Support NeoGAF

[Ignatz Mouse]

Flamingo:

The ironic thing in all of this is the one force working to keep those costs down are the insurance companies themselves, who are usually demonized in the rhetoric.

While I could see that taking some things out of insurance would re-establish some form of market influence, I'd rather go all-in the other way to price-controlling the costs (directly, or as an effect of single-payer). This is coming from a pro-market-forces guy. I just think too much damage has been done and the potential for abuse is too great to try to reverse the effects of the last 40 years. Plus, it works elsehwere.

 

[Link]

I personally think that health insurance should only be for major health related events, such as car accidents that lead to broken bones, cancer, surgeries, and other big, high cost health related issues. Not annual checkup doctor visits, or prescriptions, or going to the doctor because you have a cold.

While I agree that a major reason healthcare costs are so high is because there's no reliable way to know how much anything actually costs, I disagree with this part. Preventative care is the best way to avoid excessive costs for serious illnesses. Take that out of insurance and people will more than likely not bother with physicals, checkups, and medication, citing costs, which will inevitably lead to greater costs overall when those people become seriously ill.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I consider myself to be a conservative in the tea party/Ted Cruz mold, and I think that the problem with health care is group insurance. Ever since employers started to roll out group insurance, and insurance in general, that is when costs began to explode.

I personally think that health insurance should only be for major health related events, such as car accidents that lead to broken bones, cancer, surgeries, and other big, high cost health related issues. Not annual checkup doctor visits, or prescriptions, or going to the doctor because you have a cold.

With insurance being used for every single health related issue, there is no price check to let market forces work. People just think "Who cares how much it costs, my insurance will take care of it". Because of this middle man, there is no way to keep prices in check. Because of this, health providers can raise their prices, which causes insurance providers to raise their premiums. There is nothing to control costs. You may be paying a $10-$20 co pay to see a doctor, but your employer/insurance is paying the rest of it and this drives up health costs and causes employers to lower wages or not hire as many people.

If people paid out of pocket for the non catastrophic health issues, it would drive down costs because the average consumer would actually know how much each kind of health procedure costs.

I read a story about some hospital in Oklahoma that is cash only, and how even major surgeries like hip or knee replacement only costs a couple thousand dollars. Wish I still had the link.

Long story short, I honestly think health costs have exploded because no one knows how much the procedures cost because "my insurance will take care of it". Because of this, health providers can charge artificially higher prices and this screws over people who have no insurance. Get rid of group insurance and only have insurance for catastrophic events, and prices will go down.

Insurance is meant to hedge against a risk, and how is health insurance health insurance when you know you will be using it for every single health related issue? That is not a hedge for a risk, that is just a pool of funds to use for your health visits. Health insurance these days is not insurance, its a common slush fund to pay for health issues.

You don't choose to go to the doctors. So knowing how much it costs would change what? It's not like buying a car. You can't put off or plan medical expenses. And you can't just explain away every doctor visit as routine. They're not. How can I predict when I'm sick, have a curious mole, have random pain? If you make people wait due to costs you're gonna to not catch things that actually inflate the costs. Seeing a doctor for 15 minutes isn't what's making health care costs insane. It's collusion and insane profit motives (you can't escape the health care market, you can't choose not to have a surgery because it's expensive). Something needs to incentivize or force (price controls) cheaper care

Health care isn't a market.

 

[gcubed]

While I agree that a major reason healthcare costs are so high is because there's no reliable way to know how much anything actually costs, I disagree with this part. Preventative care is the best way to avoid excessive costs for serious illnesses. Take that out of insurance and people will more than likely not bother with physicals, checkups, and medication, citing costs, which will inevitably lead to greater costs overall when those people become seriously ill.

insurance would absolutely SKYROCKET if you removed all the preventative coverage. Oh hey, its not part of my insurance so i'm not going to get a check up! Then you are paying more because you had a heart attack, or are severely diabetic, or you have stage 3 or 4 cancer because you never bothered to go for a checkup.

