Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.

 

« Previous | Next »


FRUSTRATION



barack obama and staff

FRUSTRATION
Sometimes you realize you’re the smartest person in the room.  Unfortunately, that’s not always a good thing.

(Barack Obama and his staff)

Picture: dunno source, Caption: grammarlicious, via Poster Builder

» Recaption This

» See All Captions

Incorrect source or offensive?
  • Share on Facebook
  • Copy & paste this:

» 494 comments

  1. mothergoose says:

    Ahhh yes, the Presidential Face-palm. I have the feeling he’s going to be doing that enough times over the next four years that his forehead will begin to flatten.

    • Troll Brotherhood says:

      O RLY? is an Internet phenomenon, typically presented as an image macro featuring a Snowy Owl. The phrase “O RLY?” (“Oh, really?”) is typically used in a sarcastic or sardonic manner, often in response to a statement that the speaker feels is obvious, or blatantly false and/or self-contradictory.[1] Some internet forum trolls may also reply “O RLY?” in response to a lengthy or overly detailed post. This term is also used in a friendly conversation, the response to “O RLY” being “YA RLY” (“Yeah, really”) and so forth, repeating this.
      The phrase “O RLY?” was used on the Something Awful Forums at least as early as August 2003.[2] The original “O RLY?” Snowy Owl image macro is based on a photo taken by nature photographer John White, which he posted to the newsgroup alt.binaries.pictures.animals in 2001.[3] The snowy owl image was photoshopped on 4chan after the word filtering of the word “repost” to “owl”.[4] An owl is also on the cover of the O’Reilly book “Learning the Unix Operating System”, creating an additional play on words for those familiar with O’Reilly covers.
      Use in commercial works
      * In the Game Boy Advance game Mega Man Battle Network 6, if the player tries the Humor program at Cyber Academy, Lan responds to a certain joke with “O Rly?” and MegaMan.EXE replies with “Ya Rly!”. Also, if the player tries it at the Expo Site, there is a “No Wai!” joke.[5]
      * In the Xbox 360 version of the football game Blitz: The League, one of the hidden gamer achievements is called “O RLY?” It is earned by losing a Campaign Mode game by more than 24 points. The image of this achievement is, appropriately enough, of a snowy owl.[6]
      * In the Nintendo DS game Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney, one of the characters is named Olga Orly, a clear reference to this phenomenon.[7]
      * The promotional video announcing the American license of The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya, “Adventures of the ASOS Brigade Episode 00: Made by Fans for Fans,” features a short segment using pictures with the caption “O RLY?” in both English and Japanese. The segment starts with Yuki Nagato making a statement in Japanese, with an “O RLY?” image displayed, and with her replying, in Japanese, “Really.” The segment ends with another picture saying “NO WAI!”[8]
      * In the MMORPG EverQuest 2, Orly and Yarly are two Hooluk (owl-like race) NPCs that stand above the portal on Whisperwind Isle in The Barren Sky.[9][10]
      * In the text-based game Alter Aeon, ORLY is an emote that players can use, which results in “hooting” at another player.[11]

      • mothergoose says:

        Ordinal Post Rule…fail.

        • the_original_shortright says:

          this makes me want to facepalm. instead, i’ll just substitute a *headdesk*.

          • Captain Wow says:

            *headkeyboard*
            zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzcccccccccccccccccc

            • mothergoose says:

              *tries headkeyboard*
              apy 9y89p235pq3tgh [h3q[tiuakgj a’sfguja [t9uq5 [u9 0gb[a e9999

              • Captain Wow says:

                It’s not bad, just leaves little square indentions in your forehead.

                • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

                  Then you’re not doing it right. *picks broken keys out of forehead*

                • the_original_shortright says:

                  my old college roommate was an intern for the red cross one summer. she had the office in the basement with no one around… you know the type. she fell asleep at work one day on the keyboard and woke up with the “b” key stuck to her cheek and all the little square outlines. apparently her boss though it was hilarious and didn’t get mad at all.

      • bitter clown says:

        Please, please stop with this ordinal rule crap. Who voted for this anyway? Why are there rules? Why’s the rum gone?

        • Tessie says:

          Who voted for this anyway? Why are there rules? Why’s the rum gone?
          `
          Where is the snack tray? And the scantily clad dancing boys?

        • Jane St.Clair says:

          Outside of the last few days, where we’ve apparently had a troll infestation, PK has a relatively low instance of “first” trolls, as compared to the other lol sites. The few times we do have an ordinal posting, the content presented by the regulars is almost always more interesting and amusing then the low quality lols we’ve been having lately. You, as a newcomer, look like a douche of the epic sort when you come banging in demanding we stop long standing PK practices. Either you are a troll and don’t care, or you want to be a repeat commenter on this site and have your opinions respected. If the former is true, carry on with your vitriol and we’ll do our best to ignore you, except when times are slow and we feel like poking you. If it is the latter, lurk a little more and proceed with caution in your initial forays.

    • bitter clown says:

      Keep trying, if you type enough letters you will eventually come up with something funny to say.

    • goptoughguy says:

      Seriously, if Obama is the smartest person in that room, then that is truly a heinously stupid room.

  2. uber says:

    facepalm apply directly to the forehead facepalm apply directly to the forehead facepalm apply directly to the forehead

    • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

      i think those commercials were designed with the intent of giving you a headache.

      never tried the stuff though, seemed like a scam. plus the commericals pissed me off.

      • Bitter's Chef says:

        The commercials are bad enough on TV, uber shall DIE!

        Where are the fire-breathing dragons when you need one?

  3. uber says:

    and your point would be what?

  4. sisyphusredux says:

    I don’t get it. What, exactly, IS Obama’s IQ?

    • parker says:

      over 9000

    • Captain Wow says:

      Infinity times elebenty.
      -
      No wait, that’s Chuck Norris’s IQ.

    • bad fairie says:

      that’s just what he wants you to think. but the reality is that having an unappreciated numbskull for a vp just about guarantees that no wingnut with half a brain is going to try to off obama

    • AZfederalist says:

      We have no idea — he won’t release any of his transcripts and his first executive order was to seal all of his records.

      Listen to him off-teleprompter — it’s a pretty good clue: “Ummm, ahhh, it would cost about, …uummmm ahhh errrr , hold on … I’m getting to it, it would cost about ummmmm errrr “

      • bad fairie says:

        here’s an idea, why don’t you call up your local college, business, doctor, or government agency and try asking for anybody’s records not your own and see how far you get. obama didn’t seal his records, they were never public information in the first place! just like your records aren’t public domain….it’s called privacy….

        • viking gal says:

          As someone in the college biz, I can tell you that it is against the law to release someone’s college records and/or transcript without their express written permission, complete with signature and the appropriate fee. –and such records are only released at that point to the one person indicated in the written letter.

    • henry charles alexander says:

      barack HUSSEIN Obama’s IQ is not what we should worry about. His ambition is the problem. he’s is a Constitutional lawyer. Remeber, it takes a thief to catch a Thief, well it takes a Constitutional lawyer to subvert the Constitution.

      “praise the Lord and Pass the ammo.”

      • MomusTATW says:

        Someone should have stayed in school and learnt the difference between socialism and communism…..but here it is for you in a nutshell (better late than never), Communists want to remove all national boundaries, identities and governments so that all people from all over the world are free to make their own choices and work for the common good, but this unfortunately relies on every being have a base human nature that is essentially “good”.

        Socialists on the other hand want to uphold the current government, but extend its powers to protect and raise up the lowest echelons of society to ensure that there is an equal playing field and encourage a more meritocratic society rather than an elitist society.

        However, I suspect, you dislike them mainly because they “want to take your gun”….oh you poor thing, you need a gun to compensate? You only have your right to bare arms due to a document set down in very different times.

