Revisited: The Rationing Has Already Started and obAMATEUR-CARE Is Not in Full Swing Yet….

We told you so……

It was estimated that 9-25 million people with pre-existing conditions were not insured.

The “high risk pools” set up under 2010 obAMATEUR-care law will be closed to new applicants by March 2nd (some states by Sunday) because funding is running low.

A sign of things to come…. We have seen this in Europe, especially in England, but warnings went unheeded to the pResident and Democrats hell bent on 1/7th of the nations wealth.

What will happen next?

Update: Following are the smear attacks by Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman on Republicans and Sarah Palin:

  • August 13, 2009 “Right now, the charge that’s gaining the most traction is the claim that health care reform will create “death panels” (in Sarah Palin’s words) that will shuffle the elderly and others off to an early grave. It’s a complete fabrication, of course.”
  • August 20, 2009 “It seems as if there is nothing Republicans can do that will draw an administration rebuke: Senator Charles E. Grassley feeds the death panel smear, warning that reform will “pull the plug on grandma,” and two days later the White House declares that it’s still committed to working with him.”
  • February 25, 2010 “So what did we learn from the summit? What I took away was the arrogance that the success of things like the death-panel smear has obviously engendered in Republican politicians. At this point they obviously believe that they can blandly make utterly misleading assertions, saying things that can be easily refuted, and pay no price. And they may well be right.”
  • August 30, 2009“Moderate Republicans, the sort of people with whom one might have been able to negotiate a health care deal, have either been driven out of the party or intimidated into silence. Whom are Democrats supposed to reach out to, when Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who was supposed to be the linchpin of any deal, helped feed the “death panel” lies?”
  • October 4, 2009 “The Republican campaign against health care reform, by contrast, has shown no such consistency. For the main G.O.P. line of attack is the claim — based mainly on lies about death panels and so on — that reform will undermine Medicare. And this line of attack is utterly at odds both with the party’s traditions and with what conservatives claim to believe.”
  • March 21, 2010: “Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”

The New York Times columnist, economist and political advisor said that within less than 20 years the US will need to raise taxes and ration healthcare to deal with rising costs under Obamacare and yes, he said “death panels.”

Turns out to be true!! Krugman confirms RATIONING AND DEATH PANELS!

So, what’s next?

Oh yeah the ultimate goal:  Single payer system totally in the hands of the government – total control of 1/7th of the economy.  It works so well with Medicare and the VA!


85 thoughts on “Revisited: The Rationing Has Already Started and obAMATEUR-CARE Is Not in Full Swing Yet….

  1. Cluster February 16, 2013 / 9:13 am

    What will happen next? How about designating optometrists and podiatrists as primary care physicians as may soon be the case in California. There is expected to be a huge doctor shortage very soon in California and I suspect elsewhere as many current physicians retire or leave the practice altogether. Last year in fact it was reported that as much as 83% of current practicing physicians were considering leaving the practice as a result of Obamacare.

    In addition to that, private insurance premiums are up, and more people than anticipated are expected to be dropped from their employers insurance rolls. But of course, these results will all be considered “unexpected” and Obama will never be held to account.

    I want to comment on a post from the religious bigot rustybrown21012 in an earlier thread. He said:

    My point is that politicians should not be inserting their religion into law GOING FORWARD. That is the topic of this post – lines in the sand which shall not be breached henceforth.

    I want to remind rusty that Obama and the democrats invoked the teachings of Jesus at nearly every opportunity when they were crafting Obamacare. In addition, Obama invokes Chrisitanity all the time when he speaks of redistributing wealth and his misguided policies to help the poor. Do you care to comment on that?

    • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 11:54 am

      Sure, since you asked, I’ll comment on that. While I’m against invoking deities to pitch public policy,even when dems do it, the policy goals of insuring the uninsured and helping the poor are worthy. The type of religious politicking I was referring to in the previous thread is the type practiced by republicans – and the type that is, ahem, arcane to the irreligious such as forcing displays of the ten commandments, prayer in school, denying the fact of evolution, teaching intelligent design in the classroom, etc.

      Off topic, this has nothing to do with the failure of OBAMACARE – //moderator

      • M. Noonan February 16, 2013 / 12:02 pm


        I think you’ve missed it – our side says we must give to the poor and not go to strip joints. Your side says we can’t legislate against the strip joints but that we must legislate in favor of giving to the poor. When you enact food stamps, you are enforcing Christian charity.

        And this leaves aside the abundant evidence that trying to legally force people to be nice (in this case, give to the poor) actually harms the poor…not because it is bad for them to get help, but that it turns out it is bad if they can count on a check every month no matter what they do.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 12:19 pm


        Mark said it well. It is your side that enforces religious tenets through legislation, ie: wealth redistribution, all the while trying to legislate out religious tenets in the public square. It’s quite a conundrum.

        Conservatives don’t deny evolution. We believe that Creation AND evolution are harmonious concepts. The display of the ten commandments dates back to our founding, so again, we are not forcing the display, rather preserving it.

        I think you are really confused about a lot of things.

      • neocon01 February 16, 2013 / 12:35 pm


        you never answered about sharia and Islam, seems you only hate Christianity….why is that brownpants?

        you do not HELP any one by stealing MY money and giving it to someone who did not EARN it……..marxism 101

      • Amazona February 16, 2013 / 12:50 pm

        “…the policy goals of insuring the uninsured and helping the poor are worthy…”

        Do you think these “policy goals” are the job of the federal government? If so, can you find anything in the Constitution that allows this?

