study is full of crap. It goes against everything I know." I would have had no problem.
However, you said the article is debunked. You called those involved and those who posted the article bigots. You offered no proof of either.
Either confine your comments to what you can prove from the data provided, go look for more evidence, or just give us you opinion for what it is, you opinion. Quit blowing it out your ass.
.
No,
DeleteIf you wish to believe the peers of Barack Obama, at the Harvard Reviews, you go right ahead.
DeleteI was not discussing the Harvard Review,
I was discussing the shit piece journalism that Farmer Fudd brought to the table.
The piece of shit journalism does not need any further research to be debunked.
It debunked itself, within itself.
If you want to substantiate the claims made in it.
You COULD do so, it is SUGGESTED that you read the study. You MAY find a data set in it that validate the piece of shit journalism fascist Farmer Fudd presented.
SPA won't go away even when the vast majority wishes him to do so No matter, no one pays any attention to him anyway. He has become a cartoon.
DeleteJeebus. There have been dozens of Serious studies by Professionals at the Census Bureau, BLS, CBO, Both political parties, and damned near every boy/girl scout troop in the country.
DeleteThey ALL came to the same conclusion; Whites are heading for Minority status.
But I doubt it
DeleteWhat did Romney win the white vote by? About 60%?
DeleteAnd, he lost the election by 4?
I have to correct you, rufus.
DeleteMr Obama won the election ...
President Obama scoring 332 and Mitt Romney 206.
Mr Obama recieved 61% of the vote
Mr Romney received 39%
A spread of 22%
A landslide victory.
DeleteIdaho Vandals football fans:
ReplyDeleteIdaho has a bye tomorrow.
They play Ol' Miss next weekend.
If I have said otherwise I was in error.
out for Wal-Mart trip...
Delete
DeleteFudd
.
ReplyDeleteI think it was a Harvard study that made that prognostication.
First, Harvard didn't do this study. They merely reviewed it.
Second, from this you posit that because some study coming out of Harvard was in error that 'all' studies coming out of Harvard are in error. I could cite you the logical fallacy this is but I have done it before. Let me suggest you go to the nearest search engine and type 'list of logical fallacies'. Perhaps, you will be able to retain it if you look it up yourself.
Third, it wasn't just Harvard you trashed, it was the author of the article, the authors of the study, Penn State, Brown, and Polirtical Journal. On the basis of what? Zip. You were too lazy to even go back and check on the source material.
You don't like Harvard. Read their review and them come back with a critique of it.
Fourth,
Hold that repor, near and dear Q.
:)
Well, let's see. On the one hand, Harvard University Shorenstein Center? On the other hand, a guy who gets much of his 'knowledge' from the Tetrahedron Publishing Group? Harvard? Rat? Gee, that's a tough one.
.
As noted, above, Q.
DeleteThe study may not have been done at Harvard.
It may have just been reviewed, by the peers of Barack Obama.
So, consider the source.
I judged the piece of shit journalism, not the "Study" it was supposedly written about.
If my lack of writing skills had you confused, mea culpa, baby.
I'm just an middle aged country boy, you know.
But the piece, "article", if you insist, present by the fascist Farmer Fudd ....
DeleteThe conclusions that were drawn in it ...
That was debunked.
.
DeleteAnd once more, merely for clarification,
I have no objection to you saying the article is 'shit journalism'. That's your opinion. What I objected to was two things. One saying the article is 'debunked'. Since the article merely describes the Harvard review of the study, the only way you could say the article was debunked is by proving the author hadn't laid out the Harvard opinions of the study correctly. Or that, he had added something that was at odds with the review or the study. Neither of which you did.
Second, I objected to you calling everyone involved with this article bigoted while providing no proof.
.
Object ll you want.
DeleteI was discussing the author, as a bigot.
I said that the fascist, Farmer Fudd, who brought the piece of shit journalism to the table was a bigot.
I have not been corrected.
.
ReplyDeleteQuirk: Either confine your comments to what you can prove from the data provided, go look for more evidence, or just give us you opinion for what it is, you opinion. Quit blowing it out your ass.
rat: No
:)
All right, keep blowing it out you as but get called for it.
.
Call away.
DeleteAssholes-R-Us.com
I will respond, if the mood suits me.
Won't if it don't.
[;-)
hmmm, Quirk, you are really backing that article? Well, really, it was just a Washington examiners interpretation of "the study" but the line "Their study looked at 2,944 people using an unidentified dating website. They picked five men and five women from 313 zip codes." immediately raised flags as to its usefulness.
ReplyDeleteIt was published by a Harvard Review, ash.
