 |
The difference is that she cared about the people of Alaska .So when real phony ethics investigations began to prevent her from doing her job ,she did the right thing and resigned. MORE POLITICIANS FROM BOTH PARTIES COULD LEARN A LESSON FROM THAT .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Never knew a mama grizzly to run from a fight. Or make excuses. You have a future as a Palin spin meister.
BS Tal ,it was a political witch hunt conducted against her because she made the mistake of proposing and passing the toughest ethics laws of any state in the union. Her opponents used the laws against her like Mordred in Camelot. They were bankrupting her personally having to defend herself and more important ,it prevented her from effectively doing her job. She did the right thing for the people of the state as their Governor, and by resigning when she did. More public servants should understand that none of their jobs were ever intended to be lifetime jobs. The founders envisioned citizen statesmen ,not careerists .
How noble to run from a fight and make more money which was her motives in the first place. But of course she could never admit such a thing. Not so sure about those ethnic laws of which you credit her with but she was in bed with big oil and was passing checks from them.
She made a lot of enemies for the least populated state of its size with a large welfare dependent population.
Basically she proposed and passed laws you wish your side would do . It's a load of cr@p and a complete lie to say she had a crony relationship with the oil companies. Why don't you do your research instead of flapping gums with lies fed to you by the PDS crowd .Quote:
Not so sure about those ethnic laws of which you credit her with
How Governor Palin Reformed Alaska's Ethics Laws and Made Crony Capitalism a Crime | A Time For Choosing
Pardon me if I am skeptical of a right wing blogger who quotes from Sarah's own book.
Is that all you have ? Prove it wrong. But you won't because you can't .
And Tom rushes to her defence like a good republican, is your slip showing TomQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I defend Palin because she is unfairly smeared here . I also share Palin's CONSERVATIVE views. Do you really think the beltway Repubics ,the party leadership like and support her ? No Clete ,I don't march when the Repubics beat their drums.
Well perhaps you should. Genuine grass roots people such as yourself will never get a say.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tut I tried . Too much garbage to swallow. Here is my compromise. When they act like free market ;small government constitutionalists I can get with their program. But I have no intention to even pretend to support Democrat-lite.
Are you joking? Sister Sarah and her red meat rhetoric for conservatives hardly makes her your savior. And does nothing for the rest of the country. But if she is all you got..!
Keep purging your own party, its great theater, and dwindles the numbers down even faster. You think a RINO will vote for a redneck?
Hello again, tom:
IF Republicans acted like that, I'd BE one. But, they FOOL themselves into believing that crap..Quote:
When they act like free market ;small government constitutionalists I can get with their program.
Right wingers believe in HUGE, unbelievably LARGE government when it comes to things like COPS, and the DRUG WAR, and managing the HUGEST, LARGEST prison population in the world... They're happy with the BIG, HUGE NSA program that SNOOPS on every American in direct violation to the Constitution...
Oh, yeah... They LOVE spending LARGE, unbelievably MONSTROUS amounts of cash on our military... More than the next 16 countries COMBINED...
They just think the SOCIAL side of government is WAYYYYY tooo big, and shouldn't even exist.
In the final analysis, you AIN'T fooling nobody.
Excon
You forgot about the vagina cops.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Abortion and forced "Euthanasia" are both murder.
Denying health insurance to poor people while you buy yours at a cut rate from the boss can be forced euthanasia also. And that's after you pop out the vagina. So bosses that don't provide adequate health insurance are murderers. Insurance providers that drop people when they face life threatening diseases are murderers.
Nobody is DENYING the lazy cheapskate poor people anything... they can buy it and pay for it like everyone else has to do... if they stopped wasting money on things like cellphones for every kid... they could pay for medical insurance on just what they spend every month on their phone bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Funny how you and the other lefties can kill babies cold heartedly... but refuse to hold people old enough to be responsible for their own behaviour... to be responsible for their own behaviour.
And personally I know lots of porr people that should die because they wasted their money on dumb instant gratification rather than spend it on things they actually need.
I did it... there is absolutely no excuse why they can't either.
