HuffPost Social News

LA2000's Comments (33)

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25 of 33
John McCain Could Lose Senate Primary To Tea Party Supporter

John McCain Could Lose Senate Primary To Tea Party Supporter

Commented Nov 21, 2009 at 19:45:47 in Politics

“Or... McCain could pull a Lieberman, lose the primary, and run (and win) as an independent. Either way, the republican party as we know it today becomes weaker and the radical, cannibalistic conservatives look less and less electable.”

redsongia replied on Nov 21, 2009 at 22:41:00

“McCain would have no trouble running as a Lieberman style independent with all of Cindy's money.

Leaving the GOP might give him his best years in the Senate.”

pinkoursula replied on Nov 21, 2009 at 19:50:19

“Or JD could run as a "Conservative" a la Hoffman! Oh my, wouldn't that be fun.”
huffingtonpost entry

Five Questions for Meg Whitman

Commented Sep 22, 2009 at 19:15:43 in Politics

“For someone who is allegedly for lower taxes, she certainly had no problem raising fees on eBay sellers.

She is out of her element. I can't imagine a more ill timed advance into politics given her resume and resources.”

newleaf replied on Sep 23, 2009 at 00:22:15

“"She is out of her element. I can't imagine a more ill timed advance into politics..­." - why did that remind me so of Sarah Palin? Hope Whitman gets her ass handed to her, just like Palin did.”
The Trigger Option: An Ultimatum To Insurers

The Trigger Option: An Ultimatum To Insurers

Commented Sep 05, 2009 at 01:39:07 in Politics

“A trigger option? Option, as in optional?

How many violations until this option is triggered? If just one company violates one rule, is the option triggered? If one company violates the rules 10 times is the option triggered?

This won't work because there is no hard metric that would automatically trigger the option. It still requires a politician to pull that trigger, and that will never happen. We will just get a bunch of excuses about how the whole industry shouldn't be punished for the sins of a few. You know, like the excuses we hear from lawmakers and regulators about financial industry abuses.

No thank you. This idea only serves to provide absolution to some cowardly politicians who don't have the spine to do the right thing by their constituents. It wouldn't solve the problem.

And it certainly wouldn't provide better healthcare.”
Right Wingers Wreak Havoc on Philadelphia Town Meeting

Right Wingers Wreak Havoc on Philadelphia Town Meeting

Commented Aug 05, 2009 at 17:02:09 in Eyes & Ears

“If you really want tort reform, then most certainly you want the government fully invested in the finances of our healthcare system. The more invested our government becomes, the more "on the hook" they are for those legal costs and the more pressure they will feel to do something to lower those costs.

The fastest path to tort reform is single payer. So rather than slow the whole thing down, why not hop on board?”

steve52 replied on Aug 05, 2009 at 17:35:54

“Under single payer nobody has to sue to pay for ongoing medical care: it's already paid for. Tort "reform" is a red herring anyway, as malpractice costs are less than 1% of total health spending. Tort "reform" is code for denying access to the courts for the average person. The real issue in malpractice is the cost of malpractice insurance, which is not driven by the cost of litigation, as shown in states which have capped awards but have seen no reduction in insurance rates.”
A Solution to Our Health Care Crisis

A Solution to Our Health Care Crisis

Commented Jul 26, 2009 at 19:19:55 in Politics

“Well, considering the cost of medical care, expecting your health insurance to cost less than your cable bill, less than your cellphone bill, less than a tank of gas, less than an game for your XBox, is probably a little unrealistic, certainly in the short term.

We are all healthy until we are not. Cancer, car accidents, even heart attacks, happen to "healthy" people every day. What do you do with no insurance, no work (because you are in the hospital), all those student loans, and a $14,000 hospital bill for a "minor" crisis like a car accident? You will so wish you could go back and sign up for that $125 a month HMO plan. It will seem like a screaming bargain compared to even a minor hospital stay.

