Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 6/24/2009
EmailEducation Secretary Arne Duncan joined White House press secretary Robert Gibbs at the top of the briefing today to talk about simplifications being made to the federal student aid program application.
TAPPER: If this means that more students will fill out the application and more students will get student loans, do you have an estimate of how much more it's going to cost ultimately?
DUNCAN: I don't have a firm estimate on that. But, again, we think that's not a cost. We think that's an investment. We think the best thing we can do as a country is have more young people going on to college. So we think this is absolutely the right thing to do. This has to cease being a barrier to entry….
TAPPER: About the Race to the Top, are you worried that all the state are going to run out of money…miss out on money in the Race to the Top and the $5 billion that you can allocate?
DUNCAN: It's not about states missing out on money. What we're going to do is we're going to invest very significantly in a number of states who are going to lead the country where we need to go.
It's going to be very competitive. We'll be coming out in the next couple weeks with what that application is going to look like. As you know, the president's, you know, tremendous leadership and Congress' support, we have unprecedented resources. But we're being very clear, with unprecedented resources has to come unprecedented reform. And if all we're doing is investing in the status quo, that's not going to get us where we need to go. So we're going to invest lots of money in a number of states that will literally lead the country where we need to go. I think we've had a race to the bottom around the country. That has to stop. And it will be a competitive process.
We're going to be very, very, you know, objective and transparent about this. And we want a set of states to demonstrate to the country what's possible educationally. We'll probably do this in two rounds, so states that don't get in the first round will have a chance to go back and look at, you know, what — where they're deficient. And every state that doesn't — who applies, who doesn't get through, we'll send them a letter saying this is where you missed and this is what you have to work on. But investing in the status quo is not going to get our country where we need to go. This is about a very strong reform agenda.
**
TAPPER: During the campaign of then-Senator Obama and then- Senator Clinton — fought quite a bit about the question of individual mandates. And the president, as I understand, said to Diane Sawyer that his thinking has evolved on the issue. Just explain the process by which his thinking has evolved, and why it has, and why he has changed his position.
GIBBS: Well, I think — look, I think what's paramount in this take is the process moves forward in the Senate and the House, the president wants to be flexible to the notion to the degree to which a piece of legislation will come forward. In terms of — in terms of ensuring that everyone is covered, the president is now open to — to this idea. I think there have been in discussions with all the parties and stakeholders involved, there has been discussion about — that it will be harder to get everyone at the table to stay at the table if — if you're not getting that larger universe of people covered. And I believe that on both the left and the right.
TAPPER: Does he see…
GIBBS: Let me also say that — and I think as the president said in the interview — they're a lot of, obviously, specifics to work out, including he's a big believer in the notion that there has to be a pretty stringent hardship waiver, I think the president said, throughout the campaign. Very few people can afford it to don't — don't have it because they can afford and don't want it. It's because they can't afford it. If the help that they're getting is still not sufficient enough to have them afford it, then we have to examine a robust hardship waiver.
TAPPER: Does he have any specific lines that he would not cross when it comes to what penalties people get? And does he view health insurance the same way that some people view — well, the same way that all states view auto insurance. If you want to drive, you have to have car insurance…
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: I don't know that — I've not heard him speak about the first part, about the specifics or details of something like that except for the broader hardship waiver.
-jpt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
DUNCAN: I don’t have a firm estimate on that. But, again, we think that’s not a cost. We think that’s an investment.
=======
He’s wrong. It is a cost. Someone has to pay for it.
Posted by: MayBee | June 24, 2009, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
If this wasn’t such a joke, I’d comment on all the BS in this story… (Good questions, Jake)
When will WH comment on this?
Is today Tehran’s Tiananmen Square?
People being thrown off of bridges, being slain in the streets. Beating old men in the streets. “Would you help us, could you help us?”
CNN – a chilling, heartbreaking phone call from a woman in Tehran. “they are killing students with axes, put axes through the hearts…this is horrific, this is genocide, this is…a massacre, this is Hitler, and you people should stop it…nobody takes action; it’s time to act.”
ABC correspondant Lara Setrakian twitters:
they are beating people severely. helicopters all over the city finding protesters & telling guards so they go attack
and
[from source], hearing from Iran: people are hoarding the injured in their homes because they’re afraid of going to hospitals
Jim Sciutto of ABC: more witness ‘police arresting anyone wearing green & black’ and ‘police beating more severely..using all sorts of weapons..shooting into air’
People are being shot as they chant “God is Great” from rooftops.
