RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President?

RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rulemylife -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/3/2009 9:16:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth I know your opinion is based upon the latest link you find; but the time question was directed to everything BUT the Health-care issue. Uh,............... Merc,...... the health care issue is the topic of the thread.

Brain -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/3/2009 10:39:08 PM)
Unemployment - 25 year high and increasing, Stimulus - Followed Bush plan and added another $787 Billion, It's not a perfect world, but to answer your question like I said before it takes time in economics for spending increases or tax cuts to effect unemployment. Iraq - Exiting....Someday, At least they are exiting, reasonably soon, is it another year? In any case, I think it was George that wanted to stay there for 50 years if I remember correctly. Afghanistan - Escalating with US personnel dying in record numbers I’m not sure what the answer is for that place because I’ve heard different solutions from various people, more aid, less troops or more troops but it sure would help if NATO did their fair share. So far, only the Canadians and the Dutch have contributed significantly with soldiers. Growth Industries - Foreclosure speculation and gold buying scams, I think there are signs the economy is turning around. Alan Greenspan said something about that today. Existing Business - Failures given more money, under Fascist model of government intervention, Profit and growth motive eliminated in consideration of additional regulation, taxes, and bureaucratic scrutiny, Robert Kennedy Junior said the Republicans are 100% corrupt and the Democrats 60%. George Bush was definitely a fascist. His grandfather was a fascist too selling weapons to Hitler. You and I don’t disagree on this one. The money those bastards made on the war in Iraq privatizing the military and contracting everything out is disgusting. http://costofwar.com/ Factory Workers - Please take your parting gifts with you to the employment office. Best news is, unemployment may be extended again I don’t have a problem helping those guys. Those guys just want to pay their bills and feed their families. Middle Class - You have a promotion pending; because this Administration doesn't lie, so this "President Barack Obama's treasury secretary said Sunday he cannot rule out higher taxes to help tame an exploding budget deficit, and his chief economic adviser would not dismiss raising them on middle-class Americans as part of a health care overhaul." This doesn’t concern me right now because it won’t happen until the economy has significantly recovered and people are doing better. The treasury secretary said so during the interview. I listened carefully and heard it because I was very interested in his answer and how he would handle this question. And I don’t expect higher taxes to happen unless he gets elected to a second term. Why don’t you wait until he actually does lie before you accuse him of lying? The other thing is you have to be fiscally responsible, unlike the Republicans who find tax cuts to be the answer to every problem. Middle Class Promotion must mean you are now part of the problem and you will be taxed as part of the solution. are worse than they were in January. The Republicans are the problem because Obama wants to tax the rich or those making over $500,000 a year and the Republicans are strongly opposed and would prefer to tax the middle class and would prefer Obama break a promise so they can use it in the next election against him.