        Whilst nothing can be done for your IQ I hope I have helped your understanding of the wider world. I doubt you will ever read this but I feel better for it jacka55.

  5. A gun-owning, voting, religious, real American says:

    I guess he wishes he had paid attention more when they were discussing civics and social studies, oh, and math, and science, and english when he was BS’ing his way through all those schools. This walking stack of fecal matter remains and forever shall be remembered as a complete failure as a presidential usurper, as a rabble rouser, and even a failure as a man. I have absolutely no sympathy for him.

  6. Captain Wow says:

    *checks jebus’s ID*
    It’s okay! He’s just ten years old.
    -
    Mentally anyways.

  7. senor says:

    HAHAHAHA OBAMA IS SO SMART! HE IS THE SMARTEST MAN IN THE WORLD!!!1 I’M SO GLAD HE IS OUR PRESIDENT! HE IS SO SMART HE WON’T RELEASE HIS COLLEGE TRANCRIPTS AND SHOW US HOW SMART HE IS. HE IS SUCH A TRANSPARENT PRESIDENT OTHER THEN THAT.
    It’s not that big of a deal that he didn’t release his transcripts, but don’t say you are a new age politician that will be the most transparent president when you withhold your information to make nuts on the rightwing make all of conservatives look bad.

  8. sisyphusredux says:

    No one answered my query.

    What, exactly, is Obama’s IQ?

    I’ve searched all over the internet, and can find nothing-save speculation.

    I know mine. Does he not know his? What?

    I don’t get this at all….

    • mothergoose says:

      I googled it, but have only found speculation as well… for what it’s worth, they range from 110-145…

      • mothergoose says:

        BTW… am having Seinfeld flashbacks to George having to take the IQ test…

        • sisyphusredux says:

          Thank you. At the very least, you responded in a couteous and rational manner.

          I found the same range. But no one knows for sure-everyone just seems to assume he’s brilliant.

          Why? What has he done that is illustrative of his brilliance, acumen or talent? I’m serious here-I really want to know.

          BTW_I like your little peace symbol thingie. I have one on the back of my car that says (peace symbol) KILLS.

          • mothergoose says:

            I’m not sure about his IQ. I do think he’s intelligent. I understand where you’re coming from about finding proof of his acumen and brilliance; the only evidence I have to offer are his books… I know that’ll probably get me in trouble on this site, but…

            I still think Carter may have been one of the most intelligent Presidents we’ve ever had. Not sure where Obama falls in that category. I also don’t think that W was the dumbest… although he was a gaffe machine.

            • Deep Thought says:

              Buks tast gud.

            • For some reason this entire thread is making me think of that joke that ends “Don’t worry, dude….the smartest man in the world just jumped out of the plane with my backpack.”

            • sisyphusredux says:

              Carter was a nuclear scientist-so in terms of academic IQ, he rated right at the top, along with Jefferson and Lincoln and Wilson.

              Then again, Carter and Wilson had remarkably bad presidential admins, and both Jefferson and Lincoln had their bad moments.
              OTOH, such normal IQ men as Truman, Roosevelt, Reagan and Eisenhower accomplished quite remarkable things.

              Personally, I think it has a lot to do with luck, political prescience, a large dose of historical memory and…well, realism.

              Obama is still learning. I’ll be far more interested in what he accomplishes (or learns) in the next couple of years.

              • mothergoose says:

                I’ve been trying to hold a “wait and see what happens” approach with him as well. I did the same with W when he came into office (the first term). I wasn’t a Bush-basher straight away… that happened with me over time… right around the Iraq invasion…

                Has Obama made mistakes? ABSOLUTELY… but, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, for now. If the economy doesn’t turn around will I be happy with him? Probably not. But again, I’m willing to give him some time… about 4 years… then, we’ll see where the country is… that’s what elections are for, afterall.

                • Torus2112 says:

                  That’s probably the best route, I’m personally optimistic because no matter how smart he is technically, he was competent enough to get into Harvard Law, and he strikes me as at least pragmatic and, if you will, wise, which I will take any day over pure “mental horsepower” with no perspective.

                  • bitter clown says:

                    We have NO idea why he got into Harvard Law, because no one will release his grades. Or ANY other information that may give us an idea of his competence.

                    • viking gal says:

                      Harvard law doesn’t admit idiots, unless they are the children of rich alumni.

                      • bitter clown says:

                        We don’t know that, do we? We are only asked to take their word for it.

                        • mothergoose says:

                          Yeah.. and that whole birth certificate thing… how’s that working out for ya?

                        • bitter clown says:

                          It’s far more than the birth certificate, it’s all the secrecy that surrounds this administration. I am starting to get a little bit sick of it, especially from someone that campaigned on the transparency issue.

                        • Touretts says:

                          Two words- “Affirmative Action” is how Obama got in. Which is why he will not release his grades

                        • mothergoose says:

                          IMO: There’s a difference between “personal transparency” and “Administrative Transparency”. I think his Administration, while not as transparent as I’d like, is certainly being more transparent than Bush. Of his personal life, I really don’t care… by this point, if there was something dangerous or overly shady in his past… don’t you think Hilary or McCain, or anyone else he’s ever run against him, would have exposed it by now??!!

                        • Touretts says:

                          But he promised transparency- then locks away every record on himself

                        • Deep Thought says:

                          There is that little hypocrisy issue, to be certain.

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          You know what, there’s some stuff that’s just none of our business. Who gives a crap what his grades were? He’s president now and knowing his grades won’t change that. So fvcking get over the g-d grades bullshit.

                  • Semperfidd says:

                    “he was competent enough to get into Harvard Law” Bush was competent enough to get in Yale. Just because you get into an Ivy league school does not necessarily mean you are competent. Granted the averages lean towards competency but I have met a couple of Harvard grads who were very talented in some ways but had no clue in others.

                    • Semperfidd says:

                      Going to college does not make you more competent or smarter than other people. I have two degrees and I am positive I am not smarter or more competent than alot of people on this site and I am assuming that not all of them went to college. My wife is definately smarter and more competent than I and she did not go to college.

                      • Torus2112 says:

                        I said that the fact that he got in (not to mention graduated) showed some indisputable level of intelligence, but I liked that that was married to some very practical wisdom, and that is what makes a competent individual in my book.

                        P.S., Bush got in because of connections. Obama got in on merit, which is an important distinction.

                        • bitter clown says:

                          How do you know that? Can you back that up? I just can’t say for sure that Obama got in on merit.

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          “Bush got in because of connections. Obama got in on merit,” And I suppose Bush graduated because of connections too? If you are going to toss out statements like that you should at least have something to back it up.

                        • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

                          The funny thing is that they claim that Bush got in on connections and put his C-student grades up against both Gore’s and Kerry’s in the 2000 and 2004 campaigns. If you go back and look, Gore and Kerry made basically the same (or slightly worse) grades at the same or comparable Ivy League schools, and were thought of as intelectuals.
                          -
                          The fact that Obama hasn’t released his grades doesn’t bother me, but it does tell me that either he’s not the A student that everyone assumes or he’s got something else hidden in there that he just doesn’t want to let out. Which is his perogative, but he and his defenders need to understand how bad it looks.

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          Why does it look bad? Why can’t he say “you can’t see it ‘cos I don’t you to.” Why is that so awful?

                        • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

                          It looks bad in the sense that he’s promised to have a completely transparent administration, and it’s a bit, well, not transparent to not disclose things that former presidents have disclosed with no qualms. Also, it looks bad in that he’s thought of as an intellectual and a very smart guy, but doesn’t necessarily want to release grades that might or might not prove that. There is some question as to how he got a job as a professor in the first place, and releasing grades would stomp that to the ground.
                          -
                          It’s a bit squinchy that a president COULD quell rumors and “misinformation” as he seems so hot and heavy to do by observing full disclosure, but chooses not to. Like I said, it’s his perogative, it’s his private life, but he doesn’t need to be surprised or mad when people question it if he chooses not to release it.

