TH3

Things like this are exactly why I did not re-register as a Republican. The parts of the GOP that seem to run things have become like a bad labor union....nothing that any of their members can do is wrong....and we will defend them them till the end. There is nothing that this guy has done that is defensible on any level, from any angle, from any viewpoint that isn't totally wrong or hypocritical. When the GOP lives consistently by their own self professed virtues - and call out their "own"....I'll be back.

#11. Only in America do conservatives fall for a fabricated "made in Canada" list.

Still waiting for documentation/back up the the black market costs that make hc in other countries equal in costs to ours.....our is it just smoke and conjecture like ^^

oooooo you got me....as with most other posters....and the GOP these days.....when presented with something substantive it is more interesting to find a gotcha moment than deal with actual issues.....

Here is my voting record: - Bush 1 - Perot - Dole - Bush 2 - 2004 No vote for President - 2008 - Obama - (sorry - Palin was a dealbreaker) - Johnson I have NEVER defended the ACA - I think we should start with a clean sheet of paper and design a new HC funding and delivery system. I have never really defended BO - I have said all along he is mediocre at best. Your problem with me is I challenge the posters on this board to come up with something better than BO sucks. Citizens are hungry for leadership in this country.....BO sucks is not leadership. If the GOP were to take the lead with STRONG, pragmatic, executable proposals that were developed without lobbyists - they would strong position to put the US on the right track. - Develop clean sheet HC funding and delivery. We have to get our HC costs on par with the rest of the world and eliminate employer funding - it makes our private sector carry costs that our international competitors do not. - Clean up the tax code - for real - eliminate all deductions over a 10-20 span - no exceptions. The tax code has become the single biggest form of federal govt intervention. The deductions developed over the last decades are more than our entire budget.....from there you can adequately reset the tax rates. Want to know why your taxes feel high - you are making up for someone else s deductions. - I don't have a well developed answer - but middle class income growth is the key to our economy. Our current economic condition is from stale demand - the leverage the middle class used to fuel economic growth from 1998-2008 is gone and we are back to a new norm of static growth in the middle class. I tend to think this situation is the result of globalization, technology. We are in a wage growth dead end right now - low demand = lots or resumes = no wage pressure = no wage growth = no demand growth. We somehow need to get out of this circle.

Federal taxes are pretty much as low as thet have been in the modern era....in fact much lower than the Reagan era 20 vs 17 percent GDP. I dont think that the ACA is the most effecient delivery structure for HC at all. Not sure what you mean by voter fraud.....but if you think that screwing with voting rules is one of your best strategies to win an election something is wrong. Tell me where I am not

I did not vote for BO....just telling like it is.....our county was in my 50 years....at its lowest point in 2008-2009...at the end of GW. Sorry if I do not think if Obama Sucks is a good platform

1. Did not start two unneeded wars. 2. Did not cut taxes to unrealistically low revenue rate (15 percent gdp) without any corresponding cut in expeditures. 3. Started the process of getting our country on par with health care with the rest of the civilized world. 4. Did not participate in jiggering voting rules to disenfranchise voters. BO has been mediocre at best.....but I would say our country is going to be in much better shape than when he took office.

Single payer ~~~ Voucher. == Choice

Exactly.

Richard Tol, a professor of economics at the University of Sussex in the United Kingdom and an expert on climate change

Let's not construe "conservative" with anti liberal. I have NEVER proposed any type of HC structure, supported the ACA etc....I have merely pointed out that the USA pays pretty much 2x for health than the rest of the industrialized world. I do have some structural concepts that might be interesting - I have shared them with health care professionals as well as corporate leaders with positive comments but on this board anything that doesn't rhyme with "Obama Sucks" doesn't get real airplay. There is nothing conservative about the way we deliver HC through mandated employer provision. There is nothing conservative about not coming up with a pragmatic executable alternative to the ACA. I would lay this alternative out but I believe that most posters here don't want to talk about actual solutions but more dream like no government panaceas. AFA GW - Yes one can say there are not enough data points etc....but the data points that are there strongly suggest that the earth is warming and humans have there fingers in it....the CONSERVATIVE thing to do is take heed....there is nothing conservative about ignoring data or relegating it to merely political talk. If humans are causing GW and it continues - then by the end of the century sea levels will be raised by over a foot based on the current levels of rise and that wipes out TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS in coastal development. There is nothing conservative about ignoring that this is a possibility. The title of this thread already presumes that any argument not on the side of the OP is a liar..... If you read my earlier posts you would see that i don't believe there is a pragmatic executable solution to replacing FF with non carbon alternatives. As far as the Singer article - come on...if someone had posted a link that was not in line with your thoughts and the author of that article had been on the payroll of industry participants - you would immediately call him or her out as not credible - Gotta keep your standards equal or your own credibility is questioned......

