The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour

Text Size

Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour

By Jeri Thompson on 3.3.10 @ 11:35AM

Imagine — a Republican who’s actually listening.

Sen. Jim Bunning cut a deal with Democrats to release the hold he had blocking a 30-day extension of unemployment benefits and subsidized COBRA health insurance. But the impact of his stand against more deficit spending will hang over Washington for some time. When he said on the floor Tuesday night that, “If we cannot pay for a bill that all 100 senators support, how can we tell the American people with a straight face that we will ever pay for anything? That is what senators say they want, and that is what the American people want.”

The Inside the Beltway media will insist that Bunning was throwing sand in the gears of Republican political momentum, but I don’t think that American people saw it that way. To most Americans concerned about our country’s future, this latest “deal” makes the rest of Bunning’s Republican colleagues appear all the more politically cautious for not backing him up.

My guess is that some of those Republicans up on Capitol Hill flashed back to the beating that Newt Gingrich and the Republicans took for shutting down Washington back in the mid-1990s budget battle. They were focused — as they all too often are — on Washington’s echo and perception chambers. In this case, that was a mistake.

All you have to do is spend a little bit of time outside of the Beltway mentality — read state-based or local blogs and the comments on some of the larger national blogs, listen to talk radio, talk to moms in the carpool line — and you realize that Bunning’s stand was not the wild-haired maneuvering some folks in Washington made it out to be. Back in 1995, people may have been unhappy or frustrated with the Clinton crowd, but the economy was better and we were not a nation at war on two fronts, and perhaps most important, we were, compared to today, in far better fiscal shape, even if our budgets were in deficit.

If Republicans were nervous about getting behind Bunning out of fear that folks back home might revolt because unemployment checks weren’t coming, or their constituents in the hinterlands weren’t getting their local reruns of Seinfeld on their dish, then maybe they should go home and listen. It’s only anecdotal, but callers were flooding the phone lines on Fred’s radio show yesterday in support of Bunning. And it wasn’t just Fred’s show. Talk shows nationally and locally were hearing it from callers. There is a different mood out there right now. People want some sign from Washington that their voices are being heard and Bunning for a couple of days was speaking for them.

Did it backfire? It appears Bunning made his point and we’re back to business as usual. But other opportunities are going to come along where American taxpayers are going to want to hold their government accountable. This is an administration that has the worst case of tin-ear I’ve ever seen. Joe Biden says one minute he doesn’t know what the American people think, then tells us ad nauseam what they think anyway, in between saying that stimulating the economy has worked — but then again it hasn’t — all in one sitting. We have a President who has not spent one day of his life working at a private sector job that contributed a dime of economic growth lecturing CEOs on the policies they should support to help grow the U.S. economy. You have prospective political appointees who actually believe their failings, such as creating offshore tax havens for clients, are actually reasons for them to work at senior position in Cabinet level departments, since their cheating experiences will allow them to better identify other cheaters. In short, we have leaders who do not believe they are accountable.

This Bunning Budget Buster is just the latest example of Republicans being too timid by half in holding this White House accountable for the spending, spending, and more spending it is doing. Every few weeks it seems we read about another round of extenders and debt-ceiling raising and skies-the-limit promises on jobs, growth and trade. And from the Republicans? Crickets.

But there are signs some Republicans get it. Later today, Sen. Scott Brown will introduce an amendment that will return about $80 billion in unspent and uncommitted stimulus dollars to taxpayers via a lowered payroll tax. Given the trillions of debt this Administration and this Congress have put on the backs of our families and future generations, this is a nice, symbolic move. Maybe we should use this temporary “tax cut” to invest in the campaigns of conservatives who will work with leaders like Brown to get us a better return on our “investment” in Washington.

Finally, in Texas, Gov. Rick Perry won his GOP primary running away. In Washington, the cognoscenti are saying that his populist campaign, which trounced Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and tapped into voter anger over Washington’s economic and health care efforts, was evidence that voters were willing to toss out Republicans or Democrats alike if their views on such issues weren’t respected. Perry may have used Hutchison’s long-time in Washington to great political effect, but a conservative, long-time Republican governor running against a Washington controlled by Democrats doesn’t strike me as particularly “bipartisan.” Republicans voted for the Republican they felt best reflected their concerns and interests. When Republicans vote for a Democrat for that reason, we can say “bipartisanship” reigns.

About the Author

Jeri Thompson serves on the advisory board of SecureAmericaNow.org., a bipartisan foundation focused on national security issues, particularly in the Middle East.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (258) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Tim| 3.3.10 @ 11:52AM

It would be nice if somebody picked up and ran with the ball on this, but most likely it is a tactic that will be buried in an unmarked grave with Republicans helping to wipe away the footprints.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 2:25PM

I believe that Jeri Thompson has forgotten her days in Nashville when she didn't pay her bills (most likely didn't have the money) and didn't pay her physicians that provided her what amounted to free medical care. It appears the only "little" people Ms Thompson want to without benefits from are like those she used to identify with - perhaps the apple falls too close to the tree. I can imagine poor Jeri clinging to the curtains "As God is my witness, I'll never be poor again." Good for you, Jeri, but there are those of us out there who still care to help those that are.

Brent| 3.4.10 @ 2:55PM

@ Pamela - This article has nothing to do with anyone, especially Republicans and conservatives, NOT wanting to help people, "little" or "big". As Sen. Bunning asked, why can't Washington pay with current budget dollars for even ONE bill that everyone agrees on passing? You and I can't run deficit spending in our households forever, and neither can / should the US federal government. We are quickly approaching the day when this country will have to pay the piper for our fiscal overspending.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:02PM

I understand completely and agree in part, I just think we need to choose other programs to cut or not fund rather than those that are a life line the unemployed.

BobFL| 3.4.10 @ 11:10PM

pamela, Bunning was for using currently-allocated but unspent TARP funds to offset this bill. The Senate Dems refused -- they didn't want to touch their slush fund. They preferred to borrow ANOTHER $10B on your great-grandchildren's tab, rather than use the cash already borrowed from your grandchildren.

'Cause they might need that cash to buy some more votes, as November approaches.

Barry| 3.5.10 @ 8:29AM

Pamela,

The only thing more eternal than the stars in the sky are government programs. DHS has their hands in everything from agriculture to the NRC, yet the departments and programs which do the same jobs are still being funded. Personally, I'd like to see both sides of the fence show a little common sense and cut those endless drains off. Unfortunately, "We the People" keep allowing our "representatives" in Washington to screw America blind.

Kristen| 3.4.10 @ 2:56PM

So Pamela, if I understand you correctly, since someone was once down and is now up they should fork over their windfall to those who are still down? Hmm sounds like socialism to me.

Continuing to spend on ANYTHING we don't have the money for is bad policy. You can't do it in your home, why do you think any of the rest of us can or that our government should. We have to balance the budget and keep it that way.

Congratulations Bunning. Now will the REST of the Republicans get a spine?

Steve Jones| 3.4.10 @ 3:07PM

Pamela, apparently you like so many others can't see the forest for the trees. "IF" Jeri Thompson had once been down and out, she's obviously risen above that. Good for her! It's not something that "those who are" can't do for themselves. I know Fred and Jeri Thompson and I can tell you they are Good People expending exhaustive resources to help us all. I also know Jim Bunning and I can tell you that his motive had nothing to do with denying anything to "those who are". I applaud him for his stance and ask you this.....How long could you run your household and personal business with no rersources with which to pay the cost?? Perhaps you have an endless supply of other people's money, which allows you to be care free of what will happen when time comes to pay the bill. Perhaps you can do that knowing that your successors will have to deal with it, long after you have moved on to other things. Imagine that!!

Eric| 3.4.10 @ 3:52PM

Problem is Pamela, you say you want to help people but it sounds more like you want to force ME to help people. There is nothing stopping you from getting your butt out into your community, pulling together everyone you can to sponsor a neighbor in tough times. In fact, your money and time would be 78% better spent since that is a (old) conservative estimate on the amount the government wastes trying to return the money to those that need help. Who the hell wants to live in a society where "charity" is compulsory?

Marilyn| 3.4.10 @ 4:24PM

No one forgets when they are poor, but if our Government goes broke, which they already are, we are all going to know what poor really means. Nobody seems to understan you can't spend money you don't have. Our country is owned by Communist China

Freelancelot | 3.4.10 @ 5:56PM

Pamela, you're clearly an absolutely self-centered, totally subjective Liberal. We don't need any more of your kind.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:00PM

Hmm, self-centered? I think access to health care should be available for all citizens of the US, and you don't? Self-centered? you should pick another word.

Alfie| 3.5.10 @ 1:08AM

Health care IS available to everyone, now! Just visit any ER room to see the sore throats and colds and headaches. NO person is turned away. Take your blinders off! Everyone "has access" to medical care, now! But many prefer to live "on the dole" and make the government spend our tax money on the free-loaders, which most are. They work the system. The irony is that this health care plan will make them PAY or be fined for their health coverage, for the first time.. Hah! Aren't they going to just love that? Who shouldn't run the program? The obviously inept federal government. Who should not be covered? All non-citizens. Those are the two largest objections.
And abortion? No one other than the two principals should EVER have to pay for this procedure - except in case of rape, incest or a life-threatening condition. I believe that's the law. Finally: WHERE'S THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THIS????

Indy| 3.6.10 @ 6:33PM

So very true. The sad thing is, most of these get something for freeloaders don't actually understand that this isn't free, and a matter of fact are going to be legislated into buying insurance whether they want it or not.

Doug| 3.6.10 @ 10:23AM

Pamela,

You and other like minded folks are a big part of the problem we face today.

"Access" to healthcare IS "available" for ALL citizens of the US (and even the illegal aliens who have broken our laws by coming here). Don't think so? Go visit ANY E.R. in America and see who's in the waiting room !!! I know for a fact that this is the case after spending the last week at the hospital with a sick relative. Not one person was turned away for lack of insurance, in fact, one nurse told us that it's against the law for them to refuse healthcare

You DO NOT have a "right" to FREE healthcare in this country nor should you. You have a "right" to pursue healthcare by getting off your lazy butt and working so that you can buy insurance to help offset the cost of healthcare or by paying for your healthcare yourself outright. And while we're on the topic of insurance, you should not have the "right" to force insurance companies to cover "pre-existing conditions" either. That's like going to an insurance company today and wanting coverage for an auto accident you had yesterday or trying to buy coverage the day after your house was flooded or burned down.....Sorry, ain't gonna happen....grow up and accept the fact that you have "personal" responsibility for the position you find yourself in !!!

You want Socialism/Communism......Move to Cuba !!! We sure won't miss you here !!!

GMP| 3.6.10 @ 1:27PM

Pamela, we need healthcare reform.....but with everyone out of work, how doe you expect to pay for it. 36,000 people lost their jobs yesterday and the Dems make a joke because it wasn't higher. Those 36,000 no longer pay taxes which would pay for their healthcare, the companies they work for no longer have employees, so are no longer generating income they once did and paying their taxes on that income, so who's paying for this healthcare you want to give everyone? Ah....me....the taxpayer who works 3 jobs and still barely makes it. Well really my son, maybe and my grandkids, because the gigantic evidence of what balderdash this plan is won't become evident until that generation is of age and may be working (if there are any jobs left, because we may not have any companies left to hire them) and all this tax is coming out of their checks.