Posted by: Sadie | June 24, 2009, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
Adding onto MayBee’s comments, this new style of calling any cost an “investment” and treating it like it really isn’t money is absurd. All investments cost money, and only some investments have positive returns. Citizens and journalists shouldn’t stand for this whitewashing of reality, from either left or right, repub, demo, or anything in between or beyond.
Posted by: Aaron | June 24, 2009, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
“Posted by: Sadie | Jun 24, 2009 3:55:28 PM”
Sadie, tell us again how the tea parties are just like these Iranians.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
Aaron:”Adding onto MayBee’s comments, this new style of calling any cost an “investment” and treating it like it really isn’t money is absurd. ”
OK, so why doesn’t Gibbs stop doing and Republicans in return quit calling tax cuts – which made up over $200 billion of the stimulus bill – spending?
Deal?
Posted by: jhw539 | June 24, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
“He’s wrong. It is a cost. Someone has to pay for it.”
He is wrong because the concept of cost and investment are not mutually exclusive.
Investment is not free.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
“Sadie, tell us again how the tea parties are just like these Iranians.”
The Tea Party protesters probably fully expected to be beaten, shot and set on fire by the evil Obama administration, but when it didn’t happen they attributed it to his usual lack of decisiveness.
Posted by: Skip | June 24, 2009, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
Investment is not free.
=========
Very true, Ryan C.
Posted by: MayBee | June 24, 2009, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
“But, again, we think that’s not a cost. We think that’s an investment. We think the best thing we can do as a country is have more young people going on to college.”
————————————-
As a parent currently paying college tuitions, I can GUARANTEE you it IS a COST!
It’s an investment yes, but when your looking at the cost of some of the top colleges in the country…i.e. 50K per year, and its coming out of your pocket, it most certainly is a cost!
Posted by: Mike_C | June 24, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
My apologies to those who care: It was a poor comparison to compare the Iranians to the Tea Parties. The only comparison is in trying to get your government to listen to their citizens. Huge difference: Being Ignored Vs. Being Murdered.
Posted by: Sadie | June 24, 2009, 5:02 pm 5:02 pm
“My apologies to those who care: It was a poor comparison to compare the Iranians to the Tea Parties”
I must say in full sincerity that it’s big of you to say so.
Posted by: Skip | June 24, 2009, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
“Everyone is covered”
Enough of the rhetoric already!
Define covered!!!!
one single plan? OR multiple levels at an incresing premium rate for better coverage?
is covered going to mean you pay $1000 per month? $500 ? $100 ?
will you be 100% covered for all visits, procedures, medications?
Any co-pays?
Any deductibles?
Posted by: Mike_C | June 24, 2009, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm
Mike_C:”Enough of the rhetoric already!
Define covered!!!!”
If you cared, you would have at least read the Kennedy bill that does define all you are asking in detail (but DOES NOT have any public option BTW).
It would be interesting if the opponents of health care reform / proponents of the current system were forced to equally define our current state. No one dies due to being unable to pay for healthcare in the US – why is that? Lets get defined just how bad your infection has to be to get admitted via the emergency room, or just how disabled a child will be permitted to become because they don’t have money to get a fracture properly set (or who pays to get that fracture set).
The information is out there, it is NOT in headlines and on blogs though. You need to actually wade through the hundreds of pages of documented made publicly available.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 24, 2009, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
Never did hear why the Obama administration threw the DC school kids under the bus. Maybe vouchers are not an investment.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | June 24, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
“Never did hear why the Obama administration threw the DC school kids under the bus. Maybe vouchers are not an investment”
Probably because the Obama admin did no such thing.
While Congressional Democrats removed funding, the Obama admin made it possible for the kids already there to finish their full terms instead of this coming year only.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
“My apologies to those who care: It was a poor comparison to compare the Iranians to the Tea Parties. The only comparison is in trying to get your government to listen to their citizens. Huge difference: Being Ignored Vs. Being Murdered.”
I do care and I appreciate it as its not an easy thing to do.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
jhw,
You made my point. Thank YOu!
Why should I have to read all this? Does your current t insurance company dump 1000 page document on you and tell you to go “wade” through it.
