It's quite obvious you didn't even bother to check out any of the videos i linked you to..

greed yes.. but greed set up by the fiddling with the market in the name of social engineering.

social engineering gone horribly afoul..

and the ones that caused it point the fingers at the ones who threw up the warning signs.. warning signs that were outright ignored..

Pelosi, Frank and other House Democrats had plenty of opportunity to get on board and help put the brakes on the runaway train but they kept shoveling coal on the fire instead, calling the brakemen racist..

"start kickin' in?"

Are you kidding me? The top percentile already covers way over half the federal tax reciepts.. and they don't just swim in the rest.. it's mostly invested throughout the market so that other people and small businesses have access to money to borrow and banks have money to lend..

get off your populist bent..

I don't want to be on a "fixed income". I want to be able to earn more someday than I do today..

populism results in stagnation.

self reliance results in growth.. of the self, of the family, of the community...

non-responsive.. you didn't answer the question

Right! and they insist on dragging a couple of "Republicans" along so that they can make the claim that it's a "bipartisan" effort.. all for the sole purpose of giving themselves cover in the next election cycle...

Not taking sides in this particular arguement..

but a question if you would so endulge me:

To how much of another's prosperity are you entitled so that you might enjoy a comfortable life?

no link? no demographics? no methodology?

I bet I could design a poll that would show you 85% of people would be willing to let me put a .45 to their brainstem and pull the trigger..

It's all in how you ask it and to whom you ask it..

how many people in this poll? a couple thousand?

where was the poll taken? downtown Detroit? The CNN pressroom? A homeless shelter?

come on..

if the statement is "if I have a choice..." maybe sure plenty might see it as a good idea

if the statement is "you have no choice but to enroll through us..", I'm certain you'll get a different response..

Can you afford $15,000 per year in insurance?

Would you rather go to jail?

Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM

Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64

Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis? Bombshell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4

Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and Democrats are Clueless on Freddie Mac Fannie Mae and the financial credit crisis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxMInSfanqg

Democrats LIE about ECONOMIC Bailout - video of Barney Frank DOING NOTHING ABOUT BANKING CRISIS then pointing fingers at Republicans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HQWk1Wp3L4

Barney Frank in 2005: What Housing Bubble?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW5qKYfqALE

Watch out! You might get what you're after!
Cool Baby! Strange but not a stranger.
I. am. an. or_di_na_ry guy.. Burnin Down the House!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNnAvTTaJjM

what poll? Show me...

<---------Is wondering what modern application leaches have besides catching catfish...

PELOSI: Buy a $15,000 Policy or Go to Jail
JCT Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail
Friday, November 06, 2009


Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”

Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:

“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]

- - - - - - - - - -

“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]

- - - - - - - - - -


“Criminal penalties

Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:

• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

###

http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=153583

Remarks Before the Rules Committee, H.R. 3962 and the Republican Alternative, "Common Sense Health Care Reforms and Affordability Act"
Friday, November 06, 2009


(Remarks as Prepared)

Madame Chairman,

The people have spoken: they do not want a trillion-dollar government plan to replace their health care. Republicans have listened to the American people; it is clear from the Speaker’s health care bill, H.R. 3962, the Democratic majority has not.

The bill Speaker Pelosi crafted over the last three months, behind closed doors – which doubled in size from 1,000 pages to 2,000 pages – will do lasting damage to our economy, medical innovation, and heap mountains of additional debt on our children and grandchildren, especially when combined with an unpaid for bill to address the flawed Medicare physician payment system.

This bill will kill American jobs. Using methodology developed by the President’s top economic advisor, this bill could cause us to lose another 5 million jobs, something we can’t afford to do when our unemployment rate just reached 10.2% and shows no signs of improvement.

The Democrats’ bill will cut Medicare – by up to one-half trillion dollars, which will harm the health care 11 million seniors currently have and like.

The Democrats’ bill will pile debt on our children.

The Democrats’ bill will increase the federal commitment to health care by $600 billion according to the Congressional Budget Office. And an earlier report by the non-partisan Medicare actuary confirmed that the bill approved by Ways and Means would bend the curve upward, meaning health care would consume an even faster-rising share of our economy.

Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag has stated that, “The single most important thing we can do to improve the long-term fiscal health of our nation is slow the growth rate in health care costs.”

If the Budget Director is to be believed, then the worst thing we could do for our nation’s long-term fiscal health is to increase the growth rate in health care costs by enacting the Speaker’s health care bill.

The Democrats’ bill will raise taxes by over $700 billion. Many of those tax increases will hit families with incomes below $250,000, something the President has repeatedly promised he would not do.

The Democrats’ bill will use federal funds to pay for abortions.

The Democrats’ bill will allow taxpayer money to subsidize health insurance for millions of illegal immigrants.

