published Saturday, October 26th, 2013

Conversely

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

101
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
prairie_dog said...

People are only going to join this thing if it is free, or cheaper than what they already have.

Remember the idea about solar cells, but there was no market for them? Solyndra bankrupt despite fed dollars?

There's no market for health insurance that people already cannot afford. It might be different if the economy was booming, but it's not.

Obama has hung his hat on some limber timber, and it's not going to stay. Legislation cannot change human nature any more than it can change the laws of physics.

October 26, 2013 at 12:12 a.m.
fairmon said...

prairie_dog said...

Legislation cannot change human nature any more than it can change the laws of physics.

It don't need to change it just exploit it. How many formerly industrious self sufficient hard working people are now content to be dependent? This legislation is carrying the mother load of all the transfer of wealth and dependency initiatives. It is another federal government cost that increases the deficit and debt.

The new republican theme song may be "turn out the lights the party is over". Their initiative should have been and should be implement the law as written and scheduled. They should be insisting that the changes made without congress approving be reversed. NO, NO, NO to the individual mandate postponement and the one year waiver for businesses.

October 26, 2013 at 12:42 a.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "This legislation is carrying the mother load of all the transfer of wealth and dependency initiatives."

How so Fairmon? What money is being transferred from the haves to the have nots? Your statement is quite baseless.

Everyone pays for some part of their health care under ObamaCare. No one skates free. No one will be dependent.

Insurers are burdened with the responsibility to provide affordable rates for health care coverage or they know they will not find themselves involved in health care picture in the future.

This in turn means that in order for health care insurers to remain profitable, they will have to put downward pressure on what all health care providers bill for their services. This is true health care reform.

The health care industry has enjoyed for decades a right, if you will, to bill whatever they wanted for their services and most Americans have seen their insurance rates rise, rise, rise, and rise again.

Competitive forces have not been a part of this nation's health care system. Now it will be forced upon it.

When ObamaCare takes root, and it will in time, then it will essentially provide a deregulation of the health care industry, which has been needed for decades.

The model for ObamaCare is the health care system that has been in place in Massachusetts for six years. It went through every form of resistance that ObamaCare will go through. Today, 98% of the residents of that state are insured. The program is working.

A poll taken within the State earlier this year found that 84% are very pleased with RomneyCare. Six years down the road, ObamaCare will be just as successful.

"It is another federal government cost that increases the deficit and debt."

Short range, it probably will be problematic. Long range, it will save this nation trillions, once resistance to it subsides, when adamant opponents take a deep breath, look into it, understand it, eventually embrace it, and ultimately wind up accepting it.

Eventually, all the chicken wing flappers will tire from all their flapping, because ObamaCare IS going forward and it will eventually become a widely accepted and popular.

October 26, 2013 at 1:44 a.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said....

How so Fairmon? What money is being transferred from the haves to the have nots? Your statement is quite baseless.

Higher premiums for those not subsidized and higher taxes to off set the loss of tax revenue to those subsidized via tax credits.

In response to...."It is another federal government cost that increases the deficit and debt."

alprova said...

Short range, it probably will be problematic. Long range, it will save this nation trillions

The administrative and hierarchy cost is permanent and will increase therefore adding to the cost of government which, at some point, will require increased revenue. I assume with your belief that this is the vehicle needed you join me in supporting making it effective as scheduled and in the form passed until experience is sufficient to determine if alterations are appropriate?

alprova opines that...

Competitive forces have not been a part of this nation's health care system. Now it will be forced upon it.

Government dictated rates for health care and insurance with every policy required to include various items the buyer does not and will never need is not free market capitalism or competition. A tax on essential health care products such as artificial joints, stints etc. will go to the general government fund and be paid by consumers, not consistent with open and fair competition. A tax on some capital gains is not a health care issue but is a hidden transfer of wealth and again is not consistent with a competitive market.

Aggressive implementation and a stop of all the talk about possible changes, delays etc. will take away the uncertainty plaguing the economy and contributing to slow growth. Increased growth would cure a lot of ills but I see no meaningful effort out of Washington to accomplish that. Both parties are too busy campaigning.

October 26, 2013 at 4:57 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Well, I wondered when the GOP was going to come up with their "own" plan. They've been talking about it for years now -- glad to see they finally have their website up and running.

October 26, 2013 at 5:46 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

alpo first finds a cause he likes. then searches for a way to make it fit. square peg, round hole syndrome. obamacare is redistribution of wealth. why not admit it?

October 26, 2013 at 7:09 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Congress passed legislation in 2008 which took more than $2,000 from every man, woman and child in America and gave it to Wall Street investors who made bad investments. The plan might be called "The Paulson Plan," after Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, former CEO of a major Wall Street investment firm, who returned to Wall Street in January, 2009, to great fanfare and gratitude. I guess in your warped, twisted mind that's not redistribution of wealth?

Should America be as grateful to Secretary Paulson as his Wall Street friends are?

October 26, 2013 at 7:27 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

"warped, twisted mind" says antibelle. harsh language for a tolerant leftist.

October 26, 2013 at 7:36 a.m.
EaTn said...

Why did the roll-out of the Obamacare web site fail? All the govt computer geniuses were too busy over at NSA. Having worked on major projects in private industry, I don't remember any rolling out flawless as planned. The site will be fixed and millions of uninsured will have insurance.

