DallasMike's Comments (232)

“When Bush was in office a Dem won look at your history!”

“I suggest that the NJ result suggests New Jersey voters don't like to re-elect politicians when the state is worse off now than when he was elected. Chris Matthews on Hardball also observed that the Republican ran a very positive campaign, and the Democrat ran an increasingly negative campaign.

So even a popular president can not -through his support - overcome basic incompetence by the governor.

And that's a good thing too.”

“DallasMike, stop showing how ignorant you are, the Virginia & NJ races had nothing to do with the President, the exit polls proved this and so does history. History shows that what ever party wins doing a national election, the off year afterwards, the generally lose some seats. So the Governor races is the norm, but the win in Upstate NY 23rd district is a blackeye on the rethugs. Govs.don't vote in congress, the dems picked up 2 more house seats.”

“It says much more about politics in those particular states than it does about the national situation. Politics is very much local.”

“In New Jersey

1) we elect people to public office,
2) they get caught in a corruption scandal and/or gross mismanagement,
3)we throw them out next election cycle.

It is like second nature in the Garden State. It has nothing to do with Obama or anyone else beyond the tunnels and bridges. As far as national politics goes, New Jersey is solidly blue.”

“If New Jersey had a Democratic Governor for over one hundred years it would speak volumes about the validity of Obama's message...­...you know.....l­ike it does in the 23rd for the neocons' platform.

It takes a special kind of insanity to blow a 100 year congressional seat.....a­nd the neocons proved it.....con­clusively.”

“Thats right - its important to keep people ignorant so corporations can maintain control of the country.”

“When underfunding is part of the problem, money is part of the answer.

Even you should be able to figure that out.”

“I believe you missed the point, entirely. Monies that would otherwise go toward imprisoning our youth would be SHIFTED to educating them instead. Same pool of money; different priorities. Personally, I'd rather see the money spent on something future-forward and positive, than maintaining a failing status quo, wouldn't you?”

“Go AWAY!”

“Here Here!! Mike from Dallas. Its exactly that attitude that is driving folks to the Democratic Party. "Our entitlements"; "Free ride" - My guess is that Hispanic labor built your house and cares for your lawn. Keep up the good work!”

“@at a Canadian film festival by Canadiens”

“didnt even know one existed”

“The movie was so big I never even heard about it. But it's a disgrace, nonetheless. Democratic leadership wouldn't even entertain impeaching Bush. despite more than ample grounds. If you don't hear the quantitati­ve/qualita­tive difference in the talk against Obama, you have selective hearing. What is going on is disgraceful, and dangerous. All you repugs are so worried about the budget -- aren't you at all worried about what all this inflamatory speech is doing to the cost of protection the democractically elected president? Let alone what it would do to this country if something should happen to him? Or are you hoping for martial law so that this country can finally get under the kind of control you really want?

Where is the Republican leadership on this? Are they just too busy grasping for power and lobbyist money? LIberals were traitors if they questioned Bush about the war, but the right can rant and inflame and somehow that's okay because one highly inappropriate film (don't know because I didn't see it but I'm giving you the argument) was made about Bush? If you were offended by that film, why aren't you going ballistic about what's going on now? Because he doesn't share your views?”

“I have two answers to this question:

1) ANY talk about assassinating a president is wrong. PERIOD.
2) I've never heard of this movie. I like movies and follow them pretty closely and I've never heard of it. So it's not like it had either widespread exposure or approval. As Wendy says above, truly a false-equivalency.

Oh, and "disgraceful" doesn't half cover it.”

“Tit-for-tat arguing is never the basis for a profitable discussion, especially when you've got to reach as far as you've done here.”

“Government running my life, or...
Corporations running my life...

oh, decisions decisions.”

“Votig againts the medicare Part D which was unfunded and did not give medicare the right to negotiate drug prices..

Voting against the tax cuts whihc even McCain voted against (the first one), staing that it woud run up deficts and only go to the rich.

Regards”

“ah when bush assumed power we had a budget surplus.

the bush tax cuts to the rich cost us more then modifying health care. if i remember right the democrats were opposed to those.

the war in iraq isnt even counted toward the deficit. if i remember right the democrats were oppose to those.

