Every article I have read about the Kansas disaster has been negative until now. Denny managed to find the only one praising Brownback. Reagan inherited no such thing. His assistants (he wasn't smart enough to do things) created a recession on purpose (nowadays the EU calls it austerity) that lasted his whole presidency, and from which subsequent presidents never escaped because of his monstrous deficits. (He had been elected because he had promised in every speech to balance the budget.)
Ronald Reagan INCREASED taxes on the poor and middle-class more than any President in history. But back to Kansas, where Brownback has created Death Panels to drive out the needy. Mon Apr 27, 2015 at 02:40 PM PDT "Fleeing Kansas Saved My Life" A Teen Unable to Get Cancer Treatment Finds Hope in Tennessee byChris ReevesFollow forKansas & Missouri Kossacks 7 Comments / 7 New When Levi Ross was diagnosed with Cancer things looked bleak. A High School Senior looking forward to his future, the diagnosis of a form of spinal cancer called epitheliod sarcoma had put his life in jeopardy - moreso when his diagnosis was combined with Sam Brownback's for profit KanCare. http://www.rawstory.com/... “There’s no way that by staying in Kansas that I would have stayed alive,” Ross explained. “I feel pretty good considering I’ve had a massive surgery.” “It’s really sad,” he said of the KanCare experience. “It’s very upsetting that we divide ourselves by states.” While Ross's story tells us of a patient who managed to leave the state and receive lifesaving care, it also brings to mind those who are trapped with minimal to no resources, who find that Sam Brownback's KanCare is exactly what the Republican warned against: a death panel. Kansas Department of Health and Environment had hoped that cases like Ross would provide a testament to how efficient and well managed privatizing medicaid would be - saving money and lives. KanCare providers, however, had the ultimate final say. In the end, the goal of a treatment out of state to save his life wasn't something they were willing to provide to the Ross family. Thanks to charitable giving of St. Jude's hospital in Tennessee and attention to his plight, Levi Ross has a future ahead. It would be one thing if the situation with Ross' family was unique, but over the last year more Kansas families have found themselves receiving the short end of a privatized system that Governor Brownback imagined would save money. http://www.pitch.com/kansascity/kancare-sam-brownback-finn-bullers/Content?oid=4031015
Jimmy Carter. Nobel Laureate. Anti-semite (well, he hates jews, but loves arabs, so not technically). http://observer.com/2014/08/the-moral-disintegration-of-jimmy-carter/ The Moral Disintegration of Jimmy Carter By Rabbi Shmuley Boteach | 08/11/14 10:00am For years I have been defending Jimmy Carter against charges of anti-Semitism. Maybe I just didn’t want to believe that a President of the United States – the freest country in the world – could dislike Jews. So I chalked up his animus toward Israel and his awful accusations of Israeli apartheid to a faulty moral compass. Even the other day on NewsMax TV my friend Steve Malzberg asked me point blank if Jimmy Carter is an anti-Semite and I said no, blaming his inane statements on Israel to his being what Vladimir Lenin described as ‘a useful idiot.’ Mr. Carter always sides with the weaker party in a conflict notwithstanding their immorality. Let us never forget that the Carter Administration tried to seat the exiled Khmer Rouge as the rightful government of Cambodia even though they slaughtered one out of three Cambodians in the 1975-78 genocide. For Mr. Carter, weakness was itself a sign of righteousness. But Mr. Carter’s recent accusations of Israeli war crimes, his demand for a United Nations investigation into Israel’s actions in Gaza, and his call for Hamas – a genocidal terror organization – to be recognized as a legitimate political partner by Israel is making it near impossible not to ascribe to Carter some nasty feelings toward the Jewish state. Where is Mr. Carter’s call for the world to recognize the legitimacy of Al Qaida or the Taliban? Why isn’t Mr. Carter calling on Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan to recognize the legitimacy of Boko Haram? Why is it only the Jews who have to recognize the legitimacy of the terror organizations sworn to their annihilation? Mr. Carter’s pronouncements on the Middle East have become so toxic that had he not once been the American Commander-in-Chief they would be dismissed as the ravings of a man utterly out of touch with reality. But notwithstanding all the damage to his credibility, and notwithstanding his own grandson Jason, currently running to be Governor of Georgia, basically asking him to shut up, he remains obsessed with the Jews and Israel. While ISIS is trying to carry out the slaughter of Yazidis and Christians in Iraq, while Libya descends into a hellish morass of violence, and while hundreds of thousands die in Syria, Jimmy Carter remains fixated on the crimes of the Jewish state. (Proving once again Jews vote against their own interests @stephenson)
Kathleen Sebelius was governor of Kansas from 2003-2009 before joining the Obama administration to do damage on a national scale. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_state_budget_(2008–09) Kansas, like many other states, is facing a $186 million gap for fiscal year 2009 and according to early estimates approximately $1 billion deficit for fiscal year 2010.[1][2]However, more recent estimates place FY 2010's shortfall at $654 million.[3] Sure looks like tax cuts caused big deficits.
In April 1978, President Jimmy Carter declared the Khmer Rouge "the worst violator of human rights in the world." The only truth in this smear piece is that Denny Crane posted it in the wrong thread. Israel is a rogue terrorist state who's government not only sanctions, plans and commits numerous assassinations of perceived enemies around the world, most of whom are simply working stiffs who have no axe to grind, but also continues to spend our grandchildren's money stockpiling nuclear weapons to turn the arab world to glass.
What a moronic post. If Israel wanted to nuke the Middle East or kill all the Arabs, it would have been done long ago. My preference would be peace and prosperity for all parties there. Iran is a product of Carter's presidency. Just as ISIL is a product of Obama's. ISIL sounds just your speed.
Laughing at yourself? Look at the horrific green line. No change from late 70s to the early 80s in the party controlling Congress. The only change was Reagan and his austerity-forcing debts. He turned his party into the ideology of freeloader borrowing. Then Israel would have immediately been terminated by the superpowers. But thanks for warning readers when your post is about to be moronic.
Do you get dizzy from spinning so much? There were no austerity forcing debts. They were there in 1980, when Carter was president. Next you'll tell me you were only making a joke. What a knee slapper.
Did you just say that Carter ran $200 billion annual deficits like Reagan? Do you deny that in his very first budget year, Reagan more than doubled Carter's worst year (of 4 years)...and that first year was Reagan's BEST year for deficits (out of 8 fucking worse years...it was just hell to live under that laughing freeloader).
You are mixing the words "debt" and "deficits." Surely you understand the difference. The green line is deficit, and it wasn't $0 in 1980. The debt and deficit each roughly doubled in Carter's 4 years, and again in Reagan's 8. Your statement about austerity is absurd. In economics, austerity is the policy of reducing government budget deficits. Austerity policies may include spending cuts, tax increases, or a mixture of both. Budget deficits didn't reduce. Anyone who can read a graph can see that is true.
Oh and by the way, Reagan was so pissed off at Menachem Begin over his invasions against American will, that he had his wife offed while Begin was in Washington, D.C. That neutralized Begin, and introduced years of more liberal Israeli prime ministers to American liking. Your hero Reagan was the most anti-Israel president before or since, in his strong reactions to Israeli aggression.
LOL at the fantasies you come up with. Reagan ordered peacekeepers to Palestine and many were killed by a terrorist act. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing
I never confused debt and deficit and you know it. Nice little diversion there, I must compliment you. I'm not going to look it up, but Carter averaged $20-something billion deficits, while Reagan averaged $200-something billion. 10 times as much. You throw out dictionary definitions to deny that fact...ha ha ha!!! Along with something irrelevant about doubling. Gotta compliment you again. Great lying. It'll fool most of your readers. 10 times as much...10 times as much. That's what matters. Democratic Congress caused it? Then why didn't they cause $200 billion deficits under Carter? Reagan caused it.
The green line is deficit. By definition, austerity would be shrinking deficits. You can't have it both ways.
