Earlier today, MSNBC's cameras spotted a protester carrying a gun outside Portsmouth High School, where President Obama was about to hold a health care town hall. And, as he just told Chris Matthews on Hardball, the gun was loaded.
"Who'd be silly enough to carry an unloaded firearm?" said the protester, William Kostric.
Matthews then asked him why he brought the gun to a presidential event.
"That's not even a relevant question. The question is, why don't people bear arms these days?" Kostric said.
He said no one from New Hampshire was alarmed by seeing the gun, which was strapped to his leg. Maybe the people "bused in from Massachusetts" were alarmed, he said.
"They already have their health care scheme and their socialism. They can keep it," he said.
Kostric was also carrying a sign that said, "It is time to water the tree of liberty," an apparent reference to this quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Matthews asked Kostric to say the rest of the quote -- the part not on his sign. He only responded that was for people to "look up. It's not a sound bite."
"I'm not advocating violence," he said. "I'm advocating an informed society, an armed society, a polite society."


Jyrinx
August 11, 2009 5:41 PM
That's “sound bite.” The term predates the popular knowledge of the word byte.
</pet-peeve>
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ouroboros
August 11, 2009 6:10 PM in reply to Jyrinx
It's polite to intimidate people with your gun into voting and legislating how you'd like them to you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbeats
August 11, 2009 5:48 PM
This is why Libertarians ideals never work in the real world. It is a childish ideology. The thought that if every single person at that event was carrying a loaded weapon would make everyone safer is blind demagoguery at its worst.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 11, 2009 5:53 PM
gotta agree with him on making sure your firearm is loaded if you're gonna carry one.
but when you say that it's time to water the tree of liberty (with blood), you are advocating violence. at least have the guts to admit it. coward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris
August 11, 2009 7:01 PM in reply to fkaZk0sm0
He did, by all means, follow the law. So good for him. But I'm not intimidated, which was his purpose. It's to show who is tougher. And no one is tougher than a man with a gun. It's useless though to focus on the gun. Focus on what he says about health care reform. Don't get side tracked.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bar Kafka
August 12, 2009 8:53 AM in reply to Chris
Help us out here. What exactly was his message about health insurance reform?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:27 AM in reply to Chris
So, let's look a little deeper at your excuse, "It's legal."
How about if 5 shoed up packing? 10? 50? 100?
At which point is the IRRESPONSIBILITY so overwhelming that you can no longer ignore it?
Clue: EVERY right is inextricably entwined with RESPONSIBILITY. Figured you and the gun-nut need to be told this because it NEVER arises when the rhetoric is ONLY about, "MY rights!"
Which self-absorbed rhetoric wholly overlooks that OTHERS have rights, including that of not being threatened with violence.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
twirling fartknocker
August 11, 2009 5:56 PM
if this guy is not a total loner, I pity anyone who shares their life with him
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shortstop
August 11, 2009 6:24 PM in reply to twirling fartknocker
Um, look how closely his eyes are placed and note how much he resembles a stunned bovine. It's a safe bet he's a loner.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
August 11, 2009 6:02 PM
I sure hope somebody is cataloging these folks showing up at these rallies. I fear we are going to find out they are all meeting in the basement at C street.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GeorgeTheShrubber
August 11, 2009 6:07 PM
This guy's right. Guns dont kill people. People with guns kill people. One troubling demographic to keep an eye on are those unhinged, gun-packin, socialist-Massachusetts-hatin, sign-carryin protest nutters who wish to spill 'tyrant' blood on a liberty tree.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
August 11, 2009 6:19 PM
I am rarely surprised at the depth of ignorance in this country anymore, but I am becoming surprised that there are so many of them out there. We have an epidemic of crazies. Thanks Rush, Glen, Shaun, Lou and Bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tchamp77
August 11, 2009 6:21 PM
Is this guy a specimen of what Matthews refers to as "regular Americans?"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kenneth Thomas
August 11, 2009 6:23 PM
How did this guy not get arrested?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
August 11, 2009 6:49 PM in reply to Kenneth Thomas
arrested for what?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lok52
August 11, 2009 9:07 PM in reply to Kenneth Thomas
Basically, be not breaking the law. Here in Ohio, it is not illegal to carry a firearm openly, you just need a permit to carry one concealed. And follow the various laws about where you can carry it. I'm sure, if he had been breaking the law, the SS or the local cops would have been all over him.