        You listed several things that you find, ahem, either “mysterious” or “secret” or “known or knowable only the initiated” and you also assert that these things are the result of “religious politicking” by “republicans (sic)”.

        “… forcing displays of the ten commandments…”

        The Ten Commandments are part of a long and rich cultural heritage spanning many religions, and their display has been part of American culture since we were established as a nation. Forcing removal of them is “politicking” of a different belief system, one which denies the existence of the deity suggested by the Ten Commandments, and is also proof of intolerance of differing beliefs and opinions.

        “….prayer in school…”

        This falls under the cherished Freedom To Choose mantra of the Left as well as the guaranteed right of freedom of worship codified in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. As long as no one is FORCED to pray in a school, denying others the right to pray in schools is just another FORCED imposition of a different belief system as well as a violation of a Constitutional right.

        “….. denying the fact of evolution…”

        This is a favorite yet provably false complaint of the Left. In fact, few if any conservatives “deny the fact of evolution”. The only point of contention is not that of evolution per se but of the insistence that all life originated from inert matter in a random collision of lifeless particles. So you are faced with either admitting that there is no effort to “deny the fact of evolution” or changing your terminology to be more accurate and refer only to the origin of life.

        At this point you are also faced with the fact that while the theory that random accidental collisions of inorganic matter somehow resulted in life forms either organic in nature or capable of becoming organic in nature is a necessary part of a certain belief system, it has not been proved through accepted scientific theory and therefore remains a matter of faith.

        ” teaching intelligent design in the classroom…”
        Not teaching it as proven scientific fact but teaching that this is something believed by millions and millions of people, including scientists, and explaining why.

        That is, presenting all the information out there and letting people evaluate what they hear and draw their own conclusions.

        When I look at what you have listed what I see is an adamant demand that only one side of an issue be presented. And you are fine with this as long as it is the side you yourself support. I don’t think you even see this as a desire to limit the personal freedom of others by restricting what they can see, do or be taught.

        And this is the core of Leftist ideology—that a group of people makes the decisions for everyone—what they can be told, what they can be taught, what they can do, and what they must do.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 12:57 pm


        “Wealth redistribution”, as you put it, is not necessarily a religious tenant. Otherwise, highly atheistic Eurpean countries would not be practicing it to a greater degree than we are.

        Regarding evolution, there have been many voices on this blog arguing against common, accepted facts in the theory. Maybe you were not among them.

        “The display of the ten commandments dates back to our founding” -That’s wrong, got any evidence to back that up?

        Why can’t you comment on topic? – //moderator

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 1:00 pm


        I did indeed address Islam and sharia in that last thread. To repeat – I think they’re odious and I agree with you that radical Islam poses a threat to this country.

        YAWN… off topic – //moderator

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 1:21 pm

        “Wealth redistribution”, as you put it, is not necessarily a religious tenant. – Rusty

        It’s tenet. Not tenant.

        And in terms of our founders – aside from opening every continental congressional session with prayer, and having scriptures in plaques present, they all have several quotes as to the presence of their Faith in crafting the Constitution. Here’s one that speaks to keeping God present:

        “God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.” – Thomas Jefferson

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 1:32 pm

        In fact, I always love going back and reading quotes from the founding fathers. It is amazing how relevant their words are today:

        “Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company….The most abandoned scoundrel that ever existed, never yet wholly extinguished his Conscience and while Conscience remains, there is some religion.” – John Adams

      • M. Noonan February 16, 2013 / 1:42 pm

        I think the main point here is to remember that liberals think you can get to Christian civilization without the Christianity…that what we have in the West, the tattered remains of Christendom, could have been here without Christianity. No question is asked about why things are to ragged and falling apart…no connection drawn between the collapse of our civilization and the collapse of its Christian character. Liberals seem to think that people will be generous to the poor without a command from God to do so…but one only need look at the liberal bastions such as Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit to see that the more liberals remove the Christian underpinnings, the worse it goes for the poor…only Christians and Jews actually care about the poor, because God tells us to. Liberals mouth words about caring for the poor, but the poor are worse off now than ever…not in the ability to get a cell phone and cheetos, but in the ability to live a life of dignity and independence….which is far more important than having a cell phone.

      • Amazona February 16, 2013 / 3:43 pm

        ““The display of the ten commandments dates back to our founding” -That’s wrong, got any evidence to back that up?”

        Well, there are no photos of such displays so I can’t produce any, but it is ridiculous to just claim with absolute assurance that the statement is “wrong”. What I have to back up the belief that the Ten Commandments were displayed during the era of our founding is quotes from Founders and prominent people of the era. Given the common reference to the Commandments, one can extrapolate that they were not “arcane”—that is, not secret, not mysterious, and not known or knowable only to the initiated—but quite available to the public.

        “When we look at the Founding Fathers, we see they were anything but neutral when it came to addressing the influence of the Ten Commandments on our republic. For example, twelve of the original thirteen colonies incorporated the entire Ten Commandments into their civil and criminal codes.”

        John Quincy Adams stated: “The law given from Sinai was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code. These are laws essential to the existence of men in society and most of which have been enacted by every nation which ever professed any code of laws.” He added that: “Vain indeed would be the search among the writings of [secular history] . . . to find so broad, so complete and so solid a basis of morality as this Decalogue lays down.”

        John Witherspoon was the president of what later came to be known as Princeton University and was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He said that the Ten Commandments are the sum of the moral law.

        John Jay was one of the authors of The Federalist Papers. He later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He said, “The moral or natural law, was given by the sovereign of the universe to all mankind.”

        On September 19, 1796, in his Farewell Address, President George Washington said, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports.”

