OK. So one poll conducted on NBC's website about "voter enthusiasm" asking "are you interested"? is "all indications?" That's like saying that the debate was a "draw" because of the snap poll on the CNN website.
Mitt Romney was never able to break 25% of his own party's vote in the primaries. I don't see that as being very "enthusiastic" about voting for him.
I still roll my eyes at people who think it's a good idea to turn over the country to a man who's shown that he values money over people, thinks that the rules aren't really applied to him and says totally contradictory things like "Government can't create jobs... as president I will create 12 million jobs.." The one term he served as governor, employment in his state went down and he had a 32% approval rating.
I'm not going to play the obnoxious plutocrat and say that because I've got a relatively successful small business that I know more about global economics than you, but I'll tell you that lowering my taxes or giving me all the shelters in the world won't make me hire any more people. I have a small staff of people who help me do my work... that's all I need.
I want YOU to have more income AND for you to not have to worry about escalating costs of living out-pacing your income. I want you to have money to spend. And money sitting in my bank account doesn't do you any good. Especially if it's in my foreign accounts and yes... I have two.
What I NEED is a stronger middle class with more disposable income to buy the product I make. Jobs aren't created by lowering taxes on businesses, jobs are created by consumer demand.
Giving a rich guy a big bag of money isn't going to make him suddenly decide to open up a toy factory... he's going to do that if he sees that there is a large number of people who are no longer struggling to get food on their tables and now have extra money to buy the kids toys.
My big issues are the economny, foreign policy, and national security/military. I'm a fiscal conservative, while I would consider myself to be socially moderate. I'm a member of the so-called middle-income bracket. I'm very concerned about our country's future if we continue on the same path that we've been on for the last six or seven years. Bush started it and Obama has unfortunately taken us to even greater depths. From my standpoint, it's time for a change in administration. I know most of my fellow PJ message board members are social liberals who vote for socially liberal politicians, but I'm much more concerned with my bank account, my 1040 tax form, and just trying to survive financially.
I won't be shocked to see Romney win. I've always been an independent voter. My big issues are the economny, foreign policy, and national security/military. I'm a fiscal conservative, while I would consider myself to be socially moderate. I'm a member of the so-called middle-income bracket. I'm very concerned about our country's future if we continue on the same path that we've been on for the last six or seven years. Bush started it and Obama has unfortunately taken us to even greater depths. From my standpoint, it's time for a change in administration. I know most of my fellow PJ message board members are social liberals who vote for socially liberal politicians, but I'm much more concerned with my bank account, my 1040 tax form, and just trying to survive financially.
Just curious, what do you think Romney would do differently than Obama and Bush?
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
My big issues are the economny, foreign policy, and national security/military. I'm a fiscal conservative, while I would consider myself to be socially moderate. I'm a member of the so-called middle-income bracket. I'm very concerned about our country's future if we continue on the same path that we've been on for the last six or seven years. Bush started it and Obama has unfortunately taken us to even greater depths. From my standpoint, it's time for a change in administration. I know most of my fellow PJ message board members are social liberals who vote for socially liberal politicians, but I'm much more concerned with my bank account, my 1040 tax form, and just trying to survive financially.
Well-said, sir.
i think the only thing the GOP and Romney have going for them is that they aren't the incumbent in this election. The reality is that economy, in whatever perspective one chooses to evaluate it, is the result of policies that are consistent on both sides of the floor. Romney is not going to be able to fix it, and in all likelihood will further exacerbate the situation however, he is the only option if you want to fail Obama and his administration. His plan doesn't need to be coherent nor does it need to make any sense whatsoever because ultimately, he isn't the incumbent in this false economy.
The question is whether or not his strategists have controlled the gaffes Romney is prone to.
I won't be shocked to see Romney win. I've always been an independent voter. My big issues are the economny, foreign policy, and national security/military. I'm a fiscal conservative, while I would consider myself to be socially moderate. I'm a member of the so-called middle-income bracket. I'm very concerned about our country's future if we continue on the same path that we've been on for the last six or seven years. Bush started it and Obama has unfortunately taken us to even greater depths. From my standpoint, it's time for a change in administration. I know most of my fellow PJ message board members are social liberals who vote for socially liberal politicians, but I'm much more concerned with my bank account, my 1040 tax form, and just trying to survive financially.