DomKen -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/3/2009 10:57:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Such a careful editing job. Show me the various speeches and interviews in full. The Barney Frank quote wasnt edited, it is the entiretly of his response to a question about why the current bill doesnt go all the way to single payer. The Obama speeches are such plain clear words that what would adding the rhetoric around them do. To his union supporters, SEIU and AFL_CIO he was very clear that he supports single payer and that his vision is for employer plans (which ARE the private insurance industry) to be gone in 15 to 20 years. But, go ahead and ignore the facts and play your childish games as you always do. So it's his vision? How precisely is that a plan to eliminate privatehealth insurance? Nice attempt at goal post moving but not good enough. BTW were you similiarly outraged over McCain's plan which was to intentionally eliminate employer provided coverage and force everyone into the market for individual plans? http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/apr2008/db20080429_854428.htm http://www.factcheck.org/mccains_5000_promise.html Yes that his precisely his vision. He said it. There is no goalpost moving, nice try at deflection though. McCain? Why would I care what he thought, Ive never been a McCain supporter. Nice try at a strawman though. Sanity claimed Obama had a plan to eliminate private health insurance (the title of the video he posted). Plan != vision. You tried to claim that vision was good enough. That's called moving the goalposts. Accusing me of erecting a strawman is a lie.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/3/2009 11:07:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain Unemployment - 25 year high and increasing, Stimulus - Followed Bush plan and added another $787 Billion, It's not a perfect world, but to answer your question like I said before it takes time in economics for spending increases or tax cuts to effect unemployment. Yet he wants to take credit for a slower rate of loss in the GDP, before any of the stimulus money is even off the ground. Cant have it both ways, which he does, and which you do later in this post. Iraq - Exiting....Someday, At least they are exiting, reasonably soon, is it another year? In any case, I think it was George that wanted to stay there for 50 years if I remember correctly. You dont remember it correctly, it was McCain, not Bush and it was a quote taken out of context to start with. The Iraq timetabe is identical to Bush's. Afghanistan - Escalating with US personnel dying in record numbers I’m not sure what the answer is for that place because I’ve heard different solutions from various people, more aid, less troops or more troops but it sure would help if NATO did their fair share. So far, only the Canadians and the Dutch have contributed significantly with soldiers. Ie he isnt even as good as Bush in achieving consensus and having other nations join in. Growth Industries - Foreclosure speculation and gold buying scams, I think there are signs the economy is turning around. Alan Greenspan said something about that today. see above note on your inconsistency Existing Business - Failures given more money, under Fascist model of government intervention, Profit and growth motive eliminated in consideration of additional regulation, taxes, and bureaucratic scrutiny, Robert Kennedy Junior said the Republicans are 100% corrupt and the Democrats 60%. George Bush was definitely a fascist. His grandfather was a fascist too selling weapons to Hitler. You and I don’t disagree on this one. The money those bastards made on the war in Iraq privatizing the military and contracting everything out is disgusting. http://costofwar.com/ Youre right, there will be disagreement on this one. Especially since you have no facts to base it on. Factory Workers - Please take your parting gifts with you to the employment office. Best news is, unemployment may be extended again I don’t have a problem helping those guys. Those guys just want to pay their bills and feed their families. And who's responsiblity is that? Middle Class - You have a promotion pending; because this Administration doesn't lie, so this "President Barack Obama's treasury secretary said Sunday he cannot rule out higher taxes to help tame an exploding budget deficit, and his chief economic adviser would not dismiss raising them on middle-class Americans as part of a health care overhaul." This doesn’t concern me right now because it won’t happen until the economy has significantly recovered and people are doing better. The treasury secretary said so during the interview. I listened carefully and heard it because I was very interested in his answer and how he would handle this question. And I don’t expect higher taxes to happen unless he gets elected to a second term. Why don’t you wait until he actually does lie before you accuse him of lying? Because either he and every advisor he has is a total dope on economics or he had to be lying. There is no way in hell his numbers ever could hang together without middle class tax increases. He may be a total dope, but his advisors arent.; The other thing is you have to be fiscally responsible, unlike the Republicans who find tax cuts to be the answer to every problem. unlike the Democrats, who never saw someone elses dollar they didnt like, at least tax cuts have proven to be stimulative and have theoretical reasons why they are. Spending increases as stimulation were debunked before Keynes started to smell in his grave, and FDR proved in practice how damaging they are. Middle Class Promotion must mean you are now part of the problem and you will be taxed as part of the solution. are worse than they were in January. The Republicans are the problem because Obama wants to tax the rich or those making over $500,000 a year and the Republicans are strongly opposed and would prefer to tax the middle class and would prefer Obama break a promise so they can use it in the next election against him. LMAO, you must be on some good drugs.

Sanity -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 3:58:32 AM)
The problem with Obama's plan is that he's inconsistent. He tells one group its this, and he tells another group its that. If that's his "vision" for our future then he's seeing double and he needs to get his head examined to find out why his "vision" is so messed up. Why can't the man put his real plan on the table and let us debate it openly and honestly. Will a little bit of sun light kill everything that he wants to do? It's beginning to look like it might. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Sanity claimed Obama had a plan to eliminate private health insurance (the title of the video he posted). Plan != vision. You tried to claim that vision was good enough. That's called moving the goalposts. Accusing me of erecting a strawman is a lie.