        William Holmes McGuffey, considered the Schoolmaster of the Nation, once said, ” The Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus are not only basic but plenary.”

        “The founders of this country wanted to honor Moses as the deliverer of the Ten Commandments. After separating from England, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were responsible for designing a symbol of this newly formed nation. Franklin proposed Moses lifting his wand and dividing the Red Sea. ”

        “In the U.S. Capitol, there are displays of the great lawgivers (Hammurabi, Justinian, John Locke, William Blackstone, etc). All are profiles of the lawgivers except for one. The relief of Moses is full faced rather than in profile and looks directly down onto the House Speakers rostrum.

        Anyone who enters the National Archives to view the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution must first pass by the Ten Commandments embedded in the entry way of the Archives. Likewise, there are a number of depictions of the Ten Commandments. One is on the entry to the Supreme Court Chamber, where it is engraved on the lower half of the two large oak doors.

        Another is engraved in the stone above the head of the Chief Justice with the great American eagle protecting them. And Moses is included among the great lawgivers in the sculpture relief on the east portico.”

        James Madison said, “We have staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart…”

      • Amazona February 16, 2013 / 3:49 pm

        “Regarding evolution, there have been many voices on this blog arguing against common, accepted facts in the theory. Maybe you were not among them.”

        Name one. If there were “many” you ought to be able to name some and tell us where these denials appeared.

        Or are you reserving the ability to simply redefine “common accepted facts”?

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 4:53 pm


        All of my posts today are responses to direct questions posed to me. I’ll also respond on topic soon, but I thought it would be more to the liking of the group to address the issues they brought up. Is that OK?

        Strawman. The question wasn’t whether the founding fathers gave nods here and there to god – they did – the question was for you to back up your (and apparently ama’s) belief that “the DISPLAY” of the ten commandments dates back to our founding”. Neither one of you can back that up, because it’s simply not true. If it were true, it could be seen as our founders’ endorsement of a particular religion.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:10 pm


        Without a picture of John Adams, or Jefferson, etc., standing directly below a posting of the Ten Commandments in the public square, you will continue to play your childish games. The fact is, the founding fathers were most Deists, and men of strong, strong Faith. Having opened every meeting with prayer, I am sure they would be astonished that we don’t. Furthermore, I am sure they would be surprised that school children don’t.

        Rusty, you can pretend that the founding of our country was not by men of Faith, and not by Judeo Chiristian Values, but you would be wrong, and it’s vey immature of you to even continue to try. It’s as if you have never even read writings from the Founders.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:15 pm

        Oh and Rusty, just to correct you again, I never did say that there was a DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments. I did say, and I do remember reading in the book John Adams, that he had parchments of Scripture that he had with him during congressional meetings.

        You might want to read that book, it’s very good, but lengthy and not many pictures.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 7:26 pm

        You write:
        “Oh and Rusty, just to correct you again, I never did say that there was a DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments.”
        Yet at 12:19 you posted: “The display of the ten commandments dates back to our founding…”

        Can’t you even keep your own words straight?

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:33 pm

        Well you know Rusty simple minds like yours need pictures, and I just don’t have any Polaroids of the founding fathers. Your just going to have to use your imagination, if you have one.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 7:42 pm


        Nope. A simple, credible citation from a book would suffice. They did write books back then you know.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:46 pm

        Yes. Have you read John Adams? I referred to it earlier. If that’s the proof you need, then there you have it and you can apologize later.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 8:12 pm

        You haven’t read the book have you?

    • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 11:54 pm

      “You haven’t read the book have you?”
      Uh, no Cluster, have not. But I would appreciate you pointing me to the part where Adams proudly, publicly displays the ten commandments. Please stop positioning me to your posterior, I don’t wanna go there…

      • Amazona February 17, 2013 / 2:38 am

        A few months ago another intolerant bigot was claiming that George Washington was not religious, and I looked up some of Washington’s public comments to point out the stupidity of the comment.

        I remember, and may have quoted, a reference to large copies of the Ten Commandments being prominently displayed at Washington’s inauguration. First or second, I don’t remember. I was looking for quotes and not just references to something like choosing to take his oath in front of a depiction of the Commandments, so while I thought it was interesting I didn’t make a note of it.

        Who knew there would be a quiz?

        I can’t find the reference now but it doesn’t matter. I am sure the term “display” would undergo some morphing to mean only a PUBLIC display, or a VERY LARGE PUBLIC display, or some such qualifier.

        This is the game the RRL trolls play. They nitpick tiny details and carp on them incessantly, because this is all they really can do.

        We, however, do notice that they never actually discuss POLITICS. They never actually talk about governance, but only about personality and petty things like who stood next to what size DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments and was it in public and did someone write about it.

        I cited references to the Ten Commandments by Founders and their contemporaries, and rusty sneered that without a comment along the lines of “Dear Abigail, today I stood and admired the large DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments so prominently placed in public” there is simply no reason to believe that a society which had so much respect for the Commandments would also display artistic renditions of them—just as people do now.

        And this nattering is supposed to make up for the dearth of actual political commentary from this wannabe blog vandal/speed bump. Who has, I notice, also turned into a whining sniveler complaining that no one wants to read his mental sewage. waaaaa waaaa boo freakin’ hoo.

      • Amazona February 17, 2013 / 2:40 am

        “Please stop positioning me to your posterior, I don’t wanna go there…”

        Seriously, folks, does anyone believe this?

      • Amazona February 17, 2013 / 2:46 am

        In a letter dated November 4, 1816, John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson:

        “The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion..”

