Quantcast

Kucinich challenges tea party to stand up for civil liberties

By admin
Tuesday, February 8, 2011 10:56 EDT
google plus icon
 
  • Print Friendly and PDF
  • Email this page

WASHINGTON – The House is set to take up a measure this week renewing key provisions of the PATRIOT Act that expire Feb. 28.

Liberal Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) issued a challenge to tea party supporters and lawmakers in the new Congress: time to show you’re serious about liberty.

“The 112th Congress began with a historic reading of the U.S. Constitution,” Kucinich said in a statement. “Will anyone subscribe to the First and Fourth Amendments tomorrow when the PATRIOT Act is up for a vote? I am hopeful that members of the Tea Party who came to Congress to defend the Constitution will join me in challenging the reauthorization.”

Republicans won back control of the House by a large margin in November, thriving on the energy of the tea party movement, which fretted that Democrats were undermining freedom in the United States. Republican lawmakers across the country frequently proffer their commitment to the tea party’s self-styled ideals of liberty and freedom.

“Will tea party members defend the Constitution or capitulate on PATRIOT Act extension?” Kucinich’s statement added.

The PATRIOT Act, passed soon after the attacks of September 11, 2001, has since enjoyed broad bipartisan support in Congress, as well as the backing of the Bush and Obama administration. The request to extend it came last week from Attorney General Eric Holder and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in a letter to Congress.

The three provisions to be brought up for renewal include authorizing the FBI to use roving wiretaps, permitting the government to seize personal items during surveillance, and a clause allowing the surveillance of suspected targets not linked to terror groups.

The House legislation would extend them through December 8, 2011.

“It is essential that these intelligence tools be reauthorized before they expire, and we are committed to working with Congress to ensure the speedy enactment of legislation to achieve this result,” Holder and Clapper wrote, according to the National Journal.

So far, tea party supporters have largely refrained from protesting the PATRIOT Act, instead focusing their gripes on taxes and government spending.

 
 
 
 
By commenting, you agree to our terms of service
and to abide by our commenting policy.
 
  • Anonymous

    Watch those olives Dennis

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EZ4W5CDCIVXKIIKESYBN2EP6VE brian

    THANK YOU!! Finally someone who gets it. Instead of complaining about the Teaparty, using the same tired tactics they use, MAKE THEM PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR MOUTHS ARE. They CLAIM to be all about the Constitution. Half of them claim to be against the wars and the defense budget.

    Finally, someone isn’t taking them for granted and is putting them on the line. Now we all know that these are just neocons in new suits, but the worst that can happen is that we see a reduction in the wars, and an increase in civil liberties. The best that can happen is that we PROVE what we’ve been saying about the baggers; that they are just little Bushies in new suits…

  • DriveBy

    Kucinich is barking up the wrong tree. Teabaggers are for civil rights for corporations, not for the civil rights of the people.

    Fox News/US Chamber of Commerce 2012!!
    USA! USA!! USA!!!

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/KSIB2PGTAXFCPCMQ74NRZ4UUJM Beerman

    Driveby that is not entirely true. I have a close friend who is a Tea Party guy and he would vote against the Patriot act. Yes they have been coopted by Dick Armey, Palin and Bachmann, but not all of them are bad. Sort of like the Democrats. LOL

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1046573071 Matt Mosley

    Commit a Patriotic act, KILL THE “PATRIOT” ACT!!!

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Kucinich is right and his two biggest Tea Party allies will be Ron Paul and Rand Paul. Despite the Koch Brothers/Neo-Con takeover of about half of the Tea Party, Ron Paul is the intellectual godfather of the Tea Party movement which has been hijacked by Palin-Gingrich and other fake Tea Party types. That is what the left-progressives-libs do not understand since they make no distinctions. Kucinich and Ron Paul and Ralph Nader all agree on a number of things and the biggest ones are Civil Liberties and the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Ron Paul has spoken out against the “PATRIOT” Act from the minute he saw it and has opposed vehemently.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Read my comments above: Rand Paul and Ron Paul are also taking the Tea Party to task on these same issues.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    True, but too many libs-progressives-leftists cannot make any distinctions. They think all Tea Partiers are like Palin and Gingrich which is TOTALLY wrong.

  • Anonymous

    Live in a closet, do you? LOL

  • Anonymous

    As long as Palin, Gingrich, Christie, Beck, and Bachmann are allowed to speak for the teabagger party, that will always be true. There is no distinction.

  • Anonymous

    So what? Nobody is listening to them.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/KSIB2PGTAXFCPCMQ74NRZ4UUJM Beerman

    hard to argue with that logic smallbear.

  • http://resror.myopenid.com/ Your Name

    But didn’t you know that corporations ARE people?

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/KSIB2PGTAXFCPCMQ74NRZ4UUJM Beerman

    @Truth, i think thats where I was trying to head. They are not all bad. I personally agree with Ron Paul on quite a few things. It’s kinda weird, I am 90% against all Republican Principles but only about 50% with Paul and the other 50% we agree on. Cats and Dogs and all that.

    I took the test and I am a Liberaltarian so this Paul/Kucinich/Nader coalition just about fits me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1369501073 Gary Mialocq

    Most of the so-called Tea Party members can’t even spell Patriot Act, let alone understand it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EZ4W5CDCIVXKIIKESYBN2EP6VE brian

    Good. Being a liberal libertarian (ya I know, long explanation), Ron Paul has earned my trust even though he verges on the line of anarchocapitalism (nonsense)… But I don’t trust Rand further than I can throw my dick, excuse my French. Ron needs to take his son to task and keep him on track to reduce the empire.

  • http://www.facebook.com/johnbryansfontaine John Bryans Fontaine

    Tea Party Inc.: The Big Money and Powerful Elites Behind the Right-Wings Latest Uprising

    http://www.alternet.org/multimedia/tea_party_inc/

  • Anonymous

    Here is how the Constitution reads to the Tea Party. blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah …. right to own guns …. blah blah blah …….

  • H.P. Loathecraft

    Teabaggers: Authoritarians first, civil libertarians second.

    Edit: A distant second at best.

  • http://twitter.com/EndofMoney End of Money

    The most devastating part of the Patriot Act is the idea that a statute can override any part of the Constitution, including the First and Fourth Amendments. Not true. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. It’s right in there, read it!