He didn't break the law, so they didn't arrest him. That is the way lawful societies are supposed to work. Even if you don't like the laws.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
boo_lala
August 12, 2009 12:16 AM in reply to Lok52
Threatening the president is against federal law, whether or not he was allowed to carry a gun there. He was holding a sign that says "It's time to water the tree of liberty" in a location where the president would soon be arriving. He admitted on televison that he was referencing the quote which defines that "water" as the spilled blood of patriots or tyrants. I think a federal prosecutor could argue that the sign by itself, in the context of the townhall, consituted a threat on the president, and violated 18 USC Sec. 871 Having his gun on display would be extra evidence of his intention and meaning.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lok52
August 12, 2009 10:34 AM in reply to boo_lala
Sorry, that doesn't scan. The Secret Service, who are extremely paranoid about threats to the President, and are quite familiar with the Federal Statutes that cover that kind of thing, saw that this guy was there with a gun, carrying that sign, but didn't arrest him for breaking that law for some unknown reason? I don't think so.
Unless you are a lawyer for the SS, I am going to have to agree with their interpretation of the events, which, since they didn't arrest the man, seems to be he was there lawfully exercising his 1st and 2nd Amendment rights. As long as he didn't try to approach the President or pull his weapon, he was allowed to be there.
There is another possibility. The SS wanted to arrest him and informed the President, who ordered them not to do so, despite the apparent threat. Why would he do something like that? Because arresting the man would have made him front page news for days, and made upcoming town halls and the healthcare debate even more charged up, with wingnuts getting even more paranoid about their 2nd Amendment rights. Instead, people hear the guy on Harball and think, "What an idiot" and it dies down.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:33 AM in reply to boo_lala
Gun-nuts always leave out absolutely all laws which don't have the word "rights" in it. Thus everything is "legal" simply because they say so, including an unlimited "right of self-defense" on any pretext whatsoever. And if you state the fact tthat their "rights" -- when actual -- are also LIMITED by law, they accuse you of being a "tyrant" and strap on a gun in defense of their "liberty" to be quasi-criminal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tchamp77
August 11, 2009 6:24 PM
Is this guy a specimen of what Matthews refers to as "regular Americans?"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
August 11, 2009 6:43 PM
The thought that if every single person at that event was carrying a loaded weapon would make everyone safer is blind demagoguery at its worst.
I would say that anywhere the President is, is about the safest place in the world to be.
So what would be the need to pack a gun, other than to overcompensate for something you're severely lacking, in a rather public way?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:38 AM in reply to rynato
Either overcompensate, or to calculatedly intimidate, threaten, push the limits, make a scene, and get media attention.
Look at the sequence: first a twit twitters that protesters should attend town halls armed. Next, a gun-nut shows at a town hall protest with a loade gun.
Watch: the number of gun-nuts following his lead will INCREASE.
When someone is injured or killed, will those here who defend that "right" finally get that there are issues not only of "rights" but ALSO of PUBLIC SAFETY -- which trumps individual "right" -- and RESPONSIBILITY?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Spencers Mom
August 11, 2009 6:47 PM
So, according to Bugeye Bobblehead, the problem with our society is that not enough people are armed!
Why is Matthews giving a nutjob like this air time?
PEACE
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 12, 2009 2:55 AM in reply to Spencers Mom
Hey, he's only spouting the NRA line. Their solution to every social problem seems to be to have more people carrying guns.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
flounder
August 11, 2009 6:48 PM
About the only place here in AZ where guns are not allowed is in the State Legislature. I'm trying to see if the teabaggers will try to convince the largely Republican legislature that they would be safer if everyone was carrying.
The best part of Matthews' interview was when he asked the guy about the history of people bringing guns to see the prez.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
emelbe
August 11, 2009 7:08 PM
I seem to recall David Reese of 'Get Your War On' fame satirically making reference to Obama's "give all the white peoples' guns to the black people program." This Kostric clown reminds me of Reese's reactionary conservative white guy 'Accounts Payable' character minus the repartee and, presumably, about twenty IQ points.
Too bad you can't strap those to your leg.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
August 11, 2009 7:09 PM
Anyone else getting worried about the Caucasian gene pool in this country?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
August 11, 2009 7:42 PM
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Carrying a gun, I imagine he sees himself a patriot, so where's the tyrant?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kovie
August 12, 2009 12:00 AM in reply to JohnW1141
Jefferson was referring to what he viewed as too-powerful central governments that trampled upon the natural rights of individuals and were morally illegitimate and legally unaccountable. Clearly, this man views Obama as a tyrant, because he wants health care reform and is thus taking away this man's freedom to be sick and untreated.
A paranoia so delusional, one can hardly fathom it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:41 AM in reply to kovie
ASnd he subsequently backed away from it when he saw the French revolution acting on the equivalent premise of "tyranny by the majority/mob".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
August 12, 2009 4:43 AM in reply to JohnW1141
That's easy. The one with the dark skin is the tyrant.
