Comments on: Good SCHIP http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/ Making the World Safe for Liberalism Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:13:47 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: jpe http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320921 jpe Sat, 13 Oct 2007 02:41:20 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320921 minor mistake - 25k for an suv is deductible in the first year, and the rest is depreciated over 6 years. minor mistake – 25k for an suv is deductible in the first year, and the rest is depreciated over 6 years.

]]> By: jpe http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320892 jpe Sat, 13 Oct 2007 02:31:51 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320892 Bush made it cost-effective for small business owners - just like that Frost fella, as a matter of fact - to buy trucks. Whereas cars aren't deductible as a business expense, huge, massive trucks are fully deductible. And, of course, wingnuttia applauded the move. The lesson here? Government subsidized SUVs? Great! Healthcare for kids? Hisssssssssss. Bush made it cost-effective for small business owners – just like that Frost fella, as a matter of fact – to buy trucks. Whereas cars aren’t deductible as a business expense, huge, massive trucks are fully deductible. And, of course, wingnuttia applauded the move.

The lesson here? Government subsidized SUVs? Great! Healthcare for kids? Hisssssssssss.

]]> By: biggerbox http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320662 biggerbox Sat, 13 Oct 2007 00:50:21 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320662 Now now, maha. O'Reilly's staff says that Malkin does not eat puppies. But it is not clear whether that covers older pets and/or whether it applies to all breeds, and also kittens. ;-) Now now, maha.

O’Reilly’s staff says that Malkin does not eat puppies. But it is not clear whether that covers older pets and/or whether it applies to all breeds, and also kittens. ;-)

]]> By: skippy http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320613 skippy Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:42:46 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320613 it really floored me when the hardly-ever-right wing denigrated the frosts for not being truly "poor" and receiving assistance. the point being made (by reality, it turns out) is <b>not</b> that the frosts weren't destitute when they received assistance to get health insurance...the point is that the middle class <b>can no longer afford health insurance because it's become so expensive</b>! it's rather like saying i'm stupid because i can't easily hook up a tv nowadays...it's not that i've grown stupider, but tv hook ups have become more complicated. the range of affordability for insurance has been slowly creeping up the past decades, and now it's out of the reach of many people who, under the same circumstances, could easily afford it several years ago. that's certainly not the fault of the people who have the same jobs and work just as hard as they did two decades ago. but the repubbbs definitely don't want you to focus on the real factor here...insurance, pharmaceutical and medical companies who are raising their prices out the reach of most americans. it really floored me when the hardly-ever-right wing denigrated the frosts for not being truly “poor” and receiving assistance.

the point being made (by reality, it turns out) is not that the frosts weren’t destitute when they received assistance to get health insurance…the point is that the middle class can no longer afford health insurance because it’s become so expensive!

it’s rather like saying i’m stupid because i can’t easily hook up a tv nowadays…it’s not that i’ve grown stupider, but tv hook ups have become more complicated.

the range of affordability for insurance has been slowly creeping up the past decades, and now it’s out of the reach of many people who, under the same circumstances, could easily afford it several years ago. that’s certainly not the fault of the people who have the same jobs and work just as hard as they did two decades ago.

but the repubbbs definitely don’t want you to focus on the real factor here…insurance, pharmaceutical and medical companies who are raising their prices out the reach of most americans.

]]> By: Pat http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320598 Pat Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:10:23 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320598 That ploy of "some people say..." has been used from the beginning at Fox but if the media rug can get pulled from Malkin then she can spew all she wants from within her own home. She only matters to the extent that she has a platform. Maybe there's value in having a wingnut on public display to be made an example of, but I am not entirely sure about that. Are the worst of the worst, such as Malkin a net asset or liability for progressive causes. A lot of time gets spent on them. Maybe quashing their assinine innuendo, lies and distortions is cathartic for us. Certainly lies in public discourse should not go unchallenged but who's amplifying Malkin and Coulter's voices and letting them define the discussion? Maybe 25% of our venting should be directed at media that gives them their soapbox. I write any and every show that has Coulter as a guest and let them know it is not even good entertainment, among other things. I don't waste my time on Fox though, they're beyond persuasion or help. That ploy of “some people say…” has been used from the beginning at Fox but if the media rug can get pulled from Malkin then she can spew all she wants from within her own home. She only matters to the extent that she has a platform.

