Farm bill

[Actor]

Besides the fiscal cliff congress is neglecting to pass a farm bill. If they don't then current agricultural policies expire and the government has to support farmers by...

buying milk from farmers at an inflation adjusted rate that is about double the current market price.
disposing of as much milk as possible through school lunch programs.
dumping any remaining milk to keep it off the market.

These are all Republican policies implemented under the Eisenhower administration. The idea is to support farmers by increasing the demand for milk (the government becomes a customer) and by decreasing supply (the government destroys the milk).

This will double, possibly triple, the price of dairy products. Figure on paying more for your ice cream and pizza.

[hcap]

It's the Tea Party crowd being purists. Cutting off the nation's nose to spite it's face.



I would imagine Wayne LaPierre would favor posting armed guards at supermarkets to deter milk and dairy rioting. Could be the end of western civilization as we know it. And for God sakes, just think of our kids fighting over the last bit of milk at school cafeterias, and at nap time.

Good thing we are armed to the teeth. Who knows when ravenous apocalyptic insane hoards will turn into zombies and try to break into the homes of non anchor, hard working American patriots? :bang: :bang:

[Tom]

Nice try, but when we go off the cliff, it is thanks to Obama.
End of story.

[fast4522]

When when we go off the cliff will the cuts be in alignment to any year level?

[Robert Goren]

If we go of the cliff, it will be because of John Boehner and the house republicans. In fairness to Boehner, he is trying to herd a bunch of cats. Latest poll showed him with a higher negative rating than Nancy Peolsi. Who thunk it?

[Valuist]

If we go of the cliff, it will be because of John Boehner and the house republicans. In fairness to Boehner, he is trying to herd a bunch of cats. Latest poll showed him with a higher negative rating than Nancy Peolsi. Who thunk it?

2012 tax revenues will be at 2007 levels. Yet the deficit has gone from $9 trillion to $16 trillion. Its clear the problem is spending and the blame is squarely on the Senate.

[Tom]

Nice figuring, Bobby - Obama will not agree to any spending cuts and YOU blame repubs.

[fast4522]

If we go of the cliff, it will be because of John Boehner and the house republicans. In fairness to Boehner, he is trying to herd a bunch of cats. Latest poll showed him with a higher negative rating than Nancy Peolsi. Who thunk it?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: If

[nomad1102]

If we go of the cliff, it will be because of John Boehner and the house republicans. In fairness to Boehner, he is trying to herd a bunch of cats. Latest poll showed him with a higher negative rating than Nancy Peolsi. Who thunk it?

We fell off the cliff 30 years ago. It is now a matter for F = Gm1m2/r2 to determine the impact.

Nomad

[ArlJim78]

hilarious. Democrats have controlled congress for most of the past 60 years, but the farm bill is a "Republican" policy?

[Tom]

In their warped little minds, it makes sense. :lol:

[soupan]

Nice try, but when we go off the cliff, it is thanks to Obama.
End of story.

Really?

If Obama gave all the spending cuts asked for in return for a 10% raise in the "job creator" ( :lol: ) tax rates, republicans still wouldn't give in.

BTW in case you missed the FACTS... OBAMA won the election mostly on the message of RAISING TAXES on high income individuals.

Sounds democratic to me. :jump:

[soupan]

hilarious. Democrats have controlled congress for most of the past 60 years, but the farm bill is a "Republican" policy?

Are you NOT against these type bills as a manipulation of your "true market" capitalist America? :rolleyes:

[Robert Goren]

Anybody who thinks any congressman (Tea Partiers included) will for vote any real spending cuts when their vote will actual makes a difference should not be allowed around a gun. The only way they are going to anything about the deficit is if they raise taxes. Some Republicans talk a good game and some people are dumb enough to believe them.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Besides the fiscal cliff congress is neglecting to pass a farm bill. If they don't then current agricultural policies expire and the government has to support farmers by...

buying milk from farmers at an inflation adjusted rate that is about double the current market price.
disposing of as much milk as possible through school lunch programs.
dumping any remaining milk to keep it off the market.

These are all Republican policies implemented under the Eisenhower administration. The idea is to support farmers by increasing the demand for milk (the government becomes a customer) and by decreasing supply (the government destroys the milk).

This will double, possibly triple, the price of dairy products. Figure on paying more for your ice cream and pizza.

Mistaken again....from the NY Times (12/20/12):

"Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case. Milk now costs an average of $3.65 a gallon."

I kind of think Truman was president in 1949.

[Tom]

BTW in case you missed the FACTS... REPUBLICANS WON THE HOUSE mostly on the message of NOT RAISING TAXES on ANYONE

FTFY.

Besides, Obama won the election on the Santa Claus platform. HOHOHO!:lol:

[soupan]

FTFY.

Besides, Obama won the election on the Santa Claus platform. HOHOHO!:lol:


You'll see in upcoming elections how the repub house of cards will crumble, especially when they make the next blunder of going off the cliff and forcing everyone's taxes higher.
I'm hoping SOOOOOO badly they make this mistake. It will truly crush the already fractured RED PARTY.
I dare you Bone-er, talk to your center right republican who's earning $60k a year and convince him it's Obama's fault and that Obama should cave on the precise platform he ran AND WAS ELECTED under....and 98% suffer so the wealthy can laugh louder all the way to the bank...oops, I mean create all those jobs.. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I can't laugh loud enough at your stupidity.

[fast4522]

Anybody who thinks any congressman (Tea Partiers included) will for vote any real spending cuts when their vote will actual makes a difference should not be allowed around a gun. The only way they are going to anything about the deficit is if they raise taxes. Some Republicans talk a good game and some people are dumb enough to believe them.

Time for Civil War, Bobby.

Over the cliff and taxes for all for two years, no deal, no bipartisan votes just pain until we vote for tax cutters in the mid term election. Live with all the cuts for two years.

[Tom]

I can't laugh loud enough at your stupidity.

Maybe you just laugh because YOU are stupid! :lol:
Your posts strongly suggest that possibility.
Very strongly.

[OntheRail]

You'll see in upcoming elections how the repub house of cards will crumble, especially when they make the next blunder of going off the cliff and forcing everyone's taxes higher.
I'm hoping SOOOOOO badly they make this mistake. It will truly crush the already fractured RED PARTY.
I dare you Bone-er, talk to your center right republican who's earning $60k a year and convince him it's Obama's fault and that Obama should cave on the precise platform he ran AND WAS ELECTED under....and 98% suffer so the wealthy can laugh louder all the way to the bank...oops, I mean create all those jobs.. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I can't laugh loud enough at your stupidity.
And the Democratic Controlled Senate has done NOTHING but to foster Obama's Divisive Policies. How bout passing a Budget... Hell with it Harry... We Don't Need No Stinkin' Budget tells the House don't matter what you send I'll not bring it to the Floor. Going over the Cliff is the Democrat's Wet Dream.. and you and your type blame the Republicans. Yes me must give the workless drags more stuff cause they Voted for Santa... :rolleyes:

[fast4522]

It is time to bring that old codger down a few notches, a realistic budget first or no house bills at all without the budget. Hight time to put a empty chair and extreme pressure in front of the Senate.

[NJ Stinks]

2012 tax revenues will be at 2007 levels. Yet the deficit has gone from $9 trillion to $16 trillion. Its clear the problem is spending and the blame is squarely on the Senate.

So the problem wasn't cutting taxes for at least 10 years while going to war?

What is clear to you is anything but clear to me.

[newtothegame]

Are you NOT against these type bills as a manipulation of your "true market" capitalist America? :rolleyes:
Question is are you???
You question only republican decisions yet applaud things like Solyndra. :lol:

[mostpost]

2012 tax revenues will be at 2007 levels. Yet the deficit has gone from $9 trillion to $16 trillion. Its clear the problem is spending and the blame is squarely on the Senate.
If 2012 tax revenues are indeed at 2007 levels, that is the problem. Starting with 1977 here are the five year increases in yearly tax revenues.
1977 to 1982= 73%
1982 to 1987= 38%
1987 to 1992= 27%
1992 to 1997= 44%
1997 to 2002= 17%
2002 to 2007= 38%
2007 to 2012= 0% (at least according to you.)

Clearly the problem is a lack of revenue. Having the same amount of revenue as you did five years ago is not a positive. After three decades of substantial increases in revenue we arrive at a five year period in which there are no increases. I said three decades but it really goes back much further.

In fact, looking at the historical tables, you find no other five year periods outside the Great Depression where revenues do not rise. In the meantime the population continues to grow. The retired population grows even more rapidly. The tax base stagnates. Tax rates drop. Inflation causes goods and services to cost more. And you can't figure out why the deficit increases. Spending plays a part, but lack of revenue plays a far greater part.

[mostpost]

Nice figuring, Bobby - Obama will not agree to any spending cuts and YOU blame repubs.
Obama has proposed more than $1 trillion in spending cuts, but that does not get reported on Fox does it?

[mostpost]

hilarious. Democrats have controlled congress for most of the past 60 years, but the farm bill is a "Republican" policy?

It's hilarious that you think the Congress can pass any thing which the President does not agree to. Last I looked the President still had veto power and it still reguired a two thirds vote to override. So for 36 of those 60 years a Republican President had the power to stop a Democratic Congress from passing anything.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Obama has proposed more than $1 trillion in spending cuts, but that does not get reported on Fox does it?

$1 trillion over how long? Spending cuts, as in, eliminating $1 trillion from current levels? Or we will reduce the growth in spending over some period of time in a way that cumulatively equals $1 trillion?

If I'm hooked on crack and keep spending $5,000 more than last year, every year to feed my habit, claiming that I'm cutting $25,000 from my crack habit by only spending half as much ($2500) more every year for a decade isn't exactly awe inspiring... assuming that your statement reflects my analogy.

[mostpost]

FTFY.

Besides, Obama won the election on the Santa Claus platform. HOHOHO!:lol:
Republicans won the House on the basis of Gerrymandering. More people voted for Democrats in House races overall by a wide margin.

[delayjf]

So the problem wasn't cutting taxes for at least 10 years while going to war?
Since the tax cuts stimulated the economy to record revenue levels - no. Think of the cost of the war as a stimulus package. Who do you think builds M1 tanks, toyota?