  • H.P. Loathecraft

    I bet Randy makes some affirmative noises and then votes for the Patriot Act. Dad will probably vote against it, which is why I agree with Beerman. Ron Paul is not your garden variety Repug, though I fail to understand why he doesn’t have the guts to run as an indie like Bernie Sanders.

  • H.P. Loathecraft

    But the moderates have little or no currency with the media. Not enough foam.

  • Guest

    SPEAK IT!

  • Anonymous

    More like Karl Rove & News Corp…

  • Guest

    That’s right, and electing intelligent people was never an intention of the PTB.

  • Anonymous

    Right on, but try to get that through peoples heads, its hard, especially with Huffington morons.

  • Anonymous

    There was only one time I was not proud of Dennis’ voracious never ending tenacity to hold this fucking government cabal of ours from ignoring and shredding the constitution.

    That was his last minute capitulation on health care. That sure doesn’t outweigh his 99% record of daily principled fights for the America we used to be.

  • Guest

    People focus on the person and not what they are saying. Every time there is an article about Ron or Rand all you can hear is the echo of racist. No body is listening to what the Pauls are saying. You’ll hear about Roe V Wade but you won’t hear about how the federal reserve (I refuse to capitalize that name) needs to be accurately audited. You won”t hear that the blowback is what causes terrorist attacks. Instead if Ron Paul goes on “The View” all they will talk about is a woman’s right to choose (it’s important but not our most pressing issue). It seems people have a love affair with subterfuge and obfuscation… or denial.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Powell-Gammill/500083817 Powell Gammill

    smart!

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/KSIB2PGTAXFCPCMQ74NRZ4UUJM Beerman

    to all you Tea Party haters. You are pushing away quite a few people that we have a lot in common with. Don’t let the Oligarchy win by keep us from talking to each other. There is far too much hate out there. Let’s work together.

  • Anonymous

    I think the actual teabag ranking is something like this:

    1. Authoritarians
    2. Racists
    3. Dumbfucks
    4. Stooges
    5. God warriors
    6. Gun nuts
    7. Bad spellers
    8. Pathetic losers
    9. Self-hating gays
    10. Truly dangerous psychopaths
    .
    .
    .
    23. Civil libertarians

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    “a woman’s right to choose (it’s important but not our most pressing issue).”

    What is our most pressing issue, if not making sure all citizens have the right to self determination? Granted, there is much hand wringing about things that should have been long settled and it’s intentionally being used as distraction, but the fact that these people, in the presence of “more pressing issues”, want to waste time curtailing rights is right up front with terrorism and the federal reserve con and prohibition (war on the poor and minorities).

    The reason we don’t have progress on any given issue is because we’re intentionally left without a national direction. It is just as important to figure out that direction as it is to chop the looters off at the knees.. they are part and parcel of the same beast.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    I work with a teabagger, spends company time buying ammo from a traveling salesman ($7 a bullet is what he spent on his last “super killing” bullets).. feels corporations (framing it as the poor, hard working, honest ‘person’ running it) should have carte’ blanch… He also supports “killing them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here”, and the Patriot Act pretends to facilitate that. I’ve not asked him directly if he support it, but that’s because I can’t stand talking to him and watching him bellow out “damn free loading Liberals, liars, scum!” every time I back him into a corner he can’t get out of.

    Given he’s a birther, pro-corporate whore, racist, “kill the brown people!” kind of guy, i have to think he’s fully behind “uncomfortable laws” that “protect us”.

  • mjcc1987

    And get out of their lawn chairs and Medicare provided scooters? That means taking off the white hood and muss up the hair?

    Sir- you ask too much!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    see my first-hand experience above.

    teabaggers are a special kind of nuts. Sane people that agree with SOME of the propositions of teabaggers have long since walked away from that hijacked movement. You can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep, and the “teabagger movement” is keeping the company of Palin, Newt, Rush, Beck, et. al.

  • http://www.tommyjonestheband.com RantingTommy

    If they weren’t SO far off base when it comes to economic issues, they’d have my vote.

  • http://www.tommyjonestheband.com RantingTommy

    too many right wing morons in the tea party, which is created and owned by the Koch brothers

    it’s a fake movement, even back when the Paul’s were scamming people with it

  • http://www.tommyjonestheband.com RantingTommy

    actually, the Paul’s are for economic policies that continue to concentrate all the resources of the nation into a few hands

    they are simply Republicans with issues

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    He’s from Texas.. the populace there isn’t smart enough to vote “I” like they do in Vermont. Voters in most places hit party ticket and walk away..

  • http://www.tommyjonestheband.com RantingTommy

    it’s even harder to get paulites to understand just how insane the economic policies of the Pauls are (especially since they are right in line with the Republicans and their transfer of wealth from the commons to the richest 2%)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    I, too, didn’t like his switch on HCR, but he did it to get “something” passed to work with. If it would have been defeated, we’d have nothing for another decade or more. .. and there were some good things in it even though it didn’t go far enough.. not being dropped from coverage and not being able to be denied coverage.. good stuff. .. that said, the bill could have been 5 pages instead of 2000… heh

  • Anonymous

    Divide & Conquer. They’ve succeeded at the first and are close to the second…

  • http://www.tommyjonestheband.com RantingTommy

    the tea baggers work to support the oligarchy

    that is their purpose

  • Anonymous

    Why stop at the tea party? Challenge EVERYBODY especially your own party to stand up for civil liberties. Make your voices heard, contact your congressional reps today!!!

  • Guest

    May I correct you slightly: Tea Idiots don’t actually know WHAT they are for!!!

  • Buford2k11

    Can any republican/tper justify this law with the Constitution? How about holding them to their pledge to justify the laws put before Congress.

  • Guest

    “That was his last minute capitulation on health care.”

    Can’t you and others PLEASE let go of that?! You will NEVER know why he did what he did. Besides, it turns out that his vote was NOT the deciding vote.

    Theory has it that he did what he did so as to keep the possibility of Public Option and Single-Payer ALIVE. I choose to believe that just as Ralph Nader does and said so in an interview. LET IT GO!!!

    He has ALREADY started pushing for Single-Payer in Congressional speeches. Give the man 100% instead of that 99%, eh?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    I have almost nothing in common with the teabagger here at work.