Sherry| 3.4.10 @ 7:47PM

Pamela: I've read your comments and am supposing? that you knew Ms Thompson "when". I do NOT have insurance. I live in Tennessee. I am not old enough for Medicare. My husband lost his job of many years in Feb 2009. We are without insurance but are TOTALLY against the Democrats version of health care "reform".. This type of reform will only bankrupt our country. Reform is needed. Throwing away money that we do not have is Reckless!! I pray for the defeat of ObamaCare. Our Congress needs to start over and "fix" the problems one at a time.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 8:59PM

No, didn't know her. However, since my husband is a physician, I do know many who did what she did (sued and wages garnished) ran up high medical bills and didn't pay them. Who do you think really pays when that happens. We all do. One more point, I don't see many individuals who qualify by their age refusing Medicare. It works, what is Medicare but a FEDERALLY FUNDED HEALTH PROGRAM? (And by the way, after I married "up" I then went to law school, instead of riding on my husband's white coat tails)!!!!

EVELYN HENDRICKSON| 3.5.10 @ 5:24PM

EXCUSE ME PAMELA BUT WE PAID INTO THE SOCIAL SECURITY FUND ALL MY HUSBAND'S AND MY WORKING YEARS. IT MAY BE ADMINISTERED BY THE GOVERNMENT BUT IT WAS OUR MONEY THAT WENT INTO IT, NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S! THEY JUST MANAGED TO SQUANDER THE FUND BEFORE IT EVER GOT TO THE SENIOR CITIZENS. WHY DON'T WE GIVE SOME MORE OF IT TO THE ILLEGALS IN THIS COUNTRY.

George McVay| 3.6.10 @ 11:59PM

Refuse Medicare? And risk losing our Social Security benefits? Nope, don't think so. In case you don't realize it, medicare has become more or less compulsory if you wish to receive SS benefits. So, no, you won't see very many people refusing it. You are missing the big picture. I don't think anyne is opposed to anyone else having their healthcare insurance; the question is, are you prepared to saddle your kids, grandkids and great-grandkids with the mountain of debt this reform will create? i personally think we all should be ashamed to even consider it. Our kids deserve more responsibility from us than that.

AuntieMadder| 3.5.10 @ 3:39AM

Sherry, my situation is similar to yours: unemployed, broke, without medical insurance, and living with chronic pain due to cervical spinal stenosis and cervical rheumatoid arthritis. I'm absolutely against nationalized health care, too. The final outcome won't be good health care for me and you. Instead, it will reduce health care in the US from the best in the world to mediocre at best. Further, it will, as you stated, bankrupt the country. That's not the legacy that this auntie wants to leave for her nieces and nephews and their kids and grandkids.

The health care overhaul that the Democrats are attempting to force upon the country isn't necessary or wanted because it's not health care that needs reformed. Again, we have the best health care in the world. It's the cost of medical insurance and the cost of health care that need reformation. Cost reduction could be addressed with only a few, simple, short bills. The complete government takeover of health care is not the solution to the problem.

As for me, I'll be praying for the defeat of ObamaCare, too, and toughing it out. I'd rather do without and suffer through today than force young Americans, some who aren't even born yet, to suffer and do without for generations to come.

Derek| 3.5.10 @ 5:40AM

While helping people in need is a noble thing, there is nothing in the Constitution that allows you to mandate to me, by force, who I help and how I will do it.

Don't tell me of Jeri Thompson or anyone else that thaey should spend their hard earned dollars helping someone because you think it's a good idea.

Doug | 3.6.10 @ 11:22AM

The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke.

Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.

Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.

The “War on Poverty” started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to “the poor”; it hasn’t worked and our entire country is broke.

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - you’ve had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.

Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the “Stimulus”, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working, although ACORN appears to have found a new bank: the American taxpayer.

And finally, to set a new record:
“Cash for Clunkers” was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress’ generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.

So with a perfect 100% failure rate and a record that proves that “services” you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?

20% of our entire economy? Are you crazy?

Let me get this straight.

We're going to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes,
with funding administered by a Federal Reserve Treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke and already 12 + Trillion Dollars in debt...... What could possibly go wrong?

George McVay| 3.7.10 @ 12:03AM

Bravo! Well said. And all too true!

@refinnej| 3.18.10 @ 4:50PM

*applause*. Very well stated.

basur | 10.27.10 @ 9:19AM

Where were the so-called fiscally responsible Republican standing behind Bunning.

Where was the hapless McConnell (the owl), McCain and the rest of the inside-the-beltway RINO frauds??

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 12:01PM

It is time we all recognize that, yes, this is the hill we are ready to die on. Bunning is to be commended for taking this stand.

Free men everywhere are tested from time to time by the forces of tyranny. How they answer that call determines the fate of their descendants for generations to come. Like Cato we should stand at whatever cost against the impending dark night of tyranny and for the light of Freedom. If we perish in the event then history will at least record that there were those who understood the value of liberty and our grandchildren will not curse our names for failing to make the attempt. By such effort we may yet prevail.

Kenneth Allen| 3.3.10 @ 12:21PM

For a real 'profile in courage' watch/listen to New Jersey Governor Chris Christy. Here is a man laying it out forcefully, but respectfully, to the assembled mayors. No more overspending, no more taxes, we have to cut.

Jim bunning has been invisible for years. Now he gets religion!
Christy campaigned (and won) on the issues of overpromising and kikicing the can down the road.

http://radioviceonline.com/new.....budgeting/

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 12:24PM

Finally we see the actions of a true fiscal conservative. Kudos to Bunning. I don't like the guy, but he's not going for reelection, so he's free to do what is right -- and he did. If he had acted like this all along, I would have liked him a lot better.

This action is indicative of the nature of our election system whereby we have no term limits so pandering is rampant. Congress votes for reelection, not on principle. This says that both Democrats and Republicans want everything and are willing to pay for nothing. That is the antithesis of fiscal conservatism.

Richard H. Davis| 3.4.10 @ 10:46AM

Holding up $10 billion for a few days after voting for trillions in unfunded spending does not constitute a "fiscal conservative" in my (liberal) book. I would support term limits of something like 20 years, but I would extend that to Supreme Court judges. I would support a balanced budget amendment of sorts, which would allow almost unlimited spending in times of high unemployment, but would require surpluses in good times. The problem would be enforcing it, as the courts are reluctant to get that far into the weeds, and Presidents and most members of Congress are perfectly willing to spend any amount, any time to enhance their re-election chances.

tom Hooker| 3.7.10 @ 7:24PM

Bob, Where was your angst, Bunning's angst, and angst from the far right when George Bush pissed away $700 in Iraq to corrupt companies like Halliburton and Blackwater? Where was your angst when Bush gave $1.5 trillion in tax cuts to millionaires when we were running budget deficits?

Franklin| 3.3.10 @ 12:25PM

I am currently unemployed. Most of the day yesterday I spent trying to get thru to Mr Bunning's phone to let him know that I'm proud of him.

The Republicans and Independents that railed against him for doing what the American people want him to do should be ashamed and scared for their jobs.

The Republicans that agreed with him that were silent - get a back bone!

The Democrats are just hopeless. There's no getting thru to them.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 2:30PM

Perhaps your time would have been better served looking for a job!

Mike| 3.4.10 @ 2:53PM

Pam, that's a cheap shot. My wife and I are both looking for work, and so far we've been able to score one part-time job. Though the leads keep coming in, there are so many people chasing the same leads here in Northern Michigan.
Nonetheless, we keep up with the news and what's going on with this abominable administration, because we care about our nation, just as Franklin does.

Colleen| 3.4.10 @ 5:35PM

It's an extemely cheap shot Mike, but what do you expect? Pam just got her giblets roasted over an open fire of her own hypocricy above, she had to find some way to vent it out.

I'm proud of Franklin, and of you, for avoiding the temptation of looking at the short term (gimme my unemployment check NOW!) and instead thinking of the long term health and viability of this country and this economy.

pamelal| 3.4.10 @ 9:06PM

I apologize that was flippant, and insensitive. But, again, no offense, do you really think legislators care what one person, one phone thinks? That was the point I was trying to make. I represented several companies in the halls of Congress and can assure you, from what I saw - they do not.

AuntieMadder| 3.5.10 @ 3:45AM

Liberals never make their points without being nasty and personal with someone about it. Good job, pamela...for a lefturd.

Bill| 3.5.10 @ 4:22PM

Pam who the hell do you think you are with a stupid comment like that.The fact that if your in the construction industry or other sectors there are no jobs to be had. Washington is playing games with peoples lives ( BOTH PARTIES ) and Bunning himself has never had a job that he was not pampered all his life. I am disgusted with all of them they are so far from reality

Tina| 3.6.10 @ 1:25PM

Pamela- why don't you get your ticket ready and mover to Venezuela-Your type of mentality in a hurting country with hurting citizens is not needed here. This has always been land of the free. You can't and won't take that away from us. And the bonehead at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who smokes like a chimney isn't going to tell me what to do either- after all- he DOESN'T PAY MY BILLS

George McVay| 3.7.10 @ 12:07AM

You really just don't have a clue, do you?

Anonymous| 3.3.10 @ 12:38PM

As one of too many left unemployed due to California's budget crisis, I qualified for COBRA's Subsidy. However, by the time it finally went through, I would've had to pay 1/4th of my unemployment each month. So now my family has also fallen into the ranks of the uninsured. We don't need higher taxes for 5 years to maybe pay for government run medical coverage. We need real help NOW!

Northright| 3.3.10 @ 12:50PM

Help now--an economy that generates jobs with benefits, NOT government programs.

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 1:14PM

Why would companies want to offer more benefits? Companies offered benefits in the first place to acquire and retain qualified individuals. With an abundance of unemployed people and the decline of unions, companies will offer less benefits, not more. You will see fewer benefits offered in the future. Besides, our economy generates jobs overseas, not here. Over 2/3rds of our economy is based on consumption, not manufacturing. Where are these jobs going to come from?

Anonymous, the data shows that universal health care as exists in places like Canada cost half as much as in the U.S. If you are a fiscal conservative, wouldn't you go for the option that costs the least even if it means rationing and letting Grandma die? It is not costs that prevents us from having lower health care costs, it is our desire to get everything and pay nothing for it and a conservative ideology based on belief rather than reason.

victor| 3.3.10 @ 1:49PM

Listen Bubele,
When you say that "data shows that universal health care as exists in places like Canada cost half as much as in the U.S.",
what you are conveniently leaving out is the Canadian Government doling out money for government doctors, whereby when the money runs out, they stop seeing patients. Some doctors stop in September or October. They then take vacations or work for private clinics until new funding comes in January.
Government Health care also dictates, fine word that, what drugs you can get and when you can get them.
Government run health care also restricts diagnostic equipment. Did you know that there are only 700 or so MRI machines, while the US has 22,000?
Fiscal Conservatives want the biggest bang for the buck.
What's the point of paying for any doctor if you don't get the care?
PS, what are you going to do when doctors retire and there is no one to replace him?
Penny wise and pound foolish is what describes you liberals to a tee.

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 2:15PM

The fact remains that in Canada everyone is covered and it costs half as much. Is there rationing? Obviously. You cannot significantly reduce costs without rationing.

Let's say you lost your job and had to take one at half of the salary. Wouldn't you begin to ration your household budget and not buy expensive foods or that Mercedes you wanted? We can no longer have a health care system where everyone gets everything and pays nothing. You don't seem to realize that.

Dave| 3.4.10 @ 2:59PM

And you can not have a health care system where you pay everything and get nothing.
Who cares if everyone one is covered when everyone is cut on their services?

Brent| 3.4.10 @ 3:10PM

@Bob - Canada's overall healthcare expenditures are 1/2 of ours because they get much less care than we do. I don't want to scrap the finest healthcare system in the world to turn it over to a government that can't run anything as efficiently as the private sector.

I don't know what healthcare you have for your family, but mine isn't "free". I pay actual dollars for mine each month. I also receive less in salary each month because my employer offers health insurance.