No they can't, you embellish and exaggerate.
Bulls**t,,Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The so-called poor have $200+ gym shoes... and expensive jackets... that they are on the news all the time for getting beat to a pulp or shot by some other "poor" person who steals it off them.
Anyone that has shoes that cost more than $40 (and that's being generous) has money to spend on health insurance.
If you wear $200 or $300 Nike shoes... you HAVE money for health insurance.
I actually have a job so does my wife... and between me and my wife we are at the 6 figure range... neither of us own a pair of $90 dress shoes much less $200 or $300 tennis shoes.
All of them -- or how many? Or just the ones who made the news?Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
There are a LOT of them... look sometime... its a status symbol in the 'hood. Same with certain brand jackets...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Teen boys maybe, but not little kids or their moms..Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Oh yeah it is.. even gradeschool... and with the moms it's the hairdo... and the nails...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Lots of money spent on personal self gratification now.. at the expense of long term needs.
I grew up fairly poor... I spent years doing without certain things so I could afford more important stuff... like Insurance... actualyl paying off my student loans... things like that.
I too grew up poor. It was only because we lived near farms and farmers who cared about us that we always had enough food to put on the table. And we had a vegetable garden too. Supper might be a pound of ground beef made into five patties (one for each of us), sliced tomatoes, homemade applesauce (we lived in NY apple country), corn on the cob from the field next door to our house, and homemade cupcakes. My talented mom made most of my clothes even into college and cooked/baked everything from scratch. A neighbor girl gave me her bike when she outgrew it. I got a scholarship for college, my parents cashed in stock that they had bought when they were first married, and I paid off the rest of my college tuition/R&B by working in the college neighborhood and at the college even during holidays and summer.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
I've tried to always make my own kids work for what they want and not just hand it to them. I think I've succeeded and they appreciate what they have and take good care of things.
My husband and I were talking yesterday about how young people today, black and white both, don't seem to understand what to wear to a job interview and how to behave (like, you don't text your friends while you are talking with the interviewer). My husband wondered, isn't that common sense?
Exactly.. common sense apparently isn't common any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Most of my Jr. And Sr. High period was during the wonderful Carter Administration... both parents were working part time jobs to pay the mortgage.(father was laid off from his job).and put food on the table and clothe me and my brother... I remember going to the Salvation Army thrift store for stuff many times... the real unemployment rate was near 30% for that region at that time... Back when the Japanese were dumping steel at bleow cost that shut down the Steel mills and with them the coal mines and the places that supplied them which were a lions share of the jobs.
THere were men with families that worked in the mills all their lives and in their 40's and 50's bagging groceried at the supermarkets or pushing a broom... anything to make a few bucks to pay the bills... as a kid there were NO jobs because any job was saved for any adult with a family that needed it.
Yeah... we learned the difference between what you want... and what you need. It made the difference between surviving or not.
Well when you see me defending any of that except the large military ,of which I'll say right here and now I fully support... then you can lump me in with your false preconceptions about what the " right wingers " believe. As I recall it was the Dems who for years talked about wanting to put all those cops on the streets . In fact ,the Dems are happy to hire as many public sector employees as they can get away with . As I recall it was Dems who were integral in getting things like mandatory sentencing .You may not remember the aftermath of the Len Bias death but I do... so let me refresh your memory .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
This is how PBS tells it :
Drug Laws And Snitching - A Primer | Snitch | FRONTLINE | PBSQuote:
In 1986, the Democrats in Congress saw a political opportunity to outflank Republicans by “getting tough on drugs” after basketball star Len Bias died of a cocaine overdose. In the 1984 election the Republicans had successfully accused Democrats of being soft on crime. The most important Democratic political leader, House Speaker “Tip” O’Neill, was from Boston, MA. The Boston Celtics had signed Bias. During the July 4 congressional recess, O’Neill’s constituents were so consumed with anger and dismay about Bias’ death, O’Neill realized how powerful an anti-drug campaign would be.
