My top five favorite political cartoons for the week…
by Steve Benson at GoComics.com…
by Steve Sack at GoComics.com…
by Kevin Kallaugher at GoComics.com…
by Nate Beeler at Townhall.com…
ICYMI, at the Apollo Theatre, January 19…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-hDt2E8MoE[/youtube]
by Michael Ramirez at Townhall.com (click to enlarge)…
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Thankfully for the American people, the grid locked political system means the Bush tax cuts will expire and across the board spending cuts will kick in…and we’ll have a balanced budget pretty soon.
EGV,
Right, and some flying pigs just landed on my birdfeeder.
Mary – not sure if you follow the news, but the supercommittee failings trigger automatic spending cuts, and with them locked on everything else, hard to believe they’ll come to an agreement on a full extension of the Bush tax cuts – so yeah, the combo of the spending cuts, wars winding down, and increased revenue will go a long way to having a balanced budget.
EGV,
You’d be better off believing that flying pigs just landed on my birdfeeder. Its much more likely to happen than your fantasy.
Which part don’t you believe – that the Bush tax won’t expire?
EGV,
Any fantasy that we will acquire a balanced budget anytime soon, and so easily, is comparable to flying pigs on my birdfeeder. Oh my another one just arrived!
Mary – the interesting this is, if the politicians do nothing, a lot gets done on the deficit. They have to agree to extend the bush cuts or they go away at the end of the year. The triggered spending cuts were automatic when the super group failed. So the fantasy becomes a lot closer to reality with all the gridlock.
Now if we just cut old people welfare (Medicare/Social Security), we’ll have a surplus…
EGV,
I will agree on fantasy, and that is about it. Politicians from both parties spend their time in smoke filled rooms, slapping each other on the back and coming up with ways to spend our money, kiss each other’s read ends, and ultimately play the American people for idiots.
They’re called the Ruling Class, and are made up of people of both parties who have every intention of keeping the status quo. I’ll give you this tax cut if you let me spend on this or that.
Stick to the flying pigs on my birdfeeder.
Mary,
You need to get tuned into the liberal mind bending and you will see that flying pigs on your birdfeeder are not only possible but they are reality. According to EGV Obama has been under a balanced budget his entire time in office. Obama has now gone 1000 days as president without ever even passing a budget. With no budget passed that means no budget exceeded. See how that works? You could apply the same thing to the flying pigs. You have to at least admit that there are just as many flying pigs on your bird-feeder today as there were when Obama took office right?
Truth -
Please don’t lie. I’ve never said that we have a balanced budget.
Also, President’s done pass budgets. They sign them.
Ex-GOP: the supercommittee failings trigger automatic spending cuts, and with them locked on everything else, hard to believe they’ll come to an agreement on a full extension of the Bush tax cuts – so yeah, the combo of the spending cuts, wars winding down, and increased revenue will go a long way to having a balanced budget.
I wonder, though – what’s really going to be the “long way,” there? As far as a Dollar amount, perhaps, but will it really make a large percentage difference?
Isn’t it that nothing happens until next year, anyway? The usual deal is that the “real pain” is loaded on the back end, and we never really get to it.
Hi TS,
LOL. Give or take one or two. :)
EGV- Obama presidency began with stimulus and his entire presidency has been paid for by Continuing Resolutions that keep government spending at stimulus levels because his administration has not been able to pass a budget. He may not pass budgets but he does submit them and the last budget Obama submitted only got two votes period….that includes Democrats. Are you really going to try and argue that Obama is not responsible for getting his own party to work with him on passing a budget? If you are, then you might as well try and convince Mary that there are flying pigs on her bird-feeder cause it makes just as much sense.
Doug – the estimate that I found, between the Bush tax cuts and the spending cuts, is $6 trillion over 10 years. Throw in the war winding down and the economy getting stronger, and things would be pretty close.
Bush tax cuts end December 31st of this year.
Truth -
I’m saying that you said it wrong. You said Obama hasn’t passed a budget. Congress passes a budget, and the President signs it. It isn’t the other way around.
EGV, why do you want to be a stickler about a technicality and keep stressing that the president does not submit, pass and sign budgets all by himself. It is a dodge cause you do not want to hold the president responsible as the leader of the party that had complete supermajority control of government and failed to pass a budget. And the last budget he submitted only got two votes total (including Democrats). Do you blame the Democrats for not supporting the president or do you blame the president for submitting a budget that nobody (including his own party) would support. I would blame the president. Only two votes….wft…you have got to be kifdding me….what a joke….can you say ’flying elephants eating from Mary’s bird-feeder’ then?