NO! you are provided with a sheet or two with a pretty good summary of your coverages.
Now, since your the boy wonder here, why dont you answer a couple of these questions.
If the so-called Kennedy bill has all this, then why have you not touted it? Why have you not said, wait…. under my current plan, i have a $1000 dollar deductible on top of my 12,000 per year cost. Under the kennedy bill I would only have to pay $5,000 a year with a $100 deductible….
Why if there has existed this mythical table of numbers, has uit not been splashed all over the MSM…. I should have been seeing it as well as hearing about it!
Do you even know what details are there, or are you going to have to go google it?
We have all seen the nice colorful charts COngressmen love to show off…Where is the one showing all these wonderful details?
and at that….like you said…the kennedy bill did not even include the great pupblic option. It is not even going to cover 1/2 of the currently uncovered. So even if there were numbers to looks at…they are meaningless because they are not real. It’s like looking at the cost of all the extras on a new car and trying to figure out if its the on you want to buy…without looking at the base cost!
+++++
It would be interesting if the opponents of health care reform / proponents of the current system were forced to equally define our current state.
++++++
first you have your current plan. It’s costs and what it covers. Right now you cant compare it the govt/public plan, so that is as far as you can go right now.
You have all these studies that say our costs are twice or more than those of the other top countries. So where is the data that gives you that result. Break it down! What are the specific components here in the uS that are creating that 2X effect? Surely with all the money spent on these studies there MUST be data telling us where those costs are. Of course the real trick is how do you force those costs down, without losing availibilty and coverage.
Again, the real issues is the details, not the rhetoric.
You can run around with polls, & rhetoric all day. In the end, it will ALWAYS come down to comparing those sheets of paper with the details that you have on your current plan & the new one. Most of us do this every year or two anyway.
As I have stated, we do NOT know what this gov’ts plan will be. We have heard the rhetoric, but that is all.
Posted by: Mike_C | June 24, 2009, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm
Never did hear why the Democrats threw the DC school kids under the bus. Maybe vouchers are not an investment
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | June 24, 2009, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm
DUNCAN: “As you know, the president’s, you know, tremendous leadership and Congress’ support, we have unprecedented resources. But we’re being very clear, with unprecedented resources has to come unprecedented reform.”
Unprecedented resources? Is that really the mentality of the Obama Administration? What we have is unprecedented debt.
Posted by: James Danley | June 24, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
jlw,
just for giggles…. i glanced over the draft of the kennedy bill…LOL…good try….
try doing a search for the word premium on it. tell em where yo find the dalloar amount for the premiums you would pay under that plan.
Also there are a LOT of TBD’s in there!
very little you can compare to your current plan.
Posted by: Mike_C | June 24, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
Mike_C:”Why should I have to read all this? Does your curren t insurance company dump 1000 page document on you and tell you to go “wade” through it.”
Yes. There is a glossy brochure, but if I need to know the procedure to get pre-approved for Singular then someone from my doctor’s office has to spend a half hour on the phone with an agent. It just isn’t feasible to go through the insurance plan’s full documentation.
You want a glossy brochure, which is fine, but you seem to believe that does more than define just the vaguest outline of coverage. That is just not true.
And personally, I do not like the Kennedy bill. It does not have the obvious public option that works so well for every other first world nation and does not do the job – we’d still have millions of people on the stupidly expensive (to taxpayers) “wait until you’re sick enough that the ER can’t turn you away” plan.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 24, 2009, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm
Please name ONE example of the government taking over a industry and the costs decrease – as a result!!
Why is ABC airing a informerial for you, President Obama, and the questions are being controlled be you and the liberals and the conservatives are being shut out???
What is the COST for the Seniors in the U.S. under your health plan??
Posted by: bgs | June 24, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
jhw539 wrote: “…quit calling tax cuts – which made up over $200 billion of the stimulus bill – spending?”
I totally agree! Tax cuts are not
government spending. They just allow tax payers to keep more of THEIR OWN MONEY, which obviously means less revenue in government coffers.
Posted by: James Danley | June 24, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
bgs:”Please name ONE example of the government taking over a industry and the costs decrease – as a result!!”