                        • viking gal says:

                          Good point. Not showing your college or law school transcript to the world is vastly different from not showing your criminal record to the world!

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          Eh, I wouldn’t be falling over myself to whip out this stuff for people who have it out for me either. But maybe that’s just me. And he promised a transparent administration, not a no-holds-barred look into his past. And maybe he is hiding something, who knows? Either way, I still don’t think it’s any of our business.

                        • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

                          I agree with you, Eric. It is none of our business. But he shouldn’t get all pissy about it and his defenders and allies shouldn’t get all pissy about people wanting to know. That’s my only point :-)
                          -
                          Personally, I’d rather hide my grades away in a vault somewhere at the bottom of the Marianas Trench.

                        • Jane St.Clair says:

                          I have a 3.98 GPA at the Master’s Level and I still cringe every time my adviser pulls up my college history and starts scrolling through my first three years in undergrad.

                        • Dr. Demento says:

                          I have a 4.0 on the Bachelors, Masters and PhD level.

                          Proves I know a shitpot about nothing relevant to anyone but me and six other people in the known universe.

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          Must be a philosophy major.

                        • charro says:

                          I got an A in watercolors!

              • Sisy – Carter a nuclear scientist? Not unless completing a single introductory course in running a small sealed reactor makes one a scientist. He left the academy prior to completing enough study to serve on a nuclear sub. (link)

                Don’t know what’s deeper on this LOL, the fresh troll meat or the revisions of history.

            • Tessie says:

              “I still think Carter may have been one of the most intelligent Presidents we’ve ever had. ”
              `
              Which raises the question of whether *intelligence* and *the ability to govern effectively* are two separate things (no insult to Mr. Carter intended). I know plenty of intelligent people who can’t sing a note or, if you put a pencil in their hand, can’t draw a straight line. It’s not entirely unreasonable to suppose that a talent for governing isn’t all that different from any other kind of talent, in that it’s irrespective of intelligence — although ideally, a leader should have both.

              • Sarah says:

                Carter just got screwed by situations that were out of his control in the Middle east. He did good things too. Like keeping Egypt and Israel from blowing each other off the map…

                • viking gal says:

                  That Camp David treaty was like the falling of the wall in Berlin–a major milestone for those of us dinosaurs who are old enough to remember it! “What? You mean an Arab leader and the head of Israel agreed to be in the same building?!”

  9. cgray says:

    Actually, Larry Summers is probably the most intellectually gifted person in that room, and that’s not saying much. This ceaseless, mindless worship of Obama provides ample evidence the Democratic Party is more of a cult than a political party.

    • mothergoose says:

      As opposed to the Republican Party who just says “no” to EVERYTHING Obama does WITHOUT COMING UP WITH THEIR OWN PLAN!!!

      Republican 1: “We hate the democrats healthcare plan!!! Oh…you want to see our plan…well…uhhh….DOWN WITH SOCIALISM!! HE’S GOING TO KILL OFF THE ELDERLY!! DUCKS EAT ICE CREAM!!”

      Republican 2:”What?!!”

      Republican 1:”Just keep yelling and maybe no one will notice that we can’t come up with anything better!”

      • Cosman246 says:

        And that’s why Specter jumped ship.

        • ProgrammerDude says:

          Word!

          • froofrou the fabulous says:

            No, Specter jumped ship because he knew he couldn’t win his seat back as a Republican since he very rarely votes with his party on important matters, and since his job is more important to him than representing the people who sent him to Washington, he told them they could all kiss his ass and went to the other side.

            • IndieTarheel says:

              And given that he was a Dem in the first place who jumped ship when it was convenient to do so for the reason Frou just mentioned, it pretty much proves that people have indescribably short attention spans AND tend to learn nothing from history.

      • Blarg says:

        Just because they can’t come up with anything better in the immensely short time frame that the Obama White House put out doesn’t mean we should go with the crappy plan they tried to throw together as fast as they could.

        • Blarg says:

          I realized after hitting send that that sentence had far too many they’s in it. The first they is the republicans in Congress, whereas the second and third were referring to the democrats in Congress.

          • mothergoose says:

            Except that I feel they are using the “time limit” idea as an excuse for not coming up with something better… I’m sure they’ve had plenty of time to come up with something…anything… if they truly wanted to reform Healthcare and Insurance.

            To me, it just looks like they are trying (along with some Dems, to be fair) to protect their interests in the pharma/healthcare/insurance industries so the big campaign checks keep rolling in.

            • Kal says:

              What Republicans and their followers forget to realize is that Democrats (particularly guys like Ted Kennedy) have been working on the health care issue for almost 20 years. They’ve been working on actually having a plan where as the Republicans have been working on how to make sure their have and have more base can get richer off the people who actually work for a living.

              And if you want to talk about ludicrously short time frames, look back on the “If you’re a PATRIOT you’ll accept your freedoms taken away” Act or the “But I really really wanna bomb the guy who made my daddy look bad” authorization.

              • mothergoose says:

                Valid point. But my major concern is that if the Repubs want to offer an alternative plan, then fine… let’s see it.

                It’s kind of like the “Alternative Budget” the repubs said they had… don’t remember seeing one.

                • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

                  MG, you mean the alternative budget that Boehner came up with that had no numbers (well except for page numbers maybe)? it was genuis!

                  • Deep Thought says:

                    U sed Boner :lol:

                  • mothergoose says:

                    Yeah, that’s the one. Didn’t Eric Cantor have a lot of things to say about it at the time? Then someone asked him for figures to support it and he gave the standard “we’re still working on it, I’ll get back to you”… I guess they’re still working on it.

                • sisyphusredux says:

                  Has it occurred to you that most of us are quite content with the system we have? And that we have little or no interest in switching to government controlled healthcare?

                  Personally, I’ve lived with socialized medicine-and was appalled by it. My husband lived with it for forty years, and is pitching a decided hissy fit over the prospect of having to live with it again.

                  No, I do not work for the health care or insurance industry. I’m just a private citizen with an intense interest in my and my family’s health prospects. And I have contacted my federal representatives to acquaint them with my views.

                  Why is that so hard to understand?

                  • mothergoose says:

                    Out of curiosity, where did you live with socialized medicine?

                    • eddiepscetti says:

                      Australia and I’m not impressed.

                      • Eric-in-STL says:

                        Why not? Serious question.

                        • eddiepscetti says:

                          They have what they call a medicare levy which everyone pays which I think is currently $795 a year. However, I can also have private health cover, which is in addition to what I pay the government. Although, I do get a tax break if I choose to have the private cover. On top of that, when I go to the doctor it’s usually $58 per visit, but I also get a portion of that back from medicare. My problem with it is, if I need to see my doctor, I usually have to wait 6-8 weeks before I can get in. if I need anything beyond that, it’s going to be months. If I need to see a specialist, I can count on 3-6 months before I can get in, but I don’t have to pay for that if I get a referral first.
                          -
                          Now, let’s say I have to go into the hospital. I’m now looking at anywhere from 9-12 months before I can get in, and that depends on what it’s for. This is where the private health cover comes in. I can choose to use that and can get in earlier, but it may or may not be covered, it all depends on how extensive your coverage is.
                          -
                          Compared to what I had in the States, I could call my doctor and get in within a week. If I needed surgery I could usually schedule that within a 3 month time frame. I probably paid close to what I’m paying now, but my doctor visit’s were on $10 per visit, and the two times I was in hospital only cost me $20.
                          -
                          Again, I’m not impressed.