Why be a stickler for the words? Because those are the rules! On one hand, you are saying that I’m being a “stickler” for saying the President doesn’t pass and sign budgets by himself, and then you go on and say he hasn’t been able to sign and pass a budget by himself. So you seem to be saying I’m being a pass for mentioning the obvious. Let me say it again – Obama doesn’t pass budgets himself. Congress has to pass it. And let me know, how many votes is it going to take to pass a budget? Think we’ll see a passed budget anytime soon?
Congress is massively polarized – it is why they get an approval rating that hovers around 10%. Obama’s been quite the moderate compared to all of those in congress.
If Pelosi/Reid/Obama had been able to insult Bush and balance the budget that easily, they would have done so when they had all the power.
The tax-cut myth has blinded both Parties. The Bush tax-cuts did little to stimulate the economy, and their repeal will do little to balance the budget.
Meanwhile… sudden and truly drastic spending cuts, and even the bankruptcy of Social Security and Medicare, would please the Liberals very much. The resulting economic crisis would be blamed on the Republicans, and a new socialist dictator could arise.
I would like to hope that even most Democratic politicians would rather see the country on firm economic footing rather than fall into chaos, in spite of the opportunities that chaos affords to the ruthless.
Meanwhile…. I keep lauhging out loud at that image of King Obama commanding the waves to stop, as the Republicans ride the surf of growing public opinion.
A reminder: Obama did submit a budget for consideration and it was rejected 97-0 in the democratic controlled Senate.
Jerry – and the Dems had said BEFORE the vote it wasn’t going to get votes because of the larger deficit plan being talked about at the time.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/163347-senate-votes-unanimously-against-obama-budget
Ex:
So what is he waiting for, what was his excuse before and now since then? Obama found time between his 80 rounds of golf to submit the 97-0 budget but has only had time since then to ramp up the class warfare rhetoric. By the way, that was a fine campaign speech he gave the other night.
I love all five.
What is this fascination with the “Stick ’em up! This is a hold-up!” Party? I’ll only give the time of day to the Party that at least says, in their own mealy-mouthed way: “Well, we’ll try not to waste too much money before we ask for more.”
Only those who say the right things will try to do the right thing.
Jerry – The 2012 budget appropriations were handled in appropriations bills - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget
The 2013 budget plan will be submitted around Feb 13th. Congress will no doubt fight, no pass anything, and we’ll get the automatic triggered cuts and tax hikes.
And by the way, when isn’t a state of the union about what has been accomplished and what a President would like to accomplish? What state of the union doesn’t sound like a campaign speech? Do you think in the past they’ve ignored accomplishments and goals, and just read through the phonebook or something?
Doug – the estimate that I found, between the Bush tax cuts and the spending cuts, is $6 trillion over 10 years. Throw in the war winding down and the economy getting stronger, and things would be pretty close.
Bush tax cuts end December 31st of this year.
Ex-GOP, that’s certainly significant. I question whether it will actually play out that way, i.e. it seems that usually the savings are less than expected, while outlays end up greater, and a general “rose-colored” glasses approach is followed with respect to forecasting the economy.
Even if the $6 trillion is realized, won’t it only take us 4 or 5 years to pile up that much additional debt?
Ex:
Of course the SOTU address is a spin fest. I am glad we agree on something. What was disturbing is O’s playbook showing only one play—class warfare. This is not what America is about. He talks about “fair” and in the context he uses the word it is code speak for socialism/class envy.
Before we get too far afield I need to bring this back to the reason this blog exists: abortion. I know Obama from his years here in Illinois. He is to the left of the Kennedy liberalism which is really saying something. He is an extremist proabort. And now you can add anti-conscience rights to the list. Did you see how he has declared war on the Catholic Church and all organizations that take their conscience rights seriously? Is this where you want to see your Democratic party go? Cecile Richards, the pres of PP, says she thinks his decision was a political move to garner support from women. I think just the opposite…he has awakened a sleeping dog and it is going to bite him big time.
I fully agree that every SOTU I’ve heard is a campaign speech. Heck, 99% of the time a politician opens their mouth, it is a campaign speech.
I don’t know if I fully agree on the class warfare – I think we are simply at a crossroads and need to decide what we value. Do we tax the rich at a rate we’ve historically taxed them at, or do we cut services to the most vulnerable in society. I think it is a very legit question, and one that needs to be answered. I’d rather put the tax rates of the rich back to where they were under Reagan.
I’m not Catholic – I’m Christian – so I don’t follow much of the news from the organizations. Do they take medicare/medicaid dollars?