[Valuist]

If 2012 tax revenues are indeed at 2007 levels, that is the problem. Starting with 1977 here are the five year increases in yearly tax revenues.
1977 to 1982= 73%
1982 to 1987= 38%
1987 to 1992= 27%
1992 to 1997= 44%
1997 to 2002= 17%
2002 to 2007= 38%
2007 to 2012= 0% (at least according to you.)

Clearly the problem is a lack of revenue. Having the same amount of revenue as you did five years ago is not a positive. After three decades of substantial increases in revenue we arrive at a five year period in which there are no increases. I said three decades but it really goes back much further.

In fact, looking at the historical tables, you find no other five year periods outside the Great Depression where revenues do not rise. In the meantime the population continues to grow. The retired population grows even more rapidly. The tax base stagnates. Tax rates drop. Inflation causes goods and services to cost more. And you can't figure out why the deficit increases. Spending plays a part, but lack of revenue plays a far greater part.

The economy has been in the toilet since 2007. Anyone with any knowledge of economics knows you don't raise taxes in hard economic times.

Oh yeah, I forgot, things have been great on Main Street. :rolleyes:

[Valuist]

Republicans won the House on the basis of Gerrymandering. More people voted for Democrats in House races overall by a wide margin.

How ironic an Illinois liberal would complain about gerrymandering. Did you follow the Illinois elections at all?

[NJ Stinks]

Since the tax cuts stimulated the economy to record revenue levels - no. Think of the cost of the war as a stimulus package. Who do you think builds M1 tanks, toyota?

Gotcha. Reminds me of a song by Country Joe & The Fish.

now come on wall street don't be slow, why man this's war a-go-go,
there's plenty good money to be made, supplyin' the army with the tools of the trade,
just hope and pray that when they drop the bomb, they drop it on the Vietcong.


Nothing from Country Joe about cuttin' taxes in that song though. Somehow I think he would have mentioned it - but nobody was that looney back then.

[mostpost]

The economy has been in the toilet since 2007. Anyone with any knowledge of economics knows you don't raise taxes in hard economic times.

Oh yeah, I forgot, things have been great on Main Street. :rolleyes:
In 1932 we were in the middle of the worst depression in our history. The top tax rate the previous several years had been 25% on income over $100,000. That year the rate went up to 56% on income over $100,000 and 63% on income over $1,000,000. The rate more than doubled. In March of 1933 the Great Depression was officially over. I won't say the economy was perfect or that we did not continue to see some hard times, but there was fairly consistent improvement from 1933 to 1937. In 1937 the genius Republicans decided it was time to balance the budget, just like now. The result? A cut in government spending and a new recession. When we started to spend again the economy grew again.

We raised taxes and it not only did not hurt the economy but the economy grew. Not only that, but the tax rates prior to 1925 ranged from 46 to 77%. We dropped them to 25% in 1925 and in four years we had the worst depression in our history.

I'm guessing that you and many other here have studied economics in college.
Therein lies your problem. Every thing you have been told is a lie. Milton Freidmon was a charlatan. The moment we started adhering to his economic principles is the moment we started downhill as a world class economy.

[soupan]

Time for Civil War, Bobby.

Over the cliff and taxes for all for two years, no deal, no bipartisan votes just pain until we vote for tax cutters in the mid term election. Live with all the cuts for two years.

Oh Really?

Cut off your nose to spite your stupidity?

When interest rates skyrocket and people walk away from their homes then the banks default and panic hovers over this country AND WORLD then what, genius?

You know a lot about NOTHING.

[mostpost]

Since the tax cuts stimulated the economy to record revenue levels - no. Think of the cost of the war as a stimulus package. Who do you think builds M1 tanks, toyota?

You keep making this claim that the Bush tax cuts resulted in record revenues and it true that we collected more revenue than previously. But that is meaningless, because we almost always collect more revenue than previously. The question is how would the revenue collected with the cuts compare to what it would have been under the higher rates previously in place? 39.6% of X is always more than 35% of X.

[newtothegame]

Oh Really?

Cut off your nose to spite your stupidity?

When interest rates skyrocket and people walk away from their homes then the banks default and panic hovers over this country AND WORLD then what, genius?

You know a lot about NOTHING.
Funny, how you failed to address the solyndra comment.....
Even funnier how you talk about others knowing nothing yet all you have done here is attempt (poorly at that) to bash one party.
if you really had any clue at all, yo would know its BOTH parties.
But, snce you like to tell people how little they know, please show us your proposal on how to fix this current 'crisis".
And before you go on this tirade of raising taxes on the wealthiest, you do know that taxing them ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THEIR PAY will only pay for a few weeks if that right??
Ok, let's hear it......(this ought to be fun) lol:lol:

[newtothegame]

You keep making this claim that the Bush tax cuts resulted in record revenues and it true that we collected more revenue than previously. But that is meaningless, because we almost always collect more revenue than previously. The question is how would the revenue collected with the cuts compare to what it would have been under the higher rates previously in place? 39.6% of X is always more than 35% of X.
Why stop at 39.6% of x??? You and I both know that is just a short term, make ya feel good, fix.
Would you agree the number of those on government assistance is increasing?
So, based on that alone, is it safe to say that less and less people are the ones that pay into the system?
Ok, now follow closely clueless.......if less and less are paying more and more, how much more can you continue to tax them?
you see, taxes alone is not the problem, You on the right fail to want to address the real problems (and so do some on the right), as none of those sorry SOB's in congress want to be labeled as the one 'throwing mama from the cliff.
They are only interested in keeping those cush jobs for as long as they can.
you and I both know that spending HAS TO BE ADDRESSED. And not at some 'well we will cut 10% from our original plan of spending 30% increase. That IS NOT CUTTING SPENDING.
So, as much as I hate the idea, I say screw it! Let's go over the damn cliff and lets put a hurt on ALL involved. You want to increase revenue through taxation, here is the perfect chance...go over the damn cliff already. But, none of those sorry SOB's has the balls to actually do it in my opinion. Because, as I said, they are only interested in their political jobs.
you see, if we actually go over the cliff, blaming parties will no longer matter as EVERY household will have to evaluate what happened.
Then, and only then, will the possibilit (notice I said possibility) of these bafoons in Congress start to realize either they get it fixed or they get the hell out of office.

[soupan]

Funny, how you failed to address the solyndra comment.....
Even funnier how you talk about others knowing nothing yet all you have done here is attempt (poorly at that) to bash one party.
if you really had any clue at all, yo would know its BOTH parties.
But, snce you like to tell people how little they know, please show us your proposal on how to fix this current 'crisis".
And before you go on this tirade of raising taxes on the wealthiest, you do know that taxing them ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THEIR PAY will only pay for a few weeks if that right??
Ok, let's hear it......(this ought to be fun) lol:lol:

Show me where I applauded the Solyndra venture? If there was enough money lost in Solyndra and other Obama/white house backed failures, then Romney did a poor job of pointing the economic consequences out to the American people in his bid for President.
Did we not just have a presidential election?
Solyndra was a failure. Many Gov. sponsored R&D ventures go belly up, as do private sector R&D's. Many succeed too. If there were enough impropriorties at Solyndra, it would have cost Obama the election. Solyndra is a pimple on the ass of the problems this country will have if taxes go up on everyone comes Jan 1 and stay unchanged without legislation.

Secondly, don't insult me regarding the facts of how much revenue the taxing of wealthy Americans will have on our nations debt.
It's not the point. It was a huge part of what the American people VOTED for. Like it or not. Romney specifically detailed what he was going to do regarding lowering taxes, with more "trickle down BS".
Trickle down does NOT work. If it did, we'd be doing great since Bush cut the tax rates years ago.
Obama specifically outlined his plan. The vote, regardless of attempts on the right to argue otherwise, was not close.

I'd raise taxes much higher on the wealthy. The closer you get to the million mark, the higher they'd go, as high as 50%. No incentive you say?? Good, sit on your millions, cash in your chips and not invest in the economy. Sit the next dance out. There will be others who will take the risk if the demand is there. It's a big country out there.

[newtothegame]

Show me where I applauded the Solyndra venture? If there was enough money lost in Solyndra and other Obama/white house backed failures, then Romney did a poor job of pointing the economic consequences out to the American people in his bid for President.
Did we not just have a presidential election?
Solyndra was a failure. Many Gov. sponsored R&D ventures go belly up, as do private sector R&D's. Many succeed too. If there were enough impropriorties at Solyndra, it would have cost Obama the election. Solyndra is a pimple on the ass of the problems this country will have if taxes go up on everyone comes Jan 1 and stay unchanged without legislation.

Secondly, don't insult me regarding the facts of how much revenue the taxing of wealthy Americans will have on our nations debt.
It's not the point. It was a huge part of what the American people VOTED for. Like it or not. Romney specifically detailed what he was going to do regarding lowering taxes, with more "trickle down BS".
Trickle down does NOT work. If it did, we'd be doing great since Bush cut the tax rates years ago.
Obama specifically outlined his plan. The vote, regardless of attempts on the right to argue otherwise, was not close.