                        • eddiepscetti says:

                          Oh, and I didn’t even go into precriptions. There is no coverage for those, but you can claim them on your taxes but you have to have a minimum of $1500 in deductions before you get any type of break.
                          -
                          When I had medical coverage in the States, I had a $10 co-pay..

                        • froofrou the fabulous says:

                          That has got to be the best testimonial for why it’s a bad idea, Eddie! Thank you!!

                        • eddiepscetti says:

                          Let me add that there are currently people who can’t afford the private health cover who are in desperate need of surgery now, but because of the backlog, most of these people could possibly die before they get the needed surgery. There are going to be exceptions of course, but for the most part people here seem to have just accepted the fact that it’s going to be awhile before they get in.

                        • Tessie says:

                          Thanks for the enlightening posts, eddie.
                          *sneakily tries to put the toe of one foot onto ed’s lawn*

                        • eddiepscetti says:

                          The bottom line is, while everyone wants health care that people can afford, nationalizing it isn’t going to solve the problem. Until they can get runaway costs down (i.e. regulating the costs?) there will be those who may have the access, but still won’t be able to afford to see a doctor or get needed treatments.

                  • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

                    well, that’s the beauty of the plan sisy, there’s nothing in the plan that mandates you must have the gov’t health care option, hence it’s an “option”

                    personally, i have a big stake in it passing – as it currently stands in the health care system we got, i cannot get health care due to pre-existing conditions so, basically, i get sick, i’m screwed.

                    but the plan as it’s offered will either force the insurance companies to accept me or offer me an alternative option that will cover me regardless of pre-existing conditions.

                    the whole idea is something i like, we’re all americans, we all live together in some sense of the word, we should look out for each other not cast aside the sick or frail simply because they are inconvenient. i mean, we’ve kept georgia for years…
                    :) (sorry couldn’t help that last jab)

                    • Semperfidd says:

                      I am sorry you are so misinformed wallfly…maybe you have been watching too much CNN.

                      You can keep your current health care coverage but here is the catch. Once the new Government plan is passed you will be unable to switch to another private health care insurance company. If you do NOT have private health care coverage before the inception date of the government plan it is illegal to get private health care coverage.

                      The reality….private health care companies will not be able to add more people to be insured privately after the government plan is enacted. The private companies will have to raise their premiums to stay competitive with the public plan which does not operate based on profitability. This will make it impossible for them to stay in business without (1) raising premiums even higher or (2) forcing their insured to drop their policy based on higher premiums.

                      Your “CHOICE” will be:
                      1. Not Insured….Government Plan
                      2. Lost your Job….Government Plan
                      3. Change your existing private health care plan….Government Plan

                      • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

                        i appreciate the additional information semper but it’s contrary to the research i’ve seen done here at work – just did a story on it the other day, actually and despite what i’ve seen on fox or fox-affliated types the notion that you cannot switch health care plans or are otherwise going to be forced into the plan. the only catch i had seen that i was iffy about was the cost – the inclusion of a new tax on who-knows and the addition of a fee if a small business doesn’t pick up a health care plan, but so far nothing has been set in stone so it’s mostly just concepts at this point. i mean, honestly, i would be willing to pay a bit more in taxes (though i’d rather not) if it will ensure that we can get a gov’t option for people who otherwise would be left without.
                        i will do more looking into it to be sure, but you can pretty much guarantee that if you’re getting your info from fox you’re going to be misled since half the time they just make stuff up.

                        (and cnn is a decent source of news, biased like everything else if you want to get into it, but it’s better than fox and msnbc, a bit worse than ap but generally not bad – the best approach so far seems to be to watch a bit of everything then go with what seems similar between them, there’s a real story in there somewhere behind all the crap)

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          I will agree with you that all the media is biased towards one direction or the other.

                          “but so far nothing has been set in stone so it’s mostly just concepts at this point.” The house, Pelosi wanted to pass this last week. If it is all concepts then why the big push to pass it as it is currently written?

                          ” mean, honestly, i would be willing to pay a bit more in taxes (though i’d rather not) if it will ensure that we can get a gov’t option for people who otherwise would be left without”

                          Medicare and Medicade are the number 3 and 4 most expensive items in the Federal Budget. The government has done an extremely poor job running these two programs. What in the world would make you think that the government could run a program covering 300 million people? What does the government do well other than collect tax payers money and spend it poorly? Please name one program the government runs well.

                      • mothergoose says:

                        The other “CHOICE” would be:
                        1. leave it alone… and let so many go without any coverage at all
                        2. Go with the Republican plan… oh that’s right…they don’t have one

                        I’m also not sure about your #3 choice. I’ve not heard anything about forcing people to change their exisiting health care plan.

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          I am not saying that we need to leave it alone MG…of course that is all you see in your rose colored glasses…There needs to be change. That I agree with. But moving towards a system that is government run is not the answer. The government runs the VA and they do a pretty crappy job of it.

                        • bitter clown says:

                          Once the government begins to offer health insurance companies will cancel their private plans which most people are happy with. Private companies competing with a government, doesn’t work.

                        • mothergoose says:

                          I can’t speak to the VA issue, I’ve no experience with it. I’ve heard both good things and horror stories; might some of that be from the VA Hospital they were in, or is it more the VA Administration?

                        • Tessie says:

                          “Private companies competing with a government, doesn’t work.”
                          `
                          Really? UPS and FedEx seem to be enjoying a degree of success, even though the Post Office exists.

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          “might some of that be from the VA Hospital they were in, or is it more the VA Administration?”

                          Does it matter which one it is? They are both run by the government.

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          “Really? UPS and FedEx seem to be enjoying a degree of success, even though the Post Office exists”

                          How successful would they be if their customers were forced to use the US Postal Service? I am pretty sure that if my company were forced to do that we wouldn’t pay to use FedEx or UPS.

                        • Tessie says:

                          ““Really? UPS and FedEx seem to be enjoying a degree of success, even though the Post Office exists”

                          How successful would they be if their customers were forced to use the US Postal Service? ”
                          `
                          Well, then it wouldn’t be *competition* — now, would it? The question you originally posited is whether private enterprise could *compete* with the same enterprise if run by the government. I provided two examples of companies who are successfully doing so.

                        • bitter clown says:

                          Well, suppose the government says you can use Fedex but if you ever switch to UPS you will have to just use USPS forever. How long do you think Fedex would last?

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          “Well, then it wouldn’t be *competition* — now, would it? The question you originally posited is whether private enterprise could *compete* with the same enterprise if run by the government. I provided two examples of companies who are successfully doing so.”

                          That is kind of our whole point Tessie. The government is going to make it an uneven playing field by enacting regulations and conditions that the private industry can not compete with. To use your Fedex and UPS example. If you were to compare it to what the government wants to do with healthcare (according to what I have read) then all of the businesses who do not have a Fedex or UPS account by the time the congress passes their bill will have to have (and pay for) an account at the US Postal office. Further, FedEx and UPS can not get anymore customers than what they have after the congress passes their bill. If any of the current Fedex or UPS customers want to change from Fedex to UPS or vice versa, they cant. They would have to get a US Postal account. This of course is very simplified and not an exact parallel to the healthcare plan that is being proposed.

                          Also, if FedEx and UPS are doing so well in comparison to the government run US Postal Service, why not privatise the US Postal Service? Your example actualy proves that private industry providing the same services as the government run industry does a better job. In 2008 FedEx made $1.1 billion in net profit where as the US Postal Service lost $1.7 billion

                        • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

                          Semper, don’t forget the fact that the government is not set up to make money. They don’t have to worry about making a profit, so therefore they can undercut everyone else because they are printing the money that they need to make it work (thereby causing inflation for everyone else, making it harder to pay for things, making it harder to pay taxes and still live, making it more difficult for the government to get money to run, making it necessary for them to print money, making inflation go up…..see a pattern here?)