October 26, 2013 at 7:37 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

So the currently uninsured will opt to buy insurance now? Even with subsidies, I don't see it happening.

October 26, 2013 at 7:48 a.m.
limric said...

Annibelle Annibelle Annibelle,

You seem to be forgetting your place. Bringing that up is nothing more than 'class warfare'.

Please recite: "Socialism for the rich; Capitalism for the rest."

There, don't you feel better.

October 26, 2013 at 7:58 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Oh, slipped my mind, limric. I thought I was talking to people with some sense of fairness and decency. Now, the GOPer's are boohooing over Jamie Diamond, Chief Crook of Wall Street, because he's getting a slap on the wrist. These people should be in jail, not still stealing from the average taxpayer in the trillions of dollars. PL doesn't understand that telling the same lie over and over, even after the truth is revealed, is warped and twisted.

October 26, 2013 at 8:02 a.m.
degage said...

yup, annie, 2008 was a democrat house and senate. If I remember right Obama and McCain came out and endorsed it. So it seems that was a bipartisan bill and the democrats were all for it. 273 to 171 for it in the house. 74 for it to 25 against in the senate. More democrats voted for it than republicans.

October 26, 2013 at 8:10 a.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

I just now found your last night’s challenge to me. It will be quite easy to refute you.

It will not be short though because you will just repeat the same anti Christian lies if I do. So I will make it lengthy, you like lengthy. Why? I want to try to shame you into silence (I know, good luck with that) and if not at least to prevent others from being deceived by you.

If you don't respond then I will assume you missed my comments and repeat them.

Be on the lookout.

Now, considering all of the anti Christian and ungodly things you have written I challenge you tell me why you profess to be a Christian. What is your evidence?

October 26, 2013 at 8:14 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Mrs Gage: You mean the wall street bailout that The Organizer voted for? That bill?

October 26, 2013 at 8:26 a.m.
fairmon said...

anniebelle said...

Congress passed legislation in 2008 which took more than $2,000 from every man, woman and child in America and gave it to Wall Street investors who made bad investments. I guess in your warped, twisted mind that's not redistribution of wealth?

Anniebelle..It was redistribution and we apparently agree they should all have been allowed to bankrupt, including GM and Chrysler, and let the chips fall where they may, that is the American way.

BTW I am glad to find you are in the know on that history. Please enlighten me on some wonderments:

1-How much of the $2,000 per man, woman and child is still owed to us?

2-Did the government require a few million shares of stock in return for the tax money they were provided?

3-If the answer to #2 is yes Are they selling the stock to recover some of the money?

4-Did they justify their actions because some working people with a 401k had investments in these entities? People buying stocks do so knowing there is a risk of loss of some or all invested.

October 26, 2013 at 8:41 a.m.
anniebelle said...

It was like the old fantasy "mushroom cloud" the Bush cabal presented to the citizens to get us into an unfunded, unholy war - it's called fear. He used the same game plan when the financial markets started to implode near the end of his reign - FEAR. We were told the world was going to end if we didn't give these banksters trillions of dollars. You recall any of that? No, of course not.

October 26, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.
fairmon said...

anniebelle said regarding bailed out bankers...

These people should be in jail, not still stealing from the average taxpayer in the trillions of dollars.

Would you include Barney Franks and those insisting the banks make high risk loans by allowing Fannie and Freddie with their implied loan guarantees to buy those loans?

BTW....how many trillions were stolen? Do you think they are still stealing money from tax payers?

October 26, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

So Belle, Sen OBAMA was motivated by fear when signing off on the WS bailout? Is that what you're saying?

October 26, 2013 at 9 a.m.
fairmon said...

anniebelle...what do you recommend as the top tax rate? What should someone making $100,000 per year pay? Be specific, don't use a bunch of philosophical talking points from some journalist or politician.

anniebelle..You say you read and study a lot so maybe you can tell me if the taxes a business pays is reflected in the cost of their goods or services that I buy?

October 26, 2013 at 9:01 a.m.
fairmon said...

anniebelle said...

He [Bush] used the same game plan when the financial markets started to implode near the end of his reign - FEAR.

I have often wondered why Obama didn't put a halt to spending that money when he took office. He did promise to cut the deficit in half his first term, he didn't hint that he would double the debt.

October 26, 2013 at 9:06 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Clear to most that The Anointed One is a screw-up on many levels. Only the most strident ideologues still defend this cat. can you hear me Belle?

October 26, 2013 at 9:11 a.m.
moon4kat said...

The current "health care system" redistributes wealth every time an uninsured person goes to the emergency room and can't pay the bill. They are given medical care, and we all end up paying for it in higher insurance premiums and higher fees for medical services.

The Tea Party GOP refuses to acknowledge that fact, and has no plan to fix it. Just saying "no" is not a plan. If the GOP had come up with something better I think we'd have heard.

October 26, 2013 at 9:12 a.m.
alprova said...

pt wrote: "alpo first finds a cause he likes. then searches for a way to make it fit. square peg, round hole syndrome. obamacare is redistribution of wealth. why not admit it?"

Because it is anything but a redistribution of wealth.

If and when the insurers are abolished and single payer is implemented, THEN get back to me with that crap.

October 26, 2013 at 9:13 a.m.
alprova said...

pt wrote: "So the currently uninsured will opt to buy insurance now? Even with subsidies, I don't see it happening."

How can you see anything with your very dim view on everything?

