To listen to crazy Larry, I didn't know who he was eulogizing, Theo or Keith?

"He did more than was asked from any son!" WTF? I took care of my dad when he was dying of ALS, I cooked his meals, I arranged his medications, I got him to every appointment, I did all the cleaning, cooking, shopping. Not to mention keep on as a full time student and working weekends at a amusment park. What have you been doing Keith? WE DON'T KNOW! Now granted, my bitching is aimed at Crazy Larry for giving Bathtub boy sainthood, but there are sons and daughters who went through (and are going through) worse than I did. So Mr. O'Donnell, SHUT THE HELL UP!

what is the nexis between KO dad passing away, and the HCR in congress? I meanisnt KO a Millioiare? Im sure his dad has medcare? SO I want to know the point KO is making?

I have to say, unlike KO, I have class may Mr>Olbemann Sr rest in peace. Im sure if this about Bill O talking about his dad passing away Ko would find some mean nasty joke to make.

OMG NOW Mike Moore is on pushing for more, and this bill hasnt PASSED yet!

Yukeees

Hey fatso go oin biggest looser! Uggg a walking taking example of heart disease and diabetis!

Keith wants to forward the lie that if we pass Obama care, we'll get the same health care congress and the president gets. There is no way that could happen. Keith also wants to forward the concept that his father's only chance was passing Obama care. To Keith (and the other democrats) the ends justify the means.

Yeah tonight's show was a joke. From O'Donnell, praising "Theo" and the "bravery" of KO. Yeah, whatever...cry me a river.

Then they wheel out "Fatso" Moore, who after all these years still can't get a wardrobe, talking about Wall St. and the bankers.

I thought it was funny when they began of course talking about health care and who ole "theo" would've been alive if he had the same coverage as Canadians. Well wasn't some promment Canadian offical down here a few weeks ago getting medical treatment in....AMERICA!

Moore even said what is going to be passed wasn't right and was a mess. That's why they shouldn't pass it at all.

And of course, the final straw to really get at your emotions tonight was what I think was a "plant" phone call from the lady who wrote Obama from Ohio on her condition. Her brief and obviously "scripted" answers make me think it was all a "plant" to lure in ones on the edge thinking how much we need this reform.

Then of course "Fatso" pulls out a checkbook and gives the first dontation to Theo's fun through the Free Health Clinics. Like Crazy Larry, I thought it was something right out of the Jerry Lewis Telethon, all that was missing was a drunken McMahon and the timpani.

Michael Moore preaching health care is like Tiger Woods preaching monogamy.

Death Panels. According to Obamacare, the enormous amount of money spent on prolonging Mr. Olbermann's life was a waste. More money was spent on health care in Mr. Olbermann's final days than was spent on his health care during his entire life... and for what? More suffering and painful surgical procedures with no reasonable chance of recovery?

Keith, your father is a prime example of what Obamacare is lobbying against: Spending huge amounts of money on health care for the elderly with little expected benefit.

But, I suppose, YOUR father was an exception to the rule.

Aside from Keith, Larry, and Michael using the death of his father to make a political point, my condolences go out to Keith and his family.
My condolences also go out to those that lost their lives during this weekend's Nor'easter. Here's also hoping that those that don't have power back yet get it back soon. Mine went out at 8:56 Saturday night and returned at 6:45 last night. I spent Sunday afternoon through early yesterday evening with a friend that had power.
Now, back to OlbyWatch, already in progress...

I'm sorry but I really don't give a rat's ass that Keith's dad has died. I've said it before and I'll say it again..if I were related to him I'd want to be off this planet too. Trust me..he's gonna bounce back.. Guarantee you he'll skip out on his "job" to make it to opening day and he'll claim he needed the time off because it was so stressful and needed to decompress after losing daddy... BULLSHIT.

He's spewed so much hate turn about is fair play. so kick him while he's down...

Keith Olbermann No class -- all ASS

Crazy Larry is just as bad as Keith. Look, we all know that 11 yr old Rodney Allen Ripey look a like was and is a shield. I appluad Beck, Rush and Malkin for calling this kid out.

And yes Larry, if I was Rush I would tell that kid that yeah, by the time HC kicks in 2014 your mom probably wouldn't make it.