While watching your money is good, this is penny wise/ pound foolish. It is good intentioned thinking like this that has the whole system crashing down.”

bro43 replied on Jul 26, 2009 at 22:55:10

“In the late 70's catastophic insurance for a family of four was less than $100/year. Yes that's right per year not per month and that got you up to $25,000 of coverage. That was before HMO's were pushed on employers and $25,000 was enough to cover just about all medical bills one could incur in a year. The insurance plan my parents had was guarenteed renewable and not cancelable for any condition. Government intrusion into healthcare spawned HMO's and the like and this has lead to huge increases in costs of service. What is needed is less government regulation and more choice for the patient. When the doctor patient relationship is restored costs will be reigned in once again. Get government out of the healthcare business is the answer not more involvement by the bureaucrats.”
A Solution to Our Health Care Crisis

A Solution to Our Health Care Crisis

Commented Jul 26, 2009 at 19:03:57 in Politics

“This is an interesting point of view but it wouldn't be a health care solution, it would be a political solution. It would fail to address the underlying crisis, which would continue to rage on.

Those upper income people and those under 34 that you mention that fail to get insurance still get in car accidents. Still get cancer. Still have heart attacks. Still break a bone. When they show up with their uninsured crisis, the costs can be enormous. $75,000 a year is nothing when their cancer treatment is anywhere from $40,000 to $200,000. And when they can't pay, you do. The costs come in city and state budget deficits that require higher taxes and in ever escalating premiums for everyone who has done the right thing and purchased insurance. As those premiums rise, more middle income and upper income people opt out and the crisis continues.

The only real solution will involve coverage for everyone. Everyone needs a hospital at some point. It's only fair that everyone pay something to keep the system functioning.”

jjfaux replied on Jul 26, 2009 at 21:16:01

“I agree that those who opt out of insurance will have to be covered by someone, the problem is that the cancer treatments and personal crises you mentioned are the things most of those people want coverage for. The problem is that insurance companies are required to cover far far beyond this. Invitro fertilization, sleep studies, and a variety of other procedures and extra care. Everyone pays for this by higher premiums. Do you not think $25 a month for catastrophic insurance only would entice more people into getting coverage. I wouldnt' even mind being forced to pay that. What i object to , is paying thousands of dollars a year when i have never had a medical problem in my life.”
Dear AMA: I Quit!

Dear AMA: I Quit!

Commented Jun 11, 2009 at 20:15:55 in Politics

“The republican argument is that the government is so big and powerful that it would provide benefits at prices that private industry couldn't match, thereby destroying the private healthcare system and creating a backdoor to nationalized medical care.

Of course, what escapes the republicans is that better benefits at lower prices is exactly what the American people want. The unfettered free market has had decades to get their act together and they haven't managed it. And while republicans like to bash government run organizations as inefficient and ineffective, they seem to forget that our police departments, fire departments, and military are all government run organizations that manage to do a pretty fantastic job.”
Rebranding Will Not Be Enough For These Republicans

Rebranding Will Not Be Enough For These Republicans

Commented May 05, 2009 at 09:25:25 in Politics

“You haven't been paying attention. Any republican with an ounce of common sense can see that the Obama administration is not nearly the scary, left wing boogey man that the GOP tries to make it out to be. Its actually very much the centrist government that George Bush promised (remember that old chestnut about being a "uniter not a divider") but never delivered. This is what the center looks like. Get used to it. The republican right wing is out of the game, probably for a decade or more. This is as close to right wing as you are going to get for a very long while.

In fact, the only group truly disenchanted at the moment is the far left.”
The Credit Card Debt Crisis: The Next Economic Domino

The Credit Card Debt Crisis: The Next Economic Domino

Commented Feb 26, 2009 at 02:32:13 in Business

“The republicans and the Bush administration pushed cheap credit so that middle class americans wouldn't realize that their actual wages were falling. If they could get Americans to support their traditional standard of living on credit, the theory goes that the middle class wouldn't really notice or object to the declining income. At least in the short term.

And here we are. Middle class debt helped prop the economy up, but now that they have been bled dry, the credit industry will simply dispose of them like a spent tube of toothpaste. They will leave government to clean up the carnage.”
Obama's State of the Union Address: An Epitaph for the GOP

Obama's State of the Union Address: An Epitaph for the GOP

Commented Feb 25, 2009 at 07:20:35 in Politics

“I may be registered republican, but there isn't anyone I would rather have in charge at this critical moment than President Obama. We will all be better off for his success.”

ecsiwingo replied on Feb 25, 2009 at 08:22:29

“YOU are no registerd repulican!”
Eyeless in Gaza

Eyeless in Gaza

Commented Jan 13, 2009 at 06:43:28 in World

“You are, of course, welcome to travel to Israel, stand on a rooftop in Ashkelon, and face those "bottle rockets" yourself.