October 26, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

Regarding your challenge to me to refute you I begin with your statement:

“conservative, I have made in that same point about Biblical Scholars and their interpretations of Leviticus at least a dozen times in the past.”

Not much there. However, I will remind you once again that a scholar is just someone who has spent a lot of time on a subject. He can be sincerely wrong about what he writes and can deliberately lie as well such as those who have an anti Christian bias and are paid to come up with an interpretation at odds with the Bible.

Yes, you have come up with the “Holiness Code” concoction in a vain and foolish and evil effort to refute God when he said:

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” Leviticus 18:22 and “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” Leviticus 20:13.

Plain and simple language alprova, the words of God alprova.

Tell me alprova, what do those verses say? Forget Wickedpedia alprova, how do you interpret them?

October 26, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Dim, Alpo? Maybe. But I don't see everything thru the prism of ideology. Your intractability is almost amusing.

October 26, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "Would you include Barney Franks and those insisting the banks make high risk loans by allowing Fannie and Freddie with their implied loan guarantees to buy those loans?"

You forget yourself.

Fannie and Freddie were just awarded a $5 million settlement due to their being victimized in what happened.

They bought up what were supposed to be loans written to financial standards that weren't.

This was the end result in the rescinding of Glass-Steagall, which protected this nation from widespread depression for 75 years.

October 26, 2013 at 9:23 a.m.
alprova said...

pt wrote: "Dim, Alpo? Maybe. But I don't see everything thru the prism of ideology. Your intractability is almost amusing."

Ideology is EXACTLY what built this country to what it once was.

Build a better mousetrap...remember that?

October 26, 2013 at 9:27 a.m.
degage said...

Annie, then in 2009 Obama got another 800billion to redistribute to his donors. He said he really needed more money Tarp wasn't enough. You always bash Bush and give your god a pass. The democrats went along with the 2008 and 2009 money grab. So get off your high horse.

October 26, 2013 at 9:31 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alps: President Obama admitted that his health care law raises taxes: “So what we did — it’s paid for by a combination of things. We did raise taxes on some things.” Oh really...so that the wealthy must pay more allowing the poorest to pay less. seems like redistribution to me

October 26, 2013 at 9:31 a.m.
caddy said...

If it weren't for the GOP, this Land would be a UTOPIA for all the Liberal Progressives wouldn't it ! ? Just think, we could knock down the walls of Mexico, Canada and provide them with Healthcare too.

We could Marry whomever we want, people of the same sex, inanimate objects, even animals !

Pedophiles want their rights too you know !

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=11517

Utopia, equality. Freedom you know is altogether different than "equality."

October 26, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, committed $700 billion in taxpayer money to rescue Wall Street from its own chicanery and greed. To listen to the bankers and their allies in Washington tell it, you'd think the bailout was the best thing to hit the American economy since the invention of the assembly line. Not only did it prevent another Great Depression, we've been told, but the money has all been paid back, and the government even made a profit. No harm, no foul – right?

Wrong.

It was all a lie – one of the biggest and most elaborate falsehoods ever sold to the American people. We were told that the taxpayer was stepping in – only temporarily, mind you – to prop up the economy and save the world from financial catastrophe. What we actually ended up doing was the exact opposite: committing American taxpayers to permanent, blind support of an ungovernable, unregulatable, hyperconcentrated new financial system that exacerbates the greed and inequality that caused the crash, and forces Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup to increase risk rather than reduce it. The result is one of those deals where one wrong decision early on blossoms into a lush nightmare of unintended consequences. We thought we were just letting a friend crash at the house for a few days; we ended up with a family of hillbillies who moved in forever, sleeping nine to a bed and building a meth lab on the front lawn.

October 26, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.
alprova said...
October 26, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

So Belle. Was Sen Obama sold a bill of goods on the bailout? Or not?

October 26, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.
alprova said...

conservative, those words were not written by God. They are related as a very harsh opinion by someone who claims to be speaking on behalf of God.

AND, keeping them in context, when you start reading the Book of Leviticus, it begins with, "The Lord called to Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting. He said, “Speak to the Israelites and say to them..."

Skipping to Leviticus 17, the beginning of the Holiness Code, which applies to all who enter the Temple, you will read, “Speak to Aaron and his sons and to all the Israelites and say to them: This is what the Lord has commanded:"

Are you an Israelite or are you a Gentile?

Do you believe yourself a descendant of the Hebrew Tribe, known as the Levis?

You Sir are allowed to deem all the relevant laws contained in that Book if you choose, but they do not apply to anyone but the Levites, and that SIR is something you can never refute, no matter how many times you post your crap.

October 26, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.
fairmon said...

news flash...

,"After a little more than 5 years, Americans have rated President Obama the 5th best president ever."

The details.... according to White House Publicists:

Reagan, Lincoln, Washington & Jefferson tied for 1st, 17 presidents tied for 2nd, 21 other presidents tied for 3rd, Jimmy Carter came in 4th, and Obama came in 5th.

October 26, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.
degage said...

PT, annie can't answer that because if she does she would have to say something against her God. She just can't admit Obama has done far worse in the last 5 years.

October 26, 2013 at 9:47 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

LadyGage: 😜

October 26, 2013 at 10:07 a.m.
una61 said...

Where illegal immigrants sign up for Obama's Care.

October 26, 2013 at 10:45 a.m.
miraweb said...