Just go away Larry ok...shouldn't you be banging that hot wife of yours, Kathryn Harrold.

The Crazy Larry plea to Rush to apologize to the little kid threw me over the edge tonight -

Who are the dispicable people who use these kids anyway?
Each sob story has a local solution, not a requirement to enslave America like some Euro mommy state.

Crazy Larry just doesn't get it. I am not sure if enough do.

Whine and complain about Insurance Company behavior.
HEY LOSERS (congress), it's your f$%#ing rules. Fix 'em by getting rid of them. Try getting out of the way and health care will be like buying a slurpee at the 7-11.
Don't you get it yet? Whatever you control costs more, uncontrollably more, BECAUSE THERE IS NO MORE INNOVATION.
Look into how the supply of service providers are restricted, by law I might add. (hint, NO INNOVATION)

And use that stupid Commerce Clause for something it was meant for, for a change.
And 3rd party payor, hey, maybe you'd like to address that and return insurance to what its good for, mitigating risk, not buying the daily groceries.

HCR may be fine, but if the Constitution precludes it, it doesn't matter how many little kids are paraded in front of the camera, it can not legally be done this way. The Constitution was written specifically to keep the government in check, from ensnaring the public in schackles for eternity. ENOUGH, LOSERS.

They've (big government types) pushed every cause through to a right (education, soc sec, medicare, etc) maybe, just maybe, now it stops.
If you (DEMS) want to change it, get an amendment passed.
Or do what is legal/constitutional.

For the rest of you, check in and read the SIMPLE constitution.
It's there to LIMIT government, but only if you don't let them twist its meaning.

Let me give you a simple example -
GUNS, they're in there.
Health Care, not in there.
Abortion, not in there.
Free Speech, in there.
Right to be heard, not in there.
INCOME TAX, amendment (good grief, that should say it all)
Anything not in there can not be done by the government.
Anything not in there is a right of the people (as individuals)

These people need to be defeated.
----------------------------------------
Focus on freedom.
Focus on the individual.
Focus on limiting government, some things are nice, but sorry, you'll need to do them yourself.

the opening is there, take it

"GUNS, they're in there."
Kinda
"Health Care, not in there."
Might fall under a few sections. So kinda.
"Abortion, not in there."
Agree
"Free Speech, in there."
Not really (the FCC is the most obvious example of this)
"Right to be heard, not in there."
Agree
"INCOME TAX, amendment (good grief, that should say it all)"
Brought to you by a Republican politician, IIRC.
"Anything not in there can not be done by the government."
Implied powers
"Anything not in there is a right of the people (as individuals)"
And it seems like corporations and unions have more rights than people nowadays

GUNS, they're in there."
Kinda
Please explain to me How "... the right of the people to keep and bear arm shall not be infringed" is Kinda?

"Health Care, not in there."
Might fall under a few sections. So kinda.

"Promote the general welfare" not PROVIDE the general welfare

"Abortion, not in there."
Agree
"Free Speech, in there."
Not really (the FCC is the most obvious example of this) regulated it is our duty to control the regulators

"Right to be heard, not in there."
Agree
"INCOME TAX, amendment (good grief, that should say it all)"
Brought to you by a Republican politician, IIRC. agree

"Anything not in there can not be done by the government."
Implied powers, again The 535 Members of Congress and the appointed supreme court are OUR employees not the other way around. Allowing them to imply and excercise that they have more poewer than they do is never a good thing.

"Anything not in there is a right of the people (as individuals)"
And it seems like corporations and unions have more rights than people nowadays Because we allow it. Bigger Goverment and Goverment programs are not the answer.

To sum it up People are responisble for themselves, we should never look to the Goverment to create or improve our lives, The social saftey net is just that minimal and a last stop.

""GUNS, they're in there."
Kinda"

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That's kinda? Are you serious? I'm am floored, absolutly floored, by the stupidity of that staement.

""Health Care, not in there."
Might fall under a few sections. So kinda."

Where? My God, are you really that out of touch with our constitution? Are you a non-American and therefore have a reason to be this out of touch? Seriously, what is wrong with you?

""Free Speech, in there."
Not really (the FCC is the most obvious example of this)"

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I can't believe this is what has become of this country.

