White House on NY-23: 'Anger Can Get You 45% of the Vote'

Mrs. S. Palin's effect on Election 2009 is the same as Election 2008: DuD.

Some Talking Heads published that these consecutive failures sculptures her candidacy for the Presidency. "Say it ain't so, Joe."

America's Rule of Law was torn to shreds by the eight-year incompetence of Pres.Bush. Lord knows, our country doesn't need the same incompetence -- even if it wears blood-red LipStick.

Mrs. Palin did Alaska a favor by quitting State Politics. Hope she give the same blessing to the nation.

Adam

"Where'd you find that call for bipartisanship you allege? Written on the wall? Voices?"

I realize you're not that bright Fred Thompson but

"No one plays the "with us or against us" card more often or more consistently around here. You make GWB look almost bi-partisan by comparison.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Nov 5, 2009 1:40:26 PM

I'm 99% sure that's incorrect given the size of the business.

Posted by: Alyson |

Ok.

Do you expect that you could save money by losing the private insurance and just paying your employee's PO expenses?

"Businesses with up to 25 employees would be eligible to purchase insurance through the exchange in the first year. That threshold would increase to 50 employees in 2014 and to 100 employees in 2015."

note the public option is on the exchange and I'd be covering the employees by paying for their premiums-- or for whatever plan they chose, but they'd be in a bigger risk pool which is to my advantage.

The objections are coming from small businesses that don't want to be mandated to provide coverage, though there will be exemptions.

Again with the calls for bipartisanship from someone who has never acted bipartisan nor has any plans to.

And its not us and them

Its the right wing liars (who shrillness far exceeds their numbers) and everybody else.

Posted by: Ryan C |

Where'd you find that call for bipartisanship you allege? Written on the wall? Voices?

And Michael Steele is lame.

And it's not us and them...it's them and us. Got it.

We already know you are in bed with Big Pharma but is a liberal health insurance executive an us or a them in your world?

you would also have to pay penalties for not covering me.

**

I'm 99% sure that's incorrect given the size of the business.

Posted by: Alyson | Nov 5, 2009 1:40:45 PM

If you dropped me and paid my PO expenses I would break even but you would also have to pay penalties for not covering me. Do you think that the cost of my PO coverage plus the penalty you have to pay to not cover me is less than what it costs you today?

And I don't think most business will be paying the PO expenses for the employees they drop.

"No one plays the "with us or against us" card more often or more consistently around here. You make GWB look almost bi-partisan by comparison."

ROFLMAO!

Again with the calls for bipartisanship from someone who has never acted bipartisan nor has any plans to.

And its not us and them

Its the right wing liars (who shrillness far exceeds their numbers) and everybody else.

"You have predicted and advocated that the Dems do the same thing to the "moderates" that refuse to go along with Obamacare."

I am a guy blogging his opinion.

He is the head of the RNC.

I may not think much of Michael Steele but his opinion certainly carries more weight than mine.

Like I said Democrats should be thrilled that the GOP is seeking to drive out the remnants of moderates in their ranks.

Democrats should be thrilled.

Posted by: Ryan C |

You have predicted and advocated that the Dems do the same thing to the "moderates" that refuse to go along with Obamacare.

Am I wrong?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Nov 5, 2009 12:33:50 PM

Yes. I can drop coverage, pay instead into the public option, which will cost less and then increase their pay. The employees are then better off as they are covered and receive better pay, and I stay competitive with bigger firms who have advantages. In addition, the employees would have more money to put into the economy-- which at times like this benefits everybody, particularly if it's not just our f/t employees we're talking about. We might even be able to afford to make more part-timers full-timers.

As we all know, most Americans get health insurance through their employers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the cost reduced their cash wages by 7.9 percent on average in 2008. If we went the direction I'd prefer and had national health insurance, and our small biz and all other employers were entirely relieved of the health benefits expense, we could all afford to pay workers 7.9 percent more and be no worse off. If the payroll tax went up by 7.9 percent to pay for health insurance, it would be a wash, but since taxes would be higher, government spending could be higher without increasing the deficit. It sorts out.We just have a peculiar way of looking at it. Some of us. LOL.

"I guess push polling is a right wing thing. "

No one plays the "with us or against us" card more often or more consistently around here. You make GWB look almost bi-partisan by comparison.

Michael Steele on the lessons of losing NY-23

ABC:""[C]andidates who live in moderate to slightly liberal districts have got to walk a little bit carefully here, because you do not want to put yourself in a position where you’re crossing that line on conservative principles, fiscal principles, because we’ll come after you,” Steele told ABC's Top Line in response to a question about Republicans who support the White House's stimulus and health care plans."

Democrats should be thrilled.

"Would you favor or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans if you knew that you would get free stuff from Uncle Sugar and the rich would pay for it?"

Oddly no pollster has asked that.

I guess push polling is a right wing thing.

It fits in with the inherent dishonesty one must have to buy into the ideology.

"Yes you took what Frank Luntz told you to think and like a good little parrot you repeated it."

Like the time POTUS made the back room deal with Big Pharma and told the left to never criticize Big Pharma again?

"Its a push poll of GOP talking points."

Here's the Democrat version...

"Would you favor or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans if you knew that you would get free stuff from Uncle Sugar and the rich would pay for it?"

"Are you quite able to read?"

Yes you took what Frank Luntz told you to think and like a good little parrot you repeated it.

"What a magnificent performance Rasmussen turned in yesterday, confirming yet again that his reputation is well deserved"

ROFLMAO!

5 pts off in Jersey.

The middle of the pack for VA.

And he called Hoffman a winner.

But he tells right wingers what they want to hear so they have an investment in propping up this scam artist.

Posted by: Alyson | Nov 5, 2009 12:14:43 PM

How you incentivize the employees so that they choose the public option and not coverage that you provide? That coverage you provide is worth quite a bit right? 10k? More? Now you want them to pay that 10k out of pocket to the public option. How you gonna make it up to em?

You, on the other hand, can drop coverage as long as the penalty is less than 10k and come out ahead. Of course, you are free to share the savings with them.

Seems like you will be incentivized and they won't....until you drop coverage.

Am I wrong?

btw, tying health insurance to employers is insane and REAL reform would address it. Sadly, Washington doesn't really do real reform.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Nov 5, 2009 1:37:01 AM

If we're talking about what I want to see the answers would be yes, yes, yes and no, though I'd prefer the last question to read that wouldn't incentivize your employees to seek health care through the national exchange with a contribution from you (meaning of course I wanted them to be incentivized to do that. I support Wyden's amendment-- and would like to see choice incorporated across the board, making employees responsible for choosing their coverage, and untying coverage from employment to improve portability)

If we're talking what I expect to see, I'm willing to get there step-by-step amelioratively.