In order to cultivate the approval of black voters, Jewish Bernie Sanders is inviting the Reverend Al Sharpton to "feel the bern." Which is ironic, considering that was also the last phrase heard by the seven people torched at Freddy's Fashion Mart after Sharpton inspired an angry black mob to set fire to the store out of hatred for (wait for it!) Jews.
At the summit meeting of these two enormous hypocrites, Sharpton questioned the aging socialist on important policy issues like guaranteeing racial discrimination in employment (Affirmative Action), preventing police officers from making arrests of criminals of color or protecting their own lives, and the water quality in Flint, Michigan. Water which is hated simply because it's brown.
Of course, Sharpton's endorsement of a Democratic candidate will only go to the highest bidder, which is why Hillary Clinton will also be meeting with the emaciated race-baiter to kiss his, uh, ring.
Still, Bernie has got a decided edge in cultivating Rev Al's favor. After all, he's the one promising the biggest boost in entitlements for the nation's underclasses. But unfortunately, such entitlements have become a modern form of slavery which gives complete control to those holding the checkbook.
Hope n' Change doesn't actually think that Bernie sees this (while we're damn sure that Hillary does), and that his intentions are probably good. But we know where the road paved with such intentions inevitably leads (even if the White House is a rest stop on the way).
Case in point: Bernie is gleefully shouting that he'll give free college to everyone. But what good is free college to black students who've been trapped by Democrats in underperforming inner city schools and denied the ability to choose a real education? Many black students "graduate" from these high schools with reading levels insufficient to follow the directions to prepare a TV dinner (seriously, that's an actual metric used to measure their abilities).
So either the "free colleges" will turn them away or have to be dumbed down to a 5th grade reading level (spoiler alert: it will be the latter).
Barack Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for black Americans, and neither the Criminal nor the Commie hoping to succeed him would be any better. Which is why Hope n' Change thinks that the best thing which could happen during Black History Month would be a dramatic shift among black voters to a party which actually wants to lift them out of poverty rather than continuing to build ever-higher walls of entitlements around the Democratic plantation.
 |
| Why, yes - we WERE offended by another racist, sexually demeaning halftime show! Thanks for asking! |
42 comments:
Interesting definition of free there burnie. Bet ya wont be putting a cap on those education cost as ya make it free and somebody's gonna hafta pay for all that - I just wonder who it will be? No I don't, we all know who it will be that pays for 'free'.
The evil beauty of BS's plan is that by forcing the 1%ers to pay for all that free stuff for everyone else will simply cause them to take their money and jobs and move elsewhere on the planet, thereby forcing the middle class to pick up the tab and eventually bankrupting them so that all of us will become serfs of the state.
The thing that people don't understand is that nothing in life is free. Bernie spews promises of free this and free that, because he knows they will appeal to the masses. Once these college kids that worship him now graduate and mature, eventually paying for others' college, they'll be feeling the Bern all right!
Perhaps the political slaves who think there such a thing as "free" should be required to read things like "Atlas Shrugged" on better yet our Constitution before they are let out of HS. Just a thought.
Hypothetically, if I were forced to choose between BS and the Wicked Witch of the East, I would choose BS. At least he's open and honest about his socialism, and doesn't strike me as an absolutely horrible person that would have been burned at the stake in medieval times.
Judi, I've given a copy of Atlas as a high school grad present for ages. Not sure it ever gets read, but I'm making the effort..
Well, as the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher said "pretty soon you run out of other peoples' money". On the one hand, I wonder if Sanders and company ever took a course in economics, on the other hand, perhaps they do know what they are doing ... as in Lenin and company.... Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the one percenters provide approximately 98.6% of the jobs? That is, not counting the Hollywood Idiots in the one percent ... I mean beautiful people.
Interesting, the guy who wants to raise taxes to 90% meets the guy who doesn't bother to pay taxes for his help to get him elected. It's another poignant portrait of what the reality of socialism looks like. And since the Rev Al is technically "rich" (since he doesn't bother to pay taxes on the income derived from his extortion racket) he really doesn't care so much about the slavery aspect. The "rich" and "protected" class won't have the problems that the vast majority of people of color will.