I'd raise taxes much higher on the wealthy. The closer you get to the million mark, the higher they'd go, as high as 50%. No incentive you say?? Good, sit on your millions, cash in your chips and not invest in the economy. Sit the next dance out. There will be others who will take the risk if the demand is there. It's a big country out there.
See, your post is a symptom of the problems which plague this country. you say Solyndra is nothing more then a pimple therefore the insinuation is to not deal with it. I guess you think the BILLIONS in just medicare FRAUD is a pimple too?
How about the Billions we send overseas to governments, like the Morsi regime??? More Pimples you say???
Seems the ass you referenced is quite full of pimples!!!
You talk about unchanged legislation....was that in reference too the past four years without a budget out of the SENATE? Or is that just a reference to the repugs in the house??? You see soupan, you can play partisan politics all you like but NOTHING you have mentioned even remotely addresses the problems.
You say:
Secondly, don't insult me regarding the facts of how much revenue the taxing of wealthy Americans will have on our nations debt.
It's not the point.
If this is the case as you say, then why would you bother following it up by saying the american people voted for it? What's the point as you claim this is NOT it? You see, it's real easy for someone like yourself to sit back and vote to raise taxes on others but, when it comes close to approaching you (as it will come next week without legislation) you get upset. I wonder why that is? Hmmmmm????
Now as I best understand it, the constitution provides for the safety of the american people and infrastructure such as highways, roads, bridges. If this is the case, do the wealthy benefit more from the american military then the poor? If so, please explain how. If we all benefit the same, then why should one group pay more then the other? I know, I know, your reply will be because they can. They can also take and leave...right?
Here's a basic math question for you since you have taken up this fight for America......:lol:
If more and more people are on government assistance, in lower tax brackets, and more and more are currently disabled, wouldn't it be a fair statement to say that then the opposite would be true of those in the tax brackets which can pay?
If so, how can you tax less and less people more and more of their salaries to pay for more and more people who pay less and less? Today it's 39.6 % (mosty's number) that is wanted. What is that number tomorrow when it does NOTHING but pay for a day or two? Tomorrow are ya going to go back and ask for more again? Now you do understand I am not directly referencing YOU but as a legislator.
As I have said, BOTH parties are at fault and only care about their political lives. You can call out repugs if you like but over the summer, they did pass an extension of the Bush's tax cuts. It was the SENATE which never even brought it up for vote. That same senate whis is held by democrats and led by Harry Reid.
As I said earlier, and I will say again...you want more revenue...LETS ALL TAKE THAT RIDE over the cliff. After all, you or I are no more american then the other. We are all in this together! You will get plenty more revenue and for once, the people will really see (be forced to with their pocket books), the real issues at hand.
Then, politicians will actually have to worry about heir political lives vs spending months and years trying to convince the voting constituency that it is the other parties fault. I am not so sure about you, but I did not cast my vote to have some numbskull telling me it's not his fault.

[soupan]

As I said earlier, and I will say again...you want more revenue...LETS ALL TAKE THAT RIDE over the cliff. After all, you or I are no more american then the other. We are all in this together! You will get plenty more revenue and for once, the people will really see (be forced to with their pocket books), the real issues at hand.


Perfect. Spoken like a true right winger. A REAL American.
Go ahead right wingers, go over the cliff, let all the sequestration kick in (about 2 months) and set back the fragile economy.
The wealthy will laugh, the poor will continue to be poor and you'll just do more destruction to the middle class.
We'll see next election who those in the Middle Class believe is the cause of their demise. Good luck.
The ABSOLUTE END of the Republican party for at least 15yrs. (if that hasn't happened already.

[Tom]

Go ahead right wingers, go over the cliff, let all the sequestration kick in (about 2 months) and set back the fragile economy.

This bill was passed singed by three factions - a Republican House, a Democrat Senate and a Democrat White House.

2/3 of the blame here goes to the dems, actually, more than 2/3, because the dems have failed to produce a budget for almost 5 years and were unwilling to adress real budget issues, so they came up with this kick the can down the road deal.

btw, it is Obama's intent to go over the cliff.

[Valuist]

Show me where I applauded the Solyndra venture? If there was enough money lost in Solyndra and other Obama/white house backed failures, then Romney did a poor job of pointing the economic consequences out to the American people in his bid for President.
Did we not just have a presidential election?
Solyndra was a failure. Many Gov. sponsored R&D ventures go belly up, as do private sector R&D's. Many succeed too. If there were enough impropriorties at Solyndra, it would have cost Obama the election. Solyndra is a pimple on the ass of the problems this country will have if taxes go up on everyone comes Jan 1 and stay unchanged without legislation.

Secondly, don't insult me regarding the facts of how much revenue the taxing of wealthy Americans will have on our nations debt.
It's not the point. It was a huge part of what the American people VOTED for. Like it or not. Romney specifically detailed what he was going to do regarding lowering taxes, with more "trickle down BS".
Trickle down does NOT work. If it did, we'd be doing great since Bush cut the tax rates years ago.
Obama specifically outlined his plan. The vote, regardless of attempts on the right to argue otherwise, was not close.

I'd raise taxes much higher on the wealthy. The closer you get to the million mark, the higher they'd go, as high as 50%. No incentive you say?? Good, sit on your millions, cash in your chips and not invest in the economy. Sit the next dance out. There will be others who will take the risk if the demand is there. It's a big country out there.

Just tax the hell out of everyone else, right? Just as long as they don't raise YOUR taxes. That line of thinking is the real problem in this country.

[Robert Goren]

I am all for going after fraud in government programs. The liberals like myself love pointing it out in defense programs. The conservative love pointing it out in non-defense programs. Unlike conservatives, the liberals do believe we should get rid of programs just because some crook(s) stole some money from it. If we actually did that, there would be no government programs including defense programs. Crooks are everywhere there is money. We should hunt down the crooks and throw them in jail. A guy who robs a gas station with a gun and gets maybe $100 goes to jail, but guy robs the medicare program for billions has his company pays a fine and gets elected governor of Florida. The difference is the smart crooks hid behind corporations when they steal so if they get caught, they can keep most of they stole and never face any real punishment. Both Military contractors and contractors for non defense programs use the same methods to steal millions and most don't even make the news when caught. Somebody gets caught trading $20 of food stamps for booze and the story is in every conservative blog for weeks.

[Tom]

Bobby, who controls the Justice Department?








Answer : The people who are gun-running for Mexican drug cartels.

[soupan]

Just tax the hell out of everyone else, right? Just as long as they don't raise YOUR taxes. That line of thinking is the real problem in this country.

Define "everyone else". If you're talking about the small part of the population that earn close to a million per yr or greater, yes, "everyone else".

I used to be a business broker. I had NUMEROUS clients who owned dozens of McDonalds, Dunkin Donuts and other franchise type businesses. They made so much money they couldn't spend it in 20 lifetimes. It got to a point they would call me out of boredom. "What new stuff do you have"? "I'm tired of just my restaurants". God bless them, this is America. make as much as you like. I don't begrudge their empire. You'll just be taxed accordingly.

[fast4522]

Do not be fooled by the posts of the slug with 30 posts, because he is the creation of the trash that has been around here for a long time and now thinks that he owns the place. Just saying it as it is, even if most don't favor blunt in your face comments. Time to share some pain.

[Robert Goren]

Bobby, who controls the Justice Department?








Answer : The people who are gun-running for Mexican drug cartels. It does matter who controls the justice dept as gunning-running scandal proves since it happened GWB too as conservatives keep trying to forget. Fraud goes on under democrats and republicans alike. Some the biggest frauds in terms of dollars stole went on during the Iraqi War under GWB. There was one case where nearly 100 million of dollars in cash just disappeared and nobody still has any idea where it went. But like I said, no president escapes them and none of them do much about it. Even under the conservative Reagan, top government officials were involved in a massive fraud on the American taxpayer known as "Arms for Contra". I know some of you think that was a good idea, but none the less, taxpayer money was used illegally and at least this case, a few people went to jail.

[fast4522]

Notice exactly who is playing pocket pool in this picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[TJDave]

Notice exactly who is playing pocket pool in this picture. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I noticed all the friggin flags. What's that all about?

One ain't enough?

[hcap]

Do not be fooled by the posts of the slug with 30 posts, because he is the creation of the trash that has been around here for a long time and now thinks that he owns the place. Just saying it as it is, even if most don't favor blunt in your face comments. Time to share some pain.You are one sick puppy! See a doctor SOON

[fast4522]

Confirmation.

[Robert Goren]

I noticed all the friggin flags. What's that all about?

One ain't enough? Probably, Every cabinet has a flag and of course each state has one. I believe this dates back to the start of the country. Who knows why the room has them other this room probably has those flags in it all the time.

[Tom]

We have, what, 58 states?
That's a lotta flags!

[PaceAdvantage]

Republicans won the House on the basis of Gerrymandering. More people voted for Democrats in House races overall by a wide margin.How come America didn't become a Utopia when Democrats controlled EVERYTHING from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011?

What exactly happened during those two years of bliss? We already know nothing happened to improve the economy...

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh Really?

Cut off your nose to spite your stupidity?

When interest rates skyrocket and people walk away from their homes then the banks default and panic hovers over this country AND WORLD then what, genius?

You know a lot about NOTHING.Shouldn't everything have been fixed when Dems had control of the entire gov't from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011? How did you guys **** that up so badly?

[sammy the sage]

Shouldn't everything have been fixed when Dems had control of the entire gov't from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011? How did you guys **** that up so badly?

Same reason when the pugs had it...in the 2000's...they don't care about you or I

[soupan]

Shouldn't everything have been fixed when Dems had control of the entire gov't from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011? How did you guys **** that up so badly?

This post is pretty funny.

Destroy a few walls inside a building and it can be repaired in a few days.

Knock the building down completely and it takes considerably longer.
Plus this President has gotten the LEAST cooperation by adversaries then any I can remember in history.
Many of my closest friends are hard core liberal hating Republicans. The one thing we all agree (and laugh) about is that NO ONE, left or right, can fix this mess quickly.

[Robert Goren]

How come America didn't become a Utopia when Democrats controlled EVERYTHING from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011?

What exactly happened during those two years of bliss? We already know nothing happened to improve the economy...You keep saying that, but is not true. You need 60 votes in the senate to do anything as you well know and the Democrats had exactly 60 for about 5 months in 2010. Actually the ecomony has improved quite a bit over the fourth quarter of 2008. We are not having negative growth in GDP like we had then not mention what was happening on Wall street and with the banks. It has slowed it a bit since the republicans took over the house. You can see that if you track GDP growth by the quarter, but it is still postive, not great, but still postive. Even unemployment is inching downward, a slow trend to be sure, a downward trend none the less. If you had bought stock in april of 2009 just as Obama's policies were starting, you would have nice profit.