  • http://twitter.com/btmfdrsheaven rebecca meritt

    tea party hasn’t connected that the Patriot Act has not only cost us our freedom but has emptied our pockets.body guarding the country is not cheap. background checks on every American working in or doing business at US ports costs $232 a person just for the ID card.

  • DriveBy

    I like Ron Paul. Some of his ideas are nuts, and we can debate them, but he’s absolutely dead on as far as his stance on US foreign policy is concerned. Sure Ron Paul gave birth to the idea of a Tea Party, but that went the way of the Dodo almost before it took shape. The teabaggers we have are a Koch Bros project. Teabaggers are a bunch of brain-dead racist anti-American assholes and I want to have nothing to do with them…. Let’s say I hate teabaggers as much as they hate the idea a nigger in the While House. ‘Nuff said.

  • DriveBy

    “…all they will talk about is a woman’s right to choose (it’s important but not our most pressing issue)”

    Not the most pressing issue for you because you’re not a woman. It is the most pressing issue for those looking for coat hangers right now. Yes, the FED need to be audited but this is also important. We can walk and chew gum at the same time, you know?

  • Anonymous

    Lost all respect for Kucinich after hearing he was suing the Capital building restaurant because there was a pit in his olive:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110126/ap_on_re_us/us_kucinich_lawsuit

  • Anonymous

    Explain the Tea Party to me. Are they against corporate influence on government the way the first Tea Party was?

  • Anonymous

    Hey, the Emergency Laws served Egypt just fine for 30 years. Why do you want to take that away from us?

  • http://matt.jmatt.net/ Matt

    I think HP is probably right. I’m definitely not a fan of Ron Paul, but at least he’s consistent in his Libertarian beliefs. Rand, on the other hand, is a typical Republican hypocrite who has already broken many of his campaign promises. The KY LIbertarian Party cited Rand’s support of the PATRIOT act in their press release officially disowning him:

    http://www.lpky.org/node/243

    “Libertarians want a complete repeal of the PATRIOT Act, closure of Guantanamo Bay, and an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Rand Paul has stated that he wants to continue military detentions at Guantanamo Bay, a retroactive official declaration of war by Congress, and has denied that he seeks to overturn the PATRIOT Act.”

  • Anonymous

    Me too man, it was really disappointing but very telling as to the type of person that he is since he asked for $150,000 in compensation.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    You’re right.. when someone causes you pain, suffering, and $10s of thousands of dollars in bills because they sold you food with inedible objects in it, it’s wrong to demand to be made whole. And the pit wasn’t “in an olive” as much as it was in a “sandwich” (wrap). Next time you’re eating a pizza with “sausage and olives” and break your bridge work over pits on your pizza, be sure to post back and let us know how you don’t blame anyone but yourself for presuming your “ready to eat” food wasn’t really ready to eat.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QMPOO3PZFN7XV2XZKCGSXXR3WM Joe Somebody

    Yeah.. the kind of person he is.. one of the only non-millionaires in Congress who doesn’t take special interest money and isn’t on the take.

  • Anonymous

    so? YOU WILL GAIN RESPECT FOR THE GOVERNMENT IF IT PUTS THE
    BUSH and DICK IN JAIL……..FOR_____________

  • Anonymous

    Tea Party? Civil liberties? Hahhahahha

  • Anonymous

    if it was so simple… he suffered a broken tooth as a result of the pit being where it shouldn’t. this resulted in multiple visits to dentists, oral surgeons, etc. wasn’t just that there was a pit in his olive.

  • Anonymous

    His reply on why he sued satisfied me. I have the same type of insurance as Congressman Kucinich, FEHB, and for neither of us is there dental coverage that worth a crap. In fact from what I ferreted out was that he settled for far, far less than $150k.

  • http://harry-canary.myopenid.com/ Harry Canary

    or more like:
    1. loudmouth
    2. blowhard
    3. windbag
    4. full of themselves
    5. big talker
    6. little doer
    7. b.s. artiste
    8. opinionated
    9. self centered
    10. narrow minded
    11. childish
    12. arrogant

  • http://harry-canary.myopenid.com/ Harry Canary

    Reaching out to blowhards, windbags and loudmouths in love with the sound of their own voices is futile. It’s like the my teabagging neighbor. I have not spoken to him for six months. He has not shut up in that time. Can’t get a word in edgewise with a crowbar.

  • Anonymous

    “liberal libertarian”

    Corporate brown-noser in birkenstocks.

    Long hair and a BMW

    Plays Grateful Dead while signing layoff notices

    Uptight and snooty as all get-out (excuse my french)

    “Reduce the empire” == “Selfish me wants to pay less taxes”

  • Anonymous

    Here is what you are looking for:

    Their economic policies are bankrupt figments of a drug-addled imagination, they make sense only in insipid paperback novels. These policies make no sense whatsoever and they do not apply to actual living human beings.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Watch Ron Paul DESTROY the “PATRIOT” Act:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcJqZ5WqeCg

    Remember, Dr. Paul was against from the beginning not just now when it is popular to do so.

  • Anonymous

    “Kucinich and Ron Paul and Ralph Nader all agree on a number of things and the biggest ones are Civil Liberties”

    WHAT A FRACKING LOAD OF CRAP!!!

    Ron Paul carees NOT ONE WHIT about women!!! NOT ONE WHIT!!! He does not care about their lives or their families or their children. Read his policy on abortion!!! All he cares about are some whacked-out “principles”. He is a FUCKING NEANDERTHAL.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Wrong. You have NO understanding of Austrian economics. Pick up some books and read: Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises and come back with facts instead of leftist panic.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Since you clearly have not read Austrian economics founding works, your statements are pure lib/progressive fear speak.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Sanders is a socialist, which is fine, but Dr. Paul is trying to garner wide support not just the 13% or so of Independent party votes.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/RepublicConstitution?feature=mhum TruthRegimes

    Sanders is a self-described socialist. And, if you would look into it, he and Dr. Paul agree on many things. Only extreme leftists oppose Paul since they panic that the Big Welfare State may crumble under him. But don’t worry, the Repugs will get Romney in there and smash you all with the Warfare State again as the nation continues to go into debt. Either way, it will be more debt: Obama or Romney. Poor options.

  • Anonymous

    It is customary and polite to simply present the bill and ask for it to be paid.