"a lie told often enough becomes the truth"
glenn beck
fox news information czar
the view 5/20/09”

“The point is, why weren't Republicans holding tea partie protestes and marching on Washington when bush was running up the deficit? Can't answer this question, can you?”

“A. It is Republicans
B. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/11/us/democrats-say-bush-s-tax-cuts-jeopardize-military-spending.html
C. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/09/23/MNGN78TF8B1.DTL
D. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-03-bush-budget_N.htm”

“And Bush and his gang lied about going to war killing over 4300 Americans, destroyed families, injured over 30,000. Why did you believe Bush about going into Iraq? I would imagine that you accepted his lies and justifications during the 8 years he was in office. And no that is not the end of the story for Bush, considering these families will never be the same again.
The "crux of the situation" is because Van Jones man who signed a petition about 9/11 and that's the reason he should be fired. Have you ever once looked at and listened to the conspiracy theories? Maybe if you did you might understand why people feel the way they do about 9/11.
Last time I checked we are allowed to express our "freedom of speech" in different ways, just like the Right, the birthers, the deathers, Hannity, Cheney, Limbaugh..­.........”

“Thanks for proving Mr. Friedlander's point. He could've believed aliens came down and attacked Manhattan for all I care. After all, the Bush administration was packed with folks who believed that the Earth was 6,000 years old or that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons. You know, silly stuff like that.

The difference is that those nonsensical ideas actually had a bearing on public policy. Namely a decision to go to war. Van Jones had no role other than advising on the creation of a green economy. Something, as Friedlander points out, which would've had non-partisan benefit at a time we all need an economic recovery. Instead we get more political point-scoring from the usual suspects who seem inclined to crucify by any means and for any reason. It's truly a waste of what was probably our best opportunity to get a credible green jobs sector off the ground in the US.”

“Please explain to me how Van Jone's personal beliefs about 9/11 - whatever they may be - effect his ability to do his job as a green jobs adviser? Back when John Ashcroft was appointed Attorney General and it was revealed that he belongs to a religious denomination that believes in speaking in tongues, demonic possession and the handling of poisonous snakes to prove one's faith, the pubs cried fowl, saying that a person's personal beliefs about things not directly related to that person's job were completely out of bounds. Funny how all of that respect for a person's private beliefs went out the window as soon as it was a black Democrat and not a white pub.”

“Much better that McCain and Palin,. thank you!”

“MUCH better than the "other" options.”

“Exact quote with link. Otherwise, bull hockey snot.”

“Nancy Pelosi denounced those who were using Nazi imagery. She did not call anyone a Nazi.
"But I guess your hate for anyone who does not share your views makes you deaf."”

“SEX change and IVF are NOT COVERED by most insurance already.”

“Tort reforms? You are kidding right? If a surgeon messes me up for life and I need constant care, he and the hospital are GOING to pay for it. YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT”

“Ah, so misled all the way down the board! Here's a frightening thought - Your doctor graduates from Liberty College or Oral Roberts University - Congratulations - you've just met a Death Panel Doctor. LOL>”

“--If a doctor wants to decline to accept government welfare program payments..­.there you go playing w/ words again! insurance is not welfare, and doctors should NOT be allowed to decline payments of any sort. Google the hippocratic oath.

--elected procedures. Tell me, does your current insurance provider cover sex changes? Invetro fertilization??? How about tin hat replacement?

Tough to have a real debate when some are in denial of basic facts.”

“--there are current government mandates on insurance? I think not. We wouldn't be having this grand discussion if there were.

--ah, the tragedy of the commons...­that's what government is for! ask a Democrat!

--I thought you JUST said you understood that insurance is different form welfare.
This is a civil rights issue, my friend.”

“9-We need to eliminate government mandates on hospitals and doctors in terms of how they charge, bill, or otherwise interact with their patients paying cash or using private insurance. If medicare, medicaid, chips, or other government programs come with regulations and controls fine. A doctor seeing a patient using those programs has to abide those rules for THAT patient. But not for the next patient who comes it the door and is paying cash or using private insurance. And if a doctor wants to decline to accept government welfare program payments, he ought to be as free to do that as he is to decline to deal with any particular private insurance.

10. Eliminate coverage for elected procedures like sex change operations and invetro fertilization.”

“(cont'd again)
8) I sense a double standard. You wish to weed out bad doctors. OK. How about the bad nurses, bad techs, bad MAs, and bad insurance companies? But that would require a government mandate, seeing how well self-policing works...