Doug -
Actually, the increases will definitely kick in if the rates expire, and the cuts are pretty hard cuts based on the trigger mechanisms built in.
Now the question is, who is going to blink? As we get later in the year, is the GOP going to dig their heals in and say it is all or nothing? I’m guessing Obama says that we can’t narrow the deficit enough if we fully extend the cuts (and I believe he’s right).
Somebody should blink…if they don’t, well, it could get interesting.
Ex-RINO, great dodge of Jerry’s question about wether or not you think it is proprer for Obama to go after Catholic hospitals. You stating you are not Catholic so you haven’t been following Obama’s attacks on the conscience clause in Obamacare….And then to say that you are Christian and haven’t followed Obama’s attacks on the conscience clause….when the Catholic hospitals all shut down and all the indigant need to look to our government for care maybe your Christianity will kick in again.
mp, you are welcome to repost your comment on the actual thread in which the “racist and bigoted comments” were made.
truth – I don’t think it is a dodge at all – I said I didn’t follow it much, and asked a question about it.
Here’s my question then to you – if the Jehovah’s Witnesses started a hospital, and I was taken in for emergency care, do you feel that they should be able to deny me a blood transfusion based on a conscience clause?
Ex:
Rather than trying to unwind all of this myself this is excerpted from the United States conference of Catholic Bishops website:
Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, president of the USCCB, sharply criticized the decision by the Obama administration in which it “ordered almost every employer and insurer in the country to provide sterilization and contraceptives, including some abortion-inducing drugs, in their health plans….Never before has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the marketplace and buy a product that violates their conscience. This shouldn’t happen in a land where free exercise of religion ranks first in the Bill of Rights.”
Of course it is not only the Catholic Church that is affected–many Christian denominational Churches who are equally concerned about prolife issues find themselves in the same boat. And the same with any business owner who does not want to use his/her money to pay for things they find morally reprehensible…Obamacare will roll over them as well. Perhaps you think this is fine but it is a BIG DEAL that threatens to deliver a serious blow to religious freedoms and conscience protections if it is not overturned.
Many conservative prolife Catholics were very critical of the bishops cozying up to Obamacare prior to the vote that ultimately resulted in its passage. They could see what Bishops could not, namely that Obama could not be trusted. Now the bishops are feeling like the jilted bride left at the altar. After giving Obama moral cover to help in the bill’s passage this is thanks they get.
Ex-RINO, they should treat you like they treay every other patient and if it ain’t enough for you then they should call the Flight for Life and have you transferred.
truth – are you saying they should treat me like any other patient and be forced to give a blood transfusion, or should they not be forced?
Jerry – still researching this and asking questions – I just don’t want to leap too fast either way… so, is the bottom line, net-net that health insurance plans will be required to pay for birth control with no copayment?
Ex-RINO.
NO;they should not be forced to treat people using procedures that they are not trained or equipped or staffed to perform. And they should also be allowed to continue treating people who they can. It happens all the time. Hospitals fly people to other hospitals in the Flight for Life every day for treatment they are not able to perform. Is your point that you believe every hospital should be required to do blood transfusions or be shut down? Spit it out.
I’m not Catholic – I’m Christian
Ex-GOP, I hope you aren’t saying the two are exclusive. The way you wrote that implies Catholics aren’t Christians.
truth – if you ever died because a simple medical procedure wasn’t done because the doctor didn’t agree with it because of their religious beliefs – I hope your family would sue that hospital and take every dollar in the world from them. And I’d cheer them the whole way.
Eric – that was not my goal and I didn’t write it well.
Ex-RINO,
That is a really poor analogy to say the least…. birth control is NOT a life-saving procedure.
Ex-GOP: Actually, the increases will definitely kick in if the rates expire, and the cuts are pretty hard cuts based on the trigger mechanisms built in.
Hey, if they are “hard Dollar” amounts, then all fine and good as far as I’m concerned – can’t ask for more from such a pathetic Congress.
___
Now the question is, who is going to blink? As we get later in the year, is the GOP going to dig their heals in and say it is all or nothing? I’m guessing Obama says that we can’t narrow the deficit enough if we fully extend the cuts (and I believe he’s right).
Somebody should blink…if they don’t, well, it could get interesting.
Have to laugh – I have no Idea, Ex-GOP. Republicans are playing a very dangerous game with the majority of the electorate. I’m not saying that’s necessarily “right,” nor “wrong,” electorally, either – we’ve had 80 years (or more) of fiscal malfeisance – how do we even bring the BS to a stop, let alone re-pay the difference?
So truth – do you agree with me on my scenario – that there is a line, at some point, in which the rights of the patient trump the conscience of the doctor?