A note about Bernie's "free college to everyone": Good point @Stilton about the future of a "college education" that is "free" and socialized. Since we supposedly will be converting our already questionable university system into what will basically be "public schools", why should any sentient being expect that these newly public institutions will not devolve to perform as poorly as the existing ones? Quite frankly, after another 4 or 5 years in a "free" university, how long will it be before we should expect those graduates to be challenged by preparing a TV dinner? As it is, 10% of university grads already think that Judge Judy sits on the Supreme Court.
My prediction: The continued growth of worthless "(insert grievance group here) studies" programs issuing meaningless diplomas that won't qualify one to even successfully executing a TV dinner.
"...the best thing which could happen during Black History Month would be a dramatic shift among black voters to a party which actually wants to lift them out of poverty rather than continuing to build ever-higher walls of entitlements around the Democratic plantation."
I agree, but what party would that be? The establishment GOP still favors flooding the country with cheap labor with high demands on social services that compete with the needs of the indigenous population. Even Bernie understands this, although he now repudiates himself from that position now that he's in the spotlight.
Speaking of Slavery: I've long argued that the bulk of the Progressive agenda is actually a war against the middle class, whether they realize it or not. Latest example of this is Obama's new budget and $10-a-barrel oil tax.
Obama argues that this is a "fee on oil paid for by oil companies" as if expenses incurred by a company producing a product are magically absorbed by someone other than the consumer of that company's product. Of course, even Marxists like Obama aren't that dense. But he certainly thinks that most people who approve of his agenda are. Of course, if you're rich like Obama, the Clintons, or Al Gore, another $5-a-tank means practically nothing do you. But the reality is that the poorer you are, the higher the percentage of your income you will be paying for basics such as energy.
Oh, but he's got an answer for that: He says the tax would be phased in over five years and offset by transfer payments for low-income Americans. Got it? So to make it up to "poor" families, he'll kick some of the money back to them in April through refundable tax credits. Once again, "the poor" get bought off by a Democrat with a bigger tax refund, even though they probably paid more than what they get back on the fuel tax over the preceding year. Suckers!
So who then who gets the bulk of the bill? The middle class!
This is why we will never see meaningful tax reform out of these people. It serves their interests, not yours.
And again, "the rich" don't care. "The poor" get subsidized. Who gets the bill? The middle class. This is an example of why the Democrats are now a party that only represents the interests of the very rich, and the very poor. The sainted "middle class" that they all endlessly pander to are really the fodder.
@ Pete: What a great idea! Hopefully your gift will touch someone.
@ Econ: I've mourned the plight of the middle class for nearly 60 years. It's always been like that since I can remember.
Good points, fellow readers. What these kids haven't figured out, (and won't likely until long after they're hopelessly caught in the quicksand) is that if they're going to go to college so that they can get a $70,000 job instead of a $35,000 job, once they get that $70,000 job, they're going to be paying the better part of that extra $35,000 they're making to the Federal government to pay for that education, forever. (At least it's possible to pay off and be free of student loans - taxes are forever)
At some point, many will wonder what the point of it all was, especially when they start to notice that the people who are making $35,000 are living nearly as well, if not better than they are. And remember, the more "poor" you are, the more tax credits and government programs are available to you that lower your overall cost of living. The more money you make, the less you qualify for the freebies.
For decades, we've been on a trajectory where it will be possible to live a nominal "middle class" existence without working at all. (This has long been the case in other "social democracy" welfare states, like Britain where literally a million "middle class" people have no jobs nor any good reason to have one) So the question should be, just how viable and stable will be an economy where it's actually more profitable to be sedentary than productive? There are not just economic considerations, but social as well; societies where the vast majority of people are not somehow productive and have nothing meaningful to do with their time and lives are not particularly pleasant or stable over the long run.
Since I've long since believed that "single payer" health care is inevitable, personally I wish we'd just get on with it. Since the rise of Obama, my family's biggest single recurring expense is "health care", and it's a charge I'd love to offload to someone else. Under a Sander's regime, the bill would get shifted from a bill I must pay from my personal checkbook to my income taxes. (Well over 5-figures) I have absolutely no control over "the bill", but I do have control over my income, and therefore the income taxes I pay. So, for example, around $18,000 would have to be transferred from what I pay now for health care to my income taxes if this were to be a wash. But if the government were to raise my Federal income taxes by $18,000 from what they are now, I really wouldn't see the point in working all that much, if at all! I'll just "semi-retire" to a point to where the government would consider me "poor", and wouldn't tax me at all. Someone else will have to pick up that $18,000 that I am supposedly consuming in health care. There aren't enough 1%ers to carry the load of me and millions like me, so it'll be up to the "hope-n-change" millennials who are supporting this agenda to pick up the bulk of my bill. I have to admit a certain level of schadenfreude over that.