Dude - R Fred is a fraud, bought and paid for by the Tobacco people, chemical companies and now the fossil fuel industry. If people on this board are going to vilify lame ass left wing people - as least live by your own standards and don't take up defense of a TOTAL fraud. I am a conservative republican by the way. Do you own research if you don't like my links.....

Couple things - I have not seen any legislation proposed/talked about etc from the "left" in several years - Yes BO is tightening the restrictions on coal plants - but the forces who do not believe in legislation regarding GW have won the war - there will be no GW legislation in the US. While legislation is dead - the science continues. Second - Whose lies? Are we saying that the thermometers are lying? 2013 was - what - 4th warmest on record? So we have the science community maintaining that this is continued evidence. So the right wing points fingers at the science community and says they are liars and simply want to take over the world.... I suggest you read the article from Wired regarding coal plants - it is a very straight forward view on the demand of power to raise hundreds of millions from poverty transfixed with the pollutants and the Chinese government attempts to balance these two. Seems the Chinese don't have an issue with accepting the science of GW - they are just at the point of balancing its use with its detriments.

Still waiting for OC's data that shows other industrialized countries costs are the same as USA due to shadow costs

Here is a great article http://www.wired.com/2014/03/clean-coal/

Yes good ole Siefried Sawyer....also on the right side of so many things....like UV does not call skin cancer, CFC does not cause ozone depletion, and second hand smoke is inconsequential (probably forgot to ask flight attendants). Might want to try to hitch your wagon up to someone with a better batting average.... http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/S._Fred_Singer

Cutting a link from a clearly slanted source is hardly weight.....

So a graph with actual data and math gets skewered - but a cut and paste article from a propaganda site is cool?

Better check your stats sharky....BO has only a fraction of executive orders that most presidents have.. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php Really - "He hates this country" ? Come on statements like that just undermine any other relevant statements you might come up with...

OCinBuffalo, on 21 March 2014 - 01:49 PM, said: Yet again you drop another thoughtless assertion. Our health care costs ARE on par with the rest of the world's. The difference is: we report our health care cost straight up, all of them. They do not. They look at what "they" are paying, ONLY in terms of what the government is paying. They don't account for side payments(because they are illegal, but everybody does it) or private insurance in their "per capital health care spending" charts. You need to understand the very real difference between what is actually happening, and some report you get sitting at your school board meeting. They are not the same thing. What you will get if we do what "everybody else" does: sure, you'll get your nice report that says costs have gone down, and therefore your district has to pay less. And, if that's all you care about, getting that report, then fine, but: it's a lie. It's a lie, because instead of really paying for health care, the government is just setting an abritrary, low reimbursement rate, and then? The providers start taking the "side payments" to deliver care/see your health care enrollees first, which make them whole. The teacher's union will work something out with the local hospital, so teacher's get first crack, but you aren't in that union, so either you grease some palms at the emergency room, or, you wait for 3 days. That's the reality of the rest of the world's fake, "low health care costs" here. You want nice cost reports that show you're doing a good job on the school board? Hell, I can print out all sorts of nice reports for you using this: http://d3js.org/ but the underlying data will all be a lie. Rather than actually cutting costs, all the rest of the world does: move those costs from one payer to another, and report on the difference. Single Payer: one of the biggest lies ever, because in any Single Payer system, you will always find multiple payers. Always. You want to focus on costs, fine, let's do that. But, just stop with this is "rest of the world" crap. Again, your assertion is completely false. For one - i have not proposed ANY HC programs - so get off my back. Second - got ANY reports etc that show these "shadow costs" that other countries have? Waiting for OC to answer this......

Why is it wrong to use anecdotal evidence to prove GW but OK to disprove......?

Bueller......

Apparently Not!

My point is BOTH observations sound so stupid.... Please tell me you get it.....