                          What is going to drive private insurance out of business is that undercutting of prices. There is no way that a private entity can compete with a public one, so they will go out of business. Then, when you have no other options (IF the healthcare bill does not, in fact, contain the provision about switching healthcare automatically makes you enroll in the public option), you are forced to go to the public plan. It’s the same result, just a different way of getting there.

                    • Page 16 (link) busts the “option” story from what I can see.

                      I changed insurers with a disclosed pre-existing GI condition, and got covered with no restrictions. Worst case would have been not having expenses solely related to the GI issues covered for the first six months. Better to get the costs covered after six months than to be liable for them indefinitely.

                      In what state have you been refused an insurance policy due to your pre-existing condition? Your phrasing implies that you’re not currently “sick,” so can’t you hang on until coverage of your pre-existing condition kicks in?

                      I took the gamble when I switched, but when my parents switched in their mid-fifties, they carried both the old and new policies for six months to avoid a lapse of coverage on their pre-existing conditions.

                      I don’t presume to know the details of your situation, but I do know a lot of folks who are talking about pre-existing conditions have never actually looked into it.

                      Any hints on the Georgia joke?

                      • Post above was so far down the page that I probably should have quoted WallFly’s post that I was replying to.

                      • Semperfidd says:

                        I thought they passed the HIPAA law that took care of that.

                        If you were covered under your prior employer’s healthcare plan and take a job with a new employer, your new employer’s health insurance plan can impose a six-month “look back” period. During that time, you must have had “creditable coverage” with no breaks in excess of 63 days in order to get immediate treatment for a pre-existing condition

                  • markmier says:

                    Also, please provide evidence for your claim that “most of us are quite content.” For one, define “us.”

                    • Semperfidd says:

                      Wednesday, July 22, 2009 Email to a Friend ShareThisAdvertisementThe health care reform legislation working its way through Congress has lost support over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 44% of U.S. voters are at least somewhat in favor of the reform effort while 53% are at least somewhat opposed.

                  • Torus2112 says:

                    I’ve lived with it all my life, seems to be going great. My dad just had 36 gallstones and an infected gallbladder removed in our small town hospital in southern Ontario, and now he’s fine, and it was all completely free.

                    • mothergoose says:

                      Glad your father is ok… and can’t beat the price!!!

                    • bitter clown says:

                      It was free to you, as it should be for veterans, but nothing is completely free.

                    • Semperfidd says:

                      I am glad your father is ok as well. My mom was in Manatoba last week for her towns 125 year reunion. Of course one of the big topics was healthcare reform in the states. She had some stories for me when she got back of some really long waiting periods for seeing specialists and MRI’s. It seemed most of the people she talked to couldnt understand why the US would want to try to move toward a system like they had in Canada. No system is perfect. Good and bad can be said about both. Just an observation via my mom :o )

                      • Rattus says:

                        I keep hearing tales from Americans who know someone who either visited Canada or lives in Canada and has horror stories to tell about the healthcare system. As an almost lifelong resident of Canada, I can safely say that I don’t hear these stories from people I meet here. And I can get in to see my doctor usually same day, and my MRI wait time was two days (tumour free, but still partially deaf – so semi-yay!). I do know, however, the Idaho-residing sister of a close friend who ended up losing her house because a broken leg resulted in some sort of infection and things just snowballed out of control (and she was a nurse, for christ’s sake – you’d think she had a little pull). I’ll take my government run health care system, thank you very much. I will also take the government regulated bank where all my money nestles all safe and warm over Joe’s Bank and Grill, which seems to be a viable American option.

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          This is what frustrates me about the socialized medicine thing. I keep hearing horror stories from some people while I hear glowing reviews from other people. Eddie doesn’t like it in Australia, but you like it in Canada. The question is, will ours in America be like either of them?

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          I was born in Canada so half my family lives there. I am glad you are happy with the system you have in Canada. I am sure plenty of people are happy with the welfare system we have down here in the states. My point being, you will find people happy and unhappy with any system. The real question is what does the overall population think and what are the survivability/quality of living statistics that go with both systems? From everything I am reading it looks like the US system gives better treatment as far as overall technology goes. The big problem is that the US is number one in spending per patient. That number needs to go down and those dollars need to be spent more wisely.

                    • Nicolle says:

                      I HATE how Americans are using Canada as an example of a health care system that doesn’t work. I’m sick of hearing about people who “have Canadian friends who have had problem X, Y, Z when it comes to getting treatment”. I couldn’t even imagine living in a country where I couldn’t afford proper medical care. My father had a a MI on a Friday and was out of the hospital on a Monday, with a stent in one of his arteries. My Opa had a plethora of medical problems, and would have never have lived to the age of 82, if not for socialized medicine (he had his leg amputated below the knee because of gangrene). Moreover, I have never heard anyone say, “I wish our system was more like the Americans’”. I like that my government cares more about it’s citizens, than profit. Also, if it was such a flawed system, why would Canadians vote the man who brought socialized medicine to Canada the greatest Canadian? This is coming from someone who is strongly anti-union.

                      • froofrou the sparkly says:

                        If profit was ebil then the members of Congress would be paupers. Just remember that when people demonize others for making a profit.

                  • Eric-in-STL says:

                    Define “most of us.” If you think the system is fine the way it is then you must have cash to spare because frankly, the fact that I can’t afford the new meds my doctor prescribed for me really makes me think the current system is totally screwed.

                    • I’m on an Rx that costs $750/month, any wonder why I don’t mind paying $420/month for Blue Cross wit Rx coverage?

                      Parts of the current system are screwed, but they can be fixed in far less than 1,000 pages.

                      1. Allow insurers to compete across state lines.

                      2. Eliminate the employer deduction for health insurance and give that money/tax-credit to the employee as a voucher/deduction toward their own healthcare policy that moves with them from job to job and state to state.

                      3. Open the Rx market to competition with price disclosure at all levels.

                      4. Pass tort reform to curb the rampant lawsuit abuse.

                      5. For the truly needy (means tested), require workfare and provide a voucher to for them to purchase their own policy.

                      This would cut costs, improve outcomes and extend coverage to all. Unfortunately, I can’t claim authorship here, this proposal has been around for years, but has always been opposed by big unions, big gov’t and the trial lawyers.

                      You don’t junk your car to fix a cracked windshield, why junk the best system in the world to fix its few flaws.

                • Semperfidd says:

                  How is the general public supposed to hear about anything the republicans propose when they watch liberal slanted media that won’t report republican ideas?

                  • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

                    it’s a well known fact that reality has a liberal bias… wait, if everything has a liberal bias then doesn’t that make liberalness the center? i mean, if the norm is what the majority is then liberal = norm and the center is usually considered the norm of society, or at least the majority of what people believe.

                    also, the sky is green. saw it myself.

                  • mothergoose says:

                    Ohhhh boy… here we go… It’s always the media…
                    SHOW ME A GOOD REPUBLICAN IDEA ABOUT HEALTHCARE REFORM!!!!!

                    • bitter clown says:

                      Listen to the radio, you will hear plenty of Republican ideas.

                      • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

                        i did that once, i got glenn beck.. next time around it was whats-his-face with the cigar limbaugh. i’m unimpressed with their radio shows. they need something less negative and more lively, like a political satire radio drama done in the theme of a star wars/star trek cross over.

                        • bitter clown says:

                          Try:

                          Michael Medved
                          Dennis Praeger
                          Dennis Miller

                          There are others that are more moderate than the ones you mention and very very fair, easy to listen to and if you are a left wing person, like a lot of their listeners are you can call them and challenge them and they do not hang up on you or call you names, etc. like some others.

                        • Eric-in-STL says:

                          Did you actually suggest we listen to Dennis Miller for ideas on healthcare reform? I don’t know the other two guys.