What will I do with all my new-found free time? Perhaps finally start the blog people have been begging me to write pointing out the insanity of it all. Probably another good reason for the Progressives to continue their clamp-down on free speech before it's too late.
@ Judy King. Good idea about making high school students read something educational. However, I can't see someone who can't manage the directions on a TV dinner wading through Atlas Shrugged.
Ahhh… I remember when I was in my early twenties and believed all the world’s problems could be solved if A) The government would just give money to everybody, and B) we would just quit fighting wars and just love each other (and maybe smoke a doob while we’re at it). So very, very naive…. And “free” college? “Free” college would be a lot like the “free” football phones that Sports Illustrated used to give away. Yup… they were free, but they were pieces of crap, and dollars to donuts they are all in landfills right now.
@Judi King,
Atlas should be required reading, but I’m the first to admit it is a daunting task. I read it for the first (and last) time in my late fifties and thought I’d NEVER get through the dang thing. Ayn Rand had a fine idea for her book, and the message is timeless and relevant, but the story could have been conveyed in about 900 fewer pages. So…. Imagine trying to get your typical 18 year old to read a 1,400 page novel. They have a 140 character limit maximum attention span.
@Paladin,
An BS is probably going to croak pretty soon; Chillary is one of those people who live to be 127. Of course, who would the Bern pick for VP? Sharpton!!?
@John the Econ,
“10% of university grads already think that Judge Judy sits on the Supreme Court.” Pretty dang scary, but it made me wish she was there instead of Kagan or Sotomayor. And you nailed it on who ALWAYS gets stuck with the bill. This is one reason I like flat tax proposals. Should someone like Cruz, by some miracle, get elected and get that pushed through, there will be much gnashing of teeth in the entitlement community. “Whut, I has to PAY for my own FOOD??!!” Try and imagine life without the IRS. Hard to imagine, but bring it on!
Young idealist progressive: "Bernie, is it true that if elected, you will give me a free college education?"
Bernie: "Absolutely. You will just have to pay for every one else's."
Why do I keep thinking of scenes from the movie 'Idiocracy'? Are we there yet? "It's got ELECTROLYTES!"
Of all those softball "questions" that were pitched by moderators last night, hardly any of them were about specifics and would not have been answered if asked. As for all the free stuff that the upper 1 or 1.5 % are going to pay for: That's about 3.2 to 4.8 million rich folks... Assuming: (1) They remain rich, (2) They don't hide it, and (3) They stay here. Has anyone ever said how much revenue is going to be needed for all the free stuff? They could keep that to real simple math, that would be OK. This is ridiculous.
How about START with making todays education worth while, better value, and cull the ones who are there for the parties, activism and free stuff. That includes faculty. And assure there really are jobs for them.
@ Colby: I've read "Atlas Shrugged" twice. The only part I found daunting was John Galt's speech (at least the first time). If these lofos could only get this concept, then the miracle of a Cruz presidency might be possible.
Wasn't it President Johnson who stated that if we pass this (the 'Great Society' legislation and all the subsequent give aways'), that we'll have these niggers (his words, not mine) voting for us (that would be the Democrat party) for the next fifty years. Sadly he under estimated the time frame ............
Just goes to show that you can buy votes.
Yes, Anon, it was LBJ who said that. His exact words. He is also the same POS who gave the North Vietnamese the where and when of our bombing strikes that cost us so many pilots' lives.
@John the Econ, I realize your single-payer healthcare wish is slightly tongue-in-cheek and of course, wrapped around the economic aspect of it, but I do wish you would consider the rationing portion of the deal and the shortage of services. Fewer doctors would go through the arduous education it takes to get their degrees for the prospect of a bureaucratic government job. People always point to Medicare as socialized medicine and a success (if you ignore the economics of it). I would suggest a better example is the Veterans Administration. Multiply that across the nation and well, you know.......