[Tom]

You are one sick puppy! See a doctor SOON

Note to Fast: Make sure you don't go to hcap's doctor - you see how THAT turned out! :eek:

[mostpost]

You keep saying that, but is not true. You need 60 votes in the senate to do anything as you well know and the Democrats had exactly 60 for about 5 months in 2010. Actually the ecomony has improved quite a bit over the fourth quarter of 2008. We are not having negative growth in GDP like we had then not mention what was happening on Wall street and with the banks. It has slowed it a bit since the republicans took over the house. You can see that if you track GDP growth by the quarter, but it is still postive, not great, but still postive. Even unemployment is inching downward, a slow trend to be sure, a downward trend none the less. If you had bought stock in april of 2009 just as Obama's policies were starting, you would have nice profit.
This is so frustrating. They keep repeating the same things over and over again.
Democrats had control of the House and Senate; ignoring the fact that Republicans employed the filibuster hundreds of times. Barney Frank prevented reform of the Community Reinvestment Act; ignoring the fact that Republicans who controlled both the House and Senate at that time never brought the matter up for even a single committee hearing, much less a vote. It does not matter what Frank said, he had no power to stop any legislation on the matter. But there was no legislation to vote on. It languished in committee because the status quo was profitable to the Republicans' banker friends.

It is also not true that Obama has passed no budgets. Budgets were passed for 2010 and 2011. Budgets were not passed for 2012 and 2013 because the Tea Party House refuses to pass them.

[johnhannibalsmith]

This is so frustrating. They keep repeating the same things over and over again.
...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Thankfully we have the vast reservoir of original ideas and fresh, unique perspectives known around these parts as mostpost. :kiss:

[Tom]

Even when he tells the same lies over and over and over. :lol:

[hcap]

Note to Slow from Even Slower: Make sure you don't go to hcap's doctor - you see how THAT turned out! :eek:

FTFY

[hcap]

This is so frustrating. They keep repeating the same things over and over again.
Democrats had control of the House and Senate; ignoring the fact that Republicans employed the filibuster hundreds of times. Barney Frank prevented reform of the Community Reinvestment Act; ignoring the fact that Republicans who controlled both the House and Senate at that time never brought the matter up for even a single committee hearing, much less a vote. It does not matter what Frank said, he had no power to stop any legislation on the matter. But there was no legislation to vote on. It languished in committee because the status quo was profitable to the Republicans' banker friends.

It is also not true that Obama has passed no budgets. Budgets were passed for 2010 and 2011. Budgets were not passed for 2012 and 2013 because the Tea Party House refuses to pass them.Nothing will change. Amazing that guys like Froggy and Fast, can be so ignorant and gullible. Good job correcting them as usual, but you are only preaching to the choir

[PaceAdvantage]

This post is pretty funny.

Destroy a few walls inside a building and it can be repaired in a few days.

Knock the building down completely and it takes considerably longer.
Plus this President has gotten the LEAST cooperation by adversaries then any I can remember in history.
Many of my closest friends are hard core liberal hating Republicans. The one thing we all agree (and laugh) about is that NO ONE, left or right, can fix this mess quickly.No, it's not funny. It's sad.

You and others keep harping on how Republicans are behind the fact that Obama and the Democrats really haven't done much of anything.

And yet, when Democrats controlled everything for two straight years, again, nothing really happened. You can't have it all ways.

Two years is a LONG TIME to pass a lot of different laws. To TRANSFORM America, as Obama I think said during one of his campaigns.

Again I'll ask. How did you guys royally **** up such an opportunity?

[Jay Trotter]

FTFY
I finally had to google what the heck this stands for. Could never figure it out.

FTFY is short for "fixed that for you". Who knew!!!

[PaceAdvantage]

I finally had to google what the heck this stands for. Could never figure it out.

FTFY is short for "fixed that for you". Who knew!!!Damn you're slow.

[Jay Trotter]

Damn you're slow.That's nothing. I finally broke down yesterday and asked my kids what the heck a # (hashtag) meant! I knew it meant "hashtag" but I had no clue what a hashtag was actually for.

My son wrote back: #dated #outoftouch

Typical smart ass.

[johnhannibalsmith]

That's nothing. I finally broke down yesterday and asked my kids what the heck a # (hashtag) meant! I knew it meant "hashtag" but I had no clue what a hashtag was actually for.
...

I still don't get it and actually pisses me off for some reason when I see it all over the place. :D

#BiteMeLosers

[Jay Trotter]

I still don't get it and actually pisses me off for some reason when I see it all over the place. :D

#BiteMeLosersWell, I'm told it is for using something called Pintrest or Instagram or some such thing. I can barely deal with Facebook. Apparently it is a way to search for images.

Anyway, we digress....

[soupan]

No, it's not funny. It's sad.

You and others keep harping on how Republicans are behind the fact that Obama and the Democrats really haven't done much of anything.

And yet, when Democrats controlled everything for two straight years, again, nothing really happened. You can't have it all ways.

Two years is a LONG TIME to pass a lot of different laws. To TRANSFORM America, as Obama I think said during one of his campaigns.

Again I'll ask. How did you guys royally **** up such an opportunity?

You total fool.

When the banking crisis hit many of the most respected economic minds and educators in this country were invited by politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle to give input as to the best way to move forward and straighten the country out.

They couldn't short fix the problem. Everyone knew it. Many on both sides of the aisle agreed to throw money at the problem, and it wasn't just Democrats (any republican businessman will tell you it takes money to make money).

But you in all your wisdom, (I've been reading your posts for six months now and have learned wisdom is something you have none of) think Politicians could legislate solutions in 2 years.

Do yourself a favor and block me from posting on your site because you're my number one target, and trust me, watch what you post because I'll bury you worse then I did in the banking thread. :)

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Do yourself a favor and block me from posting on your site because you're my number one target...:)

Why not just avoid the insults that seem to be coming from nowhere except your ideological differences and not try to get ruled off so that the left can have another poster on the site for the right to argue with?

[PaceAdvantage]

You total fool.

When the banking crisis hit many of the most respected economic minds and educators in this country were invited by politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle to give input as to the best way to move forward and straighten the country out.

They couldn't short fix the problem. Everyone knew it. Many on both sides of the aisle agreed to throw money at the problem, and it wasn't just Democrats (any republican businessman will tell you it takes money to make money).

But you in all your wisdom, (I've been reading your posts for six months now and have learned wisdom is something you have none of) think Politicians could legislate solutions in 2 years.

Do yourself a favor and block me from posting on your site because you're my number one target, and trust me, watch what you post because I'll bury you worse then I did in the banking thread. :)You've said nothing. You realize that, right?

I never said solutions would magically appear in two years. But you totally ****ed up a golden opportunity, and now blame Republicans for your total ineptness.

Nice going.

[Actor]

How come America didn't become a Utopia when Democrats controlled EVERYTHING from Jan 2009 - Jan 2011?

What exactly happened during those two years of bliss? We already know nothing happened to improve the economy...Obstructionism by the G.O.P. using the supermajority rule of the senate. I thought you knew. :bang:

[Robert Goren]

No, it's not funny. It's sad.

You and others keep harping on how Republicans are behind the fact that Obama and the Democrats really haven't done much of anything.

And yet, when Democrats controlled everything for two straight years, again, nothing really happened. You can't have it all ways.

Two years is a LONG TIME to pass a lot of different laws. To TRANSFORM America, as Obama I think said during one of his campaigns.

Again I'll ask. How did you guys royally **** up such an opportunity? There you go again repeat that . It is not true and you know it, yet you keep repeating it over and again. In the few months the democrat did actually control everything (the needed 60 votes to do anything in the senate), they passed Obama Care. You may not like it, but from the latest polls I have most people do. One thing is for sure, it will have a long lasting effect on the country. We, I am sure, will disagree on whether the effects will be good or bad. But please stop saying they did nothing and stop say they were control for 2 years when they actually had control for about 5 months.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Obstructionism by the G.O.P. using the supermajority rule of the senate. I thought you knew. :bang:

Okay, let's grant this. I read a lot of the lefty blogs. Many, many, many more than I do the rightie blogs. I usually shake my head at most from both sides, but ocassionally you stumble on a gem. I had to go to one of my old favorites for something I remember reading way back when through a link at DemUnderground or HuffPoo or somewhere.

Someone was trying to compile a list of all the things that Dems had proposed and the Repubs had managed to obstruct. The list was basically a list of typically narrow scoped, "feelgood" policy. Some of it had policy that at least had merit, in that despite having pros and cons, it at least had the potential to make a difference in something other than political ads and votes - like the veteran bills and a few of the fair pay bills that have kicked around forever in one form or another.

I'm genuinely curious - what do you think is the most crucial bill that was blocked? What bill was presented in good faith during that period that would have moved this country forward in the context that this PA/Soupan skirmish is developing?

I mean to say, both sides seem entrenched in fighting it out from these two positions - Dems did nothing vs. Repubs wouldn't let them - but can we get beyond that to what exactly it was that Dems tried to do that they blocked that would have us in a much better place now?

I'm sure that there is something out there that can be pointed to as policy that was certain to have us much better of by now but unfortunately, we as a nation are suffering because of Republicans stopping it for no reason other than to stymie the President and Democrats.

EDITED: Meant to add the link to one of my favorite blogs that I haven't been frequenting nearly as often as a I should lately (especially since he's crying for money these days since Soros forgot to send a check) and part one of this guy's list:

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/2010/10/want-proof-that-the-republican-party-is-against-the-people.html#tp

[Actor]

I'm sure that there is something out there that can be pointed to as policy that was certain to have us much better off...FTFY...by now but unfortunately, we as a nation are suffering because of Republicans stopping it for no reason other than to stymie the President and Democrats.Precisely. Well publicized G.O.P. policy was "make Obama fail." What the G.O.P. failed to realize (or did they) was that policy equates to "make America fail." The electorate knew this on 6 November.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robert-draper-anti-obama-campaign_n_1452899.html

[johnhannibalsmith]

... In the few months the democrat did actually control everything (the needed 60 votes to do anything in the senate), they passed Obama Care....

You positive on that? I was pretty sure that they had to utilize reconciliation to amend the original Senate bill because they didn't think that they could get the desired House bill (what we actually call Obamacare basically, minus a bunch of the riders dealing with Pell Grants) past the Brown41 Senate.

