DennisDee wrote:
And there is the problem in itself. You have allowed Obama to brainwash you into thinking insurance companies are the problem for the skyrocketing cost of healthcare. The entire issue of provider costs were ignored. Providers are the ones charging $150,000 for bypass surgery. Providers are the ones charging $3-$5000 for an MRI . The status quo was certainly better for most Americans. You do not screw 80% of America in order to win the v**es for 20%. Its r****t. Middle Class w****s will end up paying for B****s and Hispanics. Now that's R****T
And there is the problem in itself. You have allow... (
show quote)
It has become very obvious during this administration that the Rep's not the Dem's. are the R****TS.
The healthcare industry at one time, where the hospitals were not for profit and now for profit have a "hidden" price list for medical supplies and services. Check the price of an aspirin.
I was charged $7500 per MRI twice by a county hospital.
It comes down to privatization and for profit that is costing so much because their priority as with all business is PROFIT.
The prison industry lobbies for stronger laws to keep prisoners longer and coming back and have no incentive to rehabilitate prisoners. Why do that, they want them back. The government subsidizes the size of the population. That is nasty privatization, it stinks against the majority of the people all for money and screw the country.
Religion is a big business for many.
Schools are a business. Pres. Bush with No Child Left Behind, had their crony companies supply test forms at a cost replacing teachers mimeographing the tests.
Privatization will ruin our country because it is not representative of the foundation of our Constitution.
alex wrote:
don't you libs ever get tired of that bulls**t lie
Challenge the lie, Alex....and please don't use simple minded rhetoric....."where's the beef"?
DennisDee wrote:
Sorry but Obama has been the most partisan President in US History. If he had only listened to the opposition about ACA maybe he wouldn't look so sad and foolish right now
Listening to the opposition would only leave the status quo...the gouging done by the underwriters for the benefit of the money industry at the expense of the poor.
Presently, the insurers have been exposed at selling worthless paper.
And what has those lazy ass conservatives come forward with to give a challenge to Obamacare? Nothing but vouchers....and Sarah Palin came up with "death panels" while it is in her own party.
The t***h is they don't have any desire to address the healthcare needs of the people or they would have.
Their fear is that Obamacare would take hold evidenced by their commitment to sabotage the program.
If they really thought it was so bad and would die on its' own merit they would have let it alone and then they would have a legitimate stand, however, they went head on to destroy it. It couldn't be more obvious.
alex wrote:
don't you libs ever get tired of that bulls**t lie
We just want to stay in context with the (so-called) conservatives.
alex wrote:
don't you libs ever get tired of that bulls**t lie
You used 10 words and said nothing.
bmac32 wrote:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/11/02/the-real-story-of-job-creation/
I can not and would not champion a rebuttal of the compilation and execution of those figures, however, I will say and argue that none of those presidents had a legislative Congress (that creates job opportunities and the money for job growth) as does Pres. Obama.
There is more to the numbers than just the Pres. causing those numbers, to exclude the government does not give a TRUE picture of employment by any president.
All because they are jealous and prejudice, leaving the country to pay the bill.
As far as him not getting a job...that is a middle school statement coming again from hatred, jealousy and prejudice. Simple mindedness gibberish. And indeed totally unfounded.
bmac32 wrote:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/11/02/the-real-story-of-job-creation/
Not one of those administrations sans Obama had to deal with a Congress that we have today which you deliberately ignore.
The Pres. doesn't legislate or spend the money....that comes from the 'house' but they have to be awake to do it.
The bottom line is the Rep. have played many games against any progress to get the country going again because they are jealous and prejudice of him.
They place their ideology ahead of the country....and that is a nasty, lousy, dirty trick on the country.
bmac32 wrote:
Now you need to stop that, your making me feel old.