If by "redistributing wealth" you mean that the rich are going to have less and the poor have more then you are speaking total nonsense.

It isn't unfair to say that there will be "redistribution". The subsidies that are preserving the insurance industry from the overwhelming expense of an aging population are redistributing tax money to that industry.

If that sounds more like a "Republican" idea than a "Democratic" one you would be right. It was the Heritage Foundation who designed that model.

Heritage Foundation Policy Paper: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/1989/pdf/hl218.pdf

Insurers Raise Profit Guidance: http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2013/10/26/despite-glitches-obamacare-profit-windfall-to-insurers-well-underway/

October 26, 2013 at 11:47 a.m.
prairie_dog said...

The comments about transfer of wealth are absolutely true.

The "subsidies" for people who are in a low income status (and of course this will be abused, because black-market and cash economy income is NOT reported and so cannot be verified) represent a 100% redistribution of income from those who pay their full premium to those who do not.

Where does the money come from, if not from other taxpayers and premium payers?

The stats are in, and to this point, there are more people signing up for medicaid than for Obamacare. How could anything else be true? People who don't have the money to pay premiums cannot sign up, and they're not going to have money to pay the fines, either.

The outright dole has been in play too long. The people who have become dependent upon it, and have lived on it for generations, don't know any other way to live.

Premium payments, per individual, are going to run around $600 per month, no matter where the money comes from. That's $6,000,000,000 per month to insure an additional 10,000,000 Americans. There are two groups of people who don't care about that; the few thousand who make so much money that they'll never feel it, and the millions who pay no taxes or health care costs at all. The rest of us will be burdened with the loss of purchasing power and decreased standard of living that comes from taking money from us so that it can be given to other people.

So, thanks a butt load, Washington, for failing to regulate business and for taxing business to the point that we have a terrible economy where people cannot get jobs to support themselves; and thanks a butt load, Washington, for creating a culture of dependence.

October 26, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.
fairmon said...

anniebelle's post at October 26, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.

You should at least credit the source of the dribble.

October 26, 2013 at 12:02 p.m.
fairmon said...

al says...

Fannie and Freddie were just awarded a $5 million settlement due to their being victimized in what happened.

To be paid by who? That means even more so those with over sight and complicit are accountable. I think I still have the video of Barney's spitting & sputtering response to secretary treasurer Snow's suggestion that these two entities should be better regulated and that they were headed for trouble. Ms. Waters and others chimed in that the recommendation was an attempt to discriminate against minorities. Why were the CEO's of F&F never charged?

October 26, 2013 at 12:11 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Sen Ron Johnson, R, WI plans to offer legislation titled "The ‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act’ will amend the law to make Obamacare live up to the promises of the politicians who sold the plan to the American public. I will file the bill in the coming week and hope to garner support from fellow Senators of both parties who truly want to make sure President Obama honors his promise that every American has the freedom to keep his or her own health care plan." sounds good to me

October 26, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.
miraweb said...

Prairie dog writes:

Where does the money come from, if not from other taxpayers and premium payers?

Very true. That is where the money has always come from. The question is where does the money go?

When a person who qualifies for subsidies signs up the premium is still paid. The cash goes to the insurer. The insurer pays their overhead, bonuses, and shareholders. What's left is sent to the hospitals and doctors.

There is a redistribution but it is from the middle class to the wealthy, not from the rich to the poor.

The truth is that redistribution has been going on for a long, long time. Paying doctors and hospitals to cover the uninsured showing up in the emergency room has been a surcharge on your premiums for years.

October 26, 2013 at 12:20 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

miraweb,

Yes you are 100% right. Under Obamacare, the money that was already being redistributed through health insurance premiums now has to support an additional level of bureaucracy, skimming another 25% or so off the top before it gets to the health care providers. So, everything gets more expensive for the middle class, nothing changes for the poor, and no improvement in care is had by anyone.

Malpractice insurance and proliferation of clerical functions eat up a huge portion of what we pay. IF, and that's a big "IF," fraud could be held to a minimum, a "single payer" system like Medicare would reduce the overall cost of health care by removing all of the other clerical functions in doctors' offices and health insurance companies.

Every person in a doctor's office who is not providing direct patient care, and every person in a hospital who is not providing direct patient care, all of them, get paid from our medical insurance premiums. I don't think most people understand how much of our money goes to the duplicate levels of billing/payment functions which exist. Go to one doctor for surgery, and you end up paying a half-dozen providers, each with their own duplicate billing and office staff, and all their malpractice insurance premiums.

Health care is more expensive, with no benefit to the patient, just because our systems require so much more clerical support. That's the place to cut costs.

October 26, 2013 at 12:43 p.m.
miraweb said...

It's pretty easy to do the math.

Medicare's administrative expenses are 4%.

Private insurers' administrative expenses are 12%

Insurers have enjoyed a near-monopoly with very little real competition for years. Perhaps the competitive aspect of the exchanges will actually trim the fat out of the insurance markets but we are a long way from the way real competitive businesses operate.

There are a lot of ways to improve ObamaCare but the clown car operating as the House of Representatives will have to quit tripping over their big feet and funny noses before anything useful happens.

October 26, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

EaTn said...

Why did the roll-out of the Obamacare web site fail? All the govt computer geniuses were too busy over at NSA. Having worked on major projects in private industry, I don't remember any rolling out flawless as planned. The site will be fixed and millions of uninsured will have insurance.

