<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Party of &#8216;No&#8217; in 2010</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:52:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat J</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-356087</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-356087</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m definitely in the minority jharp.  Unlike a lot of these posters you actually make sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m definitely in the minority jharp.  Unlike a lot of these posters you actually make sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jharp</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-355438</link>
		<dc:creator>jharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 01:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-355438</guid>
		<description>Pat J:

“What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?”

&quot;NEVER. Maybe one of those people with chronic conditions will someday find a cure for what ails them. Providing the poor wretch lives long enough without insurance. Obama’s health care proposal will save lives and help reduce the deficit.&quot;
------------------------------------------------
You will find yourself in the minority here.

The belief here is to first have the unhealthy lose everything they have worked their entire lives to accumulate.

And in the meantime let them worry about the expenses instead of focusing on getting well.

And one minor point. Whether or not the find a cure is not the issue. It has a lot to do with quality of life during the experience.

And these people call themselves Christians.

Go figure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat J:</p>
<p>“What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?”</p>
<p>&#8220;NEVER. Maybe one of those people with chronic conditions will someday find a cure for what ails them. Providing the poor wretch lives long enough without insurance. Obama’s health care proposal will save lives and help reduce the deficit.&#8221;<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
You will find yourself in the minority here.</p>
<p>The belief here is to first have the unhealthy lose everything they have worked their entire lives to accumulate.</p>
<p>And in the meantime let them worry about the expenses instead of focusing on getting well.</p>
<p>And one minor point. Whether or not the find a cure is not the issue. It has a lot to do with quality of life during the experience.</p>
<p>And these people call themselves Christians.</p>
<p>Go figure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat J</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-355182</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:55:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-355182</guid>
		<description>&quot;What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?&quot;

NEVER.  Maybe one of those people with chronic conditions will someday find a cure for what ails them.  Providing the poor wretch lives long enough without insurance.  Obama&#039;s health care proposal will save lives and help reduce the deficit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?&#8221;</p>
<p>NEVER.  Maybe one of those people with chronic conditions will someday find a cure for what ails them.  Providing the poor wretch lives long enough without insurance.  Obama&#8217;s health care proposal will save lives and help reduce the deficit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat J</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-355179</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:53:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-355179</guid>
		<description>The party of &quot;no.&quot;  More like the party of &quot;doh.&quot;  With all apologies to Homer Simpson.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The party of &#8220;no.&#8221;  More like the party of &#8220;doh.&#8221;  With all apologies to Homer Simpson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jharp</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354932</link>
		<dc:creator>jharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354932</guid>
		<description>Commuter:

&quot;harpo, you are one of the most consistent liars I’ve run across&quot;

Care to prove your point and cite one lie I&#039;ve posted? I didn&#039;t think so.

&quot;Here’s another fact to deal with. I do not believe for one moment that you are&quot;

I am what I say I am. I&#039;m not always right but I always tell the truth.

And for the fifth time. 

What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Commuter:</p>
<p>&#8220;harpo, you are one of the most consistent liars I’ve run across&#8221;</p>
<p>Care to prove your point and cite one lie I&#8217;ve posted? I didn&#8217;t think so.</p>
<p>&#8220;Here’s another fact to deal with. I do not believe for one moment that you are&#8221;</p>
<p>I am what I say I am. I&#8217;m not always right but I always tell the truth.</p>
<p>And for the fifth time. </p>
<p>What about those who need chronic care who lack insurance? Let them die?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Commuter</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354904</link>
		<dc:creator>Commuter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 17:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354904</guid>
		<description>harpo, you are one of the most consistent liars I&#039;ve run across on blogs, and that&#039;s saying a lot. I&#039;ve seen you on other blogs displaying your appalling ignorance, then disappear as the moderator has enough and bans you. In the last few weeks you&#039;ve set up shop under the jharp line on this site to advocate for the same progressive claptrap here.

I can only think that the moderators here allow you to stick around as an example of the worst of the lies that the progressives offer and one of the duller examples of the tools they use to spread them. And to your credit, you rise to the challenge.