      • Amazona February 17, 2013 / 1:08 pm

        I’m not inclined to waste much time on rusty’s screeching for attention, but I did find some references to DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments in colonial times. And gee whiz, one of them even references George Washington.

        Going back to 1675 (which was, after all, “colonial times” we can see a DISPLAY of the Ten Commandments. In From “Colonial Virginia: Its People and Customs by Mary Newton Stanard, we see the comment: (emphasis mine)

        “A favorite interior decoration for houses of worship throughout the Colonial period was the framed Lord’s Prayer, Creed, or Ten Commandments, which was often provided by bequest. In 1675 John Washington, of Westmoreland, bequeathed the Lower Church of Washington’s Parish “the Ten Commandments and the King’s Arms, to be sent for out of England”.

        Ms. Stanard also says, in the same volume, “About 1764 Mrs. Elizabeth Stith, of Surry County, bequeathed fifty pounds sterling to buy “an altar piece” for the Lower Church in Southwark Parish. Her directions were that “Moses and Aaron be drawn at full length, holding up between them the Ten Commandments…”

        While every year of “colonial times” has not been covered, we can see that public displays of the Ten Commandments were quite common, according to a historian of the times.

        A famous colonial church was the “Falls Church”. From Wikipedia (emphasis mine)

        “The Vestry Book first referred to it as the “Falls Church” on 28 November 1757, owing to its location at the intersection of the road to the Little Falls of the Potomac River (upstream of the Chain Bridge) and the Middle Turnpike (leading from Alexandria to Leesburg, now Virginia Route 7 or Leesburg Pike, called West Broad Street in downtown Falls Church City)

        George Mason was elected Vestryman in 1748, as was George Washington in 1762.”

        (My note: Two of the Founders, one of them George Washington.)

        The new brick church

        In 1762, the wood building was judged to be “greatly in decay”. The vestry (the church governing body), meeting at The Falls Church, ordered a new brick building constructed on the same site. In 1763, George Washington and George William Fairfax were appointed church wardens with responsibility to contract for a new building. This was Washington’s last official act on behalf of this church after the parish was divided in 1765 and before work began. After 1765, the seat of Truro Parish, which had been here, returned to the southern part of the county and this church became the seat of the new Fairfax Parish.
        The present chancel was built in 1959 by removing part of the original east wall. Until then, the holy table and communion rail were along that wall. Until 1861-65, colonial tablets with the Lord’s Prayer, Ten Commandments, and Creed were also above the altar on the east wall. These, too, were destroyed during the Civil War. The eight tiles below the Present table are from the original 1769 aisles.”

      • rustybrown2012 February 17, 2013 / 2:08 pm

        Ama @ 1:08,
        Are you daft? No one is disputing that the ten commandments were displayed IN CHURCHES at the time! That’s COMPLETELY besides the point. The issue, relating to my original post, is my abhorance to laws “FORCING DISPLAYS OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS”. That’s what I wrote. You and Cluster then falsely claimed our founding fathers displayed them. Only a lunatic, or someone completely dishonest, would construe that to mean an opposition to the tablets being displayed in churches! News flash: there are no laws regarding the ten commandments in churches! Sheesh! All that work you did pulling up citations that are completely irrelevant to the conversation.

  2. Retired Spook February 16, 2013 / 9:31 am


    Rusty Brown is just another in a long list of slimy little trolls who have infested this site over the years. He really isn’t worth getting worked up about.

    Good people are going to be hurt by ObamaCare, but the ones who are going to be hurt the most are those who support and/or voted for Obama. Poetic justice if you ask me.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 9:46 am

      I actually think rusty is just a new name for an old liberal retread. His last line to Amazona is, and has been often used:

      “it would be hilariously funny if it weren’t so sad”

      You have a better memory than I do on previous liberal trolls, so who does rusty remind you of?

      • Retired Spook February 16, 2013 / 11:16 am


        It could be Jeffy/Body/Monty/Wallace et al or Dave Bowman or Truthie, or……hell, they all sound alike, probably because they’re all the same person, or they all get their talking points from the same place. Who cares? I’ve seen 9 years worth of trolls here, and I can count on one hand the number of coherent thoughts they’ve contributed and have fingers left over.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 11:20 am

        LOL!!!! God love ya Spook. Have a great weekend

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 11:22 am

        Curious though isn’t it that liberals love to bash people of Faith, but lean on religious teachings to advance their agenda.

      • Amazona February 16, 2013 / 11:27 am

        Spook beat me to it. They do all sound alike, because they are all alike, and many of them the same person.

        What amuses me is the so-obvious fact that they find this little blog, and the conservatives who post here, and our ideas, so upsetting that they are driven to haunt the blog to try to derail it with their anger and hostility. We know that our ideas pose the greatest threat to Liberalism/Progressivism—the idea that this great nation became great when it followed the Constitution set down by our Founding Fathers, that Leftism is an oppressive system cloaked in fake concern for “the people”, that it is dependent on lies and emotional manipulation of sheeple, etc.

        It is just interesting to see them acknowledge this.

        We also know that most of the foot soldiers of the Left don’t know squat about the system they are supporting, but are driven by pathologies such as irrational rage and overriding hatred, and they feel that venting these pathologies in the name of political discourse means they are not crazy, just passionate about a cause.

        If they truly ARE passionate about the virtues of Leftism, they would be trying to convert us, explaining it and explaining why it is such a better system of governance. Yet we never, NEVER, see this from them

        All we see is unending displays of spite and malice, loathing and rage.