It doesn't really matter any way you slice it, because they passed it. I think the bone of contention herein is all of the great policy we missed out on because of obstructionism.

[johnhannibalsmith]

FTFYPrecisely. Well publicized G.O.P. policy was "make Obama fail." What the G.O.P. failed to realize (or did they) was that policy equates to "make America fail." The electorate knew this on 6 November.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robert-draper-anti-obama-campaign_n_1452899.html

I don't get it. You correct my spelling of the word "off", for which I am eternally grateful, but take a pass on telling me which policy that didn't make it past Republicans you supported the most.

Thanks, that was very illuminating.

[Robert Goren]

I think it clear that Obama would have spent more money on infrastructure if the GOP had let him. We can argue until the cows come home whether that would have been a good thing or bad thing. The only infrastructure the GOP is interested in is a pipeline. We can argue about that until the cows come home too.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I think it clear that Obama would have spent more money on infrastructure if the GOP had let him. ...

Obama? By executive order? He doesn't need the GOP blessing to pull one of those stunts. Are you saying that he just threw his hands up, along with the Dems that actually do create laws, and collectively decided that they would only offer up trivial bills to not get passed and didn't bother trying for all the good ones? That doesn't sound like a politician. It plays out really well when you can point to a great policy that you proposed and the Evil Party of No stopped it in its tracks. Hey, I believe the whole theory of obstructionism, I just want to know what I missed out on because of it. Hypotheticals about what a guy might've done if he was in a body that allowed him to craft legislation aren't quite what I was hoping for.

[Tom]

Obstructionism by the G.O.P. using the supermajority rule of the senate. I thought you knew. :bang:

Oh, I see.
So then, 'splain to me how BUSH screwed things up so bad?
Weren't the dems smart enough to obstructurize him and those pesky repubs? :lol:

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren
I think it clear that Obama would have spent more money on infrastructure if the GOP had let him. ...


No their fault he had to shovel so much payola towards union boys and other big contributors - buying an election is not cheap.

[mostpost]

but can we get beyond that to what exactly it was that Dems tried to do that they blocked that would have us in a much better place now?
From six months in 2010
6/24/10
H.R. 4213
Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2010
While many extensions of unemployment benefits contained in this bill eventually passed, some did not.
57-41
At a time when working families were suffering the worst effects of unemployment, Republicans refused to extend benefits.

9/23/10
S. 3628
Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act (Disclose Act)
Written in response to the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, this bill would require donors and sponsors to personally approve TV ads, as candidates are required to do.
59-39
39 republicans blocked passage of a bill that would require transparency in political advertising. Thirty nine is twelve less than a majority. Republicans who are so freaking concerned about an eighty year old black woman voting in Mississippi are not concerned at all about Karl Rove telling lies that reach millions.

9/28/10
S. 3816
Creating American Jobs And Ending Offshoring Act
Eliminates tax provisions that effectively reward companies for moving overseas. This bill was opposed by business groups that claimed it would hurt American companies' ability to compete in other countries.
53-45
Republicans not only want to move all our jobs overseas, they want to pay companies to move them there.

11/17/10
S. 3772
Paycheck Fairness Act
Revises the law to further prevent pay discrimination based on sex.
58-41
Republicans believe men should be paid more because they are men. Women should stay in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.

12/8/10
S. 3985
Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act of 2010
Provides a one-time $250 payment to senior citizens to offset a lack of any Social Security cost-of-living adjustment in the coming year.
53-45

For the cost of a month in Afghanistan and Iraq, Republicans denied senior citizens the chance to make their lives a little better.

12/8/10
S. 3991
Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2010
Grants emergency workers basic collective bargaining rights.
55-43
Republicans don't think the people who risk their lives to protect us should have any say in how they are compensated for doing so.

12/09/10
S. 3454
Defense Authorization
Provides funding for the Department of Defense and each arm of the military, among other national defense agencies. This version included a provision to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't' tell" policy which prohibits openly gay people from serving.
57-40
Republicans refused to authorize Defense appropriation because of their bigotry towards those who are different from them. You could also use the word hypocrisy here.

12/9/10
H.R. 847
James Zadroga 9/11 Health And Compensation Act of 2010
Provides funds for health care of 9/11 emergency responders and clean-up workers suffering from the after effects of the terrorist attacks and their aftermath.
57-42
So you spent weeks crawling around the collapsed ruins of the Twin Towers, rescuing those who were trapped; recovering those who did not survive; breathing the stench of decaying bodies and ingesting and inhaling the toxic fumes and dust. And now you are coughing up blood and your eyesight is damaged and you expect us to pay for your doctor bills. Tough shit buddy, that money is going where it is deserved. To tax breaks for our millionaire friends.

The above are eight examples of policies proposed by Democrats and blocked by Republicans. I found them here,
http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/majority-does-not-rule-in-filibuster-filled-111th-congress-20101216

They are not "feel good" policies. They are policies that would have helped people who needed help and deserved help. They would have required a little sacrifice on the part of people who could have afforded a little sacrifice. But those people will not sacrifice anything. They only take.

[Tom]

Did you invent the twist tie?
Because no one twists things like you do!

[Actor]

Did you invent the twist tie?
Because no one twists things like you do!You're too modest. You are the twisting champ, and I'm not talking about dancing. :bang:

[Actor]

Oh, I see.
So then, 'splain to me how BUSH screwed things up so bad?
Weren't the dems smart enough to obstructurize him and those pesky repubs? :lol:Put it down to patriotism. The dems were smart enough to realize that "make the president fail" was not good for the country. The G.O.P. pioneered obstructionism.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...They are not "feel good" policies. They are policies that would have helped people who needed help and deserved help. They would have required a little sacrifice on the part of people who could have afforded a little sacrifice. But those people will not sacrifice anything. They only take.

For the record, I do appreciate the effort. That is basically the same list that I was referencing. I stipulated that I found many of the bills on their face to have merit, and some on that list reflect the examples I cited, but I'm basically seeing policy that is narrowly focused. My "feelgood" qualifier wasn't intended to be a negative per se, but a description that reflects that it wasn't legislation that was designed to have some transformative effect on our country's woes - or even MAJOR campaign issues. That's basically where this began.

The first one is the closest and it basically was enacted - and we all remember that rationale for that obstruction if you can really call it that since the opposition basically announced what they needed in exchange for complete approval. Most of had to with offsetting the expense, but you did have some goofy conditions that people held it up with, like Hatch who wanted to spend even more money and drug test everyone. It's pretty safe to say that the important components of that bill were enacted.

But again, I knew I could count on you to at least come with something - even if it doesn't really convince me that there was a real effort to press important legislation that would have helped our recovery or general health as a nation and it was stymied. Don't misinterpret that as not thinking that some of those aren't worthy of consideration, just not that it answers my genuine query as stated.

[mostpost]

No, it's not funny. It's sad.

You and others keep harping on how Republicans are behind the fact that Obama and the Democrats really haven't done much of anything.

And yet, when Democrats controlled everything for two straight years, again, nothing really happened. You can't have it all ways.

Two years is a LONG TIME to pass a lot of different laws. To TRANSFORM America, as Obama I think said during one of his campaigns.

Again I'll ask. How did you guys royally **** up such an opportunity?

I have a question which I wonder if you will answer honestly. The question is this. Are you really so ignorant that you do not know how the Senate works in spite of almost constant explanations here and in the media, or do you think you are clever by baiting us into explaining things you understand all too clearly, but do not wish to acknowledge?

Putting your hands over your ears and shouting la la la la la la la la la is not reasoned argument.

[NJ Stinks]

But again, I knew I could count on you to at least come with something - even if it doesn't really convince me that there was a real effort to press important legislation that would have helped our recovery or general health as a nation and it was stymied. Don't misinterpret that as not thinking that some of those aren't worthy of consideration, just not that it answers my genuine query as stated.

The debt ceiling impasse in 2011 and the subsequent downgrading of the U.S's AAA credit rating was due to the idiots on the right who couldn't raise taxes a nickel. The whole freakin' thing was caused by Republican obstruction.

But I guess that wasn't important either. :rolleyes:

Links: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-25/politics/debt.talks.timeline_1_debt-ceiling-debt-limit-national-debt?_s=PM:POLITICS

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-06/u-s-credit-rating-cut-by-s-p-for-first-time-on-deficit-reduction-accord.html

[elysiantraveller]

The debt ceiling impasse last summer and the subsequent downgrading of the U.S's AAA credit rating was due to the idiots on the right who couldn't raise taxes a nickel. The whole freakin' thing was caused by Republican obstruction.

But I guess that wasn't important either. :rolleyes:

Links: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-25/politics/debt.talks.timeline_1_debt-ceiling-debt-limit-national-debt?_s=PM:POLITICS

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-06/u-s-credit-rating-cut-by-s-p-for-first-time-on-deficit-reduction-accord.html

Huh?...

Neither one of those articles backs up your statement.

The real problem lies with both sides. Neither side can get their party to line up behind anything even remotely resembling a deal. The President, by using the power of his office, has made the issue about taxing wealth while avoiding talking about spending. Make no mistake though, if he were to offer any sort of deal that decreased spending and/or raised real revenue he would be unable to get his party to tow the line with him.

Instead, because of poor leadership, what we have are two sides repeatedly drawing lines in the sand because these idiots can't get their subordinates in line...

...we get what we vote for...

<This is not meant to be Partisan>

[Tom]

Put it down to patriotism. The dems were smart enough to realize that "make the president fail" was not good for the country. The G.O.P. pioneered obstructionism.

No, the republicans understood that they were elected not as a rubber stamp for the president, but as a separate branch of government who represent the PEOPLE, not the president.

Worked out pretty good.

[Tom]

...or do you think you are clever by baiting us into explaining things you understand all too clearly, but do not wish to acknowledge?

I can't speak for PA, but as for me, I seriously you have a clue what you talking about half the time. I also enjoy pathetic reasoning you often come up to rationalize failure. :lol::lol::lol:

[Tom]

Put it down to patriotism. The dems were smart enough to realize that "make the president fail" was not good for the country. The G.O.P. pioneered obstructionism.