Just curious, what do you think Romney would do differently than Obama and Bush?
Romney should be more of a fiscal conservative. I'd rather take my chances with Romney in office than settling for more of the same with Obama. Nothing will get better under Obama. He had four years and couldn't get it done.
If Obama were to be re-elected, the House of Reps will still be majority republican and the Senate could possibly be a republican majority. So, if that happens, then there will definitely be a continued stalemate and Obama will have to find ways around congress in order for him to put his policies in place and this would be very bad for the American people.
I know a lot of nervous small business owners - from a guy who owns a small advertising firm to a friend who's a solo, private practice pediatrician. They are very worried at what a second Obama term will do to their businesses. I've also spoken with a cancer doctor who said that ObamaCare is already hurting her employer's practice and things will only get worse for Medicare patients when the healthcare-provider reimbursement cuts go into full effect over the next two years. Fewer and fewer Medicare recipients will be able to access medical care as a result of doctors not accepting Medicare patients. This is a scary time indeed and folks who don't see it apparently have their heads in the sand.
United Center (Chicago): 8/24/09
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
It's much more than Chuck Todd's comments. I just posted that little snippet because it was on the Huff Post's website and many left-leaning folks trust what pundits on Huff Post and NBC have to say.
Primaries are a circus of ideas. We all know that. But, once a nominee is chosen, then the respective parties galvanize around that candidate. For example, Rick Santorum carried Alabama in the republican primary, but Romney will easily carry Alabama on November 6th.
I'll go out of a limb (albeit not a big limb) and say that most of the republican voter enthusiasm is being driven by voting Obama out of office as opposed to merely voting for Romney. That's probably the best way to articulate how voter sentiment has trended as of late.
OK. So one poll conducted on NBC's website about "voter enthusiasm" asking "are you interested"? is "all indications?" That's like saying that the debate was a "draw" because of the snap poll on the CNN website.
Mitt Romney was never able to break 25% of his own party's vote in the primaries. I don't see that as being very "enthusiastic" about voting for him.
Post edited by BamaPJFan on
United Center (Chicago): 8/24/09
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
I'll go out of a limb (albeit not a big limb) and say that most of the republican voter entusiasm is being driven by voting Obama out of office as opposed to merely voting for Romney. That's probably the best way to articulate how voter sentiment has trended as of late.
Ok... so considering that the president has about a 50% approval rating and that George W Bush had about 24% that maybe the "voter enthusiasm" last time was more about ending 8 years of spoiled rich brat running the country into the ground?
I'll go out of a limb (albeit not a big limb) and say that most of the republican voter entusiasm is being driven by voting Obama out of office as opposed to merely voting for Romney. That's probably the best way to articulate how voter sentiment has trended as of late.
Ok... so considering that the president has about a 50% approval rating and that George W Bush had about 24% that maybe the "voter enthusiasm" last time was more about ending 8 years of spoiled rich brat running the country into the ground?
And you want to go back to that?
The last four years have been worse than the previous four. Joe Biden even said less than a month ago that the middle-class has been hammered over the last four years.
Take a look around you. We're at the threshold of hell. It ain't gettin' any better with four more years of this current administration.
United Center (Chicago): 8/24/09
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
I know a lot of nervous small business owners - from a guy who owns a small advertising firm to a friend who's a solo, private practice pediatrician. They are very worried at what a second Obama term will do to their businesses. I've also spoken with a cancer doctor who said that ObamaCare is already hurting her employer's practice and things will only get worse for Medicare patients when the healthcare-provider reimbursement cuts go into full effect over the next two years. Fewer and fewer Medicare recipients will be able to access medical care as a result of doctors not accepting Medicare patients. This is a scary time indeed and folks who don't see it apparently have their heads in the sand.