 

[Frank the Great]

If people paid out of pocket for the non catastrophic health issues, it would drive down costs because the average consumer would actually know how much each kind of health procedure costs.

I was going to post a long-winded response, but . . .

insurance would absolutely SKYROCKET if you removed all the preventative coverage. Oh hey, its not part of my insurance so i'm not going to get a check up! Then you are paying more because you had a heart attack, or are severely diabetic, or you have stage 3 or 4 cancer because you never bothered to go for a checkup.

Seriously, it's not that complicated . . .

 

[AndyD]

While I agree that a major reason healthcare costs are so high is because there's no reliable way to know how much anything actually costs, I disagree with this part. Preventative care is the best way to avoid excessive costs for serious illnesses. Take that out of insurance and people will more than likely not bother with physicals, checkups, and medication, citing costs, which will inevitably lead to greater costs overall when those people become seriously ill.

insurance would absolutely SKYROCKET if you removed all the preventative coverage. Oh hey, its not part of my insurance so i'm not going to get a check up! Then you are paying more because you had a heart attack, or are severely diabetic, or you have stage 3 or 4 cancer because you never bothered to go for a checkup.

Indeed. This is what people miss when they claim insurance should be for major things only. That most major things can be prevented by regular preventative care, which is infinitely cheaper by comparison. It still requires discipline though, whether its paid for or not.

 

[empty vessel]

No they don't.

The last thing that's needed to to calcify progressives of any stripe with the kind of "purity" notion that is wrecking the GOP.

It's not about purity, although I certainly do think parties should be pure. The whole point of a political party is to assemble together people with like-minded political views. The problem with the Republican party is not that its base is holding its leaders accountable and purifying the party--that's a magnificent thing. The problem is that the base is stupid and has terrible ideas. So it is purifying the party by making it stupid. (Admittedly, having a two party system complicates this, but that's a problem with having a two party system, not a problem with purity of political parties per se.)

Anyway, this is about putting an end to supply side political dominance, which has objectively and measurably been disastrous for the country. I don't need to hear Democrats announcing they believe in crackpot political theories about taxation and spending. As far as I'm concerned, Democrats who announce to me that they are fiscally conservative are pledging economic ignorance and vouching for conservative ideas that are anathema to me.

Somebody who's pro Wall-St, has conservative ideas about spending and debt, and is anti-worker is still better than somebody who is all those things, plus wants to keep marriage "traditional" and is actively working to undermine abortion rights and increase the incarceration rate.

That's true. And I'll still call out the former as a crank supply sider who should not be trusted. It's bad for the country to be fiscally conservative. And people have to start saying it for the political dominance of supply side to fall.

 

[B-Dubs]

You don't choose to go to the doctors. So knowing how much it costs well change what? It's not like buying a car. You can't put off by or plan medical expenses. And maybe you can't just explain away every doctor visit as routine. They're not. How can I predict when I'm sick, have a curious mole, have random pain? If you make people wait due to costs you're gonna to not catch things that actually inflate the costs. Seeing a doctor for 15 minutes isn't what's making health care costs insane. It's collusion and insane profit motive (you can't escape the health care market, you can't choose not to have a surgery because it's expensive). Something needs to incentivize or force (price controls) cheaper care

Health care isn't a market.

insurance would absolutely SKYROCKET if you removed all the preventative coverage. Oh hey, its not part of my insurance so i'm not going to get a check up! Then you are paying more because you had a heart attack, or are severely diabetic, or you have stage 3 or 4 cancer because you never bothered to go for a checkup.

These are basically my argument, though I would like to add that if you are sick you aren't going to go shop around for the cheapest care. For two reasons: one, you'll be sick and won't have the energy and two, you'll want the best care just in case it turns out you have something serious. Also what you're talking about won't help people with chronic conditions in the slightest. No one chooses to get asthma or Chron's or UC or diabetes. Market forces won't help them in the slightest.

