Letters to the Editor

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 at 1:05am

Spares no expense

Remind me not to vacation to Alabama anytime soon. Seems some nut there "loves Sarah Palin so much" she's forking out $63,500 for a four-hour lunch with the former vice presidential candidate.

All of it is going to charity, but knowing Palin, she'll skim a little off the top for "expenses." And of course, stiff the waiter.

Paul D'Argent, 37209

 

 

 

Send comments via e-mail to letters@nashvillecitypaper.com

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: alabama | Sarah Palin

286 Comments on this post:

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 2:39

chief, i know exactly what you're saying. no need to twist it.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:41

brrrrk,

"And they're all making big profits."

SURE they are! I would be worried if they weren't. But if you really buy that the healthcare reform won't cost a lot more or that it won't be worse than it is now, you're living a pipe dream. I'd rather it stay the way it is NOW than have it made worse.

By: gdiafante on 9/29/09 at 2:41

Chief has no Christian morality, he's full of it in every aspect.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:42

Blanket,

"how about secular, chief?"

You may not know this, Blanket...but the church doesn't turn anyone in need away.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:43

Blanket,

"indeed, brrrk. his type would love for the U.S. to be closer to a christian theocracy than it already is."

Not really Blanket...but you and brrrrk, it would seem, would rather that all christian theology be stamped out entirely.

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 2:43

chiefpayne568 said

"AH, so you believe the government should take care of everyone and that charities should not exist.

Wow...pretty socialist (communist?) attitude, I must say."

Didn't say that now did I... once again putting words in my mouth. But I will say that any private institution that fails to deliver a public service that is dependent upon by all for existence should be dissolved. We should go back to the days when states could determine whether or not a company was acting in the public good, and if determined they weren't... pull their license.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:44

Gdia,

"Chief has no Christian morality, he's full of it in every aspect."

Appears you are now the one being arrogant, yes?

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 2:45

chiefpayne568 said

"Not really Blanket...but you and brrrrk, it would seem, would rather that all christian theology be stamped out entirely."

I have no problem with Christianity, only Chri$tians....

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:47

brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 3:43

"Didn't say that now did I... once again putting words in my mouth. But I will say that any private institution that fails to deliver a public service that is dependent upon by all for existence should be dissolved. We should go back to the days when states could determine whether or not a company was acting in the public good, and if determined they weren't... pull their license."

No but you did as why charities are necessary...and given the discussion we were having I assumed you meant that the government would take over all the normal duties of charites...I would think a logical assumption.

Now I WILL agree with you that the states should have the right to pull licenses for companies not acting in the public good, rather than the federal government. I am a believer that much of the power in the federal government really does belong to the states.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:49

brrrrk,

"I have no problem with Christianity, only Chri$tians"

Really? So you have no problem with the religion...just those who consider themselves Christians. Fascinating.

By: Dragon on 9/29/09 at 2:49

"But I will say that any private institution that fails to deliver a public service that is dependent upon by all for existence should be dissolved"

No more food for you.

By: Loner on 9/29/09 at 2:52

The politicians, Democratic and Republican, have top-shelf health care plans in place, all taxpayer-funded. The miltary have almost top-shelf health care available - at taxpayer expense. The aged and the destitute have a decent, but lower-shelf product - again, avalable at taxpayer expense.

The super rich, fat cat Americans, like Rush Limbaugh are usually self-insured. They don't need any taxpayer help with their medical bills.

The rest of the country has to scramble to protect their assets when adversity strikes - as it inevitably does. These taxpayers foot the bill, but get the shaft.

US employers are currently burdened with providing expensive health insurance plans for their workers...this creates a competitive disadvantage for American manufacturers and service providers. Industrialized nations with national healthcare programs are in a better position to compete in the global marketplace than we are. Or am I wrong on that?

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 2:52

chiefpayne568 said

"Now I WILL agree with you that the states should have the right to pull licenses for companies not acting in the public good, rather than the federal government."

And you see a company like PacifiCare, a company that denied claims 39.6 percent of the time while making a 20% plus profit, as acting in the public good?

By: gdiafante on 9/29/09 at 2:54

"Really? So you have no problem with the religion...just those who consider themselves Christians. Fascinating."

Clueless.

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 2:54

chiefpayne568 said

"Really? So you have no problem with the religion...just those who consider themselves Christians. Fascinating."

Didn't say I have a problem with real Christians, but Chri$tians... those who put the dollar sign before their faith.

By: house_of_pain on 9/29/09 at 2:55

brrrrk, being alive is a pre-existing condition. That's not PacifiCare's fault...

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:55

brrrrk,

"And you see a company like PacifiCare, a company that denied claims 39.6 percent of the time while making a 20% plus profit, as acting in the public good?"

Perhaps not...but until a real reform bill comes, I will say they are better than the government alternative, at this point.