The small business owners should thank Wall St., the subprime mortgage crisis, and bankers for the uncertainty in the economy. Those who almost destroyed this economy are still doing as well as ever. The problem? 93% of the post-recession earnings/revenue has gone to the top 1% (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 21008.html). Banks and large corporations have trillions of dollars on the sidelines, the companies that got the bulk of TARP funds are not hiring; instead, they are making record profits and laying people off. They are as anti-American as you can get and they don't have an ounce of patriotism in their blood.
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.
I know a lot of nervous small business owners - from a guy who owns a small advertising firm to a friend who's a solo, private practice pediatrician. They are very worried at what a second Obama term will do to their businesses. I've also spoken with a cancer doctor who said that ObamaCare is already hurting her employer's practice and things will only get worse for Medicare patients when the healthcare-provider reimbursement cuts go into full effect over the next two years. Fewer and fewer Medicare recipients will be able to access medical care as a result of doctors not accepting Medicare patients. This is a scary time indeed and folks who don't see it apparently have their heads in the sand.
The small business owners should thank Wall St., the subprime mortgage crisis, and bankers for the uncertainty in the economy. Those who almost destroyed this economy are still doing as well as ever. The problem? 93% of the post-recession earnings/revenue has gone to the top 1% (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 21008.html). Banks and large corporations have trillions of dollars on the sidelines, the companies that got the bulk of TARP funds are not hiring; instead, they are making record profits and laying people off. They are as anti-American as you can get and they don't have an ounce of patriotism in their blood.
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.
Doctors who run their own small shops will be the ones most adversely affected by the cuts in Medicare reimbursements because they will struggle to pay their overhead. Big hospitals will still be affected, but they will not have the hard hits that solo practitioners/small practice phyisicans will. Doctors who are on the payroll of large hospitals and large clinics will be insulated from the Medicare cuts to a much larger degee because they aren't as dependent on Medicare. A poll was just released two weeks ago, prior to the second debate, that showed that well over 50% of American phyisicians support Romney. The medical profession is really at a big crossroads right now with this new healthcare legislation.
I know a lot of nervous small business owners - from a guy who owns a small advertising firm to a friend who's a solo, private practice pediatrician. They are very worried at what a second Obama term will do to their businesses. I've also spoken with a cancer doctor who said that ObamaCare is already hurting her employer's practice and things will only get worse for Medicare patients when the healthcare-provider reimbursement cuts go into full effect over the next two years. Fewer and fewer Medicare recipients will be able to access medical care as a result of doctors not accepting Medicare patients. This is a scary time indeed and folks who don't see it apparently have their heads in the sand.
The small business owners should thank Wall St., the subprime mortgage crisis, and bankers for the uncertainty in the economy. Those who almost destroyed this economy are still doing as well as ever. The problem? 93% of the post-recession earnings/revenue has gone to the top 1% (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 21008.html). Banks and large corporations have trillions of dollars on the sidelines, the companies that got the bulk of TARP funds are not hiring; instead, they are making record profits and laying people off. They are as anti-American as you can get and they don't have an ounce of patriotism in their blood.
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.
Doctors who run their own small shops will be the ones most adversely affected by the cuts in Medicare reimbursements because they will struggle to pay their overhead. Big hospitals will still be affected, but they will not have the hard hits that solo practitioners/small practice phyisicans will. Doctors who are on the payroll of large hospitals and large clinics will be insulated from the Medicare cuts to a much larger degee because they aren't as dependent on Medicare. A poll was just released two weeks ago, prior to the second debate, that showed that well over 50% of American phyisicians support Romney. The medical profession is really at a big crossroads right now with this new healthcare legislation.
I refuse to click on a link to The Daily Caller. Sorry.
The cuts in reimbursements are offset by the reductions in cost of overcharges by big pharma, ins. companies, etc. The best part of ACA is that it requires insurance companies to use 80% of all patient premiums for care, not for executive pay, marketing, etc. Cuts are not the same as savings.
The problem with the system can be summed up in one experience:
My brother in law is in Wealth Management with Merrill Lynch. One of his biggest clients is a diabetes specialist in NJ. The doctor put it plainly: I get paid to test people, not to treat them. How many of those who support Romney feel the same?