You can polish a turd to a high shine but after all that effort you still just have .... a turd.

October 26, 2013 at 12:59 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

anniebelle said...

Congress passed legislation in 2008 which took more than $2,000 from every man, woman and child in America and gave it to Wall Street investors who made bad investments. The plan might be called "The Paulson Plan," after Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, former CEO of a major Wall Street investment firm, who returned to Wall Street in January, 2009, to great fanfare and gratitude. I guess in your warped, twisted mind that's not redistribution of wealth?

Should America be as grateful to Secretary Paulson as his Wall Street friends are?

I guess if you think the Stimulus plan save us from a depression then you would feel the same about this and I bet you do.

I see that you have been to the “Wayback Machine” and it spit out one of your favorite and oft recycled talking points so I guess I will recycle one of mine.

Even though I opposed the TARP program I opposed it for different reasons. Here are the details that you seem to always ignore as to the funds “given away”.

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/financial-stability/reports/Documents/December%202012%20Monthly%20Report%20to%20Congress.pdf

Monthly 105(a) Report December 2012

The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was established pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA). More than four years after the establishment of the TARP, we are making substantial progress in winding down the extraordinary assistance that had to be provided during the crisis. Treasury has continued to work to reduce the dependence of the financial system on emergency assistance and replace public support with private capital.

As of the end of calendar year 2012, taxpayers have recovered more than $387 billion – or nearly 93 percent – of the $418 billion ($31 billion loss... although I think this is padded a bit and is actually about $15 billion low - Jt) in TARP funds disbursed to date. And taxpayers have so far realized a $23 billion positive return on their investments through TARP’s bank programs. Treasury has recovered $268 billion from TARP’s bank programs through repayments, dividends, interest, and other income – compared to the $245 billion invested in those institutions. (Net loss $8 to $23 billion ... Hardly the greatest scam ever - Jt).

By any objective standards, the Troubled Asset Relief Program has worked: it helped stop widespread financial panic, it helped prevent what could have been a devastating collapse of our financial system, and it did so at a cost that is far less than what most people expected at the time the law was passed. (I only agree with the latter - Jt)

And where was most of that $30 to $50 billion in TARP money lost? .... the UAW / Government Motors bailout .... yes we redistribute our wealth to a bunch of semi skilled bolt tighteners that produce junk cars.

October 26, 2013 at 1:27 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Jonah Goldberg - “I’m scandalized by these racist, anarchist, extremist, hostage-taking Democrats who want to delay ObamaCare which is the law of the land”

October 26, 2013 at 1:31 p.m.
miraweb said...

Both Healthcare.gov and Romney's ORCA app will be studied for years in how not to do technology in the public sector. It's a useful conversation and needs to happen.

I worked for Social Security in the mid 1990s and the problem we had at the office wasn't that we had old computers. It was that we had NO computers.

The office was still operating on secretaries and carbon paper. I was not at all surprised by the photos of the VA disability backlog showing mountains of paper file folders. The VA isn't the only office with that problem.

There needs to be a federal equivalent of the Army Corp of Engineers for technology. The world has changed but the government has not.

October 26, 2013 at 1:39 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova:

I welcome your challenge to refute you. You wrote:

“Do you ever use a concordance? Holiness Code is universally referred to as Scripture appearing in Leviticus 17-26, and I assure you it applies only to Jewish citizens who desired to enter the then in existence Temple as Priests.”

Yes, I use a concordance, I have three. If you have one, you don’t use it.

Why? Because “Holiness Code” does not appear in it.

Caught you again.

October 26, 2013 at 1:59 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova;

You said “conservative, those words were not written by God.”

These are the words:

“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,”

“Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God.”

“ Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” Leviticus18:1-2, 22

And you know this because?

You also said “They are related as a very harsh opinion by someone who claims to be speaking on behalf of God”

And you know this because?

October 26, 2013 at 3:47 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova:

Now if you are contending that God did not personally with ancient pen and paper in hand sit down and write the Bible then you are without a doubt the deceiver I have accused you of being. No Christian or Jew believes that.

Simply put Christians and Jews believe that God used man to write the Bible, Scripture, and that it is without error for God is perfect and made sure no mistakes were made when He used man to write his precious word.

What are willing to say that you believe?

October 26, 2013 at 4:07 p.m.
joneses said...

Nine senior military commanders fired just this year by the Obama administration. General Carter Ham, Army; Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, Navy; Maj. Gen. Ralph Baker, Army; Brigadier Gen. Bryan Roberts, Army; Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant, Marine Corps; Maj. Gen. Charles M.M. Gurganus, Marine Corps; Lt. Gen. David Holmes Huntoon Jr, Army; Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, Navy; Major Gen. Michael Carey, Air Force.

A Pentagon official who asked to remain nameless because they were not authorized to speak on the matter said even young officers, down through the ranks have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job — just keep your mouth shut.

October 26, 2013 at 4:24 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

An Uncle Joe Stalin tactic.

October 26, 2013 at 4:55 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Conservative wrote: "Simply put Christians and Jews believe that God used man to write the Bible, Scripture, and that it is without error for God is perfect and made sure no mistakes were made when He used man to write his precious word."

That's the funniest thing that old Conservative has said today! There's more holes in the Bible than in his pointy little head.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfp6QipYV3w

October 26, 2013 at 5:02 p.m.
jesse said...