@Colby Muenster, it's easy to imagine life without the IRS, but not so easy imagining the status quo voluntarily giving up most of their power over people and the economy.
@Rod, it doesn't take a PhD in economics to see that the math doesn't work. Like I pointed out above, the bulk of the bill will fall upon the middle class, simply because regardless of the anti-1%er rhetoric, it's where most of the money is and comes from. They can only tax the rich so much, and the can not and will not tax the "poor". Who's left?
And I wholeheartedly agree with you; They wish to cheapen college ever more by making it as bad as the public schools have been. Perhaps instead of contemplating billions more for "free" college, why don't they address the failing educational institutions that they already pay for and oversee? What they are really doing is buying the votes of the university establishment. And what's going to the the point of umpteen million more people with college degrees when there's no viable economy to employ them once they get more letters after their name?
@Shelley, yes, I have considered the inevitable effects of socialism on the future availability and quality of health care. And yes, I am fully aware of the dismal state of the health care that the government already runs. Yes liberals-in-denial, the VA is your future. But guess what? It's already happening. Just look at what a fiercely independent individual like @Stilton & family has endured dealing with ObamaCare. Even if you have decent "insurance", getting to see your doctor now takes days to weeks. Soon, it will be months, just like it is in Canada.
The thing is that I have accepted this future as the reality. I did so as soon as ObamaCare, which was specifically designed to make this all happen was passed. The GOP talks big about "repealing ObamaCare", but it's all talk. They can't repeal it because there's no way to go back in time. The insurance I liked (<$400/month and paid 100% over my deductible) and the doctor I liked are long gone, and they aren't coming back. The cancer in the system has metastasized, and the patient is dying.
"Single Payer" is just a matter of time. Sooner or later, even conservatives are going to cry uncle on this, simple because there will be no other choice for those without hundreds-of-thousands to millions of dollars in spare equity.
My only advice is that people squirrel as much money away as possible for the day when the "public option" is not available or otherwise fails to deliver. This, of course, is why "the rich" pay lip service to "single payer", but don't really worry about it. Health care will always be available to those willing and able to pay for it.
A few years ago after "The Wolf of Wall Street" came out, someone asked me why I'd want to be that rich. My response was "It wouldn't be because I have any desire to snort cocaine off some whore's ass. It would be because I wouldn't have to worry about my family becoming destitute simply because one of us got sick." It used to be that the middle class could reasonably indemnify themselves against this. Not any longer. And that's always been the plan.
That Superbowl pic is a laugh, it reminds me of the old joke;
"The king said 'SHIT!' and ten thousand loyal subjects squatted and strained".
@Rod,
I probably am way off here, but vaguely remember reading that if the gubmint took all of the money from the top 5%, it would fund the gubmint for 9 days or some such. The progressive's plan is complete fantasy that they sell to ignorant people who have zero desire to pull their own weight. Effing scary that those ignorant people who are more than willing to live on the dole are getting ever closer to having a majority vote.
@Judi King,
Yup! I read almost the whole book, but will admit when I got about 5 pages into the John Galt speech, I thumbed through it, found the end, and started reading again from that point. Maybe I'll give it another go. I wonder if there is a Cliff Notes version. That might be what one should give to the Twitter generation.
I've also read "Atlas Shrugged" twice. I also skipped most of Galt's 60-page speech the first time, but I made sure to read it all the second time, just for the sake of completeness. And the sad part about the book is, the progressives saw it as an instruction manual instead of the warning it is. They also saw "1984" as an instruction manual. Once the progressives get done spending all the other peoples' money, what will they do when their dependents (all the "entitled ones") can't get their freebies any more? The progressives will all be hiding in their gated communities, but the entitled will eventually find them. What then?
I think that when the food begins to run out the hungry will move out to raid the storehouses of those who kept a supply on hand. Our grocery stores today rely on a steady stream of edibles coming in by tractor-trailer and I doubt any have enough stock on hand to last even a week should the production and transportation system shut down. Property rights mean little to the starving. People who keep a significant storehouse of food and other necessities will be considered as "hoarders" by those who didn't. The government (if it still is active) will direct those who have food stored to bring it to government distribution points so that it may be rationed out to all. I don't see anything pretty about any part of this picture and it may come on slowly as we see price inflation with increasing scarcity of goods or, it may come suddenly as a result of war or natural disaster. We must if we are to avoid this coming mess change our behavior. Government dependency is, in the end, fatal to many and disabling to most. The best I can see for me is that I am near the end of my expected live span so don't expect to suffer for very long in any case.