The USPS offers the cheapest service of its kind in the world. And the government created the internet, which is so wildly successful compared to the private commercial charge data networks of the time it is hard to even recognize the similarities.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 24, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
Ryan C wrote: “the Obama admin made it possible for the kids already there to finish their full terms instead of this coming year only.”
That’s great for those 1,716 students already in the program. But no new students will be allowed in the program. To me that IS throwing the other Washington D. C. students under the bus.
Posted by: James Danley | June 24, 2009, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm
jhw539, even if what you say is true, that the USPS offers the cheapest service of its kind in the world, the cost of running the USPS goes up every year. bgs wanted an example of an industry in which the costs decreased when taken over by the government.
Posted by: James Danley | June 24, 2009, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm
“That’s great for those 1,716 students already in the program. But no new students will be allowed in the program. To me that IS throwing the other Washington D. C. students under the bus.”
Ask Congress to raise taxes to provide vouchers and charter schools then.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
James Danley:” bgs wanted an example of an industry in which the costs decreased when taken over by the government.”
It is undisputed that in every first nation world the health care spending per capita is half to one third America’s. The rate of increase is fully controlled. That is documented fact.
It is viciously debated if they have better care (longer lifespans) or worse (longer wait times to get that tennis elbow fixed), but I have heard no serious debate that our care is two to three times better (commensurate with what we’re paying).
Posted by: jhw539 | June 24, 2009, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm
Ryan C, according to Education Secretary Arne Duncan the federal government has “unprecedented resources.” So much so that they are going to give “lots” more money to the federal student aid program. They could “invest” just a little less in that program in order to continue with the D. C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.
Posted by: James Danley | June 24, 2009, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm
why don’t we just make it easier, nationalize everything! private, charter n public school, lets nationalize it! all the kids will get the same education. that way it’ll be easier for the left wingers to to have complete control of what is taught in school. “Saddam=Good, innocent victim vs. Bush=bad evil dictator”. or ” conservatives=bad bad bad vs Democrats= good good good” .
Jake-i suggest you bring this up with Arne next time ok.
Posted by: jaj | June 24, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
“Saddam=Good, innocent victim”
C’mon that Republican talking point is so 80′s.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 24, 2009, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
I’m the biggest proponent of increasing communications with Iran. The challenges of the enforcement of law and order is common to all nations. But to sit back and act like it is not wicked to look the other way while ‘volunteer’ citizens at large go around beating and killing their fellows is outrageous.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 24, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm
Simplifying bureaucratic government forms and red tape – another sinister plot from the left.
Posted by: danita | June 24, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
And it really is an outrage. The basij is like mud between dirt and water. Should the water make use of the mud?
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 24, 2009, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
Thank you, Mr. Danley, for pointing out that jhw did not answer the question bgs posed, but tried to dodge it by answering a question not asked. Gee, sorta like our president is doing on the air right now– yes, I’m watching ABC’s infomercial. He took the first question asked, an admittedly dopey Kitty Dukakis type question, and wandered off with a response that was tangentially related but not a direct answer to the specific question asked.
Posted by: moderate | June 24, 2009, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
jhw says: “It is undisputed that in every first nation world the health care spending per capita is half to one third America’s. The rate of increase is fully controlled. That is documented fact.”
Do you know why their costs remain controlled and ours are going up? Could it be that medical malpractice insurance is much more affordable, or not even an issue in those other countries? Could it be that the US spends all the money to develop new drugs and procedures? Could it be that when the US goes to the same system and tries to reduce costs to the same level that innovation will slow dramatically and we will have to depend on government funding for R&D? If we have to depend on the government to direct funds for R&D, then there will be much less flexibility in coming up with new treatments and miracle drugs. I also ask, what is the social cost of going to nationalized health care? When the government pays for all health care, don’t they think they have the right to restrict lifestyles and behaviors that they deem to be harmful and thus too expensive? What happens to personal freedoms when we depend on the government for everything?
Posted by: Jason | June 25, 2009, 10:49 am 10:49 am
jhw539: “It is undisputed that in every first nation world the health care spending per capita is half to one third America’s. The rate of increase is fully controlled. That is documented fact.”
Please provide a link to such documentation, because I’ve not heard that claim substantiated.
Posted by: Allen McPheeters | June 25, 2009, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
“Please provide a link to such documentation, because I’ve not heard that claim substantiated.”
This blog deletes all links.
The United States healthcare system is ranked 37th by the WHO.