Has anyone noticed that when Al was poutin w/his hurt feelins con man had nothin to say about GOD, the BIBLE or anything to do w/religion!!Al got over it ,came back and jumped right back in the middle of it and got this garbage started all over again!!

BTW : TENN. is in the process of gittin a LESSON in the art of FOOTBALL!!

October 26, 2013 at 5:13 p.m.
conservative said...

Aplrova:

Back to your challenge to refute you. You wrote:

“Holiness Code is universally referred to as Scripture appearing in Leviticus 17-26, and I assure you it applies only to Jewish citizens who desired to enter the then in existence Temple as Priests.”

That is a whopper of a lie. This concoction of a “holiness Code” is an effort by non Christians, unbelievers, Atheists etc. to justify Homosexuality and sodomy.

And again “Holiness Code” cannot be found in a Concordance as you tried unsuccessfully to con me and others.

You are one brazen deceiver!

October 26, 2013 at 5:21 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Conservative,

There's no evidence of a god named Jehovah as being a real character.

No evidence that the Bible is anything other than a collection of myths and legends told long before the Israelites.

No evidence of any miracles or supernatural events in the Bible.

No evidence of anyone named Jesus being a deity.

No evidence of anything you spout.

However this forum provides your own personal testimony of your ignorance. Stay in your closet with your gay "research" material.

But please keep up the good work. You're the poster boy for Bible-Bangers and funny as hell.

October 26, 2013 at 5:39 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Methinks Con just craves attention. He has that in common with Alpo.

October 26, 2013 at 5:41 p.m.
yddem said...

Okay, Joneses, you want it, you got it:

Gen. Carey - fired for "personal misbehavior" and he does not claim he was wrongly charged.

Vice Adm. Giardina - under criminal investigation for using counterfeit poker chips is a casino.

Lt. Gen. Huntoon - censored for an "improper relationship" which was not described but which he did not dispute.

Maj. Gen. Gurganis - he was in command when 2 officers under his command were killed while sitting at their desks.

Maj. Gen. Sturdevant - he was one of two commanders relieved for failure to use correct procedures to protect those under his command.

Brig. Gen. Roberts - relieved of duty and fired for adultery.

Maj. Gen. Baker - he was relieved after alleging groping a civilian, which he has yet to dispute.

Rear Adm. Gaouette - accused of using profanity in a public setting and making racially insensitive comments.

Gen. Ham - he was extremely critical of Obama after Benghazi. He resigned and retired this year.

So much for the purge. You guys will believe anything and everything the Reactionary Right puts on the internet. Never question anything pitched by a right hander is your credo.

October 26, 2013 at 6:31 p.m.
fairmon said...

miraweb said...

It's pretty easy to do the math.

Medicare's administrative expenses are 4%.

I think you are using the amount paid to those private companies processing claims at cost plus 4% which is also the rate which self insured employers pay. You will never know with any accuracy the true government administrative cost.

October 26, 2013 at 6:50 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Hark, what was that sound?

It was Joneses & PlainTruth gulping a heaping helping of crow!

October 26, 2013 at 6:50 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Crow? Why?

October 26, 2013 at 6:55 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "To be paid by who?"

$5.1 billion will be paid to Fannie & Freddie by JP Morgan for those toxic loans it put up for investment. The mortgage securities that JP Morgan sold to Fannie and Freddie included those that were packaged by two institutions that failed in 2008: Bear Stearns and Seattle-based Washington Mutual, as well as $33 billion it sold itself to Fannie & Freddie. JP Morgan bought Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual

"I think I still have the video of Barney's spitting & sputtering response to secretary treasurer Snow's suggestion that these two entities should be better regulated and that they were headed for trouble. Ms. Waters and others chimed in that the recommendation was an attempt to discriminate against minorities. Why were the CEO's of F&F never charged?"

Because, as you should know, Fannie and Freddie were set up as clearing houses for banks, both used to buy up long term loans which allowed banks to have more money on hand to loan.

It was the BANKS that were skirting lending standards -- not Freddie and Fannie.

October 26, 2013 at 6:57 p.m.
fairmon said...

miraweb said...

When a person who qualifies for subsidies signs up the premium is still paid. The cash goes to the insurer. The insurer pays their overhead, bonuses, and shareholders. What's left is sent to the hospitals and doctors.

I think you will find the law requires insurers pay out 80% of every dollar of revenue or give a refund to policy holders. That leaves 20% for taxes, interest, dividends and other expense. The insured qualifying for a subsidy will receive a tax credit which apparently means to some it will cost nothing which is true if the deficit and debt continues being ignored.

It is not possible to insure 30 million more people when in any given year only a small percent use the ER which some insist is just as costly as the AHA. I have advised those receiving letters from their insurance company they would not offer them insurance next year to write them back and tell them they can't do that the president promised you that you can keep what you have.

October 26, 2013 at 7:04 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said...

Because, as you should know, Fannie and Freddie were set up as clearing houses for banks, both used to buy up long term loans which allowed banks to have more money on hand to loan.

Correct. The exiting CEO's knew about the high risk loans but were being highly compensated based on loan volume. They were commended and encouraged by some members of congress to be aggressive in the home ownership metric.

It was the BANKS that were skirting lending standards -- not Freddie and Fannie.

There were instances of fudging appraisals, incomes etc. but those people have not been indicted. I question why JPM is being fined when they bought WM and BS after those two had failed due to their loan practices?