“that was not my goal…”
Ex-GOP, thanks for clarifying.
Ex-RNO, no I don’t agree with your scenario. I thought your scenario was ludicrous and your lack of respect for the conscience of catholic Christians is palpable. Especially since you call yourself Christian. I attribute it to your ‘Obama uber alles’ syndrome.
truth – so you are saying that a medical facility should have the right to withhold any type of treatment they see fit based on their belief system?
I’m just trying to figure out what your view is here. Are you really Mitt Romney? :-)
Ex-RINO,
If Obamacare stays law then you can be certain that the government will ration care based upon their budgeted amount and many types of treatment will be unavailable to you. When that happens; and due to Obamacare regulations; catholic hospitals will only be allowed to treat catholics. But not to worry; prior to getting the treatment you can renew your baptismal vows in the lobby with a catholic priest ;)
Truth – I don’t think you understand at all how health care works…but I’m going to give you a free pass at this point.
Regardless, health care is rationed today in the US. Let’s hope that health care reform succeeds and gives more opportunity for care to people who don’t have it now. If it fails, I think we’ll see a single payer system in the near future. Things are already close to that tipping point.
Like the system in the UK. The rationing board is refusing to pay for drugs that are proven to extend life and relieve pain of people with prostate cancer. Coming soon to a hospital near you. Welcome to Obamacare where a panel of bureaucrats decide what treatments are allowed for which people. No lifetime cap but end-of-life treatment is denied so nobody ever gets a chance to hit the cap if there were one.
I don’t think you understand at all how health care works I do understand what Sebelius and Obama said about the catholic hospitals. Either they pass out abortificients or treat nobody but catholics. I’ll excuse your ignorance this time cause you previously admitted that you have not been following the Obamacare attack on the catholic hospitals. A lot of people like you will be leaving Obamacare hospitals and getting baptized in the emergency room at a catholic hospital or flying to Thailand for end-of-life treatment. Sebellius and Obama would encourage it in their rationing panels as a cost savings measure aimed at balancing the budget and mean-while the costs of all kinds of health care will continue to sky-rocket.
truth – you continue to be tough to pin down.
Now my guess is, you really don’t believe that every patient in the US should get every drug or treatment simply because they demand it, do you? I did a quick calculation of the prostrate drug…so it is $55K a year American, and on average, it prolongs life 4 months. Do you believe, in America, every citizen should be able to have this drug if they require it?
Now, my guess is you’ll say no.
But yet you are complaining in your 10:52 post that the UK government is saying they won’t pay for it.
So are you saying you believe governments should pay for all requested health care and drugs at all times?
Now, my guess is you’ll say no.
And you’d be wrong again. I believe prescription drugs should be available to everybody that benefits from them. Making them available to more people would actually bring the cost of these drugs way down per dosage.
Interesting. Okay – so you believe essentially in universal health care when it comes to prescription drugs, correct – you believe the government should subsidize or pay for them outright if a citizen cannot pay for the drugs themselves?
Ex-RINO,
You need reading comprehension lessons. I did not say that the governement should be in the health care business at all. I merely pointed out the rationing that takes place where the government does oversee universal health care. Everybody ends up getting treated as an indigant and end-of-life treatment is the first place they cut.
Truth
So you are scolding the UK government for not paying for these drugs, but then you are saying that you do not think the government should be paying for drugs.
What?
There is no contradiction there. Government should not be taking over health care but if they do (like in the UK) then they have a responsibility to provide end-of-life meds.
I can agree with you to the morality of providing certain treatments to individuals. The US healthcare system must really anger you then as a lot of private insurance companies don’t pay for Zytiga, and in general, these sort of drugs often only can be paid for by the rich.
This whole argument you lay out though doesn’t fit with your Paul Ryan lovefest. In Ryan’s plan, rationing is how he achieves savings in Medicare – he intentionally raises premiums slower than health care costs, meaning those who have money can pay for what they need, and those who don’t will go without. That is rationing, yet you embrace that model? Where is the difference here? Are you okay with rationing as long as it is the poor that loses out?
Ryan’s plan phases in privately owned HSA’s to cover the difference.
And what happens if somebody doesn’t have money in their privately funded HSA?
So I repeat the question for you… Are you okay with rationing as long as it is the poor that loses out?
Of course not. I disagree with your premise entirely. The only rationing here is the UK’s universal health care system rationing end-of-life cancer treatment. Obamacare rationing in the US is delayed by Obama until after the election.
Truth -
So if the Government decides not to pay for a drug in the UK, it is rationing.
But if the Government decides not to pay for a drug in the US, it is good financial sense.
Go figure.