9) The most effective improvement in error prevention has been accomplished by the FAA and the anesthesiologists, both of whom took a non-blame approach to ferreting out the sources of errors and implemented uniform systems with check lists and feedback loops to decrease mistakes. Weeding out bad apples will help, but not nearly as much as creating a system to avoid the mistakes in the first place.

10) If you design an engine with too many moving parts, we call it a Rube Goldberg, a crazy contraption that routinely breaks down, requires extensive maintenance (and hence costs a lot), and may not do what you want it to. That aptly describes our current system of healthcare with its multiplicity of moving parts poorly hooked together: insurance companies, providers, and accessory services, each with different interests and demanding a different form/fax/web app. Your proposal to maintain private pools of insurance does nothing to improve this wasteful, error prone, and inept arrangement. If you want to cut costs and improve the health of yourself and your fellow citizens, simplify.”

“(cont'd)
4) Another consequence of the cherry picking: ~45M Americans are without any kind of health insurance. There are only 12M illegal immigrants in this country, so Beck and Dobbs and most of the bigots are spouting nonsense blaming the brown people.
5) De-linking insurance from employment does not suffice. Two thirds of all bankruptcies are due to medical calamities, which means that people are already shelling out for health care from their own pockets and it's bankrupting them. Making such contributions tax deductible only eliminates the tax burden and then only after the fact, not the cost of the care itself (co-pays, physical therapy, prescriptions costs, etc).
6) The costs of the uninsured fall on all of us. Why? Because ERs then see a higher flow of sicker and more difficult and more costly to treat patients. And Emergency Rooms are required to take all comers regardless of ability to pay. So unless you want to a) change the law and b) hire security guards for every ER in the country to dump the underinsured (even if the coverage inadequacy is voluntary) on the sidewalk, then we can't realistically reduce costs without covering everyone. No 'probably' about it.
7) "We need to find some better way to encourage and reward medical providers for providing true charity care." -- If you are rewarding charity, it isn't charity.”

“I don't know if Senator Sanders will get around to debating you, but I will. Setting aside the other points for the moment, I will contend that 5, 6, 8, and 9 are bad ideas and 2 and 7 are misleading and less effective than you think:

1) Insurance companies have no internal mandate to improve health. If you want better health for yourself and fellow citizens, then that has to be established as a goal. You disparage 'routine maintenance' but that yields better health: smoking cessation, mammography, pap smears, vaccination, blood pressure monitoring, colorectal cancer screening, etc, etc.

2) Insurance companies have a mandate to generate a profit. This fact guarantees diversion of funds from delivery of better health to CEO pockets.

3) Insurance companies exclude people from care. To take but one, Blue Shield of California was fined for 'red-lining,' ie, denying payment after delivery of services on the bogus basis of non-disclosure of pre-existing conditions (the conditions were NOT pre-existing). Perhaps monitoring for unfair, unlawful, and unhealthful exclusion of people is just another government mandate you don't want? Fact: insurance companies cherry pick the population for those who demand the least services (read: the cheapest) and then sell them health insurance. If you think your family, friends, and neighbors are the insurance industry's ideal customers, then you have another thing coming, as you will quickly discover should you ever develop a chronic illness, particularly one requiring ancillary services (like PT). (cont'd)”

“Actually Dallas Mike, the only legitimate answer is a single payer not for profit system that everyone can buy into. You can eliminate the tax rules and everything you want at that point But in the absence of single payer health insurance, anything else we do is meaningless in reality.”

“1st of all, Senator is spelled with an "o."

--serious tort reform. I think most of the country agrees with you. We need to lower prices.

--bad doctors...­can we talk about weeding out doctors while simultaneously lowering prices? I don't think so.

--there's a cap on the number of medical schools? I believe we have adequate educational opportunities for those who qualify. There are as many as the market allows.

--tax deductible premiums? Soooo, you're basically asking the government to subsidize premium costs. how does that differ from asking them to shoulder the costs entirely?

--"Consider how many issues with health care (loss of coverage at the worst possible time, not enough options, etc) can be traced right back to having health insurance tied to employment­." ***what?? the problem is that insurers have been allowed to drop people on a whim. it's not limited to just your employers' plan.”