There IS no free lunch. I just don't want my lunch (healthcare) delivered and paid for by the federal government. Frankly, I don't want it paid for by my employer either. I'd rather buy health insurance on my own (like auto insurance) and only have it cover catastrophic illnesses. It's not that we pay nothing - the problem is that insurance has divorced us from the cost of our medical care. Have you ever tried to find out exactly what your insurance company will pay for a procedure BEFORE it happens. It's like pulling teeth to get information from them.

Die Fledermaus| 3.4.10 @ 8:13PM

Brent, what Bob also leaves out is that Canada's population is only a little over 34 million people which in 2009 ranked them the 36th largest country by population.

"Universal Healthcare" nuts always point to examples where populations are small and thus the "cost" is smaller than ours. But the US is 3rd based on population and the costs are mostly the creation of government, not the private sector.

And even Canada's budgets show the strain of years of unchecked growth in government.

As to rationing - "NUTS". We are Americans and can produce anything we want and consume it. And then there was the "we are all doomed because all of our jobs go overseas" crap.

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:31PM

1. I assume you will decline Medicare when you are 65? (since you do not want a federally run health care program)
2. Yes, you can find out what a procedure will cost, you can ask the physician and they can give you the insurance contract rate for most all primary insurance companies (Aetna, BCBS, Humna, etc)
By the way, I am not for FREE health care - I am for access. There is a difference/\

Carol| 3.5.10 @ 7:43PM

Please explain to me how I can decline Medicare at 65 when it has manadatory enrollment>

ncatty| 3.3.10 @ 2:57PM

You may disagree with Bob, but he is not a liberal.

JC157| 3.3.10 @ 5:12PM

I do disagree with Bob and YES he is a liberal. Cutting the cost of healthcare is the real solution. $5 for an aspirin is idiotic

Tom| 3.3.10 @ 1:58PM

The true cost of universal health care is hard to determine. Depending on the study it may or may not include time spent in que. And comparing the US, with its poor health habits, to countries with good health habits is problematic to say the least.

The example of Mass. is not promising for an American experiment in universal health care.

JP| 3.3.10 @ 2:42PM

Funny that the one of the top liberal politicians in Canada, Danny Williams, last month got heart surgery in Florida. I suppose the "free health care" motto didn't include competence. Williams freely admitted that he didn't trust one of the systems he spent his life advocating. He said it was his life, his heart. What he was saying that not even the Candadian elite enjoy what most Ameircans take for granted. Some system.

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 3:27PM

JP, if you want more than YOUR insurance will pay for, you can pay for it yourself just like Danny Williams. That's capitalism. Even now, rich people in the U.S. get better care than poor people. That's just fine with me. If the government offered universal health care that should not prevent you from paying for additional care yourself. That's a very American thing to do. Isn't that why we work -- to get things we couldn't get otherwise? Why should health care be any different?

Your admonishment of the Canadian system backfires if you intelligently use logic for analysis.

JP| 3.3.10 @ 5:00PM

Bob,
You cannot have it both ways. Either the Canadian system is superior because it offers free 100% coverage equally to all; or it is superior because it offers superior services and treatment. It appears that most proponents of the Canadian system use the first reason. Few use the second. As a matter of fact, both reasons are diametrically opposed to eachother.

Williams went to Florida to get a routine heart procedure. He went to those lengths either because he loves Florida or he doesn't trust his own nation's universal medical system. When a nation's elites must travel abroad for even routine procedures something is amiss. One would expect that from Kosovo or Belieze, but not Canada.

yet, this is something that people like you wish to foist on the US.

Paul from SA| 3.3.10 @ 6:22PM

Cost comparisons are bogus. Quality, access, indirect costs, indirect taxes, subsidies, cost of living, demographics... all differ.

U.S. has the best medical care.
U.S. has the best doctors.
U.S. has the best hospitals.
U.S has the best equipment.
U.S. has the best medical schools.
U.S. has the best and worst lawyers.
U.S. has the most freeloaders.
U.S. has the most retirees.

If we use cost to compare with other countries, then Russia needs comprehensive vodka reform since they spend so much more -- per capita -- than us.

Imagine comparing costs between states? Texas is much cheaper than Democrat/liberal states.

30moves| 3.3.10 @ 6:37PM

I read that, if enrolled in the government plan you may NOT privately purchase medical services beyond what is covered. You would have to leave the country. Check the fine print.

Iris| 3.4.10 @ 3:15PM

Oh for goodness sakes! Poor people are already covered in this country. Have you ever heard of Medicaid? Not to mention most states have in place programs to take care of the health needs of children. What are you people talking about???? We already pay a ton of money to COVER these individuals. Not to mention the coverage we provide for illegal immigrants. Give me a break!!

William Marble| 3.4.10 @ 2:13PM

"conservatice ideology based on belief rather than reason"? Where did this notion come from? Convservatives are more based on reality than liberals every day of the week.
I lived in Canada, and their helath care costs, all costs included, are about the same as in the U.S. And caare is rationed, and slow. The studies you quote only consider out of pocket costs at the point of service, not the added tax burden levied to subsidieze the care. So get your facts straight please.
And as a conservative (what is a fiscal conservative, anyway) I believe each person should earn his.her own way. The government's role is to protect against catastrophic situations, like not allowing me to starve in the street.
You equate a decline in unions and unemployment? When did unions provide cost effective goods and services? Never.
So do not mix your arguments.
Conservatives do not want Grandma to die, to the contrary, it is liberals who thwarted personal responsibility in Social Security, who oppose tort reform which would lower medical costs; who want illegals to be counted in our census (which will grant money and legislators based on illegals?) ; who oppose enforcement of the immigration bill written by the late Sen. Kennedy - you probably conveniently forgot he promised that we would NEVER allow Federal monies to be spent on iollegals. How quickly we push aside the "Lion of the Democratic Party" for our political wishes.

Oh well. You can all go pay your taxes, and get your "free" health care (you know Obama care will not cover about 15% of the population? That is about what we have now, without government interveention - GREAT imporvement by the Chicago mob living in the White House.
Good Job all.
who

Doug| 3.6.10 @ 10:44AM

Sorry Bob, but you're totally wrong on this point. I love it when liberals use Canada's socialistic heathcare program as an example of what we need to do here because it's so easily proven wrong.

I guess you've overlooked how many Canadians come to the US for their heathcare? Even the Canadian politiicans come here as evidenced recently by Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams: see http://www.heartland.org/polic....._Care.html

From the article:

"A top Canadian politician attracted national attention when he decided to abandon his country’s health care system, which has been suggested as a model for reforms in the United States, to cross the border in seeking treatment for a heart condition.

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams traveled to the United States in February to undergo heart surgery. The 59-year-old millionaire is set to spend over three months in America recovering from the operation."

It has nothing to do with "a conservative ideology" and everything to do with getting the finest healthcare available and not having to wait 6 months to get it.

Don't like it here? Move...Delta's ready when you are !!!

Pat C | 3.4.10 @ 12:34PM

You can find a high deductible catastrophic plan for peanuts on this site. http://www.ehealthinsurance.com/

Chalkdust| 3.3.10 @ 2:04PM

"it is our desire to get everything and pay for nothing for it and a conservative ideology based on belief rather than reason."
Bob
Please, have you not paid attention at all ; to the point of the article that gave birth to these posts or the conversation thats beating the airwaves to a froth, maybe is it true about liberals, tin ears and hard heads?

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 2:19PM

Have you not paid attention to what I have said? I gave Bunning kudos for his action -- it's great. But I have no tolerance for those who claim to be fiscal conservatives and think health care is a privilege and don't really want to go for the lowest cost option. Health care is bankrupting this country and will only get worse. If we don't do something radical, then our taxes will have to be raised in the future. Medicare increases account for most of the increase in the federal budget. If you don't attack that cost in a major way (not with just tort reform or "competition"), we will doom our progeny to a very poor future.

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 3:32PM

Bob:
Medical treatment, doctor visits and the like are a commodity like any other. How in heavens name did the country ever decide that everyone should be able to get every treratment available at someone elses expense?

Should I not be able to prioritize my own spending so that if I need to pay a doctor I can? Certainly you Bob, should not be responsible for my bills.

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 4:17PM

I agree 100%. But then, we shouldn't require doctors and hospitals to treat everyone that comes through their doors. The fire department should not help those who don't have insurance, right? I would prefer to be honest about those things and provide a very basic level of care for all that takes into account that which we mandate through legislation. After that, you get what you pay for... If Grandma doesn't have the money for extended care, then she dies... It is that simple... If you don't believe that, then you should support universal health care.

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 4:27PM

Fire Depts. began that way, run by the Ins. Cos. and caring for their insured. Vols followed superceeded by community Depts. as is the case today.

Likewise we have community hospitals and non-profit hospitals. Could they not organize on a member basis akin to say Credit unions? Group members, by whatever criteria the local hospital selected, would then be covered.

It seems the underlying question here is, "Why is the federal government imposing itself into local issues? By what authority does it presume to mandate that individuals purchase coverage from what is certain to be government selected purveyors (AARP, ACORN?)?

Many "solutions" might be available were the govt. power to allow, rather than mandate.

Tom| 3.3.10 @ 7:20PM

Bob,
You are too smart to believe that government will mandate 'a very basic level of care'. Every interest group will seek to fund its pet treatment. One of the problems with private insurance is it is nearly impossible in most states to get 'a very basic level of care' due to state mandates on what must be covered. Remove the mandates and prices will go down.

Doug | 3.6.10 @ 10:53AM

Tom, You are so right.

I am a male, non-smoking, non-drinking, non-illegal drug using US citizen. Why should I HAVE to buy coverage for smoking related cancer, alcoholism, drug abuse, or for that matter, why does my policy cover me for pregnancy? Last time I checked, that's never happened to a man before.

You want lower health insurance prices, pass Tort reform, extend the ability to purchase health insurance coverage over state lines to increase competition, cap medical liability payouts, and get the government out of regulating the industry !!!

victor| 3.3.10 @ 10:19PM

Bob:
"Health care is bankrupting this country and will only get worse. If we don't do something radical, then our taxes will have to be raised in the future."

The Republicans have that "radical" solution:
Cut the State Mandated Coverages and start from scratch.
Why does the average state have 45 or so mandated coverages?
What state do you live in Bob?
I live in New Jersey and we have 45.
The lowest at 13 is Idaho and the Highest at 70 is Rhode Island.
Mandated coverages go from maternity to mammography to acupuncture to smoking cessation to psychotropic drugs to massage therapists to podiatrists to hair transplants.
From soup to nuts, we're not supposed to pay for anything ourselves, so long as we get the State to mandate it for us.
http://www.cahi.org/cahi_conte.....es2008.pdf

Look up your state and see what is covered and what you have in your policy.

"Medicare increases account for most of the increase in the federal budget."

Medicare costs are supposed to be CUT!
The cost is for all of the fingers in the pie.
Let us buy across state lines and let us buy basic coverage for what we really need.
Do you need to be covered for maternity care, mammographies, pre-natal, midwives, ob-gyn?
What about tattoo removal?
Aromatherapy?
I just got our car insurance renewal and because of our usage, we chose a basic plan which costs 300 for liability and 350 for collision and a few bucks more for the rest; total: $737.
Why can't we do the same for health?
Pay for what you think you need and deal with the rest.
There is a coop out there for Christians, that for a nominal cost 150 for one 200 for two and maybe 300 a month for a family. There are certain criteria, but if you neither smoke, drink, gamble or commit other sin and belong to a Christian church, you are covered for nearly all expenses.
And the best part?
No Government Required!