    Only then if the other party refuses, do you need to pull out the lawyers and the lawsuits.

    Did Kucinich try the olive branch first or did he go straight for the lawsuit? That is the question.

  • Anonymous

    Considering he settled for just the cost of the bill, my guess would be he tried, they told him no, he sued for an outrageous amount to get their attention, and they settled.

    Sad that it has to go that way, but all things considered, my respect for him remains intact. If he pushed for the $150k I’d have to rethink.

  • Anonymous

    He’s already settled the suit – for financial damages only, i.e., his actual dental bills. (Didn’t even get reimbursed for his legal fees.)

    There wouldn’t have been a suit if these boors hadn’t been shrugging him off.

    Time to get your head out of fantasy land.

  • Anonymous

    They repeatedly refused to consider it.

    Why do you think he filed so long after the treatment was finished?

  • Anonymous

    You are obviously ignorant of common procedure.

    If he’d truly wanted greater compensation, he wouldn’t have accepted their offer of settlement for dental bills only and let the suit go to court. It was the huge amount that finally got their attention and made them take his demands seriously.

  • http://twitter.com/mujaku mujaku

    The Tea Party could not care less about the Patriot Act or the same the Suspend the Constitution Act. They are the modern day equivalent of the German Sturmabteilung (Stormtroopers).

  • Anonymous

    Unfortunately we’ll have a few Congress Critters like Paul, Kucinich, and Sanders in the Senate that will stand up and speak against this piece of shit legislation but the fix is in folks. It will pass the House, Senate and Obama will sign it. So much for the Constitution.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6CTNXOTY4WFV5I5TC7H5KPHQW4 John

    Many in the TEA Party, don’t seem to be in the least interested in the Constitution and Civil Liberties. Not only are they oblivious to how these concepts relate to them, they are adamant about taking them away from anyone who looks, acts, preys, loves or thinks (differently) from them.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6CTNXOTY4WFV5I5TC7H5KPHQW4 John

    That burns me too, but on this issue, he is right-on!

  • Anonymous

    WHAT???

    You mean Ron and his heir apparent son, Rand, he of the head-stomping campaign worker, won’t be standing up for civil liberties? Really? And after all that “freedom” and “liberty” talk, and getting the government off our backs, too.

    I guess we are going to have leave “freedom” and “liberty” up to “the free market”! I wonder how much it is selling for today???

    WOW!!!!

  • Anonymous

    How despicable of you to suggest that Kucinich is some kind of Johnny come lately to this issue.

    I’ll see that Ron Paul video and raise you two Dennis Kucinich videos. Looks like Dennis was against it right from the start too, “before it was popular to do so.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDyE-_Aba8A

    http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4512432/rep-dennis-kucinich-on-the-patriot-act/

    In addition there is this: “Kucinich voted against the USA PATRIOT Act, against the Military Commissions Act of 2006,[27] and was one of six who voted against the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act”

    Where is Ron Paul on this current vote??? I guess that is what is important not so much what he did over 10 years ago.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you for this fran. I can truly say I agree with you on this one thousand percent!

  • Anonymous

    Name all the works by Austrian Schoolers you have read, please!

    I have to say before you do though, that given the kinds of specific vocabulary most of those writers used, especially von Mises, I have seen not one indication in all the posts you have ever posted that you have read even a single book or even a single chapter in a book by any of these mendacious an blovaitaing blowhards who you speak so highly of.

    But don’t feel bad I haven’t seen anyone who talks about these guys who actually has read them. And don’t try to bullshit me either, because I have read some of their works.

  • Jaimie11

    You are an ignoramus. I have no doubt at all now.

  • Jaimie11

    Another ignoramus. You and the ranting tom make a fine pair.

  • Anonymous

    I hate to tell you this, you being an Austrian School scholar and all, but Bernie Sanders didn’t become a Senator from Vermont by garnering “13 percent” of the “independent” vote!

  • Jaimie11

    Really Pag – his view regarding women is that they have every right to NOT be subjected to control and the busybody insertion of government micro-managers in their business.

    Roe v Wade should be repealed, and also the laws against abortion that were passed before women had the right to vote. There should be no laws for or against abortion or restricting the lawful freedom of women in any manner at all.

    As for Ron Paul, he supports that position and also believes it is up the states to make abortion law or not. I prefer no laws at all, as I prefer no laws at all regarding marijuana and any other number of PERSONAL issues that are not the business of government or anyone other than the person involved in whatever the issue is.

    Fran is wrong – she has an extraordinarily narrow concept of freedom – apparently believes freedom is a little gift government gives good little boys and girls, and takes away when they are bad. Don’t fall for that. Freedom exists before government and accepts government only to prevent the abridgments of freedom by persons who do not respect
    the rights of their fellow citizens. More government than is necessary to protect freedom is automatically tyranny.

  • Jaimie11

    Why don’t read a little something by a person who is obviously a much better thinker than you, and see how ridiculous your demeaning comment is. Eh, but maybe that’s one of the few ways you get to feel good about yourself.

    “Indeed, those who deride and dismiss this movement do so at their peril. While some Tea Partiers may be racist or focused on eccentric themes – such as the validity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate – far more of them, those who were part of the original grass-roots effort, are focused on issues that have merit. If you actually listen to them, instead of just reading accounts transmitted through the distorting mirror of the mainstream media, you hear grievances that are profound, as well as some proposals that are actually ahead of their time.”

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/wolf21/English

  • Jaimie11

    For you HP – an alternate perspective:

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/wolf21/English

  • Anonymous

    You write:

    “As for Ron Paul, he supports that position and also believes it is up the states to make abortion law or not.”

    The reason we finally had Row v. Wade was because this was the policy before Row v. Wade. This basically meant that any state could do anything they wanted. The federal government got involved because the states were draconian and neaderthalian (sp?) in their particular choice. I tried to make this clear in the post that you answered when you blew me off.

    I guess you still don’t understand why we no longer have states rights in this country. When each individual state could do whatever they wanted you had train cares that only white people could ride in and you had lunch counters that only white people could sit at and you had hotels that only white people could stay in. The states rights position is a bankrupt and tired position. It has only resulted in bigotry and ignorance where ever and whenever it was been the predominate ideology!