Oh, I'm sorry, what did I mean to say? Yeah, I meant, the one with the birth certificate issue, that's the tyrant. Yeah, like that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
paulw
August 11, 2009 7:47 PM
It's awfully tempting to suggest that the secret service should have obliged him (I'm assuming for the sake of argument that he considers himself a patriot), but that would have been giving him one of the things he wanted. Instead, he got the other thing he wanted, what was to get on TV trying to intimidate people.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
emelbe
August 11, 2009 7:58 PM in reply to paulw
Bingo. It looked to me like Kostric showed up to this event spoiling for a confrontation over his sacrosanct second amendment "right."
That the reactionary grievance queens are apparently starting to turn conspicuously militant is unsettling to say the least.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Fried Chicken Lover
August 12, 2009 12:40 AM in reply to paulw
Imagine if a die-hard leftist had showed up, armed, with that sign, to a Bush event while he was still president. He'd still be on the news, but it'd have been FoxNews reporting his death after the Secret Service pumped everything they had into him and several bystanders in the vicinity.
Double standards suck.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
August 12, 2009 2:59 AM in reply to Fried Chicken Lover
During the last administration, the sign alone would have been enough to have him carted off to jail for a few hours.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Snig
August 12, 2009 8:40 AM in reply to Fried Chicken Lover
Imagine someone with an Arab appearance or wearing a turban came wearing a gun and carrying a provocative sign. What if they came to a Bush event or a Palin rally?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
waybrilliant
August 11, 2009 8:12 PM
"I'm advocating an informed society, an armed society, a polite society."
Hmm, paraphrasing Heinlein. Wonder if he's going to get all pervy in his old age too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TomH in PA
August 11, 2009 8:28 PM
I saw the interview and the guy was quite reasonable and even articulate, in my view. The sign, however instantly disturbed me when I saw a still photo of the event earlier today. This well-disciplined young man in a tee shirt reminded me just a little too much of another fellow whose sign read "Fair Play for Cuba."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:45 AM in reply to TomH in PA
"Well disciplined"!? Can one be that and also misinformed and full of shit?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DoLmeme
August 11, 2009 8:30 PM
I must say, the thought of this man with a gun was quite dreadful and truly upset my tender sensibilities. The thought that the peasants in fly-over country might take responsibility for their own defense and welfare is quite troubling. Why, they could revolt when us sophisticated, urbane Beltway-ites rob them blind in order to pay for bloated defense budgets, foreign wars of aggression, and lavish subsidies and contracts for our favorite corporations. When we created the welfare system and nanny state, they were intended to make the peasants docile and dependent like domesticated animals. How dare they thumb their nose at our progressive reforms!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jagriff1
August 12, 2009 3:40 AM in reply to DoLmeme
Droll. Except for a general lack of any relationship to facts in the real world. With the exception of Texas, every single tax donor state (those that receive fewer federal dollars than they contribute) went for Obama in the last election. So if anyone is being robbed, it's those of us in blue states. Fortunately, most of us are mature enough to recognize that providing for a compassionate society makes everyone's life better. Sadly, it's the mental deficients who can't do basic math that seem to think they need to carry guns around to defend their right to suck at the federal teat while complaining about the government.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:48 AM in reply to DoLmeme
And what, pray tell, was he "defending" himself against? His hallucinations?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mohan
August 11, 2009 8:34 PM
Isn't there a federal law that prevents a gun within 1000 feet of school property.. Doesn't it apply to this case?
(2) Title 18, United State Code, Section 922, paragraph (q) is the Gun Free School Zones Act. You can’t have a gun in, on the grounds of, or within 1,000 feet of the property line of, an elementary or secondary school, whether public or private. (Note that this doesn’t include colleges or universities.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:51 AM in reply to Mohan
Then he was arrestable. Perhaps that's why the Greek Orthodox (allegedly) gave him "sanctuary".
Or perhaps the priest was terrified knowing that gun-nuts will shoot people in churches as soon as they'll shoot them anywhere else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cath01
August 11, 2009 8:38 PM
Note the source at the bottom of Mr. Kostric's sign: RestoreTheRepublic.com. Not particularly sinister, but the site qualifies as fringe libertarian. Here's part of the site's self-description:
"...a collection of freedom orientated Americans who had become aware of the danger our republic was in after seeing the film [America: Freedom to Fascism] and had made the descisison to do something about it by spreading the message of 'America: Freedom to Fascism'."