Here&#039;s another fact to deal with. I do not believe for one moment that you are anything other than a young, immature, and extremely poorly educated example of the typical cannon fodder the progressive left uses and discards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>harpo, you are one of the most consistent liars I&#8217;ve run across on blogs, and that&#8217;s saying a lot. I&#8217;ve seen you on other blogs displaying your appalling ignorance, then disappear as the moderator has enough and bans you. In the last few weeks you&#8217;ve set up shop under the jharp line on this site to advocate for the same progressive claptrap here.</p>
<p>I can only think that the moderators here allow you to stick around as an example of the worst of the lies that the progressives offer and one of the duller examples of the tools they use to spread them. And to your credit, you rise to the challenge.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s another fact to deal with. I do not believe for one moment that you are anything other than a young, immature, and extremely poorly educated example of the typical cannon fodder the progressive left uses and discards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jharp</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354661</link>
		<dc:creator>jharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354661</guid>
		<description>Commuter:

&quot;harpo, I used your new rules and the fuel as a hypothetical tax when you decided to change the rules and claim that the income redistribution federal tax credit could be applied to any tax you wanted in order to claim your debunked 95% tax cut figure.&quot;

There aren&#039;t any &quot;new rules&quot;. Those are the rules and have always been the rules. And the rules don&#039;t apply to any federal tax. (gasoline and cigarette taxes being a good example) The wingnut gas bags claim that 46% of those receiving Obama&#039;s tax credit don&#039;t pay any taxes is flat out false. It sole intention is to mislead and that is dishonest.  It&#039;s just that simple.

And I don&#039;t belong to any &quot;group&quot;. I graduated college and started my own business at age 23 and have been at it for 25 years. And I have traveled all over the world (4 continents)as well as throughout the United States. And based on my life&#039;s experiences and my education I have learned to deal in facts and to think for myself. You ought to try it.

And it disgusts me me hear gasbags like Limbaugh lie and obfuscate about 46% of the tax cut recipients don&#039;t pay any taxes. And then his dittohead minions pick it up and run with it.

It is a lie and you know it. And as a patriotic American I refuse to sit back and watch this lie spread.

The fact is 95% of us benefited from Obama&#039;s tax cuts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Commuter:</p>
<p>&#8220;harpo, I used your new rules and the fuel as a hypothetical tax when you decided to change the rules and claim that the income redistribution federal tax credit could be applied to any tax you wanted in order to claim your debunked 95% tax cut figure.&#8221;</p>
<p>There aren&#8217;t any &#8220;new rules&#8221;. Those are the rules and have always been the rules. And the rules don&#8217;t apply to any federal tax. (gasoline and cigarette taxes being a good example) The wingnut gas bags claim that 46% of those receiving Obama&#8217;s tax credit don&#8217;t pay any taxes is flat out false. It sole intention is to mislead and that is dishonest.  It&#8217;s just that simple.</p>
<p>And I don&#8217;t belong to any &#8220;group&#8221;. I graduated college and started my own business at age 23 and have been at it for 25 years. And I have traveled all over the world (4 continents)as well as throughout the United States. And based on my life&#8217;s experiences and my education I have learned to deal in facts and to think for myself. You ought to try it.</p>
<p>And it disgusts me me hear gasbags like Limbaugh lie and obfuscate about 46% of the tax cut recipients don&#8217;t pay any taxes. And then his dittohead minions pick it up and run with it.</p>
<p>It is a lie and you know it. And as a patriotic American I refuse to sit back and watch this lie spread.</p>
<p>The fact is 95% of us benefited from Obama&#8217;s tax cuts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Commuter</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354576</link>
		<dc:creator>Commuter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354576</guid>
		<description>&#039;fantasy number that can’t be supported using readily available figures.&#039;

should be: &#039;fantasy number, can’t be supported using readily available figures.&#039;

&#039;who’ve long ago realized that taxes across the board&#039;

should be: &#039;who’ve long ago realized that taxes across the board are rising&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;fantasy number that can’t be supported using readily available figures.&#8217;</p>
<p>should be: &#8216;fantasy number, can’t be supported using readily available figures.&#8217;</p>
<p>&#8216;who’ve long ago realized that taxes across the board&#8217;</p>
<p>should be: &#8216;who’ve long ago realized that taxes across the board are rising&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Commuter</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354568</link>
		<dc:creator>Commuter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354568</guid>
		<description>harpo, I used your new rules and the fuel as a hypothetical tax when you decided to change the rules and claim that the income redistribution federal tax credit could be applied to any tax you wanted in order to claim your debunked 95% tax cut figure. That was illustrating a point. That point was that if you want to use those rules, then include all federal taxes, not just the ones in a paycheck. I followed it up in another post with more specifics showing that in the case of smokers, and they concentrate in households, they could already be behind the game by your rules. I also pointed out in another comment that I could play harder by your rules and assign the income tax credit to anything I wanted and call it a Pampers credit.