DeleteLiberal gospel, you know!
The article debunked itself, but Q feels bad, sad, and a little mad.
In other words, I think that he "feels" the pain of Farmer Fudd.
.
DeleteAsh, if you were able to follow the posts at all, you would see that I was not trying to defend the article or the study in any sense but rather objecting to the manner in which rat was attacking it.
I realize it is a subtle difference but why don't you go back and try reading the entire stream a few more times and you might see the difference.
.
Say what? Read the whole thread? You gotta be kidding! There are many things better to do with my time than to try to parse that drivel but I got the gist of it by skimming it and I was intrigued enough to go back and find that actual article that seems to have piqued all your (well 3 of you) interest and it is was a crappy journalists take on a some review of a study(ies). Rat's (histrionics aside) was correct in with his notion that "it debunked itself" as is the case with most everything Boobie, errr Fudd, posts. Down the rabbit hole with Fudd where the AM Thinker is the font of all wisdom.
DeleteThe article and its conclusions were trash and not worth considering other than in the context of your trying to moan about Rat's trashing of it and the Fudd which put you pretty darn close to defending the worthless piece.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe Quirk is unhappy with my "Style", ash.
DeleteHe "feels" for the fascist Farmer Fudd.
The fellow that shits his slippers, and then tell us all aout it.
Farmer Fudd can apologize for his faulty memory, for his charges that ...
Delete.... I committed criminal acts
.... That Deuce aided and abetted the above mentioned alleged criminal actions
That the servers at Google were hacked, by Deuce, and archived data sets from the Elephant Bar were selectively erased.
A simple, though profound apology for being wrong when he made those unfounded accusations is all that is requested ...
... of Robert.
Until then, Farmer Fudd is in blogger boot camp, and will stay there for the duration.
Farmer Fudd has got himself his own exclusive blogger DI.
Any veteran knows what I am speaking of.
Fascist Farmer Fudd is going to be dogged, dogged hard, from here on out.
DeleteThese opening days, they've been a picnic for him, compared to the scrutiny he will be coming under.
Every word, every comma, every piece of hyperbole will be scrutinized, inspected and dissected.
Publicly.
Drive On, Drill Sargent, Drive On!
That is all he should say, but he won't.
He does not understand, will not take advice and, deep down ...
.... is a tad Masochistic.
[;-)
.
DeleteThe article and its conclusions were trash and not worth considering other than in the context of your trying to moan about Rat's trashing of it and the Fudd which put you pretty darn close to defending the worthless piece.
Pretty darn close. My, oh my.
Once again, you miss the point. You went back and read the 'whole article'. I congratulate you on your initiative. For as far as it went, that is.
You read the entire article and stopped. You then gave an opinion of it, something the rat decries, dontcha know. Although it doesn't stop him from doing the same.
But why did you stop? Right there in the article was a link (easy peasy) to the Harvard University Shorenstein Center review that the article referred to. It was short, one page, and had you bothered to read it you would have seen that the article did refer to some parts of it but that much of what the author said wasn't actually in the review. However, the author did also mention specifics from the original study although he didn't provide a link. However, Harvard's review of that study did have a link (easy peasy).
Had you bothered to check out the original sources, you would be able to provide evidence for/or against the proposition that the article or for that matter even the study itself were debunked. But you didn't and the rat didn't. You were too fucking lazy. Instead you offered the blog your 'opinions'. Whoopti-fucking-do. You complain about the author but at least he had the initiative to actually read the source material, something neither you nor the rat were prepared to do. And yet, not having read the study detail the author was commenting on the rat calls him bigoted.
I could give a shit about the article, the review, or the studies. They talk about trends that will not occur before I am long gone if ever. Rat seems to think I called him out because Bob. Nonsense. I called him out because of his illogical mind and lazy approach to argumentation.
If I see a poll put up here that interests me, I check it out to see if the questions are worded to skew the responses. I check the conclusions that are drawn by the pollsters and the media to see if they are legitimate and match up. I've seen people here that will put up a single poll question that supports their meme and ignore the rest of the poll that goes completely against it.
I see people here who put up study results but never bother to check the study detail themselves, studies that have assumptions from lala land, studies that take results from other studies which are themselves built on questionable assumptions and use those results as a starting point, Anybody who has the barest knowledge of statistics knows that results from the last example can quickly yield results that are useless.
I'll take any 'opinion' you want to offer and give it the consideration it deserves, but don't tell me you have proved or debunked something without giving me examples, evidence, opposing data, proof, something, especially when all it takes is hitting a link.
Get off your lazy ass and do a little work like Rufus did below.
.