 

[empty vessel]

I'm always amazed that the hardest core capitalists and pro-liberty contingents among us inevitably fail to recognize the necessity of voluntary participation to the concept of a market. They'd make great Communists since their concept of a market allows involuntary exchanges.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

ev: I guess I misinterpreted your comment. What you meant wasn't "people have to stop saying this" but "people have to stop believing in dumb things."

That's a different thing.

Also, edit: I kinda hate that "fiscally conservative" only means supply-sider now. I certainly didn't always mean that. It used to be the fringe of the conservative side of thought.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I'm always amazed that the hardest core capitalists and pro-liberty contingents among us inevitably fail to recognize the necessity of voluntary participation to the concept of a market. They'd make great Communists since their concept of a market allows involuntary exchanges.

The thinking is rooted in the idea that you can opt out and live in a cabin somewhere. Seriously.

It's a fantasy, that at its most realistic might have applied to an agrarian culture that was sparsely populated.

 

[sc0la]

The thinking is rooted in the idea that you can opt out and live in a cabin somewhere. Seriously.

It's a fantasy, that at its most realistic might have applied to an agrarian culture that was sparsely populated.

I always get joy at imagining über conservatives picking up Walden with great excitement only to get bored as fuck a few pages in. None of this Rand-ian easy mode individualism, "I actually have to do shit to survive on my own?!"

Tea partiers could learn something from On Civil Disobedeance as well, but they might get turned off once they discover MLK used its advice

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

I consider myself to be a conservative in the tea party/Ted Cruz mold, and I think that the problem with health care is group insurance. Ever since employers started to roll out group insurance, and insurance in general, that is when costs began to explode.

I personally think that health insurance should only be for major health related events, such as car accidents that lead to broken bones, cancer, surgeries, and other big, high cost health related issues. Not annual checkup doctor visits, or prescriptions, or going to the doctor because you have a cold.

With insurance being used for every single health related issue, there is no price check to let market forces work. People just think "Who cares how much it costs, my insurance will take care of it". Because of this middle man, there is no way to keep prices in check. Because of this, health providers can raise their prices, which causes insurance providers to raise their premiums. There is nothing to control costs. You may be paying a $10-$20 co pay to see a doctor, but your employer/insurance is paying the rest of it and this drives up health costs and causes employers to lower wages or not hire as many people.

If people paid out of pocket for the non catastrophic health issues, it would drive down costs because the average consumer would actually know how much each kind of health procedure costs.

I read a story about some hospital in Oklahoma that is cash only, and how even major surgeries like hip or knee replacement only costs a couple thousand dollars. Wish I still had the link.

Long story short, I honestly think health costs have exploded because no one knows how much the procedures cost because "my insurance will take care of it". Because of this, health providers can charge artificially higher prices and this screws over people who have no insurance. Get rid of group insurance and only have insurance for catastrophic events, and prices will go down.

Insurance is meant to hedge against a risk, and how is health insurance health insurance when you know you will be using it for every single health related issue? That is not a hedge for a risk, that is just a pool of funds to use for your health visits. Health insurance these days is not insurance, its a common slush fund to pay for health issues.

What about people who can't afford to pay for seeing the doctor? Getting their disease/sickness diagnosed? Getting an Xray? Getting an MRI because the doctor is concerned with their symptoms? If people would go to the doctor more for check ups or when they're first starting to show symptoms, we wouldn't have to be dealing with so many other problems that come from people ignoring problems that turn into life and death situations.

What do you suggest those people do?

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

Apparently McCain and Bam's are bosom buddies now

The unlikeliest of alliances forged between two once-bitter rivals stands to upend the status quo of congressional gridlock and potentially resolve a bitter partisan chasm that has characterized the modern era of crisis governance.

Yes, President Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) are essentially working together against GOP leadership and the tea party to break the Senate out of its current situation and resolve major budget rifts that have plagued Washington for years.