""Anything not in there can not be done by the government."
Implied powers"

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

THERE ARE NO IMPLIED POWERS!!!!! That's just some bullshit phrase progressives made up to try to justify the horendous abuse of power they were perpetrating on america! Show me where there is anything like an "implied powers" clause in the constitution.

I can't even begin to express how angry it makes me that anyone in this country can be so ignorant of the laws that govern them. Read the constitution for once in your live and stop buying the utter crap that the liberals and progressives are shoveling out these days.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Infringed by whom?

The First Amendment only applies to Congress.

"That's just some bullshit phrase progressives made up to try to justify the horendous abuse of power they were perpetrating on america!"

That's a bipartisan effort. Both the Democrat Party and the Republican Party have been contribution to the growth and expansion of an inefficient government.

"The First Amendment only applies to Congress."

The right to bear arms is the second amendment.

"Infringed by whom?"

Well, any government authority, I guess.

Then there's this from the 14th amendment:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Which is generally interpreted to mean that state governments cannot pass laws that overrule the federal government, which means if Congress can't do it, the states can't either.

Note the phrase says no "state" shall, even though in practice it also has bound city, county and other government bodies other than the "state." It also wouldn't apply to Washington D.C., but equal protection binds them as well since any DC governments can only be empowered at the consent of Congress.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Let's not forget this nugget from MSNBC's David Shuster (known as "Robin" around these parts): "Most people in their right-thinking mind know that the Tenth Amendment is a bunch of baloney."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2009/09/11/msnbcs-shuster-tenth-amendment-baloney-issue-appeals-right-wing-fringe

Yeah. I'd like to see a justification on how guns are just "kinda" in the constitution.

And I'd like to know what sections health care would fall under.

And I'd also like a deeper explanation about why the presence of the FCC negates freedom of speech, to the point where it is "not really" in the constitution. If anything you would be arguing that the FCC is unconstitutional if that's your position. Not that the FCC makes it so freedom of speech is "not really" in the constitution.

Also. Infringed by whom? The government. If you're gonna say "just congress" I'll direct you to the 14th amendment.

In regards to MKDAWUSS,

Nobody, but nobody, is that stupid. He's doing it on purpose. He has to be.

"The First Amendment only applies to Congress."

What. The. F***. Are. You. Talking. About.

""A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Infringed by whom?"

Infringed by anyone! Wether it's your neighbor, city, county, state or federal government, your right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!! How hard is that to understand?

"The First Amendment only applies to Congress."

Are you saying that because the first admendment states that only congress can make no law abridging freedom of speech that the other branches can? That under this amendment that the other branches can infringe on free speech? Again, what the hell is wrong with you? You understand that there are three branches of government and only ONE is called the legislative (i.e. the one who writes laws)? The other two are the executive that enforces laws but does not write them, the judicial determines the constitutionality of laws, BUT DOES NOT MAKE THEM! How can this not be clear to you?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

You know what that is? That's the 10th amendment. Notice that it says any power not delegated to the United states, a.k.a. the federal government, is the states or people to deal with? Well guess what, the second ammendment says the federal government has sway over free speech and the first amendment over owning guns and they are not allowed to infringe on either one. Learn some basic civics.

I think the preceding conversation(s) makes it VERY CLEAR the Constitution must be viewed as literally as possible or soon (now) it means nothing.

It's simple, read it, live it or lose it.

These people need to be defeated.

Focus on -
-------------------------
L_imited government
I_ndividual
F_reedom
E_ternal vigilance

I switched the order of amendments in the last paraghraph there but hopefully you know what I meant

"The other two are the executive that enforces laws but does not write them,"

Executive orders

"the judicial determines the constitutionality of laws, BUT DOES NOT MAKE THEM!"

Ever heard of "judicial activism?"

"Infringed by anyone! Wether it's your neighbor, city, county, state or federal government, your right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!! How hard is that to understand?"

Then what's all this about "illegal possession of firearms" that I hear about from time to time?

"'The First Amendment only applies to Congress.'

What. The. F***. Are. You. Talking. About."

The FCC is clearly not subject to the First Amendment, and neither is the Supreme Court.

Read the First Amendment again - "CONGRESS shall not..." It's a "thou shalt not" for Congress and Congress alone.