O’Neill knew that for Democrats to take credit for an anti-drug program in November elections, the bill had to get out of both Houses of Congress by early October. That required action on the House floor by early September, which meant that committees had to finish their work before the August recess. Since the idea was born in early July, the law-writing committees had less than a month to develop the ideas, to write the bills to carry out those ideas, and to get comments from the relevant government agencies and the public at large.
One idea was considered for the first time by the House Judiciary Committee four days before the recess began. It had tremendous political appeal as “tough on drugs.” This was the creation of mandatory minimum sentences in drug cases. It was a type of penalty that had been removed from federal law in 1970 after extensive and careful consideration. But in 1986, no hearings were held on this idea. No experts on the relevant issues, no judges, no one from the Bureau of Prisons, or from any other office in the government, provided advice on the idea before it was rushed through the committee and into law. Only a few comments were received on an informal basis. After bouncing back and forth between the Democratic controlled House and the Republican controlled Senate as each party jockeyed for poitical advantage, The Anti Drug Abuse Act of 1986 finally passed both houses a few weeks before the November elections.
So you see... it was the Democrats being tough on crime that brought us mandatory sentencing and the largest prison population in the world. It is the Democrats that want all those cops because they think it is a better option to have all these cops on the public payroll instead of people having the right to exercise their 2nd amendment rights.
Both parties did it, and the dems get the blame? Who was the president that signed it?Quote:
After bouncing back and forth between the Democratic controlled House and the Republican controlled Senate as each party jockeyed for poitical advantage, The Anti Drug Abuse Act of 1986 finally passed both houses a few weeks before the November elections.
Not surprisingly it's come to this...
First of all according to my liberal friends here the poor and uninsured don't get health care. Turns out they do, and now those non-profit hospitals which provide such are going to get fined for taking care of sick people. You can't make this stuff up.Quote:
Obamacare installs new scrutiny, fines for charitable hospitals that treat uninsured people
Charitable hospitals that treat uninsured Americans will be subjected to new levels of scrutiny of their nonprofit status and could face sizable new fines under Obamacare.
A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.
Charity for the uninsured is one of the factors that could discourage enrollment in Obamacare, which requires all Americans to purchase health insurance or else face new taxes themselves from the IRS.
“It requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file additional paperwork with the IRS every three years. This is to prove that the charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by Obamacare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats,” said John Kartch, spokesman for Americans for Tax Reform.
“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status. The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax — hence the positive revenue score” for the federal government, Kartch said. “Obamacare advocates turned over every rock to find as much tax money as possible.”
Additionally, the rise in the number of insured Americans under Obamacare will make it more difficult for tax-exempt hospitals to continue meeting required thresholds for treating the uninsured, driving more hospitals into the for-profit category and yielding more taxable money for the federal government.
“The requirements generally apply to any section 501(c)(3) organization that operates at least one hospital facility,” according to a “Technical Explanation” report of new Obamacare provisions prepared by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) on March 21, 2010, the day Obamacare passed.
Obamacare’s new requirements could slam hospitals with massive $50,000 fines if they fail to meet bureaucrats’ standards.
We can't have poor people being taken care of by anyone besides the government now can we? I just love liberals, they hammer on us about taking care of others then not only tie our hands but now penalize us for doing so.
I know, a hospital is not a church, blah, blah, blah (that was for you, Tut). Now I understand why the Baptist-Catholic alliance that owns the best hospital in our city is looking for a buyer, Obama intends to put them out of the ministry of healing the sick anyway.
Why is Obama waging war on the church?
Hello again,
Was I LYING to this girl? Is Obamacare going to HURT her?
excon
How about learning more and spewing ignorance less?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Barack Obama and his right hand man Pete Rouse hand picked a group of democrat thugs, including Phil Munger, Jeanne Devon, Shannyn Moore, Val Henning, Linda Beigel, and others. These hand picked thugs filed dozens of phony "ethics" complaints, and bombarded the Governor's office with FOIA requests.
All of this was right out of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals"
Under Alaska law, no matter how ridiculous the "complaint" the state had to investigate. Obama's thugs cost the Alaskan people over $2 MILLION with this insanity. They also cost Palin $500,000 on a $125,000 a year salary. And NO, she wasn't allowed to start a legal defense fund, like every other politician would have been.