Anyone for superheterodyne? Now that is old.
alex wrote:
when you are typing in the quote box and come to the end just keep typing the box will move to accommodate your message
Those old people that you refer to here that don't want change who are satisfied with no change are like the Archie Bunker type, however, I am close to 80 now and enjoy some of the new technology coming out such as covert camera's and video but have no use for the hi tech phones, I pads, etc.
I do feel like all this new technology is a distraction away from the important issues facing our country today, especially those 'smart' phones that are like a magnet to the younger set which is their comfort zone away from the needs of the country.
slatten49 wrote:
:lol::mrgreen: I like you Dville, but if this thread is about Obama being, possibly, the worst ever...how did you and others get into evolutionary science? Your question about the "Liger", for example.
Sometimes, we all get a little giddy! :wink: :mrgreen:
No harm intended! :oops:
I didn't intend to go off track I just responded to where it was led. Thanks.
Constitutional libertarian wrote:
You never ever trade freedom for security ever !!!
You need security to protect freedom.
Where did this thread go off track? Read the title.
As for wo
Constitutional libertarian wrote:
It is difficult to evaluate when one party see's larger more obtrusive gov as negative and the other see's it as ensuring health care for all.
Has he extracted our forces from 2 different conflicts yes and very probably saving many young American life's. But at what cost, we have not met our primary objectives of a safer world or democracy in those nations.
As well as done a pretty god job of alienating most of our allies for a whole host of reasons. I do not blame him here he lacked experience and it shows.
But I do blame him for the NSA spying, yes we all were banging the drums back when Bush was president but it was wrong then and it is wrong now. You can not give up freedom for security ever !
As for women's and minority rights he has fewer woman or minorities in his adminstration than any other resent president. This is neither bad or good assuming he picked the most qualified person for the job or the most qualified he could get congresses approval on.
As for the economy if it weren't for the fed printing money hand over fist it would be completely in the toilet. But by holding up the stock market in this way can and will eventually catch up with us.
So depending on how you think our country should look he is either a hero or a villain.
My question is this can we as a nation hold our heads high in the believe that we have lived up to our founding fathers ideals?
I think they might be a bit concerned
It is difficult to evaluate when one party see's l... (
show quote)
First 'freedom' and 'security' go hand in hand.
I was not responding to the few dozen women qualified for certain positions. My issue was women's general working conditions and their health rights legislated for the most part by men.
Hero or villain depends which side of the aisle one favors.
I doubt strongly that the founding fathers would threaten the livelihood of the middle class who physically worked to build our country.
The stock market is breaking records, however, there will be another crash...but when? And I don't want our Soc. Sec. on Wall St. for the crash......
alex wrote:
with his nose growing every day like it does it's a wonder he can keep his head up his ass all the time like he does
Ah! Yes! The President did not honor Lincoln that day. About honoring his duty.
When Florida had that bad hurricane a few years back Pres. Bush got right on it to help his brother Jeb. But when Katrina landed in New Orleans he put 'brownie' on it and he went to California to play golf. And we sure know how 'brownie' screwed up.
So Pres. Obama didn't honor Pres. Lincoln that day but there was no loss of life involved. Convenient Amnesia.
Constitutional libertarian wrote:
No one said Bush was perfect, please do not deflect to the past when what we must do is search for answers in the present
How does one grade something without comparing to its' history? What are the parameters? We know darn well that we individually compare to another which is natural.
So what are the answers that are valid without being biased? Or do we have to be biased?
He is said to be bad because he wants healthcare for all when we know the insurance companies gouge for profits.What is the alternative for ACA is it status quo... the present setup?
He is bringing us out of 2 wars ...is that bad?
He put in his budget trillions that was passed on to him that wasn't in the previous budget....it had been put on a credit card.
He is a proponent for womens rights...that shouldn't be bad....mother's, wive's and daughter's.
If one is a Republican, they don't collect Pres. Obama's accomplishments they collect the negatives.
Has there ever been a President that was 100% bad for the country all the time. If you ask his opponents they will say yes.
To be straight forward in grading him we would have to have an open mind and I don't think many could be found in politics.