McCain has emerged as a kingmaker of sorts in a chamber where various rank-and-file members of the Republican minority have lost their patience with leaders’ strategy of routinely blocking or slowing down legislation and high-profile nominees advanced by Democrats.
Most recently, he played a leading role in securing the confirmation of seven Obama nominees to run important departments and agencies. He was a seminal figure in writing and shepherding immigration reform through the chamber with a large bipartisan majority. He’s broken with nearly all other Republicans in saying his party shouldn’t filibuster Obama’s three nominees to fill vacancies on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. And he’s been actively pushing his members to stop blocking budget negotiations with the House.

Now, as the White House and members of Congress prepare for a potentially ugly battle to keep government open and continue paying its bills this fall, Democratic leaders see McCain as a pivotal figure in their effort to reach a compromise and force tea party conservatives to stop holding routine government funding and debt ceiling bills hostage. Some of them privately joke that he’s the new minority leader.

“Senator McCain is the Senate Republican leadership’s worst nightmare,” said a senior Democratic aide, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record. “He is very interested in fixing sequestration, he has railed against the tax loopholes, he is clearly not afraid to defy them when he thinks it’s the right thing to do, and he takes 10 Republican members with him. We definitely see him as an important part of the path forward on a budget deal.”

The White House, meanwhile, told Politico recently that its aides talk to McCain about every other day. President Obama, who name-checked McCain when he thanked senators for approving immigration reform and his nominees, gave a nod Wednesday to the efforts the senator has led to ease gridlock.

McCain’s desire for a budget agreement is motivated by one of his biggest policy priorities: Protecting the Pentagon. The military budget is set to take a major hit due to the across-the-board budget cuts enacted in 2011, and pragmatists like him recognize that the only politically feasible way to undo the so-called sequester is to replace it with a mix of targeted spending cuts and new revenues. That’s a key reason for McCain’s alienation from the tea party, which has blocked a budget accord that includes so much as a penny in new tax revenue.

While talking up one of his legislative proposals this week, McCain again lamented that “our military is being forced to reduce its ability defend against threats to our security because of sequestration.” A number of his GOP colleagues — including Sens. Susan Collins (ME), Lindsey Graham (SC), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Mark Kirk (IL), Lisa Murkowski (AK) and Bob Corker (TN) — share his view that a budget compromise is necessary.

More at the link.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I'm always amazed that the hardest core capitalists and pro-liberty contingents among us inevitably fail to recognize the necessity of voluntary participation to the concept of a market. They'd make great Communists since their concept of a market allows involuntary exchanges.

Well in the Obamacare case they tried to make the argument health care was voluntary.

 

[Hitokage]

It's like I said before, McCain is a bitter old man whose vindictiveness sometimes gets used for good. This time he's more pissed at certain Republicans than he is at Obama for beating him.

 

[kehs]

Apparently McCain and Bam's are bosom buddies now
More at the link.

McCain 2016!

 

[RDreamer]

Apparently McCain and Bam's are bosom buddies now

More at the link.

Is McCain bipolar or something? I feel like he bounces back and forth between sanity and insanity. One minute I'm applauding him and the next I'm shaking my head at him. I hope this bit of coherency lasts a while.

 

[bananas]

Is McCain bipolar or something? I feel like he bounces back and forth between sanity and insanity. One minute I'm applauding him and the next I'm shaking my head at him. I hope this bit of coherency lasts a while.

A lot of his earlier craziness was due to being up for reelection in 2010.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Is McCain bipolar or something? I feel like he bounces back and forth between sanity and insanity. One minute I'm applauding him and the next I'm shaking my head at him. I hope this bit of coherency lasts a while.

He's been pretty damn consistent this year. He's literally been enraged by the tea party/libertarian wing ever since Rand Paul took him to the woodshed during the drone filibuster debate. He's been rebelling against the "don't pass anything ever" movement since then.

He's still pissed at Obama about Syria, he still holds grudges against Martin Dempsey, but overall they all support the global war on terrorism/out of control drone program/etc. Speaking of which, we might have our next hawk:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Friday rebutted Gov. Chris Christie's (R-NJ) criticism of the libertarian's "esoteric" national security positions through a senior advisor, who told the Washington Times that Christie "needs to talk to more Americans."