@Geoff King- You're quite right. Bernie's plan is more or less to enslave the rich and take their wealth...but the rich will exercise their option to get the heck out of Dodge. The aftermath, as you say, would be a socialist nation funded entirely by the middle class. At least, until the middle class gave up and got on the dole.
@Jeremy Blaire- Sanders should be forced to stop using the word "free" and instead use the phrase "taxpayer funded." It might help wake up at least a few voters. Or not.
@Paladin- I agree; I think Bernie is a well-meaning idiot who at least has misguided integrity. But Hillary is just bad news; an evil, power-hungry harridan.
@Pete (Detroit)- Good for you. Although I fear that today's high school graduates struggle with any literature longer than a tweet.
@Fred Ciampi- I mentioned above that I think Bernie is at least sincere in his socialistic beliefs. That being said, he has an absolutely amazing inability (or unwillingness) to do basic math.
@John the Econ- When I hear "free college," it translates in my head to "the end of meaningful education in America." It will be considered discriminatory for any privileged minority to receive a failing grade - and so no one will fail. Or learn. Or be ready for a job.
Regarding which party black Americans should be voting for, I agree that neither party is any damn good for them. I guess I was wishing that the GOP might become that party. But you make an enormously important point when you bring up the effect of unchecked illegal immigration on the black Americans who compete for those jobs.
In the recent Dem debate, Bernie said that he'd help black Americans by "creating millions of jobs." Of course, we already know that the government sucks at creating jobs. But he then ignores your point that "millions of jobs" already exist which are going to illegal immigrants. Furthermore, the reason that many of these are considered "the jobs Americans won't do" is because even our current degree of socialism gives those Americans incentive to choose not to work. That needs to change.
@John the Econ- Great points throughout about who really pays all taxes: the people. And per your example, the "poor" may get some dough kicked back to them, but the bulk of the collected money will go to shore up the Washington power structure. And the rich and politically connected will continue to fiddle while the middle class burns.
@Judi King- I think I remember a better time for the middle class. But it was a long time ago...
@John the Econ- Excellent dissertation on what will happen when people have the option to live comfortably by simply existing and not working (albeit not for very long). And the scenario you describe in which a person manipulates (legally and ethically) their income downward in order to minimize taxes and maximize benefits is exactly what I'm already doing (and yes, it DOES give me time to write this blog).
@John Ortmann- I wonder if a "graphic novel" (we used to call them comic books) version of Atlas Shrugged might get more traction amongst the young? I know there was recently a movie trilogy of the book, but I think it got less than stellar reviews for being long and talky. Which, of course, is probably unavoidable.
@Colby Muenster- Youth is the time for well-intentioned, naive idiocy. I don't blame the young for being stupid (I was myself), but I do blame the Democrat politicians who are old enough to know better, but shamelessly take advantage of youthful voters (I think of it as statutory vote rape). I must admit, Islamic scholar Yusuf Islam did a good job of pointing out the disparity between youthful ignorance and the hard-won wisdom that comes with age in his song "Father and Son." Of course, back then he was still called Cat Stevens.
@NVRick- Bingo!
@PRY- Substitute "other peoples' money" for "electrolytes" and I think we're there already.
@Rod- I saw a great video by Bill "Firewall" Whittle some time ago in which he did do the math. If the government takes EVERYTHING from the evil rich (100% tax rate) it would fund the government for a trivial amount of time - a handful of days or weeks. But what then? The rich have been taxed out of existence, and the massive amount of revenue they supply is gone for good.
It's time's like this that I wish Aesop's Fables (in this case, the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg) was mandatory reading in schools. By the way, since it's not always easy to tell, I'm not kidding about that.
@Judi King- I'd be hypocritical if I continued talking about "Atlas Shrugged" without admitting that I've never made it through the whole book. It IS daunting - even for those of us old enough to appreciate the experience of reading words on paper.
@Anonymous- The quote you mentioned was cited in an LBJ biography, but its authenticity isn't sure. What IS sure is that this has been the Democrat playbook for generations now.
@Fred Ciampi- You'll hear nothing good from me about LBJ.
