And this is what passes for leadership in the Tea Party? If anyone thinks the $#%^%%&&*
who are running as TP candidates for president really want to improve life for the average American and are not puppets of big business, they are sorely mistaken.

Most politicians are crooks.

No kidding, Jack.

As president he can do even more to help the government which he hates. He can start a couple of fake wars (to protect our sovereignty from Somalia or something like that), order soldiers sent in with overpriced inadequate supplies from some Texas war contractor and then make "death bets" on the soldiers lives with a multi-national bank headed up by Dick Cheney and based Bahrain. Almost everyone wins.

No one was harmed. It's not a bad idea - an interesting way to pay for public employee retirement costs.

He's missing step number 3: find a legal way to increase mortality in retired teachers. Free smokes?

"C'mon Granny, you're too old to worry about lung cancer...Live a little."

And I suppose none of the left-leaning types that frequent here have a problem with the Oregon Lottery making money and spending it on education, especially when those that play the lottery in all of its forms usually aren't the type that have the money to throw away.

a legal way to increase mortality in retired teachers

If it gets the tea party folks comfortable with death panels, I'm all for it.

What's the problem. I worked for a public company who offered to buy life insurance on its employees, at no cost to them, with the death benefits going to defray company provided health benefits. The program was completely voluntary with no repercussions if you declined to participate.

Ninety-nine per cent of all politicians give the rest a bad name.

If one digs down into what makes life insurance arbitrage profitable it is rooted in the favorable tax treatment afforded the insurance industry. The biggest insurance magnate around these days is none other than Baracks's pal, Warren Buffett, whose Berkshire Hathaway holding company insurance and reinsurance business segment earns in excess of $30 billion annually. Funny that when Warren said he wasn't taxed enough that he didn't single out insurance companies or mention life insurance proceeds. Warren moves the shells around the table better than most.

Sadly, that's typical for Rick Perry. The man's so crooked that he needs four people to help him screw his pants on in the morning, and he's been like this from the beginning. As a governor, he's making me nostalgic for Bill Clements and Dolph Briscoe, and lower than that I can't get. (At least Shrub was King Log as opposed to King Stork during his term, and he didn't cause any real damage as governor. Perry, on the other hand, is the worst lump of offal to sit in the governor's chair since General Phil Sheridan was governor of Texas during Reconstruction.)

Did any of you actually read the article? The only recipients of any benefits would be the corporations buying the insurance. The retired teachers would have gotten zip.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/09/01-3

And if you don't agree with the right wing, they'd like to try to find ways to keep you away from the ballot box

The retired teachers would have gotten zip.

I read the article as acknowledging that the teacher's retiree health care benefit fund would eventually have been enriched -- the article mentioned the pension fund was 94% funded. I didn't notice a ratio for the health care benefit fund. I don't know what Texas's ratio is but small numbers down to and including zero percent are not uncommon for post-employment health benefits.

I did read the article.
Makes me wonder how many other schemes are going on, bonds, debt, etc.
The schemers have it all over us and we are being buried by schemes
and perhaps literally early by the callousness of care for the people.

I think Perry is a frightening dude. I like Bachmann much more---it should be easier to restrain someone who is naturally cute.

I worry that Perry would turn the white house lawn into a monster truck course....

LexusLibertarian,

I believe there are left-leaning types who do not like the metro/city agenda around here.

Perhaps we need to distinguish between the "insiders" agenda and citizens who are not considered to the "right" but do not at all like what is going on.

What I find interesting is that I talk with those across the board, and find many are disgusted with what is going on.

In my opinion, the ones who do like what is going on are those who benefit somehow and/or are dependent on going along.

The media has already investigated Perry in the past month more than they have ever investigated any of Obama's various shady dealings.

I'm moving to Canada. Who's coming with me?

Speaking for myself as a "left-leaning type," I despise the lottery.

To be clear, I consider my politics to be "all over the map" (meaning it depends on the issue). I am fiscally conservative but I am sure the dyed in the wool tightie righties would still consider me a liberal, while liberals would be appalled by anyone who holds a number of my beliefs. All it says that I have an independent mind and I will never be one of the sheeple of the right or sheeple of the left.

A couple points of note....1)The Huff post has no credibility and 2) The "progressive libs" are terrified of Gov. Perry. It will be a Carter-esc landslide over one term Obummers come Nov 2012.

The thing that struck me this morning while I was out doing yard work was that most of the people supporting the tea party are about the same as those who supported the nationalist socialist party in Germany. They are dumb enough to buy into all kinds of propoganda, fear, and hate while not smart enough to see the bigger picture of politics and the increasing concentration of wealth in America. They somehow think that buying into the TP politicians will improve their personal lot when it won't.

I don't understand how buying life insurance policies on a group of people, of whatever age, would be a money-making endeavor for the purchaser/beneficiary. Life inusurance companies make money by taking in more money in premiums than they pay out in benefits. Premiums relative to payouts for older insureds are therefore high.

I take a backseat to no one in being against Perry, and I'm not fond of insurance companies either. But I don't get how this insurance deal would have worked. I've heard of Walmart doing the same thing--buying life insurance policies on its employees with the company as beneficiary. Is there some significant tax benefit to doing this that makes the overall scheme profitable?

Anyone have an answer?

I'm sorry, I guess I'm missing what it wrong with this. The teachers aren't asked to contribute anything toward the premium for the insurance. Who is harmed? Sounds like the 'uproar' (if it exists outside of the Huffpost) is nothing but political hyperbole. shocker.

Making millions of dollars by "securitizing" life insurance policies on people that you've never met is some pretty sick shinola. But that's America now.

Jack, I think perhaps you are assuming the folks who don't get what's wrong here have any sense of morals, ethics, or conscience. And that's a dangerous assumption.

If I've got a workforce that has value to my company, shouldn't I be able to insure it? Its called "insurable interest" and is perfectly legal and ethical. How is it different than the Indy Colts taking out an insurance policy on Peyton Manning? They've invested a lot of their organization's money in him and have an obligation to protect the other employees should anything happen. If Texas has invested so much in their employees, doesn't it have the right - at ITS OWN EXPENSE - to secure that investment? The only potential 'victims' here are Texas (if they overpaid the premium), and the insurance company (if they miscalculated the risk). If it helps Texas balance its budget and keep more teachers employed, I don't see the harm/outrage.

Like I stated in an earlier post, someone other than the corporation calling itself Merck, needs to make a vaccine against stupid and order dumba$$ to take it.

They've invested a lot of their organization's money in him and have an obligation to protect the other employees should anything happen.

Did you read the article? The state isn't taking out insurance and keeping it to protect anyone. It's packaging up the policies and selling them to syndicates of faceless speculators, keeping a cut.

You keep spinning, but that's some sick shinola. I don't care which political party is doing it.