“If Governor Christie believes the constitutional rights and the privacy of all Americans is ‘esoteric,’ he either needs a new dictionary, or he needs to talk to more Americans, because a great number of them are concerned about the dramatic overreach of our government in recent years,” Paul advisor Doug Stafford told the Washington Times.

In a Thursday speech at the Aspen Institute, Christie invoked 9/11 to say that libertarians in the GOP like Paul have a "dangerous" line of thought and engage in "esoteric, intellectual debates."

"I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation," Christie had said. "And they won't. Because that's a much tougher conversation to have."

Paul tweeted Friday that while Christie may be worried about "the dangers of freedom," the Kentucky senator worries about the "danger of losing that freedom."

"Christie worries about the dangers of freedom. I worry about the danger of losing that freedom. Spying without warrants is unconstitutional." - Rand Paul

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/paul-to-christie-either-he-needs-new-dictionary

I honestly don't know who will win this debate. Is neoconservatism truly dead, or is Rand Paul's isolationist foreign policy just a fad that will end once Obama leaves office?

 

[Link]

I'd have to imagine McCain has privately decided to not seek re-election and retire in 2016. It's the only logical explanation to this recent wave of sanity.

 

[empty vessel]

I honestly don't know who will win this debate. Is neoconservatism truly dead, or is Rand Paul's isolationist foreign policy just a fad that will end once Obama leaves office?

Neoconservatism, which is neoliberalism, is definitely not dead. On the Republican side, civil liberties and non-interventionism is alive only because a Democrat is in the White House.

 

[Fenderputty]

“Senator McCain is the Senate Republican leadership’s worst nightmare,” said a senior Democratic aide, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record. “He is very interested in fixing sequestration, he has railed against the tax loopholes, he is clearly not afraid to defy them when he thinks it’s the right thing to do, and he takes 10 Republican members with him. We definitely see him as an important part of the path forward on a budget deal.”

What possible ulterior motive would McCain have for returning to his "Maverick" roots?

He's been pretty damn consistent this year. He's literally been enraged by the tea party/libertarian wing ever since Rand Paul took him to the woodshed during the drone filibuster debate.

So just being a childish dick is his motive? Sour grapes after 2010? Now he's enraged at the parties direction? lol What a douche.

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

What possible ulterior motive would McCain have for returning to his "Maverick" roots?

Legacy?

 

[Tamanon]

I hate when writers do this:

Paul tweeted Friday that while Christie may be worried about "the dangers of freedom," the Kentucky senator worries about the "danger of losing that freedom."

"Christie worries about the dangers of freedom. I worry about the danger of losing that freedom. Spying without warrants is unconstitutional." - Rand Paul

You don't need to summarize a tweet, especially if you're pulling quotes from it. Or if you do summarize it, don't just print it immediately afterwards.

 

[RDreamer]

A lot of his earlier craziness was due to being up for reelection in 2010.

I feel like there were a few outbursts since then, but you're probably right a lot of the craziness may have been before that.

 

[JesseEwiak]

I'd have to imagine McCain has privately decided to not seek re-election and retire in 2016. It's the only logical explanation to this recent wave of sanity.

I think a lot depends on where Arizona is in the GOP primary calendar and what kind of legitimate contenders McCain has in a primary. The problem in 2010 was that Hayworth was just relevant enough that he could've possibly taken out McCain if he hadn't move to the right.

However, if in 2016, if Arizona's laws allow people to register for a party at the voting place, then McCain is unbeatable because indies and Democrats (assuming Hillary is being coronated) will vote for McCain in a primary. If the Arizona primary is late enough only the hardcores are voting, there's strict voting as far as primaries go, there is a credible challenger that McCain can't kill via SuperPAC's, then he might retire.

 

[Souldriver]

:jnc

Oh man :jnc

Republicans going after other Republicans for not being "conservative enough".

:jnc

Imagine if Wal Mart agrees to tell pharmacy customers about Obamacare
:jnc

Sooo, what is :jnc?