You can google to find per capita health care spending broken down by country
These figures are from 2002 but they give you an idea of what we are dealing with.
# 1 United States: 4,271
# 2 Switzerland: 3,857
# 3 Norway: 3,182
# 4 Denmark: 2,785
# 5 Luxembourg: 2,731
# 6 Iceland: 2,701
# 7 Germany: 2,697
# 8 France: 2,288
# 9 Japan: 2,243
# 10 Netherlands: 2,173
# 11 Sweden: 2,145
# 12 Belgium: 2,137
# 13 Austria: 2,121
# 14 Canada: 1,939
# 15 Australia: 1,714
# 16 Finland: 1,704
# 17 Italy: 1,676
# 18 United Kingdom: 1,675
# 19 Israel: 1,607
# 20 Ireland: 1,569
Posted by: Ryan C | June 25, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
“Could it be that when the US goes to the same system and tries to reduce costs to the same level that innovation will slow dramatically and we will have to depend on government funding for R&D?”
What do insurance companies have to do with research and development?
Posted by: Ryan C | June 25, 2009, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Thanks for the data Ryan C… Assuming that the data you show is valid, it disproves jhw539′s claim “that in every first nation world the health care spending per capita is half to one third America’s.” You have to drop to number 13, Austria, before you get to a country that spends less than 1/2 per capita on health care spending.
Also, I think raw spending per capita is an inappropriate measure — health care spending as percentage of GDP per capita makes more sense. Here’s your list, with that data (2002 GDP info courtesy of StudentsOfTheWorld.info):
1. 11.63% USA
2. 11.14% Germany
3. 10.47% Switzerland
4. 9.99% Israel
5. 9.52% France
6. 9.03% Iceland
7. 8.91% Belgium
8. 8.74% Denmark
9. 8.38% Australia
10. 8.34% Austria
11. 8.28% Netherlands
12. 8.26% Canada
13. 8.15% Italy
14. 7.95% Sweden
15. 7.54% Norway
16. 7.14% Japan
17. 6.71% Finland
18. 6.45% UK
19. 5.97% Luxembourg
20. 4.89% Ireland
With this list, you have to drop to no. 20 before you get to a country spending less than one-half of what the USA does.
So, again, jhw539: where’s the documentation for your claim?
Posted by: Allen McPheeters | June 25, 2009, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
Ryan asks: “What do insurance companies have to do with research and development?”
Think about it. If they can help fund R&D in cancer or aids or any chronic illness like diabetes, etc… and come up with a cure or an inexpensive treatment it lowers their costs dramatically. Private funding of R&D is much more effective and much greater in total than government funding of R&D.
Posted by: Jason | June 25, 2009, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm
jhw539: “It is viciously debated if they have better care (longer lifespans) or worse (longer wait times to get that tennis elbow fixed), but I have heard no serious debate that our care is two to three times better (commensurate with what we’re paying).”
Having debunked your two-to-three-times claim (at least until you respond with your documentation), I’d also like your response to this: Many supporters of the President’s healthcare plans would like us to adopt a system similar to Canada’s. (American spending is roughly 140% of Canada’s according to my chart in an earlier post.) Yet Canadians who have the means come to America to get treatment they can’t get (or have to wait a long time to get) in Canada. See John Stossel’s story on 20/20 “Sick in America” for more detail. (You can watch parts of that story in Stossel’s blog here on abcnews.com — see the entry “Health Care Canada Style” dated 6/12/09.)
Assuming that the health-care spending numbers do not factor out the amounts spent by foreign nationals, a Canadian spending his hard-earned money on treatment in the States is increasing the figure spent on health-care in America, and keeping the health-care spending in Canada figure artificially low. Given the relative difference in population, this probably affects the Canadian number more than the US number.
Your response, sir?
Posted by: Allen McPheeters | June 25, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
“Thanks for the data Ryan C… Assuming that the data you show is valid, it disproves jhw539′s claim “that in every first nation world the health care spending per capita is half to one third America’s.” You have to drop to number 13, Austria, before you get to a country that spends less than 1/2 per capita on health care spending.”
Like I said those figures are from 2002.
This have been rapidly accelerating.
“In 2005, the U.S. spent $6,041 per capita on health care—more than double the median per capita spending ($2,922) of the 30 industrialized countries that form the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In addition, the U.S. spent 15.3 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) compared with the OCED median of 9.1 percent.”