Sanity -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 4:06:52 AM)
If McCain were president, Ken, don't you think we'd be debating whatever he put on the table? If he were trying to sneak in a plan to, say, nationalize health care and he got caught like Obama did, we'd probably be discussing his dishonesty just like we're discussing Obama's dishonesty. McCain is very Liberal, the debate would probably be very similar - except I think McCain is probably a lot more honest about his vision than Obama is, or ever can be. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen BTW were you similiarly outraged over McCain's plan which was to intentionally eliminate employer provided coverage and force everyone into the market for individual plans? http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/apr2008/db20080429_854428.htm http://www.factcheck.org/mccains_5000_promise.html

MmeGigs -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 4:57:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maverick481 You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays! That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems. Except that there aren't a ton of frivilous lawsuits. A study found that in 90% of malpractice cases, the plaintiff was actually injured, and that the vast majority of injured folks don't sue. It also found that the 10% of frivilous cases don't tie up the court system, they get thrown out. Tort reform is a distraction in the health care debate. The U of Mich hospital was able to cut its malpractice costs by 2/3 by studying injury cases to make sure they don't repeat those mistakes, and apologizing when they screwed up and trying to make it right. That's way more of a savings than any kind of tort reform has been claimed to be able to deliver.

Maverick481 -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 5:47:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs quote: ORIGINAL: Maverick481 You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays! That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems. Except that there aren't a ton of frivilous lawsuits. A study found that in 90% of malpractice cases, the plaintiff was actually injured, and that the vast majority of injured folks don't sue. It also found that the 10% of frivilous cases don't tie up the court system, they get thrown out. Tort reform is a distraction in the health care debate. The U of Mich hospital was able to cut its malpractice costs by 2/3 by studying injury cases to make sure they don't repeat those mistakes, and apologizing when they screwed up and trying to make it right. That's way more of a savings than any kind of tort reform has been claimed to be able to deliver. Yes, but even for that 10% that MIGHT get thrown out the doctor has to cover himself for those instances. I've talked to Doctors who tell me about lawsuits brought against them that are settled just to make them go away and they are frivilous lawsuits. Alot of Doctors settle these things out of court instead of dragging their name through the mud and ruining the practice and costing them money when they have to appear in court. If we had tort reform and the loser had to pay I know from the Doctors I have talked to they would fight more of the cases because they know they would win and it would cost the plantiff money that most of them can't afford. The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue. Some of the lawsuits that I have heard about from Doctors are just insane. But hey, what the hell. It's an easy payday for someone and it doesn't hurt anyone but those rich greedy Doctors who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a Doctor.

Brain -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 5:50:18 AM)
Orly Taitz Melts Down On MSNBC, Blames MSM "Brownshirts" (VIDEO) The conventional wisdom is that August is the slowest month for news, thus it's tailor-made for the "Birther" movement -- crazies that come hand-delivered to the media in their month of need, like barrel-dwelling fish that shoot themselves. Today, they're waving around a supposed "Kenyan birth certificate" for President Barack Obama without regard to the fact that it would have to have come from an alternate reality where Kenya became Kenya before Kenya was Kenya, and on which Obama is said to have been born in a city that was actually part of Zanzibar at the time of his birth. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/03/orly-taitz-melts-down-on_n_250441.html

Lucylastic -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 6:52:29 AM)
OMg Brain she is hysterical, Ive watched a couple of youtube clips and the ones going around ...someone said it was like arguing with an upset fraggle, which describes it beautifully, shes a riot. Lucy

servantforuse -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 6:59:47 AM)
One more addition to Mercs list. The impending tax increase on the middle class. Tim Geithner and Larry Sommers admitted to the talking heads on Sunday that they are inevitable. Another campaign promise soon to be broken..

