« Back to story "I'm Sorry Rush: Limbaugh Apology Form"

Story Comments

Posted by: Albmore 9 months, 2 weeks ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

40%
Albmore9 months, 2 weeks ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

What is sad is that with all the problems OUR nation has the dems and the white house house had nothing more important as to start this. The reps are NO better jumping on the band wagon. At the same time the American people are dumb enough also to join in instead of pressing the represatives to remove the billions in pork projects WE will soon have to pay for.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
50 Replies

loading ...
- 88%
  Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  The DeMint amendment put forward as an alternative by Republicans to Obama's stimulus would have cost four times as much:
  
  "To listen to critics on the right, the stimulus was a terrible idea. First, they claimed that it was filled with pork — but in order to make that claim, they had to denounce things that were not, in fact, in the bill. An aide to John Boehner, the House minority leader, claimed the stimulus would spend $30 million protecting a marsh mouse near Nancy Pelosi's district; no such provision was in the bill. Boehner and other Republicans insisted it would spend $8 billion on a high–speed rail link between Los Angeles and Las Vegas; no, it wouldn't. In a way, the apparent need of Republicans to invent wasteful spending out of thin air was a demonstration of how clean the bill really is: They obviously couldn't find enough real waste to complain about."
  
  http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/2643097...
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  6 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 7%
    4thchance9 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "Republicans to Obama's stimulus would have cost four times as much"
    
    NO, that's just another damage control left wing dem liberal LIE!
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    5 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 92%
      Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      The tax cuts in the DeMint amendment would have cost $3.1 trillion over the next ten years. I'd like to see a link to support your counterclaim.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      2 Replies
      
      loading ...
      - ShixaComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
        
        hefaa1Comment removed: Hard Banned
    - 91%
      hamy9 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Um...then why did our spending quadruple under Bush?
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
    - libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
- 22%
  Endoscopy9 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Albmore
  Did you ever hear of distracting people?
  
  They rant about Rush for two reasons.
  
  1. The major one is to keep peoples attention off of that boondoggle bill with 9000 earmarks and other stupid things in the bill. Lets not have any transparency and keep people talking about Rush.
  
  2. A foolish attempt to divide the Republicans. Try to get them to take sides. Divide and conquer. Bound to fail. Obama is giving the Republicans a lot of ammunition with his huge spending that does not target the economy. For example how does changing health care fix the economy????
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  40 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 89%
    Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Obama never said changing health care would fix the economy, but nationalizing health care would take the burden off businesses, which could then create more jobs, which would subsequently help fix the economy.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    37 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user36 Replies
      - 73%
        Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Many companies have gone bankrupt because they are no longer able to compete in a global market due to legacy costs inherent with providing health care for employees. That's one of the main reasons the American auto industry has driven itself into a ditch.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        34 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned20 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        How much do you think GM spends in total on health insurance for its tens of thousands of employees?
        
        Now, how much do you think all those multi-million-dollar salaries add up to?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        19 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user8 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I know you do.
        
        But the point is, taking the responsibility of paying for healthcare out of business' hands would save them tremendous amounts of money.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        7 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned6 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Currently, the average cost of healthcare premiums is about $5600 for a single person, and about $12,000 for a family. And that doesn't include what you pay for copayments and deductibles.
        
        If your taxes go up less than your portion that per year depending on whether you're single or filing for a family, and your employer's taxes go up less than the amount they'd pay for you, then everyone's saving money.
        
        And the reason it wouldn't cost the government more than it now costs businesses and employees to pay for health insurance is that one plan that covers everyone would have cheaper administrative costs than several plans administered by private companies who also add in their profits.
        
        You can see a very detailed plan here:
        
        http://www.pnhp.org/publications/proposal_of_the_p...
        
        If you still have questions after reading this plan, they're likely to be answered somewhere else on that website--it's very extensive and answers a lot of questions.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        5 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned4 Replies
        
        100%
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        You have reached the root of the problem. How do you solve it. Many countries have pursued national health care as a solution. It will have good and bad associated with it, as will any solution. Is that the route this country should take, do we pursue another, or do we live with what we have?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
        
        Neutral
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Should that be the battle plan for all departments of government?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 16) (recursion depth : 15) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
        
        100%
        Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I completely agree that executive pay in corporate America has reached obscene proportions over the past decades. However, this is an issue that can be immediately remedied, whereas legacy healthcare costs must be shifted or those who work hard all their lives are left high and dry:
        
        http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/11/crippling-burd...
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned7 Replies
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned6 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Surely you realize I'm not a fan of the huge compensation packages executives at giant corporations receive.
        
        I'm not arguing that those people are worth that much money.
        