The core concept is that the feel good campaign promise and the subsequent legislation was presented, touted, and bragged about as an income tax credit that would exclude an arbitrary group defined as the rich not paying their fair share and reduce the income taxes paid by an fantasy number that can&#039;t be supported using readily available figures.

My beef with you started on another thread when you were vulgarly attacking the Tea Party people, who&#039;ve long ago realized that taxes across the board, using the 95% sham. Pointed out to you then that they were magnitudes smarter than you or the other tools on the sites you link to because they do realize that and are doing something proactive about it.

Which I believe both scares the clown class you belong to and makes you extremely uncomfortable holding onto a position that people you call redneck teabaggers easily see as a fools stock in trade.

Your 95% claim, in any of it&#039;s iterations, has gotten old, harpo. There is a dolt here. It&#039;s you. That&#039;s a common attribute for tools like yourself who are so eager to be used by the manipulators that you toss aside any pretense of intellectual honesty. Just to be a member of the cools kids. 

All your gyrations, all the morphing of your positions, and all the ignorance and dishonesty they indicate, has been a futile exercise in trying to support a position that no one but the tools have accepted as anything but an increasingly desperate POTUS&#039; shell game for months now.

Increasingly desperate enough to reveal his very disquieting confusion on how to salvage his game on prime time television. A performance you call brilliant. Which reveals all we need to know about about your sycophancy and explains the derisive lack of independent and serious thought we get from you.

Manipulators don&#039;t use sharp tools, harpo. They use dull ones.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>harpo, I used your new rules and the fuel as a hypothetical tax when you decided to change the rules and claim that the income redistribution federal tax credit could be applied to any tax you wanted in order to claim your debunked 95% tax cut figure. That was illustrating a point. That point was that if you want to use those rules, then include all federal taxes, not just the ones in a paycheck. I followed it up in another post with more specifics showing that in the case of smokers, and they concentrate in households, they could already be behind the game by your rules. I also pointed out in another comment that I could play harder by your rules and assign the income tax credit to anything I wanted and call it a Pampers credit.</p>
<p>The core concept is that the feel good campaign promise and the subsequent legislation was presented, touted, and bragged about as an income tax credit that would exclude an arbitrary group defined as the rich not paying their fair share and reduce the income taxes paid by an fantasy number that can&#8217;t be supported using readily available figures.</p>
<p>My beef with you started on another thread when you were vulgarly attacking the Tea Party people, who&#8217;ve long ago realized that taxes across the board, using the 95% sham. Pointed out to you then that they were magnitudes smarter than you or the other tools on the sites you link to because they do realize that and are doing something proactive about it.</p>
<p>Which I believe both scares the clown class you belong to and makes you extremely uncomfortable holding onto a position that people you call redneck teabaggers easily see as a fools stock in trade.</p>
<p>Your 95% claim, in any of it&#8217;s iterations, has gotten old, harpo. There is a dolt here. It&#8217;s you. That&#8217;s a common attribute for tools like yourself who are so eager to be used by the manipulators that you toss aside any pretense of intellectual honesty. Just to be a member of the cools kids. </p>
<p>All your gyrations, all the morphing of your positions, and all the ignorance and dishonesty they indicate, has been a futile exercise in trying to support a position that no one but the tools have accepted as anything but an increasingly desperate POTUS&#8217; shell game for months now.</p>
<p>Increasingly desperate enough to reveal his very disquieting confusion on how to salvage his game on prime time television. A performance you call brilliant. Which reveals all we need to know about about your sycophancy and explains the derisive lack of independent and serious thought we get from you.</p>
<p>Manipulators don&#8217;t use sharp tools, harpo. They use dull ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jharp</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-party-of-no-in-2010/#comment-354559</link>
		<dc:creator>jharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:09:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=62097#comment-354559</guid>
		<description>HawkWatcher: Remember what you learned in elementary school? You can’t subtract from the number zero. 

You must have dropped out after the 2nd grade.

0 - 2 = -2

&quot;The 46% who already were paying no federal income tax did not get a tax cut.&quot;

Flat out false. Those 46% did get a tax cut. $400 for individuals, $800 for couples.

All in all the tax cut benefited 95% of us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HawkWatcher: Remember what you learned in elementary school? You can’t subtract from the number zero. </p>
<p>You must have dropped out after the 2nd grade.</p>
<p>0 &#8211; 2 = -2</p>
<p>&#8220;The 46% who already were paying no federal income tax did not get a tax cut.&#8221;</p>
<p>Flat out false. Those 46% did get a tax cut. $400 for individuals, $800 for couples.</p>
<p>All in all the tax cut benefited 95% of us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

