On health care, constructive conversation

Full story: TwinCities.com

Sen. Amy Klobuchar and former Sen. Dave Durenberger were right on the money in their column "Cost and access matter.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 9 of9
EqualCivilRights

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

"Just as disturbing, many of us Catholics have interpreted that false doctrine of separation of church and state to mean "separation of church and our daily living." Even more disturbing is the absurd insistance of the pope that Catholic doctrine should be written into our civil laws. We do not live in a Catholic dictatorship and tens of millions of Americans reject your Catholic dogma.
Resident

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

3

2

2

EqualCivilRights wrote:
"Just as disturbing, many of us Catholics have interpreted that false doctrine of separation of church and state to mean "separation of church and our daily living." Even more disturbing is the absurd insistance of the pope that Catholic doctrine should be written into our civil laws. We do not live in a Catholic dictatorship and tens of millions of Americans reject your Catholic dogma.
and, we do not live in a socialist society and tens of millions of Americans reject the policies of the Obama administration!!!!
Fan of Common Sense

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

How did Obama come to be invited to speak at Notre Dame? I'm guessing it has a little bit to do with the fact that he's PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! It's kind of prestigious to have a sitting president give your commencement speech, don'tcha think?
Didaskalos

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Writer Mulry has overlooked an important point: Bush spoke at Notre Dame in May 2001, before he had ordered even a single serviceman into combat anywhere. When Obama speaks at Notre Dame, he will have already ordered servicemen into combat in Afghanistan. Where are the outraged protests over that troop deployment?

In his column "God and Man at Notre Dame," [http://catholicexchange.com/2 009/04/03/117287/] Paul Kengor writes:

"...Thus, Notre Dame’s invitation to Obama in 2009 is different from its invitation to George W. Bush in 2001. Obama vehemently rejects the Catholic Church’s moral teaching on a procedure that the Catechism calls “gravely contrary to the moral law.” Bush did not.

"A final point of contrast: In his commencement speech at Notre Dame, Bush spoke of the “God who endows us with individual rights.” For Bush, that included unborn life. When President Obama spoke of those inalienable rights in his inaugural, he conspicuously left out the word “life.” Obama candidly disagrees with Bush, as well as with Pope Benedict XVI, with the late Pope John Paul II, with the cardinals, with the bishops — with the Catholic Church.

"In protesting their college’s awarding of an honorary degree to President Obama, Notre Dame’s pro-lifers are not being hypocritical. They are being faithful to a fundamental moral teaching and policy of their Church."

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Re: "Too Big To Fail"

The letter-writer is right on the money! How interesting that the merger mania that began under Reagan has resulted in gigantic conglomerates that may well be unmanagable, as well as fearsome concentration of capital and credit in only a few hands. For decades, the Republicans never saw a merger they didn't like, in their never-ending quest to concentrate wealth and power in as few hands as possible. Now look at the result!

Trillions of taxpayer dollars, underwritten by China, wasted to prop up the results of the so-called "market-driven" political party. Wealthy bankers bailed out, as loan foreclosures escalate. Wall Street executives receiving million-dollar bonuses for making bad business decisions -- while homeowners who made questionable home-buying decisions are pilloried, and evicted so their homes may sit vacant for months or years because little credit is available for new buyers.

The bailouts appear to mostly benefit those who need them the least. Why not reinforce those bad loans at the source -- the homeowners -- thereby making the securitizations resulting from bundling their loans strong again? Why not prop up communities, instead of Wall Street players? Those players won't wind up in homeless shelters!

“We're all connected”

Since: Feb 08

St Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Apr 9, 2009
 
David F. Arons: As a cancer survivor, THANK YOU. Thank you for making a positive difference in so many lives.
Eric

