obama. What's up with that? in Off Topic Forum

0 Points

obama. What's up with that?

Started By	Comment
TheWhiteRabbit		#1861	[-]
Posts: 6126 02/29/12 06:40 PM More Recent Posts	DelosWorld wrote: Well I'm not paying into Social Security or Medicare right now. I don't really care if they go bankrupt but I will gladly help to bring that about by maximizing the benefits I can pull of of them when I retire. I look upon that as being my civic duty to bring about positive change and to break the status quo for the future benefit of free Americans. At least you're being honest about it and saying what the politicians would never dare to.
	Remove this ad
youfist		#1862	[-]
Posts: 23332 02/29/12 06:42 PM Everyone's favorite bigot More Recent Posts	TheWhiteRabbit wrote: I don't know what you want me to say. Oil production is at an 8 year high in the country. What is Obama supposed to wave a magic wand and make it all better. All this shit with Iran is making gas prices explode, as well as speculators who are driving the price up. He can't help it if the oil companies are greedy fuckers and would rather export gas overseas to make more profit. Should we become competitive with the gas prices of other countries, I just don't see what there is to do except continue to move off oil altogether. how much in tax is in each gallon of gas? Fed, State, local? and you FUCKERS blamed BUSH for high gas and 5% unemployment (which was an OUTRAGE)...and now? not a criticism? fuckin plonkers
DelosWorld		#1863	[-]
Posts: 6356 02/29/12 06:46 PM More Recent Posts	TheWhiteRabbit wrote: I don't know what you want me to say. Oil production is at an 8 year high in the country. What is Obama supposed to wave a magic wand and make it all better. All this shit with Iran is making gas prices explode, as well as speculators who are driving the price up. He can't help it if the oil companies are greedy fuckers and would rather export gas overseas to make more profit. Should we become competitive with the gas prices of other countries, I just don't see what there is to do except continue to move off oil altogether. Refineries are most efficient when producing at maximum capacity, resulting in the lowest cost per gallon of refined product. If there's excess product to export because of low demand you pretty much have to export it. There are not super large long term storage places that can hold refined product so your other options are to reduce production levels which causes the expense of refining to increase, or to shut down refineries which puts people out of work. Obama has a big push to increase the levels of US exports and he even has a cool logo that he came up for his program. Has Obama said that refined products are exempt from his export push?
TheWhiteRabbit		#1864	[-]
Posts: 6126 02/29/12 06:48 PM More Recent Posts	Bush was the cause of the mess Obama is cleaning up. Is that really in contention? And there hasn't been a federal tax increase on gasoline since 1993, do Republicans want us to pay less? Where the fuck would we get the money for public transportation and infrastructure of highways, bridges and roads?
DelosWorld		#1865	[-]
Posts: 6356 02/29/12 06:49 PM More Recent Posts	nomii wrote: So you're perfectly okay with your fellow citizens hurting in the process who are disabled or poor seniors, just so you can feel satisfied on your ideology. Okay then. It would be more like you boycotting Arizona so illegals could take jobs away from Americans and suck away the benefits of the tax dollars from citizens or documented aliens that retain their jobs and dutifully pay all of their taxes.
TheWhiteRabbit		#1866	[-]
Posts: 6126 02/29/12 06:50 PM More Recent Posts	You people are talking way above my pay grade now! I am just a college student who is interested in the machinations of politics, stop taking me into the weeds with your wonky jargon!
TheWhiteRabbit		#1867	[-]
Posts: 6126 02/29/12 06:56 PM More Recent Posts	Obama campaign knocks Romney birth control reversal The Obama campaign's deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter: “In one hour, Mitt Romney showed why women don’t trust him for one minute. It took little more than an hour for him to commit his latest flip-flop. Even worse, he ended up on the wrong side of an issue of critical importance to women. The Blunt Amendment would allow any employer to deny their female employees coverage because of that employer’s own beliefs. With his support of this amendment, Mitt Romney is taking important health care decisions about contraception, mammograms, and cervical cancer screenings among other issues out of women’s hands and into the hands of their bosses.” Romney said today that he opposed a Senate effort to allow employers to opt out of covering birth control, before clarifying he didn't understand the question and backing the Senate amendment.
DelosWorld		#1868	[-]
Posts: 6356 02/29/12 06:57 PM More Recent Posts	TheWhiteRabbit wrote: You people are talking way above my pay grade now! I am just a college student who is interested in the machinations of politics, stop taking me into the weeds with your wonky jargon! Think of a politician as being a Hollywood make-up artist. The goal is to cover up the truth and portray an imaginary image or alternate reality. You are just supposed to take it without question and rally behind the politician that promises you the best show.
drowsy12		#1869	[-]
Posts: 14281 02/29/12 06:58 PM More Recent Posts	the Blunt Amendment goes way farther than contraception. If Mitt sticks to supporting the amendment (I guess he has to because the GOP in Congress is), Obama will destroy him with this later on.
TheWhiteRabbit		#1870	[-]
Posts: 6126 02/29/12 06:58 PM More Recent Posts	Now you're talking up to my speed. I absolutely agree. And fuck I posted that Romney story in the wrong thread
	Remove this ad
DelosWorld		#1871	[-]
Posts: 6356 02/29/12 07:02 PM More Recent Posts	How about if the employer has the belief that it's not his job to provide any health care coverage since it's just a vestige of attracting workers during WWII. Could the employer just pay his employees more so they could buy it on their own so he could concentrate on running the actual business? Would that be allowed? I say "he" but you know I mean "he" or "she" or "it".
nomii		#1872	[-]
Posts: 13718 02/29/12 07:29 PM Registered user More Recent Posts	Would the "pay more" cover the annual increases to keep up with insurance company costs?
APG		#1873	[-]