Jesus Nucking Christ!! is the only thing popping up in my mind. ;-)

 

[RDreamer]

Sooo, what is :jnc?

Jesus Nucking Christ!! is the only thing popping up in my mind. ;-)

It refers to a guy in one of the sports threads named Jack n Coke. People started using :jnc when all the emotes went away. I forget the specifics on why, though. Everyone adopted :jnc to mean :lol.

 

[Fenderputty]

Legacy?

I will never remember him as a Maverick again. He's always gonna be the moron who got primaried into his recent insanity. He's also responsible for bringing us Palin, even if it was only his campaign that wanted her.

 

[RDreamer]

I will never remember him as a Maverick again. He's always gonna be the moron who got primaried into his recent insanity. He's also responsible for bringing us Palin, even if it was only his campaign that wanted her.

Whenever I hear the word maverick I immediately think of Palin and that horrible campaign. That word is forever tainted.

 

[Tamanon]

It refers to a guy in one of the sports threads named Jack n Coke. People started using :jnc when all the emotes went away. I forget the specifics on why, though. Everyone adopted :jnc to mean :lol.

He had to wear a Seahawks avatar from a bet, and somebody made the Seahawks symbol into a laughing emoticon. Ergo :jnc instead of GAF's old :lol.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Neoconservatism, which is neoliberalism, is definitely not dead. On the Republican side, civil liberties and non-interventionism is alive only because a Democrat is in the White House.

I agree with this post 100% except for the quote attribution. Weird.

 

[Hitokage]

:jnc is an NFL-GAF thing. Sometimes people let it slip outside, but you really shouldn't encourage them.

 

[Fenderputty]

Whenever I hear the word maverick I immediately think of Palin and that horrible campaign. That word is forever tainted.

My dog is named Maverick (after the norcal surf spot). He's adorable. Hopefully this will help untarnish the word.

 

[Jack Remington]

I consider myself to be a conservative in the tea party/Ted Cruz mold, and I think that the problem with health care is group insurance. Ever since employers started to roll out group insurance, and insurance in general, that is when costs began to explode.

I personally think that health insurance should only be for major health related events, such as car accidents that lead to broken bones, cancer, surgeries, and other big, high cost health related issues. Not annual checkup doctor visits, or prescriptions, or going to the doctor because you have a cold.

With insurance being used for every single health related issue, there is no price check to let market forces work. People just think "Who cares how much it costs, my insurance will take care of it". Because of this middle man, there is no way to keep prices in check. Because of this, health providers can raise their prices, which causes insurance providers to raise their premiums. There is nothing to control costs. You may be paying a $10-$20 co pay to see a doctor, but your employer/insurance is paying the rest of it and this drives up health costs and causes employers to lower wages or not hire as many people.

If people paid out of pocket for the non catastrophic health issues, it would drive down costs because the average consumer would actually know how much each kind of health procedure costs.

I read a story about some hospital in Oklahoma that is cash only, and how even major surgeries like hip or knee replacement only costs a couple thousand dollars. Wish I still had the link.

Long story short, I honestly think health costs have exploded because no one knows how much the procedures cost because "my insurance will take care of it". Because of this, health providers can charge artificially higher prices and this screws over people who have no insurance. Get rid of group insurance and only have insurance for catastrophic events, and prices will go down.

Insurance is meant to hedge against a risk, and how is health insurance health insurance when you know you will be using it for every single health related issue? That is not a hedge for a risk, that is just a pool of funds to use for your health visits. Health insurance these days is not insurance, its a common slush fund to pay for health issues.

I'll give you the link to the Oklahoma hospital case. It's right here:

http://watchdog.org/64814/ok-surgery-centers-cash-only-approach-offers-transparency-efficiency-affordability/

Price transparency is something that is sorely needed in medicine, and it's a shame that the Affordable Care Act didn't carry any price transparency mandates.

With that said, this system would never work on a large scale. You'll notice that this hospital doesn't take Medicare and Medicaid patients, for starters. And it's only a tiny minority of patients who could afford to pay cash for most procedures.