As for agreeing with you on the state's rights issue, I believe the states should have the right that the federal government has taken away...but they need to be judicious about it.

By: Dragon on 9/29/09 at 2:55

"US employers are currently burdened with providing expensive health insurance plans for their workers...this creates a competitive disadvantage for American manufacturers and service providers. Industrialized nations with national healthcare programs are in a better position to compete in the global marketplace than we are. Or am I wrong on that?"

You're wrong. US employers include health insurance as part of the workers' compensation. If they did away with it, they should increase the base wages accordingly. It has no effect on global competition, unless you are suggesting the compensation be reduced (no benefits, no compensation of wages).

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 2:57

Chief,

And you see a company like PacifiCare, a company that denied claims 39.6 percent of the time while making a 20% plus profit, as acting in the public good?

Simple question, simple answer... yes or no.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:58

brrrrk,

"Didn't say I have a problem with real Christians, but Chri$tians... those who put the dollar sign before their faith."

Just because someone is a Christian doesn't make them fools either. They have no problem having their dollars go to help their fellow man...they just don't want their money to be wasted and abused by politicians.

Hence, my suggestion, which I sent to both Tennessee Senators, to expand Medicaid to include a larger financial area so those who cannot afford healthcare could get that. What's wrong with THAT idea? Best of all, the only ones who wouldn't have healthcare then would be the ones who don't WANT healthcare. Right?

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 2:59

brrrrk,

"Simple question, simple answer... yes or no."

Ok...you want a simple answer to a complicated question. Fine.

YES

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:05

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 3:43
Blanket,

"indeed, brrrk. his type would love for the U.S. to be closer to a christian theocracy than it already is."

Not really Blanket...but you and brrrrk, it would seem, would rather that all christian theology be stamped out entirely.

Out of government? YES. Culturally, no.

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 3:08

Blanket,

Ironic...I would have no problem with religion being out of government, as long as government would stay out of culture. LOL

By: house_of_pain on 9/29/09 at 3:08

Amen, Blanket.

By: Loner on 9/29/09 at 3:15

Religion? As a civilizing influence, religion is highly over-rated. As we can see today, in the Middle East especially, religion has been used as cover for colonialism, oppression, aggression, occupation and apartheid. Religion has given cover and a divine rationale for mass murder and assassinations.

When Bin Laden refers to a Zionist-Crusader Alliance, he is accurately describing the "special relationship" between Christian America and Jewish Israel. I listen to many of the Christian AM radio programs, the evangelicals certainly fancy themselves as crusaders on a mission from God, as they support and defend the Israelis, no matter what.

The Judeo-Christian outburst of the day...."Goldstone lies!"

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:18

OK, single payor healthcare is still on the table, right?

By: chiefpayne568 on 9/29/09 at 3:26

Blanket,

Well it is in the House...not sure about the Senate.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:28

You do know that health insurance companies are exempt from anti-trust laws, right?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dylan-ratigan/why-would-we-let-them-rig_b_302480.html

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:30

Another clueless christian:

http://failblog.org/2009/09/29/church-store-fail/

By: brrrrk on 9/29/09 at 3:30

Blanketnazi2 said

"You do know that health insurance companies are exempt from anti-trust laws, right?"

Health Insurance and Baseball... go figure?

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:31

Wait a minute - considering the stance of the Pope in regard to pedophiles serving as priests, it could be a Catholic store.

By: Loner on 9/29/09 at 3:36

Ah, the old shell game, Dragon? If we take from Peter to give to Paul et cetera. It's just a wash then, eh?

If employers were off the hook for health bennies, then employers would have to pay their workers a higher wage? Perhaps. At the very least, it would get American employers out of the health insurance business and that would be a good thing, IMO.

If an affordable public option was out there, workers might not need the higher wages that you envision, Dragon.

Are you saying that employers would rather pay premiums to insurance companies as opposed to paying that money directly to their workers. Sounds like a kick-back scam between American employers and the insurance companies.

Most of the industrialized nations agree with my point of view, Insuring health care is the responsibility of government, not employers. That's not socialism, that's social responsibility.

By: slacker on 9/29/09 at 3:38

Loner, you are joking, correct?

By: dargent7 on 9/29/09 at 3:46

Sorry to break up the fist fight...but an 8.0 earthquake just hit "American Samoa".
The tsunami is traveling at 500mph outwards....should hit Hawai'i by tomorrow and Tenn. by Thurs. Oh, wait. We've got no shore line. So, let's continue with the bull*sh**t.
Puts things in perspective, doesn't it? Mother Nature can take us all down, at will.
We all ramble on and on. Troop surges, more wars, and then an earthquake shuts everyone up. Hopefully. But, doubt it.

By: Blanketnazi2 on 9/29/09 at 3:46

i just read that, dargent.

By: Loner on 9/29/09 at 4:06

Slacker, be more specific....joke?