        But underneath it all is the awareness that we pose a danger to what they have adopted as validation for their pathologies. Not “we” as the few here on this blog, but “we” as the growing movement of conservative thought which rejects Leftism with such vigor, and which is prepared to defend out Constitution and our Constitutional rights.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 12:00 pm

        We also know that most of the foot soldiers of the Left don’t know squat about the system they are supporting, but are driven by pathologies such as irrational rage and overriding hatred, and they feel that venting these pathologies in the name of political discourse means they are not crazy, just passionate about a cause.

        Leftism is all about the struggle. A never ending struggle where there all always victims of an unfair system that needs to be legislated.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 12:14 pm


        Nope, I’ve never commented under a different name on this blog. And to everyone in general, I don’t see why you’re so worked up about my “tone”. Amas’ characterizations of “irrational rage and overriding hatred”, if in fact that was referring to me, is unwarranted. If my tone becomes snarky, it is in response to ama’s snarkiness. Her tone doesn’t bother me, but I’ll certainly dish it back to her since that seems to be her preferred way of communicating

        Final warning: Comment on topic or have your posts deleted. //moderator

      • Amazona February 16, 2013 / 12:18 pm

        I don’t think anyone is “worked up” about your “tone”. Water off a duck’s back and all that.

        What you say—different story. And no one actually gets “worked up” about that, either, as we see it over and over again and recognize it for what it is.

      • tiredoflibbs February 16, 2013 / 2:54 pm

        Ama – “They do all sound alike, because they are all alike, and many of them the same person.”

        They are mindless drones, period. They sound alike because they all regurgitate the party line – No original thought.


        Not one of them will comment on the topic because they believe that everything from the government, no matter how wasteful or inefficient is needed and is great. The private sector can take the same duties and do it at a fraction of the cost and service more people.

        Government is the problem and not the solution.

      • neocon01 February 16, 2013 / 3:02 pm

        A sign of things to come…. We have seen this in Europe, especially in England, but warnings went unheeded to the pResident and Democrats hell bent on 1/7th of the nations wealth.

        What will happen next?

        like Kanada it will suck so bad those with money will travel to other countries for treatment, for the rest – get in line behind the illegal mexicans.

  3. rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 5:54 pm

    The “rationing premise” of this post is ridiculous. Yes, the program is running out of money, but it’s already insured 100,000 high-risk people and is only in place until 2014 at which time insurance companies will be prohibited from discriminating against people who are already sick! If that’s your definition of rationing, sign me up!

    BTW all, moderator forbids us from discussing religious issues so I will no longer be responding to your queries in that vein. Too bad, I had some enlightening comments. If you were waiting for a response from me, post the query again on that previous “line in the sand” thread if you like; perhaps we can discuss them there.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:12 pm

      Enlightening comments? That’s hilarious. You are anything but enlightening. My grandchild has a better grasp of reality than you do.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 8:00 pm

        Oh, that’s hilarious. “High unemployment, higher taxes, dead ambassador, cover up, golf games, largely white cabinet” are all about rationing in Clusterland. Where can I get some of the stuff you’re smokin’?

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 8:10 pm

        High unemployment = rationing jobs
        Higher taxes = rationing people’s money
        Dead ambassador = rationing life
        Golf games = rationing work
        Large white cabinet = rationing minorities.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 9:51 pm

        Dog owner = rationing cats
        Motorcycle = rationing cars
        Homeowner = rationing apartments
        Clean-shaven = rationing beards
        Religious = rationing critical thinking

        You’re right Cluster, everything is rationing!

      • dbschmidt February 16, 2013 / 10:30 pm


        Here I was holding out hope you were just ignorant but nevertheless, you proved you are stupid and as Ron White claims “You can’t fix stupid.”

        Rationing occurs when one item forces the curtail of a second but in your “brilliant mind” because I have a cat–that limits or curtails the number of dogs available? Really, you are / are you (dependent) that stupid?

        High unemployment and lack of jobs does curtail the number of available jobs or avenues of employment as does over regulation curtail new opportunities but crawl back under your trailer and you will see multitudes of newborn cats and dogs.

      • rustybrown2012 February 16, 2013 / 11:08 pm

        Wow db, you really coalesce the stupidity of this blog. My response, which you found so stupid, was parodying Clusters’ ridiculous parsing of the word “rationing”. Sorry you missed the joke.

        But as a follow-up, you make an even dumber point – that unemployment curtails the number of available jobs. Wow, guess you’re working on your own personal breakthrough economic theory, eh?

      • M. Noonan February 17, 2013 / 2:09 am


        Its really no more than an aside here, but one of the funniest things I get to see on the ‘net is claims that religious people don’t use critical thinking – in my experience, there is a direct correlation between lack of thought and lack of religious belief. I don’t know what dimwit first proposed that believers don’t think, but whomever it was clearly never read the Summa.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:29 pm


      What do you like best about the Obama presidency? The high gas prices? The high unemployment? The anemic GDP growth? The higher taxes? The increased tensions in the ME? The dead Ambassador? The cover up? The record number of golf games? The high number of old white men in his cabinet? The constant campaigning?

      You can pick more than one

      • Retired Spook February 17, 2013 / 11:18 am

        What do you like best about the Obama presidency? The high gas prices?

        In northeast Indiana we’re closing in on $4/gal again ($3.89 at most stations yesterday), the earliest in the year that we’ve ever seen the price that high. Nothing more than a massive tax on the very people Obama promised not to raise taxes on.