The fact of the matter is, it takes 2 sides to make peace. It only takes one side to force surrender. If Hamas was interested in peace, it did not behoove them to fire rockets at anyone - and certainly not to fire first. It was cocky, arrogant, foolhardy, and will ultimately only lead to more palestinian suffering and their own demise.

The Palestinian cause as a military cause is completely lost. Prolonging it only prolongs the needless suffering. The quicker all parties accept this, the quicker a two state solution can be implemented and the full force of the international community can be utilized to improve the lives of Palestinians.”
Eyeless in Gaza

Eyeless in Gaza

Commented Jan 11, 2009 at 07:05:42 in World

“For those who find Israel's response too strong for their taste, keep a couple of things in mind:

1) What kind of crazy leadership provokes a fight with a much stronger opponent without expecting that they, and their citizens, will face a most severe response? What possible rationale would any leader have for starting a fight they knew their citizens were destined to lose? The only people that care less about the civilians of Gaza than Israel are the leaders of Hamas. Note to Hamas leadership: If you don't like getting punched, don't pick a fight.

2) How long would Mexico be allowed to fire mortars at civilians in San Diego before the US military responded with the full force at its disposal? San Diego was, after all, Mexican territory at one point.”

dwdp replied on Jan 11, 2009 at 21:19:08

“"What kind of crazy leadership provokes a fight with a much stronger opponent without expecting that they, and their citizens, will face a most severe response?"

Nelson Mandela (African National Congress)
Gerry Adams (IRA)
Charles De Gaulle (French Resistance)
George Washington (American Revolutionaries)

.. and they were all called terrorists at the time.”

ARBOC2 replied on Jan 11, 2009 at 17:49:37

“A better explanation of Israel's alleged right to defend itself would be to compare the outrageous assault against Gaza would be for the US military to retaliate against a bottle rocket attack from Mexico upon San Diego with a nuclear attack upon Mexico City as our response to our right to defend ourself..”

seadickrun replied on Jan 11, 2009 at 12:41:56

“"What kind of crazy leadership provokes a fight with a much stronger opponent without expecting that they, and their citizens, will face a most severe response?"

George Washington was the first to come to mind. Wouldn't we describe the Boston Tea Party as an act of terrorism under today's language? And this was only over taxes, not being driven off of one's land.”

slinkymom replied on Jan 11, 2009 at 10:17:56

“We cannot ignore the fact that (I) is occupying land that was supposed to for for the (P's). If we took away part of Mexico, invaded their land, and then prevented them from freedom of movement, what would you expect their response to be?

I don't excuse the leaders on either side, both have valid concerns with the other. Both are using methods to "resolve" their issues that are designed to ensure a continuation of this bat-tle and result in the loss of innocents.

I cannot help but point to the people in American who have strongly disagreed with Bush's at-tack on Ir-aq. Sadly, those that don't want vio-lence to be the answer are rarely the ones in charge.”
<em>This Week in Magazines</em>: Tone Deaf Republicans, Rock Stars, and Subprime Wolves

This Week in Magazines: Tone Deaf Republicans, Rock Stars, and Subprime Wolves

Commented Nov 24, 2008 at 02:08:18 in Media

“There are plenty of people who take perfumes seriously. Just check out basenotes.net, search a fragrance, and you will find a world of people commenting with great seriousness on everything from the most mundane to the most rarified of fragrances.

It is the huffpost of scent.”
The Tragedy of Sarah Palin

The Tragedy of Sarah Palin

Commented Nov 01, 2008 at 19:18:18 in Politics

“I disagree with the entire premise of this article. Sarah Palin could never have been a "GOP Obama" for the very same reason that a xeroxed $20 bill is never going to be confused for the real thing. Because it isn't.

You might have been able to make a convincing argument that the GOP could have camouflaged the "real" Sarah Palin and created a construct to fool the voters into thinking she was actually a change agent... except for one thing. They tried that. Bridge to Nowhere. Maverick-y maverickness. Humble Soccer mom life. Vaunted ethics. Each and everyone of those qualities melted under scrutiny and turned the GOP credibility gap into yawning credibility canyon.”
huffingtonpost entry

Off the Meds

Commented Oct 17, 2008 at 02:44:46 in Politics

“If your ordinary folk friends think borrowing even more money (with interest no less) is a better idea than actually paying for this meltdown here and now (with our taxes), then they must be very rich or very poor because they don't know the first thing about handling money.