Should healthcare be a for-profit business? Should $$$ (in our society, $$$=God) be the deciding factor for doctors?
The small business owners should thank Wall St., the subprime mortgage crisis, and bankers for the uncertainty in the economy. Those who almost destroyed this economy are still doing as well as ever. The problem? 93% of the post-recession earnings/revenue has gone to the top 1% (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 21008.html). Banks and large corporations have trillions of dollars on the sidelines, the companies that got the bulk of TARP funds are not hiring; instead, they are making record profits and laying people off. They are as anti-American as you can get and they don't have an ounce of patriotism in their blood.
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.[/quote]
Doctors who run their own small shops will be the ones most adversely affected by the cuts in Medicare reimbursements because they will struggle to pay their overhead. Big hospitals will still be affected, but they will not have the hard hits that solo practitioners/small practice phyisicans will. Doctors who are on the payroll of large hospitals and large clinics will be insulated from the Medicare cuts to a much larger degee because they aren't as dependent on Medicare. A poll was just released two weeks ago, prior to the second debate, that showed that well over 50% of American phyisicians support Romney. The medical profession is really at a big crossroads right now with this new healthcare legislation.
I refuse to click on a link to The Daily Caller. Sorry.
The cuts in reimbursements are offset by the reductions in cost of overcharges by big pharma, ins. companies, etc. The best part of ACA is that it requires insurance companies to use 80% of all patient premiums for care, not for executive pay, marketing, etc. Cuts are not the same as savings.
The problem with the system can be summed up in one experience:
My brother in law is in Wealth Management with Merrill Lynch. One of his biggest clients is a diabetes specialist in NJ. The doctor put it plainly: I get paid to test people, not to treat them. How many of those who support Romney feel the same?
Should healthcare be a for-profit business? Should $$$ (in our society, $$$=God) be the deciding factor for doctors?[/quote]
Doctors who own their own private practices cannot treat people for free or they would not be able to keep their practices open. These private practice phyisicians are the ones who have relied most on Medicare. Because of the Medicare cuts, many have already stopped taking new Medicare patients. Hospitals have more discretion on whether to treat someone or not. Obviously, emergency rooms cannot turn folks away. But, for the solo and small practice physician, they have to make a business decision.
Post edited by BamaPJFan on
United Center (Chicago): 8/24/09
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
I'll go out of a limb (albeit not a big limb) and say that most of the republican voter entusiasm is being driven by voting Obama out of office as opposed to merely voting for Romney. That's probably the best way to articulate how voter sentiment has trended as of late.
Ok... so considering that the president has about a 50% approval rating and that George W Bush had about 24% that maybe the "voter enthusiasm" last time was more about ending 8 years of spoiled rich brat running the country into the ground?
And you want to go back to that?
Bush had an approval rating of 60% going into his 2004 re-election. It didn't hit the '20s until a couple of years into his second term. So, long story short, Bush was strongly popular leading into the 2004 presidential election. Obama being at or below 50% is not good for his chances at re-election.
Take a look around you. We're at the threshold of hell. It ain't gettin' any better with four more years of this current administration.
Threshold of Hell?
Well boy, that's a rational argument.
Well, Obama IS the Anti-Christ, remember?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
Total federal and state "welfare" spending topped $1 trillion last year, marking a nearly 30 percent increase since the start of the Obama administration -- according to a new congressional report which documented spending across more than 80 benefit programs for low-income families.
Total federal and state "welfare" spending topped $1 trillion last year, marking a nearly 30 percent increase since the start of the Obama administration -- according to a new congressional report which documented spending across more than 80 benefit programs for low-income families.
well boy, we sure don't want to like.... help the poorest people who need help, do we?
What's missing from those numbers?
The number of people who needed help.
See in the Bush years (and what Romney has very clearly said is his policy) our strategy for dealing with the very poor, child poverty, child mal-nutrition and the homeless issue was the Bush Program of "Go Fuck Yourself, Not My Problem."