Hibbing, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Apr 9, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Madaman wrote:
Re: "Too Big To Fail"
The letter-writer is right on the money! How interesting that the merger mania that began under Reagan has resulted in gigantic conglomerates that may well be unmanagable, as well as fearsome concentration of capital and credit in only a few hands. For decades, the Republicans never saw a merger they didn't like, in their never-ending quest to concentrate wealth and power in as few hands as possible. Now look at the result!
Trillions of taxpayer dollars, underwritten by China, wasted to prop up the results of the so-called "market-driven" political party. Wealthy bankers bailed out, as loan foreclosures escalate. Wall Street executives receiving million-dollar bonuses for making bad business decisions -- while homeowners who made questionable home-buying decisions are pilloried, and evicted so their homes may sit vacant for months or years because little credit is available for new buyers.
The bailouts appear to mostly benefit those who need them the least. Why not reinforce those bad loans at the source -- the homeowners -- thereby making the securitizations resulting from bundling their loans strong again? Why not prop up communities, instead of Wall Street players? Those players won't wind up in homeless shelters!
Right on.
1. "Too big to fail" needs to be replaced with a 21st century updating of antitrust laws driven by the principle "too big to ever be allowed!" Clearly we are all living thru the downside of the misguided, opposite, laissez faire approach.

2. The bailouts are garbage. Fact: There are about 8500 banks in this country, most of them community banks. Only about 10 banks (the huge guys!) are in finacial trouble. Why are we bailing out those that need to die their deserved Darwinian death? Isn't that just continuing to enable the same crap from those institutions that got us into this mess in the first place, a la giving cash to an alcoholic? Shouldn't we rather pump money into the community banks that have been doing sound business to ease the Darwinian extinction pains for main street?

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Apr 10, 2009
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Eric wrote:
<quoted text>
Right on.
1. "Too big to fail" needs to be replaced with a 21st century updating of antitrust laws driven by the principle "too big to ever be allowed!" Clearly we are all living thru the downside of the misguided, opposite, laissez faire approach.
2. The bailouts are garbage. Fact: There are about 8500 banks in this country, most of them community banks. Only about 10 banks (the huge guys!) are in finacial trouble. Why are we bailing out those that need to die their deserved Darwinian death? Isn't that just continuing to enable the same crap from those institutions that got us into this mess in the first place, a la giving cash to an alcoholic? Shouldn't we rather pump money into the community banks that have been doing sound business to ease the Darwinian extinction pains for main street?
Absolutely! There USED to be a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that would actively review the impact of proposed mergers, and would refuse to allow some to go through -- citing adverse impact on competition or excessive concentration. Since Reagan, that agency has simply been a rubber stamp "APPROVED" to every merger proposal made. Now we are enjoying the consequences.

A different poster in another thread regarding the bailout of Detroit automakers aptly observed that if we keep bailing out these dysfunctional creatures, we are going to be up to our butts in dinosaurs before too long. Same goes for these mega-banks. Why isn't the same scorn and derision heaped upon those executives that made poor business decisions that is routinely dumped upon those homeowners who made questionable home-buying decisions?

It is truly sad when the rank-and-file sprays venom on some of their own that need assistance, but remain silent when their masters obtain a thousand times more assistance for vastly more massive blunders! How many delinquent homeowners have Harvard MBAs in Residential Finance? These "professional" executives have MBAs, and decades of experience in fiscal dynamics -- yet they screwed up FAR worse than these homeowners. Yet, many get supremely self-righteous about giving troubled borrowers any breaks.
Archie

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Apr 10, 2009
 
On Health care a constructive conversation
David Arons of the American cancer Society lobbying division to RINO Durenburger..

"Dave, is there anyway your committee could get the Democrats and RINOS to raise the tobacco tax another buck or two"?

'I don't think so Dave, the states Tax collection has dropped 46 million already, and we don't want draw attention to our scam"

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 9 of9
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Ted Stevens Discussions

Search the Ted Stevens Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
U.S. Postal Service losing tens of millions ann... Jul 4 Grow Conservatism 16
HAARP project winding down: Was it all a huge c... May '14 not Angels harps 1
Secret Weapon? Conspiracy Theories Abound as US... May '14 not Angels harps 1
Conspiracy Theory Target HAARP May Be Shut Down May '14 your community 1
Justice Dept. prosecutor commits suicide while ... (Sep '10) Apr '14 yes - Im HAPPY NOW LOL 24
Toxic exposure in asbestos case (May '09) Apr '14 mike crill 32
How the Senate became the House, in 4 steps (Nov '13) Feb '14 Cat74 90
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••