That is BS.
It was dems who repeatedly tried to make the president fail in Iraq - insulting our troops, declaring we could never win, anything to undermine the military. The dems are directly responsible for an inflated body count.
That is why I look at dog shit with greater respect than I do ANY democrat.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
The debt ceiling impasse last summer and the subsequent downgrading of the U.S's AAA credit rating was due to the idiots on the right who couldn't raise taxes a nickel. The whole freakin' thing was caused by Republican obstruction.

Closing out 2012 the same as you started it?
Clueless?

If someone was hooked on drugs, and was spending $2000 a day on his habit, losing his home, stealing from family....you libs would see the solution as giving him more money to buy drugs.

It is a spending problem.
End of story.

[Robert Goren]

I am not sure what is holding up the farm bill. The local republican delegation (3 in the house and 2 in the senate , no democrats in the delegation) is promising Nebraska farmers in town hall meetings across the state that it will be passed soon and there will be absolutely NO cuts in it. I am pretty sure that the same thing is happening in every farm state.

[Tom]

Congress is going for the record number of days of doing nothing.
And, it is their vacation time - you expect them to give a rats ass about the country when it is party time?

[johnhannibalsmith]

The debt ceiling impasse in 2011 and the subsequent downgrading of the U.S's AAA credit rating was due to the idiots on the right who couldn't raise taxes a nickel. The whole freakin' thing was caused by Republican obstruction.

But I guess that wasn't important either. :rolleyes:
...

Hmmm, well, I'm not sure I could eloquently fit this in the profile of important legislation that was blocked by the right simply to stymie the President. Raising the debt ceiling has unfortunately become a necessary evil, and even using the word "necessary" makes me cringe because it really shouldn't be. You claim it is necessary because Repubs wouldn't raise taxes. I, as you can well imagine, look it at as a byproduct of our nation's unwillingness to be realistic about our spending for a good long while now. Your own article even addresses both ends of it ("...S&P lowered the U.S. one level to AA+ while keeping the outlook at “negative” as it becomes less confident Congress will end Bush-era tax cuts or tackle entitlements.")

Either way, it's fairly moot, unless you think that the example you cite demonstrates a scenario that could have played out differently and would have made a significant difference in our nation's overall health and position. I think this is sort of like mosite's use of the unemployment benefit bill - yeah, you can make the case that it wasn't rubber stamped by the right - but its hard to make the case that there was obstructionism and not just basic compromise since it was fairly predetermined that we'd get there one way or the other.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
The debt ceiling impasse last summer and the subsequent downgrading of the U.S's AAA credit rating was due to the idiots on the right who couldn't raise taxes a nickel. The whole freakin' thing was caused by Republican obstruction.

Obama said that extending the Bush tax cuts was needed.
Hard to fit that into your perception of reality.

[OntheRail]

I think it clear that Obama would have spent more money on infrastructure if the GOP had let him. We can argue until the cows come home whether that would have been a good thing or bad thing. The only infrastructure the GOP is interested in is a pipeline. We can argue about that until the cows come home too.

How bout they spend less on robotic rats and gnats screwing in a swamp... studying the health of hookers in China... yes CHINA... giving a few hundred grand to some idiot to rub shit on a Crucifix and call him an artist or the a plethora of other asinine waste of cash. If they could do that maybe we'd be able to save our infrastructure and pay down the Debt. And while we're at it maybe they could use able-bodied EBT recipients to flag traffic... pick trash or some other menial labor jobs we the tax payers get stuck paying to outside contractors. Get real more taxes is not the problem... their spending junkies and it's time to send them to rehab.

[NJ Stinks]

.

If someone was hooked on drugs, and was spending $2000 a day on his habit, losing his home, stealing from family....you libs would see the solution as giving him more money to buy drugs.

.

And you guys would insist that all the druggie needs is a tax cut so everybody in the family can prosper and, of course, live happily ever after. :rolleyes:

[Robert Fischer]

If someone was hooked on drugs, and was spending $2000 a day on his habit, losing his home, stealing from family....you libs would see the solution as giving him more money to buy drugs.

kinda like more guns to solve a gun problem? ;)

[Robert Goren]

How bout they spend less on robotic rats and gnats screwing in a swamp... studying the health of hookers in China... yes CHINA... giving a few hundred grand to some idiot to rub shit on a Crucifix and call him an artist or the a plethora of other asinine waste of cash. If they could do that maybe we'd be able to save our infrastructure and pay down the Debt. And while we're at it maybe they could use able-bodied EBT recipients to flag traffic... pick trash or some other menial labor jobs we the tax payers get stuck paying to outside contractors. Get real more taxes is not the problem... their spending junkies and it's time to send them to rehab.The stuff you mention should not be funded, but the cost all of it together for a decade probably costs less than what stolen by the crooks in Afghanistan in a month. You talk about things that cost a few hundred thousand or at most a million. The Afgan crooks think in terms of billions. At most of that money goes back into the US economy, but the money stolen in Afghanistan goes every place but back into the US economy.

[HUSKER55]

good point there Robert :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

And you guys would insist that all the druggie needs is a tax cut so everybody in the family can prosper and, of course, live happily ever after. :rolleyes:

No, a DRUG cut. Pay attention.
I know it is hard.

[Tom]

The stuff you mention should not be funded, but the cost all of it together for a decade probably costs less than what stolen by the crooks in Afghanistan in a month. You talk about things that cost a few hundred thousand or at most a million.

You are beginning to put 2 and 2 together and getting close to 4.
Now, that same reasoning, on a larger scale, the tax on the upper 1% is not a drop inthe bucket of our deficits. SPENDING is our problem. Serious cuts are needed or else you can look forward to a lot feta cheese in our future.

[Robert Goren]

I think where it is being spent is more of a problem. Money spent that goes back into US economy is one thing. Money spent that goes into Swiss bank accounts and on mansions on the Rivera is another. That is what conservatives have trouble understanding.

[OntheRail]

The stuff you mention should not be funded, but the cost all of it together for a decade probably costs less than what stolen by the crooks in Afghanistan in a month. You talk about things that cost a few hundred thousand or at most a million. The Afgan crooks think in terms of billions. At most of that money goes back into the US economy, but the money stolen in Afghanistan goes every place but back into the US economy.

That seem to be on Obama's watch... as well.

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 18, 2009

President Obama has ordered the first combat deployments of his presidency, saying yesterday that he had authorized an additional 17,000 U.S. troops "to stabilize a deteriorating situation" in Afghanistan.

And Obama's did zip to stop the thefts... just crate up more.

So a pattern of waste be it here or elsewhere is waste none the less. Do all that can be done to halt waste... graft and theft first. But your saying as long as the waste is inside the US it all cool with you.. cause it'll trickle down. :rolleyes:

What needs to be fixed... is the spend mentality.

[Tom]

I think where it is being spent is more of a problem. Money spent that goes back into US economy is one thing. Money spent that goes into Swiss bank accounts and on mansions on the Rivera is another. That is what conservatives have trouble understanding.

What federal spending is going there?
I have no problem understanding it.

Personal wealth is not the same as government spending.
Get over you pathetic jealously of those who do better than you do.

[Robert Goren]

What federal spending is going there?
I have no problem understanding it.

Personal wealth is not the same as government spending.
Get over you pathetic jealously of those who do better than you do. Jealous of Afgan theives, Give me break!:bang:

[Tom]

What channel are you on tonight?
What are you talking about?

Never mind...it can only hurt me to know.:bang:

[soupan]

That seem to be on Obama's watch... as well.

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 18, 2009

President Obama has ordered the first combat deployments of his presidency, saying yesterday that he had authorized an additional 17,000 U.S. troops "to stabilize a deteriorating situation" in Afghanistan.

And Obama's did zip to stop the thefts... just crate up more.

So a pattern of waste be it here or elsewhere is waste none the less. Do all that can be done to halt waste... graft and theft first. But your saying as long as the waste is inside the US it all cool with you.. cause it'll trickle down. :rolleyes:

What needs to be fixed... is the spend mentality.

That's not what he's saying but obviously you can't figure that out.

I hope you and Tom are comfortable going to work every day to help pay for Harmid Karzai's palace and servants.

He lives like a king, like many jerk off leaders we give money to, all off the backs of American taxpayers and and the foolish Military leaders that have convinced the dopes in Washington that some towel head living in a cave on the other side of the world is somehow going to take down our country.
So let's open the checkbook and give them $$$ and send out soldiers to be slaughtered.
Yep, makes sense to me. :jump:

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

He lives like a king, like many jerk off leaders we give money to, all off the backs of American taxpayers and and the foolish Military leaders that have convinced the dopes in Washington that some towel head living in a cave on the other side of the world is somehow going to take down our country.
So let's open the checkbook and give them $$$ and send out soldiers to be slaughtered.
Yep, makes sense to me. :jump:

I knew it wouldn't be long before I found a post of yours that I agreed with more than disagreed with. The tone of most of them probably helped me with that realization. :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

Obstructionism by the G.O.P. using the supermajority rule of the senate. I thought you knew. :bang:Oh yes...of course...the same Republican party that was declared dead and buried in 2008 and now again in 2012 is the same Republican party that prevented the Democrats from doing ANYTHING from Jan 2009-Jan 2011...

Makes a TON of sense.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

There you go again repeat that . It is not true and you know it, yet you keep repeating it over and again. In the few months the democrat did actually control everything (the needed 60 votes to do anything in the senate), they passed Obama Care. You may not like it, but from the latest polls I have most people do. One thing is for sure, it will have a long lasting effect on the country. We, I am sure, will disagree on whether the effects will be good or bad. But please stop saying they did nothing and stop say they were control for 2 years when they actually had control for about 5 months.Obamacare? Oh yes, that's what this country needed.

How many small businesses are shutting their doors now because of Obamacare?

Yes, that's what we need. Even LESS jobs...

Pat yourself on the back for that achievement, and be sure to tell me how good it's been for the country.

When should I check back with you? 3-5-10 years from now?