Keith Olbermann once did a nice job of explaining the FA.

Executive Orders

Executive Orders have two main functions: to modify how an executive branch department or agency does its job (rule change) or to modify existing law, if such authority has been granted to the President by Congress. Executive orders are not mentioned by the Constitution, but they have been around a long, long time. George Washington issued several Presidential Proclamations, which are similar to EO's (Proclamations are still issued today). EO's and Proclamations are not law, but they have the effect of statutes. A typical modern Proclamation might declare a day to be in someone's honor. Historically, they have had broader effect, such as the Emancipation Proclamation. A typical EO might instruct the government to do no business with a country we are at war with. Executive orders are subject to judicial review, and can be declared unconstitutional. Today, EO's and Proclamations are sequentially numbered. The average president issues 58 EO's a year. As of March 13, 1936, all EO's must be published in the Federal Register. The first to have been so published was #7316, by President Roosevelt.

"Ever heard of "judicial activism?""

My brain is starting to hurt. Isn't one of the bedrock principal bedrocks of conservatism that judicial activism has no place under our constitution? Are you suggesting that the act of judicial activism excusses judicial activism? Judicial activism is bad, pure and simple. It should not happen under liberal judges nor under conservative judges. It has no place in a republic.

"Then what's all this about "illegal possession of firearms" that I hear about from time to time?"

What you are hearing is liberals and progressives violating the constitution. Again, just because they have violated the law in the past and continue to do so today does not make it right.

"Keith Olbermann once did a nice job of explaining the FA."

I have no idea what Olbermann said about the first amendment but I do know that if it came from his mouth it will be utter bullshit.

Plus I already explained why it said congress and only congress, they are the only ones allowed to make laws.

The paragraph on EO's is not mine but came from http://www.usconstitution.net/choose.html

"The FCC is clearly not subject to the First Amendment"

The FCC is an agency created through an act of Congress. Any regulations it puts forth are therefore ultimately an extension of Congress. Thus, any action it takes is the equivalent of Congress making the action, and thus binds it to the dictates of the Constitution.

"and neither is the Supreme Court."

The Supreme Court isn't supposed to be making laws. Judicial Activism is measure of the court re-interpreting existing law in order to achieve an end that wasn't intended. Remember, though, that the court has no enforcement authority. Also, the court system is controlled by congress, which also sets the number of Supreme Court members. So, what the courts decide is an extension of Congress as well.

Unless your point is that there are ways around the letter of the law. Which, of course, there are. But I assume you aren't outright advocating using legal trickery as a means of circumventing justice. You know, like not actually voting on a major entitlements bill in order to pass it.

The boys at Media Matters are at it again. This time they're ripping Fox News for showing results of a survey posted at the New England Journal of Medicine website that indicated nearly half of doctors would quit medicine if Obamacare passes.

So MediaMatters claims they called the NEJM, and got them to say it wasn't their poll, but an e-mail survey by a sister company. That just happened to be on the NEJM site? Curiously enough, the page listing the poll results now contains a letter saying the poll wasn't connected to the NEJM.

AND, they are attacking the survey itself as "promotional material" for a medical recruiting firm. And it's not a scientific poll, yada yada.

To top it off, Media Matters and its commenters then say that the Fox News shows that discussed the poll were purposefully lying about it ... AS IF THEY HAD MADE UP THE SURVEY IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Wow. Let's review. The poll was posted on the NEJM site. Reporters talked about the results. The results aren't good for Obamacare. Media Matters contacts NEJM and suddenly has an exclusive up that the survey isn't connected to the NEJM (so who knows what was said in that conversation. "Take down the survey or we'll get Soros to smear you.")

OK, probably not that conspiratorial, but you get the gist of it.

Let's not forget that the survey itself is real. Not necessarily scientific, but it bears the responses of a pool of 1000 doctors, and there are some drastic anti-Obamacare numbers reported by the survey.

Isn't this the typical liberal tactic on this issue? Instead of addressing the concerns of some of these doctors (or the people in general), the solution is to discredit those who oppose the bill? Or even question it at all?

I miss you, America. I hope we can meet again someday.

we've missed you america 47000! i just wish i could write as concisely and well-reasoned as you do!(i'm better at cheap shots and venom) i shoulda been a lefty!

