I live in the 4th District, and I will vote for DesJarlais again. In fact, this slanderous editorial prompted me to get one of his yard signs and put it in my yard tonight. timbo above is correct. You can call DesJarlais a hypocrite, but he is NOT A DEMOCRAT, which means he will not vote to steal my wealth.
I live in the 4th District. I don't care if Scott DesJarlais is a hypocrite. There is one thing he is not. He is NOT a Democrat. So he won't go to Washington and vote to steal my money and redistribute it to people who have never worked as hard as I or made the sacrifices I have made to succeed.
I will vote for DesJarlais. And because of the cartoon above and the slanderous editorial in today's Times, I'll go get one of his yard signs and put it in my yard tomorrow.
From the Knoxville News Sentinel today regarding the expansion of Medicaid: "Former Democratic Gov. Phil Bredesen called the mandated expansion "the mother of all unfunded mandates" and projected the cost to Tennessee at $1.1 billion over the first five years the state is fully on the hook for the new enrollees."
How I wish that more Democrats had the understanding of economics that Bredesen has and fewer were economic illiterates of the sort that write editorials for the Chattanooga Times. Unfortunately, the number of Democrats with Bredesen's understanding is limited.
Well, the Times editorial staff has a short memory. Tennessee tried to expand the number of people insured with TennCare. I recall that a bunch of do-gooders kept suing Tennessee to force the State to provide MORE, MORE, MORE -- to the point that Democrat governor Bredesen, to his credit, made the difficult decision to cut people off the rolls to keep the State from going bankrupt.
So if Medicaid is expanded, how to do propose to keep the do-gooders from doing exactly the same thing again?
Yes, I would like to argue some more semantics. OK, Easy123, what about this? Since the mandate is a "tax" and not a "penalty" according to esteemed Justice Roberts, it is my understanding that the mandate can be overturned by a simple majority in the Senate without the need for a 60 person filibuster proof majority. The Republicans are going to have that majority come January 2013. Any thoughts?
Given this ruling, is there anything the United States Government cannot compel me to do or force me to purchase -- by taxing me if I do not comply?
One more thing: "CHILDREN up to the age of 26" is such a sad statement. What age do people become adults these days?
If you're going to make this a personal thing involving Gov. Haslam, I wish to point out that the Haslams are generous people who probably give more money to charity every year than the editorial writer has made in his lifetime. And if you want to state it on a percentage basis, they probably give a higher percentage of their income to charity than the editorial writer, if he is the typical chintzy liberal Democrat.
So the GM bailout is now "mostly repaid?" That's a flat out lie. Furthermore, the whole GM deal was the most corrupt transfer of wealth from bondholders to unions in history. Castro and Hugo Chavez would be proud. I've learned my lesson. I'll never own another bond issued by a corporation with a unionized workforce.
Hey, Austin, why don't you write an editorial praising Obama for giving the Presidential Medal of Freedom to that radical socialist Dolores Huerta?
Yeah, game on for November. See you at the polls. I have faith that the people of the United States won't make the same mistake twice.