What a crock.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have a question which I wonder if you will answer honestly. The question is this. Are you really so ignorant that you do not know how the Senate works in spite of almost constant explanations here and in the media, or do you think you are clever by baiting us into explaining things you understand all too clearly, but do not wish to acknowledge?

Putting your hands over your ears and shouting la la la la la la la la la is not reasoned argument.So what you're essentially saying is, you'll never own up to your own party's failures to get things accomplished, and always blame the other side for your own shortcomings.

Duly noted.

[PaceAdvantage]

That's not what he's saying but obviously you can't figure that out.

I hope you and Tom are comfortable going to work every day to help pay for Harmid Karzai's palace and servants.

He lives like a king, like many jerk off leaders we give money to, all off the backs of American taxpayers and and the foolish Military leaders that have convinced the dopes in Washington that some towel head living in a cave on the other side of the world is somehow going to take down our country.
So let's open the checkbook and give them $$$ and send out soldiers to be slaughtered.
Yep, makes sense to me. :jump:Towel head? Normally, I'd delete such a blatantly RACIST post, but I think I'll leave this up to show all the left-leaners how racist they really are...

And they like to call the Tea-Party and right-leaners racist? Yeah...right...

Just compare the signage at any Tea-Party rally to any "Occupy Wall Street" rally and tell me again who the bigots are....

http://c481901.r1.cf2.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWS_Jews.jpg

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/10/aaa.jpg

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/10/aag2.jpg

[OntheRail]

That's not what he's saying but obviously you can't figure that out.

I hope you and Tom are comfortable going to work every day to help pay for Harmid Karzai's palace and servants.

He lives like a king, like many jerk off leaders we give money to, all off the backs of American taxpayers and and the foolish Military leaders that have convinced the dopes in Washington that some towel head living in a cave on the other side of the world is somehow going to take down our country.
So let's open the checkbook and give them $$$ and send out soldiers to be slaughtered.
Yep, makes sense to me. :jump:

Just making the date of the deeds clear... and to whom the butchers bill belonged to.. OBAMA. I guess you missed the part about crating up as in more cash. We don't crate up men for transport. ... But swing away soupy.

[soupan]

Obamacare? Oh yes, that's what this country needed.

How many small businesses are shutting their doors now because of Obamacare?


When should I check back with you? 3-5-10 years from now?

What a crock.

I have the answer for you. Over the next 10 years it will save countless jobs and those companies that can't cut it would probably be going under regardless.

About 7 years ago, prior to Obamacare, a very close friend of mine who owns a successful mid sized business gets a letter from his insurance carrier asking to reaffirm the ages of all employees. One month later they tell him his companies premiums are going up 32%... as in THIRTY TWO.

He calls his legal department to get answers. They tell him they found out (off the record) that the insurer learned that he had many employees that were over 40 and that they were bumping up ALL rates to companies that had too many "high risk" employees.
I went to his office to kill some time one afternoon and he tells how he had a 3 hour meeting with his legal staff earlier that day. "I'm getting rid of every employee over 40 over the next year. Unfortunately, I have to mix in some younger people too to make it look good, but I'm not spending ridiculous money on health care".
Stories like this are not a-typical.

Everyone, whether on the right or left, saw what was happening with health care costs. Go look at graphs over the last 10 years. Nothing was done about it by BOTH BUSH'S and everything Clinton pushed for was squashed. Had McCain won, nothing would be done and if Romney had won, he'd immediately push to repeal it.
Ok, you say as a right winger you want to improve the system (like buying insurance across state lines, etc)... TOUGH SHIT!!! You lost the elections and you failed to do anything in previous administrations except block attempts to reform the system. You wanted to protect profits of health care providers. Even Obamacare doesn't go far enough, certainly because of Health lobbyists that are in the pockets of many Democrats as well as as Republicans. Republicans did nothing on health care like they did nothing to get the Hispanic vote. Now they want to talk about immigration reform?
Tough SHIT... you lost the elections and we're just a few years away from drastic changes in the house as well.

The Republican right wing message is clear, if you have health care and can afford to keep it, good for you, if not, DROP DEAD, literally.
and don't get in the way of Health Providers profits, it's bad business.

Reality sucks, don't it?

[soupan]

Towel head? Normally, I'd delete such a blatantly RACIST post, but I think I'll leave this up to show all the left-leaners how racist they really are...

That's right, when countries whose leaders (like in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, North Korea, the f-in list goes on endlessly ) continue to EXTORT the American people the way they do, I'll make seemingly racial slurs at the way they dress and whoever doesn't like it or agree with me, too bad.

I figured since I'm flipping the bill for their 4pm tea and curry biscuit break, I've earned privilege to call them anything I want.
When their taxes put me up in a palace with gold fixtures and servants, they can lob insults at my shorts and tee shirts endlessly, so long as the check arrives every month.

People who know me know I'm not a racists.
People who know me know I'd spend tax money on our own citizens before I send a single dime into a place like Afganastan.
Regardless of skin color, or what they wrap their heads in.

But, good try. :bang:

[newtothegame]

I have the answer for you. Over the next 10 years it will save countless jobs and those companies that can't cut it would probably be going under regardless.

About 7 years ago, prior to Obamacare, a very close friend of mine who owns a successful mid sized business gets a letter from his insurance carrier asking to reaffirm the ages of all employees. One month later they tell him his companies premiums are going up 32%... as in THIRTY TWO.

He calls his legal department to get answers. They tell him they found out (off the record) that the insurer learned that he had many employees that were over 40 and that they were bumping up ALL rates to companies that had too many "high risk" employees.
I went to his office to kill some time one afternoon and he tells how he had a 3 hour meeting with his legal staff earlier that day. "I'm getting rid of every employee over 40 over the next year. Unfortunately, I have to mix in some younger people too to make it look good, but I'm not spending ridiculous money on health care".
Stories like this are not a-typical.

Everyone, whether on the right or left, saw what was happening with health care costs. Go look at graphs over the last 10 years. Nothing was done about it by BOTH BUSH'S and everything Clinton pushed for was squashed. Had McCain won, nothing would be done and if Romney had won, he'd immediately push to repeal it.
Ok, you say as a right winger you want to improve the system (like buying insurance across state lines, etc)... TOUGH SHIT!!! You lost the elections and you failed to do anything in previous administrations except block attempts to reform the system. You wanted to protect profits of health care providers. Even Obamacare doesn't go far enough, certainly because of Health lobbyists that are in the pockets of many Democrats as well as as Republicans. Republicans did nothing on health care like they did nothing to get the Hispanic vote. Now they want to talk about immigration reform?
Tough SHIT... you lost the elections and we're just a few years away from drastic changes in the house as well.

The Republican right wing message is clear, if you have health care and can afford to keep it, good for you, if not, DROP DEAD, literally.
and don't get in the way of Health Providers profits, it's bad business.

Reality sucks, don't it?
Would love to see a link ........I mean if Obama care is going to save "countless" jobs, I am sure this would be touted from the highest......

[newtothegame]

That's right, when countries whose leaders (like in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, North Korea, the f-in list goes on endlessly ) continue to EXTORT the American people the way they do, I'll make seemingly racial slurs at the way they dress and whoever doesn't like it or agree with me, too bad.

I figured since I'm flipping the bill for their 4pm tea and curry biscuit break, I've earned privilege to call them anything I want.
When their taxes put me up in a palace with gold fixtures and servants, they can lob insults at my shorts and tee shirts endlessly, so long as the check arrives every month.

People who know me know I'm not a racists.
People who know me know I'd spend tax money on our own citizens before I send a single dime into a place like Afganastan.
Regardless of skin color, or what they wrap their heads in.

But, good try. :bang:
WOW...lol Amazing how the truth comes out!
So soupan, could the exact same be said for those who pay for those who collect in this country??

[Saratoga_Mike]

I have the answer for you. Over the next 10 years it will save countless jobs and those companies that can't cut it would probably be going under regardless.

About 7 years ago, prior to Obamacare, a very close friend of mine who owns a successful mid sized business gets a letter from his insurance carrier asking to reaffirm the ages of all employees. 1) One month later they tell him his companies premiums are going up 32%... as in THIRTY TWO.

He calls his legal department to get answers. 2)They tell him they found out (off the record) that the insurer learned that he had many employees that were over 40 and that they were bumping up ALL rates to companies that had too many "high risk" employees.
I went to his office to kill some time one afternoon and he tells how he had a 3 hour meeting with his legal staff earlier that day. 3) "I'm getting rid of every employee over 40 over the next year. Unfortunately, I have to mix in some younger people too to make it look good, but I'm not spending ridiculous money on health care".
Stories like this are not a-typical.



1) The health insurance for my small business is increasing 29% in 2013.

2) I don't believe your story. Why? Because of your "off-the-record" BS. Why would an insurer need to learn ages "off-the-record?" When you buy health insurance, the insurer receives the DOBs of all covered individuals.

3) Under ObamaCare, insurers may still risk-adjust for older employees. I believe the ratio is set at 3.5x roughly.

[Robert Goren]

1) The health insurance for my small business is increasing 29% in 2013.

2) I don't believe your story. Why? Because of your "off-the-record" BS. Why would an insurer need to learn ages "off-the-record?" When you buy health insurance, the insurer receives the DOBs of all covered individuals.

3) Under ObamaCare, insurers may still risk-adjust for older employees. I believe the ratio is set at 3.5x roughly.It maybe higher priced, but at least you can collect on what your policy says your covered for. It was always that way before Obama care. I ,sadly, know true that was.

[Saratoga_Mike]

It maybe higher priced, but at least you can collect on what your policy says your covered for. It was always that way before Obama care. I ,sadly, know true that was.

What is the "it" referring to here?

[soupan]

1) The health insurance for my small business is increasing 29% in 2013.

2) I don't believe your story. Why? Because of your "off-the-record" BS. Why would an insurer need to learn ages "off-the-record?" When you buy health insurance, the insurer receives the DOBs of all covered individuals.

3) Under ObamaCare, insurers may still risk-adjust for older employees. I believe the ratio is set at 3.5x roughly.

You don't believe the "off the record" statement?

Ever go out to a bar or pub near courthouses?
Ever fraternize with with a bunch of Attorneys?
Think they talk about projects they're working on, especially when they're corporate lawyers?