MKDAWUSS. Even if we cede your points (which is EXTREMELY generous) there is still a gaping hole in your logic.

It wouldn't follow that, judicial activism, executive orders, and the FCC invalidate the constitution. Based on your argument, what would follow is that those things are unconstitutional.

MKDAWUSS posted on March 17, 2010 6:05 PM:

""Health Care, not in there."
Might fall under a few sections. So kinda."

MK, Illinoisduckkiller's response just below yours:

"Promote the general welfare" not PROVIDE the general welfare"

counters your "kinda" assertion pretty well. Do you have anything further to counter?

MKDAWUSS further posted on March 17, 2010 6:05 PM:

""Anything not in there is a right of the people (as individuals)"
And it seems like corporations and unions have more rights than people nowadays"

MK, could you elaborate more on why you believe that about corporations and unions?

And now...the idiot, is running Special Comments to talk about HC. Get the hell out Keith. Still talking 'bout "Theo". Uh..."Theo" is dead.

HC will be shot DOWN.

I feel like the Emperor from Star Wars, and I quote.

"The time has come. Execute Order 66."

Lets roll House and Senate, wake up.

I think this is a repeat of his hourlong Special ED comment of a few months ago.

Stupid then, stupid now.

He forgot to look at the life expectancy and standard of living of those now in the 2nd and 3rd class neighborhoods vs yesteryear.

00Ps

Betcha the PMSNBC execs are wondering how they will be able to squander their whole profit sharing checks next month, now that audience magnet is back.

I wonder if Keith is dumb enough to think that Obama care would have extended Theo's life?

Fastest hour in television !

Who does this jack ass think receives the money the insurance companies collect on policies?

Tonight's Speshul Propaganda was originnally aired back in October '09.
It is even more LAME now.

"It is even more LAME now."

Isn't it amazing when the truth is "lame?" I guess that's why certain news outlets don't let facts get in the way of a good story...

Yes, it's a little dated in some areas, but it still applies now

Keith's special comments usually consist of three things; lies, lies and damn lies.

See here and
href="http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2009/10/new_keith_olber.php#comments">here for the previous posts on the Spcial Komment.

MKDAWUSS. Just because you agree with what he is saying, doesn't mean he speaks "truth".

Keith Olbermann gave an hour long special comment where he dismissed everyone who disagrees with him as too stupid to understand the bill, or too corrupt to want the bill to go through. If you think that's an honest view of the world, you've got your head in the sand.

Well, here's something to get Keith's juices running when he (eventually) returns to COUNTDOWN TO NO RATINGS.

http://biggovernment.com/falliance/2010/03/19/freedom-alliance-responds-to-allegations-against-sean-hannity/

He's going to be on this like flies on $#!T. And that's all they have.

Wow, no matter whether you agree or disagree with his politics I'm just shocked at the lack of compassion shown by some readers after the death of ones father. Were some of you folks raised by a pack of wolves?

I certainly hope you take a look in the mirror and are able to ask yourself, "Is this the way a compassionate person would respond to someone's parent passing away who they obviously loved?"

Mr. Harris, Olby has no compassion for anyone but himself. "Poor pitiful me!" is his mantra. I'm sorry his parents are dead, but he shows no sympathy for anyone at any time ever!

To use his parents to pimp Obama Care is disgusting.

Wow, no matter whether you agree or disagree with his politics I'm just shocked at the lack of compassion shown by some readers after the death of ones father. Were some of you folks raised by a pack of wolves?
I certainly hope you take a look in the mirror and are able to ask yourself, "Is this the way a compassionate person would respond to someone's parent passing away who they obviously loved?"...Harris

Well then let me ask you, how would you react to someone whose father just died, and that someones "politics" were right up there with "Hanoi Jane" or "Mata Hari?" In other words the most anti-American "journalist" to come across this nations airwaves since the beginning of radio or TV. Would you then forget all of this person's "politics" and evil attacks on any innocent bystander that he deems is worthy of his nasty and bitter wrath simply to boost his low self esteem?

Just forget the thousand or so unsubstantiated vicious attacks he's made on everyone simply because they had the nerve to disagree with this madman's sick agenda.