tazzygirl -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:03:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity The problem with Obama's plan is that he's inconsistent. He tells one group its this, and he tells another group its that. If that's his "vision" for our future then he's seeing double and he needs to get his head examined to find out why his "vision" is so messed up. Why can't the man put his real plan on the table and let us debate it openly and honestly. Will a little bit of sun light kill everything that he wants to do? It's beginning to look like it might. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Sanity claimed Obama had a plan to eliminate private health insurance (the title of the video he posted). Plan != vision. You tried to claim that vision was good enough. That's called moving the goalposts. Accusing me of erecting a strawman is a lie. you do realize that when a bill is proposed, it goes to committees, where it may be added too, where things may be changed.... when it comes out... it may not be the same bill that went in... and then it goes to the floors of Congress... where again it may be changed.

Lucylastic -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:08:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse One more addition to Mercs list. The impending tax increase on the middle class. Tim Geithner and Larry Sommers admitted to the talking heads on Sunday that they are inevitable. Another campaign promise soon to be broken.. The latest news since sunday..from NYTimes(monday) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/us/politics/04obama.html WASHINGTON — The White House tried Monday to douse speculation that it might raise taxes on the middle class in violation of President Obama’s campaign promise, just a day after two of his top economic advisers left the door open to such a move to rein in spiraling deficits. Mr. Obama told his economic team in a meeting at the White House that he intended to stand by his promise not to increase taxes on families making less than $250,000, aides said. He then sent his spokesman out to repeat that message in front of the television cameras.“The president made a commitment in the campaign. He’s clear about that commitment, and he’s going to keep it,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary.The renewal of the promise came a day after Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Lawrence H. Summers, director of the National Economic Council, both refused to rule out tax increases on the middle class while discussing ways to pare the deficit. The two were speaking on separate Sunday morning talk shows, venues where administration officials are usually well prepared on the official line before appearing.“It’s never a good idea to absolutely rule things out no matter what,” Mr. Summers said on “Face the Nation” on CBS. Mr. Geithner, on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” said, “We can’t make these judgments yet about exactly what it’s going to take” to tame the deficit.Conservative critics interpreted those comments as laying the groundwork for trying to wriggle out of Mr. Obama’s campaign pledge. “Obama should fire Geithner and Summers,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, a group that opposes tax increases. They “went on national television and implied the president lied his way into office and that he is open to raising taxes.”The developments come at a time when the White House and Congressional Democrats, trying to figure out how to pay for expanding health care coverage, are considering proposals to increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Some critics from the left have suggested that Mr. Obama should not limit tax increases to the rich so that a broader cross section of Americans would be invested in the new health care system, as they are in Social Security and Medicare.But the White House is trying to fend off attacks portraying Mr. Obama as a tax-and-spend liberal. Mr. Gibbs said that he had read the transcripts from Sunday’s shows “a few times” to study what had been said and that the president had made a point of reminding Mr. Geithner and Mr. Summers of his position, but was not scolding them.“We talked about it as an issue,” Mr. Gibbs said, but added, “This wasn’t a, you know, like ‘school is in’ type of thing.” Mr. Gibbs seemed exasperated at repeated questions on the matter at his daily briefing. “If you don’t trust what I’m going to tell you, I don’t know why we do this,” he said finally. Asked why Mr. Geithner and Mr. Summers did not repeat the president’s campaign promise, he said, “They left it to me.”

