Comments Posted By David R. Block
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 20 Comments
Sadly, Charles' demand of lockstep agreement with his musings for commenting privileges at his site, and his removal of folks for disagreeing or even questioning his highness is legendary.
I was removed, and I haven't the foggiest as to why, because I was removed sometime in a four week span when I had not commented at LGF.
Big Brother Charles Johnson is always watching for apostates from the Church of Charles Johnson.
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 5.12.2009 @ 16:14
MY PROBLEM WITH 'FALSE' EQUIVALENCE
Heh. Comrade John Cole. Freud would have a field day with that handle. So he self identifies as a commie now.
What is there to like about the Republican party right now? The party of torture, blown budgets and fiscal irresponsibility, warrantless wiretapping, cheap cynicism and contempt for science and the rule of law?
I'm not convinced that what was done was torture. "Blown deficits and fiscal irresponsibility." Obama's first year deficit eclipses Bush's entire 8 years. No end to the red ink in sight. Obama hasn't done much about the warrantless wiretapping. To Steal a line from Glenn Reynolds, "Hope and SAME."
What's to like about the Communist Party, Comrade?
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 11.09.2009 @ 12:18
IS 'THE END OF AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT' REALLY SO BAD?
#3
I blame Nixon and Johnson for that "ignore when inconvenient" precedent. In addition to FDR. Although some Presidents in the late 1800s were even more strict in abiding by the Constitution.
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 25.08.2009 @ 11:50
THE ROLE OF RACE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PRESIDENT
Further digestion of this piece is somewhat difficult. My known ancestry (that my mother was able to trace before she died) goes back to Europe (Prussia (Germany) specifically) in 1876, 1882, and 1885 except for one branch that she was not able to follow pre-1900. She had no family tree for her father.
That being said, I'm probably suffering from white guilt deficiency because my ancestors were not around to be part of the problem. And back in those days, it was the Democratic Party that was trying to keep the brothers down, while German descendants were busy voting for Republican candidates who weren't doing that.
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 20.08.2009 @ 13:35
I see that the Pollster site has some information by state. I wish that they had more.
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 20.08.2009 @ 13:18
HEALTH CARE REFORM TEETERING ON THE EDGE OF FAILURE
I think that we could stand a compromise between the Democratic bill and one written by Senator Coburn (OK), and Representatives Michael Burgess (TX-26), John Fleming (LA-4), and Ron Paul (TX-14).
You would have the lawyers bill and the doctors bill, respectively.
(And I may be missing some of the doctors.)
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 17.08.2009 @ 14:01
Let's see, health care costs keep going up. (R and D = Research and Develpment or Design, not Republican and Democratic.)
Basic problems include new drug introduction and how long that patent is protected. The longer the protection the longer the R and D costs may be amortized and new drug will cost less before it goes to generics and then costs even less. The shorter the protection, the higher the consumer cost, because the Pharma company would like to recover the R and D costs, and will charge what it takes to make that money until generics appear.
If they don't cover those costs (and make a little profit), then R and D will suffer, and fewer new drugs will come to market. Cap what they can make on new drugs and you essentially cap new drugs from being made in the first place.
New tests? Same basic problem. They need to pay for the R and D or it's not going to be worth the innovation. Of course, cost avoidance, in the form of malpractice avoidance, may spur the development of new tests for various conditions. That's not guaranteed, nor can one predict where development might occur. Most malpractice insurance companies don't own pharmaceutical outfits.
If Obama is squealing about "unnecessary tests" (and there for a while he was), then it is illogical (and purely political) to avoid tort reform. Of course, with politicians like John Edwards, we know why we won't see "Democrats for tort reform." Now don't we?
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 17.08.2009 @ 13:53
SHOUTING DOWN THE OPPOSITION AT HEALTH CARE MEETINGS IS NOT THE ANSWER
So if one went to their congress-critters town hall and didn't hear of the memo (which I didn't know existed until coming across the link above), are they still part of the conspiracy?
Or are they just PO'ed voters?
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 5.08.2009 @ 14:22
Tim wrote:
Leaders on the right need to tamp this behavior down, if the left reacts to their behavior with the same kind of behavior, then real widespread violence could escalate.
Yes, I realize that you banned Tim, but I wonder if he slept through the Bush administration when the right showed remarkable restraint.
Somehow I doubt it.
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 4.08.2009 @ 15:24
'THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING HERE'
Michael,
Every network has aired interviews from the White House in the Bush years. What rock did you crawl out from under? Please.
Find a full length Townhall during the Bush years from the White House and then one will have apples and apples instead of apples and cranberries. Yeah, they're both red fruit, so what?
Comment Posted By David R. Block On 16.06.2009 @ 13:53