Bill| 3.4.10 @ 6:20PM

Bob,
Again you need to be corrected. Healthcare certainly is not bankrupting America. It is a growing and flourishing industry that the people support! The bankrupters of America are its interfering, meddling, leftist politicians and their “I want it all for nothing”, collectivist, intellectually and morally bankrupt supporters such as unions and ideologically left special interest groups. We are now $12T in debt and healthcare did not get us there, government with its reckless spending, over regulation, and idiotic monetary policy has put us there. In this country, you get what you put in it and properly manage. Sitting on your petard and whining while your are waiting for the rest of us to raise you will only get you what you deserve, nothing.

neoconservative| 3.4.10 @ 6:31PM

I believe that true conservatives aren't necessarily looking for the cheapest healthcare option, but as for myself, I don't want the government getting involved anymore than they already are in my private life. The average American pays around 41 cents on the dollar in taxes (thats all taxes totaled up together, income, state/fed,property,sales etc...) and the government can't seem to get anything right. How much more do they want.? Ron Paul has it right...

Barry| 3.5.10 @ 8:58AM

I'd estimate that half the cost of healthcare in America is a direct result of government intervention. Let's set the way-back machine for thirty years ago. You went to the doctor's office, and paid a little out of pocket. Then, the government got involved. They decided that doctor's offices had to have a certain amount of employees per number of patients, certain types of equipment, etc. This increased the cost to actually run a medical practice. (I'm not saying that there shouldn't be some regulation. If there weren't we'd have dirty back-alley doctor's offices, but the fact remains that when the government gets involved prices go up.) I say that in people want "universal" healthcare, they should lobby their state government. Congress technically has seventeen powers granted to it by the constitution. Deciding that the people have to pay for a program or face a fine isn't one of those powers. (For those of you who use Canada and/or Denmark as examples, look at the population densities and income taxes as well as other factors like quality, wait times, and quota systems that spring up as a result.)

Oldefarte| 3.3.10 @ 2:08PM

Bunning should be given an award by the American TAXPAYERS, and should be held up as an example of political courage. Make no mistake, November will witness a bloodbath for both Democrats and/or Republicans who don't get THE MESSAGE regarding the increasing of the governmental expenses that American taxpayers are forced to PAY FOR!!!!!

rdman| 3.3.10 @ 2:19PM

Where were the so-called fiscally responsible Republican standing behind Bunning.

Where was the hapless McConnell (the owl), McCain and the rest of the inside-the-beltway RINO frauds??

David| 3.3.10 @ 2:33PM

I would like to think otherwise, but I don't think Bunning would have taken the stand he did absent his decision to not run for re-election next term.

And Bob, haven't you heard, the Prime Minister of Canada just had his open heart surgery in Miami, I believe it was last week. He explained, "it is my heart, it is my health, and I didn't give up my right to get the best health care when I became a politician". He said he will pay the political price if there is one to be paid. He also pointed out that had he had surgery in Canada, he would have been criticized for jumping to the front of the line.

Albert Frevele| 3.3.10 @ 3:14PM

What seems to be missing here is that Senator Bunning actually SUPPORTED the measure itself in principle and in fact. What he opposed was new spending to pay for it. He wanted to take "leftover" money from other programs and use it to fund this bill. The problem is that the US Government should not be doing this garbage in the first place. COBRA, Health Insurance, Unemployment Benefits, etc... are not enumerated powers of the US Government. Therefore, the bill Bunning "opposed-but-supported" is unconstitutional anyway! I am not impressed.

Anthony| 3.3.10 @ 3:23PM

The way this man was trashed and villified by the Democrat leadership and their henchmen in the MSM, with some of the most obscene ad hominen attacks yet, shows the debate is indeed over; Democrats are morally and intellectually bankrupt and corrupt.
Harry Reid, one of the most corrupt of these Ds, told Rs and the entire country last week that reconciliation was never a consideration.
Mr. Reid, you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts. You sir, and your entire party are a complete disgrace. November cannot come soon enough, assuming you haven't destroyed the entire country by then.

Diane| 3.8.10 @ 2:01PM

I agree....November can not come soon enough. "They" are saying that the American people will be too dumb to remember by the time November comes around. I'm not that dumb and I refuse to believe that any of the American people will forget. I'm so pissed that I'm ready to get rid of those chicken poop Republicans also. Where were they when they should have gathered together in support of Benning?? Well, maybe some of you have some names that we can support in the November clean-out??
This "entitlement" belief that has swept this country is beyond belief!!! I want less government in my life. Oh, and the stimulus check that most Americans received last year will be taken back on your tax return for 2009. I just found that out from my tax preparer. She advises me that the entire $250 will be recouped from my pitiful refund. Interesting. Sad too. I would have refused the lousy $250 if I had been offered a choice last year. Miserable failure that stimulus crap was in the first place!! What happened to the birth certificate idea relative to Hussein's eligibility to be the president? Anyone hear anything that can be confirmed on that suit?

MikeBee| 3.3.10 @ 4:11PM

For a week, the local 2 news in the Detroit area, an area especially hard hit by this recession, was calling for residents of the area to call the mean, nasty Jim Bunning. Bunning was right. But the local news stated many times that he was standing in the way of this bill's passage; standing in the way of local folks' unemployment benefits. Actually, it was the Democrat party in Washington who were standing in the way, refusing to find money to pay for this extension. They could easily have paid for the extension with some of what BHO is still "holding in his pocket" from the stimulus bill of 2009. But, the Democrats refused to work with the Republicans again, and only wanted their way, or the highway. Good for Jim!

BTW, full disclosure: I've been on unemployment since January of 2009.

Curtis| 3.3.10 @ 4:12PM

You phony conservatives only complain about deficit spending then their is a Democrat in the White House. Where was the outcry when Reagan and W. ran up record deficits. I guess if the money goes to kill people including children who have done nothing to us and for tax cuts for the rich deficits are ok. But the spending is for ordinary Americans who are out of work because of a recession caused by Republicans then that is not ok. If tax cuts for the rich are your only solution to a recession shouldn't they be working by now? Also The Spectator is ridiculous, as usual in calling this Bunning's finest hour. Why for calling recession victims lazy? Hell with that. The sooner this jackass spoiled ex baseball player retires the better.

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 4:25PM

Curtis, people around here can tell you that I complain just as much about the record debt created by Reagan and Bush as anyone else. But the key is building a growing economy where people have jobs. If unemployment is low, then many of these issues will go away. However, we don't have any industrial policy, a tax policy that rewards non-productive financial risk, and politicians on both sides that spend without the resources to do so because that gets them reelected.

Although you may not like it, Bunning did the right thing here because we should not spend what we cannot afford. That is immoral for our children as that leaves them with more debt than they can pay. There are two options, spend less or tax more, or both. After running the numbers, I believe we need to make people pay for what they get. Then, they should be more amenable to reducing spending. The federal government should do less, Medicare needs to be reformed, and the military should be used where absolutely necessary, not on optional wars like Iraq.

Troll Watch| 3.3.10 @ 5:25PM

It is time for our pathetic troll Bob to offer his lovely advice to the guy he voted for. I bet President Obama would love to hear from his main "man" at AmSpec. The power, as Bob has pointed out many times, isn't here at AmSpec but with the Democratic Party and independents. Why would Bob waste his time offering advice to a bunch of what he considers losers? Maybe Bob doesn't believe anything he writes. That is my bet.

Paul from SA| 3.3.10 @ 6:32PM

The annual deficit was a big deal when Reagan was prez, but he had a Dem congress. After slashing income tax rates, the economy was roaring and income tax revenues to the gov't nearly doubled. The deficit was due to Dem spending.

Bush 43 and GOP congress spent too much, but annual deficits were still small compared to GDP, and once again, the Bush tax cuts led to massive increases in revenue to the gov't.

Tax cuts = higher revenue for gov't.

Obama and Dems now are taking debt to whole new level, more than tripling what Bush did. In ten years, we'll be spending nearly $1 trillion a year to service the debt.

Dems always care about short-term benefits but have no clue about the future.

curtis| 3.3.10 @ 7:24PM

Bush tax cuts led to massive revenue to the govt? Huh? Not if the rich who pay most of the taxes are using offshore tax havens which they were and are. How much debt did Obama inherit from Bush?

Tax cuts=higher revenue for gov't? Then how come we did not have a problem with deficits from FDR to Johnson and the top rate was what 70% or more. Keynesian economics worked better for middle class and poor Americans than this thrickle down nonsense. If the tax cut REALLY were mostly to the middle class and poor who would spend it - THAT would help create more jobs. Giving huge tax cuts to the rich like Bush did just gives more mansions and yachts to the rich.

Besides isn't the problem now the hight cost of medical care which the Repubs seem to want to do nothing. They had eight years or at least six under Bush to fix that and did nothing.

Ryan| 3.4.10 @ 8:23AM

Study someone called Arthur Laffer and the Laffer curve. When individuals keep their own money, they produce more and make more money...and are able to pay more taxes.

Deficits are NOT created by tax cuts, they are created by overspending.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:51PM

Try sending all YOUR money to congress MORON. I'll keep my money for myself!

Keith| 3.4.10 @ 3:04PM

Curtis,

You may want to revise your revisionist history. Check out what JFK had to do with taxes...to increase revenue to the federal government he cut taxes and launched our space program with some of this new found surplus.

You are almost correct abo0ut the top rate being "70% or more" for a period...that period was immediately preceeding the Great Depression. The tax rate was lowered to help pull us out of that one as well.

Regarding your preposterous statements of BHO inheriting all of this debt W, I think that W was too much of a progressive for my tastes when it comes to having any fiscal responsibility but even if allow the false premise that all debt prior to January of 2009 a cursory check of the numbers indicates that in the past year BHO has spent 4 X's the money that W spent in all 8 years of office.

I am not sure where we are heading as a nation when more than 52% of the population are being paid by the remaining 48%. Approximately 52% of our current population receives moeny from the tax payers including Gv employees, et al. The avg annual wage in the US is $40k (which puts an avg US wage earner in the top %5 of global wage earners) while the avg wage for US Gov employee is over $70k. If you live in Wash, DC and are a Gov employee, then your avg wage is over $170k per year. So you may want to tone down the class envy a bit as the planet grows smaller each day.

If I recall correctly, 2018 and more 100% of our GDP will go towards paying the interest on what we are spending now under BHO (servicing the debt). I wont even ask if you would run a business this way but would you run your household that way? Would you spend today like there is no tomorrow knowing that within a few years 100 % of what you make will just barely pay for the interest on what you ate, drove, wore or slept in or threw away today?

btw, I belive that JFK was also going to war when he cut taxes.

curtis| 3.3.10 @ 7:29PM

Who cuts taxes on the rich when we are going to war? Name another president who was that short-term benefits sighted and had no clue about the future. I won't even get started about Bush II incompetent and possibly catastropic short sightedness when it comes to global warming.

Iconoclast| 3.4.10 @ 1:36PM

If I were you? I wouldn't blow more smoke about global warming in the middle of an ice age.

P.S., You're rich compared to the rest of the world. How about a little donation for people starving in Ethiopia, hmm?

Roger| 3.4.10 @ 7:27PM

How about Jimmy Carter.
It's funny when people talk about the surplus of money Bush II inherited from Clinton. Unfortunately, the surplus was on paper only. There never was a surplus. In additionally, up until the Democrats assumed power the amount of spending was contained. Since the take over of the Pelosi crew, spending has dramatically increased each year. And yes, conservatives complained daily about it and the lack of financial responsibility by Bush. Cutting the taxes on the "Rich" as you call them, allows them to, yes keep more of their money. B it, the rich are the ones who owes the business we work at. The better off they are the better off we are. If I'm a business man being taxed like no tomorrow, why should I hire you and give you any benefits? It would be cheaper to hire two part timers, both for taxes being paid but also benefits.
May I suggest some lite reading on the mechanics of running and operating a business.
As for gobal warming, since most of the proof seems to been doctored, why would I want to pay higher taxes and utility bills (cap and trade) to put money in Al Gores pocket. I, unlike you actually continually search out the information and re-read it to ensure I know what I'm talking about. Since you are just repeating liberal/democrat taking points without any knowledge on the subject, I will ignore your ignorance. I would suggest more light reading on the subject, but it's not light and will take a few weeks to digest the information.