Bankers are still allowed to be brokers which is not a good practice. The government and big banks are too tight.

October 26, 2013 at 7:18 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "What are willing to say that you believe?"

Exactly what I have always stated.

The Bible is not the word of God. The Bible is the word of humans who claim to have interacted verbally with God. Additionally, the Bible has been translated into approximately 550 languages, from a handful of extinct languages, by untold numbers of human beings, each with their own opinions that were most certainly inserted into what they transcribed.

I asked you if you were a Gentile or a Levite.

The history of the Book of Leviticus is not hard to discover and understand. The Holiness Code isn't either.

Your choice it to completely ignore certain facts and apply what you read in your Bible to those whom you feel deserve YOUR wrath, no matter the context that scriptural references are presented, and no matter the fact that there are very few Levites who are alive and well.

Your chance, or that of anyone reading this, that you are a descendent of the Levite tribe is less than 5%.

Now Sir, I have been very polite, when I tell you that you are free as a bird to read whatever you so desire in your personal copy of the Holy Bible and apply it to your life, also as you see fit.

However, you have no authority, invitation, nor right to condemn another soul on this Earth, based on what you interpret from so much as one sentence that you read in your Bible.

If you truly read your Bible and heeded every word contained in it, you would understand this.

You're not going to change my opinions, or those of anyone else, from what I read that others have written.

It's your time to waste, if you must.

October 26, 2013 at 7:18 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

I "must" refute you because you challenged me to refute you and I said I would (unlike you I keep my word) and I have.

But we obviously have a long way to go because you keep adding to what I must refute.

I am not wasting my time. I love refuting Liberals especially deceivers like you.

October 26, 2013 at 7:51 p.m.
alprova said...

Okey Dokey Con Man.

Let me know when you post this big refutement, okay?

I sure don't want to miss it.

October 26, 2013 at 7:55 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "I question why JPM is being fined when they bought WM and BS after those two had failed due to their loan practices?"

As unfair as it might seem, JP Morgan sold $33 billion of their own loans to F&F, knowing they were written under poor standards, AND because when you buy a company in bankruptcy, to clear it's books, you buy any baggage that comes with it.

All told, the amount of toxic loans that JP Morgan and Co. sold to F&F that went south was over $50 billion. Settling for ten cents on the dollar is not a bad deal for them and they know it.

If they were made to make everything whole, well...JP Morgan would join the list of defunct mega-banks.

It IS a bad deal for their stockholders however.

But hey...that's the breaks of investing, right?

This is the tip of the ice burg. Look for more settlements forthcoming...

October 26, 2013 at 8:01 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova:

Now you have set a trap for yourself by stating:

“The Bible is not the word of God. The Bible is the word of humans who claim to have interacted verbally with God”

You use the word “God” but arrogantly claim the Bible is not the word of God and incredibly claim to be a Christian!

So, how to you know anything about God?

How could you know anything about Jesus and claim to be a Christian without the word of God?

October 26, 2013 at 8:04 p.m.
conservative said...

Alprova:

At 5:21p.m. I called you out on your lie about “Holiness Code” being found in a Concordance.

October 26, 2013 at 8:14 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

You once said that you would beat me in a race to the "pearly gates"

Where did you get the idea of "pearly gates" and what does that mean?

October 26, 2013 at 8:19 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "Alprova: Now you have set a trap for yourself by stating: “The Bible is not the word of God. The Bible is the word of humans who claim to have interacted verbally with God”..."

If I asked you if you have spoken, one on one with God, what would your answer be? Have you ever had a conversation with God?

"You use the word “God” but arrogantly claim the Bible is not the word of God and incredibly claim to be a Christian!"

That's the part you will never get. My beliefs in God are not dependent on what is written in any copy of a Bible.

"So, how to you know anything about God?"

What does anyone truly know about God? God is omnipotent. I don't need to read testimony in a book to understand that. I don't need to hear the words of a preacher at a pulpit to interact with God. I don't need to stand in a room and listen to a public prayer to have God's ear.

"How could you know anything about Jesus and claim to be a Christian without the word of God?"

I know about Jesus from reading the New Testament, and nowhere in that Testament does Jesus condemn anyone. Jesus was all about love, understanding, and yes, he, most of all, understood that no one is without fault.

"Let the one among you who has never sinned throw the first stone.."

A valuable lesson from the man's own lips that you should, but refuse to adopt relative to your interaction with others.

October 26, 2013 at 8:19 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

Are you a sinner? Yes or No?

October 26, 2013 at 8:21 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

You obviously believe and have stated that Homosexuality is not sin.

Where did you get the notion that Homosexuality is not sin?

October 26, 2013 at 8:25 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo: Con man owns you so bad, he could be cited for a 13th Amendment violation.

October 26, 2013 at 8:28 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

You said:

"What does anyone truly know about God? God is omnipotent."

What would be the point of having a conversation with God if you can't truly know about God?

Then how can you say God is omnipotent? Who told you that, where did you get that notion?

October 26, 2013 at 8:33 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "At 5:21p.m. I called you out on your lie about “Holiness Code” being found in a Concordance."

Who knows what version of the Bible you read.

October 26, 2013 at 8:36 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

So what concordance do you have that has "Holiness Code" in it?

You are taking a beating but you deserve it.