      • Cluster February 17, 2013 / 12:10 pm

        $3.59 here in the desert and not a single news report on how this effects people’s budgets. I remember the daily reports of high gas prices when the oil men Bush and Cheney were in office.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:37 pm


      I think my favorite part of the Obama presidency is that the poor, are getting poorer. Less income, less jobs, less opportunity, meanwhile the DOW is high enriching those that have money. You know the 1%. Isn’t that ironic? And hilarious?

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:51 pm

      It’s all about rationing sport. But your whining is duly noted.

      • neocon01 February 17, 2013 / 11:58 am


        there is NO rationing on his/her whining so far…..LOL

      • neocon01 February 17, 2013 / 12:12 pm

        meanwhile bakk at the raunch bathouse barry dithers and VACA-TIONS….
        ‘Sending a Message’: Nuclear ARMED Russian Bear Bombers Caught Circling Guam Before Obama Delivered the State of the Union

        John Bolton: “Every day brings new evidence that Obama’s ideological obsession with dismantling our nuclear deterrent is dangerous.”

      • rightlane1 February 17, 2013 / 3:11 pm

        We are becoming so weak China thinks she can strong arm Japan and Russian think Bears circleing Guam are statement of relative strength. I hope they underestimate us..

      • rustybrown2012 February 17, 2013 / 3:01 pm

        That’s actually pretty funny Neo!

    • tiredoflibbs February 17, 2013 / 7:43 am

      The point of the post is the FACT that the government estimated at least 9 million people who are uninsured have pre-existing conditions. Money for their care is running low and they have begun rationing with only a very small fraction covered – 100,000 is a far cry from the lowest estimate of 9 million. There are no two ways about it. The rest of 2013, those still uninsured are not being helped by obAMACARE which was supposed to be the greatest program ever instituted (if you listen to the proggies). All the estimates that these people have done and the budgeting for this program as a result of those estimates, if they are wrong which this early program shows how wrong they are, then what else will they ration when this program goes into full swing.

      You FEEL that this post is ridiculous, but THINKING people see this as a sign of things to come. We already know for a FACT that their estimates on the impact of the debt are way off – the CBO has already said so. We also know, by this evidence, that if the program runs short of money, then they will ration care and coverage. We also know for a FACT that there is a shortage of doctors to care for all those people who suddenly have coverage to pay for their care. Something has to give and the patients will suffer for it. You just don’t like the FACT that your pResident’s stellar accomplishment is already showing signs of failure before it starts – no wonder you are so desperate to deflect the topic of discussion away from that FACT into your religious bigotry screed.


      • M. Noonan February 17, 2013 / 10:12 am

        Drug costs are also skyrocketing – It appears that ObamaCare limits how much money will be spent on your prescriptions…once you reach it, that’s it for the year unless you go 100% out of pocket.

      • tiredoflibbs February 17, 2013 / 10:58 am

        Yet even more room for rationing – another I told you so for the proggies!

      • rustybrown2012 February 17, 2013 / 3:08 pm


        For all its faults, it’s a canyon of a stretch to characterize a program which insured 100,000 people who otherwise would have been UNinsured as “rationing”. Single payer is the answer.

      • tiredoflibbs February 17, 2013 / 7:13 pm

        wow, rusty, if you spin it any more it would be unrecognizable. I know you have trouble with FACTS, but “rationing” is taking place since obAMACARE is running out of funds for one of the most “serious” reasons for implementing the plan in the first place. It sounds like you are one of those “if we spend billions and it saves a single life it would be worth it” kind of mindless drones. The plan implemented is crap due to the FACT that the single payer system is the ultimate goal.

        Besides there is too much history and data proving that this program, like it European counterparts, will resort to rationing when funds run low. Now matter how you try to spin it and see it through rose colored glasses the program is a failure insuring thousands when millions are still without insurance because the government said stop insuring these individuals.

        To you denial is only a river in Egypt.

        Again, pathetic.

      • M. Noonan February 17, 2013 / 10:33 pm


        It is doubtful that there was – or will be – a net increase in the number of people insured once ObamaCare if fully implemented. The thing is, you’re still going off what its partisans said it would do…but now we’re getting in to the nitty gritty – per Pelosi, now we can see what is in it – and its turning out to be a nightmare. Even some Democrats who voted in favor of it are turning on it…it looks to do the exact opposition of what was intended…there will be less health care available and at a higher cost.

        In light of this – and other things I’ve seen – I think I’ve got the key to Obama: he’s a coward. Now, don’t for a moment think I’m making out that I’m any less of one…I hope, through prayer, to actually become brave one of these days…but I think that what we have in Obama is someone who is simply afraid to cross any of the powers that boosted him to office. He can’t – won’t – say “no” to any of them…and so all of them just dive in and put through whatever they want, with the ultimate result of this mish-mash being unworkable laws and baleful programs which just make a mess of everything, except for those who managed to insert their personal licenses to steal in to the bills. This cowardice shows not just in ObamaCare, but in the stimulus spending, the “green energy” programs, our foreign policy…because Obama is afraid to say “no” to any one group which supports him, there is no hard center to his regime…this, of course, stems partially from his complete unreadiness for the office…he hadn’t been sufficiently toughened by life to be able to steel himself to say “no”. And now he’s got no chance to learn.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 7:50 pm

      I am loving it Casper. In fact I hope you lose your job and with states revenues decreasing, forcing them to cut back, I would have to think that teachers in WY may be feeling the pinch. There is a record number of people on food stamps, a record number of people on welfare, and a record number of people out of work and out of the labor force. But this is what YOU wanted. Not me. So I am happy for you. Why can’t you understand that?