Virginia| 3.4.10 @ 12:07PM

Curtis. You sir, are not in touch with what his happening.

Good conservatives always complain about deficit spending. That's one reason why the Dems hate them.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:49PM

Try democ RATS in control of congress almost 4 YEARS, NIMROD! Try explaining that away!

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:54PM

Tell me, pray tell, just WHO pays the most taxes Jackass? Who pays the salaries for workers, loon?

Mickey C.| 3.4.10 @ 4:11PM

The only thing "phony" on here is your inane diatribe, sir.

The Bush tax cuts, as mandated and passed, were for the benefit of ALL taxpayers - not just the rich. And had you actually taken the time to go back and do some preliminary homework on this fact, you wouldn't sound as ridiculous as you now do.

What really told the tale of the tape (so to speak), was in what the MSM did in trying to sell the American public on what they viewed as its "shortcomings." And since it was both proposed and legislated by Republicans, they couldn't get their "shock and awe" out to the American public fast enough.

It was the mainstream media more so than any other single entity that did their level best to try and frame these tax cuts as something only benefitting the rich. So much so, that with that tag line repeated over and over ad nauseum, it eventually morphed into becoming "the truth." It was anything but.

Furthermore, while some Republicans may now froth at the mouth about the record deficits we now see under this administration, most of us in the centre or right were all up in arms during the Bush administration as well. Most of us felt it was not the right thing to do, nor was it responsible behaviour (ESPECIALLY) under a Republican-held Congress and presidency that almost universally decried any ill-funded or bloated project brought forth by the Dems. The only ones that looked the other way were the RINO's. Hence, the term. Their was no "RINO" distinction prior to Mr. Bush's presidency and it was because of his fiscal policies that a great many of us suffered from "buyers remors" during his second term.

ImagePhreak| 3.3.10 @ 5:48PM

While we argue and pit democrats against republicans, liberal against conservative, people like Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski along with the central banks, make off with our wealth, our borders, our resources and our freedoms. We must stop the political social fighting and expose the shadow government. End the private Federal Reserve, read the constitution, and we will repair our republic.

Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 5:49PM

Anglo-Saxon plotters strike again: Anglo-Saxon press attacks Anglo … | Accountancy Bu links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…Anglo-Saxon press attacks Anglo … Related Blogs on True Fiscal True Fiscal Insanity: Creating Money to Buy Government Debt UK same as Greece or Ireland? « Mostly Economics The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Related Posts Free Press Release South and Central Asia: Daily Press Briefing — February 4 CCH Tax Briefing Examines Obama's 2011 Budget Proposals | Press … World Press…

Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 6:02PM

The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Information links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Information About Information The Sponsors The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Matthew Yglesias » Mitt Romney's 12 Hour Flip-Flop The last hour or so … | Rangers Report Hillcrest Road: USA at Holland in an Hour Wall Street Journal: "Bunning's…

Paul from SA| 3.3.10 @ 6:24PM

Bunning = national congressman of the week.

Richard Baker| 3.3.10 @ 7:00PM

Jim Bunning is in the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown because he can stand the heat and dish it out. Huzzah for Senator Bunning!

Mike| 3.3.10 @ 7:20PM

How long did it take this idiot to vote for the $700,000,000,000 defence budget?

Hpical Typocrit :(

curtis| 3.3.10 @ 7:32PM

Exactly! How does any true conservative justify that considering all the waste and the unnessary war in Iraq that is included in the military budget? Why did they not complain then. Maybe some did but Jim Bunning? Hello where were you?

curtis| 3.3.10 @ 7:49PM

Also how did we end up with a surplus under Clinton and then a huge deficit under W. if cutting taxes (again mostly on the rich) increases revenues? That's Chicago school/Milton Friedman nonsense that's been proven wrong and now rejected throughout the world especially but not just Latin America, Russia, Poland, etc.

Us progressives (can't use liberal now since you conservatives have demonized that word and made it equal to socialist when they are totally different - but then conservatives have never been good at shades of gray) know what you really want is a government that is so small (and ineffective) that you can drown it in a bath tub. So deficits are always ok with a plutocratic, war mongering president but not with someone who wants to help the little guy and the majority of hard working Americans who aren't in his and culture of greed elite class. Sound like class warfare to me.

Ryan| 3.4.10 @ 8:24AM

We controlled spending under Clinton with a republican congress.

Had congress kept a similar sense of responsibility through the Bush years, we wouldn't be dealing with as high deficits right now.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:46PM

Didn't Clinton break a campaign pledge NOT TO RAISE TAXES, BOZO?

Keith| 3.4.10 @ 3:17PM

Probably, like most every politician who has made a promise, but I believe the most famous utterance was from George HW Bush. "Read my lips, NO NEW TAXES!"

Roger| 3.4.10 @ 7:33PM

Again, as stated above, Clinton left a surplus on paper only. There never was a real surplus. This is just a straw man approach to an issue that's been disproved. This information, begun by Clinton cronies and enforced nightly by our shameless so-called news services.

Keith| 3.4.10 @ 3:41PM

OK, you caught us now the secret is out. W is a military genius. You finally made me admit it.

Curtis, lets suspend belief for a moment and imagine that you had something worth fighting for. I know as a progressive that you think the rest of the planet is just jealous of our health care system and if we can just lower it to their standard all of the fussing and fighting would immediately halt but, just for a moment, let us imagine that you had something worth fighting for.

Let us say that you Curtis live in Dallas Texas. Your family lives there. Your grandmother, your elementary school children, your friends and others who can't really protect themselves. One day they are attacked by someone who has sworn an oath to eliminate the infidels (your family, friends, mother, etc...) from the face of the earth. They send a small but deadly force into your town and strike quickly, possibly blowing up a major freeway complete with school buses, co-workers relatives, the whole deal.

You are stuck in traffic and saved from death. You have friends who are lost and who lost loved ones. Your entire way of life changes because of this attack. You want to confront this enemy who has attacked you and tried to bring your world to an end in every way possible financially, relationally, in every way. Nothing seems normal now, you cant just send your kid to the store for milk. What if there is another attack?

When you finally have some idea of the groups that planned and performed these attacks Curtis, where do you fight them?

Do you call them out to come back to Dallas to fight you face to face? No, that might endanger more of your family and friends.

Do you decide to go to the mountains outside of Denver where they are from and battle them on their own home field so to speak, where they have the advantage? No, that type of military action will be costly in lives and equipment ($ too).

So you hatch an idea, and publically decalere that Kansas iis the center of all of this hatred for Dallas and Texas. You state that the Gov. of Kansas has funded, trained and supported with camps those who attacked you and others. You enlist your friends from Oklahoma, Missouri, Arkansas, even Liousianna to go with you to Kansas and fight them.

Now when the knuckle heads from the Mtns outside of Denver hear this, what do they do? The ring leaders may be smart enough to stay in the caves in the moutains but the foot soldiers who want to die for the cause rush into Kansas like there was free health care or free condoms or only taxes on the rich.

And that is when you launch a military campaign that takes advantage of all of you and your friends strenghts without the costly cave to cave fighting that you were looking at before, while keeping your children at home safe from more attacks.

This si just one of the ways that we know W (ok, maybe not W but at least of those advising him) is a genuine military genius, because we faought a war in Iraq that allowed us a field of battle where we could more easily utilize our tactical advantage.

So Curtis, just tells us what you really want from your government? Let's end all of this pitting of Dem vs. Rep and talk about your vision for the United States of America as self avowed preogressive.

William 5| 3.3.10 @ 7:57PM

How far down the rabbit hole do the conservatives want to go? My guess is, not very far.

All the hullabaloo about government waste since Obama has taken office. Contrary to what they think, I'm not going to sit here and defend the federal government's performance of the past 14 months - it was a mess before , it's a mess now, it'll be a mess for the forseeable future.

It's that rabbit hole I'm curious about, and I think the conservatives should be even more so than I - the Iraq rabbit hole. This isn't a discussion about why we went to war, it's how much do you folks want to find out about the amount of waste flowing from that pile of sand in the Middle East.

I'd like to think you'd get all fired up about it and hold protests and shout down town halls if you knew how much of our $$ was wasted in Iraq over the past 8 years, but unless it happened under a Democratic watch, I'm quite sure you wouldn't.

William 5| 3.3.10 @ 7:59PM

And before you pull out the tough patriotic vitriol, let me just add, I'm not talking about $$ spent on our troops or their equipment - in my opinion, you enter a theatre of war, you can't spend enough on them or their equipment.

I'm talking about all those brilliant no-bid contracts.

William 5| 3.3.10 @ 8:08PM

I'm on a roll here - let's hold tough on unemployment benefits during arguably the worst recession in 60 years but nobody bats an eye at the billions poured into Iraq for "infrastructure"? How well were those billions spent when it was widely known that 2+ years after we invaded, average folks on the ground still had intermittent water and electricty on a daily basis?

Indeed, I can see why folks would be upset about a perceived welfare state here in our country when they already know (at least I hope they know, 'cos we don't ever hear them mention it) we're supporting another welfare state in the Middle East.

George Hayduke| 3.4.10 @ 10:39AM

The reasons these Rethuglicans love to throw money at war and the Pentagon is because it salves their conscience for not serving themselves. They're all friggin chickenhawks. Yellow Elephants. You know the type. Like Dick Cheney, they had "other priorities" than serving. Like Rush Limbaugh, they all have boils on their a$$e$ that kept them out of the military. Now they're trying to make up for it by lavishing the War Pigs with a blank check.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:44PM

Up yours!

Mickey C.| 3.4.10 @ 4:25PM

William, before you pull out yet another in a long series of liberal canards, you may want to first look at why companies like Halliburton got these no-bid contracts in the first place.

The main reason why, although completely disavowed by Dems and their enablers in the MSM, was because they were the only company on the planet with all the ingredients necessary in being able to do what the government asked for.

Look this up and you will see why it came down to a no bid contract. When you have an organization like Halliburton that can totally and completely take care of all you've tasked them with - and no one else dares to come forward, knowing as they do that they are not a match for a job endeavor of this scope and magnitude, then, my friend, you award the contract to the one company that can fulfill your demands.

That simple.

William 5| 3.4.10 @ 6:53PM

Mickey C. - I'm not talking about Haliburton. The logistical/admin support they provide to the military is something a) needed, and b) as you mentioned, very few companies are set up to offer.

While very much a liberal in the social arena, I applaud AmSpec and many of the voices in these comments for questioning government spending. My local post office is, quite possibly, the most absurdly run outfit in a 20 block radius (that includes the "Bikini Coffee Shop").

However, if they truly want me to take them seriously as something other than a "bash the current administration" outlet, I'd like to see them sink their teeth into government waste in Iraq. No one's looked too deep, tho the first glances (a few outlets have dabbled into an investigation) have shown gross negligence. Why not take a good hard look?

Further, I'm against government run healthcare, however, if we're gonna waste money in Iraq, why not waste it here instead? Why bail out Wall Street and drop billions in Iraq but throw a hissy over extending welfare benefits at home? That seems a bit odd to me.

Great Grandma| 3.4.10 @ 12:08PM

Get a clue. He didn't vote for it.

Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 8:32PM

The Bunning Blockade as Political Rorschach - Robert Iafolla - Civilian Review - Tru links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…reforming the Senate’s filibuster rules via his high profile move. II. The Courageous Man of Principal Several of Bunning’s GOP colleagues defended his unilateral blockade, which was also hailed in the rightwing blogosphere. Perhaps more importantly, Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show Wednesdday that Bunning has “shown the way” for the Republican Party. Anyway, speaking of Jim Bunning, I think we need to…

Anthony| 3.3.10 @ 8:40PM

Let's be clear here folks, the reason the Ds, Obama and the MSM took after Bunning in the vicious fashion that they did, is simple. If these corrupt Marxists do not extend unemployment for a total of 99 weeks, given the actual unemployment rate of 17.5%, Americans would be burning Washington D.C. to the ground as we speak.
Obama and the Ds are in a race to destroy America before Americans wake up and hold them responsible. It's that simple.
This extension was not welfare, as some talk radio folks suggested, it was an outright bribe to keep Americans from rioting in the streets.

Dave| 3.3.10 @ 8:50PM

I love the American Spectator!

Good job.

Pingback| 3.3.10 @ 10:12PM

Optimum Nutrition Whey links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…ENCROYABLE- Incredible amounts … Negligent Medical Care Has Resulted In Thousands Of Deaths Over … Best Restaurants to go during Rhodes Holidays | Restaurants in … The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Can Wesley Snipes make a comeback in 'Brooklyn's Finest'? | EW.com Best of 2009 – Movie Edition, The Top Ten « Words of Wisdom Easy Beat Maker – Are You Looking For The…

ATLmedia| 3.3.10 @ 10:27PM

Amazing.
Bunning & the coward brigade sit on their hands as Bush drives the economy into the sewer w/ 8 trillion unfunded obligations-Obama adds a trillion more to salvage the infrastructure-
NOW it's a crisis? A 'Congress of Whores" indeed.

Virginia| 3.4.10 @ 12:10PM

Bush again! Will you Dems ever stop using him? or is it that you're afraid that if you printed the real truth Dems would be universally out of office and in prison?

Keith| 3.4.10 @ 3:48PM

The year is 2053 and BHO is in an examining room at Bethesda Naval Hospital for his annual physical, the Dr. assures that his colo-rectal cancer is not the fault of GW Bush but still, doubt lingers in the minds of libs everywhere....

Dan Shields| 3.3.10 @ 10:49PM

Bunning ought to have had the rules rewritten from under him, and his butt thrown from the chamber into the midst of those he screwed. With a lifetime progressive score of 3.34 (96th out of 100), this obstructionist's time is long over.

LRH| 3.3.10 @ 11:12PM

he's still a coward, they all are. Easy when you having nothing to lose.

President Dither| 3.4.10 @ 12:04AM

Let me be clear....oh...wait...I can't, I don't have my teleprompter!

Anyway, I'm on pace to spend 10 times as much as President Bush did. And that's just what I'll admit to, not what I'm hiding. Plus, I want to spend even more.

By the way, President Bush won the Iraq war. He was decisive, while I, on the other hand, dithered over Afghanistan. I'm glad. I don't have what it takes to fight for this racist country.

And now Senator Bunning has kicked my backside this week. I thought he was retiring. A retiring senator made me look like a fool. That's about par for this presidency.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go sneak a smoke before Michelle makes me choke down a soy shake.

Black poww.....I....mean....Allah akk.....I...mean....peace out!

George Hayduke| 3.4.10 @ 10:35AM

"Let me be clear....oh...wait...I can't, I don't have my teleprompter!" say the mindless Republicans as they read from their teleprompters.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:43PM

Up yours!

Petronius| 3.4.10 @ 1:11AM

Oh no, not again. The trolls on this thread still gripe that the "rich" are getting a "gift" when taxation is cut. It's Their Money! My Money is My Money. If you believe the only way you can survive is by voting for a filthy politician who will plunder our incomes and assets to subsidize your deficiencies, you deserve banishment or life on a chain gang.
The Internal Revenue Code is tailored to prevent ordinary people from accumulating wealth because both parties are equally despotic when it comes to who should and should not have "real money". Public enemy #1 on the political establishment's hate list is The Cleavers. Any white middle class family with an eye toward a McMansion and a country club membership better fuggettaboutit. Republicans discovered that these people, after moving into gated private subdivisions and enrolling their children in private schools where they can't be terrorized by garden variety street trash, quit voting. Demoncrats loathe them for aspiring to these goals. For my part, just keep your grubby hands to your parasitic selves and get out of my way.
And if we do last long enough to hold a general election in 2012, our next Conservative President should offer Jim Bunning the post of Director of the Budget.

Hugh| 3.4.10 @ 5:58AM

Thanks for that side of the story, Jeri. I knew there had to be more to this, and I was not getting it from the usual media sources.

For those of you who don't know Mrs. Thompson, she is a wonderful person. I met her at Grover Norquist's ATR meetings back in 2001 and she is one of the nicest people you could ever meet.

Busbar Processor Machine | 3.4.10 @ 8:13AM

Fivestar Tools,Manufacture Busbar Processor Machine,With busbar cutting tool,bending tool and punching tool.

George Hayduke| 3.4.10 @ 10:34AM

Jim Bunning is a lowlife maggot who appears to have some serious senility/dementia issues going on.

Convet| 3.4.10 @ 2:41PM

Up yours!

Nick| 3.4.10 @ 7:39PM

Is your name Hay-duke or David-duke?

levotb| 3.4.10 @ 10:38AM

Bunning finally caved to pressure from Sen. McConnell and that's nothing to be "cheering" about! Why should self-employed and other working Americans pay other American who have regrettably lost their jobs to sit on their butts?

owyheewine| 3.4.10 @ 10:47AM

Sen. Bunning's stand is right up there with the 2 no hitters he threw.

Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 11:53AM

What Is Jim Bunning | Worldwide News links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…to release the hold he had blocking a 30-day extension of unemployment benefits and subsidized COBRA health insurance. But the impact of his stand against more deficit spending will hang over … Read more Jim Bunning and the End of Outrage | Mother Jones What is there to say about the Jim Bunning situation? It just leaves me speechless. We have here a situation in which the Senate is being hijacked,…

Seek| 3.4.10 @ 11:57AM

Calling someone a "coward" is fighting words in any man's vocabulary. Jim Bunning is a hero and a real credit to Congress. He might not have pitched the equivalent of a perfect game just now (like he did in 1964), but he was pretty close to perfect. More, please.

Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 12:38PM

What a Piece of Work! Or at least a Piece of Something. - Page 3 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…a Piece of Something. Go to Top Fred Thompson emailed a link to an article his wife Jeri wrote on Senator Jim Bunning. Here it is: The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Robert Barney View Public Profile Send a private message to Robert Barney Quote this post in a PM to Robert Barney Find More Posts by Robert Barney Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3…

RWinks| 3.4.10 @ 12:53PM

Wooee! There's a bunch of left-wing trolls on this site today. Every time they extend unemployment, the tax on employers is raised, increasing the payroll cost. Unemployment payments should never run more than 39 weeks. If people need to go on welfare, go on welfare, but don't call it unemployment. Democrats could have easily paid for this bill by dipping into their re-election slush fund (the stimulus). They could have called a vote for cloture. There were plenty of votes. But no, they would prefer to play politics. They have increased the deficit over 100 billion since they passed Pay Go a month ago.

The Democrats are increasing the deficit more than 100 billion a month, spending the country into collapse with no plan to get out. Obama, Pelosi, Reid Gangster Government.

Jeh-ree! Jeh-ree!| 3.4.10 @ 1:17PM

Jeri, Try to listen to you & Fred when @#$%^& Butler U isn't playing...
You wrote: "You have prospective political appointees who actually believe their failings, such as creating offshore tax havens for clients, are actually reasons for them to work at senior position in Cabinet level departments, since their cheating experiences will allow them to better identify other cheaters."
Hey, it worked for FDR - putting Joe Kennedy in charge of the SEC!

Bunning has now thrown no-hitters in all 3 Big Leagues!

The dirty little secret: This is the only part of the stimulus that actually stimulates; it puts cash into people's hands that they need to spend immediately!

Northern Rebel| 3.4.10 @ 1:36PM

After more in depth research on Senator Bunning's record, I find my previous statement to be without merit, and I apologize to him, personally.

Gary Joyce| 3.4.10 @ 1:43PM

Bunning took a stand that had to be taken and did so knowing full well its ramifications. He has guts ... an uncommon quality in our representatives in DC.
As painful as his stand may have been — and as poorly covered by MSM as it was — it was the correct stand.
Unfortunately, there are too few Jim Bunnings (athletically or politically) representing us.
Milquetoast politicians need to be tossed.
Bunning for President.

Gary L. Aldridge| 3.4.10 @ 2:37PM

It's all about oil. Let's bring everyone home from the two wars and other conflicts around the world. It is said there are two trillion barrels of oil under the rocky mountains. Let's go get it. Put everyone to work. We would be energy independent, selling oil to our neighbors, paying down our debts. Save some money to develop atomic power and other forms of new energy whether it is wave, solar, wind etc.....

Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 2:50PM

Common Sense Junction » Blog Archive » Jeri Thompson: “Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour” links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…or maybe’s that too intimidated — to say so publicly. I know Michelle cares because she made that plain here. I know Fred cares because he sent a heads-up about an article Jeri wrote for the American Spectator and Jeri’s article definitely shows her concern. I know I care because I cheered Jim Bunning as he expressed his concern by blocking a Senate bill that increases the deficit by $10…

Retired Registered Nurse| 3.4.10 @ 3:06PM

I agree with Kristen (the the top of the page). Socialized medicine is not the answer. Lots of people in this country want something for nothing. That is part of the reason we are in the shape we are in.

Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 3:20PM

Secondary Guidance Counselor – Kansas Education Employment Board | Educational Kansas links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…young people in Kansas . Great Bend is a community of 15000, … Original post: Secondary Guidance Counselor – Kansas Education Employment Board Related Blogs on Finest The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Antoine Fuqua talks about 'Brooklyn's Finest' – ESPN | Golden … Watch Brooklyn's Finest online stream Related Posts biology/chemistry teacher – Kansas…

JmsA| 3.4.10 @ 4:00PM

Mrs. Thompson is absolutely correct; Senator Bunning's demand for accountability, not to mention adherence to the law, if not common sense and fiscal responsibility, is what the American people want. His actions, other than for the adverse reaction to it by the elites, namely the mainstream media, democrats, and last but not least, the establishment republicans--will only serve to further buttress the call by many for smaller goverment.

Magister| 3.4.10 @ 4:30PM

Jeri Thompson makes an all too common mistake in believing, "... some of those Republicans up on Capitol Hill flashed back to the beating that Newt Gingrich and the Republicans took for shutting down Washington back in the mid-1990s budget battle."

The GOP did NOT shut down the government. They put on the President's desk the necessary appropriations bills for Fiscal Year 1996 that, signed into law, would have kept the government up and running. Clinton REFUSED to sign; HE was the one who shut down the government.

Republicans and anyone else interested in TRUTH need to challenge this LIE.

The reason Clinton got away with promoting this LIE was that for six crucial weeks, the normally voluble Speaker (Gingrich) went suddenly and strangely silent, allowing the moment and the message to be stolen and corrupted.

WHY the uncharacteristic silence?

Because early on and as a defensive precaution Queen Hillary's selected henchman Craig Livingstone had "acquired" more than NINE HUNDRED raw data FBI files on likely political enemies, Gingrich no doubt being foremost of such worthies.

Bill and Hill had the goods on Gingrich's notorious philandering and they used that on him like they tried to do to House Judiciary Chair Henry Hyde later on when articles of impeachment were being spooled up.

The difference is that Hyde was man enough to stand tall and do his duty; Gingrich was NOT.

And thus passed a once in a lifetime opportunity for the majority GOP to roll back more than a generation of well fare spending program creep.