It would be easier to just do it the Japanese way and institute price controls across the board.

Also, the increases in medical prices weren't caused by insurance, they were caused by medical technology advances.

 

[rocketknight]

There were plenty of articles debunking that dumb thing weeks ago. All that hospital does are elective and non-time-sensitive procedures, so of course it's going to function more like a traditional market. Nobody is showing up there with a gunshot wound and haggling over the cost per liter for a blood transfusion, though. What kind of point are you hoping to make?

 

[Jack Remington]

We also have pretty clear evidence from just about every other developed country in the world that a non-market approach (the complete opposite of a market approach, in fact), can make healthcare much more affordable than what we have in the U.S. while ensuring universal access.

You really have to want a market approach just for the sake of having a market approach in order to favor that over a publicly run system given the overwhelming real-world evidence out there. That is: you have to assign a fairly huge amount of utility just to the idea of having a market, rather than to the outcomes produced by the approach.

 

[empty vessel]

I agree with this post 100% except for the quote attribution. Weird.

Yeah, not sure how that happened.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Neoconservatism, which is neoliberalism, is definitely not dead. On the Republican side, civil liberties and non-interventionism is alive only because a Democrat is in the White House.

I think you're right. A "strong" national defense will always appeal to many on the right, especially the power brokers. Still I wonder if Paul can manage to upset that order in a few years, given how active the libertarian movement seems to be right now. Maybe Iran war mongering over the next few years will revive that wing, but currently it does seem like the ideological position of the McCains of the party is dwindling. Of course, that can very easily change the minute Obama leaves office.

 

[Opiate]

An interview/discussion with Ginsburg about the fallout after the repeal of the civil rights repeal. Some very depressing facts, such as that Texas began altering voting rights rules in their state hours after the supreme court ruling. Hours.

Her position distilled: I knew this would happen, and only a fool would have thought otherwise.

http://news.yahoo.com/ginsburg-says-push-voter-id-laws-predictable-070702489.html

 

[Shadow Hog]

Whenever I hear the word maverick I immediately think of Palin and that horrible campaign. That word is forever tainted.

Funny, I tend to think of Mega Man X.

 

[Tamanon]

I think of Top Gun, as anyone should. Meant I could legally call Palin Goose.

 

[Black Mamba]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we've officially entered an alternate universe where up is down, black is white, and nickleback is awesome.

TANTAROS: Are you, Senator Marco Rubio, willing to shut down the government over ObamaCare? Because when you talk about the budget, you know better than anyone, that means shut down, potentially.

RUBIO: I think the real question is: Is Barack Obama willing to shut down the government over ObamaCare? In essence, I think we should pay our military. I think we should fund the government. I just don’t think we should fund ObamaCare. And what the President is saying is we either fund ObamaCare or we don’t fund anything. And I think that’s an unreasonable position. And that’s the position he’s taken and the Democrats have taken.

I don't even...

 

[Tamanon]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we've officially entered an alternate universe where up is down, black is white, and nickleback is awesome.



I don't even...

Damn that rascally Obama wanting funding for the programs that are enacted by law.

How dare he?

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

The president has that kind of power? To insist that everything or nothing be funded? How does that even make any sense?

 

[RDreamer]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we've officially entered an alternate universe where up is down, black is white, and nickleback is awesome.



I don't even...

This is the "No u" defense.

 

[Pickles the Firecat]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we've officially entered an alternate universe where up is down, black is white, and nickleback is awesome.



I don't even...

That is one of the best quotes I've read all year. Jesus Christ the torture that logic went through.

 

[Link]

I think of Top Gun, as anyone should. Meant I could legally call Palin Goose.

Does that make Obama Iceman?

 

[Incognito]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we've officially entered an alternate universe where up is down, black is white, and nickleback is awesome.



I don't even...

so desperate to appease the right after his immigration debacle. would be hilarious if it weren't so goddamn transparent. this guy is a clown and going to get run off the stage by paul and cruz.