Ron Paul featured prominently there. Spell checking optional.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gjdodger
August 11, 2009 9:02 PM
Well, y'know...they're bullies, plain and simple. It was enough for them to show up at these things and scream and chant, while they were surrounded by frightened senior citizens who had shown up to get answers from their members of Congress. Now they're surrounded by belligerent young urban Dems and organized labor people who will get right in their faces and scream back, and they can't handle it, so they're toting guns. And eventually, one of them will find himself being glared at by an angry blue collar worker who also has a gun. At that point, unless Security will let them walk in with a flamethrower or bazooka, they'll probably go back to teabagging on the lawn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FiascoJones
August 11, 2009 9:12 PM
It's unfortunate that the cops are too busy infiltrating the peace movement to be bothered with checking on whose coming to see the President at his town hall meetings. Can we finally bury the idea that the lefties are the ones more prone to violence. We're talking about health care reform for everyone and they want to make war. Christ, you try and lead a conservative to water and they're likely to drown you in it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kovie
August 11, 2009 11:53 PM in reply to FiascoJones
These people aren't conservatives. They're crazy racists and radical libertarians who effectively want to abolish the federal government.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bill Bowman
August 11, 2009 9:41 PM
Apparently, this Kostric fellow is a member of the Free State Project (www.freestateproject.org.) This is a group that wants to get 20,000 people to move to New Hampshire ("the free-est state in the nation") and create a new society "in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property."
Now, there's an interesting statement on the group's "statement of intent" page: "Please note that we have a standing policy, articulated fully in the FAQ, of expelling those who undertake racial agitation or advocate coercion or violence."
Maybe I'm picking nits, but wouldn't a rational person consider carrying a sign that reads, "It is time to water the tree of liberty" be advocating violence??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 6:56 AM in reply to Bill Bowman
And wearing a gun to at minimum intimidate isn't, of course, a threat that is likely to be "coercive".
These are not bright people.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
theorajones
August 11, 2009 10:01 PM
The Right realizes something the Left doesn't--this isn't about healthcare.
This is about whether people like this can shut down our ability to address important problems.
Seriously, this guy is just plain nuts. And it IS a problem that health insurance costs a fortune, and that 47 million people don't have it at all, and that basically if you get really sick there's a strong chance you're in a literal "your money or your life" situation. If you're lucky enough to have the money.
There's room for actual debate here. I mean, I want things changed about this bill.
But anyone ginning up crazy guys like this simply isn't interested in anything approaching Democracy. There's a cottage industry of politicians and right-wing operatives who believe their path to fame, money, and power lies in ginning up these nutjobs.
It's a horrible game, because it destroys our ability to actually address the real problems we face as a society.
It's time every Republican is asked if they stand with or against the teabaggers. There's no "but they have a point" nonsense. They're talking about euthanasia. They're bringing guns to town halls. The point they're making is that if you scream loud enough, you can shut down democracy.
Do Republicans support this or not?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
erica
August 11, 2009 11:27 PM
I hope Will Farrell is available to play him on SNL this weekend.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kovie
August 11, 2009 11:50 PM
Great, another Paulite 10th Amendmenter who believes that government has exactly those powers expressely enumerated in the constitution and nothing more. Federal Reserve, IRS, Dept of Education, interstate highway system, Homestead Act--all unconstitutional. And my ponies are named Patrick and Henry and like to converse in Esperanto.
Some people escape to fantasy worlds from time to time to unwind. Others live in those worlds and only come out from time to time to raise trouble.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TBender
August 12, 2009 8:40 AM in reply to kovie
Libertarians want to party like its 1799.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
boo_lala
August 11, 2009 11:59 PM
I think this guy is celebrating his 15 minutes of fame prematurely.
True, the local police concluded it was legal for him to have a gun at that location, and they were probably right for their jurisdiction. The Secret Service, on the other hand, may well decide that the gun, when combined with occassion and the sign (which essentially said, "it's time to spill the blood of a tyrant") consituted an deliberate and imminent threat on Obama's life, which is of course illegal.
Squeaky Fromme just spent 30 years of a life sentence in jail for pointing a gun at Gerald Ford, after removing the cartridge from the firing chamber. (OK, I know nothing about guns, but I assume this means that she could not have fired at him and therefore it was more of a threat than an attempt.)
I think a prosecutor could make the case against this guy with the existing evidence that he broke the law, but no doubt Kostric bragged to his friends online and via email about his plans, perhaps using even more bravado, and one hopes the secret service will uncover that.
Someone should have warned Mr. Kostric that besides "Live Free or Die" there is a third option: "spend a couple of decades in prison because you did something incredibly stupid."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JNagarya
August 13, 2009 7:03 AM in reply to boo_lala
"Squeaky Fromme just spent 30 years of a life sentence in jail for pointing a gun at Gerald Ford, after removing the cartridge from the firing chamber. (OK, I know nothing about guns, but I assume this means that she could not have fired at him and therefore it was more of a threat than an attempt.)"