Maybe there’s value in having a wingnut on public display to be made an example of, but I am not entirely sure about that.

Are the worst of the worst, such as Malkin a net asset or liability for progressive causes. A lot of time gets spent on them. Maybe quashing their assinine innuendo, lies and distortions is cathartic for us.

Certainly lies in public discourse should not go unchallenged but who’s amplifying Malkin and Coulter’s voices and letting them define the discussion? Maybe 25% of our venting should be directed at media that gives them their soapbox. I write any and every show that has Coulter as a guest and let them know it is not even good entertainment, among other things. I don’t waste my time on Fox though, they’re beyond persuasion or help.

]]> By: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320527 maha Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:42:11 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320527 biggerbox -- that's her pattern. I'm sure you remember her encounter with Chris Matthews from 2004, about John Kerry's war record -- http://mediamatters.org/items/200408200005 <blockquote>BROWN: He volunteered twice. He volunteered twice in Vietnam. He literally got shot. There‘s no question about any of those things. So what else is there to discuss? How much he got shot, how deep, how much shrapnel? MALKIN: Well, yes. Why don‘t people ask him more specific questions about the shrapnel in his leg. They are legitimate questions about whether or not it was a self-inflicted wound. (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: What do you mean by self-inflicted? Are you saying he shot himself on purpose? Is that what you‘re saying? MALKIN: Did you read the book... MATTHEWS: I‘m asking a simple question. Are you saying that he shot himself on purpose. MALKIN: I‘m saying some of these soldiers... MATTHEWS: And I‘m asking question. MALKIN: And I‘m answering it. MATTHEWS: Did he shoot himself on purpose. MALKIN: Some of the soldiers have made allegations that these were self-inflicted wounds. MATTHEWS: No one has ever accused him of shooting himself on purpose. MALKIN: That these were self-inflicted wounds. MATTHEWS: Your saying there are—he shot himself on purpose, that‘s a criminal act? MALKIN: I‘m saying that I‘ve read the book and some of the... (CROSSTALK) MATTHEWS: I want an answer yes or no, Michelle. MALKIN: Some of the veterans say... MATTHEWS: No. No one has every accused him of shooting himself on purpose. MALKIN: Yes. Some of them say that. MATTHEWS: Tell me where that... MALKIN: Self-inflicted wounds—in February, 1969. MATTHEWS: This is not a show for this kind of talk. Are you accusing him of shooting himself on purpose to avoid combat or to get credit? MALKIN: I‘m saying that‘s what some of these... MATTHEWS: Give me a name. MALKIN: Patrick Runyan (ph) and William Zeldonaz (ph). MATTHEWS: They said—Patrick Runyan... MALKIN: These people have... MATTHEWS: And they said he shot himself on purpose to avoid combat or take credit for a wound? MALKIN: These people have cast a lot of doubt on whether or not... MATTHEWS: That‘s cast a lot of doubt. That‘s complete nonsense. MALKIN: Did you read the section in the book... MATTHEWS: I want a statement from you on this program, say to me right, that you believe he shot himself to get credit for a purpose of heart. MALKIN: I‘m not sure. I‘m saying... MATTHEWS: Why did you say? MALKIN: I‘m talking about what‘s in the book. MATTHEWS: What is in the book. Is there—is there a direct accusation in any book you‘ve ever read in your life that says John Kerry ever shot himself on purpose to get credit for a purple heart? On purpose? MALKIN: On. MATTHEWS: On purpose? Yes or no, Michelle. MALKIN: In the February 1969 -- in the February 1969 event. MATTHEWS: Did he say on it purpose. MALKIN: There are doubts about whether or not it was intense rifle fire or not. And I wish you would ask these questions of John Kerry instead of me. MATTHEWS: I have never heard anyone say he shot himself on purpose. I haven‘t heard you say it. MALKIN: Have you tried to ask—have you tried ask John Kerry these questions? MATTHEWS: If he shot himself on purpose. No. I have not asked him that. MALKIN: Don‘t you wonder? MATTHEWS: No, I don‘t. It‘s never occurred to me. </blockquote> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5765243/ People are asking questions about whether Malkin eats live puppies. I know people are asking these questions, because I just asked it. She has never honestly addressed the question of her puppy eating. We must demand that she reveal every aspect of her personal life to us to clear this up. biggerbox — that’s her pattern. I’m sure you remember her encounter with Chris Matthews from 2004, about John Kerry’s war record –