                        • bitter clown says:

                          No, not him specifically, his show will have guests with knowledge and info you won’t hear on the MSM. It doesn’t hurt to listen to alternative ideas.

                        • Tessie says:

                          “they need something less negative and more lively, like a political satire radio drama done in the theme of a star wars/star trek cross over.”
                          `
                          I don’t want to see either of those two guys in dresses… that *is* what you meant, right?

                • froofrou the sparkly says:

                  They actually have proposed an alternate plan that was scrapped because the Dems didnt’ like it.

              • Semperfidd says:

                Who do you work for? A poor person getting government subsidies? News flash….if you take away all the incentives for someone to succeed in life then why would anyone do anything like create a company that employs workers? Why work at all if you are never gonna get ahead in life? Maybe we should take all the rich peoples money and give it to all the poor people. ok ok..maybe not all of it…how about just 75% of it….dont forget to start with all the poloticians who are raking in the dough by representing you.

                • Eric-in-STL says:

                  Okay. Sounds like a plan. Thanks for the idea.

                  • Semperfidd says:

                    Too late. The democratic party has already thought of it. How else do you think they are going to pay for the government run healthcare without taxing the middle class? And while we are on the subject…what is Obama’s defenition of middle class? It seems to be a moving target…$250k…$200K moving downward of course.

                    • Eric-in-STL says:

                      Heh. He’s got a loooooong way to go before he gets to me, so I’m not terribly worried. Along those lines, yeah, I’m no particularly offended by the tax-the-shit-out-of-the-wealthy plan. Selfish on my part, perhaps, but what the hell.

                      • Semperfidd says:

                        Do you like to shop at Walmart? Target? BestBuy? Costco? Pizza Hut? McDonalds?…I could go on and on. Do you think these stores/services were created by the poor or the government? That is the major flaw in your comments Eric. Without the ability to become successful (measuring success in dollars here) why would anyone want to create a business or service? Most business owners I know work 60 plus hours a week and employ several people. What insentive would there be to working those hours if you had to give most of your money away? Not everyone can work for the government. Some people have to work in the private sector to fund the government as the government does not make a profit. If your goal is to be poor and live off the government then I can understand your thinking Eric. I on the other hand choose to work hard and try and accumulate enough money to retire with a summer and winter home. Both of which will have internet access so I can comment on LOL’s on this site in my old age :o )

                        • Semperfidd says:

                          “He’s got a loooooong way to go before he gets to me, so I’m not terribly worried”

                          Those numbers are married combined income numbers and they keep going down. Depending on where you live in the county, a couple making $100,00 to $150,000 is not uncommon. Here in Las Vegas, before everything went to Chit, a blackjack dealer was making aroung $70,000 a year.

            • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

              you know, they’d have had alot more time to come up with ANYTHING if they’d stop taking vacations, breaks and giving a 15 minute speech every damn time they have to vote on something (that actually goes out to all the senators, not just the republicans)

            • Semperfidd says:

              Call me stupid but don’t you think they should at least make enough time for actually reading the 1000 page bill?

            • Indie Tarheel says:

              Goose gets it. Want to know the real deal with healthcare and the current dustup? FOLLOW THE MONEY.

        • bad fairie says:

          time limit? as in being short? they’ve had since hillary started working on in during bill’s presidency – by my count that’s at least 9 years and as many as 16 yrs to come up with something besides fear, propaganda, and their current standby of ‘just say no’

      • Semperfidd says:

        MG that is a pretty one sided view of the voting citizens who are protesting against what thier representatives in government are doing. I will do some looking but I am fairly sure the Republicans have drafted a plan or two to deal with the healthcare problems. At least the republicans don’t buy their protesters like the Democrats do.

        • wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

          actually, semper, i think you got it backwards what with the republican PACs and what not doing all the organizing of the so-called “grass roots” efforts

          • Semperfidd says:

            I have never protested anything in my life. I am going to start now…that is if my representative has enough balls to have a town meeting. I don’t thing the republican PAC’s can even touch the democrats media matters, ACORN and all the forgien entaties and people that contribute to the democratic party.

            • mothergoose says:

              …and good for you… it is your right to protest… just be sure you know what you are protesting! (Obviously, I think you know your stuff, even if we disagree)…

          • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

            There haven’t been any actual cites or evidence of that, in fact, quite the opposite. The email sent out by the White House rallying the troops to “fight fire with fire” and “push back twice as hard”, not to mention the guy who got roughed up in Tampa the other night speak to the Dems actually being the organizers.
            -
            To paraphrase Hillary Clinton, dissent and disagreement with the government is our right as American Citizens, and we should be allowed to do it.
            -
            Did anyone notice that no violence erupted until the Unions got there, and until after the WH email went out? Then you’ve got several people roughed up, and at least one sent to the hospital.

        • mothergoose says:

          I have never had a problem with dissent… the problem I have with this “Town Hall Shoutdown”- movement, is that most of the people doing the shouting don’t understand what they are shouting about.

          For example: “I don’t want the Government running my insurance!!’; yet the shouter is on Medicair…

          “I don’t want the Government taking my insurance away”; yet the plan isn’t to take away existing insurance

          “I don’t want the Government to change my insurance plan!”; yet the company he works for has changed their plan three times in the last five years…

          • Semperfidd says:

            Admit it MG…the democrats cant stand that the republicans are finally standing up for themselves and protesting. The republicans are using the democrat handbook now lol.

          • bitter clown says:

            Of course they aren’t SAYING it, but the plan does include a path to eliminate private insurance. They will not be able to compete with a government plan. The government in charge of our health care is scary to some because there will be no alternative in the future. Obama has stated that he would like to eventually see a single payer system. The American people don’t want that.

            • mothergoose says:

              Not being a smart a$$; but I haven’t heard that it intends on eliminating private insurance.

              • bitter clown says:

                No, I mean they don’t specifically say that, but that will be the result.

                • mothergoose says:

                  How do we KNOW that will be the result? I guess that’s what I’m getting at… if the legislation doesn’t say it, then it’s all based on Republican speculation… if it DOES say that, then I’m interested in seeing it, know what I mean?

                  • bitter clown says:

                    Well, like I said above, it will create government competition with private companies. For example, most companies will just not buy insurance anymore for their employees forcing them to take the government option. Also, we don’t know how it will be funded yet, but if we all are going to have to pay for it by higher taxes, why buy a private insurance on top of it? And, while I’m on the subject, why doesn’t the Congress have to take it? They will be exempt. I wonder why?

                    • mothergoose says:

                      Those are good questions that I don’t have answers to. I’ll have to do some research, but I thought the idea wasn’t to allow companies to drop insurance on employees just because of the govt insurance. (We both know that there’s always a way around that, though). I hadn’t thought of that. Great point…

                      • Semperfidd says:

                        Section 102 of the healthcare bill, on page 16, defines granfathering (letting those who have private insurance keep it). One year after the government plan is implimented you can not change private insurance carriers. That means if you lose or change your job you can not get new private insurance from another private insurance carrier. Private insurance companies can not get new customers after that date either. That is how I interpert what I have read. I am no genius or a lawyer and there is alot of “legal” verbiage in there but that is what it sounds like it is saying.

                        Another thing we have not touched on is the fact that you will be fined 8% of your income if you have no coverage at all.