That’s quite a jump in just 3 years.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 25, 2009, 2:40 pm 2:40 pm
“Think about it. If they can help fund R&D in cancer or aids or any chronic illness like diabetes, etc… and come up with a cure or an inexpensive treatment it lowers their costs dramatically. Private funding of R&D is much more effective and much greater in total than government funding of R&D.”
That’s all well and good but what do insurance companies have to do with Research and Development.
Do you have any figures whatsoever establishing insurance companies investment into R&D firms?
Posted by: Ryan C | June 25, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
“Assuming that the health-care spending numbers do not factor out the amounts spent by foreign nationals, a Canadian spending his hard-earned money on treatment in the States is increasing the figure spent on health-care in America, and keeping the health-care spending in Canada figure artificially low.”
Medical tourism is responsbile for the United States’s high per capita spending on healthcare?
Quite a stretch considering medical tourism is a two way street and many Americans seek treatment overseas because its cheaper for the same quality care.
I would guess that ultimately its a non factor because they balance each other out.
But good try.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 25, 2009, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm
Ryan C: “Medical tourism is responsbile for the United States’s high per capita spending on healthcare?
“Quite a stretch considering medical tourism is a two way street and many Americans seek treatment overseas because its cheaper for the same quality care.”
Not quite what I said. My point here was specifically about the comparison between Canada and the US. To the extent that Canadians spend their healthcare dollars in the US, particularly on expensive procedures, the Canadian figures for healthcare are understated and the US figures are overstated. Given the relative size of the US and Canadian economies, the impact on the Canadian figure is probably much larger than the impact on the US figure.
I have no data on how many medical tourists go from the US to Canada or vice versa. However, a McKinsey & Co article, cited in both Forbes and the Wall Street Journal, reports that 40 percent of medical travelers are people coming to the US for treatment. While medical tourism may be a “two-way” street, it seems likely that more lanes on that street are heading from Canada to the US than the other direction.
Posted by: Allen McPheeters | June 25, 2009, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
I hate to jump in here, but I’d also like to see the source of some of the ideas floating around out there, to see if there is something to learn.
“Do you have any figures whatsoever establishing insurance companies investment into R&D firms? ”
——————-
How do you get better medications, new products, improved tools, new medical hardware, new and better procedures without R&D? How does that R&D get funded except by the insurance provider?
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 25, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
So what’s up tonight?
Is there anybody still out there that hasn’t noticed that Obama looks like a puppet when he is speaking, looking to teleprompter 1, then to teleprompter 2, then back to 1, then back to 2? He rarely looks straight ahead, and when he looks behind him and can’t see either teleprompter he completely loses it; he can’t even speak in a complete sentence.
Think how you would feel. Abandoned by your father. Then abandoned by your mom. Then entrusted by your grandparents into the hands of a known communist agitator who was also a published advocate of pedophilia, who gave you whiskey when you were a kid. Never mind what happened then.
Groomed from childhood by people who had an axe to grind against America. No wonder the guy behind the curtain is a wreck. I could go on, but why talk about ugly?
The guy is President now, and already turning grey from the constant pushing and pulling from different directions. Everything he has been groomed to think and do is turning out wrong. And he doesn’t even have the freedom to admit that he is in trouble.
So what are you doing to help him out? What do you know about the way thinks work? I don’t mean, what did that moron who couldn’t do so they ended up being a teacher, taught you about the world that they didn’t understand and couldn’t succeed in (or never tried, because they graduated from student to teacher without ever becoming part of the real world).
I mean what you have done to gain a real understanding of the world, so that you could make it better. I’m an ex-marine and I (as well as millions of others) gave you the opportunity to be a self-reliant, self-determining, self governing individual in a free country.
So what are you doing with what we gave you? And what are you doing to help the man we elected President, right or wrong?
Don’t tell me. Tell the person you see in the mirror. That, and God, is the only person you ever really need to be accountable to.
Oh, and by the way. You’re a grown-up now regardless of what you may think you are, or wish you still were. It’s now your job to pass on to the next generation, what I have just passed on to you. Whatever you have that you would call wisdom, responsibility, and hope.
Posted by: ragnar30066 | June 29, 2009, 3:32 am 3:32 am