I have no problem looking in the mirror, but I must ask you the same question if you also believe that in his father's death he has every right to use his father's death to boost his sick agenda.

If I had done anything near that when my father died, then THAT is the time I would have a hard time looking in the mirror. Do you think the Ape Ruler has a hard time doing the same?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: God bless his father, and God damn his son....

I for one have offered my condolences and wish Olbermann well at least on some emotional level even though my feelings for him are borderline hatred. I don't blame anyone else though who cannot do the same...because the problem is not that we disagree with his politics as you suggest...we disagree with his tactics in promoting his politics. Olbermann has absolutely no shame in who he smears or how he smears them and he has absolutely no qualms about lying, twisting the truth or spewing logical fallacies (I think intentionally sometimes).

By tester313 on March 20, 2010 7:17 PM (from the March 12 post):

"I couldn't have agreed more with Olberman's take on the crisis the Supreme Court has foisted on us. I note you all can't DISPUTE the things Olberman says about the SC ruling... but since you're too... uninformed to really understand the implications, its just easier to flap your gums and your arms and squawk because you THINK you agree with the ruling.

We'll see how y'all feel when some large company dumps poison in your schoolyard, then spend $12M. Not to clean it up, but to take out adds to defeat the local Congressional official who is calling for an investigation.

Money isn't speech. Companies don't have consciences, and they're not motivated by anything besides making money. The role Floyd Abrams plays does indeed look like the roll of a Quisling. Its just too bad whoever writes this ridiculous blog doesn't get that."

Paul Harris, another person who makes us all out to be a bunch of pricks. Where the hell are you when Olbermann is pissing all over people?

I'm sorry his mother died. I'm sorry his father died. I'm sorry it happened practically back to back. And you're right, some comments that were made here are despicable. But they're no more despicable than Olbermann.

The bottom line is Mary and Theo Olbermann raised a kid that became the asshole of assholes. It takes a lot to feel compassion for a guy like that and quite frankly, some people aren't capable of it. I'd tell them to keep their comments to themselves but as the Democratic Party loves to point out the people of this country are entitled to free speech.

I wonder if you'll have the stones to go to Daily Kos when Dick Cheney kicks the bucket and ask them if they were raised by wolves.

I hope his mother and father are resting with the lord. Too bad their son won't be joining them.

One thing we've learned throughout the years, Olby can dish it out, but cannot handle it.

It looks like ObamaCare will eventually pass tonight. The party of Thomas "the government which governs least is best" Jefferson has been high jacked by Pelosi/Soros/Holder/Olbermann. Its a dark day for America and surely we're all depressed, imagine how our founding fathers must feel looking down from heaven on a corrupt legislator passing an extremely unpopular bill to take over 1/6th of our economy?

Dont forget how you're feeling at this moment...whatever you do, carry over this emotion to November and vote these Socialists out of office.

WHOEVER RUNS THIS SITE:

We know KO will be gloating tomorrow about how great Obama is and what a great leader he is, but lets not foret that KO was against the Senate version of the bill w/o "public option."

PLEASE POST FOOTAGE OF KRAZY KEITH'S SPECIAL COMMENT WHERE HE DARES THE GOVERNMENT FORCE HIM TO SIGN UP FOR THIS HEALTH BILL.

So does anyone think that Keith will be in monday to do a victory lap?

"WE DID IT FOR THEO!!" I can hear it now.

Fox Haters Week in Review

http://tinyurl.com/yj3fm78

Re: SB_Mich at 7:51 pm:

AMEN!

1) Stock Market will fall
2) EVERYONE'S taxes will increase
3) The debt will grow out of control
4) US Dollar will weaken
5) Inflation
6) Fewer Doctors
7) More government control over your PERSONAL LIFE
8) Forcing you to buy Government Health Care
9) More government corruption and bureaucracy
10) Rationing Health Care

The only bright side is that Republicans will retake the House in November.

I already emailed my representative (she voted "Yes") and will do everything in my power (campaign, letters, phone calls) to make sure she is not re-elected.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Oh well, welcome to Amerika.

Lets not forget that KO was against the bill without "public option."

I beg those who run this site to find that video where he dares the government to lock him up for not signing up. Please post it before he comes on tonight to gloat about this terrific bill.