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408200005

BROWN: He volunteered twice. He volunteered twice in Vietnam. He literally got shot. There‘s no question about any of those things. So what else is there to discuss? How much he got shot, how deep, how much shrapnel?

MALKIN: Well, yes. Why don‘t people ask him more specific questions about the shrapnel in his leg. They are legitimate questions about whether or not it was a self-inflicted wound.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: What do you mean by self-inflicted? Are you saying he shot himself on purpose? Is that what you‘re saying?

MALKIN: Did you read the book…

MATTHEWS: I‘m asking a simple question. Are you saying that he shot himself on purpose.

MALKIN: I‘m saying some of these soldiers…

MATTHEWS: And I‘m asking question.

MALKIN: And I‘m answering it.

MATTHEWS: Did he shoot himself on purpose.

MALKIN: Some of the soldiers have made allegations that these were self-inflicted wounds.

MATTHEWS: No one has ever accused him of shooting himself on purpose.

MALKIN: That these were self-inflicted wounds.

MATTHEWS: Your saying there are—he shot himself on purpose, that‘s a criminal act?

MALKIN: I‘m saying that I‘ve read the book and some of the…

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: I want an answer yes or no, Michelle.

MALKIN: Some of the veterans say…

MATTHEWS: No. No one has every accused him of shooting himself on purpose.

MALKIN: Yes. Some of them say that.

MATTHEWS: Tell me where that…

MALKIN: Self-inflicted wounds—in February, 1969.

MATTHEWS: This is not a show for this kind of talk. Are you accusing him of shooting himself on purpose to avoid combat or to get credit?

MALKIN: I‘m saying that‘s what some of these…

MATTHEWS: Give me a name.

MALKIN: Patrick Runyan (ph) and William Zeldonaz (ph).

MATTHEWS: They said—Patrick Runyan…

MALKIN: These people have…

MATTHEWS: And they said he shot himself on purpose to avoid combat or take credit for a wound?

MALKIN: These people have cast a lot of doubt on whether or not…

MATTHEWS: That‘s cast a lot of doubt. That‘s complete nonsense.

MALKIN: Did you read the section in the book…

MATTHEWS: I want a statement from you on this program, say to me right, that you believe he shot himself to get credit for a purpose of heart.

MALKIN: I‘m not sure. I‘m saying…

MATTHEWS: Why did you say?

MALKIN: I‘m talking about what‘s in the book.

MATTHEWS: What is in the book. Is there—is there a direct accusation in any book you‘ve ever read in your life that says John Kerry ever shot himself on purpose to get credit for a purple heart? On purpose?

MALKIN: On.

MATTHEWS: On purpose? Yes or no, Michelle.

MALKIN: In the February 1969 — in the February 1969 event.

MATTHEWS: Did he say on it purpose.

MALKIN: There are doubts about whether or not it was intense rifle fire or not. And I wish you would ask these questions of John Kerry instead of me.

MATTHEWS: I have never heard anyone say he shot himself on purpose.

I haven‘t heard you say it.

MALKIN: Have you tried to ask—have you tried ask John Kerry these questions?

MATTHEWS: If he shot himself on purpose. No. I have not asked him that.

MALKIN: Don‘t you wonder?

MATTHEWS: No, I don‘t. It‘s never occurred to me.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5765243/

People are asking questions about whether Malkin eats live puppies. I know people are asking these questions, because I just asked it. She has never honestly addressed the question of her puppy eating. We must demand that she reveal every aspect of her personal life to us to clear this up.