Sanity -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:11:03 AM)
I was specifically discussing the Obama video in that post, tazzy. The one Ken is so upset about. This one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk The subthread you are responding to has nothing to do with Congress at all, it is concerned only with Obama's lies concerning his "vision" for America's health care system.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:14:26 AM)
quote: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? Uh, Rule - The title of the tread... Just because you and the other Obama postulates don't like facts regarding results pointed out - it shouldn't preclude debate and discussion. Appreciating you'd prefer these things to be ignored - there is not one positive trend to date from this administration. Unless you consider unemployment, higher taxes, bloated bureaucracy, lower dollar value, escalating war, and weaker business environment positive "accomplishments"? quote: George Bush was definitely a fascist Name calling aside, do you understand the definition of the word? The only president to put the US in a position of private industry ownership has been Obama; by definition a Fascist act. quote: I think there are signs the economy is turning around. Alan Greenspan said something about that today Name one sign? Mr. Greenspan said the economy "MAY" turn around by the end of the year. His quote: quote: predicted that the economy would resume growth in the third quarter of 2009. Greenspan MAYBE in the Fall A Bush Administration economist being relied upon for positive projections? Interesting. I thought the economy was Bush's fault? Would faith in his chief economic adviser be wise? For someone who can find links - you have none to support your positions here. In looking for the Greenspan reference I found that the current Treasury Secretary doesn't think current policy decisions have been felt enough. He says the job market will get worse. quote: The U.S. unemployment rate may not peak until the second half of 2010, even as the broader economy shows signs of improvement, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said. GOING TO GET WORSEThink he's underestimating the good news? Meanwhile, with the lack of economic stimulation the tax revenue has decreased. A similar thing is occurring in CA, always ahead of the liberal curve; higher taxes LOWER revenue. Also similar no Republican influence in the State's legislator. What's happening? How come increasing taxes and fees lowers income, lowers production, and reduces the job market? Without any possible roadblock all these policies and higher taxes are coming from one source - the Democrats. It's their baby and here is what its delivered: quote: The recession is starving the government of tax revenue, just as the president and Congress are piling a major expansion of health care and other programs on the nation's plate and struggling to find money to pay the tab. The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion. WHOOPS - WHAT HAPPENED? No name calling only posting results. Were they meaningful and had any ability to impact these policies; I'd have included a Republican reference; however, as many have stated on these threads, they are currently impotent regarding the political process. quote: Those guys just want to pay their bills and feed their families. In that case, you should not be supporting this administration. The only union they support is the bureaucrats in the public sector. There is no job focus on any private sector worker and the policies being implemented, will eliminate most factory work in the USA. quote: The Republicans are the problem They can not be the problem. No majority, no filibuster ability; under those circumstances HOW can they represent a problem?

tazzygirl -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:15:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maverick481 quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs quote: ORIGINAL: Maverick481 You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays! That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems. Except that there aren't a ton of frivilous lawsuits. A study found that in 90% of malpractice cases, the plaintiff was actually injured, and that the vast majority of injured folks don't sue. It also found that the 10% of frivilous cases don't tie up the court system, they get thrown out. Tort reform is a distraction in the health care debate. The U of Mich hospital was able to cut its malpractice costs by 2/3 by studying injury cases to make sure they don't repeat those mistakes, and apologizing when they screwed up and trying to make it right. That's way more of a savings than any kind of tort reform has been claimed to be able to deliver. Yes, but even for that 10% that MIGHT get thrown out the doctor has to cover himself for those instances. I've talked to Doctors who tell me about lawsuits brought against them that are settled just to make them go away and they are frivilous lawsuits. Alot of Doctors settle these things out of court instead of dragging their name through the mud and ruining the practice and costing them money when they have to appear in court. If we had tort reform and the loser had to pay I know from the Doctors I have talked to they would fight more of the cases because they know they would win and it would cost the plantiff money that most of them can't afford. The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue. Some of the lawsuits that I have heard about from Doctors are just insane. But hey, what the hell. It's an easy payday for someone and it doesn't hurt anyone but those rich greedy Doctors who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a Doctor. Many times its the Dr's malpractice Insurance that wont fight and, instead, settles out of court, even when Dr's want to fight. The insurance companies' risk management makes that decision based upon cost analysis and likely hood of winning. its a bitch when you KNOW you did nothing wrong and they still wont let you fight.

tazzygirl -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 7:17:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity I was specifically discussing the Obama video in that post, tazzy. The one Ken is so upset about. This one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk The subthread you are responding to has nothing to do with Congress at all, it is concerned only with Obama's lies concerning his "vision" for America's health care system. And my point is.... His "vision" may not be the one that comes out... it may be better... it may be worse... both parties will have a hand in it.... and this is a point no one wants to acknowledge.