And now we have a president who's trying to deal with the problem and even get those people off assistance.
But since he didn't use his magic voodoo wand and fix all the Bush-Era Fuck Ups in a week... MAN they mad.
well boy, we sure don't want to like.... help the poorest people who need help, do we?
What's missing from those numbers?
The number of people who needed help.
See in the Bush years (and what Romney has very clearly said is his policy) our strategy for dealing with the very poor, child poverty, child mal-nutrition and the homeless issue was the Bush Program of "Go Fuck Yourself, Not My Problem."
And now we have a president who's trying to deal with the problem and even get those people off assistance.
But since he didn't use his magic voodoo wand and fix all the Bush-Era Fuck Ups in a week... MAN they mad.
well boy, we sure don't want to like.... help the poorest people who need help, do we?
what kinda bullshit is that ? you're talking out yer.....mr.bullhorn again, did I or anybody else post that we don't want to feed or help the poor or people that need it ? and now that we have this huge amount of people that are using welfare(during obamas presidentsey even tho he promised to create more job's but all he did was hand out checks) and here you are again screaming "it's Bush's fault" :fp: ...com'on man really ??? is that the only way you can defend obama...by blamming Bush for obama's fuck up's ??. it's getting old man..really it is.
Total federal and state "welfare" spending topped $1 trillion last year, marking a nearly 30 percent increase since the start of the Obama administration -- according to a new congressional report which documented spending across more than 80 benefit programs for low-income families.
and now that we have this huge amount of people that are using welfare(during obamas presidentsey even tho he promised to create more job's but all he did was hand out checks) and here you are again screaming "it's Bush's fault" :fp: ...com'on man really ???
Since you seem to have an odd memory... 4 years ago the country was on the edge of complete economic Collapse. Recovering from a disaster as deep as that has taken time and... although we're in the best place we've been since then... there's a lot more work to do.
Nobody is "screaming" about the undeniable fact that this is just us crawling out of the pit that - yes - is the direct fault of our former president who brought in his disastrous economic plan that brought us from a Surplus at the end of the Clinton years to the edge of another Great Depression.
Trying to place the blame on president Obama for this would be like me pushing you down the stairs and breaking your neck and then four years later when you come to me in a wheel chair, me saying "that was four years ago... and you're STILL blaming me?!?!"
Comments
Mitt Romney was never able to break 25% of his own party's vote in the primaries. I don't see that as being very "enthusiastic" about voting for him.
I still roll my eyes at people who think it's a good idea to turn over the country to a man who's shown that he values money over people, thinks that the rules aren't really applied to him and says totally contradictory things like "Government can't create jobs... as president I will create 12 million jobs.." The one term he served as governor, employment in his state went down and he had a 32% approval rating.
I'm not going to play the obnoxious plutocrat and say that because I've got a relatively successful small business that I know more about global economics than you, but I'll tell you that lowering my taxes or giving me all the shelters in the world won't make me hire any more people. I have a small staff of people who help me do my work... that's all I need.
I want YOU to have more income AND for you to not have to worry about escalating costs of living out-pacing your income. I want you to have money to spend. And money sitting in my bank account doesn't do you any good. Especially if it's in my foreign accounts and yes... I have two.
What I NEED is a stronger middle class with more disposable income to buy the product I make. Jobs aren't created by lowering taxes on businesses, jobs are created by consumer demand.
Giving a rich guy a big bag of money isn't going to make him suddenly decide to open up a toy factory... he's going to do that if he sees that there is a large number of people who are no longer struggling to get food on their tables and now have extra money to buy the kids toys.
i think the only thing the GOP and Romney have going for them is that they aren't the incumbent in this election. The reality is that economy, in whatever perspective one chooses to evaluate it, is the result of policies that are consistent on both sides of the floor. Romney is not going to be able to fix it, and in all likelihood will further exacerbate the situation however, he is the only option if you want to fail Obama and his administration. His plan doesn't need to be coherent nor does it need to make any sense whatsoever because ultimately, he isn't the incumbent in this false economy.