And all because Newt Gingrich had let his johnson make his decisions for him.

Never forget it was CLINTON who shut down the government in the waning days of 1995, NOT the Grand Old Party. It is time to put that bald faced LIE to rest once and for all.

Marianne Broadus| 3.4.10 @ 4:40PM

I agree with Jeri's view.
I emailed Sen. Bunning commending him for his courage in standing up for responsibility. I also commended Sen. DeMint who stood up for Bunning.

Pingback| 3.4.10 @ 5:27PM

Contact links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…on the website » Nieman Journalism Lab PayPal, graphs and the trouble with feedback : TameBay : eBay news blog and forum Britain needs a 21 hour working week | Left Foot Forward The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour The Payday Loans UK are Boon in the Time of Monetary Urgency | xForce Articles Fresh Finance: The Dangers of PayDay Lending — theFreshXpress.com — The PULSE of Young Black America…

Jon Weiss| 3.4.10 @ 5:53PM

I am a Kentucky resident, I am also into my 18th month of unemployment, I have been searching for work, but there is none to be had, and recently, I have been told that now it has come to the point where the length of time I have been out of work is makeing me less attractive to employers, so that without retraining I have little chance of getting any job in my chosen field, considering that I finished Vocational Rehab to get the job I lost at the beginning of the recession, and that I am now in mt mid fifties, career changes are getting less and less attractive as well, after a while you get tired of starting over, while politicians play games with the ecomony in an apparent effort to keep the cycle going. I agree with Jim Bunning. If the government is going to spend money it shoudl be required to have that money on hand, and if that means I don't get an unemployment check, so be it. It is time to hold the overpaid leeches in DC accountable, Bunning tried that and the left went nuts over it. Perhaps we need fewer left wing ideologues and more Jim Bunnings in Congress and the White House. It might be uncomfortable for a while, but it will mean a lot less debt for your kids.

Magister| 3.4.10 @ 7:12PM

It is rare that a door closes, without another one opening. Consider taking the gold of a lifetime of work experience in the real world, getting your teaching certificate and giving that gold to the youngsters in public school who, frankly, need all the help they can get. The pay is nothing to write home about, but you'll get a chance to work with some of the best people there are, the kids. I was canned at age 53 and, as a third career, started teaching the next year -- never looked back and thank God every day for giving me a shove in the right direction. Maybe it's not for you, but give it a thought. Kids NEED teachers with experience in the REAL world.

Rose| 3.4.10 @ 5:57PM

Where were the other republicans aside from DeMint. Do we need to get new ones to replace our other republicans that were NOT there to help out Bunning. If they can't be a real republican, then have them stay home and leave the space for some other republican that will! It was Clinton who cut our military to half the size Bush came into office with. Bush rebuilt our military back up again. Clinton only did it because Gingrich was on the republican party. Maybe if someone stopped all these freebies, people might actually get a job! Let them starve. They will find a job. Look at the native americans, they are given and given. Prime example - no reason for living. All these freebies are taking the reason to live for away from them.

Rebecca| 3.4.10 @ 6:07PM

My husband lost his job 13 months ago. Four months later he accepted the only job he could find, at less than 40% of what he was earning and with NO benefits. We appreciate the extension of COBRA, but we stand behind Jim Bunning. This extension should be paid for by the stimulus bill, not more debt on our children! God bless Jim Bunning for taking a stansd. Unfortunately people who are out of work need to accept whatever jobs are available until the economy gets better -- which will never happen under DICTATOR OBAMA.

Bill| 3.4.10 @ 6:21PM

The problem is that Bunning gave in.

Thus both sides can view his actions as nothing more than a cheap political stunt.

Snowe's comments on Bunning are yet another example of why I will never again donate to the RNC, only to individual candidates.

Diane| 3.8.10 @ 2:22PM

I gave a mere $25.00 to John McCain's campaign and 6 months later, the check had not cleared my bank account. Wasn't it enough to be cashed? I was personally insulted and will never again be so stupid as to give away my hard-earned money to another politician as long as I live!! Of course, since the check did not clear, I wasn't out anything other than the time it took to carry the outstanding deduction on my records for the 6 months.

Colony14Author | 3.4.10 @ 8:00PM

Bunning asked on the floor of the Senate, “If we cannot pay for a bill that all 100 senators support, how can we tell the American people with a straight face that we will ever pay for anything? That is what senators say they want, and that is what the American people want.”

In their homes, many Americans are likely wondering, “If the United States Senate can’t find $10 billion for one spending measure, where will it find $3.83 trillion for the full annual budget?”

Federal corporate tax and individual income tax revenue in February 2010 were $34 billion - less than the receipts of February 2009. (So much for the recession being over.) Although $34 billion may seem like an enormous amount of money to most Americans, it contributes little toward an annual federal budget of $3.83 trillion. With receipts of $34 billion per month, it would take 113 months of taxes to pay for 12 months of federal spending.

How sad that only one Senator seems to understand that...

Read The Obama Timeline - to understand how we got into this mess. (www.colony14.net)

Debbie| 3.4.10 @ 9:33PM

I have some food for thought -- for parents primarily. You have a choice, you can buy one of two homes. But, there is a catch -- the homes can never be sold, they are considered used upon your death and your debt obligation is transferred to your heirs. Which do you buy? One that can reasonably be paid off in your lifetime or one that cannot. For me, that is the choice we make when our government spends tax payer money not yet collected.

Also, a lesson shared with my son: the proposed budget cuts in Fairfax County, Va were in the news. Abolishing Freshman sports received a lot of attention. My son said wow mom, that stinks. More than you know, I told him. And I explained -- if they emphasized a little known or underused program or service that doesn't matter much to anyone there would be no public outcry and their plea for higher taxes wouldn't pass. That is pretty sneaky Mom. Yes it is son.

Just cultivate thinking at home and the results will amaze you.

Jason | 3.4.10 @ 11:23PM

Senator Bunning's efforts were too little too late and now in typical Republican fashion, he caved. I'd be far more impressed if Senator Bunning had put holds on every spending bill during his entire time in the Senate.

Pingback| 3.5.10 @ 3:50AM

Jim Bunning's Finest Hour links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…voted for the Republican they felt best reflected their concerns and interests. When Republicans vote for a Democrat for that reason, we can say "bipartisanship" reigns. The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Reply With Quote + Reply to Thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread » Tags for this Thread congress ethics gridlock View Tag Cloud Bookmarks Bookmarks Digg del.icio.…

Lindsey| 3.5.10 @ 8:24AM

According to Bunning, in his article in Thursday's USA TODAY, he was tricked by Reid into dropping his position and not convinced by fellow Republicans. I applaud Mr. Bunning's stand, but he needs to learn who he can trust!

randy Pickard| 3.5.10 @ 11:11AM

i find all your discussions irresponsible in material and in fact. to each and every one of you, you got suckered, not only did you get suckered, your each ignored ed the lil red light that went of in your head about the amount you owed, the ability to pay your debt and the spending patterns of your life. you al so supported your boss who took advantage of his customers and forced his way upon the community at large. so your all to blame for this shiz. i am self employed and a republican, i hope it all works out for you, btw hiring the illegals was a bad choice to

Pingback| 3.5.10 @ 12:43PM

Jeri Thompson: Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour | NewsReal Blog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…concerned about our country’s future, this latest “deal” makes the rest of Bunning’s Republican colleagues appear all the more politically cautious for not backing him up. Read the full article. from → External, Headline, Political News This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't…

Randy| 3.5.10 @ 1:15PM

It seems the big difference in health care reform is that Democrats want to cover everyone and not really worry about the cost, by offering group coverage rates. Republicans want to actually bring down the cost by reducing the amount insurance companies can charge and limiting malpractice suits so a doctor doesnt have to pay outragous costs and then pass them on

Scott | 3.5.10 @ 2:56PM

I'm one of the unemployed who was to be affected by the hold up, and I have to confess I wasn't wild about what was going on. On the one hand, I understand was Bunning was about and I am even sympathetic to his position, but on the other hand, he and the Democrats were playing a game of Russian roulette, only it was my skull that the barrel was pointed at.

Fortunately, the gun didn't go off, and, as a result, I think in the long run the political impact is zero or a net plus for the Republicans. People got a scare, but no actual harm was done, Bunning raised a policy point that I think most Americans agree with, and the Republicans as a whole, by being sympathetic to Bunning's point but not his tactics, managed to thread the needle and stand for fiscal responsibility while avoiding being labeled as not caring about those in economic distress.

Nick| 3.5.10 @ 6:10PM

Scott,

How did your "skull" have a gun pointed at it? How many months have you had to cut your spending, sell things, make different living arrangements, and find a legal way to make money?

Is it okay to saddle future generations with debt and interest payments because you can't support yourself? Quit demanding that your fellow citizens pay for your standard of living with their tax dollars.

As a Christian, I'm sorry about your plight.

As an U.S. citizen, I don't care about your "economic distress." I have my own problems. I don't expect anyone else to pay for my expenses but myself, and I demand you do the same.

Try being an American.

Scott | 3.5.10 @ 10:41PM

"Try being an American?"

You know NOTHING about me, my situation, how I've been looking for a job, how many nights I've been up at 3 am with a cold ball of lead in my stomach, or the fact that my tax dollars have helped pay the unemployment benefits for God knows how many people over the last quarter century.

And yet you dare to insinuate that I'm a selfish bastard because I now, during the worst economic conditions in decades, have need of it and am nervous about jerks in Washington playing political games with it?

Screw you and the horse you rode in on, you s.o.b.

P.S. Your attitude is about as "Christian" as Amadinejad.

Nick| 3.6.10 @ 1:05AM

Scott,

Sorry, but the truth hurts. It is precisely your attitude that has put this country in the mess we are in.

"I payed into the system, now I'm getting mine."

I don't know what state you live in, but in Michigan, BUSINESSES pay into a unemployment insurance pool. And when the business goes negative, the benefits don't stop. Which is one of the reasons Michigan is in the shape it's in.

Tell your grandchildren, "Sorry, grandpa didn't plan very well. And I'm entitled to it (just like a welfare queen). So, here's the bill, with interest." I'm sure they'll appreciate it.

The spending has to stop. So quit your whining. Try being a little bit more like John Wayne, instead of Woody Allen.

Show me where Christ said, "Go to Ceasar and tell him to tax us more, so that the poor can mooch off all of us."

Finally, is it that you CAN'T find a job? Or is it that you can't find a job that PAYS AS WELL as unemployment does?

Because, there are many people out there that have 2, 3, even 4 jobs. And you can't find one?

God Bless!

Scott | 3.6.10 @ 9:44AM

And I suppose you, Mr. Perfect Libertarian, never drive on public roads and never, ever take benefit of the police, fire department, public schools, or any other public service, even though your taxes pay for them, because that would be "mooching" and you don't want to be a "welfare queen."

The mere fact that you throw out the term "welfare queen" so blithely indicates you're an idiot ideologue no better than the fools who post on DailyKos. Reagan, with whom the term first gained widespread use, had no trouble with people who needed temporary assistance; the "welfare queen" reference was with regard to those who habitually abuse the system.

And as for me destroying my grandkids' future, don't worry; there are no future Americans coming from me. Given the itinerant nature of my profession, I long ago decided that it would be irresponsible to create a family I could not reliably provide for.

Don't worry about you and yours being burdened, either. After my TEMPORARY assistance runs out, that's it. And you won't even have to worry about me being a burden in terms of Social Security or Medicare; given my family history and my own health issues, the chances are much better than 50/50 that I won't live long enough to see a dime from either of those programs. Your grandkids aren't going to have to go into hock to pay for me.

You're welcome, by the way.

Nick| 3.6.10 @ 5:38PM

Why so hostile, Scott?