rulemylife -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 8:41:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Uh, Rule - The title of the tread... Just because you and the other Obama postulates don't like facts regarding results pointed out - it shouldn't preclude debate and discussion. Appreciating you'd prefer these things to be ignored - there is not one positive trend to date from this administration. Unless you consider unemployment, higher taxes, bloated bureaucracy, lower dollar value, escalating war, and weaker business environment positive "accomplishments"? As always, throw in everything but the kitchen sink and hope no one will point out the fallacies. quote: The only president to put the US in a position of private industry ownership has been Obama; by definition a Fascist act. Did you do a Rip Van Winkle and just wake up when Obama took office? Fed steps in to rescue ailing insurer AIG - U.S. business- msnbc.com Sep 17, 2008 ... Under the deal, the government will get a 79.9 percent stake in AIG and the right to remove senior management. quote: Name one sign? Mr. Greenspan said the economy "MAY" turn around by the end of the year. Rally Pushes Dow to Highest Since November - Market Overview * US ...It was the highest intraday level for the Dow and S&P since November • Pending home sales rise in June for the fifth straight month WASHINGTON – Pending U.S. home sales rose in June for the fifth straight month, another encouraging sign of life for the embattled U.S. housing market, the National Association of Realtors reported Tuesday. For June, the Realtors group said its pending home sales index rose 3.6 percent to 94.6, from an upwardly revised reading of 91.3 in May. The last time there were five consecutive monthly gains was July 2003. The results were far better than analysts expected. Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters expected the index to come in at 91.2. quote: A Bush Administration economist being relied upon for positive projections? Interesting. I thought the economy was Bush's fault? Would faith in his chief economic adviser be wise? Slept through this one too huh? How many administrations, Republican and Democrat, did Greenspan work with? quote: In looking for the Greenspan reference I found that the current Treasury Secretary doesn't think current policy decisions have been felt enough. He says the job market will get worse. Myself, I think it's kind of refreshing to hear some straightforward talk. Remember when Bush was telling us up to October of last year that the economy was sound and we didn't need to fear a recession, when in fact, we had been in a recession for most of 2008. quote: The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion. And does this possibly relate to the fact we have had the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression? quote: In that case, you should not be supporting this administration. The only union they support is the bureaucrats in the public sector. There is no job focus on any private sector worker and the policies being implemented, will eliminate most factory work in the USA. Excuse me? Factory work has been steadily eroded by manufacturers going after cheap foreign labor for 30 years. And you are trying to blame this on the current administration? quote: They can not be the problem. No majority, no filibuster ability; under those circumstances HOW can they represent a problem? Because you are rarely going to get 100% of either party to agree on anything, so crossover votes are needed. Witness the cash-for-clunkers debate going on right now.

chiaThePet -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 8:46:06 AM)
They voted for Hope. But She, Love and Charity are busy looking under couch cushions for change. chia* (the pet)

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President? (8/4/2009 8:51:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maverick481 Yes, but even for that 10% that MIGHT get thrown out the doctor has to cover himself for those instances. I've talked to Doctors who tell me about lawsuits brought against them that are settled just to make them go away and they are frivilous lawsuits. Alot of Doctors settle these things out of court instead of dragging their name through the mud and ruining the practice and costing them money when they have to appear in court. If we had tort reform and the loser had to pay I know from the Doctors I have talked to they would fight more of the cases because they know they would win and it would cost the plantiff money that most of them can't afford. The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue. Some of the lawsuits that I have heard about from Doctors are just insane. But hey, what the hell. It's an easy payday for someone and it doesn't hurt anyone but those rich greedy Doctors who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a Doctor. This. My brother was an optometrist, not even a doc. His malpractice premiums were ridiculously high even before he had a settlement. A patient came in, was referred to an MD immediately for glaucoma. The guy didnt bother to go, and 2 years later sued my brother, and despite having clear contemporaneous records of the referral, his insurance company settled well into 5 figures. Ask your ObGyn about his premiums, MmeGigs...just dont be in a compromised position and near any instruments when you do.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875