                    • the_original_shortright says:

                      *answering the rhetorical question*

                      congress won’t be taking the government healthcare because they’re used to their private, well funded, can-get-in-to-see-a-specialist-the-day-they-call, system. and they know the government system will be nothing like that.

                      i work for a small health insurance company… our owner is a rabid democrat. yet she’s very opposed to this government healthcare because it WOULD kill us. we only have about 150,000 lives on our plans and we can’t possibly compete with anything the government will offer. however, if you call us, you’ll get a legitimate person answering the phone and the hold time is less than 30 seconds before you get to talk to them. when was the last time you called ANY government service and talked to a real person within about 45 minutes?

                      we (as employees) have our health insurance through one of the largest national networks (anthem) and it’s an absolute disaster… they have about a 1/4 of the US population on their network (number taken from their sales materials that i’ve got in my office) and it’s a trainwreck. i can’t imagine how bad it will be for one entity to have everyone on their “network”.

                      i got off topic, but you get the idea… government healthcare is a mess waiting to happen. they can’t handle medicare and medicaid yet they want to expand their hold on healthcare. any other company and the board would tell them it’s a bad idea… if you can’t take care of what you’ve already got, why on earth do you want to expand???

                      • bitter clown says:

                        Another thing, I would really like to see how the intend to pay for it BEFORE they vote it into law. Right now, the numbers do not add up without a tax hike on the middle class.

                        • the_original_shortright says:

                          i was kinda avoiding that because it’s a whole different can of worms. but i definitely don’t want to be paying for everyone’s health care.

                          a major thing that hasn’t even been discussed is what this universal health care plan would do about pharmacy or flexible spending or health savings accounts or anything like that.

                          yes, everyone would get coverage, but what would the plans be like? if we’re going to bring up the money… would everyone have an 80/20 copay? would there be coinsurance on all the expensive procedures? what would the deductibles be like? these are all REALLY important things that i think should come before the public before they get implemented. when a company changes health care vendors they do their best to either get the same or a better plan… this government plan will assuredly be worse than most of the private plans simply because they can’t subsidize the costs the same way.

                          an anthem, aetna, cigna has millions upon millions of dollars to back against any insurance claim. the fed is running out of funds really quickly. rather than the fed paying the hospital for your x-rays, you’re going to have to. this sort of system where the care is free only works when the country actually has the money to pay for it. even with a slight tax hike there’s no way there would be enough money to subsidize healthcare for ALL americans.

                        • Torus2112 says:

                          You Americans sure are sillybuns! Seriously though, here in Ontario things like “Health Plan” and “Copay” aren’t in our vocabulary, Government Healthcare is actually much (MUCH) simpler, we don’t have “plans,” we have a list of what is billed to the Ministry, and what is billed to you (gear like splints and wheelchairs is not free, nor are private rooms or Cable, etc, but they are available).

                          I am surprised at how many horrible things people say Gov’t care would have actually exist in HMOs: Burocrats rationing care, choosing your doctor and medications for you, “Death Panels”; these are all not only lies about Gov’t care, they already exist and would be solved by it.

                          The money saved by:

                          A) The LESS bureaucratic gov’t program’s savings in admin

                          B) Eliminating the bloated profits being lost in what I call the Rich-Guy-O-Sphere by the HMOs and deluxe Hospitals, instead having an at-cost program and salaries and fees at a set rate negotiated by the Doctor & HCP unions.

                          C) Healthier populace due to health initiatives and people not worrying about paying for a check up to catch conditions early

                          That said, all these things will not pay for the whole system, and new taxes will be necessary, but everybody else in the First World gets by with higher taxes than you to pay for healthcare just fine. Think Civic Duty.

                      • bitter clown says:

                        Oh, and I meant to say ^that^ to shortrights post above.

                        • Bitter's Chef says:

                          While we’re on the healthcare topic, if I keep reading bitter clown’s name as butter clown, do I need to go get my eyes checked?

                          Or is it just a Freudian thing that comes with the chef’s hat?

      • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

        MG! You have a Personal Troll! You have arrived!

    • Kal says:

      You really want to argue cult-like devotion to ideology between the Democratic and Republican parties?

      Give it up, please, the right really needs to realize how stupid it sounds when they throw words like “worship” out considering how blindly you were willing to follow every edict of the Bush administration.

      • Cosman246 says:

        Thank you, Kal. I was beginning to feel unheard.

      • sisyphusredux says:

        I actually agreed with the Bush admin mostly about his fight against terror-I disagreed with him vehemently on several other issues.

        Then again, I’m an independent.

        And I really, really hate all this partisan nonsense.

      • Semperfidd says:

        And the left needs to know how stupid it sounds when their house leader says that the protestors to the healthcare reform bill are waving nazi symbols and are an astroturf movement.

        • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

          Is it stupid if it’s TRUE?

          • Deep Thought says:

            Can you cite that or show some photos/video, plz?

            • Semperfidd says:

              Guess he is still looking

              • froofrou the invisible (or at least behind a tree) says:

                Actually, evidence shows that the new healthcare symbol is eerily similar to the National Socialist Party from back in the day, and there has been no actual evidence produced of any Nazi symbols showing up on the Republicans’ guys, no moreso than the swastikas showing up on a couple of Dem people a few years ago.
                -
                And I love Barbara Boxer’s reasoning behind why the protests HAD to be staged…..”They’re too well-dressed”. That’s sound reasoning right there!

              • Deep Thought says:

                Guess so. :lol:

                • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

                  Actually, I have a life, and can’t sit here hitting the refresh button all day. But I’ll go try to find…wait, what did you want me to cite? What the house leader said, or the protesters with the nazi symbols?

                  • froofrou the fabulous says:

                    She actually said “swastikas (plural) and Nazi symbols”, even though there were a couple of people there with those and that’s it. It’s not like the entire crowd was a bunch of KKK members. It’s a few people (who could be plants) making the overwhelming majority look bad, such as the “kill the Muslim” plant at the Palin rally.
                    -
                    And there has been not one shred of evidence that this is an astroturf movement. The guy they cited as the “ringleader” has like 20 facebook friends and 5 followers on Twitter. He’s scary-like.

                    • ay dios mio says:

                      KKK member “Hey we hate health care as much as mexicans! Oh yeah we still hate black people too.”

                      It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

                  • Deep Thought says:

                    Oh chillax already. Jeebus.

                    You still haven’t cited anything relevant at all.

              • froofrou the fabulous says:

                I hate to ask this, Tessie, but can we get a non-partisan cite for that?

              • Deep Thought says:

                Yeah… no. That’s not gonna do it, sweetpea, but thanks for playing. :)

              • Semperfidd says:

                Huffington Post??? Your kidding right? That would be like me linking Rush Limbaugh’s home page lol

                • Tessie says:

                  It’s not that I don’t love you guys (in a wholesome decent way, of course), but in this instance I feel as though you set me up, because:
                  `
                  Do you guys remember the Simpsons episode where Bart wins an elephant, and Homer tries to sell the elephant to an ivory dealer?
                  Homer: Here’s your elephant.
                  Mr. Blackheart (the ivory dealer): Well, I don’t know…
                  Homer: What don’t you know? You said you wanted an elephant. That’s an elephant.
                  Mr. Blackheart: Well, it is, and yet it isn’t…
                  `
                  It’s very unsatisfying to discuss any subject with people who do this sort of thing (btw, not limited to you guys by any means). It usually goes something like this:
                  Person 1: [assertion]
                  Person 2: Can I get a cite for that?
                  Person 1: [provides cite]
                  Person 2: Not THAT cite; it’s biased/cherry-picked/wears socks that smell/whatever.
                  `
                  At the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, two and two make four, even if Hitler says so. A picture is a picture, whether it comes from the Huffington Post, Michael Moore’s website, or whoever you consider the worst person in the world’s website. The person had to be there in the first place for the photographer to have taken a picture of it.
                  `
                  If you’re going to invoke the idea that anybody can say pretty much anything on any website, and/or that any picture can be photoshopped, I won’t argue — in fact, I agree with that — but if that’s the case, then why ask for any cites about anything?
                  `
                  DT asked for a picture. I supplied a link to one. The subsequent responses to my post changed the original question from, “Can you provide a cite?”, in which case the answer is Yes; to, “Can you provide a cite that I’ll accept and not dismiss as biased?”, in which case the answer is No.