Governor Palin resigned because Obama's thugs were raping Alaska's treasury, and word had went out to democrat lawmakers to stop working with her.
Governor Palin only left office after all of the scheduled legislative sessions were over, and she had fulfilled every single campaign promise.
Had the Governor stayed in office, both she and her staff would have continued to have been the target of Obama's hatred, and his thugs' attacks. They would have cost the Alaskan people as much as $10 MILLION.
As it was, she left the state better than she found it, with a $15 BILLION budget surplus, and in the hands of her Lt Governor who kept her agenda moving forward.
Damn shame MORE politicians aren't this honorable!
Look, something shiny!Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, Steve:
If a sick person getting affordable health insurance BECAUSE of Obamacare, ISN'T at the heart of this issue, then we live on two different planets.Quote:
Look, something shiny!
Excon
Are you sane! Two preposterous ideas in one and you say you are not a republican. No one could believe that the democrats believe the second one it is because people are exercising their second amendment "rights" that you need the cops. The government has a responsibility to protect the people. Do you think that by spending a third of the world military budget you are protecting the people, protecting them from whom, why don't you protect all those young men by bringing them home and giving them something useful to do, Use this military force to protect the people.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello new winger, got links for any of that crap YOU just spewed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackwater4205
Tal ,it's all over the web. Look for something besides your typical left wing zombie sites. What part do you want a link for ? It's all fact. And the emperor rewarded Pete Rouse with Interim Chief of Staff after Rahmbo Emanuel announced he was leaving the administration to run for Mayor of Chi town Rouse became Chief of Staff for a while... now he is Councilor to the emperor . Rouse is also an Alaskan and is close with some of the key players in the trumped up "Troopergate" witch-hunt . Palin of course was cleared of any wrong doing in that or any other ethics investigation leveled against her. Pete Rouse created the "Wasilla Project" a group of hate filled idiots whose mission was to do anything and everything to harass Palin.
Rouse and his goons filed one phony charge after another Palin and it's quite correct that she spent a fortune to defend herself before she resigned. You must be proud of the Alinsky tactics employed . But what really pisses your type off is that she isn't going away.
Hello again, tom:
Nahhhh.. I LOVE having Sarah Palin around.. She makes it easy.Quote:
But what really pisses your type off is that she isn't going away.
Excon
Alaska budget hole is $1.65 billion | Legislature | ADN.com
Spending rose in Palin's Alaska administrations - USATODAY.com
Alaska has energy and low population, and it a taker state which mean that it gets more from the fed than it gives. I won't bother you with facts about her money managing while mayor of Wassila, her first job, but she left because Alaska was getting HOT, and she couldn't stand the heat, which might have been smart, but she can shove that mama grizzly crap up her bazoo, if you guys would move your heads out of the way.Quote:
But Palin didn't cut the size of government as mayor of Wasilla, and she hasn't done so as Alaska's governor, city and state budget records show. Spending in fast-growing Wasilla increased by 55% during her tenure from 1996-2002, records show. In nearly two years as governor, she has presided over a 31% spending hike by a state government that sought earmarks from Washington even as it reaped billions from higher oil prices and Palin-backed tax increases on oil companies.
When the going gets tough, the tough don't quit. She is a quitter. I wish she would run for something, but then gain you guys where so excited when you thought she was going to run in 2012. Nice bus though.
The question was why is Obama waging a war on the church? Since when in this country do we penalize someone for being charitable?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Look, something shiny!
It's IS true, that sick people ARE the shiny objects that this conversation is ABOUT.
First off, HOW, in the world, is this sick person NOT what this thread is about? Secondarily, you didn't answer my question about whether Obamacare is going to HELP her...
That's because it IS, and you can't refute it.. And, if you don't answer, I'll ask again, and again, and then again.
Excon
Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Now that you mention it there are people who post here seeking medical advice. Does anyone manage to get free medical attention and free medication if they don't have insurance and don't have any money?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 PM. |