    It has harmed women, and minorities for centuries. It isn’t going to help to bring that era of American decrepitude and bigotry back!

  • Guest

    Jesus Joe! There will always be a division of opinions on such issues. And what are you talking about, “the federal reserve con?” Please explain. It seems you are either unaware the fed is fleecing US as we firmly grip our ankles or…? ? ?

  • Jaimie11

    So you don’t believe in using your constitutional right to seek recompense for having been injured by a business concern due to its negligence?

    See, people like you would just let BP, Haliburton, Blackwater, Exxon, Merck, run roughshod over the population. And, go on, support whittling away our right to sue. You’ll be SO well loved by the above named corporations and all their sleazy bedfellows.

  • Jaimie11

    So you don’t believe in using your constitutional right to seek recompense for having been injured by a business concern due to its negligence?

    See, people like you would just let BP, Haliburton, Blackwater, Exxon, Merck, run roughshod over the population. And, go on, support whittling away our right to sue. You’ll be SO well loved by the above named corporations and all their sleazy bedfellows.

  • Anonymous

    “Kucinich challenges tea party to stand up for civil liberties”…

    Why would they do that. They are looking for a Smedley Butler.

  • Jaimie11

    What we had before was laws against abortion made by men who passed them before women had the right to vote. No law controlling the behavior of women that they had no voice in creating should be allowed to remain in force.

    It is a state’s rights issue, Pag. The federal government should not be in the business of determining for women any action or behavior at all in regard to their bodies. Standing between them and their own consciences is an unwarranted paternalistic insertion of their head-patting condescension towards women. Let each state decide, let the women of each state have a voice in making laws if laws are what they want. Let them say ‘no’, if they so choose, to any law imposing rules onto women concerning what they do with their own bodies, when they do it, why they do it, and who they do it with.

    I am sure some states will make no law against abortion and others will. That is how the Constitution provides for self-rule and no centralized power in the private lives of individuals. If abortion access for poor women is a concern, it is appropriate for people who wish to help to start charities that give assistance to those women. The federal government has no right to force people who are morally opposed to abortion to pay for abortion.

    Women are sick of being treated like children who must be led to the proper decision and to virtue in the eyes of men. Roe v Wade assumes women are unable to think clearly for themselves, to access their consciences and make their own moral decisions.

    The brainwashed men and women on both sides of the abortion issue fail to understand that they have no right to make decisions for another person who is perfectly capable of making her own decisions. And those men and women who support men’s and women’s autonomy should not be so willing to compromise with tyranny and accept piecemeal handouts as freedom.

    The people of Egypt are an example of how desire for self determination and persistence in refusing compromise can change the world.

    PS – Check out Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s ideas about Row v Wade.

    Brown: [Asked to explain further about whether] the rights of men and women are not equal in this case.
    Ginsburg: I said on the equality side of it, that it is essential to a woman’s equality with man that she be the decision-maker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex. The state controlling a woman would mean denying her full autonomy and full equality.

    Source: Senate Nomination Hearing, excerpts in NY Times Jul 22, 1993

  • Anonymous

    Aside from Rand Paul, the newbies elected as “Tea Party” affiliated will side with the NEOCONS 99% of the time. These are the fuckers that co-opted and ruined what started as a movement for liberty and personal sovereignty, and turned into Fox News / Sara Palin joke that only appeals to white Christian NASCAR fans over 60.

  • Anonymous

    “So far, tea party supporters have largely [focused] their gripes on taxes and government spending.”

    Two powers that ARE granted to Congress by the Constitution.

    The teabaggers are misinformed, misled, and misused by their puppeters.

  • Guest

    There are no Smedley Butlers anymore. Kucinich is close enough in my book.

  • Guest

    Well, here it is. An simple test for the new members, a bullshit detector if you will.

    Pass or fail tea partiers, pass or fail. Real tea party a la Ron Paul, or fake tea party a la Palin and the rest of the republican establishment.

    Those who vote to renew should never again be allowed to utter the word liberty while in office.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/KHUGSYMRDZ635QMFO5P6UA5MTM nunya

    The Koch brother funded Tea Party will never stand for anything other than corporate rights.

  • H.P. Loathecraft

    I get that. I’ve seen some smart TP political operatives on Sunday TV. But the “party” is still a mess. The noise all emanates from the rabble and as long as Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, Bachman, Limbaugh are successfully co-opting their movement that image is likely to continue and I expect that it will. The press loves them because their public persona is free reality TV footage.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PJG7CFKLPNKAHETCZHP7YUSXTU paisano

    usapatriotact died inthe houise

  • LeftCoastLeftie

    Don’t you mean “this is how it sounds when someone reads the Constitution to the dumbfuck illiterate Tea Party Baggers (I hear they have a problem with readin’ and spelin’).

    Sorry Gary M, I didn’t read ahead.

  • Anonymous

    hmmm, yeah the Constitution? Tea partiers, republicans and many democrats wipe their collective asses with it. When you run specifically saying that you will stand up for the constitution and then shit on it I take issue with that.

  • Anonymous

    I, and friends of mine, have been involved in at least a couple of similar lawsuits where you go to a fucking insurance company and say, look here what’s fucked up, here’s what it cost. And they just will fuck you, not give you a dime. Then you have to go and do stupid shit so you can get what you have coming to you.

  • Anonymous

    You are a big fan of the coathanger method, no?

    Anti-abortion laws only affect poor people. Rich people will ALWAYS be able to get abortions.

    You are just a suckup- for rich people.

  • Anonymous

    Freaking coat-hanger loving anarchist.

    Rich people will ALWAYS be able to get their abortions.

    You just get your jollies pushing around poor people.

    “that they have no right to make decisions for another person who is perfectly capable of making her own decisions. ”

    Are you a fucking idiot or what? Roe V Wade explicitly grants this right! You want to let states take it away! Your argument is INSANE!

  • http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepr1xp/index.html unsean

    I’ve noticed that the Tea Party is very selective about what parts of the Constitution that it tends to get in an uproar about. If the statute in question can be interpreted as even remotely supporting the poor, immigrants, or peoples of color, they tend to be against it. If it somehow benefits their rich benefactors, then they’re all for it.

    Which is somewhat ironic, since most Tea Party members are supposedly ‘regular Joes.’