                  By the way, does this post make me look fat?

                  • froofrou the fabulous says:

                    I can agree with you, Tessie. It does get annoying when you’ve provided a cite and are asked for another :-)
                    -
                    In the interest of fairness, the only reason I asked for an alternate cite is because the HuffPost is notorious for spinning wildly left (and they dont’ really hide that, for which I respect them) and have been known to take things as wildly out of context as Rush Limbaugh. I asked for a more neutral cite because that guy could have been anyone. A plant, something like that. Without a neutral source, I still have no way of knowing what that guy was doing, or why he was there, or even if it was the same rally.
                    -
                    Nancy Pelosi said something about “swastikas and Nazis” yesterday, and was basically calling the protesters out as thugs and crimminals. I think that’s as much a subversion of the democratic process as anything, especially when Hillary herself said that dissent is one of the more patriotic things we can do.

                    • Tessie says:

                      It’s a bit of an “issue” with me, not only because I think it’s not really playing fair, but also because I used to work in a place that constantly told us employees how “empowered” we were, and how much they “valued” our feedback, and then responded to suggestions with, “forget it; not gonna happen”. After this happened a few times, most of us learned our lesson, at which point management asked us why we weren’t more forthcoming with our “input”. Blah.
                      $>:- p

                      • Eric-in-STL says:

                        Heh. Our management just did an “anonymous survey” to get our feedback on how we feel the store and the company are being run. If it was anonymous like they insisted, why did we have to put our employee ID in at the start of the thing? O_O I figure they’ll be coming for me soon.

                    • Jane St.Clair says:

                      I actually know nothing about the issue you are discussing since I’ve been in University hell and the only media source I’ve been reading lately have been children’s books. That being said at a certain point you have to take things at face value. I don’t always like some of the things people on my side of the aisle, so to speak, have said but until it’s been proven I don’t immediately decry them as being plants. Until you get proof that it is a plant in this situation you have to operate on the facts presented. Speculation really doesn’t get us anywhere. Also, I fully admit that I may have missed it, but was it ever proven that the “kill the muslim” chants at the Palin rallies were plants?

                  • Deep Thought says:

                    It makes you look hot.

                    I thought the rules for citing were well established.
                    No blogs, ever. I thought that went without saying.

                    • bitter troll says:

                      it does make you look hot, this true, and bitter troll refuses to cite it tessie

                    • Tessie says:

                      I didn’t know of such a rule, but I also wouldn’t classify the Huffington Post as a blog, although it does contain blogs. A blog is one of those things where somebody with even less of a life than I have shares his/her miscellaneous thoughts with the world.

                      BTW, saying the outfit does NOT make me look fat sets you up for accusations that you’re either fibbing and/or have low standards — you see how that works? — but thanks, I agree that it makes me look hot.

                  • Jane St.Clair says:

                    This gave me a warm feeling. :D

                  • Eric-in-STL says:

                    GODWIN’S LAW!!!!1115!!!ZOMG!!11!1!!!!

                  • Eric-in-STL says:

                    No, but it needs a coat of Weatherbeater paint. *gets out the rollers*

                  • Semperfidd says:

                    Nicely said. I just wanted to cover myself if I ever had to cite something to you and I linked Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hanity :o )

          • Semperfidd says:

            Cite please. And dont link the poster with the swastica and line drawn through it.

            • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

              Why not?

              • Semperfidd says:

                Because in Pelosi’s statement she said “I think they’re AstroTurf. You be the judge. They’re carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care.”

                One if not both of the pictures you can find on the internet (huffintons post) are not town meetings. They are of two people, a woman and a child, on the street. I am sure that now Pelosi has made the comment you are bound to see many many more as many of your esteemed collegues will be out in force with signs as plants in the crowds.

        • Tessie says:

          “an astroturf movement.”
          `
          I have never heard this expression, although it seems to imply “fake” in some way. What does it actually mean?

          • froofrou the fabulous says:

            Actually, it was a practice started by David Axelrod during the Clinton administration, from what I’ve heard. It involves paying people to show up at an event as plants to either be disruptive or start chants (“Kill the Muslim” springs to mind) and generally make the “other side” look bad for having such bad people associated with them.

            Astroturfing can also refer to the staged town hall meetings that Obama gave where he hugged that lady with cancer, and it turned out later that she works for him, and every other person at that TH meeting was invited instead of being a random person from the town.

          • eddiepscetti says:

            It implies that a grassroots movement is actually fake. Hence, astroturf..

  10. Blarg says:

    Perfect proof of the fact that book smarts =/= leadership.

  11. Kinson says:

    I’m thinking this lol is not saying Obama is smart. This lol is saying Obama’s staff is stupid. He has clearly surrounded himself with like minded individuals.

  12. Chase says:

    Saying obama is the smartest person in that room is like saying he’s the smartest person on the short bus. It’s nothing to be proud of.

  13. wallFly the magnificently lazy says:

    not sure what’s worse – you doing it or you appearing proud for doing it? it’s like crapping your pants and being like, hey guys check this out! ain’t i cooool!?

    i can’t wait for school to start up again. i mean, traffic is better during the summer and generally the kids i run into are pretty decent, but every once in a while a moron runs along being.. well.. moronic.

  14. bitter clown says:

    Yes, they tell him he is the smartest one in the room, but his head hurts when he tries to understand…

  15. FAIL 4EVER says:

    FIRST !!!!

  16. FRUSTRATION:

    Reading the comments on this one. Jaysus. Makes me want to go back to bed.

  17. alexp says:

    change caption to “realizing your chose a bunch of idiots and your policies have driven this country into the biggest debt and worst unemployment we have ever seen”.

  18. An armed, religious, voting American says:

    I laugh at you and fahrt in your general direction…
    Jeez! the human toilets are really showing their true colors with his godliness out there to protect them.
    Please, oh God, send us an asteroid!

  19. Ivanstrelnikov says:

    It’s got what plants crave. It’s got electrolytes!

  20. Andrew says:

    OBAMA’S GRADES ARE RELEVANT!!!! WE NEEEEEEEED DEM!!1111

    • Bitter's Chef says:

      Anybody’s grades after about 1970 are irrelevant. There are plenty of 4.0 graduates out there that are functionally illiterate and plenty of genius dropouts.

  21. Andrew says:

    Anyone who thinks Obama’s not smart is an idiot.

  22. Bitter's Chef says:

    OT, but does anybody here know the difference between “Reply” and “Add Comment”? Given the nesting limitations here on the LOLnet is it really that tough to scroll down and start a new thread?

    • IvanTheMildlyAnnoying says:

      Now, is that any way to run a flame war? I think not.

      • Bitter's Chef says:

        Just break it into a few flame battles every now and again. After about the third sub-sub-thread it gets tough to track who’s replying to/flaming who.

  23. Nerfy says:

    Ok…which one is the smart one again?

  24. Basara549 says:

    So, what about the cameraman? After all, he has to be the smartest person in the room, as to not get photographed with them….

  25. Starling says:

    Yup.

    Um.

    Now what?

  26. Shawn Welch says:

    Screw that communist socialist!!!

  27. WinstonSmith2600 says:

    WTF is up with the brainwashed government worshiping fools that make these captions?

  28. tore says:

    Really like your web sites details! Undoubtedly an exquisite offer of information that’s extraordinarily helpful. Keep it up to hold publishing and that i’m gonna proceed reading by way of! Cheers.

  29. cheaprevia says:

    buy Revia in Cyprus

  30. cheaprevia says:

    migraine headache florida

  31. Bitter's Chef says:

    Your post makes no sense, so all you get is plain cheesecake. No strawberries. Maybe whipped cream if you’re nice.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Newsletter Sign-up