Posts Made By: Forrest Heinle

Promissary notes? That won't be worth the paper it's written on :C

I love how the government can make you pay penalties for not having the proper payroll deductions for taxes, and charge you interest and late fees if you don't pay your taxes on time. Yet, if they owe you a refund, they pay no interest and, apparently, can even write you a promissary note.

I'd say stop paying taxes...but Wesley Snipes is a good example of what happens when you go that route.

Rod, how much time of your day do you devote to looking for ways to hate GWB? Just a question.

Now...on to the article. I think it does a good job of showing how conservatives feel about him. Some still support, some aren't so sure, and some are angry because he's done things we don't see as conservative. I know i fall into the latter group.

I like the comment about people normally getting tired of a President after a while and wanting something new. Sometimes this is the case....but it's easy to get tired of someone when they're doing things you don't like, and while the liberal left loves to saddle GWB as "our" (conservative) candidate, this article shows that a lot of conservatives no longer see him as such, thus why his popularity is so horribly low...he can't even get his base to like him.

Christine, the mockery wasn't for you, so please don't take my comments, which were in response to someone else, out of context and then complain about mockery.

1. Yes, i agree that it is already happening, Christine. But if we nationalize healthcare, it will become even worse. Especially with how well the government mismanages everything. Our government throws away money at insane levels, and you want to turn over control of something as massive and important as health care?

2. While many are in the situation that you describe, Christine, there are a great many more that don't have this problem. It IS a horrible situation for someone to be in, i admit. The problem as i see it is this. There is NO perfect solution for this problem. As with many things in this country, one side wants it one way and the other side wants it another. Nothing new about that. My problem with this specific issue is far too many liberals let their bleeding hearts get in the way of any logic they might apply to a solution. Free healthcare for all, not another ever goes without! Hooray! Make the rich pay for it, they've got plenty of money! Hooray! (Please note, i'm not saying you advocate this stance, Christine) There might be a burden on some of us now to pay for others, imagine what it will be like once it's nationalized and they take it out of your paycheck and you have NO choice as to how much coverage, how much money, or where you go.

3. The current system can be improved upon. Allowing less frivoless law suits would help. I'm sure others that know the industry better will come up with other things. What's your idea, Christine?

4. Being kind hearted is a good thing, Christine. Don't mistake me on that. But at some point you have to put aside emotion and be logical. My logic tells me that as harsh as it may sound, sometimes you have to put up with a bit of bad for the overall good.

5. If someone could show me a perfect nationalized health care with enough balances that the government could NEVER screw it up, then i might be for that. For me, such a solution does not exist, at this point, because there is NOTHING our government can't screw up and mismanage til it looks, and smells, like a pile of crap. OH, and if it costs me a penny more than i'm paying now, you can scrap it, because i'm not going down that road.


I've said it before and i'll say it again. There is nothing in the constitution or the bill of rights guaranteeing someone health care. It's a privelege, not a right. A privelege you pay for. I know liberals don't like that philosophy, hence the reason they constantly try to portray health care as a right, not a privelege. I don't, and will never, agree to that.

This is probably coming across as cold and callused. Sorry for that. I do feel for anyone in such a situation, but at this point, i prefer our current system.

I would say no to all of this, Ed. The problem is, if you go to a nationalized health care system, those costs stay the same, they're simply hidden from you by a bunch of paperwork you never see.

So how do you drive those costs down to make everything more affordable? I wish i knew. I could probably make some money off that answer (yes, the evil conservative in me is speaking)

In all seriousness, as i told Thomas, i used the word perfect, but i don't expect it. We should be able to come up with better, but until we can agree on what better is, i don't see it happening.

Rod, i don't always agree with Rush, or his reasons for what he says, but in this case, i understand where he is coming from.

Let me ask you something. What if i were the president (God forbid) and i said the following.....

"I, as president, do not care what the little people think. This country is ruled by an upper class that deserves all they have, and they should be entitled to more. Gone are the days of striving for equality. Gone are the days where even the poorest retch can rise up and become a millionaire or billionaire by the strength of their own will and perseverance. We will no longer be a country defined by our strength of will and determination. I am going to strive to enact legislation that will set the ground work for a new order. A world where the rich can spit upon the downtrodden as they like and never fear retribution. A world where the upper crust of society never must stain themselves with the presence of the poor, huddled masses. My citizens, i will give you change, change to a world where the rich will always be so, and the poor will always be so and you will never be allowed to question the governments authority to keep it as such."

Granted, that speech would be political, and probably physical, suicide. My point is, you, as a person, would NEVER agree to such a thing, Rod. You would wish it failure with every fiber of your being. Why? Because you see it as wrong. Horribly and obviously wrong.

How is what Rush said any different? He sees what Obama wants to do and feels it is wrong. You're going to berate and crucify him for wanting Obama to fail. Yet, ask yourself this. How often did you wish and verbally state that you wanted Bush to fail because you disagree with him and his policies? Is this any different?

It sounds like a double standard to me, Rod. If you don't think it is, please explain to me how it isn't, because i'm more than willing to listen. I don't stand at the altar of Rush, so i'm more than willing to have you show me the difference between the two, but at this point, i just don't see it.

I would call that good damage control

The conservative talk shows were all over this like stink on a skunk. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out they needed to can that portion, and do it fast.

BUT, yes, props to Obama for doing it. He could have just left it in.

While i don't bow at the altar of Rush....i must say, the more you libs hate him, the more money he makes. So keep hating, because if you've ever listened to him, you'd know he loves it. He feeds on liberal hate like a sponge soaks up water.

Remember how much fun he had with the Harry Reid letter? Imagine what he's going to do with this.

Funny, how when the dems were in the minority, they did the EXACT SAME THING, but it was A-Okay then.

Nothing like a little hypocrisy to get the morning started.

Rod, i would agree with you that hearing a President admit that they screwed up is refreshing. You don't get that very often from someone with that much power.

My only problem is this. As Patrick stated, if Daschle and Killefer were choices that he screwed up on, what about Geithner? Why no admission that there was a screw up on that nomination as well? If the only reason Daschle and Killefer were mistakes was because of their tax problems, then shouldn't Geithner be acknowledged as an even bigger mistake given what he's being put in charge of??

We'll see where things go from here. At this point, things appear business and politics as usual, no change in sight.

I'm actually shocked by this. Literally.

For someone who's party is so hardline against any form of information gathering that could even closely resemble torture, i'm amazed that Obama would continue to allow this. It just seems so against his ideals. Then again, once you're in office, you have access to information that no other person in the world has access to. Perhaps he saw something that made him realize that while it may be distasteful, it's useful and needed.

I can't help but shrug my shoulders on this one. I can't fault him for his decision. It's probably a wise one. I'm just surprised he would sign the order to condone it.