  • Anonymous

    They also want to send us back to the “good old days” when only rich people could afford to get abortions.

    If Ron Paul had his way, the coathanger would become a medical instrument in this country again.

  • Guest

    What’s your point?

  • Guest

    You mean denial TV.

  • Guest

    I’ve heard what he says. After the first trimester he doesn’t think abortion should be an option. And if you think about it francis… it does get a little messy. Truth be told though, no one can tell anyone what to do with their bodies. And making it illegal to get an abortion is like making drugs illegal. People are going to do it any way.

    I’ll tell you fran… you are one divisive bitch.

  • Guest

    “The brainwashed men and women on both sides of the abortion issue fail to understand that they have no right to make decisions for another person who is perfectly capable of making her own decisions. And those men and women who support men’s and women’s autonomy should not be so willing to compromise with tyranny and accept piecemeal handouts as freedom.”

    Ssssuuuwwweeeet!

  • Guest

    Talk about being a suck-up to the rich. That they would even be having this argument in a court of law (commerce) is an insult to the individual rights of a person.

    francis, you just like to fight.

  • Guest

    What do you mean… “the rich”? Are you talking rich, filthy rich, or the PTB?

  • Anonymous

    Anyone who can afford a plane ticket to a country where they are legal.

  • Guest

    Is that you?

  • Anonymous

    Why does that matter?

  • Anonymous

    I want to click the “Liked” button 10,000 times for your post but I can only click it once.

  • Guest

    Because then that would make you rich. ;)

  • Jaimie11

    You are even more foolish than I previously thought you are – “Roe V Wade explicitly grants this right! ” – really, the government grants rights – no baby, rights are inherent. Women’s autonomy is inherent, and Roe v Wade paternalistically manages women’s autonomy as if women are a sub-species of human being.

    You can’t think your way out of an open paper bag. Brainwashed – when are you going to figure out the difference between freedom and slavery? When are you going to take the red pill?

    And your accusations against me are your own projections and glaring evidence of the bindings by which you and your concepts are limited by your ideology. I am a liberal in the true sense of the meaning of liberal. You have no concept of what liberal is – you only think what you’re told to think. I wouldn’t be surprised to find you cowering in fear were you ever to come face to face with freedom and responsibility. Typical lefty – brain dead.

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry but your impersonation of a stupid person is very poor.

  • Jaimie11

    Yes, it has been co-opted by the GOP and as such no longer holds potential to make significant progress against the forces of fascism and tyranny. But its origins and the ideas that motivated people from a wide spectrum of political views to join together initially, well, those ideas are important and the all too disdainful attitude of the left to the Tea Party obscures those ideas and feeds into perpetuating the Neoconlib agenda we are all against.

    Let’s liberate those ideas from the control of what is now the fake tea party, wing of the gop – those ideas stand on their own quite well.

  • Guest

    It don’t come easy. And thank you. ;)

  • Diogenes

    Me to Kucinich: Stand up for Public Option

  • Anonymous

    If you believe for even a nanosecond that America stopped being paternalistic at the moment that women were given the right to vote by the 19th Amendment on August 18th, 1920, you have absolutely no material or intellectual understanding of the long term effects of cultural memory on current thinking.

    I could spend a couple of hours taking this apart bit by erroneous, illogical and inconsistent bit. But I’m tired, I have a head ache and I don’t really feel like it! Anyone who could write what you have written here has almost no understanding of the workings and imbalance in American culture throughout American history, and at some point you would just dismiss me as arguing with someone else anyway because you don’t even recognize yourself when I describe you and the implications of your positions to you!

    That’s how far apart we are on this issue and on most issues.

    In the late 1780s the nation had a rather long and arduous discussion about the relationship between states rights and the federal government. Until then the country had been rule by what was called the “Articles of Confederation.” This document which few have read basically relegated most governmental authority to the states. This relationship and power structure proved unworkable, the Constitution was adopted at the end of that discussion in 1789 to rescind and replace both the earlier document and the government which it had established.

    But because of the workings of cultural memory, the earlier conception remained a thorn in the side of many and an idea that promised greater “freedom” to those who resisted the intrusion of the federal government in their so-called private matters like keeping slaves.

    Eventually those with slaves and an exaggerated sense of their own importance and power decided to revert to the Articles of Confederation and so formed the Confederacy based on the misguided thought that they should be able to do what they wanted with their property.

    Once again the “states’ rights” people lost and lost big, but unfortunately in losing they took the lives of over half a million Americans, even after that dreadful tragedy or what I think is more likely, because of that dreadful tragedy and the defeat it produced for the South, this idea remains very much alive, and by no coincidence is still widely propagated and can be traced back to that same regionalism that produced the Civil War.

    That’s not to say that Southerners have not moved North and brought their anti-tax, anti-government ideology with them. But Ron and Rand Paul are Southerners after all and their respective power bases are in former rebellious members of the Confederate states. I don’t believe that they could ever be elected in any Northern or formerly Union states.

    Coincidence–I don’t think so. You might want to associate yourself with that culture and all it means in the annals of American history but for me I don’t want to have anything to do with it or the oppression and history that is represents. But you feel differently, you seem to want to embrace it and those who want to keep it alive.

    So go for it!

  • Jaimie11

    If you do not vigorously support women’s equality you are embracing oppression. Hanging your hat on Roe v Wade does not a lover of freedom make. Clinging to history and making excuses against supporting freedom and equality based in your beliefs about history, is much like a cigarette smoker who would like to quit but is so addicted to nicotine and other chemicals he is unable to quit. He will make a hundred excuses for himself until the next time he is sickened – until the next freedom is infringed upon. But…

    Did you mean annals? Annuls fits too.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for the editing advise. I didn’t know we were going to stoop to the level of grammar and spelling. You might want to check the proper verb in your first sentence in your initial post here as well: “What we had before was [SIC] laws against abortion made by men who passed them before women had the right to vote.”

    Pretending that turning the control of women’s bodies over to the states, is somehow a more just guarantee of some hallucinatory definition of “freedom” than having that power rest with the federal government is nothing more than deception, delusion, dysfunction, and is as disingenuous as it is hypocritical. This is nothing more than another way of controlling their access to the procedure more completely, locally. And as I already noted, the main reason that we had Roe V. Wade in the first place which occurred long after women gained the right to vote.