]]> By: biggerbox http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320472 biggerbox Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:21:59 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320472 What weasel-like constructions Malkin uses: "Reid says" and "it's not clear when" they got scholarships. Golly, Ms. Malkin, I thought you were some hot-shot "journalist" yourself. Wasn't the whole point of your drive-by to gather the facts?? How is it that it is not clear to a journalist like you just when they got scholarships? Didn't you ask the family? Check with the school? Actually talk to anyone about them? It's ever so much more fun to cast aspersions, and actually knowing any facts might interfere with that, huh? Same as it ever was. The good news is that the longer they try to sell this slime, the more people will get disgusted by them. What weasel-like constructions Malkin uses: “Reid says” and “it’s not clear when” they got scholarships.

Golly, Ms. Malkin, I thought you were some hot-shot “journalist” yourself. Wasn’t the whole point of your drive-by to gather the facts?? How is it that it is not clear to a journalist like you just when they got scholarships? Didn’t you ask the family? Check with the school? Actually talk to anyone about them?

It’s ever so much more fun to cast aspersions, and actually knowing any facts might interfere with that, huh? Same as it ever was.

The good news is that the longer they try to sell this slime, the more people will get disgusted by them.

]]> By: Swami http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320418 Swami Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:51:34 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320418 Wow, Malkin is disgustingly vile..What a vicious bitch. What a twisted and gnarled spirit she possesses. I have to wonder about her husband though...how he can join in matrimony with someone so devoid of spiritual beauty..she's a bitter nasty hag who's full of hate and acrimony, and what she's doing is what she truly is. She should break out her bible and read about the qualities that constitute a virtuous women, and maybe she could see how repulsive and offensive to beauty she actually is. Somebody please put a muzzle on that bitch! Wow, Malkin is disgustingly vile..What a vicious bitch. What a twisted and gnarled spirit she possesses.
I have to wonder about her husband though…how he can join in matrimony with someone so devoid of spiritual beauty..she’s a bitter nasty hag who’s full of hate and acrimony, and what she’s doing is what she truly is. She should break out her bible and read about the qualities that constitute a virtuous women, and maybe she could see how repulsive and offensive to beauty she actually is.

Somebody please put a muzzle on that bitch!

]]> By: The American Street » Blog Archive » Michelle Meshuggina Takes the Cake; Demands continuation of her Frost-ing http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320377 The American Street » Blog Archive » Michelle Meshuggina Takes the Cake; Demands continuation of her Frost-ing Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:15:16 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320377 [...] Barbara O’Brien provides the list of Republicans and three Democratic House members who voted against the expansion of SCHIP. Lobby them today if they’re from your district. PLEASE. [...] [...] Barbara O’Brien provides the list of Republicans and three Democratic House members who voted against the expansion of SCHIP. Lobby them today if they’re from your district. PLEASE. [...]

]]> By: Sarah http://www.mahablog.com/2007/10/12/good-schip/comment-page-1/#comment-320313 Sarah Fri, 12 Oct 2007 20:32:20 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=2179#comment-320313 "But S-CHIP is a program for families with some means, not the truly destitute. The truly destitute qualify for Medicaid. S-CHIP is a safety net, meaning the program exists not only to provide health care for children but to prevent families from completely going under financially because of health care costs." Yes! Thank you! The Frosts aren't supposed to be destitute. That's the whole point of the program. They would have been financially, emotionally and physically wrecked if it weren't for SCHIP. That's the whole damn point. But its more fun to play gotcha and drop little class warfare bombs than address the core issues. “But S-CHIP is a program for families with some means, not the truly destitute. The truly destitute qualify for Medicaid. S-CHIP is a safety net, meaning the program exists not only to provide health care for children but to prevent families from completely going under financially because of health care costs.”

Yes! Thank you! The Frosts aren’t supposed to be destitute. That’s the whole point of the program. They would have been financially, emotionally and physically wrecked if it weren’t for SCHIP. That’s the whole damn point. But its more fun to play gotcha and drop little class warfare bombs than address the core issues.

]]>