October 26, 2013 at 8:39 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Conservative is that fellow that Spencer Tracy talked about in "Inherit the Wind" and the Scopes Monkey Trial.

What he said describes Conservative and his ilk as participants in "fanaticism and ignorance - forever busy, and needs feeding."

A great movie.

October 26, 2013 at 8:40 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

What kind of a converstion do have have with God where you learn nothing of God?

October 26, 2013 at 8:41 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: You once said that you would beat me in a race to the "pearly gates"..."

Uh huh...

"Where did you get the idea of "pearly gates" and what does that mean?"

Are you asserting in your question that there is no such thing written about in the Bible?

Be very careful how you answer that.

October 26, 2013 at 8:44 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

You asked:

"What does anyone truly know about God?

Then how are you so sure that Homosexuality and sodomy is not sin and against his moral law?

October 26, 2013 at 8:44 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: Are you a sinner? Yes or No?"

Every one sins. The obvious answer is a resounding, YES!!

How 'bout you?

October 26, 2013 at 8:46 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

So how do you know that you sin and even what are sins if you don't have God's word on it?

October 26, 2013 at 8:57 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

I am not asserting that "pearly gates" does not appear in the Bible.

I am pointing out that "pearly gates" does appear in the Bible, the Bible that you say is only the opinion of some men.

So, what does "pearly gates" mean to you and why do you think you will beat me there?

October 26, 2013 at 9:02 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: You obviously believe and have stated that Homosexuality is not sin."

No Sir, that is not what I have stated.

Homosexuality is no more a sin than, stealing, lying, defrauding your neighbor, holding back wages on a hired worker overnight, tripping a blind person, judging your neighbor unfairly, mating different kinds of animals, eating fruit from a tree for three years after it is first planted, cutting the hair that grows on the side of your head, placing a tattoos on your body, consulting a spirit guide, cursing your mother or father, anyone who commits adultery, having sex with a woman during her period, eating the flesh of an 'unclean' animal, and even for eating shrimp.

"Where did you get the notion that Homosexuality is not sin?"

I don't believe I have ever denied it to be a sin, but it is no worse a sin than any other, including murder.

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. No one dies sin-free. No one. Everyone will have sins to answer for.

Your assertion that the one sin you single out as being "fatal," or that would send anyone to Hell faster than any sin on my partial list of known sins, is ridiculous.

You sin, I sin, and the homosexual is a sinner too, but you are no more prone to receiving gifts from God than a homosexual will.

Conversely, the homosexual has as much chance of being forgiven for their sins, as you do.

The day that you come to understand that, and accept it as a fact, the day that you have a chance to become a better person, as well as a fine Christian.

October 26, 2013 at 9:05 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: So what concordance do you have that has "Holiness Code" in it?"

I have many versions of the Bible. That particular description will be found in one targeting the Jewish, or the Torah, which is the same Bible you read, Sir.

"You are taking a beating but you deserve it."

Do you really think so?

October 26, 2013 at 9:10 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

So, you don't have any written record of God and who He is and how you are to obey him and what His will is for you and how you might please Him and have fellowship with Him but you do believe some things about Jesus from a source that you say is only the opinion of men?

October 26, 2013 at 9:10 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova;

You just keep trying to deceive. You referenced CONCORDANCE with "Holiness Code" being In it.

There is no Concordance with "Holiness Code" in it, stop your deception and lying.

October 26, 2013 at 9:16 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: I am not asserting that "pearly gates" does not appear in the Bible."

That's good, because it most certainly does appear in the Bible.

"I am pointing out that "pearly gates" does appear in the Bible, the Bible that you say is only the opinion of some men."

I have never denied one word that can be found in the Bible. You are the one who denies provable content that is found in the Bible.

We differ on the relevance of what is written to our lives, who wrote it, and the context that various cherry picked passages were written and compiled for our reading pleasure.

"So, what does "pearly gates" mean to you and why do you think you will beat me there?"

I was very wrong to write that. I am not holier than anyone else, and neither are you.

October 26, 2013 at 9:16 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

Apart from your lie about "Holiness Code" being in my concordance or even your concordance what Bible version do you have that you claim "Holiness Code" appears in?

Name the Bible now.

October 26, 2013 at 9:21 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

But the "pearly gates" has some meaning and significance to you because you brought it up.

What is the significance or meaning or goal or whatever you have in mind about "pearly gates?"

October 26, 2013 at 9:27 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "alprova: So, you don't have any written record of God and who He is and how you are to obey him and what His will is for you and how you might please Him and have fellowship with Him but you do believe some things about Jesus from a source that you say is only the opinion of men?"

Your assessment of what I believe is meaningless.

Your task is to prove that God or his Son place more emphasis on the sin of homosexuality than other listed sins that can be found in the Bible.

If you truly believe that all 'practicing' homosexuals are immediately judged and destined to go to Hell, am I to assume that you are not currently guilty of 'practicing' any of the sins I listed earlier, or any others not mentioned?

Where do you get off pre-judging anyone for anything?

You're a stone caster, with the full knowledge that you are not without sin and you could never be without sin.

Dammit, you've roped me into another stupid exchange that will not change a thing.

"nuff...

October 26, 2013 at 9:28 p.m.
fairmon said...

It IS a bad deal for their stockholders however.

But hey...that's the breaks of investing, right?

Not necessarily bad, depends on when the stock was bought.

October 27, 2013 at 7:29 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.