The story is not fiction.

If your rates are going up 29% because of Obamacare, good. I hope you go bankrupt.

Of course, you're just full of shit. So lets limit your Healthcare Providers profit margins even more so they're forced to offer you fairer rates. Oh you don't like that?

Ok, lets go to a single payer system.
Don't like that??... Good, go f_ck yourself and your business.

The system was broken and in dire need of repair. Dems had the balls to try and fix it.

[Robert Goren]

What is the "it" referring to here? Health insurance

[Saratoga_Mike]

You don't believe the "off the record" statement?

Ever go out to a bar or pub near courthouses?
Ever fraternize with with a bunch of Attorneys?
Think they talk about projects they're working on, especially when they're corporate lawyers?

The story is not fiction.

If your rates are going up 29% because of Obamacare, good. I hope you go bankrupt.

Of course, you're just full of shit. So lets limit your Healthcare Providers profit margins even more so they're forced to offer you fairer rates. Oh you don't like that?

Ok, lets go to a single payer system.
Don't like that??... Good, go f_ck yourself and your business.

The system was broken and in dire need of repair. Dems had the balls to try and fix it.

You're an idiot. Your off-the-record comment made ZERO sense. All insurers know the DOBs of the insured pool. You lied.

We use Aetna. The 2013 premiums are going up 29%. Did I blame ObamaCare? I merely made a statement.

Not only are you a racist as Pace commented earlier, you're a moron. You know nothing.

I'd debate the ACA with you, but you know nothing about it. Nothing.

[Saratoga_Mike]

You don't believe the "off the record" statement?

Ever go out to a bar or pub near courthouses?
Ever fraternize with with a bunch of Attorneys?
Think they talk about projects they're working on, especially when they're corporate lawyers?

The story is not fiction.

If your rates are going up 29% because of Obamacare, good. I hope you go bankrupt.

Of course, you're just full of shit. So lets limit your Healthcare Providers profit margins even more so they're forced to offer you fairer rates. Oh you don't like that?

Ok, lets go to a single payer system.
Don't like that??... Good, go f_ck yourself and your business.

The system was broken and in dire need of repair. Dems had the balls to try and fix it.

Missed this one earlier. Let me enlighten you Ignorant One, ObamaCare does EXACTLY that. It places restrictions on MLRs. Do me a favor and google MLRs.

[Tom]

Ok, lets go to a single payer system.
Don't like that??... Good, go f_ck yourself and your business.

You are really not mentally stable, are you?

[Saratoga_Mike]

You are really not mentally stable, are you?

I think he was irritated when I called him out on his "off-the-record" fairy tale - the one where insurers learn of insurees ages "off the record." Guess what Tom your insurance company knows your age, and they didn't learn it "off-the-record."

[Tom]

I thing they know a lot more about me than that! :eek:

[soupan]

You're an idiot. Your off-the-record comment made ZERO sense. All insurers know the DOBs of the insured pool. You lied.

We use Aetna. The 2013 premiums are going up 29%. Did I blame ObamaCare? I merely made a statement.

Not only are you a racist as Pace commented earlier, you're a moron. You know nothing.

I'd debate the ACA with you, but you know nothing about it. Nothing.

Maybe you missed the part where I wrote "REAFFIRMED" (along with social security numbers).
It's a conformation request. Done all the time.
I can waste my friends time and ask him specifics, but why bother, the story according to you, is made up. :rolleyes:

[Saratoga_Mike]

Maybe you missed the part where I wrote "REAFFIRMED" (along with social security numbers).
It's a conformation request. Done all the time.
I can waste my friends time and ask him specifics, but why bother, the story according to you, is made up. :rolleyes:

You used the pronoun "his," as in his insurance carrier. Therefore, one can safely assume it was his existing carrier. If so, the carrier would already know the ages. Have anymore fairy tales for us? You give liberals on the board a bad name.

[Tom]

Yes, even mostie picked up some street cred this week! :lol:

[soupan]

You used the pronoun "his," as in his insurance carrier. Therefore, one can safely assume it was his existing carrier. If so, the carrier would already know the ages. Have anymore fairy tales for us? You give liberals on the board a bad name.

And you believe that every DOB on record in every database is 100% accurate?
Hence the request for reaffirmation PRIOR to accessing an increase.
That's how his insurance carrier did it.
I wonder if I polled 1000 business owners asking how many would think it was science fiction if their insurance carrier might ask for a reaffirmation of the DOB and SS# of the employees they are covering.
I wonder how many would say they get a request like this once or twice a year?

What would you say....2 out of 1000? 25? 200?

Is this the best argument you can muster?

[soupan]

Missed this one earlier. Let me enlighten you Ignorant One, ObamaCare does EXACTLY that. It places restrictions on MLRs. Do me a favor and google MLRs.


You missed the point.
It was said in jest, but I see your double digit IQ struggles with that so I'll go S-L-O-W-L-Y for you. Just like you missed reaffirmed part of my "ficticious lie".

Keep twisting my comments, you're falling flat on your face.

[Saratoga_Mike]

You missed the point.
It was said in jest, but I see your double digit IQ struggles with that so I'll go S-L-O-W-L-Y for you. Just like you missed reaffirmed part of my "ficticious lie".

Keep twisting my comments, you're falling flat on your face.

Yes, you clearly have a better command of our healthcare system than I do.

[Saratoga_Mike]

And you believe that every DOB on record in every database is 100% accurate?
Hence the request for reaffirmation PRIOR to accessing an increase.
That's how his insurance carrier did it.
I wonder if I polled 1000 business owners asking how many would think it was science fiction if their insurance carrier might ask for a reaffirmation of the DOB and SS# of the employees they are covering.
I wonder how many would say they get a request like this once or twice a year?

What would you say....2 out of 1000? 25? 200?

Is this the best argument you can muster?

The insurance carrier knew the ages to begin with - they would never provide coverage w/o the ages. You clearly know nothing about healthcare, the ACA (did you figure out that MLR thing yet?) or the insurance mkt. I'm sure there are many things you know more about than me. The healthcare mkt isn't one of them. Sorry. Quit while you're behind.

[elysiantraveller]

Yes, you clearly have a better command of our healthcare system than I do.

He is still walking the walk... can't you tell?...

9ZlBUglE6Hc

The OT seems to be inundated lately with people in "the know." :rolleyes:

[NJ Stinks]

You give liberals on the board a bad name.

Really? I had not noticed that. In fact, I find Soupan to be a breath of fresh air in a smoke-filled room.

Although I do agree with John that Soupan should take easier on PA and stay awhile.

[JustRalph]

Really? I had not noticed that. In fact, I find Soupan to be a breath of fresh air in a smoke-filled room.

Although I do agree with John that Soupan should take easier on PA and stay awhile.

He's a loudmouth without manners. He has broken the rules/Tos several times already, and PA has let him get away wth it. Just like he does some others. PA s a benevolent dictator

The guys a troll and I predict a frequent flyer that has been here before.

Another day in the life of a board that's being dragged down further every month. The fact that this board is based on a sport that has been so debased over the last few years that off topic is much more interesting than than the sport, is a sad thing. It's a reflection of the times we live in.

I really used to like horse racing, and this board. Now, not so much. On either count. The worse the racing gets, the more off topic becomes an open revolving door for flame throwers. Horse players are as vocal as any group and the nature of the beast demands strong opinions. The faster someone comes galloping into the room throwing bombs and screaming about their "resume" the more I suspect they were previously ostracized from this board, or tossed from another.

While writing this I recalled the TVG board just closed

Soupan, what was your name on the TVG board?

[Robert Fischer]

people love to get angry and excited over opposing views. It also tends to escalate in order to maintain/increase the excitement. Apparently we have a new member or an alias that enjoys using insults.

Horse racing not to blame this time.

[Tom]

The guys a troll and I predict a frequent flyer that has been here before.

The big mouth is somehow familiar....just can't put my finger on who yet.

[PaceAdvantage]

He kind of reminds me of Suff...but I know even he wouldn't stoop this low to come back here, right? :lol: :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

Just curious. Has a right winger ever been tossed out of here?

[PaceAdvantage]

Just curious. Has a right winger ever been tossed out of here?Yes. Undoubtedly. Without question.

Now let me ask you something.

If a right-winger had posted "towel head," I bet you would have been just as nice to them as you were to soupan.

"Breath of fresh air"...give me a break.... :bang:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Just curious. Has a right winger ever been tossed out of here?

Welpers... have no't scene da skate sense one rowdy epi soda,,,,

perdy shore you'da figgered him too da write....,,,,

[NJ Stinks]

Yes. Undoubtedly. Without question.

Now let me ask you something.

If a right-winger had posted "towel head," I bet you would have been just as nice to them as you were to soupan.

"Breath of fresh air"...give me a break.... :bang:

No way would I comment about "towel head" no matter who said it.

[NJ Stinks]

Welpers... have no't scene da skate sense one rowdy epi soda,,,,

perdy shore you'da figgered him too da write....,,,,

So Skate was tossed. I did not know.

[johnhannibalsmith]

So Skate was tossed. I did not know.

I don't know for sure either. I liked his cryptic gibberish most of the time. Unless he was talking about the struggle of pedophiles. That was around the time he vanished.

[thaskalos]

You give liberals on the board a bad name.

The liberals on this board already had a bad name...:)

[PaceAdvantage]

The liberals on this board already had a bad name...:)Courtesy of the chip on their shoulder, no doubt.

[thaskalos]

Courtesy of the chip on their shoulder, no doubt.

Were it not for my New Years resolution to be kinder and gentler this year...I would pursue this matter further with you.

[PaceAdvantage]

Were it not for my New Years resolution to be kinder and gentler this year...I would pursue this matter further with you.To me, it's just another day at the office...either way...your call...

[thaskalos]

To me, it's just another day at the office...either way...your call...

Happy New Year, PA...

[PaceAdvantage]

The liberals on this board already had a bad name...:)And for the record, the liberals on this board are quite adept at running their mouths at conservatives....witness soupan among the very latest of that breed...