I decided to hit the pavement. I tracked down Hannity’s guests, one by one, and did my own telephone interviews with them.
ReplyDeleteFirst I spoke with Paul Cox of Leicester, N.C. He and his wife Michelle had lamented to Hannity that because of Obamacare, they can’t grow their construction business and they have kept their employees below a certain number of hours, so that they are part-timers.
Obamacare has no effect on businesses with 49 employees or less. But in our brief conversation on the phone, Paul revealed that he has only four employees. Why the cutback on his workforce? “Well,” he said, “I haven’t been forced to do so, it’s just that I’ve chosen to do so. I have to deal with increased costs.” What costs? And how, I asked him, is any of it due to Obamacare? There was a long pause, after which he said he’d call me back. He never did.
There is only one Obamacare requirement that applies to a company of this size: workers must be notified of the existence of the “healthcare.gov” website, the insurance exchange. That’s all.
Next I called Allison Denijs. She’d told Hannity that she pays over $13,000 a year in premiums. Like the other guests, she said she had recently gotten a letter from Blue Cross saying that her policy was being terminated and a new, ACA-compliant policy would take its place. She says this shows that Obama lied when he promised Americans that we could keep our existing policies.
ReplyDeleteAllison’s husband left his job a few years ago, one with benefits at a big company, to start his own business. Since then they’ve been buying insurance on the open market, and are now paying around $1,100 a month for a policy with a $2,500 deductible per family member, with hefty annual premium hikes. One of their two children is not covered under the policy. She has a preexisting condition that would require purchasing additional coverage for $600 a month, which would bring the family’s grand total to around $20,000 a year.
I asked Allison if she’d shopped on the exchange, to see what a plan might cost under the new law. She said she hadn’t done so because she’d heard the website was not working. Would she try it out when it’s up and running? Perhaps, she said. She told me she has long opposed Obamacare, and that the president should have focused on tort reform as a solution to bringing down the price of healthcare.
I tried an experiment and shopped on the exchange for Allison and Kurt. Assuming they don’t smoke and have a household income too high to be eligible for subsidies, I found that they would be able to get a plan for around $7,600, which would include coverage for their uninsured daughter. This would be about a 60 percent reduction from what they would have to pay on the pre-Obamacare market.
Delete“Sometimes you can see things happen right in front of your eyes and still jump to the wrong conclusions.”
Finally, I called Robbie and Tina Robison from Franklin, Tenn. Robbie is self-employed as a Christian youth motivational speaker. (You can see his work here.) On Hannity, the couple said that they, too, were recently notified that their Blue Cross policy would be expiring for lack of ACA compliance. They told Hannity that the replacement plans Blue Cross was offering would come with a rate increase of 50 percent or even 75 percent, and that the new offerings would contain all sorts of benefits they don’t need, like maternity care, pediatric care, prenatal care and so forth. Their kids are grown and moved out, so why should they be forced to pay extra for a health plan with superfluous features?
DeleteWhen I spoke to Robbie, he said he and Tina have been paying a little over $800 a month for their plan, about $10,000 a year. And the ACA-compliant policy will cost 50-75 percent more? They said this information was related to them by their insurance agent.
Had they shopped on the exchange yet, I asked? No, Tina said, nor would they. They oppose Obamacare and want nothing to do with it. Fair enough, but they should know that I found a plan for them for, at most, $3,700 a year, a 63 percent less than their current bill. It might cover things that they don’t need, but so does every insurance policy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSalon factchecks Hannity's anti-Obamacare guests
DeleteIdeology will blind them, for a while.
DeleteIt may bind them, even longer.
They may not be fascists, they may not be farmers ...
.... they are Fudds.
Well done Rufie!
ReplyDeleteHannity will dismiss that with a hand-wave by saying, "Look where it's coming from. The Salon is a bastion of leftism."
Delete
Delete"Men in general are quick to believe that which they wish to be true."
I believe I'll have another beer.
DeleteDamn, T, that's the most sensible thing you've said since you've been back; I think I'll join you.
Delete.
DeleteDitto.
That is showing some initiative.
Did you get back to the people with your findings?
Also, another complaint you often hear about is high deductibles with the lower prices plans. How did that effect the calculations?
I haven't seen the official price quote yet, but it doesn't appear my premiums will be going up. Although, my Medicare Part D went up 38%. I don't know if that resulted from the $700-$800 billion they pulled out of Medicare to help fund ACA.
.
.
DeleteDitto to Deuce's 'well done' that is.
.
One must give credit where credit is due.
DeleteI will buy your beer Rufus if you will accept to drink it. I don't want it to go to waste, though.