I share the commitment of each of the Members on the panel here today that we must do something to make our health care system better and more efficient. But the solution put forward by the Majority’s deep flaws make it one I cannot support.

Republicans have a better solution and I am here to let the American people know, and urge the Rules Committee to make in order for the purposes of a substitute, the House Republican alternative to this government takeover of health care.

Let’s be clear about the Republican bill: it delivers what the American people want – lower health care costs.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Republican health care reforms would reduce premiums by up to 3 percent for Americans who get insurance through a large business, up to 8 percent for Americans without employer sponsored insurance, and up to 10 percent for those working for a small business (50 or fewer employees). CBO has not made a claim that the Democrats’ bill would lower premiums.

The Republican bill will significantly reduce health care premiums, insures millions of Americans, guarantees those with pre-existing conditions have access to quality, affordable health care and does all of this without raising taxes, without spending $1 trillion we don’t have, without cutting Medicare and without putting some new Health Czar in between doctors and patients, which is what the Democrat majority does in their government takeover bill.

Americans’ health care is too important and too complex to risk on Democrats gamble. Instead, Republicans are promoting a step-by-step approach to comprehensive health care reform, and the first step is to make health insurance affordable for families, affordable for small businesses and affordable for America.

Finally, unlike the Democrat plan that increases taxes almost immediately but delays health reforms for several years, the Republican plan will immediately begin to lower costs.

Madame Chairman, clearly the bill offered by the Speaker is not what the American people want. Americans are clamoring for lower cost health care and that is what the Republican plan offers – lower costs health care without tax increases, without Medicare cuts, without adding to the deficit and without eliminating jobs.

###

http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=153581

he also doesn't speak from his heart.. if he spoke from his heart he runs the risk of letting the cat out of the bag, that he doesn't give a cold dog turn about out military, that he doesn't give two cold dog turds about stimulating growth, he doesn't give three cold dog turds about protecting our image overseas.

all he cares about is trashing us overseas, dismantling and inhibiting our military, destroying its morale, stoking the flames of racism and wiping out the private sector of the economy..

every move he's made for a solid year now has been to those ends..

companies are having trouble hiring because they are having trouble keeping business..

All this bail out business and the picking and choosing that the stimulus bill has built into it has everybody guessing who's gonna get bailed out next and who's in line for the next round of stimulus money..

I still say that if they had just come in and put a temporary halt to income taxes and capital gains taxes and actually encouraged growth, rather than discouraging it, the breaks might have been put on the downward slide a long time ago.. and yes, I'm refering both to Bush and Obama..

Too big to fail means 'monopoly'.. banks go down all the time..

If they had just let the fire cleanse the forest, growth would be on the way by now..

instead, still have ever increasing unemployment and now they're telling us to get used to it, that it'll be around for a while..

anyone remember when unemployment was down around 4-5% and the media was all telling us about the recession we were in..

Bush's 4-5% looking pretty good right about now..

bullet proof vests aren't all that hard to breech.. they have their weak points..

even so, I don't wait for anyone in any house other than my own to look out for me.. be it this president, the last president or any other president..

Part of living in a free society is the responsibility of being self reliant.. and not waiting for someone else to look out for you.

goes to motive..

any reports of his yelling religious sayings while doing his killing? or that his actions were motivated by his religious beliefs?

That's the difference..

so quick, you are, to assume another's meaning..

yes, we know.. there have been many references in the already-existing threads on the Ft Hood subject..

from American Heritage Dictionary

psychopath n 1. A person with an antisocial personality disorder, especially one mainfested in aggressive, perverted, criminal or amoral behavior.

No where in this definition is there any indicant that the person isn't or cannot be held accountable for his behaviour or not being in his right mind.

nice try.. next.


and are you really asserting that Maj Hasan should not be held to account for his actions?? really????

I;m a conservative. I make no attempt to diguise that.. but my conservatism has nothing to do with religion. not a thing.

Liberalism does not equate to tolerance

Conservatism does not equate to extremism

and no amount of empty headed howling will make it otherwise.

I no more identify with the "God hates fags" church in Kansas, whatever they call themselves, than I do with the Trinity United Black Liberation Theology Church. Both preach intolerance and intolerance I reject, no matter which side of the spectrum it comes from..

And there's at least as much intolerance on the Left as there is on the Right..

It's tolerance that allows people to live in people, in coexistence.

Stating that "Liberalism" tends to peace as "Conservatism" tends to voilence is a gross over-simplification.. and a sophomoric, ideolgically-driven, hyperpartisan way of thinking..

thanks for helping establish a middle ground

That's a convenience a soldier doesn't enjoy..

when you raise your hand and swear your oath to the Constitution, you don't have that right anymore..

the only order a soldier is obliged not to follow is an unlawful one. Being deployed to a war zone doesn't fit that description..

You follow your conscience.. Soldiers follow lawful orders from superior officers..