      • 02casper February 16, 2013 / 8:10 pm

        Sorry you feel that way. Personally, I hope you continue to prosper in this economy. Bad news for you is that for me to lose my job I would have to do something really stupid and that isn’t going to happen.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 8:31 pm

        I am watching a rerun of the movie the A team, and they’re in New York shooting guns at each other. Don’t they know that New York is a gun free zone?

      • 02casper February 16, 2013 / 8:35 pm

        “Cluster February 16, 2013 at 8:31 pm #

        I am watching a rerun of the movie the A team, and they’re in New York shooting guns at each other. Don’t they know that New York is a gun free zone?”

        Wyoming isn’t. Come by sometime and take you out shooting.

      • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 8:39 pm

        I actually wouldn’t mind that Cap. Wyoming has some beautiful spots, especially Jackson Hole. I flew over the Tetons one day and they are spectacular.

      • 02casper February 16, 2013 / 8:47 pm

        “Cluster February 16, 2013 at 8:39 pm #

        I actually wouldn’t mind that Cap. Wyoming has some beautiful spots, especially Jackson Hole. I flew over the Tetons one day and they are spectacular.”

        First time I saw the Tetons I stopped my car, got out, looked at the sky and said “There is a God”. We have some other nice spots too. I’ve been to your state several times. Saw the Grand Canyon and ate at the Road Kill Cafe on Route 66. One of the best hamburgers(?) I’ve ever had.

      • neocon01 February 17, 2013 / 11:56 am


        Come by sometime and take you out shooting.

        YOU shooting?
        OMG, visions of Kate Moore, (you) from dirty Harry the enforcer come to mind. “MARVELOUS”

      • neocon01 February 17, 2013 / 12:02 pm


        I stopped my car, got out, looked at the sky and said “There is a God”.

        Wellllll DUHHH !

        and I watch TV and and say there is a DEVIL and EVIL.
        maybe the next time you sit in that pew so smugly you can ask God how he supports your view of murdering one of HIS children in the womb.
        Oh right after killer tiller passes the basket.

    • Cluster February 16, 2013 / 8:02 pm

      Hey Cap, here’s a democrat who is finally getting it. Who knows maybe you’re next.

      Dik Bolger is a lifelong Minnesota Democrat, a gray-bearded baby boomer with a braid down his back whose Minneapolis printing company’s plant displays work by local artists and sculptors. He backed Mark Dayton for governor, but his take on the Democratic chief executive’s plan for new business taxes could be the voice-over for a Republican campaign commercial.

      “We’re screwed,” Bolger said, if the tax goes through. His 79-year-old company competes nationwide and overseas for work with major brands like Chanel. “If you’re bidding for a $100,000 job on a national basis and tax expenses push you a couple of percent higher, then I’m not competitive.”

    • M. Noonan February 17, 2013 / 10:39 pm


      I like how we are the one’s who need to be saved when we control, completely, 24 State governments, hold legislative majorities in 27, and the governorships of 30…while Democrats have complete control of only 12 State governments…and the States the Democrats are in complete control of – California, Rhode Island, Illinois, etc – are basket cases while the GOP States are surging…If this is what its like to be in terminal decline, then I’ll take it.

      • 02casper February 17, 2013 / 10:48 pm

        Actually California is turning things around and Red states like Texas and Mississippi are going down the tube.

      • M. Noonan February 17, 2013 / 11:10 pm


        Oh, you mean the announcement by the government of California that they’ll have a surplus? ROFL. Check that in June…

      • 02casper February 17, 2013 / 11:51 pm

        If I ever have to chose between Texas and CA as a place to live I’d pick CA in a second. You couldn’t pay me enough to move to Texas.

  4. Jeremiah February 16, 2013 / 8:34 pm

    To Rusty,

    Regarding Christianity and its influence in America’s founding.

    A little note of advice to you, you need to get a little broader spectrum on history, especially as it relates to the significance of Christianity’s influence on American society and culture at its founding. Here I’ve provided some background information on the history of South Carolina, and the formation of their constitution. And there’s plenty more where this came from, as in the case of every other State, Christianity formed the Constitution of South Carolina…it was not just a mere “passing reference” to religion, no, Christianity built South Carolina and all forty-nine others.

    “The Constitution of South Carolina, adopted in 1778, declares Christianity to be the fundamental law of the state, in the following language – that all persons and religious societies shall acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is to be publicly worshiped, shall be tolerated. The Christian protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of the State. That all nominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges.

    To accomplish this desirable purpose without injury to the religious property of those societies of Christians which are by law already incorporated for the purpose of religious worship, and to put it fully and to the power of every other society of Christians, Protestants, either already formed or hereby formed, to obtain the like incorporation, it is hereby constituted, appointed, and declared that the respective societies of the Church of England, that are already formed in this State for the purpose of religious worship, shall continue incorporate and hold the religious property now in their possession. And, that whenever fifteen or more male persons not under twenty-one years of age, professing the Christian Protestant religion, and agreeing to unite themselves in a society for the purposes of religious worship, they shall (on complying with the terms hereinafter mentioned) be and be constituted a Church, and be esteemed and regarded in law asof the established religion of the State, and on a petition to the legislature shall be entitled to be incorporated and to enjoy equal privileges.

    That every society of Christians so formed shall give themselves a name or denomination, by which they shall be called and known in law, and all that associate with them for the purpose of worship shall be esteemed as belonging to the society so called; but that previous to the establishment and incorporation of the respective societies of every denomination as aforesaid, and in order to entitle themthereto, each society so petitioning shall have agreed to and subscribed in a book the five following articles – without which no agreement or union of men upon pretense of relgion shall entitle them to be incoroporated and esteemed as a Church of the established religion of the State.