@Shelly- Bill Clinton just gave a speech praising St. Jude's Hospital (which is certainly praise-worthy), specifically because the young patients there don't pay for the services. Bill then went on to say that our entire medical system should be set up to "induce" doctors to provide such unpaid services for everyone. Oh really? And why the hell will doctors want to do that - especially since Democrats also make sure that trial lawyers can sue doctors for any perceived imperfection and destroy them? It frustrates me that we almost never hear tort reform brought up anymore as a serious way to drop medical costs (by lowering the cost of liability insurance on medical providers).
@John the Econ- In this global economy, jobs which require college degrees aren't going to go to the over-priced, under-educated graduates of a "free" college system - those jobs are going to go to kids in India, Pakistan, and China. The Internet has made all such jobs "local hires." Which is why we need to rethink our whole national attitude about college and employment.
Regarding health insurance, and my own personal struggles with it, I haven't wanted to do yet another update on my woes - but here's the Reader's Digest version: I still haven't made any progress on behalf of either my daughter or myself. I have learned that her insurance was cancelled (without warning) for non-payment. Except it turns out that she wasn't only fully paid, but had actually been over paying and had a balance in her account when her insurance was cancelled. The "uninsured" bills she ran up buying necessarily epilepsy meds and seeing her neurologist are still unreimbursed, and the person I spoke to at Blue Cross acknowledged that A) there's seemingly no reason that her insurance was cancelled and B) that in the months we've been pursuing this, no action has been taken by Blue Cross to rectify the situation. I was told that despite all of the phone calls and letters, nobody has added a single note to her file nor moved it high enough up the ladder for any action to be taken. Bottom line: it was their mistake, and they have no interest in fixing it.
As far as my insurance goes, I recently received another threatening letter than my insurance would soon be terminated unless I supplied additional proof of my income. I have already supplied my taxes, pay stubs, receipts, and related documents four times. The guy I spoke to at Healthcare.gov said "well, if you've submitted all that then just don't worry." I asked him why I shouldn't worry if I'm still getting letters threatening to end my coverage. "Well, it says here in the system that you sent something but nobody has looked at it. It takes a long time. We've got millions of people in the system."
"But," I asked, "if I need to send something else and it takes you months to review, doesn't that mean I'll run out of time?" He had no good answer for that, but said - quite insincerely - that he was sorry for my inconvenience. Perhaps I'll ask him to do the eulogy at my funeral.
And I have squirreled away enough money to take care of my family if the need arises. I call it "responsibility" while the Hillary/Bernie crowd would call it "wealth hoarding." Bastards.
@Popular Front- They really do look like a synchronized shitting team.
@Colby Muenster- Per my earlier comment, Bill Whittle did the math and got the kind of numbers you're talking about. If everything is taken from the rich (including their ability to create jobs) it will fund the government for a few days - but only once.
@JustaJeepGuy- "1984," "Animal Farm," and "Brave New World" are all books which might be easier for millenials to sink their teeth into.
@Twin- Everything you're saying is true, and frankly my biggest worry about that scenario coming to pass involves an EMP attack on our nation. Food supplies would end within days and chaos would ensue. So far, Ted Cruz is the only candidate I've heard speak about making a serious effort to harden our electrical grid against such an attack. Which is terrifying, considering that North Korea recently put a satellite in orbit. If it were a nuke, they could take us out permanently.
@Readers- I want to share Bill Clinton's exact quote (which I previously paraphrased) about healthcare from his recent speech for Hillary: "We need health care plans to induce doctors to do what they do at St. Jude, where nobody pays."
The words are important: he isn't talking about controlling the costs by changing the way insurance companies work, he's talking about doctors being compelled to work in a system where nobody pays.
But who in their right mind will even become a doctor in a system with limited rewards and unlimited liability? And the answer is: almost nobody. Which is why the future of American healthcare is that we'll be seen by computer jockeys instead of doctors; minimum-wage functionaries punching keys to access the government equivalent of WebMD - with all of the inefficiency, errors, and non-accountability that we currently see in the IRS, Healthcare.gov, and the VA.
Yes Doc. The point is that everything comes with a cost. If you do not pay, you will always get what you pay for.
Well, look on the bright side. I could be driveling on lIke Econ Man.