The question is whether or not his strategists have controlled the gaffes Romney is prone to.
Romney should be more of a fiscal conservative. I'd rather take my chances with Romney in office than settling for more of the same with Obama. Nothing will get better under Obama. He had four years and couldn't get it done.
If Obama were to be re-elected, the House of Reps will still be majority republican and the Senate could possibly be a republican majority. So, if that happens, then there will definitely be a continued stalemate and Obama will have to find ways around congress in order for him to put his policies in place and this would be very bad for the American people.
I know a lot of nervous small business owners - from a guy who owns a small advertising firm to a friend who's a solo, private practice pediatrician. They are very worried at what a second Obama term will do to their businesses. I've also spoken with a cancer doctor who said that ObamaCare is already hurting her employer's practice and things will only get worse for Medicare patients when the healthcare-provider reimbursement cuts go into full effect over the next two years. Fewer and fewer Medicare recipients will be able to access medical care as a result of doctors not accepting Medicare patients. This is a scary time indeed and folks who don't see it apparently have their heads in the sand.
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
Primaries are a circus of ideas. We all know that. But, once a nominee is chosen, then the respective parties galvanize around that candidate. For example, Rick Santorum carried Alabama in the republican primary, but Romney will easily carry Alabama on November 6th.
I'll go out of a limb (albeit not a big limb) and say that most of the republican voter enthusiasm is being driven by voting Obama out of office as opposed to merely voting for Romney. That's probably the best way to articulate how voter sentiment has trended as of late.
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
Ok... so considering that the president has about a 50% approval rating and that George W Bush had about 24% that maybe the "voter enthusiasm" last time was more about ending 8 years of spoiled rich brat running the country into the ground?
And you want to go back to that?
The last four years have been worse than the previous four. Joe Biden even said less than a month ago that the middle-class has been hammered over the last four years.
Take a look around you. We're at the threshold of hell. It ain't gettin' any better with four more years of this current administration.
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
The small business owners should thank Wall St., the subprime mortgage crisis, and bankers for the uncertainty in the economy. Those who almost destroyed this economy are still doing as well as ever. The problem? 93% of the post-recession earnings/revenue has gone to the top 1% (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/0 ... 21008.html). Banks and large corporations have trillions of dollars on the sidelines, the companies that got the bulk of TARP funds are not hiring; instead, they are making record profits and laying people off. They are as anti-American as you can get and they don't have an ounce of patriotism in their blood.
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.
Doctors who run their own small shops will be the ones most adversely affected by the cuts in Medicare reimbursements because they will struggle to pay their overhead. Big hospitals will still be affected, but they will not have the hard hits that solo practitioners/small practice phyisicans will. Doctors who are on the payroll of large hospitals and large clinics will be insulated from the Medicare cuts to a much larger degee because they aren't as dependent on Medicare. A poll was just released two weeks ago, prior to the second debate, that showed that well over 50% of American phyisicians support Romney. The medical profession is really at a big crossroads right now with this new healthcare legislation.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/01/surve ... over-obama
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
I refuse to click on a link to The Daily Caller. Sorry.
The cuts in reimbursements are offset by the reductions in cost of overcharges by big pharma, ins. companies, etc. The best part of ACA is that it requires insurance companies to use 80% of all patient premiums for care, not for executive pay, marketing, etc. Cuts are not the same as savings.
The problem with the system can be summed up in one experience:
My brother in law is in Wealth Management with Merrill Lynch. One of his biggest clients is a diabetes specialist in NJ. The doctor put it plainly: I get paid to test people, not to treat them. How many of those who support Romney feel the same?
Should healthcare be a for-profit business? Should $$$ (in our society, $$$=God) be the deciding factor for doctors?
The right wing propaganda machine will try to convince people that it is all the fault of big-bad government and a socialist, anti american, anti business President. Let's think about that: the President of the U.S. is anti-business. It is quite silly; but, the idiots who listen to Limbaugh or O'Reilly or Hannity buy into it b/c it reinforces their own narrow-minded, uninformed ideologies and prejudices.