Your republican friends have charged more to the national credit card in eight years than the entire nation borrowed in the other 224 years combined! How do you think that gets paid back? Taxes. So you can thank George W. and the republicans the next time you get your tax bill.

And by the way, the republicans would like your vote so they can rack up a few more trillion at your expense before you wise up.”
huffingtonpost entry

Ifill Book Public Weeks Before McCain Agreed To Have Her Moderate VP Debate

Commented Oct 01, 2008 at 18:11:14 in Politics

“They are revving up the excuse machine so they can innoculate their supporters from a bad performance by Palin.

If Palin does poorly, it's because Ifill skewed the debate with liberal "gotcha" questions because she is biased. If Palin scrapes by, its a testament to the governor's knowledge and fortitude that she managed to do as well as she did given the moderator's bias. If Palin does really well, it's a miracle! The democrats threw their most liberal moderator at her and she is still standing.

Anyone who has ever watched Ifill moderate a debate knows she is first rate. This is the republican effort to stir up some whisper stuff to help soften the blow of a sad Palin showing. They can't call Ifill out for her color, so this is how they discredit her. In the republican proof, Ifill is black and therefore biased. They can't say that out loud, so they will say it with a book title.”

martinspringfield replied on Oct 01, 2008 at 18:47:37

“After watching them try to hang 30 years of Reaganomics on Nancy Pelosi for hurting their feelings..­. after watching Karl Rove trying to blame the Iraq invasion on the Democrats.­... I think they will just about try anything. They're beyond infantile, beyond ludicrous, and their supporters don't realize how infantile and ludicrous they look supporting them.

All you need to know about Sarah Palin is that she took off for a half day flight to Alaska after her water broke while carrying a premature child already diagnosed with Down's Syndrome.

And all you need to know about McCain is he was such an impulsive clown he picked her after a 15 minute interview. I in all honesty wouldn't let these fools clean my living room, let alone run my government.”
Why Replacing Biden With Hillary Makes Perfect Sense for Obama

Why Replacing Biden With Hillary Makes Perfect Sense for Obama

Commented Sep 17, 2008 at 02:39:53 in Politics

“That boat has sailed. Would you please man up, Andy. Ideas like this are why democrats never win.

Every swing state independent would smell panic all over that move. Obama can't trust his own instincts - and he thinks he's ready to lead? The republicans would LOVE this. Poor little Sarah made Obama up and poop his pants. And he thinks he can handle Putin!? Palin must be fantastic. Who needs experience? Behold her power! Wait til she gets a hold of Iran!

McCain by a landslide.

So this idea is really not helpful.”

nanton29 replied on Sep 17, 2008 at 04:48:56

“It could be done. In football sometimes a perfectly healthy player is placed on the disabled list to make room for another athlete who is having a better season, but I am not advocating for it to be done.The backlash could be counterproductive.”
Sarah Palin and the

Sarah Palin and the "Women's" Vote

Commented Sep 08, 2008 at 04:03:08 in Politics

“Man or woman, she has lied to advance her own career.

She lied about the "Bridge to Nowhere."
Lied about the sale of the state's private jet.
Lied about her opposition to earmarks.
Lied about her knowledge regarding Troopergate.
Lied about her desire to see the Troopergate matter fully investigated.

And now she is hiding behind pre-scripted speeches and a teleprompter and refusing to answer questions.

If any one of us had this many falsehoods on our resume, we would be summarily fired from our job.

I'm a republican, but I can tell you any idiot can see that she does not have the moral integrity and honesty necessary for the job of VP.”

orkranger replied on Sep 13, 2008 at 23:26:00

“Maybe she needs some advice from someone in the know. A nice restful hunting trip with dick Cheney, shotguns at 5 paces!”

sdbsingle1 replied on Sep 08, 2008 at 12:56:03

“The truth is what it is, and I respect you for stepping up and doing what it is that you did.

Much props and this election is important to us all, so I hope that people see through the garbage and vote for the best candidate.”