    (See Locke’s Costne., Arts. 97-100).

    I. That there is One Eternal God, a future state of rewards and punishments.
    II. That God is to be publicly worshiped.
    III. That the Christian is the True religion.
    IV. That the Holy Scriptures of the old and new testaments are of divine inspiration, and are the rule of faith and practice.
    V. That it is lawful, and the duty of every man being thereunto called by those that govern, to bear witness to truth. That every inhabitant of this state, when called to make an appeal to God as a witness to truth, shall be permitted to do it, in that way which is most agreeable to the dictate of his own conscience. And that the people of this State may forever enjoy the right of electing their own pastors or clergies, and, at the same time, that the State may have sufficient security for the due discharge of the pastor office by those that shall be admitted to be clergymen, no person shall officiate as minister of any established church who shall not have been chosen by a majority of the society to which he shall administer, or by persons appointed by the said majority to to choose and procure a minister for them, nor until the minister so chosen and appointed shall have made and subscribed to the following declaration, over and above the aforesaid five articles, viz-

    that he is determined, by God’s grace, out of the Holy Scripture, to instruct the people committed ot his charge, and to teach nothing (as required of necessity to eternal salvation) but that which he shall be persuaded may be concluded and proved from the Scriptures; that he will use both public and private admonitions, as well to the sick, as to the whole within his cure, as need shall require and occasion shall be given; and that he will be diligent in prayers, and in reading of the Holy Scriptures, and in such studies as help to the knowledge of the same; that he will be diligent to the frame and fashion his own self and his family according to the doctrine of Christ, and to make both himself and them, as much as in him lieth, wholesome examples and patterns to the flock of Christ; that he will maintain and set forward, as much as he can, quietness, peace, and love among all the people, and especially among those who are or shall be committed to his charge.

    No person shall disturb or molest any religious assembly, nor shall use any reproachful, railing, or any abusive language against any Church, that being the certain way of disturbing the way of the peace, and of hindering the conversion of any to the truth, by engaging them in corrals and animosities, to the hatred of the professors, and that profession which otherwise they might be brought assent to. No person whatsoever shall speak any thing in their religious assembly irreverently or seditiously of the government of the State no person shall by law be obliged to pay towards the maintenance and support of a religious worship that he does not freely join in or has not voluntarily engaged to support; but the Church’s, chapels, parsonages, glebes, and all other property now belonging to any societies of the Church of England, or any other religious societies, shall remain and be secured to them forever.

    They shall choose by ballot among themselves, or from the people at large, a governor and command in chief, a lieutenant-governor, and privy council, all of the protestant religion; that no person shall be eligible to the seat in the Senate less he is of the Protestant religion; that no person shall be eligible to sit in the house of representative unless he be of the Protestant religion.”

    Source: The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States.
    Author: Benjamin F. Morris.

    • 02casper February 16, 2013 / 10:00 pm

      Good to see you are still hanging in there. Good luck and God bless.

      • Jeremiah February 16, 2013 / 10:21 pm



        Only by the grace of God.

        Watch and pray!

  5. rightlane1 February 17, 2013 / 2:20 pm

    The campaigning has stopped. Obama, no longer needing to campaign, will golf more. That’s human nature. The people have spoken, reelecting him, despite his policy and leadership failures, so clearly displayed throughout his first term. They are entitled to and now deserve what they get. This is the beginning of many painful liberal failures for the American people. Cell phones! They sold their freedom for cell phones and empty promises of amnesty. Morons! They won’t abandon their pride and admit they made a mistake. Or, they’ve forgotten to judge this man by the quality of his character instead of the color of his skin. At least, the illegal immigration situation will be resolved by this election. Nobody will want to come here by the time 2016 rolls around.

    Liberals place their faith in mankind’s ability to create a utopia here on earth, absent God. Their failures are always and correctly blamed on a man or group of men. That’s not going change. Such endeavors appear to be noble pursuits, but in reality are rebellions. It is our nature that predisposes us to failure in governance. That can’t change without divine intervention, but if you don’t believe in the Devine, then you’re stuck wearing your jackboots, oppressing those you would free, because human nature is what it is can’t be changed by wanna, shoulda, or coulda. Good luck with that. That why the government that governs least governs best! Yes, liberals believe, in pride who, “professing themselves to be wise they became as fools.” After 6000 years of human history, they still try the same recycled ideas, which produce the same results, while expecting success where history repeatedly shows only abject failure. Madness!

    • Cluster February 17, 2013 / 6:27 pm

      Great post

  6. Jeremiah March 1, 2013 / 3:41 am

    We have to stop Obama. He’s destroying us!

  7. bagni March 2, 2013 / 11:48 pm

    hey mark
    hope you’re well
    i stop by once in a while
    it’s always entertaining reading a new entry into your insular small circle jerk at b4v
    like the rustybrown dude
    you guys don’t like outsiders
    which is ironically appropriate for some reason?

    • M. Noonan March 2, 2013 / 11:58 pm

      Why? Why come by if you don’t like us? That is what I’ve never understood.

      • bagni March 3, 2013 / 3:45 pm

        markie mark
        i never said i didn’t like you
        and technically the whole planet is an insular circle jerk?
        i come by for a quick look into the minds of the humanoids
        to support you
        there’s a certain amount of respect i have for you, your persistence and your dedication to writing….it’s cool
        and of course…there’s my unrequited love for the neo

Comments are closed.