St Jude's says they don't charge any of the patients or their families for the care. But they don't say they don't charge patients' insurance/MEDICAID/TRICARE (if they have any).
Also, I think we can be pretty well sure everyone employed at St Jude's gets paid. Including doctors.
All y'all, I find it interesting but not surprising that "Kneepads" Bill Clinton would call for doctors to donate their time when he and The Hildabeast charge $245,000.02 for a short speech which lends absolutely nothing to the company of the folks who are footing the bill ........ except for political favor down the road.
Stilt, you just HAD to say ' synchronized shitting team'. Now I have to find some mind erasing bleach; also called moonshine. Oh, God, it's going to take eons and gallons to get that vision out of the annals of my memory circuits. Oh, the humanity!!! Every time I walk through a cow pasture now I can think of the nice singing group.......... Mooooooooo
That's rich. The couple who charge a minimum of a quarter-million dollars for 30-minute calorie-free speeches think doctors should work for free.
I can understand why the Clintons say these kind of silly things. (Clearly, the syphilis is running free in Bill's head) What I don't understand is why they don't get laughed off the stage when they say them.
This just in:
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia dies at 79
So it looks like Obama will get to replace a constitutionalist with another non-intellect of the left. Another dark day for freedom...
@β male #1- I applaud you for being concise, but I'd be remiss if I didn't rise to the defense of John the Econ's posts. They're sometimes lengthy, but there's never an ounce of fat in them. Quite the contrary. I'd be reading HIS blog if he weren't kind enough to appear regularly on mine.
@Dan- Exactly. Somebody is paying the bills at St. Jude's (including many people who give donations). The idea that those among us who are most capable of providing valuable services should be the ones compelled to offer their services for free is appalling.
@Fred Ciampi- Let us not forget that when Hillary formulated "Hillarycare," it was done without the input of a single doctor. That should tell us everything about whether such "healthcare reform" is about actual medical care or pure political power-grabbing.
@John the Econ- I'm in a state of shock about the loss of Scalia. I was just summoning my strength to watch the GOP debate when I got the news, and I think it's left me with so little hope - at least for tonight - that I can't watch the infighting and bombast. Scalia was a great man, and our nation's loss is immeasurable.
And to think of the liberals 'dancing in the streets' sickens me and reminds me of the Arabs dancing in the streets after 911. It's a sad day for our country.
"Somebody is paying the bills at St. Jude's"
Ironically, I'd suspect a large percentage of St. Jude's funding comes from 1%ers; the kind of people that Bernie and his followers would like to be rid of. So once they're vanquished, just who will get the tab? Again, the "middle class"...
Scalia's replacement: Already have seen the unhinged left suggesting Barack Obama himself!
@Fred Ciampi- I'm seriously depressed right now about Scalia's death. There were already too few people holding the line for our country and values. No words.
@John the Econ- Even apart from the wealthy who give generously, I've seen studies that conservatives of all income levels are better about making charitable donations than liberals.
Regarding Scalia's possible replacement, I just posted this cartoon on Facebook (though don't know if the link will work here).
Rip your Honor and thanks for all you did.
I am sure they is a gay Muslim already picked to replace him.
Since Clarence Thomas had his race pulled for being conservative I am sure black will also be a requirement.
We are screwed.
He will make a temp emergency appointment when the senate breaks for lunch claiming they were not in session and the court with their new temp member will agree.
Yes Doc The link worked - very good.
I think LBJ's words were more likely "this'll git the Nigra votin' Democrat for the next two hunnert years".
I think I heard a number of $19 trillion as the cost of all the liberal proposals from Bernie. That is surely rough but let's just use it. 1.5% of 320 million US population is 4.8 million rich folks(call it 5 ) and 19 trillion( oh what the hell call it 20) 20/5 is 4 and the difference in trillion vs millon is 6 zeros. So the average ""1.5 percenter" rich person is going to fork over four million per year and not take action? And do it again for the sophomore year, etc. Yeah, right.
"Even apart from the wealthy who give generously, I've seen studies that conservatives of all income levels are better about making charitable donations than liberals."
Quite true, and without exception. And in fact, the least charitable countries are socialist. After all, when you're paying 50-to-90 percent or more in taxes to the government to solve every problem, why should you give anything to charity? And yet, they have the same problems we do.
Post a Comment