“6-Elimination of most all government mandates on insurance. Don't force a single man to buy a plan that covers pregnancy and delivery if he doesn't want to. Don't force Catholics to buy plans that cover abortion or birth control if they don't want to. Don't force me to buy a plan that covers a 1001 experimental procedures and every possible ailment under the sun if that is not what I want. If I do want such coverage, fine. But if not, let me buy a bare bone plans that meets my needs. Let me buy health insurance across State lines. This whole area ties in very closely to understanding that insurance is NOT the same as welfare.

7-We need to find some better way to encourage and reward medical providers for providing true charity care.

8-We probably need to find some way to properly address those need medical care but simply cannot afford to pay for it. This has to be done without encouraging people to live on the dole. And we probably have to concede that such welfare will not provide the same level of care as those who have private means. But we must avoid the liberal goal of equality of suffering. Just because we cannot afford to give platinum care to everyone does not mean should deny the ability of people to get platinum care if that is what they want to pay for themselves.”

“Hardly the case.”

“So Rush has a song about a white guy to go with his "Barack the magjc Negro" song?

Rush has accused a white guy of voting for Bush because h'es white the same way he accused Colin Powell of voting for Obama because he's black?

That's just Rush. Others have spoken about Glen Beck. Did you miss the stories about Republican officials circulating racist emails about the President?

I find it ironic that during Bush's administration, criticizing any Bush policy (let alone the man himself) was "not supporting our troops" or worse, "treason" because we were at war.

Yet Republicans call Obama a socialist, communist, marxist, nazi, baby killer, and on and on - we're still at war, so why is it ok now to attack the President personally, beyond his policies?”

“Minorities are on the loosing side of just about any sociological statistic you can think of. Some think it's their own fault and other's think external forces play the major role. Until their is relative parity across the board there will be bitching, and your position on high will be an uneasy perch.”

“As a fellow Texan Dallas Mike I dont know where to start.....­except that you are whistlin thru the wheat fields of Nebraska!

White guys like you, who I am sure hated the civil rights movement and I am sure hate any rights for gays use the one black man who, as the entire video shows, started a fight, got dragged down, lied to the media about losing his job, having no insurance as an example of "reverse racism" as if that's even possible..­.we have this coming

....after stealing this land from the Indians, buying and selling Africans, importing Chinese labors to build the West and not paying them, stealing the Southwest from Mexico thru a trumped up war.

White people hope that those we walked all over with impunity since 1492 do not come back and treat us the same way we treated them.. if they do, so be it.

After all, what was good for the goose ( those we trampled all over) might not be as easy to swallow to the gander ( white man) so might I suggest some of you hatefilled white people get a grip and attempt to make peace before you remind them why they have a right to seek revenge...­.

after all, white man has always believed revenge is in order and if any race has an ass beating coming, it is ours. Its people like Dallas Mike that make me ashamed to be both white and Texan.”

“so rush et al aren't bringing up racism?”

“Glenn Beck called Obama a racist with a deep hatred of white people, and I didn't see any right-thinking conservative smack him down on that one.
Funny how white males are suddenly so sensitive to "race" issues. I wonder how they'd feel if they'd had to endure institutionalized racism for centuries, instead of the six months they've had the sting of a black President to feel oppressed about.
And I'm not sure what you're talking about in St. Louis, but at Claire McCaskill's Town Hall, it was a poster of Rosa Parks that was torn up, yet the black lady who had it got thrown out. Union thug? Have you ever read the history of the labor movement? Thugs weren't invented by the unions.”

“Glenn Beck called Obama a racist (& is losing sponsors as a result). Rush Limbaugh called Obama and Sotomayer "reverse racists." Where were you during the whole Gates controversy? Plenty of talk about racism on Fox during the aftermath (HINT: it wasn't about the police officers' actions). When white people talk about racism, do you not hear?”

“Were you DallasMike?”

“If yours (health insurance) excludes others and continues to exclude others due to it being overpriced for others...

Most of us are going to be on the side of helping people stay alive.

F a profit. People's lives are more important.”

“There is going to be no "free" health care. People will be able to BUY into a public system, if they so choose.

And as a matter of fact, several countries have a blend of private/public coverage AND universal care. Simple way to go would be to offer people a basic plan and if they want to add upgraded "private" coverage, well they'd be free to do so.”