    I can’t help but wonder why you can’t let a woman or why there isn’t some woman here making this argument for you. Maybe you can call Phyllis Schlafly, and get her to take me to task, I’m sure she agrees with you 100 percent on this and she worked hard to, and is credited with the defeat of the “equal rights amendment” because she convinced some women that it wasn’t necessary and that they already had equal rights even though one of her fellow travelers on the far right, Supreme Court justice Anthony Scalia, in a deliciously ironic twist, recently noted that the Constitution does not give equal rights to women.

    In fact, I would suggest that anyone who was truly concerned with the “freedom” and “equality” of women would be more concerned about that statement and its ramifications than trying to pretend they cared about women’s “freedom” while claiming that all abortion access should be relegated to the states and people of good conscience should be allowed to opt out of having their tax dollars go to pay for a procedure for those who are unable to afford it while the right in Congress today has decided to raise taxes on insurance companies who pay for abortion as a part of their insurance coverage.

    Your argument represents nothing but libertarian balderdash of the most hypocritical and deceptive sort..

  • Jaimie11

    “Pretending that turning the control of women’s bodies over to the states, is somehow a more just guarantee of some hallucinatory definition of “freedom” than having that power rest with the federal government is nothing more than deception, delusion, dysfunction, and is as disingenuous as it is hypocritical.”

    First of all, this is not my position – so find someone else to argue with who actually holds that position. You are doing a fair imitation of Limbaugh with your straw man argument. Doesn’t interest me as it will never promote honest discussion and understanding, just as it is meant to not when Limbaugh does it.

    As for annals and annuls – I was not correcting you. I was asking for clarification because both words could be made to fit.

    This kind of arrogance on your part Pag, is one reason I don’t enjoy discussing much with you. Stuff it!

  • Jaimie11

    As for pushing around poor people, I leave that to Democrats and Republicans who are constantly using poor people as hockey pucks to gain points with their fan-base. If you think the way doling out welfare and medicaid in this country is not PUSHING around poor people and demeaning them, manipulating them into becoming statistics that support stereotyping, you are not very aware of the plight of poor people who really do need help, deserve it and who should be respected according to the dignity possessed by every human being.

    When have you last been to apply for any kind of assistance from a government bureaucracy? If you have seen or experienced what goes on when the poor are involved you would be out there starting up a charity that serves people in need and affirms their dignity and respects their rights to make their own decisions, do their own thinking, have complete families, and not make needing help a reason to mistreat them.

    You don’t have to be rich to start such a charity. But you do need to have a clear idea of what dignity and freedom are. I’ve never seen anything you’ve written that indicates you have such an idea. But you are willing to pay taxes for the welfare related abuse of poor people to persist, and then not need to do anything yourself to help them. I guess that leaves you free to get your jollies doing whatever inane things you do that prevent you from having any ideas other than those predigested ones handed to you by the MSM.

  • Guest

    I am grateful for your quality of spirit.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RYT7I56X7KQ4F5PCGECEVV3Y3I Anonymous

    those kinda sounded like the people who voted for mccain/palin… but then again they weren’t packing heat (that we could see!)

  • Anonymous

    Right; that is not your position! That is why you said this:

    “It is a state’s rights issue, Pag. The federal government should not be in the business of determining for women any action or behavior at all in regard to their bodies. Standing between them and their own consciences is an unwarranted paternalistic insertion of their head-patting condescension towards women. Let each state decide, let the women of each state have a voice in making laws if laws are what they want. Let them say ‘no’, if they so choose, to any law imposing rules onto women concerning what they do with their own bodies, when they do it, why they do it, and who they do it with.

    I am sure some states will make no law against abortion and others will. That is how the Constitution provides for self-rule and no centralized power in the private lives of individuals.”

    As if women can’t have a voice in deciding the laws at the federal level? The effect of this kind of condescending paternalism that says “let the women of each state have a voice in making laws if laws are what they want” is exactly as I described it, but you can’t as I said earlier face the you I see when I read your posts and “at some point you would just dismiss me as arguing with someone else anyway because you don’t even recognize yourself when I describe you and the implications of your positions to you!”

    And true to form, that is just what you did!

  • Anonymous

    My problem with it is not that he shouldn’t have been justly compensated it’s the large sum he asked for. If he settled for just the bill that’s great, they are liable for the damage to his mouth. My problem with it is that as a business owner it has become increasingly expensive to get insurance due to ridiculous lawsuits people file. So instead of being able to give people a great deal on the services I provide I have to build in to the cost the additional tens of thousands of dollars to insure my little company from being wiped out by some douche bag who takes no personal responsibility.

  • Anonymous

    That’s great Joe, I’m glad he settled out of court for just the costs of his dental work. However I am led to wonder if public perception of him may have changed his decision; why else would he have addressed it with such condescending tone on his website?

  • Anonymous

    Actually I am only ignorant to the fact he settled for just the dental bills. I am not ignorant to common procedure. I don’t get what is with your hostility.

  • Anonymous

    Just sent Rep Platt an e-mail blasting him for supporting the “Patriot Act” . I guess if we lived in WWII Germany this might be considered a Patriot Act.

  • Jaimie11

    I sympathize with your problem, but I don’t believe that insurance premium increases are ultimately due to law suits – that does appear to be the directly responsible for the effect, but hidden behind it is the fact that medical professionals are not properly disciplined when they do harm. It is a scandal that state medical boards, intended to provide protection to the general public from negligent doctors, they instead protect doctors from law suit by finding them not liable for their errors.

    If medical boards actually did their jobs there would be fewer injuries and deaths due to medical error and adverse drug reactions. But once again the regulatory safeguard provided the public has been co-opted to protect the industry it is supposed to regulate.

    The effect of blaming lawsuits is to mount an attack on our constitutional rights, and the problem spurring the law suits remains. Where I live legislation was passed to restrict lawsuits damages and pain and suffering awards. During the campaign for passage, the ads told us malpractice insurance rates would come. Now years later, those rates have increased along with insurance premiums for patients. Medical costs increases are affected by so many factors that could be better controlled, and they are responsible in the main for insurance premium increases. Law suits have minimal effect compared with all the other costs of medical care and record maintenance, combined with inflation that is built into our debt based money system.