OrlandoMom32 replied on Sep 08, 2008 at 10:55:39

“Talk about lying? Please don't pretend to be a Republican. This insults all of our intelligence. Sarah
Palin is a successful working mom who rose to Governor of a state and is one of only two women in our nation's history. As a working mom, this is worth celebrating. Personally, I don't agree with many of her political views and have a very hard time voting Republican, but if we continue our gutter politics against women, this might be the first time!”
Anyone Can Become President

Anyone Can Become President

Commented Sep 07, 2008 at 21:14:17 in Politics

“Sarah Palin is symptomatic of a republican party that has become so very, very comfortable and confident in their use of the lie that they don't even care if you can see the lies. They don't feel the need to use obfuscation or sleight of hand to disguise the lie. They would much rather you see how brazen they are, the better to appreciate the sheer audacity of it all.

This is a culture war, alright. But the war isn't between liberal values and conservative values. That would require that the republican party have a consistent set of values. They don't. The shifting sands of their arguments show them to be an empty shell of slogans, contradictory positions, excuses, and blame.

No, this culture war is between those who value truth and those who value the expediency of deceit.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Morning After

Commented Sep 05, 2008 at 02:28:31 in Politics

“What devastates an economy is not taxes - its borrowing to cover the shortfall. This nation has been borrowing TRILLIONS (yes, that's a T) of dollars to cover the shortfall created by the Bush tax cuts. We have doubled the national debt in 8 short years - and we have yet to face the tidal wave of crushing debt that will come in the next few years as the baby boomers begin to cash those Social Security checks they are counting on.

Furthermore, you may be surprised to learn that some of our most vocal opponents on the world stage, places like China, are the ones loaning us all this money. Do you think it's just to be nice? To help out a friend?

Wake up Chuckles. This is a national security issue. And we've been sold down the river by a republican president and congress who didn't have the political courage to balance the budget and do the right thing. At least Obama understands this very basic piece of economics: we can't continue to live beyond our means.”

apexfork replied on Sep 07, 2008 at 12:18:54

“Listen, Chuckles, if you honestly think that a government takeover of a trillion dollar industry isn't going to increase the debt, I'd like some of what you're smoking.”
One Heartbeat Away

One Heartbeat Away

Commented Aug 31, 2008 at 01:36:17 in Politics

“All that faux macho swagger is what has put the United States security and its economy in such a tenuous position. Prissy elitist republicans pretending to know what they are doing when it comes to the military.

It says everything about the state of the republican party that THIS is the best candidate they could find.”

mh01 replied on Aug 31, 2008 at 13:19:45

“Liberals know exactly what to do with the military, every time. Wave the white flag.”
The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

Commented Aug 30, 2008 at 08:50:13 in Politics

“Nail on the head! Perfect!”
The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

Commented Aug 30, 2008 at 08:48:21 in Politics

“Ummm, what about someone like Colin Powell. Or Chuck Hagel.

There were much better choices out there. McCain decided to go with a marketing gimmick instead.”
The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain

Commented Aug 30, 2008 at 08:40:13 in Politics

“How exactly would Palin manage the War on Terror, the war in Iraq, and our sputtering economy should she be required to take over? Would she just use her folksy common sense and hunting skills? Her BA in journalism?

Brilliant choice? Ummm, no. She doesn't qualify for an undersecretary position in the cabinet with that resume.

You see, the thing that makes a VP an important choice is that she BECOMES the president if the smarter, more experienced, and much much older president dies. And this VP won't be picking her own cabinet and advisors because they will have already been picked by the dead president. So she would need to KNOW WHAT SHE IS DOING.

That point seems to be lost on you.”
Palin: You're no Hillary Clinton

Palin: You're no Hillary Clinton

Commented Aug 30, 2008 at 01:43:31 in Politics

“You have hit the nail on the head. None of them would have been acceptable. It is truly a sad list of names - made all the more threadbare by the number of top level republicans who have left public service to cash out and become high priced corporate lobbyists.

The republican party as it currently stands is completely devoid of adequate leadership. It's a headless Frankenstein's monster.

How far they have fallen since I voted for Reagan and Bush(I).

I voted for McCain in 2000, voted for McCain in the 2008 primary, and will be voting for Obama in november.

I've seen enough.”
next
1 - 25 of 33