        But to get back to your basic math, GM employs more than 10,000 employees. If it costs GM $10,000 to insure each, that's above the $100,000,000 you were talking about the executives receiving.
        
        We'd be far better served by relieving the burden of both outrageous executive compensation and business-subsidized healthcare.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        5 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned4 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        How do you not understand that taxpayers already pay for healthcare through insurance premiums?
        
        Your answers to everything seem always to miss the larger picture.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 13) (recursion depth : 12) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        prophyporcritesComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
        
        100%
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Were you this vocal against the Iraq War?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 15) (recursion depth : 14) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Less, not more.
        
        Again, the taxpayers will no longer pay premiums through their employers, their employers won't pay any portion of the coverage, there will be no co-pays, no deductibles, no out-of-pocket payments, the coverage will not be capped, and the entire system will cost less to run.
        
        What you pay for healthcare will be less overall.
        
        And of course, everyone will be covered.
        
        In other words, you save money. Would you rather pay more for less coverage to private insurers simply to deny the government money needed to run a better program?
        
        Did you read the PNHP proposal I've posted a few times in the past few days? Here's the link again if you'd like it.
        
        http://www.pnhp.org/publications/proposal_of_the_p...
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 15) (recursion depth : 14) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        If companies simply get rid of paying for healthcare (but there's no mechanism in place for employees to receive healthcare), then workers will leave whether there are unions or not.
        
        Then those Big Three will not stay in business, as you state.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned8 Replies
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Why do you think Americans drive those foreign automobiles?
        
        Could it be that the American companies refused to build cars Americans wanted to buy?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
        
        Neutral
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Please define what is "American vehicles"?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        Beau78909 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I drive a twelve-year-old Japanese car that I bought used eight years ago. I've had few repairs on it, and none have cost more than $300--that's in Chicago, where having brake pads replaced can cost over $200. It's still running great and gets over 30 miles to the gallon--in the city.
        
        But wtagg above also has a point--most American cars are chock full of foreign parts.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        So, driving an American nameplate vehicle made in another country is ok?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
        
        stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
        
        Neutral
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I did not realize that prisoners were working for the big 3. Is that part of the bailout plan?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        0%
        Endoscopy9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        What you and others do not stop and recognize is that they will be taxed to give that and more to the government. Our taxes will go up much more than the insurance costs. That is the historical example of where the government health insurance has gone into effect. EXPENSIVE government bureaucracies will oversee medical care. Also it will be a cost effective standard instead of safe and effective that Medicare and Medicaid currently employ. Keep in mind that those programs are bankrupt and a big drag on the government resources. A national council will tell doctors what is cost effective and that is all they can give you. The British method that it is modeled after looks at how long the patient might live and the longer the more cost effective. Old people will be denied treatment for problems just because they are old. It was writen from Dashles book. Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.
        
        So liberals are you going to be more accepting of conditions that you get in your old age and just accept them and possibly die from them? Currently in Britain the people with heart disease and arthritis are to self medicate. Will you be overjoyed when that hits here?
        
        You liberals listen to the talking points and NEVER CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.
        
        The pie in the sky liberals never want to hear of the costs of going this path. Why?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        Progressive9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        The fact is that millions of people in the US of all ages are dying for lack of healthcare. Do you know how many Americans are currently forced to choose between life-saving medication or food? Are you aware of the arbitrary ceilings placed on treatments by private insurers in the US? A basic comparison shows that universal healthcare benefits most citizens most of the time, which is a prime tenet of human decency:
        
        http://www.npr.org/news/specials/healthcare/health...
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - Neutral
        wtagg9 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Considering how much bailout money he has given many of them, they would still be in the plus column, providing he (and congress) decides to actually tax them. That hasn't occurred yet.
        
        I'd be worried more about what is happening before taking on what might happen.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
  - 92%
    pokydoke9 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "2. A foolish attempt to divide the Republicans. Try to get them to take sides." The GOP does this all by themselves they need no help from anyone.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
  - 100%
    Jeboba9 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Get them to take sides? Hell, they don't even have a side right now! They are lost and will continue to lose! America is fed up with their bullcrap!
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
- 82%
  Jeboba9 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  The Repubs could start by asking that the 40% that is THEIRS be removed. They yell about it and then go home and brag to their constituents about all the money (pork) they brough to their state.
  
  Typical Repubs. HYPOCRITES, LIARS, and THIEVES!
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  1 Reply
  
  loading ...
  - 100%
    aceofspades19 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    On Long Island the biggest chunk of pork is going to Rep. Peter King a good REpcon standard bearer - how much? $218 MILLION more than the entire congressional delegation - almost all Democrats -representing this area.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (6)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (9)

Submit a Story

Advertisement