Posts: 13962 02/29/12 07:49 PM Enterprising... And pretty good at it More Recent Posts
bob2559		#1874	[-]
Posts: 9476 02/29/12 07:49 PM Registered user More Recent Posts	Sounds like Health Savings Accounts, Delos. Pubs have been pushing these for years, the people who have them love them, and Dems hate hate hate them. I'm pretty sure Obamacare removes them as an option, apparently they simply worked too well without the government being involved for Dems to stand idly by and let them continue to exist.
Tigershere		#1875	[-]
Posts: 20912 02/29/12 08:23 PM Registered User More Recent Posts	Obama Admin Proposes Cuts to Active Duty Military Health Benefits, Would Leave Union Civilian Defense Workers’ Benefits Untouched February 27, 2012 President Obama again reveals where his loyalties lie – with the unions. According to The Washington Free Beacon, the Obama administration is proposing cuts to health benefits for active duty and retired military members and their families, while leaving the benefits for unionized civilian defense workers alone. If anything, it should be the opposite – those who put their lives on the line day-in and day-out, and their families who sacrifice so the rest of us are safe, should be given the highest priority. Some members of Congress believe the proposed changes are designed with the intention of dumping military personnel into Obamacare. The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The proposal is causing a major rift within the Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Several congressional aides suggested the move is designed to increase the enrollment in Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges. The disparity in treatment between civilian and uniformed personnel is causing a backlash within the military that could undermine recruitment and retention. The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017. Many in Congress are opposing the proposed changes, which would require the passage of new legislation before being put in place. “We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population,” Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a Republican from California, said in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more.” Read the whole thing, there’s much more they want to cut, including equipment. Oh, and the health benefit cuts won’t take place until after the next election, of course. Isn’t it odd that the same administration that intends to increase co-payments and health care costs for the military is at the same time mandating contraception be provided to women with no co-payment whatsoever? Priorities.
Beefcake		#1876	[-]
Posts: 21471 02/29/12 08:37 PM Thinks astrology is real More Recent Posts	bob2559 wrote: Sounds like Health Savings Accounts, Delos. Pubs have been pushing these for years, the people who have them love them, and Dems hate hate hate them. I'm pretty sure Obamacare removes them as an option, apparently they simply worked too well without the government being involved for Dems to stand idly by and let them continue to exist. The problem is that employers get to deduct the price of health insurance but individuals don't, so employers would have to pay an extra $125 in salary for every $100 of health insurance premium (or whatever the marginal rate works out to be). ObamaCare doesn't eliminate HSAs, but it phases them out by reducing the amount you're allowed to put in them. We can't have doctors and patients setting the price for medical care! That's the government's job!!!
nomii		#1877	[-]
Posts: 13718 02/29/12 09:24 PM Registered user More Recent Posts	Doctors horribly overcharge right now. What's so wrong with following the model of every other first world country, where costs are lower and the services accessible to the public are of much better quality.
Trainwreck		#1878	[-]
Posts: 9284 02/29/12 10:29 PM Registered user More Recent Posts	Energy Secretary Chu Admits Administration OK with High Gas Prices http://news.yahoo.com/energy-secretary-chu-admits-administration-ok-high-gas-193900713.html Wow!
youfist		#1879	[-]
Posts: 23332 02/29/12 10:32 PM Everyone's favorite bigot More Recent Posts	Tigershere wrote: Obama Admin Proposes Cuts to Active Duty Military Health Benefits, Would Leave Union Civilian Defense Workers’ Benefits Untouched February 27, 2012 President Obama again reveals where his loyalties lie – with the unions. According to The Washington Free Beacon, the Obama administration is proposing cuts to health benefits for active duty and retired military members and their families, while leaving the benefits for unionized civilian defense workers alone. If anything, it should be the opposite – those who put their lives on the line day-in and day-out, and their families who sacrifice so the rest of us are safe, should be given the highest priority. Some members of Congress believe the proposed changes are designed with the intention of dumping military personnel into Obamacare. The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The proposal is causing a major rift within the Pentagon, according to U.S. officials. Several congressional aides suggested the move is designed to increase the enrollment in Obamacare’s state-run insurance exchanges. The disparity in treatment between civilian and uniformed personnel is causing a backlash within the military that could undermine recruitment and retention. The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017. Many in Congress are opposing the proposed changes, which would require the passage of new legislation before being put in place. “We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population,” Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a Republican from California, said in a statement to the Washington Free Beacon. “We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more.” Read the whole thing, there’s much more they want to cut, including equipment. Oh, and the health benefit cuts won’t take place until after the next election, of course. Isn’t it odd that the same administration that intends to increase co-payments and health care costs for the military is at the same time mandating contraception be provided to women with no co-payment whatsoever? Priorities. Waiting for numbii to tell us this is bushs plan
Mind The Gap1		#1880	[-]
Posts: 1210 02/29/12 11:08 PM Registered User More Recent Posts	who is the lady in the lower right with the black shirt and colorful necklace? APG wrote:
	Remove this ad