  • Jaimie11

    Sorry Pag, I stand corrected. In fairness though, I was describing Ron Paul’s position. Mine is different. I do not believe any laws are necessary. I trust women to be able to make up their own minds without being restricted in any way by law. Women who feel induced abortion is a moral crime are not forced to have abortions. Women who are not so compelled are free to have abortions should they choose.

    People who are morally opposed to abortion should be compelled to pay for them. And people who support abortion rights are capable of forming support organizations to help women who cannot afford to pay.

    The government on any level should stay out of the way.

  • Jaimie11

    Thanks Boneman, you’ve made my day.

  • Anonymous

    You are probably one of the millions of huffers who don’t know a damn thing about economics, the richest 2% would have lost everything by now and our dollars would be worth more..giving you more money. The banks who should be bankrupt would be.

  • http://twitter.com/jaimeppl Jaime Hanson-Dean

    Tea Party supporters were all about the Constitution and rights! What has happened now…
    Those they voted for are suddenly backing down when it comes to protecting freedom of speech and the right to go about the day without being Searched for no reason…

    PULL IT TOGETHER GENTLEMEN, LADIES

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CDVPJXXVVPO4YVYRQUSDDPZZ64 AHCR

    These people are victims of “the machine”. They certainly do not represent many of us.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6ULIMQFGJEXUMVXF4GXXEDDNKQ Rob

    why is itthatwhen anybody disagrees with obama, they’re automatically considered racists? i have a black friend who disapproves of obama…does that mean she hates herself? the truly racist tendency is to equate disapproval of obama with racism.

  • Guest

    Yikes!

    I feel, for many Americans, that whole idea is passe’. If you think everyone in the tea party is a racist, then why don’t you just call them the ku klux klan. And I’m sure there are African American people who also enjoy teabagging. ;)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VXF7ALNGFDSINTIA2IP7OIKQ7E Michael

    yeah buddy get yur facts straight the white boy rand and the rest of those rich oppressive slave owners calling themselves regular joes shot that their patriot act down, maybe some of y’all highly intelligent sheep should do some research on your shepherd that claims he’s never raised taxes but cut them, then while your at it maybe oh i dunno look a lil into lil rands dad ron and his track record on your selective constitution. Then ask yourself do you even know what you stand for where you where born and who you are?

  • http://mysite.verizon.net/vzepr1xp/index.html unsean

    Take a breath and try again, Michael because I have no idea what you’re talking about. Though I might mention that if you didn’t try sounding like such an arsehole–which anybody who calls another person ‘sheep’ generally is–then we might have a dialog.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VXF7ALNGFDSINTIA2IP7OIKQ7E Michael

    Do you only watch MSNBC of what? Do you have any type of comprehension of what the Tea party stands for or is? Or are you just another loli pop thinking McKane and Palin are the brains behind the movement and Obama is going to bring us change we should have hope. Come on homie, educate yourself don’t spew out ignorance jonny boy, I might feel the need to have to school you. You might feel silly later. You might catch another complex. Then you might figure out you ain’t gonna bust a grape anyways and probably go back to pumped the same gay ass shit you started with up their. come on dog have some respect for yourself

  • Anonymous

    I understand what you are getting at, however I am not a doctor nor am I in the medical profession. I am in the outdoor industry. Insurance is outrageously expensive and frequently plays into our decisions on whether or not to expand. Fortunately, so far we have not had any claims, that however seems not to matter to the insurance carriers every time they raise our rates. So while I do agree with you on the fact that doctors should be held accountable in ways other than monetary punishments, it doesn’t change the fact that our litigious society is the main reason that insurance premiums are so high. At least according to our carrier and their underwriter.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VXF7ALNGFDSINTIA2IP7OIKQ7E Michael

    adddaboyyy. Dont know about the attack without mercy till your destroyed, the way things are them treasonous traitors might call it a terrorist threat and send lil gay goons to the pad to further violate their oaths but definitely my boy all that comply should….be removed from office by the 2012 vote…civil enough for the masses..much luv Rubiconcki

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VXF7ALNGFDSINTIA2IP7OIKQ7E Michael

    hey truth why are their so many ignorant people on this thread? I mean shit holmes if they took the time to be on a computer this long or to open their mouths one would think they would at least look into what comes flying out of it….

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VXF7ALNGFDSINTIA2IP7OIKQ7E Michael

    Guess they took your challenge huh buddy? Too bad now all the crap everybody was spewing they must spoon back in their mouths. Sucks to underestimate the power of americans.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LXWOUAG3UDAQPRA4CVGLMTLQK4 Gavin Snyder

    Well Kucinich has certainly shown his cards face-up. Evidently he has no intention of defending liberty.

    Trust me, it’s a game of chicken. In the end, the record will show that Kucinich votes in favor of the “Patriot” Act. Trust me.

  • DriveBy

    Whoever said that anybody who disagrees with Obama is automatically a racist?? Please keep your straw-man arguments to yourself. I disagree very strongly with Obama on a lot of issues, the encroaching police state, the so-called wars, blind support for the terrorist state of Israel, and indefinite detention of mere suspects being just the tip of the iceberg….and I’m no racist, but what has all that got to do with the fact that teabaggers are the hardcore racist base of the Republican Party?

  • Jaimie11

    I just think that it is dangerous to limit our rights to sue. Yes, it has been abused for profit by lawyers and people who know no better. It would reduce frivolous suits, I think, and safeguard our rights, if lawsuits could be reviewed by a panel of judges or a judge with a panel of citizens before being permitted to go forward.

    But I would be very careful about giving up rights in exchange for some promised benefit. That usually does not work as advertised. Your carrier is incorrect, I am pretty certain.

    I looked at all the statistics during the health care debate and frivolous lawsuits were not a significant contributer to medical costs. I found it is more likely investors who are looking for profits increases, some medical supplies and devices companies who have virtual monopolies and are setting prices. Another significant contributer is doctor owned facilities, such as testing businesses, ie colonoscopy, cardiac stress testing, CT and other imaging groups.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=az9qxQZNmf0o

    http://www.resource4surgicalaccidents.com/malpracticemyths.html

    Donovan, I hope you will do a little of your own research to satisfy yourself. I feel certain you’ll find your carrier has not been entirely honest with you regarding this topic.

  • Anonymous

    lmao!

Google+