I'm no libertarian. I'm a Roman Catholic. And I, like you, have no children. But I do have a bunch of nieces and nephews. Also, you and I are paying the price for the lack of will by our parents and grandparents to stop the politicians in the past.

This wasteful spending has to stop. Period.

So, you can cry me a river about your foolish plan to be dead before you can suck-up more federal funds through Socialist Security and Medi-scare. It doesn't change the fact that you are part of the problem.

And comparing roads and policemen with unemployment welfare payments is apples and oranges. I don't use taxpayer money to make my car or house payment. People who do are "abusing the system" like the welfare queen.

Do you actually think public schools provide a benefit to society?

If you are in such dire straits, why do you still have a computer? Is that not a luxury you could do without?

Or, are you at a publicly funded library, mooching off the taxpayers even more?

I'll pray for your suffering. God Bless!

Jean Cartier| 3.5.10 @ 3:20PM

Despite some of the "detractors" writings above,
Jeri, I am with you--a PROUD AMERICAN who
is even prouder of our ANTI-Socialist society that will allow (not just support the BREATHING)
of our citizens to become all they can throught
FREE ENTERPRISE . We ALL need to support
the Sen. Bunning's and TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY the way it was for the last 200 years+!!

D Dub| 3.5.10 @ 4:24PM

This extended unemployment benefits to almost TWO YEARS!!! Do we really want to encourage people to sit around that long? I don't give a hoot who you are...if it takes you that long to find a jon in this or any economy...you aren't looking hard enough or you tink you're too good for what's available. WE CAN'T AFFORD THIS GARBAGE ANY MORE PEOPLE!!!! DON'T YOU GET IT!!!!

AuntieMadder| 3.5.10 @ 7:07PM

Response to:
EVELYN HENDRICKSON| 3.5.10 @ 5:24PM

Mrs. Hendrickson, anyone and everyone who's worked for a living and whose paychecks reflected deductions for FICA knows that workers pay into the Social Security and Medicare systems. Anyone who's received the quarterly mailings from the Social Security Administration that outlines your entire life's earnings to date and your entire life's contributions into your Social Security retirement account knows that you not only have paid into Social Security, but that, based on your lifetime of contributions, a certain amount of money in retirement payments have already been put in the books as yours (theoretically, anyway).

Whenever someone such as Pamela doesn't know this already, it indicates to me that that person either does not and has never worked for a living and/or he (or she, as is the case here) doesn't know even the basics about Social Security and Medicare. As Pamela is a lefturd, it could very well be both. As she's here trying to tell us how Social Security retirement benefits and Medicare work and is wrong wrong wrong in what she's telling us, she has no excuse for her ignorance nor for flaunting it.

Pingback| 3.6.10 @ 10:07PM

Bunning wants to pay bills, Dems still want to use credit | Politisite links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…budget battle. They were focused – as they all too often are — on Washington’s echo and perception chambers. In this case, that was a mistake. Read the rest of the story at The American Spectator Written by politisite Visit politisite's Website Follow politisite on Twitter Filed under: Jim Bunning, Pay-go, Senator, credit · Tags: Congress, credit, Democrats, Jim Bunning, Pay-go,…

Ed| 3.7.10 @ 5:40AM

Pamela said, "One more point, I don't see many individuals who qualify by their age refusing Medicare. "

Well, I for one, am 73 years old and have refused to authorize any charges to Medicare. Medicare and Medicaid are not legitimate functions of government and I won't be a part of it. The only way that we are going to get medical costs under control is to make everyone responsible for his own medical situation and get the government out of it.

pamela| 3.12.10 @ 1:01AM

Good for you and apparently you can afford quality medical care without Medicare (federal). Bet you would change your mind of you incurred medical costs that would endanger your home, food, life in general. I am quite amused that my comments have generated such response. Apparently, few ideas other than those of extreme right wingers read this publication.

Bill A.| 3.7.10 @ 2:49PM

Pamela,

Since your husband is a physician you may wish to ask him aboutt HIPPA since you obviously don't know a thing about patient privacy that now can have you subjected to massive fines for releasing someones medical/medical legal information without their permission. If you were doing that to me I would be seeking legal counsel.

pamela| 3.12.10 @ 12:57AM

You are apparently unable to read. No where did I mention any specifics about an individual's medial history - Moreover, as I AM a lawyer, I don't think I'll be asking my husband for legal advice. Get a lifse. Massive fines? Did you not read about Blue Cross/Shield's recent "accidental" disclosure of medical information to the public? I was one of those individuals and if you think those law are enforced, you are indeed quite simple.

pamela| 3.12.10 @ 1:05AM

One more thing - the only comment I could even consider you ranting about is that Ms. Thompson did not pay her medical bills and was sued for such - this fact was in many newspapers, Tennessean, New York Times, etc. - not my statement.

Pingback| 3.9.10 @ 6:11AM

The American Spectator : Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour « Cajun Conservatism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…American Spectator : Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour The American Spectator : Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour March 9, 2010 cjgary71 Leave a comment Go to comments http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/03/jim-bunnings-finest-hour CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This E-mail transmission may contain confidential information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine. It is…

Pingback| 3.18.10 @ 2:12AM

The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

Wars [Infographic] | Checking Together » The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour This type of reform will only bankrupt our country. See the article here: The American Spectator : Jim Bunning's Finest Hour Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply. Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website 'American Idol' Dad Takes On Gillibrand for Senate Seat (20)…

ghdmanufactoryoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 3:45AM

gfhfg

sunglass | 4.4.10 @ 3:48AM

hgjj

paulsmithoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 3:59AM

hgh

burberryoutlet | 4.4.10 @ 4:01AM

yhy

www.sunglass-mall.com | 4.6.10 @ 2:33AM

You won't have to worry about having your sunglass merchandise to gather dust on its display racks waiting for the summer season to commence www.sunglass-mall.com

geld lenen | 5.12.10 @ 6:21PM

thanks

Growing Peppers | 6.23.10 @ 9:02AM

Universal Health Care in the United States is giving upset to the politicians and as well to the American citizens. The main solution to this is someone should make a system to introduce to the Americans how this Universal Health Care. I agree to Universal health care because it gives benefits as well health security to all of us. One the main reason to approve the Universal Health Care is that it will sustain the needs of those sick people and the medicine would be a lot cheaper.

Kaiser | 11.9.10 @ 5:51PM

Kaiser Permanente insurance is a nonprofit organization providing healthcare services under three different heads, the Kaiser Permanente Health Plan, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Permanente Medical Groups. Health insurance comes under Kaiser Foundation Health Plan offering services in nine states as well as District of Columbia. Headquartered at Oakland, California, the group has more than 35 medical centers and 430 medical offices.

Blueshield | 11.9.10 @ 6:01PM

One of the first things one must do before deciding on which insurance company to use for their family's insurance needs, is to compare policies. It only makes sense. No matter who may recommend the plan or who may use it, one has to analyze the data available and see how it will work in their own unique situation. Even well known companies like Blue Shield medical plans must be compared to others. If one doesn't do this then they run the risk of getting an insurance plan that will not work in their situation.

modaal inkomen | 12.11.10 @ 8:56PM

Thanks :)

RDW wegenbelasting | 12.12.10 @ 11:55AM

Thanks alot :D

Smoking Cessation Proponent | 12.25.10 @ 10:31PM

modaal inkomen 2010 | 1.7.11 @ 11:08AM

Thanks for this :)

Minilening | 1.14.11 @ 11:58AM

I'm very interested how this is going to work out in the USA. The Dutch health care insurance doesn't differ much from the your future system. Costs in the Netherlands are getting extremely high.

lenen | 2.23.11 @ 2:55PM

Great article, especially because healt insurance is such a hot topic.

Twitter Achtergrond | 3.18.11 @ 11:18AM

Health insurance has always been a hot topic, good that it's discussed in this way!

سوريا | 6.25.11 @ 1:29AM

http://www.soryh.com

Zorgverzekering overstappen | 9.22.11 @ 9:50PM

Health insurance (zorgverzekering in Dutch) will remain a matter of discussion.

vergelijken van leningen | 1.16.12 @ 11:30AM

great thing!

Geld lenen zonder BKR toetsing | 3.30.12 @ 9:26AM

Always been a fan of Jim Bunning!

The American Spectator

Political Hay

Jim Bunning’s Finest Hour

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (258) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Tim| 3.3.10 @ 11:52AM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 2:25PM

Brent| 3.4.10 @ 2:55PM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:02PM

BobFL| 3.4.10 @ 11:10PM

Barry| 3.5.10 @ 8:29AM

Kristen| 3.4.10 @ 2:56PM

Steve Jones| 3.4.10 @ 3:07PM

Eric| 3.4.10 @ 3:52PM

Marilyn| 3.4.10 @ 4:24PM

Freelancelot | 3.4.10 @ 5:56PM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:00PM

Alfie| 3.5.10 @ 1:08AM

Indy| 3.6.10 @ 6:33PM

Doug| 3.6.10 @ 10:23AM

GMP| 3.6.10 @ 1:27PM

Sherry| 3.4.10 @ 7:47PM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 8:59PM

EVELYN HENDRICKSON| 3.5.10 @ 5:24PM

George McVay| 3.6.10 @ 11:59PM

AuntieMadder| 3.5.10 @ 3:39AM

Derek| 3.5.10 @ 5:40AM

Doug | 3.6.10 @ 11:22AM

George McVay| 3.7.10 @ 12:03AM

@refinnej| 3.18.10 @ 4:50PM

basur | 10.27.10 @ 9:19AM

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 12:01PM

Kenneth Allen| 3.3.10 @ 12:21PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 12:24PM

Richard H. Davis| 3.4.10 @ 10:46AM

tom Hooker| 3.7.10 @ 7:24PM

Franklin| 3.3.10 @ 12:25PM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 2:30PM

Mike| 3.4.10 @ 2:53PM

Colleen| 3.4.10 @ 5:35PM

pamelal| 3.4.10 @ 9:06PM

AuntieMadder| 3.5.10 @ 3:45AM

Bill| 3.5.10 @ 4:22PM

Tina| 3.6.10 @ 1:25PM

George McVay| 3.7.10 @ 12:07AM

Anonymous| 3.3.10 @ 12:38PM

Northright| 3.3.10 @ 12:50PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 1:14PM

victor| 3.3.10 @ 1:49PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 2:15PM

Dave| 3.4.10 @ 2:59PM

Brent| 3.4.10 @ 3:10PM

Die Fledermaus| 3.4.10 @ 8:13PM

pamela| 3.4.10 @ 9:31PM

Carol| 3.5.10 @ 7:43PM

ncatty| 3.3.10 @ 2:57PM

JC157| 3.3.10 @ 5:12PM

Tom| 3.3.10 @ 1:58PM

JP| 3.3.10 @ 2:42PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 3:27PM

JP| 3.3.10 @ 5:00PM

Paul from SA| 3.3.10 @ 6:22PM

30moves| 3.3.10 @ 6:37PM

Iris| 3.4.10 @ 3:15PM

William Marble| 3.4.10 @ 2:13PM

Doug| 3.6.10 @ 10:44AM

Pat C | 3.4.10 @ 12:34PM

Chalkdust| 3.3.10 @ 2:04PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 2:19PM

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 3:32PM

Bob| 3.3.10 @ 4:17PM

Al Adab| 3.3.10 @ 4:27PM

Tom| 3.3.10 @ 7:20PM

Doug | 3.6.10 @ 10:53AM

victor| 3.3.10 @ 10:19PM

Bill| 3.4.10 @ 6:20PM

neoconservative| 3.4.10 @ 6:31PM

Barry| 3.5.10 @ 8:58AM

Oldefarte| 3.3.10 @ 2:08PM

rdman| 3.3.10 @ 2:19PM