Pointing even an unloaded gun at another is the criminal offense "Assault with a Deadly Weapon".
That's one of the limitations on "self-defense" about which gun-nuts are oblivious.
By the way: Joan Walsh has a good article which provides facts about his background and views. For one, he's apparently a "Birther," so lied about that to Chris Matthews.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rader
August 12, 2009 12:11 AM
I wish this clown had been asked one question: "Do you feel that your penis is perhaps a bit smaller than the average guy?" And then we could watch his head explode, because THAT IS WHAT CARRYING GUNS IS ALL ABOUT! Sorry about that, but them's the facts, dude! Now, I do expect other heads to be exploding about now, also, including well-intentioned liberal heads who can rant about the Second Amendment just as much as rightwing idiots. But that's okay. Some liberals have small penises, too, and so they also like their guns.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JimmyBobby
August 12, 2009 1:21 AM in reply to Rader
Ya nailed it!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JimmyBobby
August 12, 2009 1:19 AM
When Matthews asks this dangerous dork to tell him what liberties exactly we're losing these days, there's no answer. He talks about a "litany" of things, says we're going down the road toward tyranny away from liberty, but can't list one freedom that's being taken away. He mentions taxation, but says nothing about who paid for the freeway he drove on to get to the event, or the unemployment insurance he's being paid since he got laid off his job as a professional dangerous dork.
God, why do you make people like this? Are you testing us??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chrisfrenzy
August 12, 2009 6:46 AM in reply to JimmyBobby
Exactly! The most you're going to get from a public-gun-toting, liberty-tree-watering imbecile is a Palin-esque understanding of democracy. Like so many libertarians, this guy is hopped up on an ideology that they can easily parrot.
And actually, a guy who carries a legal gun and a threatening sign to a presidential town hall meeting is testing God. And hoping to bait a confrontation that will somehow force Obama to try to take away "real Americans" guns.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
biff diggerence
August 12, 2009 8:54 AM
What a fugging Knuckledragger.
Two digit IQ.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
August 12, 2009 9:46 AM
The GOP "leaders" in Congress have been as silent as a mouse the last few weeks as these people get more unhinged. They don't want to be seen supporting the tea partiers, but they don't want to shut them down either. They're stuck, and the result is the nuts running the nuthouse.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KevinRay
August 12, 2009 11:13 AM
It's a Jefferson quote, but no one's mentioned the other significance: it was on McVeigh's T-shirt when he was arrested.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hsr0601
August 14, 2009 2:59 PM
Good News !
A staff writer at The New Yorker and some experts have examined Medicare data from the successful hospitals of 10 regions, and they have found evidence that more effective, lower-cost care is possible.
Please be 'sure' to visit http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gawande.html?hp for credible evidence !
Some have followed the Mayo model with salaried doctors employed, Other regions, too, have found ways to protect patients against the pursuit of revenues over patient.
And a cardiac surgeon of them said they had adopted electronic systems, examined the data and found that a shocking portion of them were almost certainly unnecessary, possibly harmful.
According to analysis, their quality scores are well above average. Yet they spend more than $1,500 (16 percent) less per Medicare patient than the national average and have a slower real annual growth rate (3 percent versus 3.5 percent nationwide).
Surprisingly, 16 % of about $550 billion (the total of medicare cost per year) is around $88 billion per year, except for Medicaid (total cost of around $500 billion per year), medicare 'alone' can save $880 billion over the next decade.
In addition, under the reform package, along with the already allocated $583 billion, the wastes involving so called "doughnut hole" , the unnecessary subsidies for insurers, abuse, exorbitant costs by the tragic ER visits etc are weeded out, the concern over revenue might be a thing of the past.
(( Net Medicare and Medicaid savings of $465 billion + the $583 billion revenue package = $1048 billion - the previously estimated $1.042 trillion cost of reform = $6 billion surplus - $245 billion (the 10-year cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts) = the estimated deficit of $239 billion ))
In modernized society, the business lacking IT system is unthinkable just like pre-electricity period, nevertheless, the last thing to expect is happening now in the sector requiring the best accuracy in respect to dealing with human lives. Apparently the errors by no e-medical records have spawned the crushing lawsuits (Medical malpractice lawsuits cost at least $150 billion per year), and these costs have led to the unnecessary tests, treatments, even more profits so far. And in different parts of the U.S., patients get two to three times as much care for the same disease, with the same result.
Thank You !
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?