Bill O'Reilly: Garden Variety Right Wing Nut or Insane Dangerous Narcissist

Bill O'Reilly:  Garden Variety Right-Wing Nut or Insane Dangerous Narcissist

Twice within the last two weeks Bill O'Reilly has referred to the assassination of President Kennedy in comparison to President Obama.

He often mentions Kennedy as he touts his recent book, Killing Kennedy.

He said the sentiment of the country is the same now about President Obama as it was right before Kennedy was assassinated.

A viewer wrote in to criticize and O'Reilly became even more adamant about his position and defending his statement....even making the assertion that is was important for the viewers to know this information.

Many may not agree with not only this statement, but this interpretation of the country's sentiment and the possible insinuation that goes along with this idea.

What is the actual goal of O'Reilly, this bilge busting reservoir of flatulence?

Many citizens and voters, as we saw by the last election, are glad to have President Obama in office and very glad to have health care.  Many republicans have stated they were happy to have their children remained covered to the age of 26.

Is "stirring up" the job of the right wing conspirators.....

Will Mr. O'Reilly be paid a visit by the secret service.......

As those horrible words were repeated, twice, by the seemingly insane king of Fox News fanatical facts of anti-democrat propaganda the horrible words of the old white racists came to mind form The Men Who Killed Kennedy predicting the terrible event to happen in Dallas.

What is this joker trying to stir up...........stir up......is that the job of these Fox News whack jobs?

Bill often states as he did on the morning show of CBS when asked if he will be running for office.......I am the only one looking out for the folks.

Bill, who are your folks.........the "folks" elected and re-elected President Obama.  Wouldn't President Obama actually be the one looking out for the average working guy?  The average working guy who wants health care.

No, President Obama, is not a communist or socialist, as you also tried to say this week.

Is this man extremely dangerous, or what.

Is he actually jealous of President Obama because he is cute and funny........this may be the real reason.

Bill was here in San Diego last Friday........the ticket prices?

92.00 to 147.00 for the regular seats.......and.......539.00 for a chance to meet and greet with Bill and Dennis Miller.  Just wondering if these are the average folks Bill is meeting as he tours around the country on his Bolder and Fresher gig.  Are these the average working folks he is looking out for, people who pay 539.00 to see his show.

Are the voters in the working class neighborhoods who elected our President and who are thankful for health care paying to see that show.

Is Bill's vision skewed.......will he be visited by the secret service like Ted Nuggent and what are his actual goals? He is very offensive to those other "folks" who see President Obama as someone with a wonderful vision for our country.

Warning:  Do not be dragged into to this grand narcissistic scheme--it will only be harmful in the long run.

from Newshounds...............

http://www.newshounds.us/bill_o_reilly_reads_president_obama_s_mind_and_psychoanalyzes_his_need_to_destroy_the_hard_right_10212013



This set is 18.00.....The earrings are 8mm swarovski cubes with sterling silver findings.......I put it together with a bracelet I purchased at the gem show in Tucson.......cl
tax and shipping are included in the price.

Brent Talks--Health Care and President Hillary Clinton

Health care and Hillary.........

Brent--two things--first, call me Wesley Clarke, but I do not think health care should be associated with employment......no, I do not have an answer, other than health care should be the right of all citizens in a leading nation such as the US and not an election talking point--no one benefits from people not having health care. Well, how do we pay for it.....

second--health care could be provided in a much better and more cost effective way--yes, everything should definitely be connected in the cloud or whatever way works best for efficiency and cost. We should all be on the diabetes diet, or just a healthy diet and education in this way will cut cost in the long run. Bloomberg and Michelle Obama have some good ideas. Nurse practitioners can be used in walk-in clinics as opposed to the very expensive emergency room unfortunately being used at times for family practice. We can also give an incentive for reducing individual cost and following the healthy, less-expensive plan--public option and low cost pharmaceuticals are a great idea--a great idea and the people deserve it. 

The republican secret--they want health care for their kids, too. Yes, I have heard the guy say it on the conservative radio station here in San Diego. 

Also, school nurses and nurse practitioner clinics at schools are a good opportunity to address the health-care needs of all children, rich and poor, and a good chance for a lifetime of education on diet and exercise, etc.

We're not going back, President Obama made a positive change in the health care system for everyone and showed leadership. President Hillary Clinton will carry it further--Good job to President Obama and President Hillary Clinton.

Hillary girl forever---chloe louise

copied from The Hill...............

Hillary and healthcare

By Brent Budowsky - 07/05/13 11:02 AM ET

  

As the chaos continues surrounding implementation of the new healthcare law, the 2014 election campaign begins and jockeying for the 2016 presidential campaign is underway, the two most intriguing political questions surrounding the healthcare law are these:

First, how will Democrats running for the House and Senate in 2014 discuss healthcare during the campaign?

Second, if Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, how will she discuss healthcare going into the presidential campaign?

Let me begin with my conclusion. Democrats should not be trapped into defending the healthcare status quo. They should champion and defend the most effective and popular aspects of the law, and champion more aggressively than ever the more progressive (and popular) reforms that should have been included in the reform law but were not.

When the healthcare law was being debated, I believed then, and believe now, that a single-payer system or a robust public option needed to be included to make any reform fully effective. And I believed then, and believe now, that an expansion of the use of generic drugs, or high-quality and low-cost imports of drugs from other nations such as Canada, were also needed to protect consumers and lower costs to government.

As usual in Washington these days, these bold progressive provisions were dropped even by a Democratic president and Democratic Congress with large Democratic majorities. This was a major political mistake, because the public option and similar reforms had strong majority public support, and it was a policy mistake, because it removed low-cost pro-consumer options that would have created alternatives that would have lowered the costs of both insurance and pharmaceuticals.

This is not brain surgery. If mandates forced companies with a certain numbers of employees to pay fines if they do not provide insurance, many companies would limit jobs to avoid the employee threshold that trigger the fines, and would cut hours to avoid the working-hour threshold that trigger the fines. The Obama administration retreat on these provisions was predictable, inevitable and wise.

With the absence of a single-payer system with a public option and lower-cost drug provision, it was also predictable, and inevitable, that insurance premiums and pharmaceutical costs, as well as pain for consumers and the profits of insurance and pharmaceutical companies, would all rise in unison.

I warned Democrats ahead of the 2010 campaign not to be trapped into defending the status quo and treating the healthcare law as a panacea. I offer the same warnings today. The GOP will try to blame Democrats for higher healthcare costs and rising insurance premiums. Democrats should renew the battle for lower costs and lower premiums by championing progressive alternatives.

Enter Clinton. Hillary Clinton has a been a leader in the battle for healthcare reform for a lifetime. As first lady when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas and president, she was a true champion of powerful healthcare reform that would serve workers, women, children, the poor and the middle class.

Hillary Clinton as secretary of State could not participate in domestic political debates, but carried her interest and her commitment to better healthcare to the global arena. She has a golden and historic opportunity if she runs for president in 2016, and becomes the most sought-after campaigner for Democrats in 2014, to lead the charge for the healthcare reforms that are most needed by America and most favored by voters.

On healthcare the left was right and the right was wrong. Liberal Democrats were right and corporatist and conservative Democrats were wrong. The people want lower insurance premiums, lower drug costs, better care for women and children, better healthcare for American workers and — yes — lower healthcare costs for business that a public option and lower-cost pharmaceutical choices would create.

Should Democrats support the best aspects of the healthcare law? Absolutely, definitely and strongly.

Should Democrats support the status quo of the current law? Absolutely not. Democrats should run against the status quo. Democrats should run against rising premiums and high drug costs. Democrats should run against Republican war against women's healthcare programs. Democrats should use the current law as a platform to launch the next great era of healthcare reform.

Americans have always trusted the Democratic Party of Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton to protect the health of the nation.

Most Americans agree with the Democratic wing of the Democratic party on healthcare. Democrats should not retreat; they should advance. Democrats should not be afraid; they should be bold. Who better than Hillary Rodham Clinton to win an FDR-magnitude landslide in 2016 while championing the healthcare reforms initiated by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt?

Democrats have nothing to fear by letting the next great healthcare debate begin.

Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and Bill Alexander, then chief deputy majority whip of the House. He holds an LL.M. degree in international financial law from the London School of Economics. He can be read on The Hill’s Pundits Blog and reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

Read more: http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/brent-budowsky/309327-hillary-and-healthcare#ixzz2YDJslI4k 
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

HOW PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS ALREADY GIVEN US HOPE AND CHANGE

HOW PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS ALREADY GIVEN US HOPE AND CHANGE


You know, President Obama has already given us "hope and change" and one example of that would be healthcare. 

I do not think there is one person, democrat or republican, who wants their child thrown off of their employer health plan---and now the republicans have to address that issue as well, the precedent has been set. 

Really, who does not want to have healthcare for their family?  The idea now is real, and law. 

We can not reasonably go back--its here to stay--Thank you President Obama. 

The repubs may not want to admit it, but they like it, too.  It's a good thing for everyone!  It's a good thing for the citizens of the United States--It's a good thing for people everywhere. 

That is how President Obama has made a very good "change" and it cannot be denied, particularly by any parent. 

Good job, President Obama, thank you VERY MUCH!

--
chloelouise