Witch-hunt Shaping Up Bigtime

Yeh. Part of it is that he does extremely well out on the campaign trail so when the going gets tough he starts doing the only thing he does well. Problem is, different skills are needed now. He came up with the cockamamy idea of having town halls because he does extremely well there. However it has been a disaster for all his cohorts who have been forced into that exercise.

They say that if the only tool you have in your tool box is a hammer, then all your problems start looking like nails. Similarly, the messiah does well out campaigning so every problem needs to be one that can be addressed by giving three speeches a day. Meanwhile we have both an economic stimulus package and a health care legislative process that are currently in the dumpster. But hey, maybe he can go out to Cutbank, Montana and speak to the Elks Club if he hasnt been there already.

Skip the Elks Club in Cutbank. Better to meet at the Dixie Inn in Shelby.
 
On defense, Obama woos right, left on health care - Yahoo! News
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


And some of our "leaders" are worried about the number of "YOU TUBES" at a town hall meeting while they use the "INTERNETS" to search "THE GOOGLE"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show#32485105
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I have a friend who used to work with the Todd Org doing executive comp and surveys for said comp. He has a huge database of executive comp per year from 1000s of major companies. The product is very detailed and comprehensive.

He gets the data from the company's annual reports (and other public docs). If he can get it for executive comp surveys, why can't the government just get it from the same documents?

Maybe they should hire my friend?

(and this, my friends, is exactly why the government should not run anything. They are too lazy and there is no incentive to actually do work.)

PPS - I am going to give him a ring in the morning and see if he can "sell" his comp survey to Waxman. I know the surveys are not cheap so the government will probably not go for it. However, they are probably more detailed and accurate than what the government will get or what will be given.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the company list!

The question I have is if the government thinks there's no competition currently between healthcare insurance, why would they name 52 companies for all to see? These 52 are only the top grossing companies, so there's many many more companies besides the ones listed.

No competition huh government? Another failure in their argument.

Waxman and his gang are trying to conjure up another smear campaign. Stop grasping at straws Dems, you're looking weaker by the day.
 
Thanks for the company list!

The question I have is if the government thinks there's no competition currently between healthcare insurance, why would they name 52 companies for all to see? These 52 are only the top grossing companies, so there's many many more companies besides the ones listed.

No competition huh government? Another failure in their argument.

Waxman and his gang are trying to conjure up another smear campaign. Stop grasping at straws Dems, you're looking weaker by the day.

-------------------------------

Yep. The top 3 most misleading talking points (dog whistles)are:

For profit - lots of expensive non profit options already.
Cancelable - rare and avoidable unless you are uneducable.
Increase competition - well over 53 companies each with multiple plans.
 
Back
Top