As for the cancer doctor you know, I would love to speak with him/her directly. I just saw a friend of mine's father at a wedding in Philly. He is a soon to be retired general physician and says the opposite of what your cancer doctor says.
Doctors not accepting Medicare is part of the problem. Doctors deserve big paychecks, but their job is care, not testing.[/quote]
Doctors who run their own small shops will be the ones most adversely affected by the cuts in Medicare reimbursements because they will struggle to pay their overhead. Big hospitals will still be affected, but they will not have the hard hits that solo practitioners/small practice phyisicans will. Doctors who are on the payroll of large hospitals and large clinics will be insulated from the Medicare cuts to a much larger degee because they aren't as dependent on Medicare. A poll was just released two weeks ago, prior to the second debate, that showed that well over 50% of American phyisicians support Romney. The medical profession is really at a big crossroads right now with this new healthcare legislation.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/01/surve ... over-obama[/quote]
I refuse to click on a link to The Daily Caller. Sorry.
The cuts in reimbursements are offset by the reductions in cost of overcharges by big pharma, ins. companies, etc. The best part of ACA is that it requires insurance companies to use 80% of all patient premiums for care, not for executive pay, marketing, etc. Cuts are not the same as savings.
The problem with the system can be summed up in one experience:
My brother in law is in Wealth Management with Merrill Lynch. One of his biggest clients is a diabetes specialist in NJ. The doctor put it plainly: I get paid to test people, not to treat them. How many of those who support Romney feel the same?
Should healthcare be a for-profit business? Should $$$ (in our society, $$$=God) be the deciding factor for doctors?[/quote]
Doctors who own their own private practices cannot treat people for free or they would not be able to keep their practices open. These private practice phyisicians are the ones who have relied most on Medicare. Because of the Medicare cuts, many have already stopped taking new Medicare patients. Hospitals have more discretion on whether to treat someone or not. Obviously, emergency rooms cannot turn folks away. But, for the solo and small practice physician, they have to make a business decision.
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
Bush had an approval rating of 60% going into his 2004 re-election. It didn't hit the '20s until a couple of years into his second term. So, long story short, Bush was strongly popular leading into the 2004 presidential election. Obama being at or below 50% is not good for his chances at re-election.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116500/presi ... -bush.aspx
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
Uh... actually no.
Housing construction at a 4 year high.
Unemployment at a 4 year low.
Auto Industry comeback.
Threshold of Hell?
Well boy, that's a rational argument.
Well, Obama IS the Anti-Christ, remember?
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10 ... z29fSyrBpE
Godfather.
Along those same lines....
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49460659
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
What's missing from those numbers?
The number of people who needed help.
See in the Bush years (and what Romney has very clearly said is his policy) our strategy for dealing with the very poor, child poverty, child mal-nutrition and the homeless issue was the Bush Program of "Go Fuck Yourself, Not My Problem."
And now we have a president who's trying to deal with the problem and even get those people off assistance.
But since he didn't use his magic voodoo wand and fix all the Bush-Era Fuck Ups in a week... MAN they mad.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008%E2%80 ... _recession
Um.. actually, it was Bush who "handed out checks."
Since you seem to have an odd memory... 4 years ago the country was on the edge of complete economic Collapse. Recovering from a disaster as deep as that has taken time and... although we're in the best place we've been since then... there's a lot more work to do.
Nobody is "screaming" about the undeniable fact that this is just us crawling out of the pit that - yes - is the direct fault of our former president who brought in his disastrous economic plan that brought us from a Surplus at the end of the Clinton years to the edge of another Great Depression.
Trying to place the blame on president Obama for this would be like me pushing you down the stairs and breaking your neck and then four years later when you come to me in a wheel chair, me saying "that was four years ago... and you're STILL blaming me?!?!"
:fp:
A man that stands for nothing....will fall for anything!
All people need to do more on every level!
Seven what? Dwarves?
:fp:
If you actually elect this guy then you deserve him.
How is Romney doing in Massachusetts? You know, the state where he claims to have done all those wonderful things as Governor.
Maybe he didn't do such a wonderful job :nono: