# Obamacare #4



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Ignore her karverr - she has called me every name in the book and has never proven me wrong or been able to substantiate anything she has ever posted nor refute anything I've said that she claimed was inaccurate. The only thing she is capable of is to attempt to insult someone more educated and intelligent than she(nearly everyone). She knows little about most things and nothing about us.


She is better off not knowing anything about you if that is the case. Why would she want to?
BTW there are plenty of names left in the book for you.


----------



## medusa (Nov 20, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The Confederacy nearly destroyed the United States of America in order to protect the "peculiar institution". Your heritage fits in the trash along with the flag that represents it. Your heritage isn't just considered racist it IS racist. You can't separate the pride you have for your Confederate antecedents from the racism that fueled the COnfederacy in the first place. And spare me the argument that the Confederacy was fighting for state's rights. That argument doesn't hold water and never did.


Bingo! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Ignore her karverr - she has called me every name in the book and has never proven me wrong or been able to substantiate anything she has ever posted nor refute anything I've said that she claimed was inaccurate. The only thing she is capable of is to attempt to insult someone more educated and intelligent than she(nearly everyone). She knows little about most things and nothing about us.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

ute4kp said:


> Most people dont like racist organizations. I can't believe you defend slavery saying rasicts are in the North. They are a lot of places. But it seems the South still loves it. We don't fly a confed flag to celebrate being racist.


I am not defending slavery but rather pointing out that racism also exists in the former non-slave holding US. The north has not been free of racism.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :lol: :lol:


Good Morning LL! I see the Libs are still obsessed with one of your threads and cannot stay away nor shut their mouths. I wonder if they ever get tired of being so in the dark and uninformed of the world around them.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> She is better off not knowing anything about you if that is the case. Why would she want to?
> BTW there are plenty of names left in the book for you.


Empress, I appreciate the gesture, I do. 
It really isn't worth it. While tiresome to have the spaces filled up with her posts that I just pass over, what she has to say means nothing. 
I don't want to know anything about her. I don't think about her, I don't want to talk to her. 
Is she really from Middleton? That could be too funny. I think it was her who claimed at one point to work with the same diagnosed group of folks as I did. Wouldn't that be funny, to find that she was with the same employer? 
And, BTW, many people from Middleton do have a complex as they have to go to school and sent their kids to school with children from much more affluent communities... Topsfield and Boxford. The folks who want more feel like the bottom of the pecking order at Masconomet Regional.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> In regards to the long article, I can appreciate that other people have opinions that contradict the president. I have some myself. That in itself is not racist, it is in how it is delivered. If an article states that he is a N----- then thatis racist, no doubt.
> 
> I must add though that socialism does not equal communism. For instance it would be laughable to compare the Amish (socialist society) to the old USSR (communism).
> 
> Also not everybody is proud of America or proud to be an American anymore. There have been several things that have happened that make people ashamed of their nation. The people in the revolutionary war (my husband had relatives there too!) did not fight for today's America. They fought back because the east India company had bought off the British government and it did not benefit, but hurt the regular people. They actually fought AGAINST what is happening today with the big companies buying off parts of the government. I think that they would be horrified to know people are saying they fought for this United States.


Communism is just one form of socialism, as are Bolshevism, statism, Nazism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and more. The formal name of the former Soviet Union was: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> They think "gum-chewing, unintelligent and stupid loudmouths" Let's add rude too.


LL, could it be that some people in the world think this of US citizens because of the image the media and Hollywood creates?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Communism is just one form of socialism, as are Bolshevism, statism, Nazism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and more. The formal name of the former Soviet Union was: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


If you study socialism and the principles you will fast find that communism does not fit the bill. Anybody can call themselves anything, but it does mean they really ARE that. A person can call themselves non-racists, republican, democrat, independent, ect but that does not mean they actually aspire to those principles. And Nazism definitely does not fit the socialism description (and it would be rather funny if both communism and nazism were both socialists since they both hated each other with a passion). The description for socialism is readily available and the description of what those governments actually put into practice is readily available. If you compare they are not the same.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Well taking a page from the Hilary playbook:
> 
> That was so in the past, what difference does it make?
> 
> The Benghazi Scandal was only 6 months old, but yet an historical event that happened almost a 150 years ago that was the beginning of the end of slavery is current news?


Excellent point!!! :thumbup: :thumbup: :-D


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> One's heritage is so important. It is everything to me. My parents were peasants and I am SO proud of it and them.


 :-D :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good Morning LL! I see the Libs are still obsessed with one of your threads and cannot stay away nor shut their mouths. I wonder if they ever get tired of being so in the dark and uninformed of the world around them.


Naw. They just like to stir up trouble.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Jokim said:


> Communism is just one form of socialism, as are Bolshevism, statism, Nazism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and more. The formal name of the former Soviet Union was: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


Jokim,

Thank your for reminding us of this. I cannot understand why anyone in this country would want any other form of government than what we have (had?). So sad that there are Socialists among us - and on this thread! Scary.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good Morning LL! I see the Libs are still obsessed with one of your threads and cannot stay away nor shut their mouths. I wonder if they ever get tired of being so in the dark and uninformed of the world around them.


You remind me why I quit reading your posts. I just had a reality check and found that the same crappy words tumble from your lips without going through the "truth" part of your brain.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Jokim said:


> LL, could it be that some people in the world think this of US citizens because of the image the media and Hollywood creates?


Jokim,

In my experience, Europeans think about manners much more than Americans do. They have a different way of doing things. When we travel there, there is such a complete difference as to attention to manners and ways of doing things and interacting. It comes from one on one experience with Americans. I have spent a lot of time all over Europe and have been the "ugly American" without realizing it until afterwards. I still feel badly about it.

It is just a different way of approaching people and interacting. I find Europeans much more attentive to being mannerly than we do.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> If you study socialism and the principles you will fast find that communism does not fit the bill. Anybody can call themselves anything, but it does mean they really ARE that. A person can call themselves non-racists, republican, democrat, independent, ect but that does not mean they actually aspire to those principles. And Nazism definitely does not fit the socialism description (and it would be rather funny if both communism and nazism were both socialists since they both hated each other with a passion). The description for socialism is readily available and the description of what those governments actually put into practice is readily available. If you compare they are not the same.


Communism and Nazism are the flip sides of the same socialist coin. The full name of the Nazi party is: National Socialist Party.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Jokim,
> 
> Thank your for reminding us of this. I cannot understand why anyone in this country would want any other form of government than what we have (had?). So sad that there are Socialists among us - and on this thread! Scary.


Take the time to Google terms instead of blindly believing what you read here.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good Morning LL! I see the Libs are still obsessed with one of your threads and cannot stay away nor shut their mouths. I wonder if they ever get tired of being so in the dark and uninformed of the world around them.


Unlike you,KPG, we see the light and actually live in the world around us, not below us as you do.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Communism is just one form of socialism, as are Bolshevism, statism, Nazism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and more. The formal name of the former Soviet Union was: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.


Ps: nazism was fascist

Definition of fascist:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Take the time to Google terms instead of blindly believing what you read here.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Communism and Nazism are the flip sides of the same socialist coin. The full name of the Nazi party is: National Socialist Party.


Again, people can call themselves anything they want. Socialism does not advocate a single dictatorship, but rather everybody is equal.

Nazism is fascist. I posted a link of the definition by the merriam-Webster dictionary.

Think of it this way: If I were to call myself a tea partier, and name my group after them, does that automatically make it so? I think you would find the answer from all the irate tea partiers to be a resounding NO!


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Jokim,
> 
> In my experience, Europeans think about manners much more than Americans do. They have a different way of doing things. When we travel there, there is such a complete difference as to attention to manners and ways of doing things and interacting. It comes from one on one experience with Americans. I have spent a lot of time all over Europe and have been the "ugly American" without realizing it until afterwards. I still feel badly about it.
> 
> It is just a different way of approaching people and interacting. I find Europeans much more attentive to being mannerly than we do.


Speaking of manners, this thread is a great example of American 'manners'. I also traveled to Europe and noticed the difference in manners between ours and theirs, down to their eating styles. I always try to, 'when in Rome....', but, I have also been on the receiving end of European bad manners. Believe me, they are just as capable of being 'ugly Euros' as we are of being 'ugly Americans'. But back to Am. manners, who are the models for our kids behavior and manners today? Look around you. Is it any wonder that each succeeding generation's manners are on the decline?


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Again, people can call themselves anything they want. Socialism does not advocate a single dictatorship, but rather everybody is equal.
> 
> Nazism is fascist. I posted a link of the definition by the merriam-Webster dictionary.
> 
> Think of it this way: If I were to call myself a tea partier, and name my group after them, does that automatically make it so? I think you would find the answer from all the irate tea partiers to be a resounding NO!


I am aware of the definitions of socialism. I look at what reality has created. Theories always look good on paper.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> i wrote earlier to your question ,.An answer to your question I do believe that Bill Clinton was called a liar at his impeachment trial by some congressmen.Oh by the way if you haven't noticed he is white.


Yes, but that was not yelled out at him during a speech on the house floor. What part of that is so hard for you to understand.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Communism and Nazism are the flip sides of the same socialist coin. The full name of the Nazi party is: National Socialist Party.


Yes, and a Republican freed the slaves while today's Republicans are trying to make all working people slaves to corporations. Just goes to show, current events are not always a direct reflection of the past.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes, but that was not yelled out at him during a speech on the house floor. What part of that is so hard for you to understand.


He doesn't "get" alot. 
It was the State of the Union Address. One of the most important days of the year when the legislative body and the Executive Branch come together officially. It is an event when politics should be forgotten and decorum must be observed. 
******** and teabaggers just don't get that.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Why not? You claimed it 4 million so you need to back it up.


Not able to find it yourself, I'll help you out. If this isn't enough, I can find more for you.

The invention of the cotton gin in 1793 solidified the central importance of slavery to the South's economy. By the mid-19th century, America's westward expansion, along with a growing abolition movement in the North, would provoke a great debate over slavery that would tear the nation apart in the bloody American Civil War (1861-65). Though the Union victory freed the nation's 4 million slaves, the legacy of slavery continued to influence American history, from the tumultuous years of Reconstruction (1865-77) to the civil rights movement that emerged in the 1960s, a century after emancipation.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Not able to find it yourself, I'll help you out. If this isn't enough, I can find more for you.
> 
> The invention of the cotton gin in 1793 solidified the central importance of slavery to the South's economy. By the mid-19th century, America's westward expansion, along with a growing abolition movement in the North, would provoke a great debate over slavery that would tear the nation apart in the bloody American Civil War (1861-65). Though the Union victory freed the nation's 4 million slaves, the legacy of slavery continued to influence American history, from the tumultuous years of Reconstruction (1865-77) to the civil rights movement that emerged in the 1960s, a century after emancipation.


I found several references to the 4 million when I looked it up.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> How is it free labor if they got food clothes and housing? Humm sounds like welfare.
> :shock:


Did you really say that and mean it. The slaves were on welfare?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Jokim said:


> I am aware of the definitions of socialism. I look at what reality has created. Theories always look good on paper.


I am curious, if you know the definition of socialism then why incorrectly label nazism as socialist instead of fascist? If you knew the definition of socialism then you would have easily been able to see past the PR stunt that was the original naming of the Nazi party.

Edited to add:

Those Amish sure do make socialism look good in practice.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Did you really say that and mean it. The slaves were on welfare?


And enjoying socialism, I suppose.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I am curious, if you know the definition of socialism then why incorrectly label nazism as socialist instead of fascist? If you knew the definition of socialism then you would have easily been able to see past the PR stunt that was the original naming of the Nazi party.
> 
> Edited to add:
> 
> Those Amish sure do make socialism look good in practice.


Please read my post again.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> What was the original 'question?' Racism? Lying? Political party? If you expect an answer to something you should stay on topic. IMHO


I asked the original question. I asked if any other president had ever been yelled at during a speech he was giving and If Joe Wilson would have yelled at a white president? They refuse to answer, and keep saying President Clinton was called a liar during his impeachment trial, but that wasn't during a speech being given before congress, so totally different.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You cannot argue with this bunch as they "think" they know everything about any subject, but their stupid president is backed into a corner & they cannot take the shame!
> 
> They all are a very hateful bunch of Democrats!
> 
> Save your fingers on the typing!


There you go again with your name calling. Why show such disrespect for this country's president? You don't like it when it is done to you, but you love to do it to others.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

karverr said:


> Well if we can show our heritage when we speak of our race than it is discriminatory to call me a white man, I am a confederate american. If a black person or mexican person has to tell someone what they are then somebody needs glasses real bad. Why does everyone have to be something else if you are here legally then you are an American plain and simple.


From the beginning, I always considered this way of "showing" your heritage a way of dividing the country and keeping it divided. America was always referred to as a melting pot, so let it "melt" together. Why differentiate all people? The only reason being to keep people in separate categories and these categories will be dealt win accordingly. This is evidenced today with the African American vote, the Hispanic American vote, etc., etc. It focus' on grouping certain people together and excludes others. It is just racism in all its glory.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> Ha! I had no idea! Do different tribes have flags? I honestly don't know,I'll admit it ;-)


Here in Oklahoma, many tribes have flags representing them as nations, i.e. the Chickasaw Nation, Creek Nation, etc. These flags, along with the US flag are flown over their tribal buildings.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> There you go again with your name calling. Why show such disrespect for this country's president? You don't like it when it is done to you, but you love to do it to others.


I am NOT a Democrat, tyvm.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Still avoiding the question I asked since we were talking about racism. Has there ever been another congressman yell at a sitting president during a speech. Do you honestly agree with Joe Wilson yelling at the president of the United States during a speech he was giving? Has any other president ever been shown such a lack of respect and if the president had been white, would he have yelled at him. I don't know why this is so difficult for you to understand. I have asked it at least 3 times now and you still don't understand.


It's time to put your race card away. You Democrats use it so often it is as thin as rice paper. Pulling out the race card over and over does nothing, except make you all look small.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Please read my post again.


Would you please point out what I am missing in your posts? You call Nazism socialist, no? I have already commented about the name of the party, that anybody can call themselves socialist.

So again, if you understood the definition of socialism, why did you incorrectly label nazism socialism and not fascism?

I have copied your previous posts to me regarding this for your ease in referencing them:

"Communism is just one form of socialism, as are Bolshevism, statism, Nazism, Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, and more. The formal name of the former Soviet Union was: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics."

"Communism and Nazism are the flip sides of the same socialist coin. The full name of the Nazi party is: National Socialist Party."

"I am aware of the definitions of socialism. I look at what reality has created. Theories always look good on paper"


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> He has been nasty from Day 1, his first response to a question from either Huck or MIB was to call her a nasty name because she had the nerve to ask what his purpose was in being on a knitting site.
> He doesn't need lessons, believe me.


Questioning a person's reason for being on KP is uncalled for. Who made either one of them KP police? That is Admin's job and Admin chose to accept his membership. Karverr doesn't need Huckleberry's or Seattle's permission to do anything and knowing the two of them, I'm sure the question was not innocent.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> Questioning a person's reason for being on KP is uncalled for. Who made either one of them KP police? That is Admin's job and Admin chose to accept his membership. Karverr doesn't need Huckleberry's or Seattle's permission to do anything and knowing the two of them, I'm sure the question was not innocent.


That is pretty funny, since your buddies have challenged my reason for being on KP many times. 
I have to agree it is nobody's business whether anyone chooses to be on KP for some reason other than crafting. However, I was here, I read the question, and it was not posed in a way that said he shouldn't be here . There is always curiosity about how many men are here and certainly the why of a man being here when he doesn't indulge is natural.

So you can be sure of anything you choose, you generally are regardless of being shown innumerable times that you are in error. 
That doesn't negate the fact that he was nasty immediately.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

karverr said:


> my stroke has nothing to do with recognizing stupidity, I answered the so called question she had asked. I don't belittle people like you just did with this post.you probably think that was so cute and witty, sorry it's vile and degradingly crude. I have only said one thing insulting it was that her husband wore the panties in the family.you cover stupidity with insults ,name calling,and lies.


Karverr, that seems to be the only way they can communicate. They can only be nice to each other on their threads for so long and then come on one of these threads and lash out at everyone they feel is a threat to them. If they only stayed on their threads, they will implode within a short period of time, as they have done in the past.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> _a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government_
> 
> Do you wonder what happens to people who disagree with Obama? Just ask the Commissioner of Insurance of DC. After Obama's fix on Thursday, he made a negative statement about Obama on Friday. Then the mayor of DC fired him.


There are many people who disagree with Obama and they are still free and allowed to. I for one have areas I strongly disagree with the president and have made it known. I'm still here.

One cannot be a dictator if they may be voted out of office. If they chose to make it possible for themselves to be removed from office or "max out" on their terms I think they just might by the worst dictator ever. Should president Obama over rule the term limits on the presidency I might just consider the idea that he might be a dictator.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Karverr, that seems to be the only way they can communicate. They can only be nice to each other on their threads for so long and then come on one of these threads and lash out at everyone they feel is a threat to them. If they only stayed on their threads, they will implode within a short period of time, as they have done in the past.


Funny, how for the last 8 months you keep saying we will implode. wishful thinking on your part, solo? 
We are all friends and what you predict is not likely to happen.
BTW I see you doing the same as you pointed out to karverr


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Yes, and a Republican freed the slaves while today's Republicans are trying to make all working people slaves to corporations. Just goes to show, current events are not always a direct reflection of the past.


And now republicans are trying to take away voting rights of minorities. Who was in the white house fighting for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Democrats have always been the party capable of changing their minds and saying a mistake had been made and then fixing it. Republicans want to hang on to those poor decisions and repeat them.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> There are many people who disagree with Obama and they are still free and allowed to. I for one have areas I strongly disagree with the president and have made it known. I'm still here.
> 
> One cannot be a dictator if they may be voted out of office. If they chose to make it possible for themselves to be removed from office or "max out" on their terms I think they just might by the worst dictator ever. Should president Obama over rule the term limits on the presidency I might just consider the idea that he might be a dictator.


If he were a dictator then I would say there are a lot of republicans in the house he should remove from office and make every ones life easier. I also disagree with our president from time to time and I have written him letters saying so and I am still alive.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> The fact that your ancestors were willing to give up their lives to hang on to an institution as appalling as slavery is nothing to be proud of, believe me.


Why should he believe your closed minded arrogant opinion? He was born and raised in the south and knows a great deal more about the area and people than you ever will. You are picking and choosing only bad things that happened in the south and going no further than that. The good and bad are apart of his heritage. Who are you to tell anyone what they can and should be proud of?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

I believe karverr is capable of answering himself, or have you been hired as his new mouth piece?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I gave the most recent example of people that disagree with him. There have been a few that have died under mysterious circumstances. Many of the high ranking members of the military have been removed if they have disagreed with Obama.


But people are still allowed to disagree, no? A dictator allows no disention, no matter in you are an insignificant person or an important person. For example, Hitler allowed no disagreement... Period. He even trained kids to spy on their parents to report them if they even spoke a word of disagreement. Normal everyday folk. If that is happening now I need to change quite a bit of what I say because my kids know what I disagree with the President on, as do many friends and family. I'm not known for being shy and quiet. I can't speak to "mysterious deaths" as I'm not even sure who it is you are speaking of. Their have always been "mysterious deaths" that have been blamed on one person or another, like Marilyn Monroe.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> From the beginning, I always considered this way of "showing" your heritage a way of dividing the country and keeping it divided. America was always referred to as a melting pot, so let it "melt" together. Why differentiate all people? The only reason being to keep people in separate categories and these categories will be dealt win accordingly. This is evidenced today with the African American vote, the Hispanic American vote, etc., etc. It focus' on grouping certain people together and excludes others. It is just racism in all its glory.


You tell him, so low, he won't listen to the rest of us. His claim to be anything but just an American is divisive. I couldn't agree more. 
Call out with me, so low, "karverr, tear down that flag".


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Pride in producing the pain that the volume that Martin Bashir was reading from the other day depicted, maybe.
> Did you catch any of that? After the supreme leader of the really backward right wingers, Sarah Palin, made that comment equating the national debt and slavery Martin Bashir's team pulled up a journal written over 35 or 39 years of a particular slave's life. He recorded the overseer (poor white trash) or the owner making one slave sh-- into the mouth of another, another recorded incident was forcing one slave to urinate in the eyes and mouth of another human being. Such a heritage to be proud of, how could anyone not want to celebrate that history?
> 
> Any sane person who was not filled with revulsion by those incidents is nothing but dog dinner and pig puke.


You are going way overboard with this nonsense. Karveer never said he condoned what happened in the south. It is part of the south's history. Many German people are proud of their heritage, despite what happened with Hitler. Does that mean they should not be proud to be of German descent? I think not. Look what goes on in the Muslim countries. They have their own kind of horrible behavior. Does that mean they shouldn't be proud of where they come from? Really, get a grip.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> That is pretty funny, since your buddies have challenged my reason for being on KP many times.
> I have to agree it is nobody's business whether anyone chooses to be on KP for some reason other than crafting. However, I was here, I read the question, and it was not posed in a way that said he shouldn't be here . There is always curiosity about how many men are here and certainly the why of a man being here when he doesn't indulge is natural.
> 
> So you can be sure of anything you choose, you generally are regardless of being shown innumerable times that you are in error.
> That doesn't negate the fact that he was nasty immediately.


That was because he took it the way it was meant by the two in question. That also doesn't incorporate into his response what led up to his response.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> I believe karverr is capable of answering himself, or have you been hired as his new mouth piece?


So only your and yours are allowed to defend those you consider friends when they are being jumped on from all angels? You do the exact same thing.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> You tell him, so low, he won't listen to the rest of us. His claim to be anything but just an American is divisive. I couldn't agree more.
> Call out with me, so low, "karverr, tear down that flag".


The only thing I will call out is "jelun2, stop your nonsense."


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> So only your and yours are allowed to defend those you consider friends when they are being jumped on from all angels? You do the exact same thing.


Angels don't jump on us, but they do surround us.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

I have always believed that the only flag to be flying in this country is the American flag.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I believe karverr is capable of answering himself, or have you been hired as his new mouth piece?


I believe she answered quite elegantly,.it doesn't matter who says it don't presume anything about me.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

FUNNY!


BrattyPatty said:


> Angels don't jump on us, but they do surround us.


 :thumbup:


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes, but that was not yelled out at him during a speech on the house floor. What part of that is so hard for you to understand.


where do you think his trial was held,in the backyard.I answered your question what more do you want, your never satisfied with an answer.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> You are going way overboard with this nonsense. Karveer never said he condoned what happened in the south. It is part of the south's history. Many German people are proud of their heritage, despite what happened with Hitler. Does that mean they should not be proud to be of German descent? I think not. Look what goes on in the Muslim countries. They have their own kind of horrible behavior. Does that mean they shouldn't be proud of where they come from? Really, get a grip.


What the hell makes you think I am talking about karverr. That man, and you for that matter, means nothing to me. 
To think that I give a crap about your or him is delusional. 
You are words on a page to bounce thoughts off. 
If I mean any more than that to you you need an adjustment in your thinking. 
Now, don't get me wrong, I have a certain fondness for some of the liberals here. They are people I can make a connection with. 
Look up compartmentalization, you will have some idea of just how little you and he mean.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Unlike you, she is brilliant. At least she backs up what she posts, unlike you. Where a person resides does not make the person. It's like saying that everyone who lives in Middleton, Massachusettes is poor and uneducated because one particular moron who lives there is.


well aren't you all doing that exact thing. because 
I live in the south and proud of my heritage you call me racist.there were many men from the north who fought on the south sides, being from the north yall must be racist too.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> You are going way overboard with this nonsense. Karveer never said he condoned what happened in the south. It is part of the south's history. Many German people are proud of their heritage, despite what happened with Hitler. Does that mean they should not be proud to be of German descent? I think not. Look what goes on in the Muslim countries. They have their own kind of horrible behavior. Does that mean they shouldn't be proud of where they come from? Really, get a grip.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: Don't listen to trash.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Solo,

She's angry. :lol: :lol: :lol: Spitting angry. You got to her! :lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Here is racism in all it's glory.....So don't think it's only in the south....there are some seriously nasty racists everywhere.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/278363/


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> All of this right pro-slavery jazz is BS...and not even original. These are the same arguments the pro-slavery Southerners used to justify their "glorious"institution: that slavery was just a minor little evil that didn't affect many African-Americans, that the slaves were well off compared to the working "wage slaves" of the North, that a slave's market value protected him or her from abuses by the overseer etc etc. Baloney! (not the expletive I'd like to use, of course)


you are the only one talking about pro-slavery, I don't condone slavery of any type ,shape or form,there are a lot of slaves in this world, everybody is a slave to something. the Muslims have salves of all color,go over there and tell them to free their slaves, but have a ticket first you probably won't be able to hitch hike home with no hands. I did say that some overseers treated the slaves bad, but a lot of slaves did not under go the violence and mistreatment you describe.Unknown to you(which quite a few things are) there were many slave owners who took very good care of their slaves. Your stereo-type that all plantation owner were the way you described. is shear ignorance, there were many northerners that caught escaped slaves for the reward and beat the slaves they caught . go ahead use your expletive nothing has stopped you before.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> What the hell makes you think I am talking about karverr. That man, and you for that matter, means nothing to me.
> To think that I give a crap about your or him is delusional.
> You are words on a page to bounce thoughts off.
> If I mean any more than that to you you need an adjustment in your thinking.
> ...


boy now yall have started using the four letter words. If we don't mean anything to you why don't you just be quite. you don't have to reply to anything we write, I believe that would be a refreshing change for us. It was an easy mistake for her to think you were in reference to me in your post as you never fail to comment back .


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> where do you think his trial was held,in the backyard.I answered your question what more do you want, your never satisfied with an answer.


You are a waste of time. Avoid the question if you want. We all know why you can't answer it. You don't have the guts to admit the truth.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> You need to go read history and stop making history your version of it. Where in the world were 4 million people in bondage?


CBin reference to her statement I have found this printed material, I'm sorry it is in black and white so she won't believe it, YES THEY DID HAVE A RIGHT TO SECEDE.

In 1838, Frederick Douglass, a slave who was taught how to read by the wife of one of his masters, escaped by disguising himself as a sailor to reach New York. In 1847, Douglass began publication of the North Star, a newspaper, in Rochester. Later Douglass became an adviser to Lincoln.

For nearly 18 months after April 1861 Douglass wrote Lincoln asking him to make the war about slavery. Lincoln refused, he understood that if he made the war about slavery, troop enlistment would drop off. On July 25, 1861, the U.S. Congress passed the Crittenden Resolution declaring the object of the war to be the preservation of the Union.

In 1825, West Point taught Constitutional Law using William Rawle's book entitled A View of the Constitution. The text of this book proved it is perfectly constitutional for any state to withdraw from the union.

Here's a statement made by President Abraham Lincoln in 1848: Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.

When forming our republic, the framers of the Constitution carefully enumerated the limited powers of the federal government and then added the 10th Amendment, which reads: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Here is the right to secede from the union.

Before the so-called Civil War, Americans were state citizens. The 14th Amendment adopted in 1868 made Americans United States citizens for the first time in our history. When the first seven states announced that they would secede from the union, President James Buchanan simply allowed them to leave in peace. Congressmen even shook hands and said their good-byes.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

karverr said:


> CBin reference to her statement I have found this printed material, I'm sorry it is in black and white so she won't believe it, YES THEY DID HAVE A RIGHT TO SUCCEED.
> 
> In 1838, Frederick Douglass, a slave who was taught how to read by the wife of one of his masters, escaped by disguising himself as a sailor to reach New York. In 1847, Douglass began publication of the North Star, a newspaper, in Rochester. Later Douglass became an adviser to Lincoln.
> 
> ...


Thank you


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> _a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government_
> 
> Do you wonder what happens to people who disagree with Obama? Just ask the Commissioner of Insurance of DC. After Obama's fix on Thursday, he made a negative statement about Obama on Friday. Then the mayor of DC fired him.


Isn't that nice. Obama never has been able to take constructive criticism.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> You are a waste of time. Avoid the question if you want. We all know why you can't answer it. You don't have the guts to admit the truth.


You asked if any other pres. had been yelled at by a congressman and would it be done if he were white I answered that . do I need to write in colored ink so you will see it, black and white seems to be your weakness.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't like slavery any better than you. The confederate flag does not mean what you say it does. There are no slaves alive so they don't have to see the flag. I am thankful that no one owns slaves now , not even the north. Slave have been owned since the beginning of time. I would say that anyone that is on welfare is unslaved by the government for food , clothing and housing. You would have to agree to that.


The Confederate Flag still means exactly what it meant when it was designed and first flown. It represents the group of states that seceeded from The United States of America in order to protect their states' rights to continue slaveholding. The Confederacy nearly destroyed the country you say you're so proud of. Displaying the Confederate Flag today means exactly what it meant in 1861. You have the nerve to say "there are no slaves alive today", which of course is true, but you seem to conveniently forget that many African-Americans are the descendents of slaves and they do get to see that filthy rag when it's displayed. The Bible you refer to so often has a few things to say against slavery. I suggest you do some reading. Oh, and by the way, just because something has been done since the beginning of time doesn't make it right.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Thank you


Heres some more
It was after the invasion of the South that Virginia and the rest of the secession states took up arms for Independence.

Simply put, the Civil War was about political and economic violations which the states attempted to stop with nullification: meaning, federal laws must be constitutional or they are null and void.

The Civil War did not save the free state union of our Founding Fathers. The Act of 1871 made our government a corporation acting in commerce and the American people became dummy corporations.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The Confederate Flag still means exactly what it meant when it was designed and first flown. It represents the group of states that seceeded from The United States of America in order to protect their states' rights to continue slaveholding. The Confederacy nearly destroyed the country you say you're so proud of. Displaying the Confederate Flag today means exactly what it meant in 1861. You have the nerve to say "there are no slaves alive today", which of course is true, but you seem to conveniently forget that many African-Americans are the descendents of slaves and they do get to see that filthy rag when it's displayed. The Bible you refer to so often has a few things to say against slavery. I suggest you do some reading. Oh, and by the way, just because something has been done since the beginning of time doesn't make it right.


Don't talk to me.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

karverr said:


> boy now yall have started using the four letter words. If we don't mean anything to you why don't you just be quite. you don't have to reply to anything we write, I believe that would be a refreshing change for us. It was an easy mistake for her to think you were in reference to me in your post as you never fail to comment back .


Jelun states that she wasn't referring to you yet she was as evidenced by the words she wrote. She states she doesn't have the time of day for me, yet responds, refers to and insults me and researches, comments and refutes everything I write. She is a lost soul.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> You asked if any other pres. had been yelled at by a congressman and would it be done if he were white I answered that . do I need to write in colored ink so you will see it, black and white seems to be your weakness.


Let me speak real slow so maybe you can understand. I asked if any other president had been yelled at while in the process of giving a speech, like Joe Wilson did to President Obama, not someone being questioned during a trial. Also would Joe Wilson have yelled like that at a white president. But don't worry about it, I know you don't have the guts to answer the questions as written, so move on.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

karverr said:


> You asked if any other pres. had been yelled at by a congressman and would it be done if he were white I answered that . do I need to write in colored ink so you will see it, black and white seems to be your weakness.


Obama _is_ white. What kind of racist person is NJG?


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> boy now yall have started using the four letter words. If we don't mean anything to you why don't you just be quite. you don't have to reply to anything we write, I believe that would be a refreshing change for us. It was an easy mistake for her to think you were in reference to me in your post as you never fail to comment back .


"Thou Doest Protest Too Much" - that is what she is doing. Her anger shows that she cares A LOT. She has an anger management problem in the highest degree. Her protesting too much shows a lot. Hang in there Karverr.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Solo,
> 
> She's angry. :lol: :lol: :lol: Spitting angry. You got to her! :lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup:


One does not get angy at meaningless people. 
I thought you were supposed to have some awareness of intepersonal relationships. 
Sheesh, wrong twice in one day. I can barely stand it.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

try to dispute this, yall started the arguement about the souths right now read the truth.



karverr said:


> Heres some more
> It was after the invasion of the South that Virginia and the rest of the secession states took up arms for Independence.
> 
> Simply put, the Civil War was about political and economic violations which the states attempted to stop with nullification: meaning, federal laws must be constitutional or they are null and void.
> ...


You wanted to know about their right it another one

The Right of Secession

by Gene H. Kizer, Jr.

There is no evidence that secession was illegal or prohibited by the Constitution, and in fact there is almost overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that secession was a legal, constitutionally sanctioned act. Historian Kenneth M. Stampp, in his book The Imperiled Union, maintains that it is impossible to say that secession was illegal because of the ambiguity of the original Constitution as to state sovereignty and the right of secession. He points out that "the case for state sovereignty and the constitutional right of secession had flourished for forty years before a comparable case for a perpetual Union had been devised," and even then its logic was "far from perfect because the Constitution and the debates over ratification were fraught with ambiguity."1 It appears that the original intent of an unquestioned right of secession was established by the Founders, took root and "flourished for forty years," then later a "perpetual Union" counter-argument developed out of political necessity when Northern states began realizing their wealth and power was dependent on the Union and its exploitation of the South.
There had to be a specific constitutional prohibition on secession for it to be illegal. Conversely, there did not have to be a specific constitutional affirmation of the right of secession for it to be legal. Why? Because the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There was no constitution prohibition on secession, nor was there a constitutional sanctioning of any kind of federal coercion to force a state to obey a federal law because to do so was to perpetrate an act of war on the offending state by the other states, for whom the federal government was their agent.

The arguments for the right of secession are unequivocal. There is the constitutional right based on the Compact Theory, and the revolutionary right based on the idea that a free people have the right to change their government anytime they see fit. The Compact Theory views the Constitution as a legal agreement between the states - a compact - and if any one state violates the compact, then the entire agreement becomes null and void. Northern states unquestionably violated the Constitution on a number of grounds including unconstitutional Personal Liberty Laws on their books, as well as by deliberately harboring fugitives from justice by protecting the sons of John Brown who were wanted by Virginia for murder at Harpers Ferry. Northern states also made a mockery of the Constitution's Preamble, which states clearly that the Constitution was established to "insure domestic Tranquility" and "promote the general Welfare." Certain prominent Northern leaders with the acquiescence of states like Massachusetts were utterly at war with the South and doing everything they could to destroy the domestic tranquility of Southern states by encouraging slaves to murder white people, poison wells, destroy property and commit other acts of rapine. John Brown himself had been encouraged and financed in the North.
The revolutionary right of secession is based on the 
Declaration of Independence and the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson and John Locke, that

whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, . . .

These words come directly from the Declaration of Independence. This passage was also used, verbatim, in South Carolina's Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union. A similar sentiment was expressed by Abraham Lincoln in 1847 on the floor of the United States House of Representatives:

Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right, a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world.2

Horace Greeley's New York Daily Tribune published a long, emotional editorial on December 17, 1860, the day South Carolina's Secession Convention began, strongly supporting the right of secession on the revolutionary basis. The Tribune used the exact same passage used in South Carolina's Declaration of Immediate Causes, which comes from the Declaration of Independence, reiterating that the "just powers" of government come from the "consent of the governed" and "'whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and institute a new government,' &c., &c.", adding that


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Don't talk to me.


Right on, CB. In four words, you said it all.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Jelun states that she wasn't referring to you yet she was as evidenced by the words she wrote. She states she doesn't have the time of day for me, yet responds, refers to and insults me and researches, comments and refutes everything I write. She is a lost soul.


VERY lost soul. A priest for her? A psychiatrist? I don't think anyone can help.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Obama _is_ white. What kind of racist person is NJG?


Just proving my point over and over and over. You righties are the racist ones.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> VERY lost soul. A priest for her? A psychiatrist? I don't think anyone can help.


Jesus can but she doesn't like God.We need to keep praying for her.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Jesus can but she doesn't like God.We need to keep praying for her.


Can you pray that much? It's going to take A LOT of prayers!


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Can you pray that much? It's going to take A LOT of prayers!


Yes I can.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> try to dispute this, yall started the arguement about the souths right now read the truth.
> 
> You wanted to know about their right it another one
> 
> ...


I have no interest in whether it was legal or not. I just wish it had been successful.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> "Thou Doest Protest Too Much" - that is what she is doing. Her anger shows that she cares A LOT. She has an anger management problem in the highest degree. Her protesting too much shows a lot. Hang in there Karverr.


 :thumbup: She isn't just angry with the Repubs and Conservatives; she is angry with everything in her life as well.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Jelun states that she wasn't referring to you yet she was as evidenced by the words she wrote. She states she doesn't have the time of day for me, yet responds, refers to and insults me and researches, comments and refutes everything I write. She is a lost soul.


What do you not understand about being a message board?
I may be a lost soul, only God knows that. 
If I am, Honey, you are surely in much more trouble in the afterlife than you can possibly imagine. 
If God were going to punish me, he would have a whole lot of fire and brimstone waiting for you.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Can you pray that much? It's going to take A LOT of prayers!


I'm sorry ladies but my God can do anything if we just ask, he doesn't say how much or how hard we pray. even if it is her that we are praying for. I have to believe even she can be saved from herself.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: She isn't just angry with the Repubs and Conservatives; she is angry with everything in her life as well.


Sometimes angry people can be dangerous. Even to themselves. That's sad.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Yes I can.


You are a saint!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: She isn't just angry with the Repubs and Conservatives; she is angry with everything in her life as well.


Yes, you are completely right. Can you imagine living in her house. Yikes!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> VERY lost soul. A priest for her? A psychiatrist? I don't think anyone can help.


Give up - she doesn't believe in Christian values and would first have to admit to her problems and stop her denial of the truth. Won't ever happen. We all need to leave the non-spirtual hermit alone.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Sometimes angry people can be dangerous. Even to themselves. That's sad.


So true!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Yes, you are completely right. Can you imagine living in her house. Yikes!


I perfer thanking God than asking him for things. 
I thank God you will never find out what it is to live in my house.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Obama _is_ white. What kind of racist person is NJG?


The clever member of the crew has arrived. She must have left those minimum wage lackeys at work to do her bidding.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

karverr said:


> Well I see you do use racial slur's, they call themselves black, the word ***** you used is as offensive as the much stronger n---- word but a slur in itself.


It's a satirical comment I wrote.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> It's a satirical comment I wrote.


He cannot wrap his head around satire.
I would say why, but, he gets all upset with facts as they exist.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Yes, you are completely right. Can you imagine living in her house. Yikes!


Nope. I have no desire to even drive through or idle at a stop light in the city where she resides. I've read about it and went through it a couple of time in my travels. The most corrupt Mayor probably ever to be 'elected' just got voted out recently. I cannot imagine thinking about buying a house in that locale ever; yet she did.

I feel sorry for those who cannot advance their future, but she chose her future and then complains about it. How stupid is that?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Nope. I have no desire to even drive through or even idle at a stop light in the city where she resides. I've read about it and went through it a couple of time in my travels. The most corrupt Mayor probably ever to be 'elected' just got voted out recently. I cannot imagine thinking about buying a house in that locale ever; yet she did.
> 
> I feel sorry for those who cannot advance their future, but she chose her future and then complains about it. How stupid is that?


If I had done that it would be about the same amount of stupid as you display daily.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Nope. I have no desire to even drive through or even idle at a stop light in the city where she resides. I've read about it and went through it a couple of time in my travels. The most corrupt Mayor probably ever to be 'elected' just got voted out recently. I cannot imagine thinking about buying a house in that locale ever; yet she did.
> 
> I feel sorry for those who cannot advance their future, but she chose her future and then complains about it. How stupid is that?


Where is this place? This gives me a better understanding of her mentality. Good grief.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Where is this place? This gives me a better understanding of her mentality. Good grief.


It's separated by one town from her hometown. :|
Now that I think about it if she actually runs a business that is probably in Lawrence, cheap rents and labor. 
She would love it, she could hire people who would never understand the disrespect she was handing out by saying that they were not worth more than minimum wage.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Where is this place? This gives me a better understanding of her mentality. Good grief.


Lawrence, Massachusetts. She claims that it is in the Southeastern part of that state in her KP profile. Yet, I looked it up and it is a poor, highly populated and corrupt city with an extremely violent and high crime rate, and is located in the most eastern city in that part of the state (5 minutes) to the New Hampshire state line.

She doesn't speak the truth about her city of residence because she is embarrassed by it I suspect. I'd feel for her, but she doesn't deserve our sympathy because of how she treats us.

Several KP members discovered and showed me her profile on an on-line dating site. She cannot lie on that site since she'd have no suitors who could respond to her. On second thought


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Lawrence, Massachusetts. She claims that it is in the Southeastern part of that state in her KP profile. Yet, I looked it up and it is a poor, highly populated city, which is the most eastern city in that part of the state (5 minutes) to the New Hampshire state line.
> 
> She doesn't speak the truth about her city of residence because she is embarrassed by it.
> 
> Several KP members discovered and showed me her profile on an on-line dating site. She cannot lie on that site since she'd have no suitors who could respond to her. On second thought


You are not real good with dates, are you? That poor husband of yours... I bet he likes that site too.
Highly populated?
Only to someone from Middleton, the poor relation to those folks from Topsfield. Or is it Boxford that bothers you more? 
My cousin used to live in Boxford, he mentioned seeing those poor little Middleton kids, faces pressed up against the school bus windows... dreaming of being able to ride in his Astin Healey.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> It's a satirical comment I wrote.


since when is racist comments satirical, I guess that only applies to libs when they make racial slurs.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Where I vote, we all sign a book. The person at the table covers your signature from when you registered in the beginning. So if you are trying to vote as another person, the signatures won't match. They compare the signatures right there.

There is no law to force us to carry an ID, at least in my free state. For various reasons you may need to carry ID. There is no general law that forces our free people to show our papers..



karverr said:


> I will try to talk very slowly so you won't twist my words. first I abhor slavery in any form. second just because
> i am proud of my heritage does not make me racist. Am I typing slow enough? third I 'm glad that you have to show picture id to vote,how else will they know it is really you.If you live in the U.S. you need some type of id in case of medical emergency. fourth I respect the office of the president and congress, though I sometimes do not respect the men in office. respect has to be earned and Obama and lots of congressmen have not done that. not only that any respect some had for them they have thrown out. Now to the flag topic, I respect the flag the blacks display, the Islamic, Mexicans so respect mine plain and simple. If my opinions have offended anyone then I apologize, I have said this many times but have never gotten an apology from any of the nasty writing liberal ladies on KP when they are shown something that proves they are mistaken.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> Where I vote, we all sign a book. The person at the table covers your signature from when you registered in the beginning. So if you are trying to vote as another person, the signatures won't match. They compare the signatures right there.
> 
> There is no law to force us to carry an ID, at least in my free state. For various reasons you may need to carry ID. There is no general law that forces our free people to show our papers..


I go in and give my street name, and my last name. They say my first, I say YUP. The end.
Ask knitpregnantguilt she'll tell you it is the same in every town and city in Mass.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

karverr said:


> I'm sorry ladies but my God can do anything if we just ask, he doesn't say how much or how hard we pray. even if it is her that we are praying for. I have to believe even she can be saved from herself.


 Yes He can. Just look what happened to Paul. He was a Christian murder.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Jokim said:


> I am not defending slavery but rather pointing out that racism also exists in the former non-slave holding US. The north has not been free of racism.


I'll agree with that, to a point.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I have no interest in whether it was legal or not. I just wish it had been successful.


everyone of yall were stating that it was illegal for the states to pull out of the union,and then stated the war was about slavery. Both of these articles written by northern men ,printed in a northern paper have stated otherwise so eat grits and get off myn back.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

karverr said:


> everyone of yall were stating that it was illegal for the states to pull out of the union,and then stated the war was about slavery. Both of these articles written by northern men ,printed in a northern paper have stated otherwise so eat grits and get off myn back.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> everyone of yall were stating that it was illegal for the states to pull out of the union,and then stated the war was about slavery. Both of these articles written by northern men ,printed in a northern paper have stated otherwise so eat grits and get off myn back.


All you have to do is stop posting BS and nobody will respond. Go back to whittling 101.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> Where I vote, we all sign a book. The person at the table covers your signature from when you registered in the beginning. So if you are trying to vote as another person, the signatures won't match. They compare the signatures right there.
> 
> There is no law to force us to carry an ID, at least in my free state. For various reasons you may need to carry ID. There is no general law that forces our free people to show our papers..


 yall talk about unity, well we need every state to do the same in all voting. this would eliminate the dangling chad incident and any other discrepancy .If this means you have to prove you are who you say you are with a picture id then great. why does this bother you so bad?You make it sound like the nazi police.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I go in and give my street name, and my last name. They say my first, I say YUP. The end.
> Ask knitpregnantguilt she'll tell you it is the same in every town and city in Mass.


That should be illegal. We have had picture id for years.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> All you have to do is stop posting BS and nobody will respond. Go back to whittling 101.


 you just can't stand it when you all are wrong, is this comment the best nasty you can come up with?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> All you have to do is stop posting BS and nobody will respond. Go back to whittling 101.


And playing dueling banjos. :twisted:


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I go in and give my street name, and my last name. They say my first, I say YUP. The end.
> Ask knitpregnantguilt she'll tell you it is the same in every town and city in Mass.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I go in and give my street name, and my last name. They say my first, I say YUP. The end.
> Ask knitpregnantguilt she'll tell you it is the same in every town and city in Mass.


This sounds so secure and fool proof oh did I say fool sorry.
so if I know where you live and your name i can vote for you,this is so intelligent this way.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> And playing dueling banjos. :twisted:


I do believe that the dueling banjos were from the northern Appalachian mountains, not in the south.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> It's separated by one town from her hometown. :|
> Now that I think about it if she actually runs a business that is probably in Lawrence, cheap rents and labor.
> She would love it, she could hire people who would never understand the disrespect she was handing out by saying that they were not worth more than minimum wage.


Thank you so much for your point of view, it was so enlightening.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The Confederate Flag still means exactly what it meant when it was designed and first flown. It represents the group of states that seceeded from The United States of America in order to protect their states' rights to continue slaveholding. The Confederacy nearly destroyed the country you say you're so proud of. Displaying the Confederate Flag today means exactly what it meant in 1861. You have the nerve to say "there are no slaves alive today", which of course is true, but you seem to conveniently forget that many African-Americans are the descendents of slaves and they do get to see that filthy rag when it's displayed. The Bible you refer to so often has a few things to say against slavery. I suggest you do some reading. Oh, and by the way, just because something has been done since the beginning of time doesn't make it right.


The Bible also has references to slavery in a pro-slavery slant as well. (one of those contradictions I guess) It was used during the slavery times when they "converted" people from African religions to Christianity. I also am aware of them because the history books I had in school were from a southern press that actually tried to justify slavery by quoting those Bible passages. It may seem outrageous but it's true. I was horrified then and still am. But the college that was associated with it has race policies as well.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> The Bible also has references to slavery in a pro-slavery slant as well. (one of those contradictions I guess) It was used during the slavery times when they "converted" people from African religions to Christianity. I also am aware of them because the history books I had in school were from a southern press that actually tried to justify slavery by quoting those Bible passages. It may seem outrageous but it's true. I was horrified then and still am. But the college that was associated with it has race policies as well.[/quot
> 
> thank you for your opinion


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> Where I vote, we all sign a book. The person at the table covers your signature from when you registered in the beginning. So if you are trying to vote as another person, the signatures won't match. They compare the signatures right there.
> 
> There is no law to force us to carry an ID, at least in my free state. For various reasons you may need to carry ID. There is no general law that forces our free people to show our papers..


what does your post have to do with the post you replied to.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Thank you for bringing this up, because my curious self decided to do some checking. I went to the person who should know, the Vice President of the confederate, Alexander Stephens. I have capitalized the parts of this that apply to the "why" of the secession.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1861stephens.asp

We are in the midst of one of the greatest epochs in our history. The last ninety days will mark one of the most memorable eras in the history of modern civilization.

......

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: THE NEW CONSTITUTION HAS PUT AT REST FOREVER ALL THE AGITATING QUESTIONS RELATING TO OUR PECULIAR INSTITUTIONS-AFRICAN SLAVERY AS IT EXISTS AMONG US-THR PROPER STATUS OF THE ***** IN OUR FORM OF CIVILIZATION. THIS WAS THE IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF THE LATE RUPTURE AND PRESENT REVOLUTION. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the Constitution, was the prevailing idea at the time. The Constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly used against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

OUT NEW GOVERNMENT IS FOUNDED UPON EXACTLY THR OPPOSITE IDEAS; ITS FOUNDATIONS ARE LAID, ITS CORNERSTONE RESTS, UPON THE GREAT TRUTH THAT THE ***** IS NOT EQUAL TO THE WHITE MAN; THAT SLAVERY, SUBORDINATION TO THE SUPERIOR RACE, IS HIS NATURAL AND MORAL CONDITION. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It is so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North who still cling to these errors with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind; from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is, forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics: their conclusions are right if their premises are. They assume that the ***** is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights, with the white man.... I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the Northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery; that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle-a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of man. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds we should succeed, and that he and his associates in their crusade against our institutions would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as well as in physics and mechanics, I admitted, but told him it was he and those acting with him who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side, complete throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly planted; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enlightened world.

As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are, and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo-it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged. May we not therefore look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first Government ever instituted upon principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many Governments have been founded upon the principles of certain classes; but the classes thus enslaved, were of the same race, and in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. The ***** by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, [note: A reference to Genesis, 9:20-27, which was used as a justification for slavery] is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite-then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is the best, not only for the superior but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances or to question them. For His own purposes He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another in glory."

The great objects of humanity are best attained, when conformed to his laws and degrees [sic], in the formation of Governments as well as in all things else. Our Confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders "is become the chief stone of the corner" in our new edifice.

Source:

Alexander H. Stephens, "Cornerstone Address, March 21, 1861 " in The Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events with Documents, Narratives, Illustrative Incidents, Poetry, etc., vol. 1, ed. Frank Moore (New York: O.P. Putnam, 1862), pp. 44-46.

Modern History Sourcebook: 
Alexander H. Stephens (1812-1883):
Cornerstone Address, March 21, 1861

Alexander H. Stephens (1812-1883), although originally opposed to secession, was elected vice-president of the Confederacy. After the war he returned to political service in Georgia and in the House of Representatives. He was elected governor of Georgia in 1882 and died in office.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for bringing this up, because my curious self decided to do some checking. I went to the person who should know, the Vice President of the confederate, Alexander Stephens. I have capitalized the parts of this that apply to the "why" of the secession.
> 
> http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1861stephens.asp
> 
> ...


my northern sources I quoted stated different reasons but the south still had a legal right to secede from the union.So we still have a disagreement about that. thank you so much for you opinion.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Here are a few Bible verses that were used to justify slavery. Some verses use the term "servant" instead of slave, but in roman history you only pierced the ear of a slave with an awl, not a free servant.

Leviticus 25:44-46 (NIV)
44 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

Exodus 21:2-11 (NIV)
2 If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

5 But if the servant declares, I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free, 6 then his master must take him before the judges.[a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.

7 If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself,* he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.P

Exodus 21:20-21 (NIV)
20 Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.

Ephesians 6:5 (NIV)
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

1 Timothy 6:1-2 (NIV)
6 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that Gods name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2 Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare[a] of their slaves.

Luke 12:47-48 (NIV)
47 The servant who knows the masters will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

I have copied a brief passage regarding the use of the Bible and Christianity to keep slaves "in line". The link contains the full thing.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/slavery/experience/religion/history2.html

"Whereas an earlier generation of evangelical preachers had opposed slavery in the South during the early nineteenth century, Protestant clergymen began to defend the institution, invoking a Christian hierarchy in which slaves were bound to obey their masters. For many slaveholders, this outlook not only made evangelical Christianity more palatable, but also provided a strong argument for converting slaves and establishing biracial churches. "*


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

karverr said:


> Lkholcomb said:
> 
> 
> > The Bible also has references to slavery in a pro-slavery slant as well. (one of those contradictions I guess) It was used during the slavery times when they "converted" people from African religions to Christianity. I also am aware of them because the history books I had in school were from a southern press that actually tried to justify slavery by quoting those Bible passages. It may seem outrageous but it's true. I was horrified then and still am. But the college that was associated with it has race policies as well.[/quot
> ...


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> you just can't stand it when you all are wrong, is this comment the best nasty you can come up with?


Nope, the best nasty is to not see you. 
Click.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> You are very welcome my dear.


Nice job, Lkholcomb, may I call you Empress?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

karverr said:


> my northern sources I quoted stated different reasons but the south still had a legal right to secede from the union.So we still have a disagreement about that. thank you so much for you opinion.


As you so nicely pointed out in previous posts, the north was slanted against the south. They even went so far as to entice slaves or ex slaves to tell false stories of their slavery. Using the logic you previously stated the northern sources should not carry as much weight as the southern because the northeners where not living there. I agreed that a southern source should be found, so I found one: the vice president of the confederate states.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Nice job, Lkholcomb, may I call you Empress?


I prefer "her highness" lol.

Edited to add: or lady or dutchess (after all I do have a queen, ladies, and dukes and dutchess in my heritage) lol


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I prefer "her highness" lol.


I can manage that, this little socialist kinda likes even her facetious ideas on a par, though. :wink:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> As you so nicely pointed out in previous posts, the north was slanted against the south. They even went so far as to entice slaves or ex slaves to tell false stories of their slavery. Using the logic you previously stated the northern sources should not carry as much weight as the southern because the northeners where not living there. I agreed that a southern source should be found, so I found one: the vice president of the confederate states.


Nice, or as my wonderful wonderful GS would say... COOL!


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I can manage that, this little socialist kinda likes even her facetious ideas on a par, though. :wink:


Lol. I guess if we must be those horrible socialists then Empress is good . :wink:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Here Ute

http://www.pajiba.com/seriously_random_lists/mindhole-blowers-20-facts-about-deliverance-thatll-make-youwell-you-know.php


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Lawrence, Massachusetts. She claims that it is in the Southeastern part of that state in her KP profile. Yet, I looked it up and it is a poor, highly populated and corrupt city with an extremely violent and high crime rate, and is located in the most eastern city in that part of the state (5 minutes) to the New Hampshire state line.
> 
> She doesn't speak the truth about her city of residence because she is embarrassed by it I suspect. I'd feel for her, but she doesn't deserve our sympathy because of how she treats us.
> 
> Several KP members discovered and showed me her profile on an on-line dating site. She cannot lie on that site since she'd have no suitors who could respond to her. On second thought


I lived in Boston so I know all about Lawrence. Say no more. Got it...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> You are not real good with dates, are you? That poor husband of yours... I bet he likes that site too.
> Highly populated?
> Only to someone from Middleton, the poor relation to those folks from Topsfield. Or is it Boxford that bothers you more?
> My cousin used to live in Boxford, he mentioned seeing those poor little Middleton kids, faces pressed up against the school bus windows... dreaming of being able to ride in his Astin Healey.


They were correct! Someone informed me you wrote this post - and here it is. Let me correct your incorrect assessments in your complete obsession and interest in me:

1) My husband grew up poor but is no more. Unlike you, he never registered or had a profile on a dating website.
2) Lawrence is a highly populated city as you know since you reside there or at least stated you do.
3) Many years ago my husband and I did buy a house in the affluent town of Boxford. We never moved in since we decided that town was too sleepy and stuffy for our lifestyle. Those we know who also owned homes in Boxford and lived in them, also moved out within a year of purchasing their homes.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Isn't it fun Luke & KPG to slam where someone else lives as a corrupt city when you don't have the guts to say where you live. You nasty people!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> Isn't it fun Luke & KPG to slam where someone else lives as a corrupt city when you don't have the guts to say where you live. You nasty people!


What the heck is your problem? I JUST stated in the post prior a town where I had a home - that is a fact. The reputation of the city where Jelun lives is public and also factual. I speak the truth and it doesn't take guts, it takes moral character. When I used to read Jelun's posts she slammed me constantly and tried to belittle everything about me including where she thinks I live.

In so doing she only made herself to look the fool she is since I did own a house in the place where she bragged about as being an affluent place to live and where her 'cousin' did live while looking down his nose upon others. His and her attitudes are some of the reasons my family chose to not move in. Joke is on her, wouldn't you say? :-D


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for bringing this up, because my curious self decided to do some checking. I went to the person who should know, the Vice President of the confederate, Alexander Stephens. I have capitalized the parts of this that apply to the "why" of the secession.
> 
> http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1861stephens.asp
> 
> ...


Wow! What the Confederacy stands for--straight from the horse's [Stephen's] mouth--or rump, it seems to me. Thanks for posting this, LK.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> I lived in Boston so I know all about Lawrence. Say no more. Got it...


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Don't talk to me.


I guess the truth hurts. If you don't want me to talk to you then don't post publically where anyone can talk to you.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I guess the truth hurts. If you don't wnat me to talk to you then don't post nonsense publically where anyone can talk to you.


I am all about the truth. If that is what you want to talk then I will listen . When you start bashing the Bible I am closed minded to you.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Are you guys still at it?

Don't you realize that it will soon be Thanksgiving? At least here in the States. You know, the day we take time to be thankful for what we have? 

And what about Christmas? What ever happened to "Peace on earth, Good will toward men? 

Haven't you said all there really is to say on this subject? Anything more is just stubborn argumentation.

How about we let bygones be bygones. Anyone willing to lay this topic to rest?

:thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

karverr said:


> well aren't you all doing that exact thing. because
> I live in the south and proud of my heritage you call me racist.there were many men from the north who fought on the south sides, being from the north yall must be racist too.


If you are proud of the Confederacy and the filthy rag that was its flag you're a real piece of garbage, along with anyone who was part of the Confederacy.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> What the heck is your problem? I JUST stated in the post prior a town where I had a home - that is a fact. The reputation of the city where Jelun lives is public and also factual. I speak the truth and it doesn't take guts, it takes moral character. When I used to read Jelun's posts she slammed me constantly and tried to belittle everything about me including where she thinks I live.
> 
> In so doing she only made herself to look the fool she is since I did own a house in the place where she bragged about as being an affluent place to live and where her 'cousin' did live while looking down his nose upon others. His and her attitudes are some of the reasons my family chose to not move in. Joke is on her, wouldn't you say? :-D


So typical of a person like you. Slam another city as corrupt, but then say you had a home in a more affluent city. Well la-te-da. I knew a lady where I use to live who always did the same thing. No one ever measured up to her. Her nick name was "beaker" because of the long nose she had from always looking down her nose at other people. I don't often call anyone names, but this name is just made for you. I will now call you "beaker."


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I am all about the truth. If that is what you want to talk then I will listen . When you start bashing the Bible I am closed minded to you.


I suggested you spend a little time reading the Book you profess to love. Isn't true that you love the Bible, read and believe it, as any CHristian must?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> So typical of a person like you. Slam another city as corrupt, but then say you had a home in a more affluent city. Well la-te-da. I knew a lady where I use to live who always did the same thing. No one ever measured up to her. Her nick name was "beaker" because of the long nose she had from always looking down her nose at other people. I don't often call anyone names, but this name is just made for you. I will now call you "beaker."


You know that your bitterness is of your own choosing, correct? Jelun was the person, not I, to brag about a place in her stupid attempt to belittle me once again. I simply corrected her inaccurate statements about me and that same town. I was the person who volunteered that my family decided not to live in a place where people were so stuffy which is exactly how Jelun described her cousin and how you are defaming me now as you regularly do.

I don't care what you call me; any name you call me is your lack of judgment and your problem.

You call anyone who is not a Liberal or Democrat names on this website. You call Republicans stupid and racists. You call all wealthy people greedy, uncharitable and ignorant. You say the Koch brothers, employers and business owners are of the devil.

Life is not fair. Instead of insulting and badgering everyone with whom you do not agree, accept the good things in your life and be grateful for your gifts and blessings in your life and lose your envy. No one is responsible for your happiness but you.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You know that your bitterness is of your own choosing, correct? Jelun was the person, not I, to brag about a place in her stupid attempt to belittle me once again. I simply corrected her inaccurate statements about me and that same town. I was the person who volunteered that my family decided not to live in a place where people were so stuffy which is exactly how Jelun described her cousin and how you are defaming me now as you regularly do.
> 
> I don't care what you call me; any name you call me is your lack of judgment and your problem.
> 
> ...


NJG, she is full of doo. Pay her no attention.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Obviously none of you bothered to read what I wrote earlier. 
As far as I'm concerned, you all deserve each other. 
May you truly drive each other crazy......
You deserve each other.........
Shame on all of you......


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Are you guys still at it?
> 
> Don't you realize that it will soon be Thanksgiving? At least here in the States. You know, the day we take time to be thankful for what we have?
> 
> ...


This is my opinion and not something I expect everybody to agree with. But I actually like discussing our differences and more importantly find common threads. It provides a motivation to learn things you might not learn otherwise. A prime example would be the cornerston speech I posted earlier. I had not remembered reading that before. I have had discussions on other forums regarding hitler. It motivated me to actually read some of his speeches and not just go by what I had heard or got from other interpretations. I may be alone in this but I love learning.

I love to respectfully debate as well. I know some people on here have called each other names and been nasty, but if you look you will find that I was not nasty. I was polite. That would be because I was taught how to debate respectfully. I was a member of Toastmasters international for a while, and learned from my grandfather how to discuss heated topics without letting emotions take over.

I also like to listen to other people's points of view because it may actually show me a way I can improve my beliefs. I listen with an open mind. I do not stop listening because someones philosophy is different. Growing is about changing. I was once a Christian Republican but through personal experiences I have now chosen another path for my religion and my political beliefs.

As for it being Thanksgiving, yes it is supposed to be a day of thanks, but in my (and again I am not telling people how to believe ths is my opinion) opinion it is pathetic that we have one day of the year for appreciating what we have. I am teaching my kids and trying to live a thankful life all year round. Thanksgiving also has a dark side that has changed my view of it also. I am a nurse and worked in the Emergency department. On thanksgiving it was a horrible day and night to work. Firstly because the ED was overwhelmed with people who decided to be gluttons and stuff themselves and then go to the ER with chest pain (that was not a heart attack but upset stomach/heartburn). It was also the day that people flooded in because on this day of the year they had to have a family dinner with the family they so loved, only to remember that the reason they hadn't seem the family all year was because they couldn't stand each other! People woud come in because their family member smashed a can of yams up the side of their head, or they had been stabbed, ect. So I think that gave me a little bit of a cynical view of thanksgiving seeing the "dark side" of it.

I see Christmas as a giving holiday. The time of year that you give people things they don't necessarily deserve. A prime example would be that when Jesus was born (although it was not on Christmas) God gave the world a gift they didn't deserve: the "savior". If I recall the "peace on earth, good will toward man" was taken from a song not any religious books, but I could be wrong. If I am please correct me and show me because that would be an interesting bit of knowledge.

Should this topic bother you, may I respectfully suggest you unwatch it and not open it? I'm not telling you what to do, just offering a suggestion in good will. That may help you as it appears as though the debate is concerning to you.

Edited to add: I did not see your post until now when I responded. I was off knitting Christmas/Yule presents


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Oh what does Obama have on his schedule today......I think he is going to give a speech for an hour in NYC. 

But wait, isn't he the great admirer of President Lincoln? Didn't he use his bible twice to be sworn in as president? He brought up his name in speeches over and over again.

So why does he not have enough respect for President Lincoln to be at Gettysburg to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of The Gettysburg Address? Guess his pontificating of his respect for Lincoln is like everything else he says A LIE


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for posting....I think. I still find it shocking that someone in this day and age would defend the Confederacy.



susanmos2000 said:


> Wow! What the Confederacy stands for--straight from the horse's [Stephen's] mouth--or rump, it seems to me. Thanks for posting this, LK.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sounds reasonable to me. It seems as though one is begging for replies when you post.



MaidInBedlam said:


> I guess the truth hurts. If you don't want me to talk to you then don't post publically where anyone can talk to you.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Obviously none of you bothered to read what I wrote earlier.
> As far as I'm concerned, you all deserve each other.
> May you truly drive each other crazy......
> You deserve each other.........
> Shame on all of you......


Yes indeed, janeway isn't around for you to harass any longer so you are back on your high horse?
get bent.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Beaker beast?



NJG said:


> So typical of a person like you. Slam another city as corrupt, but then say you had a home in a more affluent city. Well la-te-da. I knew a lady where I use to live who always did the same thing. No one ever measured up to her. Her nick name was "beaker" because of the long nose she had from always looking down her nose at other people. I don't often call anyone names, but this name is just made for you. I will now call you "beaker."


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I find the key is to discuss intelligently with those who are able. Ignore or zing the rest, as you choose.



Lkholcomb said:


> This is my opinion and not something I expect everybody to agree with. But I actually like discussing our differences and more importantly find common threads. It provides a motivation to learn things you might not learn otherwise. A prime example would be the cornerston speech I posted earlier. I had not remembered reading that before. I have had discussions on other forums regarding hitler. It motivated me to actually read some of his speeches and not just go by what I had heard or got from other interpretations. I may be alone in this but I love learning.
> 
> I love to respectfully debate as well. I know some people on here have called each other names and been nasty, but if you look you will find that I was not nasty. I was polite. That would be because I was taught how to debate respectfully. I was a member of Toastmasters international for a while, and learned from my grandfather how to discuss heated topics without letting emotions take over.
> 
> ...


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> This is my opinion and not something I expect everybody to agree with. But I actually like discussing our differences and more importantly find common threads. It provides a motivation to learn things you might not learn otherwise. A prime example would be the cornerston speech I posted earlier. I had not remembered reading that before. I have had discussions on other forums regarding hitler. It motivated me to actually read some of his speeches and not just go by what I had heard or got from other interpretations. I may be alone in this but I love learning.
> 
> I love to respectfully debate as well. I know some people on here have called each other names and been nasty, but if you look you will find that I was not nasty. I was polite. That would be because I was taught how to debate respectfully. I was a member of Toastmasters international for a while, and learned from my grandfather how to discuss heated topics without letting emotions take over.
> 
> ...


Luke 2:14 ►
Parallel Verses
New International Version
"Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests."

New Living Translation
"Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased."

English Standard Version
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!

New American Standard Bible
"Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased."

King James Bible
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

damemary said:


> Thanks for posting....I think. I still find it shocking that someone in this day and age would defend the Confederacy.


We think it is shocking that you defend a lying president.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

I WOULD be thankful for an "ignore" button.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> We think it is shocking that you defend a lying president.


CB, YES! It is shocking. He is an incompetent liar and he is defended. No wonder there are people who want to be given things from the government. They don't have the brains to go out there and do for themselves. It is stupidity to support the disaster of a man.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I WOULD be thankful for an "ignore" button.


The button is up there it is called unwatch.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> The button is up there it is called unwatch.


Up yours.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

I am thankful that the sun is out.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> As you so nicely pointed out in previous posts, the north was slanted against the south. They even went so far as to entice slaves or ex slaves to tell false stories of their slavery. Using the logic you previously stated the northern sources should not carry as much weight as the southern because the northeners where not living there. I agreed that a southern source should be found, so I found one: the vice president of the confederate states.


thank you, you did very well, the sources I quoted were modern day professors, but still ,thank you for your opinion


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> NJG, she is full of doo. Pay her no attention.


I'm so glad you had such good input about this topic, thank you


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> The button is up there it is called unwatch.


Now,now CB what in the world would these topics be without her marvelous intelligent input.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Up yours.


She was only giving you a little bit of knowledge and her insight may have enlightened many to the fact, but thank you for your opinion


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

karverr said:


> Now,now CB what in the world would these topics be without her marvelous intelligent input.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:           :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:       :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I am thankful that the sun is out.


God has made the sun to rise daily so rejoice even if it's raining.
thank you so much for that wonderful insight of being thankful.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Obviously none of you bothered to read what I wrote earlier.
> As far as I'm concerned, you all deserve each other.
> May you truly drive each other crazy......
> You deserve each other.........
> Shame on all of you......


thank you so much for sharing with us


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

karverr said:
 

> God has made the sun to rise daily so rejoice even if it's raining.
> thank you so much for that wonderful insight of being thankful.


That is so the truth. The sun shines on the unjust just like everyone else. Glory to God!Matthew 5:45

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> This is my opinion and not something I expect everybody to agree with. But I actually like discussing our differences and more importantly find common threads. It provides a motivation to learn things you might not learn otherwise. A prime example would be the cornerston speech I posted earlier. I had not remembered reading that before. I have had discussions on other forums regarding hitler. It motivated me to actually read some of his speeches and not just go by what I had heard or got from other interpretations. I may be alone in this but I love learning.
> 
> I love to respectfully debate as well. I know some people on here have called each other names and been nasty, but if you look you will find that I was not nasty. I was polite. That would be because I was taught how to debate respectfully. I was a member of Toastmasters international for a while, and learned from my grandfather how to discuss heated topics without letting emotions take over.
> 
> ...


your views are well taken, Christmas was the promise that God would send the Messiah, which he did. Easter was the answer to the promise as Jesus gave his life and arose to pay for our sins.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> The button is up there it is called unwatch.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> Now,now CB what in the world would these topics be without her marvelous intelligent input.


Unbelievable. How low can a person go?? I guess she went pretty darn low. Bottom of the barrel.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> Thanks for posting....I think. I still find it shocking that someone in this day and age would defend the Confederacy.


your responses to posts are so elegant and insightful, thank you so much


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> We think it is shocking that you defend a lying president.


Did you not support George W Bush? He was a lying president.
In fact his lies killed thousands of our troops and innocent Iraqi citizens.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> That is so the truth. The sun shines on the unjust just like everyone else. Glory to God!Matthew 5:45
> 
> 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust


so rightly said , praise the one who makes all things our Wonderful Heavenly Father God the most highest


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Oh what does Obama have on his schedule today......I think he is going to give a speech for an hour in NYC.
> 
> But wait, isn't he the great admirer of President Lincoln? Didn't he use his bible twice to be sworn in as president? He brought up his name in speeches over and over again.
> 
> So why does he not have enough respect for President Lincoln to be at Gettysburg to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of The Gettysburg Address? Guess his pontificating of his respect for Lincoln is like everything else he says A LIE


There are more important things to deal with than the commemoration of the Gettysberg Address. It's a long day and a short flight to New York. Maybe he will show up for ceremonial purposes.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

now Joeysomma,lets not be that way, I was just fixing to send her a post thanking her for getting us into praising God this morning, as she was thankful for the sun which God had made


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> There are more important things to deal with than the commeration of the Gettysberg Address. It's a long day and a short flight to New York. Maybe he will show up for ceremonial purposes.


You are so right and I for one am thankful that you can realize just how busy he is, he doesn't have time for such trival things ,like showing military honor to fallen men in uniform,but he is busy. but made the effort not to wear a flag pin as he didn't want to offend anyone that takes special character in my eyes, thank you so much that you can appreciate how busy our wonderful president is in his job between vacations.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> Sounds reasonable to me. It seems as though one is begging for replies when you post.


I don't think I'm actualy begging for replies to my posts. My old arthritic knees don't like it when I kneel on them. I think of myself to be setting the cat among the pigeons.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Did you not support George W Bush? He was a lying president.
> In fact his lies killed thousands of our troops and innocent Iraqi citizens.


you are so right he lied just like every president ,they learn how in president101 before they take office. you are so wise to have brought this to our attention.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I don't think I'm actualy begging for replies to my posts. My old arthritic knees don't like it when I kneel on them. I think of myself to be setting the cat among the pigeons.


There is no need to beg for replies as your comments stand for their selves and everyone appreciates them they feel moved to reply. thank you so much for them they go a long way


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> You are so right and I for one am thankful that you can realize just how busy he is, he doesn't have time for such trival things ,like showing military honor to fallen men in uniform,but he is busy but made the effort not to wear a flag pin as he didn't want to offend anyone that takes special character in my eyes, thank you so much that you can appreciate how busy our wonderful president is in his job between vacations.


I just heard on the news that the Obama Administration "fudged" data on unemployment statistics around the time of the election. More lying.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

karverr said:


> I do believe that the dueling banjos were from the northern Appalachian mountains, not in the south.


The Appalachians stretch from northern Mississippi to southeastern New York. "Deliverance" was set in northern Georgia, in the most southern part of the Appalachians. Aren't maps wonderful?


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I guess the truth hurts. If you don't want me to talk to you then don't post publically where anyone can talk to you.


you go girl! that answer should be seen by all the so called libs. thank you so much for sharing that wonderful insight.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The Appalachians stretch from nortwestern Mississippi to southeastern New York. "Deliverance" was set in nothern Georgia, in the most southern part of the Appalachians. Aren't maps wonderful?


you are so smart, you worked on an answer all night, boy I appreciate your effort. thank you so much for your work


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> I just heard on the news that the Obama Administration "fudged" data on unemployment statistics around the time of the election. More lying.


Lukelucy, fudged can be construed as meaning to lie. the president is elected so we all have to now have him in office.he is just like a marriage- for better or worst. we have had better now we have the worst. but thank you for the information.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> Oh what does Obama have on his schedule today......I think he is going to give a speech for an hour in NYC.
> 
> But wait, isn't he the great admirer of President Lincoln? Didn't he use his bible twice to be sworn in as president? He brought up his name in speeches over and over again.
> 
> So why does he not have enough respect for President Lincoln to be at Gettysburg to commemorate the 150th Anniversary of The Gettysburg Address? Guess his pontificating of his respect for Lincoln is like everything else he says A LIE


I heard about this last night on The Kelley File. Obama only uses Lincoln when it suits his purpose. Obama is not interested in honoring those fallen for our country; he is only interested in his own reign and power. Nothing to be gained by honoring our fallen heroes, so Obama will probably go golfing or shoot some hoops instead.

After all, Lincoln was a Republican, and it is only a short flight so why should Obama bother when he can send someone else who truly cares about Americans who served our country? Obama doesn't know anything about that so he'd have nothing to say, I mean, read.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

karverr said:


> Lukelucy, fudged can be construed as meaning to lie. the president is elected so we all have to now have him in office.he is just like a marriage- for better or worst. we have had better now we have the worst. but thank you for the information.


So true! I today learned that it benefits Americans to not be married, and to either not get married or get divorced, to best benefit under the rules of the ACA.

So, in a horrible economy, Obama's economy, where Dems supposedly like to say they support the family unit, and marriage, the ACA was intentionally written to encourage the single lifestyle.

A married couple is punished by the subsidies of the ACA in regard to their income, so the ACA encourages divorce or not getting married, to help any couple with trying to afford health insurance coverage through the ACA.

Isn't that special?


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I don't think I'm actualy begging for replies to my posts. My old arthritic knees don't like it when I kneel on them. I think of myself to be setting the cat among the pigeons.


God doesn't mind if you can't get on your knee's to thank him. He is a fair and just God.

At least pigeons know how to fly when they see danger coming.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

theyarnlady said:


> God doesn't mind if you can't get on your knee's to thank him. He is a fair and just God.
> 
> At least pigeons know how to fly when they see danger coming.


 :thumbup:


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> So true! I today learned that it benefits Americans to not be married, and to either not get married or get divorced, to best benefit under the rules of the ACA.
> 
> So, in a horrible economy, Obama's economy, where Dems supposedly like to say they support the family unit, and marriage, the ACA was intentionally written to encourage the single lifestyle.
> 
> ...


Oh isn't that special. Just one problem with divorcing here. Just got him broken in. Not ready to start training a new one. :XD: :XD:

Oh please to you who are going to go off on this it's a joke. I don't care what President thinks. He is the love of my life hubby I mean.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> I just heard on the news that the Obama Administration "fudged" data on unemployment statistics around the time of the election. More lying.


His team is also lying about (fudging) the numbers of Obamacare. This Administration touts how many have shopped for insurance by putting policies into a shopping cart instead of stating the facts of how many policies have actually been paid for. The Dems excuse is that no one can yet 'pay' for a plan, so the number of windows shoppers is the # to call registered customers. Stupid, deceitful and pathetic.

The true number of paying customers is so small, it speaks to the complete failure and disaster called ObamaCare. It has already failed before it ever began. Thank God!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

theyarnlady said:


> Oh isn't that special. Just one problem with divorcing here. Just got him broken in. Not ready to start training a new one. :XD: :XD:
> 
> Oh please to you who are going to go off on this it's a joke. I don't care what President thinks. He is the love of my life hubby I mean.


You go girl! I'm keepin' mine too, even though it means more money out of pocket. He's worth it! He can divorce me, but I won't divorce him, so never gonna' happen.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Here's the info about the Obama Wedding Tax:

The Obama Wedding Tax
By: Chairman Reince Priebus November 18th, 2013

Earlier this month _The Atlantic_ told the story of a New York couple, Nona and Aaron, considering divorce. What was the couples reason for ending their marriage?

ObamaCare.

Among the countless flaws and absurdities in the presidents signature law is this: it contains a wedding tax. Because of the way ObamaCare subsidizes health insurance, many couples can save money on insurance by not getting marriedor by getting divorced.

Using the New York example _The Atlantic_ notes, Any married couple that earns more than 400 percent of the federal poverty levelthat is $62,040for a family of two earns too much for subsidies under Obamacare. However, if that same couple lived together unmarried, they could earn up to $45,960 each$91,920 totaland still be eligible for subsidies through the exchanges in New York state.

By not getting married, a couple in New York could earn an extra $29,880 and still receive subsidies if they choose not to be married. But saying I do, means losing money.

By now most people know ObamaCare is kicking people off of their insurance plans and raising premiums for others. Its resulting in smaller paychecks for workers and fewer job prospects for the unemployed. Now we also know its discouraging marriage.

In this tough economy people are looking everywhere for places to cut and save. Putting off or ending a marriage should not be an attractive option.

This wedding tax wasnt an accident. Anyone who took the time to do a quick calculation couldve seen the problem, yet they pushed the law through anyway.

Marriage and the commitment it represents are building blocks of a thriving society. The federal government should not be making marriage expensiveor making divorce lucrative.

ObamaCare was sold on the premise that it would make life more stable and predictable for average Americans. But does putting off marriage or opting for divorce for economic reasons make life better? Couples shouldnt have to choose between marriage and saving money on health insurance.

I dont know what all this says about the motivations of the people who crafted ObamaCare in the first place. But I do know it speaks volumes about how terrible the law is, how ridiculous many of its provisions are, and how dangerous and disruptive massive legislation can be.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You go girl! I'm keepin' mine too, even though it means more money out of pocket. He's worth it! He can divorce me, but I won't divorce him, so never gonna' happen.


Can't see him divorcing you either. He knows who loves him.

Can't that is true about some on here.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The Appalachians stretch from northern Mississippi to southeastern New York. "Deliverance" was set in northern Georgia, in the most southern part of the Appalachians. Aren't maps wonderful?


I love how the guy who didn't know that answer or lied about the true location then jeers at you when you provide it. 
That stroke of his (or perhaps the meds) have helped to create one nasty personality.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> Lukelucy, fudged can be construed as meaning to lie. the president is elected so we all have to now have him in office.he is just like a marriage- for better or worst. we have had better now we have the worst. but thank you for the information.


I believe the message was he/they/whoever lied. Apparently one way they did it was when someone did not answer the door, they added information to the Obama Admin's benefit instead of saying they weren't home.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I heard about this last night on The Kelley File. Obama only uses Lincoln when it suits his purpose. Obama is not interested in honoring those fallen for our country; he is only interested in his own reign and power. Nothing to be gained by honoring our fallen heroes, so Obama will probably go golfing or shoot some hoops instead.
> 
> After all, Lincoln was a Republican, and it is only a short flight so why should Obama bother when he can send someone else who truly cares about Americans who served our country? Obama doesn't know anything about that so he'd have nothing to say, I mean, read.


Whatever BO does, he does for his image. That is what he is working on right now. He sure needs to work on it.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> So true! I today learned that it benefits Americans to not be married, and to either not get married or get divorced, to best benefit under the rules of the ACA.
> 
> So, in a horrible economy, Obama's economy, where Dems supposedly like to say they support the family unit, and marriage, the ACA was intentionally written to encourage the single lifestyle.
> 
> ...


I don't know how much more disgusted I can get. It just keeps coming. Impeachment!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> His team is also lying about (fudging) the numbers of Obamacare. This Administration touts how many have shopped for insurance by putting policies into a shopping cart instead of stating the facts of how many policies have actually been paid for. The Dems excuse is that no one can yet 'pay' for a plan, so the number of windows shoppers is the # to call registered customers. Stupid, deceitful and pathetic.
> 
> The true number of paying customers is so small, it speaks to the complete failure and disaster called ObamaCare. It has already failed before it ever began. Thank God!


Thank God it is failing.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Here's the info about the Obama Wedding Tax:
> 
> The Obama Wedding Tax
> By: Chairman Reince Priebus November 18th, 2013
> ...


Terrible, terrible, terrible. When is it going to end?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I'm impressed, Janeway. Disagree peacefully? Your stock in trade has been exactly the opposite. People call you names and respond negatively to you because you invite them to with almost every word you post here.
> 
> You don't enjoy fighting? Good one. That leaves me ROFLMAO as does your pretence of being a Native American. Quite a few people who participate in this and the other political topics are well aware that you developed your NA identity over a period of time.
> 
> You just *might* be a moron but I don't see any point in trying to figure out if you actually are one. Thanks for the good laugh, I needed one this morning.


You are one of the most hateful people on this earth!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You are one of the most hateful people on this earth!


Janeway, 
Do not listen. You KNOW where the problem lies, and it is not with you.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

karverr said:


> you are so smart, you worked on an answer all night, boy I appreciate your effort. thank you so much for your work


Seattle, MIB is one in the same & smart--NOT she is as dumb as one gets! Don't reply to her--I'll take care of this idiot!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Seattle, MIB is one in the same & smart--NOT she is as dumb as one gets! Don't reply to her--I'll take care of this idiot!


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Janeway,
> Do not listen. You KNOW where the problem lies, and it is not with you.


You are correct. SIL had a keyboard for this IPAD but it runs the power down quickly so must close for now. Hugs, Lucy


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Here's the info about the Obama Wedding Tax:
> 
> The Obama Wedding Tax
> By: Chairman Reince Priebus November 18th, 2013
> ...


social security has been like this for a long time. if a man and woman both work, they both get ss, but if they are married he gets all his and she gets a large reduced spouse payment. a lot of elderly don't get married for that reason.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Seattle, MIB is one in the same & smart--NOT she is as dumb as one gets! Don't reply to her--I'll take care of this idiot!


even so, I just can't help myself, she worked so hard to find what ,she did I 'm just so thankful for her input and all the other lib ladies they have so much knowledge to share with us.you all should get down on your knees and thank these ladies , they keep us on the true path to enlightenment.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

karverr said:


> even so, I just can't help myself, she worked so hard to find what ,she did I 'm just so thankful for her input and all the other lib ladies they have so much knowledge to share with us.you all should get down on your knees and thank these ladies , they keep us on the true path to enlightenment.


You are so "right" Karverr we must heap praise on their every word. We can learn so much that is "right" from their every word.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You know that your bitterness is of your own choosing, correct? Jelun was the person, not I, to brag about a place in her stupid attempt to belittle me once again. I simply corrected her inaccurate statements about me and that same town. I was the person who volunteered that my family decided not to live in a place where people were so stuffy which is exactly how Jelun described her cousin and how you are defaming me now as you regularly do.
> 
> I don't care what you call me; any name you call me is your lack of judgment and your problem.
> 
> ...


You need to follow your own advice. Show me where I said anyone was of the devil. You need to stop telling lies. I am not bitter and I will guarantee you I live a much more happy and fulfilled life than you do. You are the one who is constantly name calling and trying to act superior to others, that looking down your nose at others and thinking you are superior. Sorry to inform you, but you are not.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> I love how the guy who didn't know that answer or lied about the true location then jeers at you when you provide it.
> That stroke of his (or perhaps the meds) have helped to create one nasty personality.


Poor guy, I guess he has to have some fun in his life and if giving me a facetious compliment cheers him up, I don't mind. I especially liked him saying I stayed up all night to find out exactly where the Appalachians are. After spending the day in ER with my mother (everything turned out to be OK, thank goodness.) we were both pooped and slept exceedingly well.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Poor guy, I guess he has to have some fun in his life and if giving me a facetious compliment cheers him up, I don't mind. I especially liked him saying I stayed up all night to find out exactly where the Appalachians are. After spending the day in ER with my mother (everything turned out to be OK, thank goodness.) we were both pooped and slept exceedingly well.


He was most likely projecting, we know for sure that fact finding is not his greatest strength.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Jessica Sanford, one of @BarackObamas #obamacare success stories, will have no insurance.
> 
> By: Moe Lane (Diary) | November 18th, 2013 at 09:00 PM
> 
> ...


Get over yourself Joey. For every story you dig up like this there are 20 stories that are the opposite. This too shall get worked out.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> We think it is shocking that you defend a lying president.


Hey, people defended Bush, now that was a lying president. Every time President Obama says something you don't like, you say he is telling a lie. Get over it. He was elected and re-elected and he has 3 years left.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Glory to God in the highest,
> And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!
> Luke 2:14 NKJV


Thank you, that verse must have slipped my mind.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:No wonder there are people who want to be given things from the government. They don't have the brains to go out there and do for themselves.


What a nasty comment to make about people you don't even know. What is wrong with you?


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Up yours.


Manners?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> You need to follow your own advice. Show me where I said anyone was of the devil. You need to stop telling lies. I am not bitter and I will guarantee you I live a much more happy and fulfilled life than you do. You are the one who is constantly name calling and trying to act superior to others, that looking down your nose at others and thinking you are superior. Sorry to inform you, but you are not.


Show me where I lied (in a PM so as not to continually disrupt this topic). However, I know you won't be able to because I do not lie.

Your constant demeaning of others and me is far from appropriate for any thread. Discuss the topic at hand and stop making personal insults to others. Choose Joy, I do.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Manners?


She has none Jokim.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You are correct. SIL had a keyboard for this IPAD but it runs the power down quickly so must close for now. Hugs, Lucy


Hugs back to you!


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I just heard on the news that the Obama Administration "fudged" data on unemployment statistics around the time of the election. More lying.


LL, their playbook has not changed since Marx, et al, wrote it. The end justifies the means. Lying will get you to the desired end, but sometimes it backfires. Truth will always come out!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> even so, I just can't help myself, she worked so hard to find what ,she did I 'm just so thankful for her input and all the other lib ladies they have so much knowledge to share with us.you all should get down on your knees and thank these ladies , they keep us on the true path to enlightenment.


Are you serious here, Karverr?


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

NJG said:


> Lukelucy said:No wonder there are people who want to be given things from the government. They don't have the brains to go out there and do for themselves.
> 
> What a nasty comment to make about people you don't even know. What is wrong with you?


Can you give me another reason? Who would want to take from the government if it wasn't so. I guess lazy would be another reason.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

From the Wall Street Journal

Please Read!! Very Important!

Marco Rubio: No Bailouts for ObamaCare

The health-care law's 'risk corridors' could result in a huge taxpayer burden.

By 
Marco Rubio 

Nov. 18, 2013 7:20 p.m. ET

With every passing day, ObamaCare's flaws are being exposed in painful ways for the American people. What started as a broken websiteand nonexistent Spanish oneis now snowballing into a full-scale disaster that makes it increasingly clear this law can't be fixed.

Under ObamaCare, people are being recklessly exposed to identity theft and fraud through the dysfunctional website and navigator network.

Under ObamaCare, President Obama's broken promisethat people could keep the health plans and doctors they were happy withhas made casualties of those plans and providers. Now people have to scramble to find new plans and doctors that often cost more than before. If they don't find them, a tax fine enforced by the Internal Revenue Service will ensue.

Under ObamaCare, abysmal enrollment numbers so far are a warning sign that this law will cost the American people moreand in more waysthan they ever imagined.

Trying to help people sign up for ObamaCare at a Hialeah, Fla., shopping mall, Nov. 14. Joe Raedle/Getty Images 

One of these ways was exposed last week after President Obama announced his unilateral action to "fix" his broken promise that Americans could keep their existing plans: a bailout of health-insurance companies.

Buried deep in the Department of Health and Human Services' press release that accompanied the president's Nov. 14 speech was this sentence: "Though this transitional policy was not anticipated by health insurance issuers when setting rates for 2014, the risk corridor program should help ameliorate unanticipated changes in premium revenue. We intend to explore ways to modify the risk corridor program final rules to provide additional assistance."

Risk corridors are generally used to mitigate an insurer's pricing risk. Under ObamaCare, risk corridors were established for the law's first three years as a safety-net for insurers who experience financial losses. While risk corridors can protect taxpayers when they are budget-neutral, ObamaCare's risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president's action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails.

Subsequent regulatory rulings have made clear that the administration views this risk-corridor authority as a blank check, requiring no further consultation or approval by Congress. A final rule handed down in March by HHS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services states: "Regardless of the balance of payments and receipts, HHS will remit payments as required under section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act."

On Nov. 14, the American Academy of Actuaries issued a press release saying that President Obama's plan to reverse health-insurance cancellations "could lead to negative consequences for consumers, health insurers, and the federal government." More specifically, the academy said, "Costs to the federal government could increase as higher-than-expected average medical claims are more likely to trigger risk corridor payments."

It is a damning indictment of ObamaCare's viability when the president's only response to people losing their health insurance plans entails putting them on the hook for bailing out insurance companies. The American people are already being directly hurt by ObamaCare's early failures, and it is unconscionable that they be expected to bail out companies when more failures emerge. 

As the people's representatives, the U.S. Congress should completely eliminate the possibility of a bailout of insurance companies. On Tuesday I am introducing legislation that would eliminate the risk corridor provision, ensuring that no taxpayer-funded bailout of the health insurance industry will ever occur under ObamaCare. If this disaster of a law cannot survive without a bailout rescue valve, it is yet another reason why it should be repealed.

When ObamaCare was debated and passed in 2009 and 2010, none of its proponents, including the president, told the American people that the law granted the federal government the authority to bail out insurance companies at the expense of taxpayers. But now their dirty little secret is out, and it should be wiped out from the law.

Americans are sick and tired of Washington politicians picking winners and losersand nowhere is this practice more grotesquely evident than taxpayer-funded bailouts, which assault the economic values of our free enterprise system in favor of those who are politically connected and whose lobbyists know the right people to call and levers to pull. ObamaCare is a living monument to this culture, and no one loses more than the average American.

My Republican colleagues and I have endeavored to find ways to protect Americans from ObamaCareas patients, taxpayers, consumers and workers. But it is becoming increasingly clear that these efforts can only mitigate some of ObamaCare's damage, not avoid it entirely.

As policy makers, we must focus on making health care more affordable and accessible for all Americans. Repealing ObamaCare will be a necessary step if we are to replace it with reforms that will actually accomplish these goals. Meanwhile, we owe it to the American people to protect them from another taxpayer-funded bailout. 

Mr. Rubio, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Florida.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Jokim said:


> LL, their playbook has not changed since Marx, et al, wrote it. The end justifies the means. Lying will get you to the desired end, but sometimes it backfires. Truth will always come out!


I hope so!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Here's the info about the Obama Wedding Tax:
> 
> The Obama Wedding Tax
> By: Chairman Reince Priebus November 18th, 2013
> ...


Wrong again beaker. You need to do a little research before you post.

Heres whats going on:

1. As part of the marketplace, where insurance companies competein a marketfor new customers (those of us without employer coverage, Medicare, or Medicaid), our nation is providing subsidies to those making less than 400% of the federal poverty line, so we can put in some of our money, taking responsibility for ourselves without breaking the bank.

2. Because our nation still holds to the traditional view that couples only start living together once theyre married, it assumes that once two people are married, they save money by sharing housing and other durable goods. (What economists call economies of scale, just on a household level.) This economic situation is one reason church leaders teach against having children out of wedlock or getting divorced unless there are very serious reasons: its much more expensive, on a per-person basis, to live as a single person than as a married couple.

3. In an effort to save taxpayer money, the designers of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) decided to take into account this reality of traditional marriage, and provide slightly higher subsidies to individuals than they would receive if they married one another and (presumably) started living together.

4. The Heritage Foundation, designers of the framework for the ACA, but now more of a partisan group rather than a (very conservative) policy shop, picks this effort to cut government spending and labels it a federal wedding tax. (This is back in January of 2010.) This is the primary article thats circulating among my friends on Facebook. This gets picked up Representative Darrell Issa (R-California) almost two years later, though Rep. Issa, one of the senior Republicans in the house, is yet to champion a bill that would actually spend more taxpayer funds to increase the subsidies for married couples. (Theres more on this from ThinkProgress here.)

5. Which brings us to today. With the roll-out of the marketplaces just days away, old bogeymen about the ACA are making the rounds again. Its absolutely fine to debate the proper level of subsidies for single and married adults, but whatever ones position: its a gross stretch of things to call this a federal wedding tax or Obamacare wedding tax. Its not a tax. Its just our nation trying to pinch pennies by assuming that married couples live together and benefit from this union.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Glory to God in the highest,
> And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!
> Luke 2:14 NKJV


I looked further wondering how I could have forgotten. Apparently there are differing translations of this verse, some stating above, and some stating peace to those who please God, ect. This is quite interesting, but then I also find the differences in Biblical transactions fascinating. Thank you for inspiring me to delve a bit further.

Luke 2:14 (KJ21)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!

Luke 2:14 (ASV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men in whom he is well pleased.

Luke 2:14 (AMP) 
14 Glory to God in the highest [heaven], and on earth peace among men with whom He is well pleased [men of goodwill, of His favor].

Luke 2:14 (CEB)
14 Glory to God in heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors.

Luke 2:14 (CJB) 
14 In the highest heaven, glory to God!nAnd on earth, peace among people of good will!

Luke 2:14 (CEV)
14 Praise God in heaven! Peace on earth to everyone who pleases God.

Luke 2:14 (DARBY)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good pleasure in men.

Luke 2:14 (DRA)
14 Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will.

Luke 2:14 (ERV)
14 Praise God in heaven, and on earth let there be peace to the people who please him.

Luke 2:14 (ESV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (ESVUK)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (EXB)
14 Give glory to God in ·heaven [the highest place/heaven], and on earth let there be peace among the people ·who please God [or he favors; L of his pleasure/approval].

Luke 2:14 (GNV) 
14 Glory be to God in the high heavens, and peace in earth, and toward men good will.

Luke 2:14 (GW) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those who have his good will!

Luke 2:14 (GNT) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (HCSB)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people He favors!

Luke 2:13-14 (PHILLIPS) 
13-14 And in a flash there appeared with the angel a vast host of the armies of Heaven, praising God, saying, Glory to God in the highest Heaven! Peace upon earth among men of goodwill!

Luke 2:14 (JUB) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will in man.

Luke 2:14 (KJV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (AKJV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (LEB) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among people with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (TLB)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, they sang, and peace on earth for all those pleasing him.

Luke 2:13-14 (MSG) 
13-14 At once the angel was joined by a huge angelic choir singing Gods praises:Glory to God in the heavenly heights, Peace to all men and women on earth who please him.

Luke 2:14 (KJ21) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!

Luke 2:14 (ASV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men in whom he is well pleased.

Luke 2:14 (AMP) 
14 Glory to God in the highest [heaven], and on earth peace among men with whom He is well pleased [men of goodwill, of His favor].

Luke 2:14 (CEB) 
14 Glory to God in heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors.

Luke 2:14 (CJB) 
14 In the highest heaven, glory to God! And on earth, peace among people of good will!

Luke 2:14 (CEV)
14 Praise God in heaven! Peace on earth to everyone who pleases God.

Luke 2:14 (DARBY)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good pleasure in men.

Luke 2:14 (DRA) 
14 Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will.

Luke 2:14 (ERV) 
14 Praise God in heaven, and on earth let there be peace to the people who please him.

Luke 2:14 (ESV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (ESVUK)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (EXB) 
14 Give glory to God in ·heaven [the highest place/heaven], and on earth let there be peace among the people ·who please God [or he favors; L of his pleasure/approval].

Luke 2:14 (GNV) 
14 Glory be to God in the high heavens, and peace in earth, and toward men good will.

Luke 2:14 (GW) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those who have his good will!

Luke 2:14 (GNT) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (HCSB)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people He favors!

Luke 2:13-14 (PHILLIPS)
13-14 And in a flash there appeared with the angel a vast host of the armies of Heaven, praising God, saying, Glory to God in the highest Heaven! Peace upon earth among men of goodwill!

Luke 2:14 (JUB)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will in man.

Luke 2:14 (KJV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (AKJV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (LEB) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among people with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (TLB) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, they sang, and peace on earth for all those pleasing him.

Luke 2:13-14 (MSG)
13-14 At once the angel was joined by a huge angelic choir singing Gods praises:Glory to God in the heavenly heights,Peace to all men and women on earth who please him.

Luke 2:14 (NOG)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those who have his good will!

Luke 2:14 (NASB)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased.

Luke 2:14 (NCV)
14 Give glory to God in heaven, and on earth let there be peace among the people who please God.

Luke 2:14 (NET)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among people with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (NIRV)
14 May glory be given to God in the highest heaven! And may peace be given to those he is pleased with on earth!

Luke 2:14 (NIV)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.

Luke 2:14 (NIVUK) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favour rests.

Luke 2:14 (NKJV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!

Luke 2:14 (NLV)
14 Greatness and honor to our God in the highest heaven and peace on earth among men who please Him.

Luke 2:14 (NLT)
14 Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased.

Luke 2:14 (NRSV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVA)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favours!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVACE) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favours!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVCE)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors!

Lukas 2:14 (OJB) 
14 Kavod to Hashem in the Highest; and on haaretz shalom among Bnei Adam kavvanah tovah (of good intention). [YESHAYAH 9:5-6; 52:7; 53:5; MICHOH 5:4-5]

Luke 2:14 (RSV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (RSVCE)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (VOICE)
14 Heavenly Choir: To the highest heights of the universe, glory to God! And on earth, peace among all people who bring pleasure to God!

Luke 2:14 (WEB)
14 Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (WE)
14 They said, `Praise God in the highest heaven! Peace on earth and loving mercy towards all people!'

Luke 2:14 (WYC)
14 Glory be in the highest things to God, and in earth peace be to men of good will. [Glory in the highest things to God, and in earth peace to men of good will.]

Luke 2:14 (YLT)
14 `Glory in the highest to God, and upon earth peace, among men -- good will.'

Luke 2:14 (NOG)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those who have his good will!

Luke 2:14 (NASB)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased.

Luke 2:14 (NCV)
14 Give glory to God in heaven, and on earth let there be peace among the people who please God.

Luke 2:14 (NET)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among people with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (NIRV)
14 May glory be given to God in the highest heaven! And may peace be given to those he is pleased with on earth!

Luke 2:14 (NIV)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.

Luke 2:14 (NIVUK) 
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favour rests.

Luke 2:14 (NKJV)
14 Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!

Luke 2:14 (NLV)
14 Greatness and honor to our God in the highest heaven and peace on earth among men who please Him.

Luke 2:14 (NLT)
14 Glory to God in highest heaven, and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased.

Luke 2:14 (NRSV)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVA)e
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favours!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVACE)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favours!

Luke 2:14 (NRSVCE)
14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors!

Lukas 2:14 (OJB)
14 Kavod to Hashem in the Highest; and on haaretz shalom among Bnei Adam kavvanah tovah (of good intention). [YESHAYAH 9:5-6; 52:7; 53:5; MICHOH 5:4-5]

Luke 2:14 (RSV) 
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (RSVCE)
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!

Luke 2:14 (VOICE)
14 Heavenly Choir: To the highest heights of the universe, glory to God! And on earth, peace among all people who bring pleasure to God!

Luke 2:14 (WEB)
14 Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, good will toward men.

Luke 2:14 (WE)
14 They said, `Praise God in the highest heaven! Peace on earth and loving mercy towards all people!'

Luke 2:14 (WYC)
14 Glory be in the highest things to God, and in earth peace be to men of good will. [Glory in the highest things to God, and in earth peace to men of good will.]

Luke 2:14 (YLT)
14 `Glory in the highest to God, and upon earth peace, among men -- good will.'


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This was the woman Obama used as an example at his news conference. I wonder how many more that started out singing Obamacare's praises will find they are without affordable insurance because of a mistake.


Yes, I know that was the woman on his news conference and like I said for every one like this you dig up there are many many more good stories and this too shall get worked out. Don't celebrate someone else's misfortune so much, cause that is what you are doing. You are glad it didn't work for her so you could post it and say see, I told you so.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: She isn't just angry with the Repubs and Conservatives; she is angry with everything in her life as well.


As are most of the other libs on this site. If they didn't have these threads to unleash, they would certainly go after each other as they did in the past. Alas, even after unloading their verbiage they are still unhappy people. In order to be happy, they have to be willing to change things in their lives. Change requires work and this work is too much for their kind. By "their kind" I mean bitter, unhappy and angry people.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

karverr said:


> thank you, you did very well, the sources I quoted were modern day professors, but still ,thank you for your opinion


My dear, modern day professors are even farther removed from the situation than the vice president of the confederate states. They are looking at it from an intellectual point. However I must wonder at any professor stating the reason of the war that is not what the vice president says. Any professor worth his degree would have surely had the capability, and research responsibility, to have sought out what the cornerstone speech said. In my opinion that fact that they either missed this or intentionally ignored it discredits their creditability. I have only stated my opinion once or twice in this subject, when I stated the cornerstone speech I just simply stated it, not gave my opinion of it.

You have no idea about my opinion as to whether the south had the right to secede, as I have not stated it.

And you need not thank me for my opinion, this exchange has been a pleasure for me.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> Wrong again beaker. You need to do a little research before you post.


It must be so very terrible to be you. I pity you.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I looked further wondering how I could have forgotten. Apparently there are differing translations of this verse, some stating above, and some stating peace to those who please God, ect. This is quite interesting, but then I also find the differences in Biblical transactions fascinating. Thank you for inspiring me to delve a bit further.
> 
> Luke 2:14 (KJ21)
> 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!


LKhol; I am a born again Christian. However, I see nothing fascinating nor meaningful or interesting for you to post and repeat the same verse again, and again and again as barely do the words change while the meaning remains the same and part of _The Bible_.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The actual Obamacare is not the only place there are marriage penalties. The other taxes accociated with the ACA have a huge marriage penalty.
> 
> The Net Investment Income Tax. This is the 3.8% for investment income over these amounts. The single threshold is $200,000 and the married filing joint is $250,000.
> 
> The same income thresholds for the .9% Additional Medicare Tax.


Thanks for reminding me? Obamacare is the premier tax-raising law ever passed (illegally) by any President. At least the law is named after the one who passed it (illegally) so no one will forgot who to blame when they want to.
:shock:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> As are most of the other libs on this site. If they didn't have these threads to unleash, they would certainly go after each other as they did in the past. Alas, even after unloading their verbiage they are still unhappy people. In order to be happy, they have to be willing to change things in their lives. Change requires work and this work is too much for their kind. By "their kind" I mean bitter, unhappy and angry people.


Thanks for clarifying "their kind". Why, based on your previous posts I thought you might have been expressing some sort of racist sentiments!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> No, it is so very, very sad that so many people are the victims of Obama. She is a victim!


NJG tries to play the part of a victim so she'll never recognize the lies and policies put forth by Obama and the Democratic Party that destroy even her.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> If you are proud of the Confederacy and the filthy rag that was its flag you're a real piece of garbage, along with anyone who was part of the Confederacy.


The south's history is more than slavery, plantations and the Confederate flag. Just as there is more to the north than factories, mansions and the tea party and the west is more than wide open spaces, the Alamo and the gold rush. It was a part of the area, not all of its' history. It's a shame you can't see that.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> As are most of the other libs on this site. If they didn't have these threads to unleash, they would certainly go after each other as they did in the past. Alas, even after unloading their verbiage they are still unhappy people. In order to be happy, they have to be willing to change things in their lives. Change requires work and this work is too much for their kind. By "their kind" I mean bitter, unhappy and angry people.


So true. Their words are so tiresome and bitter, I cannot even stand to 'hear' what their lives 'sound' like. I understand that is the very reason 'their threads' fail and why they attempt to take over threads written by those with whom they don't agree.

The Libs want to 'air' their problems and blame others while they expect others to help them instead of being responsible for themselves. Such a shame to self-destruct and wallow in self-pity instead of trying to better yourself and your life.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Show me where I lied (in a PM so as not to continually disrupt this topic). However, I know you won't be able to because I do not lie.
> 
> Your constant demeaning of others and me is far from appropriate for any thread. Discuss the topic at hand and stop making personal insults to others. Choose Joy, I do.


Send you a pm, not a chance. Lets see, I remember you calling all the libs deaf and dumb, and I was unteachable and hopeless. Those are just the ones I remember. I also seem to remember at some point you had listed about 10 or 12 things that you said about me, all in one post. It was just one slam after another, the only one I remember is naive. So you can say you are a born again christian , but your mouth proves you wrong. Or maybe you believe since you type it and don't actually say it, you are ok. Not true. Whether you are KPG or Cherf, you are still the same person trying to pass yourself off as a christian. It is not working. The next time you are dishing out advice, like this, [Your constant demeaning of others and me is far from appropriate for any thread. Discuss the topic at hand and stop making personal insults to others] stop and read it yourself, you need the advise more than most.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Hey, people defended Bush, now that was a lying president. Every time President Obama says something you don't like, you say he is telling a lie. Get over it. He was elected and re-elected and he has 3 years left.


He was elected and then re-elected by the same people that bought his lies the first time. That doesn't say much about the voting public. However, it does say a lot about those that did not vote for Obama a second time. Some people just get tired of being constantly lied to.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> LKhol; I am a born again Christian. However, I see nothing fascinating nor meaningful or interesting for you to post and repeat the same verse again, and again and again as barely do the words change while the meaning remains the same and part of _The Bible_.


What I find interesting (to clarify) is that some verses state good will to all men, while some state good will to those who who are in favor with God, or those who are pleasing to God. I find it interesting that there are so many differing translations of the same verse, from a document that is supposed to be original. The meanings are not the same. Good will toward all men Is not the same as good will toward those in favor with God (which makes me wonder if he was speaking of his "chosen people" ).

I apologize for not making it clearer why I found it fascinating.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> Send you a pm, not a chance. It was just one slam after another, the only one I remember is naive. So you can say you are a born again christian , but your mouth proves you wrong.


Again, it sounds very terrible to be you. Go ahead and continue to insult me and blame me for all your troubles, it proves nothing and will do nothing to help you and nothing to hurt me, but I'll pray for you just the same.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Hey, people defended Bush, now that was a lying president. Every time President Obama says something you don't like, you say he is telling a lie. Get over it. He was elected and re-elected and he has 3 years left.


But that is not a good thing. I guess you haven't watched the news lately. I will get over it in 3 LLLLLLLLLLLLOOONGGG years hopefully. I know it will take longer to get over this worse president ever. I love you Jimmy!


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Jokim said:


> LL, their playbook has not changed since Marx, et al, wrote it. The end justifies the means. Lying will get you to the desired end, but sometimes it backfires. Truth will always come out!


Yes it does always. We are seeing it right now. Will see more in the future. :thumbup:


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Thanks for clarifying "their kind". Why, based on your previous posts I thought you might have been expressing some sort of racist sentiments!


You are welcome. I felt the need to do so because you do think those that do not agree with you are racist. Your race card is also as thin a rice paper.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I looked further wondering how I could have forgotten. Apparently there are differing translations of this verse, some stating above, and some stating peace to those who please God, ect. This is quite interesting, but then I also find the differences in Biblical transactions fascinating. Thank you for inspiring me to delve a bit further.
> 
> Luke 2:14 (KJ21)
> 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!
> ...


 :thumbup:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> What I find interesting (to clarify) is that some verses state good will to all men, while some state good will to those who who are in favor with God, or those who are pleasing to God. I find it interesting that there are so many differing translations of the same verse, from a document that is supposed to be original. The meanings are not the same. Good will toward all men Is not the same as good will toward those in favor with God (which makes me wonder if he was speaking of his "chosen people" ).
> 
> I apologize for not making it clearer why I found it fascinating.


Ok, I get what you are saying. My opinion is that verse was not speaking to only God's chosen. God's chosen is the Jews (the line of Abraham). All, means, all, not just a select few. Non Jews are also pleasing to God, so they are also part of those "in favor" with God as you wrote. Anyone (all) who believes, accepts the Salvation offered to them, and professes their sins and willingness to follow God and Jesus _is_ pleasing to God and thereby in _His_ favor. Thanks for the clarification of your view. I just don't see much to disseminate or discuss in that particular verse.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Again, it sounds very terrible to be you. Go ahead and continue to insult me and blame me for all your troubles, it proves nothing and will do nothing to help you and nothing to hurt me, but I'll pray for you just the same.


It is not terrible to be me, as I am living in the truth. I do not blame you for any troubles I might have as you don't matter in my life at all. I am not trying to hurt you, and I do not need your prayers. Why don't you pray for the working people that do not make enough to buy food. They are the ones that need help.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Ok, I get what you are saying. My opinion is that verse was not speaking to only God's chosen. God's chosen is the Jews (the line of Abraham). All, means, all, not just a select few. Non Jews are also pleasing to God, so they are also part of those "in favor" with God as you wrote. Anyone (all) who believes, accepts the Salvation offered to them, and professes their sins and willingness to follow God and Jesus _is_ pleasing to God and thereby in _His_ favor. Thanks for the clarification of your view. I just don't see much to disseminate or discuss in that particular verse.


But here is also what is interesting, you brought up that those who accept salvation are pleasing to God. Technically there was no salvation until Jesus died and rose again. The Jewish people were waiting for a Savior so were they all included, even if they later rejected Jesus as "the savior"? At this point in time only Mary, Joseph, the inn keepers, the animals(lol), and the shepherds even knew that Jesus had come. What about those non-Jews who believed completely different faiths and never accepted Jesus as the savior? We're the angels speaking of just those in favor with God at the moment, or those all of those who would in the future be in favor with God because they would accept Jesus as savior? God, after all is privy to the future as he has mastered the timey, wimey, wibbley, wobbly thing (Dr. Who reference). Obviously those who worshiped idols were not in favor with God, so is the angel not wishing them peace? I find religious interpretation intriguing.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Poor guy, I guess he has to have some fun in his life and if giving me a facetious compliment cheers him up, I don't mind. I especially liked him saying I stayed up all night to find out exactly where the Appalachians are. After spending the day in ER with my mother (everything turned out to be OK, thank goodness.) we were both pooped and slept exceedingly well.


Again with making fun of someone elses health issues.

How thoughtless you are .

i am sorry MB about your mother and her health issues. I would not even mention any health issues on here as it is used as a weapon to get even when one has nothing to say or contribute other than that.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Is this the post where I had been told to get bent? I saw it somewhere earlier, but now I can't find it.......


joeysomma said:


> deleted


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Is this the post where I had been told to get bent? I saw it somewhere earlier, but now I can't find it.......


No. I read it. It was what jelun said to me. It wasn't about you. It wasn't anything bad.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

SS I hope your mother is okay. I know she means a lot to you.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Manners?


My mother is dead, I don't need another. Thanks, though.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes, I know that was the woman on his news conference and like I said for every one like this you dig up there are many many more good stories and this too shall get worked out. Don't celebrate someone else's misfortune so much, cause that is what you are doing. You are glad it didn't work for her so you could post it and say see, I told you so.


As time goes by there will be more. 
None of us know what will happen with this law. It is pretty sad to have to invest so much time "defending" it as so many of us want something so much different. 
The best thing is the Medicaid Extension, here's hoping people use it well.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Yes it does always. We are seeing it right now. Will see more in the future. :thumbup:


CB, 
Do you think all truths always come out?


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Is this the post where I had been told to get bent? I saw it somewhere earlier, but now I can't find it.......


page 110 I think

She is such a crass person.

She appears to be incapable of speaking except in trashy ways, there were more classless comments that followed

Did I read she is on a dating site? Wonder if she uses those adorable phrases there too? What adorable pick up lines for a senior citizen.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> But here is also what is interesting, you brought up that those who accept salvation are pleasing to God. Technically there was no salvation until Jesus died and rose again. The Jewish people were waiting for a Savior so were they all included, even if they later rejected Jesus as "the savior"? At this point in time only Mary, Joseph, the inn keepers, the animals(lol), and the shepherds even knew that Jesus had come. What about those non-Jews who believed completely different faiths and never accepted Jesus as the savior? We're the angels speaking of just those in favor with God at the moment, or those all of those who would in the future be in favor with God because they would accept Jesus as savior? God, after all is privy to the future as he has mastered the timey, wimey, wibbley, wobbly thing (Dr. Who reference). Obviously those who worshiped idols were not in favor with God, so is the angel not wishing them peace? I find religious interpretation intriguing.


Are waiting...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> But here is also what is interesting, you brought up that those who accept salvation are pleasing to God. Technically there was no salvation until Jesus died and rose again. The Jewish people were waiting for a Savior so were they all included, even if they later rejected Jesus as "the savior"? At this point in time only Mary, Joseph, the inn keepers, the animals(lol), and the shepherds even knew that Jesus had come. What about those non-Jews who believed completely different faiths and never accepted Jesus as the savior? We're the angels speaking of just those in favor with God at the moment, or those all of those who would in the future be in favor with God because they would accept Jesus as savior? God, after all is privy to the future as he has mastered the timey, wimey, wibbley, wobbly thing (Dr. Who reference). Obviously those who worshiped idols were not in favor with God, so is the angel not wishing them peace? I find religious interpretation intriguing.


I'd be interested to read and respond if you'd carry this topic onto a new thread focused on it but don't believe it should be discussed on this thread.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I'd be interested to read and respond if you'd carry this topic onto a new thread focused on it but don't believe it should be discussed on this thread.


Not to worry, Lkholcomb, I think if we can discuss my dating sites and the city I supposedly live in and almost every one of the faults I possess. 
If we can discuss how one of us used to use a different name...or if having a stroke is an excuse for being nasty or if the wrong person brings that stroke up that saying it is an action deserving of God knows what... and on and on ad finitum... I say go for it. 
If we tire of it we can skim and skip...


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> As time goes by there will be more.
> None of us know what will happen with this law. It is pretty sad to have to invest so much time "defending" it as so many of us want something so much different.
> The best thing is the Medicaid Extension, here's hoping people use it well.


Yes, it is so sad that so many people are so happy when they can pass on something that isn't working for someone. They know that if it fails many people will be without healthcare, but that is still what they want. I don't understand.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Not to worry, Lkholcomb, I think if we can discuss my dating sites and the city I supposedly live in and almost every one of the faults I possess.
> If we can discuss how one of us used to use a different name...or if having a stroke is an excuse for being nasty or if the wrong person brings that stroke up that saying it is an action deserving of God knows what... and on and on ad finitum... I say go for it.
> If we tire of it we can skim and skip...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> We think it is shocking that you defend a lying president.


 :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lukelucy said:


> CB, YES! It is shocking. He is an incompetent liar and he is defended. No wonder there are people who want to be given things from the government. They don't have the brains to go out there and do for themselves. It is stupidity to support the disaster of a man.


 :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

As usual, you don't understand. We wish to participate WITHOUT your ravings. Unwatch won't work.



Country Bumpkins said:


> The button is up there it is called unwatch.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I wish a flood of Biblical proportions would tidy things up.



jelun2 said:


> I am thankful that the sun is out.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

theyarnlady said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:           :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:       :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:        :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :x :x :x :x               :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :? :? :? :? :? :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And thank you for your sarcastic comments. They prove, ever so eloquently, that you are only engaging in this discussion to try to make a point. God bless.



karverr said:


> your responses to posts are so elegant and insightful, thank you so much


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:        :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :x :x :x :x               :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :? :? :? :? :? :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


Very pretty!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think CB, in her usual cryptic way, is trying to say, 'there are GOP lies, and there are Demo lies, and we don't like that black man pretending he has a right to be in the White House.'



BrattyPatty said:


> Did you not support George W Bush? He was a lying president.
> In fact his lies killed thousands of our troops and innocent Iraqi citizens.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Oh God.



karverr said:


> so rightly said , praise the one who makes all things our Wonderful Heavenly Father God the most highest


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank heavens for small favors.



joeysomma said:


> deleted


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You don't know what you're talking about. You prove your bias. God bless.



karverr said:


> You are so right and I for one am thankful that you can realize just how busy he is, he doesn't have time for such trival things ,like showing military honor to fallen men in uniform,but he is busy. but made the effort not to wear a flag pin as he didn't want to offend anyone that takes special character in my eyes, thank you so much that you can appreciate how busy our wonderful president is in his job between vacations.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Not to worry, Lkholcomb, I think if we can discuss my dating sites and the city I supposedly live in and almost every one of the faults I possess.
> If we can discuss how one of us used to use a different name...or if having a stroke is an excuse for being nasty or if the wrong person brings that stroke up that saying it is an action deserving of God knows what... and on and on ad finitum... I say go for it.
> If we tire of it we can skim and skip...


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I was just being a smartypants.



NJG said:


> Very pretty!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

How about lies told by Bush!

http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=165

http://www.alternet.org/story/16274/ten_appalling_lies_we_were_told_about_iraq

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0730-06.htm

http://bushwatch.small-mobile-entities.com/bushlies.htm

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/02/con04079.html

http://www.iraqwar.org/adminlies.htm

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_04/what_was_the_single_worst_thin044412.php

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/02/19/msnbcs-hoax-documentary-overlooking-the-role-of-media-in-selling-iraq-war/


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:        :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :x :x :x :x               :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :? :? :? :? :? :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


You can say so much without words, thank you.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> How about lies told by Bush!
> 
> http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=165
> 
> ...


That's all?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> That's all?


No, really I just stopped after the first page.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> No, really I just stopped after the first page.


That is just about what I figured. 
Face it, anyone who really told the truth couldn't get elected.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

NJG said:


> It is not terrible to be me, as I am living in the truth. I do not blame you for any troubles I might have as you don't matter in my life at all. I am not trying to hurt you, and I do not need your prayers. Why don't you pray for the working people that do not make enough to buy food. They are the ones that need help.


Well, it is obvious you don't understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion nor can you substantiate your words. I was correct in my brief assessment.

You've refused my prayers yet haven't deterred me from helping those less fortunate in life then my family and I are. We'll continue to live by putting our prayers, actions, monetary and emotional support where are mouth's are. You should attempt to do the same.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Well, it is obvious you don't understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion nor can you substantiate your words. I was correct in my brief assessment.
> 
> You've refused my prayers yet haven't deterred me from helping those less fortunate in life then my family and I are. We'll continue to live by putting our prayers, actions, monetary and emotional support where are mouth's are. You should attempt to do the same.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> I was just being a smartypants.


I must have missed something here. Maybe a few somethings.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> If you did click on the list of so-called lies of Bush, you would notice almost all have to do with the war in Iraq. How many days was Bush in Iraq to see what was going on there. He had to rely on reports from the ones on the ground there.
> 
> At least he was told what was happening on the ground in Iraq. He may not have had everything right.
> 
> No one seems to be telling Obama what is going on in the country. It seems no matter what happens, Obama is finding out from the television. He is not aware of what is happening. Something is very wrong here. Incompetence is King in this administration.


Using your logic, you all really need to stop talking about Benghazi. As near as I can tell neither President Obama nor Sec'y of State Clinton were there on that day or any other.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Well, it is obvious you don't understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion nor can you substantiate your words. I was correct in my brief assessment.
> 
> You've refused my prayers yet haven't deterred me from helping those less fortunate in life then my family and I are. We'll continue to live by putting our prayers, actions, monetary and emotional support where are mouth's are. You should attempt to do the same.


You believe you were correct in your brief assessment! Now that is funny. You believe you are capable of making an "assessment" over the computer. Boy, aren't you talented, NOT.

I definitely do understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion. My goodness, I have been reading your comments now for how long? I understand perfectly.

You say I should attempt to do the same----You have no idea whether or not I already am and the same goes for you. Just you saying it doesn't make it so. You take care of yourself, and I will do the same, with no advice from you.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Just heard a funny from President Obama. He said after Obamacare is working the republicans will no longer call it Obamacare. Isn't that the truth. Then it will become the ACA.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> But they were watching a live feed and were in audio contact.


I think you are watching too many spy movies.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Seattle, MIB is one in the same & smart--NOT she is as dumb as one gets! Don't reply to her--I'll take care of this idiot!


Is that a threat? isn't karverr man enough to take care of himself, especially here on the internet where no one really knows anyone personally most of the time? I don't think the tone of what you said conforms to the rules around here.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I'd be interested to read and respond if you'd carry this topic onto a new thread focused on it but don't believe it should be discussed on this thread.


I didn't bring up the Bible verse to begin with, so I'm not quite sure why it doesn't belong on this thread. This thread has seemed to have morphed from subject to subject already. I don't feel very comfortable starting a thread about a Bible verse, as much as I love discussions about interpretation, because every place I have started one on (none on this forum but other forums and even in person discussions) have ended with comments like, "what do you know you non-Christian? You shouldn't be discussing the Bible unless you believe the faith!" I am not rude, but just have the same questions I did when I was a Christian. So I generally do not start threads about the Bible for that very reason.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I didn't bring up the Bible verse to begin with, so I'm not quite sure why it doesn't belong on this thread. This thread has seemed to have morphed from subject to subject already. I don't feel very comfortable starting a thread about a Bible verse, as much as I love discussions about interpretation, because every place I have started one on (none on this forum but other forums and even in person discussions) have ended with comments like, "what do you know you non-Christian? You shouldn't be discussing the Bible unless you believe the faith!" I am not rude, but just have the same questions I did when I was a Christian. So I generally do not start threads about the Bible for that very reason.


Why are you not a Christian anymore? I won't bash you just wondering. Or you can pm me if you feel more comfortable.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But they were watching a live feed and were in audio contact.


No they were not. You must have gotten your news from Fox News. Did you not watch any of the Benghazi hearings? If Darrell Issa believed this he would have been on every channel at the same time.

The claim that top Obama administration officials were gathered in the Oval Office watching a real-time video feed of the September 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, but did nothing to intervene appears to have originated with a 24 October 2012 Forbes op-ed piece ("White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn't Respond"), the opening paragraph of which is quoted in the example block above.

However, that description is a rather distorted version of what the news sources it references (CBS News and ABC News) actually reported. A CBS News story from that same day ("U.S. military poised for rescue in Benghazi") stated the following:
Meanwhile, CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports that the FBI and State Department have reviewed video from security cameras that captured the attack on the consulate.

The audio feed of the attack was being monitored in real time in Washington by diplomatic security official Charlene Lamb. CBS News has learned that video of the assault was recovered 20 days later from the more than 10 security cameras at the compound.

The government security camera footage of the attack was in the possession of local Libyans until the week of Oct. 1. The video will be among the evidence that the State Department's review board will analyze to determine who carried out the assault.
According to that report, it was not the case that President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary of Defense Panetta, and a national security team were "watching real-time video of developments from a drone circling over the site"; rather, a single diplomatic security official was listening to an audio feed of events in Benghazi. Security cameras in the U.S. consulate compound did record video of the events as they unfolded, and a U.S. surveillance drone camera did capture the last hour of the attack, but neither of those sources was watched real-time by officials in Washington  the consulate video recordings were not recovered until weeks after the attack

Read more at

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-womack/obama-benghazi-attack_b_2022093.html


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> No they were not. You must have gotten your news from Fox News. Did you not watch any of the Benghazi hearings? If Darrell Issa believed this he would have been on every channel at the same time.
> 
> The claim that top Obama administration officials were gathered in the Oval Office watching a real-time video feed of the September 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, but did nothing to intervene appears to have originated with a 24 October 2012 Forbes op-ed piece ("White House Watched Benghazi Attacked And Didn't Respond"), the opening paragraph of which is quoted in the example block above.
> 
> ...


I think she is thinking of bin Laden.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I think she is thinking of bin Laden.


She is definitely confused.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Not to worry, Lkholcomb, I think if we can discuss my dating sites and the city I supposedly live in and almost every one of the faults I possess.
> If we can discuss how one of us used to use a different name...or if having a stroke is an excuse for being nasty or if the wrong person brings that stroke up that saying it is an action deserving of God knows what... and on and on ad finitum... I say go for it.
> If we tire of it we can skim and skip...


I have never brought up the fact of my stroke to use for support of my post . I haven't mentioned it since. you or one of your lackeys asked what disability i have and I told them. you on the other hand have brought it up twice and in a snide nasty comment. You are so callous as to try and use someones handicap against them. where we come from we correct our children severely for making fun of disabled people.. you sound like the ones who park in handicap spaces and complain there are too many of them and you should be able to park there so you won't have to walk so far. Come on everyone with a disability or handicap tell us what it is so she can make nasty remarks about it.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> I have never brought up the fact of my stroke to use for support of my post . I haven't mentioned it since. you or one of your lackeys asked what disability i have and I told them. you on the other hand have brought it up twice and in a snide nasty comment. You are so callous as to try and use someones handicap against them. where we come from we correct our children severely for making fun of disabled people.. you sound like the ones who park in handicap spaces and complain there are too many of them and you should be able to park there so you won't have to walk so far. Come on everyone with a disability or handicap tell us what it is so she can make nasty remarks about it.


You misunderstand completely, I have brought it up (as with Janeway's) as possible cause for certain disconnects and reactions. Those are facts of life. 
If you don't or can't appreciate true facts I really don't know what to tell you. 
It is quite obvious that, if you are not playing at some game, there are gaps in your knowledge and abilities. 
It seems that you are so comfortable with using information as a sledge hammer to attempt to wound that is the only use that comes to your mind. 
You are wrong. I have done this sort of post one other time to try to inform you as to the facts of life. 
Don't like it? Don't post on threads that I post on. I am not going to stop saying what I think. It just so happens that cognitive disability is something I am familiar with.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

karverr said:


> even so, I just can't help myself, she worked so hard to find what ,she did I 'm just so thankful for her input and all the other lib ladies they have so much knowledge to share with us.you all should get down on your knees and thank these ladies , they keep us on the true path to enlightenment.


you joke so well!


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Why are you not a Christian anymore? I won't bash you just wondering. Or you can pm me if you feel more comfortable.


I believe what a professor of my husband's once explained (it a bit of a story):

Everybody imagine the absolute best sundae ever. Some have chocolate, some have pineapples, some have nuts. Each one is the BEST sundae you can imagine or think of. That is like the individual's persona of God. But God isn't the best sundae of one person. He is even better than the best sundae. He is MORE than you can imagine. You can look at another persons sundae and say, "that is not right, my sundae is best!" but it is not the bet for the other person.

God (or gods) is like that. Each person sees the best interpretation of "god" for them, but God is actually more awesome than that. He/she/they are beyond imagining.

I was raised in fundie churches. They were very close minded, but still couldn't agree between themselves about things. They added and took away from the Bible as they saw fit. However they would claim it was in the Bible, but Gods forbid if you actually looked and asked because you couldn't find it! The one church was basically a cult. When we left they even went so far as to have people who worked for the power company suddenly "fix" something outside our windows, yet they spent more time staring in our windows than "fixing" anything. He came several days but he never actually did anything. Other people who left had the same type of thing happen. People in the church would spy on others in the church and run and tell the pastor if they violated one of the rules.

We also went to a church that was supposedly not as fundie. But they were still incredibly close minded. They were loath to help anybody outside the church or anybody within, unless they were "favorites". There was so much more that went on that was too numerous to list. The reason we left that church was because they decided to change the church to a "flashy" lights and money church (think the mega church on tv). Some people protest the change voicing a difference of opinion, one of which was a retired pastor. Long story short they kicked him out of the church and then attempted to stop paying him his pension.

We went to other churches as well, but any church did not discuss the Bible. If I went to the pastor to ask questions regarding interpretation I was shut down and told it was only the way THEY interpreted that was right.

This was not my experience with only a few churches or Christians, but many. For years I searches for churches and chritians who were what Jesus said they should be in the Bible. I still read the Bible in addition to other religious books. Each as their value as a learning experience.

Basically I came to see why Gandhi's said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ".


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Is that a threat? isn't karverr man enough to take care of himself, especially here on the internet where no one really knows anyone personally most of the time? I don't think the tone of what you said conforms to the rules around here.


You never have followed any rules of life much less those of KP. no threat just that he should not bother replying to your nasty remarks.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> You believe you were correct in your brief assessment! Now that is funny. You believe you are capable of making an "assessment" over the computer. Boy, aren't you talented, NOT.
> 
> I definitely do understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion. My goodness, I have been reading your comments now for how long? I understand perfectly.
> 
> You say I should attempt to do the same----You have no idea whether or not I already am and the same goes for you. Just you saying it doesn't make it so. You take care of yourself, and I will do the same, with no advice from you.


If you want no advice stop giving it.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

karverr said:


> I have never brought up the fact of my stroke to use for support of my post . I haven't mentioned it since. you or one of your lackeys asked what disability i have and I told them. you on the other hand have brought it up twice and in a snide nasty comment. You are so callous as to try and use someones handicap against them. where we come from we correct our children severely for making fun of disabled people.. you sound like the ones who park in handicap spaces and complain there are too many of them and you should be able to park there so you won't have to walk so far. Come on everyone with a disability or handicap tell us what it is so she can make nasty remarks about it.


Remember when I told you if this bunch knows anything about you--they hound & make sly remarks? this is just a prime example of how hateful they all are on any thread.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I believe what a professor of my husband's once explained (it a bit of a story):
> 
> Everybody imagine the absolute best sundae ever. Some have chocolate, some have pineapples, some have nuts. Each one is the BEST sundae you can imagine or think of. That is like the individual's persona of God. But God isn't the best sundae of one person. He is even better than the best sundae. He is MORE than you can imagine. You can look at another persons sundae and say, "that is not right, my sundae is best!" but it is not the bet for the other person.
> 
> ...


Thank you . I understand where you are coming from now. All I can say is church is full of sinners that are not perfect. We have to understand that people will always fell you. Church is only a hospital for sinners. I could tell you had been hurt in church and that is why I asked. Only God is Awesome and we have to look to His Son Jesus as our example. He is the only Perfect One. You keep reading your Bible and studying. You will find the Truth. I hope you will find what you are searching for. Blessings from me. :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Not to worry, Lkholcomb, I think if we can discuss my dating sites and the city I supposedly live in and almost every one of the faults I possess.
> If we can discuss how one of us used to use a different name...or if having a stroke is an excuse for being nasty or if the wrong person brings that stroke up that saying it is an action deserving of God knows what... and on and on ad finitum... I say go for it.
> If we tire of it we can skim and skip...


You really have sun to to a new low!


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> He was most likely projecting, we know for sure that fact finding is not his greatest strength.


What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> I was just being a smartypants.


Yes, for once you are truthful.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Just heard a funny from President Obama. He said after Obamacare is working the republicans will no longer call it Obamacare. Isn't that the truth. Then it will become the ACA.


You are dreaming!


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


Yarnie and I both said we hope your mother is okay. What is wrong with her?General Chit-Chat (non-knitting talk) -> Obamacare #3 (go to message) Nov 19, 13 17:02:35
SS I hope your mother is okay. I know she means a lot to you.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


I have said many times that I felt sorry for your mother as she has to put up with you. as your friends say, you are using your mother for sympathy.

i will pray for your mother!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think CB, in her usual cryptic way, is trying to say, 'there are GOP lies, and there are Demo lies, and we don't like that black man pretending he has a right to be in the White House.'


You must be black to love Obama as you do!


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


I truly missed that post, sorry about your mom. Old age is not for sissies is my dad's new mantra

But it is necessary to be so vile? Even today, boy would I get the evil look if I ever spoke like that to people in that manner by either parent. Does the apple fall far from the tree? Hope not for your mom's peace of mind


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I believe what a professor of my husband's once explained (it a bit of a story):
> 
> Everybody imagine the absolute best sundae ever. Some have chocolate, some have pineapples, some have nuts. Each one is the BEST sundae you can imagine or think of. That is like the individual's persona of God. But God isn't the best sundae of one person. He is even better than the best sundae. He is MORE than you can imagine. You can look at another persons sundae and say, "that is not right, my sundae is best!" but it is not the bet for the other person.
> 
> ...


I 'm so sorry that you have searched in vain for a real church. you do not say where you went to these places or what denomination you were in, I don't know and never heard of a fundie church. . I live in a small town we have many churches of different denominations, we all work together on a lot of projects that serve the people of our community. not just together but each church has it's own mission projects I also have been in a church as you described but not for long, we moved to another church. "The church I go to now is a Bible preaching and teaching church.If you allow the hippocrates to turn you from God and his church the devil has succeeded. I have been in four churches in my life and only one was as you described so if you keep looking it will come.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Remember when I told you if this bunch knows anything about you--they hound & make sly remarks? this is just a prime example of how hateful they all are on any thread.


Did that to me, too. Terrible.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


Remember that the next time you are looking for support. 
I am tired of your mood shifts. 
You, of course, are fleet of mind. Some of us take bit to process and develop a post. 
I gave you chance the last time you pulled this sh-- because someone indicated it is cyclical. 
No more.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> I truly missed that post, sorry about your mom. Old age is not for sissies is my dad's new mantra
> 
> But it is necessary to be so vile? Even today, boy would I get the evil look if I ever spoke like that to people in that manner by either parent. Does the apple fall far from the tree? Hope not for your mom's peace of mind


as Lukelucy said ,I also did not see your post, I'm truly sorry about your mom and will put her on my prayer list, what is her first name. my wife and I have spent many a night in the ER with her mom and dad and my parents too. I will also put you on it as the care giver that can be just as bad ,my mom had Alzheimer.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Poor guy, I guess he has to have some fun in his life and if giving me a facetious compliment cheers him up, I don't mind. I especially liked him saying I stayed up all night to find out exactly where the Appalachians are. After spending the day in ER with my mother (everything turned out to be OK, thank goodness.) we were both pooped and slept exceedingly well.


You are one of the most hateful people on Earth to make fun of his disability.

Go pray for that baby you aborted because you could not be bothered by having a child. Get on your knees & maybe The Lord will hear your prayers!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Did that to me, too. Terrible.


I remember Lucy!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Remember that the next time you are looking for support.
> I am tired of your mood shifts.
> You, of course, are fleet of mind. Some of us take bit to process and develop a post.
> I gave you chance the last time you pulled this sh-- because someone indicated it is cyclical.
> No more.


Thank you as you finally know what a piece of trash MIB really is on this thread.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

karverr said:


> I 'm so sorry that you have searched in vain for a real church. you do not say where you went to these places or what denomination you were in, I don't know and never heard of a fundie church. . I live in a small town we have here we have many churches of different denominations, we all work together on a lot of projects that serve the people of our community. not just together but each church has it's own mission projects I also have been in a church as you described but not for long, we moved to another church. "The church I go to now is a Bible preaching and teaching church.If you allow the hippocrates to turn you from God and his church the devil has succeeded. I have been in four churches in my life and only one was as you described so if you keep looking it will come.


Thank you for your concern. I didn't say what denomination because I have searched in most, if not all. The one that has been the most loving and accepting has been an excommunicated catholic church. Amazingly even though they stand alone now, instead of with a bigger organization, they are the ones who do more for the community than any church around here. They have a mental health clinic, a medical clinic, a few missions, and many more I can't remember at the moment. They give all of their services to the community and do not evangelize with them. They state from the start that there is no requirement to give anything to the church or go to the church. They only give help to those in need. It is a wondrous thing to see the effect they have on people's lives.

I used to believe that it was just a few hypocrites I came across, but experience has shown me wrong. There have been a few Christians who are loving and kind, living by the Bible, and in service to others, but those are very few unfortunately, in the more than 100's I've come across. I use the Bible as a book to learn from, as in stories and parables. I have been able to learn also about the translations of the Bible and why it is not infallible. I also learn from other religious books, and from history. I just love learning.

I am happy in my current religion. Ironically I have had so many people come to me asking for advice or counsel about things now (I'm not bragging, just stating one of the reasons I know I have found the spirituality for me). I was taken aback many times by this, but realized that it was because I did not stick to one book in my own counsel. I read and investigated and thought for myself in quiet moments. Because I am disabled I have many quiet moments to myself, and because of that I have learned how big a world we have. I have learned it can never be contained in one single book. A books of a few selected Biblical texts, from the many available them, by a few men. My universe is larger than that and it amazes me constantly.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

karverr said:


> as Lukelucy said ,I also did not see your post, I'm truly sorry about your mom and will put her on my prayer list, what is her first name. my wife and I have spent many a night in the ER with her mom and dad and my parents too. I will also put you on it as the care giver that can be just as bad ,my mom had Alzheimer.


I didn't miss your last post, what you said to the ladies here was terrible. they in many posts have professed true sympathy for your mother,yet you insulted them vilely.I hope your mom has another sibling to care for her as your anger is too quick to flare up. I will still put her on my prayer list my you too as I see you are in dire need of prayer. again thank you for all the work you did to find the info you posted.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for your concern. I didn't say what denomination because I have searched in most, if not all. The one that has been the most loving and accepting has been an excommunicated catholic church. Amazingly even though they stand alone now, instead of with a bigger organization, they are the ones who do more for the community than any church around here. They have a mental health clinic, a medical clinic, a few missions, and many more I can't remember at the moment. They give all of their services to the community and do not evangelize with them. They state from the start that there is no requirement to give anything to the church or go to the church. They only give help to those in need. It is a wondrous thing to see the effect they have on people's lives.
> 
> I used to believe that it was just a few hypocrites I came across, but experience has shown me wrong. There have been a few Christians who are loving and kind, living by the Bible, and in service to others, but those are very few unfortunately, in the more than 100's I've come across. I use the Bible as a book to learn from, as in stories and parables. I have been able to learn also about the translations of the Bible and why it is not infallible. I also learn from other religious books, and from history. I just love learning.
> 
> I am happy in my current religion. Ironically I have had so many people come to me asking for advice or counsel about things now (I'm not bragging, just stating one of the reasons I know I have found the spirituality for me). I was taken aback many times by this, but realized that it was because I did not stick to one book in my own counsel. I read and investigated and thought for myself in quiet moments. Because I am disabled I have many quiet moments to myself, and because of that I have learned how big a world we have. I have learned it can never be contained in one single book. A books of a few selected Biblical texts, from the many available them, by a few men. My universe is larger than that and it amazes me constantly.


I'm so happy for you to not let it discourage you. You seem to have found a good loving and caring church home.Be very careful of giving advice, it sometimes gets back in your face. We differ about the Bible but as long as you have found a church that meets your needs that is great.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I truly missed that post, sorry about your mom. Old age is not for sissies is my dad's new mantra
> 
> But it is necessary to be so vile? Even today, boy would I get the evil look if I ever spoke like that to people in that manner by either parent. Does the apple fall far from the tree? Hope not for your mom's peace of mind


I'm sorry, but this makes me laugh.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> If you want no advice stop giving it.


And you may also keep your advice to yourself. I do not need your permission for what I post.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Thank you as you finally know what a piece of trash MIB really is on this thread.


Really? You are going to use that to score points?


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Oh,...Okay.


Country Bumpkins said:


> No. I read it. It was what jelun said to me. It wasn't about you. It wasn't anything bad.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Remember when I told you if this bunch knows anything about you--they hound & make sly remarks? this is just a prime example of how hateful they all are on any thread.


How about when you accused me of calling you a moron, which I did not do. Did you ever apologize for that? Of course not, just move right on to the next slam against some one else.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> And you may also keep your advice to yourself. I do not need your permission for what I post.


I never said you needed my permission, I said if you don't want people to give you advice don't try to give advice to them. if you needed my permission to post I don't think you stand a snowballs chance in h--- of getting it.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> I never said you needed my permission, I said if you don't want people to give you advice don't try to give advice to them. if you needed my permission to post I don't think you stand a snowballs chance in h--- of getting it.


Then stop giving me advise. What I said did not concern you, so keep your nose out of it. Nor do you stand a snow balls chance in he--, of having me ever, ever, ever listen to anything you have to say. Go away


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> Then stop giving me advise. What I said did not concern you, so keep your nose out of it. Nor do you stand a snow balls chance in he--, of having me ever, ever, ever listen to anything you have to say. Go away


you do know I have that in black and white and will remind you everytime you stick your nose where it don't belong.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> How about when you accused me of calling you a moron, which I did not do. Did you ever apologize for that? Of course not, just move right on to the next slam against some one else.


she was talking to me, keep your nose out of it,(see your later post)


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

karverr said:


> she was talking to me, keep your nose out of it,(see your later post)


Jane accused me of calling her a moron, which I did not do, so back off. I was talking to her, not you.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> she was talking to me, keep your nose out of it,(see your later post)


Both of you have been around long enough that you should know that in order to have a private conversation you should PM.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> You misunderstand completely, I have brought it up (as with Janeway's) as possible cause for certain disconnects and reactions. Those are facts of life.
> If you don't or can't appreciate true facts I really don't know what to tell you.
> It is quite obvious that, if you are not playing at some game, there are gaps in your knowledge and abilities.
> It seems that you are so comfortable with using information as a sledge hammer to attempt to wound that is the only use that comes to your mind.
> ...


I really don't need a guardian angel like yourself to tell me the facts of life. I have seen and had to do things you can't even imagine for this country. Since facts of life are your specialty, I am privileged to tell you that my disability hasn't affected my mental capacity in the least,what disability affected yours? As some of your beloved libs have old us if you don't want someone to post about what you say don't do it on a public web site.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

karverr said:


> I'm so happy for you to not let it discourage you. You seem to have found a good loving and caring church home.Be very careful of giving advice, it sometimes gets back in your face. We differ about the Bible but as long as you have found a church that meets your needs that is great.


I only give advice when it is specifically requested from me. I have not found a church, but have found like minded people.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Both of you have been around long enough that you should know that in order to have a private conversation you should PM.


I don't want to talk to her in public much less private,but she keeps making remarks to me.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I only give advice when it is specifically requested from me. I have not found a church, but have found like minded people.


yes I understand but I have seen lots of times someone took advice and it didn't work out then blamed the adviser, just saying be careful


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

Janeway said:


> I have said many times that I felt sorry for your mother as she has to put up with you. as your friends say, you are using your mother for sympathy.
> 
> i will pray for your mother!


My God, that is an unusually cruel remark.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you for posting, but I quit reading before the end. Too sad.



NJG said:


> How about lies told by Bush!
> 
> http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=165
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Take your crystal and....



knitpresentgifts said:


> Well, it is obvious you don't understand the differences between the truth, a lie and an opinion nor can you substantiate your words. I was correct in my brief assessment.
> 
> You've refused my prayers yet haven't deterred me from helping those less fortunate in life then my family and I are. We'll continue to live by putting our prayers, actions, monetary and emotional support where are mouth's are. You should attempt to do the same.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Are you saying this is like Bush in the National Guard?



joeysomma said:


> If you did click on the list of so-called lies of Bush, you would notice almost all have to do with the war in Iraq. How many days was Bush in Iraq to see what was going on there? He had to rely on reports from the ones on the ground there.
> 
> He may not have had everything right. At least he was told what was happening on the ground in Iraq.
> 
> No one seems to be telling Obama what is going on in the country. It seems no matter what happens, Obama is finding out from the television. He is not aware of what is happening. Something is very wrong here. Incompetence is King in this administration.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Just heard a funny from President Obama. He said after Obamacare is working the republicans will no longer call it Obamacare. Isn't that the truth. Then it will become the ACA.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Joey's really working on her dialog. Maybe she'll write a book.



jelun2 said:


> I think you are watching too many spy movies.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

This is unusual???? (Regarding joeysomma comment.)



NJG said:


> She is definitely confused.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Just to be completely clear here, the b-----s I'm referring to are the good Christian ladies who always have a Bible verse at the ready until someone they don't approve of might need their support. Isn't our faith supposed to cross all other lines? It sure doesn't when it comes to KPG, Country Bumpkins and their supposedly devout sisters.


MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> You misunderstand completely, I have brought it up (as with Janeway's) as possible cause for certain disconnects and reactions. Those are facts of life.
> If you don't or can't appreciate true facts I really don't know what to tell you.
> It is quite obvious that, if you are not playing at some game, there are gaps in your knowledge and abilities.
> It seems that you are so comfortable with using information as a sledge hammer to attempt to wound that is the only use that comes to your mind.
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nasty much? I think so.



Janeway said:


> I have said many times that I felt sorry for your mother as she has to put up with you. as your friends say, you are using your mother for sympathy.
> 
> i will pray for your mother!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ah, the usual charming janey. God bless. You need it.



Janeway said:


> You must be black to love Obama as you do!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You all know what I'm thinking.



Janeway said:


> You are one of the most hateful people on Earth to make fun of his disability.
> 
> Go pray for that baby you aborted because you could not be bothered by having a child. Get on your knees & maybe The Lord will hear your prayers!


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

You aren't worth the smallest drop of my mother's sweat. Bend over and kiss you you-know-what. That way you'll have a friend. And that's MIB to you. Geez, your brain really is dead.


Country Bumpkins said:


> SS I hope your mother is okay. I know she means a lot to you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm an escaped Catholic.....learned the dogma but it just didn't add up to me. However, I agree that the Catholic/catholic church does not evangelize. It humbly takes care of whoever needs it without judging. Think St. Mary's Food Bank etc.



Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for your concern. I didn't say what denomination because I have searched in most, if not all. The one that has been the most loving and accepting has been an excommunicated catholic church. Amazingly even though they stand alone now, instead of with a bigger organization, they are the ones who do more for the community than any church around here. They have a mental health clinic, a medical clinic, a few missions, and many more I can't remember at the moment. They give all of their services to the community and do not evangelize with them. They state from the start that there is no requirement to give anything to the church or go to the church. They only give help to those in need. It is a wondrous thing to see the effect they have on people's lives.
> 
> I used to believe that it was just a few hypocrites I came across, but experience has shown me wrong. There have been a few Christians who are loving and kind, living by the Bible, and in service to others, but those are very few unfortunately, in the more than 100's I've come across. I use the Bible as a book to learn from, as in stories and parables. I have been able to learn also about the translations of the Bible and why it is not infallible. I also learn from other religious books, and from history. I just love learning.
> 
> I am happy in my current religion. Ironically I have had so many people come to me asking for advice or counsel about things now (I'm not bragging, just stating one of the reasons I know I have found the spirituality for me). I was taken aback many times by this, but realized that it was because I did not stick to one book in my own counsel. I read and investigated and thought for myself in quiet moments. Because I am disabled I have many quiet moments to myself, and because of that I have learned how big a world we have. I have learned it can never be contained in one single book. A books of a few selected Biblical texts, from the many available them, by a few men. My universe is larger than that and it amazes me constantly.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

That's janey for you. No class and proud of it.



jelun2 said:


> Really? You are going to use that to score points?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm thick-skinned, but I find myself gasping at janeway's remarks. Very inappropriate.



Cindy S said:


> My God, that is an unusually cruel remark.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

damemary said:


> I'm an escaped Catholic.....learned the dogma but it just didn't add up to me. However, I agree that the Catholic/catholic church does not evangelize. It humbly takes care of whoever needs it without judging. Think St. Mary's Food Bank etc.


 :thumbup:

I have even come across some pro-lifers of the catholic flavor that when ask for help by a mother in need who couldn't support another child they actually put their money where their mouth was. Even better was when they told the pro-lifers (who preached but didn't help) off! I was rather shocked in a pleasant way as my entire childhood had been anti-abortion indoctrination.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Just to be completely clear here, the b-----s I'm referring to are the good Christian ladies who always have a Bible verse at the ready until someone they don't approve of might need their support. Isn't our faith supposed to cross all other lines? It sure doesn't when it comes to KPG, Country Bumpkins and their supposedly devout sisters.


I am sorry then, MIB, the reaction was attached to my post. I couldn't figure that out. 
I do understand how stressful and exhausting being a caregiver can be. I even regretted my kneejerk reaction to your post. 
I hope that your mother is resting well and you are able to relax with her for a bit. 
We do all have to face losing our parents at some point, another sad fact of life.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> That's janey for you. No class and proud of it.


And as MIB has pointed out, not a single Christian lady on the conservative side steps up to say "too much".


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Pragmatic people of faith. They can shock people. They are not just theory. And not just one-sided. Thanks for reminding me.



Lkholcomb said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> I have even come across some pro-lifers of the catholic flavor that when ask for help by a mother in need who couldn't support another child they actually put their money where their mouth was. Even better was when they told the pro-lifers (who preached but didn't help) off! I was rather shocked in a pleasant way as my entire childhood had been anti-abortion indoctrination.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sad but true. Dogma over ethics.



jelun2 said:


> And as MIB has pointed out, not a single Christian lady on the conservative side steps up to say "too much".


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

karverr said:


> I didn't miss your last post, what you said to the ladies here was terrible. they in many posts have professed true sympathy for your mother,yet you insulted them vilely.I hope your mom has another sibling to care for her as your anger is too quick to flare up. I will still put her on my prayer list my you too as I see you are in dire need of prayer. again thank you for all the work you did to find the info you posted.


Karverr,
Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


Wow. Just.... Wow.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


Perhaps she also needs inner peace. Prayer is a great help. :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


Vile. Shame on you, LL.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Vile. Shame on you, LL.


She has no shame, she has proven that over and over. 
I think it is what happens to people when they believe that they are in some special club and saved.


----------



## Ma Kitty (Mar 15, 2013)

Jokim said:


> LL, could it be that some people in the world think this of US citizens because of the image the media and Hollywood creates?


There are these types of people everywhere. Not just in the US. But Yes, the Americans seem to have a reputation for being rude and loud when in other countries. I've met many and they've all been very nice. I have an American son in law living here now and he's great. I do find he has a very closed mind to certain things. But, since he's been on hour "socialist" health care system he's a convert. He can't believe he walks in to see the doctor and walks out without having to pay anything.

Canadians have the reputation of being over polite and that's not always the case either. However, I find we are much more tolerant than other countries. Maybe because we're such a mix of people. Who knows. We only have 30 odd million population compared to the US with well over 350 million. It's very hard to compare with those numbers.

Anyway, we all have a right to our opinions, we all are different and we should celebrate those differences.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> She has no shame, she has proven that over and over.
> I think it is what happens to people when they believe that they are in some special club and saved.


So true, Jelun. Those caring for elderly and ill parents deserve unswerving support and a hearty round of applause--not sly aspersions meant to undermine their confidence and increase the guilt quotient. LL's post is the worst I've seen for quite some time. Again, shame on her.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Ma Kitty said:


> There are these types of people everywhere. Not just in the US. But Yes, the Americans seem to have a reputation for being rude and loud when in other countries. I've met many and they've all been very nice. I have an American son in law living here now and he's great. I do find he has a very closed mind to certain things. But, since he's been on hour "socialist" health care system he's a convert. He can't believe he walks in to see the doctor and walks out without having to pay anything.
> 
> Canadians have the reputation of being over polite and that's not always the case either. However, I find we are much more tolerant than other countries. Maybe because we're such a mix of people. Who knows. We only have 30 odd million population compared to the US with well over 350 million. It's very hard to compare with those numbers.
> 
> Anyway, we all have a right to our opinions, we all are different and we should celebrate those differences.


Thank you for your reply. Basically, we are humans and the same.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true, Jelun. Those caring for elderly and ill parents deserve unswerving support and a hearty round of applause--not sly aspersions meant to undermine their confidence and increase the guilt quotient. LL's post is the worst I've seen for quite some time. Again, shame on her.


I have cared for an elderly parent for years and years. I know what it is like. It is very stressful. All I am saying that is if a person is angry/short-tempered as MIB has shown herself to be, it is not a good thing for the elderly parent.

I am speaking from experience and observation. Food for thought is all it was. But, again you misinterpret.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> I have cared for an elderly parent for years and years. I know what it is like. It is very stressful. All I am saying that is if a person is angry/short-tempered as MIB has shown herself to be, it is not a good thing for the elderly parent.
> 
> I am speaking from experience and observation. Food for thought is all it was. But, again you misinterpret.


It would be truly difficult to misinterpret your intent. It is very similar each and every time you post to or about someone who is on a different political plane than you. 
You appear to reserve any kindness for those who you wish to impress in a positive way. 
You certainly seem to have anger simmering below the surface on a regular basis. 
The difference between us is that I understand that this is a communication in written word over computers and that what SEEMS to be is not always what is. 
Maybe someday you will have the opportunity to learn that as well. 
Good luck.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> It would be truly difficult to misinterpret your intent. It is very similar each and every time you post to or about someone who is on a different political plane than you.
> You appear to reserve any kindness for those who you wish to impress in a positive way.
> You certainly seem to have anger simmering below the surface on a regular basis.
> The difference between us is that I understand that this is a communication in written word over computers and that what SEEMS to be is not always what is.
> ...


Jelun,

I am not an angry person. I do not expect you to know that from this website.

However, I do agree that it is very easy to misinterpret the written word here on this site. At least we agree on one thing.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I have cared for an elderly parent for years and years. I know what it is like. It is very stressful. All I am saying that is if a person is angry/short-tempered as MIB has shown herself to be, it is not a good thing for the elderly parent.
> 
> I am speaking from experience and observation. Food for thought is all it was. But, again you misinterpret.


LL, you are correct in stating the possible reactions of temperamental persons when faced with highly stressful situations. You have experience in taking care of an elderly parent. I am taking care of,(have been, for the past 3-1/2 yrs), my MIL who is almost 98 yrs. old. It is a very stressful responsibility, physically and emotionally. And my mother-in-law is a darling of a person. I can only imagine how hard it must be for those who take care of 'challenging' people. I admire the caretakers at nursing homes for having the patience and calmness to endure in their jobs. I have seen them react admirably in very adverse situations. "Walk a mile in my shoes . . . . ...."


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Jokim said:


> LL, you are correct in stating the possible reactions of temperamental persons when faced with highly stressful situations. You have experience in taking care of an elderly parent. I am taking care of,(have been, for the past 3-1/2 yrs), my MIL who is almost 98 yrs. old. It is a very stressful responsibility, physically and emotionally. And my mother-in-law is a darling of a person. I can only imagine how hard it must be for those who take care of 'challenging' people. I admire the caretakers at nursing homes for having the patience and calmness to endure in their jobs. I have seen them react admirably in very adverse situations. "Walk a mile in my shoes . . . . ...."


Thank you, Jokim, for understanding. I was responding to this post from Jelun:

Remember that the next time you are looking for support. 
I am tired of your mood shifts. 
You, of course, are fleet of mind. Some of us take bit to process and develop a post. 
I gave you chance the last time you pulled this sh-- because someone indicated it is cyclical. 
No more.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

damemary said:


> Sad but true. Dogma over ethics.


But that is a lie. Both Yarnie and I said something about her mother. Look at my post . If MIb , SS , Faroslady, Craftlady or whoever she is today keeps on I will post her private pm to me like Donnie K did. Yes a caregiver is very stressful. I should know I have had a disabled husband for 24 years tending too. But that is no excuse to go Alex Ballwin (SP?) on everyone. She can't even pick a side. She needs someone tending to her. Camille you need someone to help you. I am serious you are about to blow. I am praying for your dear mother. Just like you prayed for my dog.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Janeway said:


> You are one of the most hateful people on Earth to make fun of his disability.
> 
> Go pray for that baby you aborted because you could not be bothered by having a child. Get on your knees & maybe The Lord will hear your prayers!


People with disabilities are people first and disabled second. Karverr seems more than able to hold his own here so I see no reason to treat him as anything other than a human being and KP member. I find his posts ridiculous. So what? He has just as much right to be a fool as anyone else.

As I undertand it, I have been saved by our Great Redeemer and justified by God. As required, I perform good works both for their intrinsic value and for my sanctification.

At first, it really made me angry that you had taken things I told you about myself when we were exchanging PMs and scrambled what I had said. I guess you had some need to take the facts and bend them into a story you like better than the truth I gave you. I think that's really sad. I pity you but do not feel obliged to add you to my prayer list. You'll have to pray for yourself. I especially recommend you pray long and hard to become a more truthful person.

I would love it if you'd leave me alone but this is a public topic so that's not an option. If you can manage it, ignore me as often as you can and I will try to do the same for you.


----------



## Ma Kitty (Mar 15, 2013)

Okay, I haven't read every bit of this so I don't know what happened and who said what about getting angry with an elderly person someone was caring for. I'll give you my experience and you can see that it is sometimes funny to get mad.

My in laws lived in an entry level suite in our home (free) as my MIL had altzheimers and my FIL had strokes and was "confused" and they were like the grasshopper in the Grasshopper and the Ant story. So, we cared for them. As time went on they got more confused and since our washer and dryer were in their suite I had to do my laundry there. I asked repeatedly that they not move the stuff to the dryer. (She never did as she would not be able to figure out how to turn it on). Well my FIL wanted to do washing and moved my stuff to the dryer. I had hand dry stuff in it so the stuff shrank considerable. I was Mad. So, when he came upstairs to follow me after I had my rant in their suite, I was yelling at him at the top of the stairs and he was just at the top. I stopped to move him away from the stairs so he wouldn't fall down. Then we just laughed. Even though I was angry, I still cared more for his welfare than my darn shrunken ruined clothes. It all came into perspective. It is very stressful looking after the elderly. I've cleaned messes out of their pants, cleaned carpets from spills, washed pee off of any level surface that can be sat on. Paid for groceries because they forgot their money, and on and on. Would I do it all over again if they were still alive. ABSOLUTELY! It's human to get angry. I would never have ever hit them or treated them without dignity. You really have to walk a mile in the shoes of the caregiver. They thought I was the best DIL in the world. The last five years of their life they didn't have to worry about a thing. We just asked they pay their phone bill and their groceries. The rest of their pension was theirs to do with what they wished. That is what we, were born for, to care for our elderly with dignity. Sure, sometimes we get angry. We're human.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Ma Kitty said:


> Okay, I haven't read every bit of this so I don't know what happened and who said what about getting angry with an elderly person someone was caring for. I'll give you my experience and you can see that it is sometimes funny to get mad.
> 
> My in laws lived in an entry level suite in our home (free) as my MIL had altzheimers and my FIL had strokes and was "confused" and they were like the grasshopper in the Grasshopper and the Ant story. So, we cared for them. As time went on they got more confused and since our washer and dryer were in their suite I had to do my laundry there. I asked repeatedly that they not move the stuff to the dryer. (She never did as she would not be able to figure out how to turn it on). Well my FIL wanted to do washing and moved my stuff to the dryer. I had hand dry stuff in it so the stuff shrank considerable. I was Mad. So, when he came upstairs to follow me after I had my rant in their suite, I was yelling at him at the top of the stairs and he was just at the top. I stopped to move him away from the stairs so he wouldn't fall down. Then we just laughed. Even though I was angry, I still cared more for his welfare than my darn shrunken ruined clothes. It all came into perspective. It is very stressful looking after the elderly. I've cleaned messes out of their pants, cleaned carpets from spills, washed pee off of any level surface that can be sat on. Paid for groceries because they forgot their money, and on and on. Would I do it all over again if they were still alive. ABSOLUTELY! It's human to get angry. I would never have ever hit them or treated them without dignity. You really have to walk a mile in the shoes of the caregiver. They thought I was the best DIL in the world. The last five years of their life they didn't have to worry about a thing. We just asked they pay their phone bill and their groceries. The rest of their pension was theirs to do with what they wished. That is what we, were born for, to care for our elderly with dignity. Sure, sometimes we get angry. We're human.


Bless you! But others who have short fuses at the best of times should not take care of the elderly.

I admire you greatly.


----------



## Ma Kitty (Mar 15, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Bless you! But others who have short fuses at the best of times should not take care of the elderly.
> 
> I admire you greatly.


Thank you, I've been told I have the patience of Job. But when I blow, I blow. However, I'm never mean.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> I am sorry then, MIB, the reaction was attached to my post. I couldn't figure that out.
> I do understand how stressful and exhausting being a caregiver can be. I even regretted my kneejerk reaction to your post.
> I hope that your mother is resting well and you are able to relax with her for a bit.
> We do all have to face losing our parents at some point, another sad fact of life.


You don't have anything to apologize for. Everything is OK now. Much as it hurts, it's the natural order of things that we lose our parents. However, they live in us as long as we remember them. I've been really lucky to have good parents.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Ma Kitty said:


> Thank you, I've been told I have the patience of Job. But when I blow, I blow. However, I'm never mean.


I think I am the same way. I am patient, but when it goes too far - watch out. I am never mean to people, but people on this site would say the opposite. I know they don't know.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> You don't have anything to apologize for. Everything is OK now. Much as it hurts, it's the natural order of things that we lose our parents. However, they live in us as long as we remember them. I've been really lucky to have good parents.


I think in my case, I wanted my parent(s) to "get better" or be OK again. Of course that does not happen. You cannot reverse time. So, that led to trying to make them understand and correct things. That cannot happen either. It was all subconscious. It really takes so much patience and understanding, and it is more difficult with your own parents.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> But that is a lie. Both Yarnie and I said something about her mother. Look at my post . If MIb , SS , Faroslady, Craftlady or whoever she is today keeps on I will post her private pm to me like Donnie K did. Yes a caregiver is very stressful. I should know I have had a disabled husband for 24 years tending too. But that is no excuse to go Alex Ballwin (SP?) on everyone. She can't even pick a side. She needs someone tending to her. Camille you need someone to help you. I am serious you are about to blow. I am praying for your dear mother. Just like you prayed for my dog.


That is the point of the dogma over ethics comment. Your sympathies are false and ugly when you follow them up with that other BS.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Obamacare seems to be working much better in the states where the republicans are not trying to sabotage it. Some states like the republican party more that they care if their constituents have health insurance. 

"What we are seeing is incredible momentum," said Peter Lee, director of Covered California, the nation's largest state insurance marketplace, which accounted for a third of all enrollments nationally in October. Californiawhich enrolled about 31,000 people in health plans last monthnearly doubled that in the first two weeks of this month.

Several other states, including Connecticut and Kentucky, are outpacing their enrollment estimates, even as states that depend on the federal website lag far behind. In Minnesota, enrollment in the second half of October ran at triple the rate of the first half, officials said. Washington state is also on track to easily exceed its October enrollment figure, officials said.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Obamacare seems to be working much better in the states where the republicans are not trying to sabotage it. Some states like the republican party more that they care if their constituents have health insurance.
> 
> "What we are seeing is incredible momentum," said Peter Lee, director of Covered California, the nation's largest state insurance marketplace, which accounted for a third of all enrollments nationally in October. Californiawhich enrolled about 31,000 people in health plans last monthnearly doubled that in the first two weeks of this month.
> 
> Several other states, including Connecticut and Kentucky, are outpacing their enrollment estimates, even as states that depend on the federal website lag far behind. In Minnesota, enrollment in the second half of October ran at triple the rate of the first half, officials said. Washington state is also on track to easily exceed its October enrollment figure, officials said.


Yes, in addition Kentucky is doing very well. Up, up, and away.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

LL, I think you have to consider when and where I let off steam. One of the places I do that, in a negative way, is here because so many of you Conservatives are incredibly brain dead. The ultra-conservative Christian ladies are in great need of a serious dressing down. They are the least Christian people I've encountered in a very long time.

When my father was ill and took 2 years to die, my mother, brother and I cared for him AT HOME. None of us would have considered doing anything else. Now my mother is showing the signs of age more and more clearly. She has me living with her and my brother right next door. We know best what she needs and how best to make sure she gets that. We wouldn't have it any other way.

The family-based care my father got and my mother gets is the best medicine for them. There was never any possibility that my father would have been put in an SNF, and there is no doubt that my mother will ever see the inside of one of those horror chambers.

I actually get to go out to dinner and a movie tonight with a very nice man I went to high school with. Making sure to have some fun when possible is another way I let off steam. Tonight I will have the pleasures of a good dinner I didn't have to cook, lots of good conversation and a good movie. All in all, I believe I'm very lucky.


Lukelucy said:


> I have cared for an elderly parent for years and years. I know what it is like. It is very stressful. All I am saying that is if a person is angry/short-tempered as MIB has shown herself to be, it is not a good thing for the elderly parent.
> 
> I am speaking from experience and observation. Food for thought is all it was. But, again you misinterpret.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> LL, I think you have to consider when and where I let off steam. One of the places I do that, in a negative way, is here because so many of you Conservatives are incredibly brain dead. The ultra-conservative Christian ladies are in great need of a serious dressing down. They are the least Christian people I've encountered in a very long time.
> 
> When my father was ill and took 2 years to die, my mother, brother and I cared for him AT HOME. None of us would have considered doing anything else. Now my mother is showing the signs of age more and more clearly. She has me living with her and my brother right next door. We know best what she needs and how best to make sure she gets that. We wouldn't have it any other way.
> 
> ...


Yes, you are very lucky. Some places are not horror chambers. Once my father made the transition, he was content. Yes, he always wanted to come home, but he was comfortable. All depends on the place.

Keep up the good work. You will be thankful in the end.

I am not ultra conservative nor ultra religious. I was brought up Catholic, but do not practice. I have my own beliefs from my own experiences. We are all individuals.

Have a great dinner and movie. Tell me what you had to eat and what movie you saw.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Lukelucy said:


> I think in my case, I wanted my parent(s) to "get better" or be OK again. Of course that does not happen. You cannot reverse time. So, that led to trying to make them understand and correct things. That cannot happen either. It was all subconscious. It really takes so much patience and understanding, and it is more difficult with your own parents.


Now you've actually said something that makes sense. Sometimes I wish I had a magic wand and could give it a wave and change many things that would give me back the whole family I loved so much. Fortunately, with caring for a parent at home, it's possible to make sure they gat what they need and want in completely personalized ways. That seems like the best we can do in my family.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Yes, in addition Kentucky is doing very well. Up, up, and away.


That's good news. California's exchange, Covered California, seems to be working very well. Still, I'm very glad I don't have to go through the process of getting health insurance through the state exchanges or the federal exchange. I've had health insurance through Kaiser for 13 years and signed up for various improvements to my plan as time went by. Now I'm a little older and have a couple of things that need a bit more attention than they used to. Knowing I can get what I need gives me a sense of security and of having a really good safety net. It looks like that will be a reality for most Americans in the relatively near future. :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Yes, in addition Kentucky is doing very well. Up, up, and away.


Yes it seems democratic controlled states are the ones doing well. I don't understand why the republicans want to deny their citizens healthcare just to make President Obama fail, cause that is all is. The republican party, now controlled by the tea party sure have become strange uncaring people.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Now you've actually said something that makes sense. Sometimes I wish I had a magic wand and could give it a wave and change many things that would give me back the whole family I loved so much. Fortunately, with caring for a parent at home, it's possible to make sure they gat what they need and want in completely personalized ways. That seems like the best we can do in my family.


Yes, that is the best way. I waited on my dad and loved it. I just could not have him in the house - he was a danger. It killed me to move him. I will never forgive myself.

I found that he got to the point where I could not care for him anymore. Messy things happened - if you know what I mean, Sun-downer's when I had to work the next day, burners on the stove on for no reason. What was I to do?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> That's good news. California's exchange, Covered California, seems to be working very well. Still, I'm very glad I don't have to go through the process of getting health insurance through the state exchanges or the federal exchange. I've had health insurance through Kaiser for 13 years and signed up for various improvements to my plan as time went by. Now I'm a little older and have a couple of things that need a bit more attention than they used to. Knowing I can get what I need gives me a sense of security and of having a really good safety net. It looks like that will be a reality for most Americans in the relatively near future. :thumbup: :thumbup:


Enjoy your respite, Empress MIB. Time enough for commiserating about the state of the world another day.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> But that is a lie. Both Yarnie and I said something about her mother. Look at my post . If MIb , SS , Faroslady, Craftlady or whoever she is today keeps on I will post her private pm to me like Donnie K did. Yes a caregiver is very stressful. I should know I have had a disabled husband for 24 years tending too. But that is no excuse to go Alex Ballwin (SP?) on everyone. She can't even pick a side. She needs someone tending to her. Camille you need someone to help you. I am serious you are about to blow. I am praying for your dear mother. Just like you prayed for my dog.


Damemary, it's true that CB and Yarnie both said something well-meant to me about my mother.

CB, the catch is that I disaprove of your offer to pray for my mother. I know it's a harsh thing to say, but I just don't think you are worthy enough to pray for my mother. She doesn't want your prayers, either.

I feel the same way about several of your friends here. There are just some people I'm not willing to pray for and don't want to have pray for me and mine in any way. Of course, I will continue to make what I think of as general prayers about the trials and tribulations many people experience and you and your friends may well fall under those subjects.

I don't want to get any more PMs from you, either. I have the right to demand that and to expect you to leave me alone when it comes to communicating privately. Out here in public, everthing anyone says can be remarked on.

You sent me this PM:
"I am sorry that your mother is sick. Forgive me for being snarky. Prayers for you beloved mother."

To repell and reject you, I replied with this PM:
"Do not presume to pray for my mother. Yoiu aren't worth the smallest drop of her sweat. Your prayers are t***s. I am required to forgive you, but I will never tell you I have done so.

Don't PM me ever again for any reason whatsoever. Leave me the f*** alone and go on with your pretend-Christian life."

Yes, harsh and rude and I'm sure you didn't expect to get a face full of claws in response to an attempt to be nice. I want you to be very, very clear about this. Do not send me PMs. Do not pray for my mother. Encourage your buddies to refrain from doing the same.

What does the potential blackmailee say to someone who threatens to blackmail them? "Publish and be damned!" I've taken care of that publishing thing so you won't have to bother. I hope that ends this line of discussion.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> How many have actually been able to get their bill and pay for it? Are any numbers available for this?


My understanding is that people have the option, as with so many sites, to pay now or pay later.
That means, as I hear, that technically the federal gov't is over reporting. I suspect you will see it that way as you cannot admit that people will like to have insurance.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes it seems democratic controlled states are the ones doing well. I don't understand why the republicans want to deny their citizens healthcare just to make President Obama fail, cause that is all is. The republican party, now controlled by the tea party sure have become strange uncaring people.


They deny the people who live in their states health care for the same reasons they have done most things for the past few years. They want desperately for the man in the White House to fail. 
They do not want to govern. 
Why anyone runs for elective office in order to govern when they don't believe in government is beyond me. 
Once upon a time it was that they wanted limited gov't and were smart enough to work around the system to have some success. When the goal is NO gov't control, when the goal is to please the Koch brothers and the ALEC crowd there are no alternatives, there is no compromise. 
I think it is funny that we are so often accused of having been snookered... you and I both know who will be surprised and probably join us in the revolution.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

From the Wall Street Journal

Please read!


Business World 

How the GOP Should Fix ObamaCare

Along the way Republicans can create real choice, real competition and real savings while protecting those who need help.
By 
Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. 

Nov. 19, 2013 7:27 p.m. ET

Republicans are the only ones who can fix President Obama's broken promise now.

The problem is simply stated. Millions will be losing their individual insurance policies that they were promised they could keep. They will be expected to buy more expensive ObamaCare-approved policies than they want or need, and to do so from ObamaCare exchanges that aren't working.

Mr. Obama's fix, which he proposed on Thursday and which was quickly debunked by the insurance industry and its state regulators, can't work because Mr. Obama can't let it work. He has to fight to preserve the central purpose of ObamaCareto use the individual mandate and ObamaCare's compulsory benefit list to capture money from unwilling buyers of ObamaCare's gold-plated insurance policies to subsidize others.

Let's understand: The stumbling block to fixing Mr. Obama's broken promise is Democrats clinging to the central redistributive scheme embedded in ObamaCare. There is no reconciling the two. 

Americans are beginning to understand that the essence of the Affordable Care Act is that millions of people are being conscripted to buy overpriced insurance they would never choose for themselves in order to afford Mr. Obama monies to spend on the poor and those who are medically uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions. Both Mr. Obama and Republicans are blowing smoke in claiming that the damage done to the individual market by the forced cancellation of "substandard" plans (i.e., those that don't meet the purposes of ObamaCare) can somehow be reversed at this point. It can't be.

What can be done is Congress creating a new option in the form of a national health insurance charter under which insurers could design new low-cost policies free of mandated benefits imposed by ObamaCare and the 50 states that many of those losing their individual policies today surely would find attractive.

What's the first thing the new nationally chartered insurers would do? Rush out cheap, high-deductible policies, allaying some of the resentment that the ObamaCare mandate provokes among the young, healthy and footloose affluent. 

These folks could buy the minimalist coverage that (for various reasons) makes sense for them. They wouldn't be forced to buy excessive coverage they don't need to subsidize the old and sick.

If this idea sounds familiar, it was proposed right here three years ago, after the 2010 elections in which Democrats lost the House due to public disquiet over ObamaCare.

Because such a move could be sold as expanding the options under ObamaCare and lessening the burden of an unpopular mandate, it always had potential to draw Democratic support. That's doubly true now that Democrats are saddled with President Obama's promise that anybody who liked their existing insurance can keep it. Mr. Obama's promise is not literally keepable but the national charter would be the next best thing, letting millions find policies that are a good deal for them in their particular circumstances.

And, yes, this would also blow up the disingenuous financial engine of ObamaCare. This is a feature not a bug.

The ObamaCare exchanges would devolve into refuges for those who are medically uninsurable. But this seems increasingly likely to happen anyway. The federal government, having assumed the job of subsidizing these people, should do so honestly and openly.

ObamaCare is dead on the vine. It becomes clearer by the day the only way insurers can make the Obama benefits package work at a monthly premium affordable by healthy people who don't qualify for subsidies is with massive deductibles and copays and narrower provider networks. ObamaCare's individual mandate, as philosophically odious as some find it, would survive. An admirable principle buried in ObamaCarethat subsidies should be reserved for the needywould also survive.

What wouldn't survive is the Democratic scheme to force everyone, regardless of age and actuarial risk, to buy a gold-plated package of benefits that will stimulate a wasteful race to spend more resources on health care. And, down the road, by reforming ObamaCare, much else could be reformed, including Medicare and the ill-begotten and destructive link between employment and health care.

This outcome will shock liberals who have single-payer sugar plums dancing in their head right now. Let's leave them with one thought.

The government-run systems you so admire in other countries mostly came about long ago. They came about to expand access to medical care at a time when medical care couldn't do all that much for people. We live in a different age. America, let's face it, would be embarking on a single-payer system not to expand accessthough that slogan would be usedbut to deny and limit care in order to control runaway spending.

Liberals, you think you want to go there but you don't.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> How many have actually been able to get their bill and pay for it? Are any numbers available for this?


Well, I don't know. How do most insurance companies bill people. I know, I'll bet they will get there first bill at least through the mail and then switch to email for billing and automatic withdrawal or whatever they choose. I know you are hoping that they can't pay for it, so it's a failure, but these democratic controlled states care about their citizens. They will make it work. Can't say that about republican states.


----------



## medusa (Nov 20, 2012)

Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


What a disgusting coment!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

medusa said:


> What a disgusting coment!


Nice to see you, Medusa. Hard to believe you wade through all that nastiness just to pop in and say hi.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There are several states, including Minnesota, that will not allow insurance companies to reinstate old policies. Just on TV News.


Washington state also will not reinstate old policies. Said they can do better on the exchange. Again, another democratic controlled state that has been working with its citizens since the beginning to see that they get the best healthcare they can, not trying to keep it from them.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Just heard a funny from President Obama. He said after Obamacare is working the republicans will no longer call it Obamacare. Isn't that the truth. Then it will become the ACA.


"after Obamacare is working" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Now that's a joke. They can't get the website up and running. 30-40% hasn't even been built yet, even though they had 3 years to do so. The people in charge of "building" it have stated that they do not think it is secure. There is no way to accept payment as of yet. Yet the administration considered the website complete and gave it the go ahead. Policies have been cancelled, costs have skyrocketed, more cancellations will follow, groups have been given waivers, etc. Democrats have a long way to go to get Obamacare working. While the country is waiting for this to happen, more and more citizens will be uninsured. Now that's Democrat101 problem solving .


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Washington state also will not reinstate old policies. Said they can do better on the exchange. Again, another democratic controlled state that has been working with its citizens since the beginning to see that they get the best healthcare they can, not trying to keep it from them.


Yes, I have an idea that if we had the same communications systems decades ago the same reactions would be posted about Social Security and then for Medicare. 
People wonder why those who govern think they know better? Maybe just because they do.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


We've told you repeatedly that they do not consider you a friend, so why should they react as you wish them to.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

To Soloweygirl: Blah, Blah, Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

medusa said:


> What a disgusting coment!


read her vile post before you throw stones.
yall's leader Julen2 wrote said she was even tired of her s..., as she put it


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Ma Kitty said:


> Thank you, I've been told I have the patience of Job. But when I blow, I blow. However, I'm never mean.


We all have a 'blowing' point. But when we explode,(for some of us) it's never to the detriment of another person.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You are judgmental lunatics. Yes, I did put a name on it.



Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I thought 'judgemental lunatic,' but that's just me. I know the rantings about name calling, but I say, if there's a name for it, use it.



Lkholcomb said:


> Wow. Just.... Wow.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true, Jelun. Those caring for elderly and ill parents deserve unswerving support and a hearty round of applause--not sly aspersions meant to undermine their confidence and increase the guilt quotient. LL's post is the worst I've seen for quite some time. Again, shame on her.


       Shame on lukelucy


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You aren't fooling anyone. No one has 'misinterpreted you.' You are attempting to explain away your vile pronouncements. Won't work around here.



Lukelucy said:


> I have cared for an elderly parent for years and years. I know what it is like. It is very stressful. All I am saying that is if a person is angry/short-tempered as MIB has shown herself to be, it is not a good thing for the elderly parent.
> 
> I am speaking from experience and observation. Food for thought is all it was. But, again you misinterpret.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> It would be truly difficult to misinterpret your intent. It is very similar each and every time you post to or about someone who is on a different political plane than you.
> You appear to reserve any kindness for those who you wish to impress in a positive way.
> You certainly seem to have anger simmering below the surface on a regular basis.
> The difference between us is that I understand that this is a communication in written word over computers and that what SEEMS to be is not always what is.
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Well put.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lovely story. Thanks for sharing.



Ma Kitty said:


> Okay, I haven't read every bit of this so I don't know what happened and who said what about getting angry with an elderly person someone was caring for. I'll give you my experience and you can see that it is sometimes funny to get mad.
> 
> My in laws lived in an entry level suite in our home (free) as my MIL had altzheimers and my FIL had strokes and was "confused" and they were like the grasshopper in the Grasshopper and the Ant story. So, we cared for them. As time went on they got more confused and since our washer and dryer were in their suite I had to do my laundry there. I asked repeatedly that they not move the stuff to the dryer. (She never did as she would not be able to figure out how to turn it on). Well my FIL wanted to do washing and moved my stuff to the dryer. I had hand dry stuff in it so the stuff shrank considerable. I was Mad. So, when he came upstairs to follow me after I had my rant in their suite, I was yelling at him at the top of the stairs and he was just at the top. I stopped to move him away from the stairs so he wouldn't fall down. Then we just laughed. Even though I was angry, I still cared more for his welfare than my darn shrunken ruined clothes. It all came into perspective. It is very stressful looking after the elderly. I've cleaned messes out of their pants, cleaned carpets from spills, washed pee off of any level surface that can be sat on. Paid for groceries because they forgot their money, and on and on. Would I do it all over again if they were still alive. ABSOLUTELY! It's human to get angry. I would never have ever hit them or treated them without dignity. You really have to walk a mile in the shoes of the caregiver. They thought I was the best DIL in the world. The last five years of their life they didn't have to worry about a thing. We just asked they pay their phone bill and their groceries. The rest of their pension was theirs to do with what they wished. That is what we, were born for, to care for our elderly with dignity. Sure, sometimes we get angry. We're human.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well put! Thanks.



jelun2 said:


> That is the point of the dogma over ethics comment. Your sympathies are false and ugly when you follow them up with that other BS.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

This lends credence to my original thought. I felt the Federal website was sabotaged by the energy wasted fighting rumors and lies from the GOP.

I think ACA is much better than what we have. Adjustments will be made.

At least ACA is looking out for the average American, rather than removing any regulation standing in the way of greedy corporations.

-


NJG said:


> Obamacare seems to be working much better in the states where the republicans are not trying to sabotage it. Some states like the republican party more that they care if their constituents have health insurance.
> 
> "What we are seeing is incredible momentum," said Peter Lee, director of Covered California, the nation's largest state insurance marketplace, which accounted for a third of all enrollments nationally in October. Californiawhich enrolled about 31,000 people in health plans last monthnearly doubled that in the first two weeks of this month.
> 
> Several other states, including Connecticut and Kentucky, are outpacing their enrollment estimates, even as states that depend on the federal website lag far behind. In Minnesota, enrollment in the second half of October ran at triple the rate of the first half, officials said. Washington state is also on track to easily exceed its October enrollment figure, officials said.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Movie reviews, please. I know you'll have fun.



MaidInBedlam said:


> LL, I think you have to consider when and where I let off steam. One of the places I do that, in a negative way, is here because so many of you Conservatives are incredibly brain dead. The ultra-conservative Christian ladies are in great need of a serious dressing down. They are the least Christian people I've encountered in a very long time.
> 
> When my father was ill and took 2 years to die, my mother, brother and I cared for him AT HOME. None of us would have considered doing anything else. Now my mother is showing the signs of age more and more clearly. She has me living with her and my brother right next door. We know best what she needs and how best to make sure she gets that. We wouldn't have it any other way.
> 
> ...


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

karverr said:


> what does your post have to do with the post you replied to.


Read my mind three times.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I, for one, do not believe old policies should be reinstated no matter how much people love them and no matter what the President said in the past.

People overpaid for sub-par policies. They must have gotten a good sell job and believed all of it.

I think the President may have mis-spoke...and he may have been taken out of context. I think that his niceness and tendency to build consensus led to an apology and more mess. If I were President, I'd say deal with it.



joeysomma said:


> There are several states, including Minnesota, that will not allow insurance companies to reinstate old policies. Just on TV News.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I missed you.



medusa said:


> What a disgusting coment!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huh?


soloweygirl said:


> We've told you repeatedly that they do not consider you a friend, so why should they react as you wish them to.


 :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Even IF you were completely correct (you are not), do two wrongs make a right. It never worked for me when I said all the other kids were doing it.



karverr said:


> read her vile post before you throw stones.
> yall's leader Julen2 wrote said she was even tired of her s..., as she put it


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Try a hex instead.



ute4kp said:


> Read my mind three times.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> Read my mind three times.


LOL, I love it!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

I am with you, he apologized. I wish he hadn't even done that. He should have said this was what was up, these policies were worse than pig puke. 
Go buy something worth buying. Grow up and stop whining, you have real health insurance now.



damemary said:


> I, for one, do not believe old policies should be reinstated no matter how much people love them and no matter what the President said in the past.
> 
> People overpaid for sub-par policies. They must have gotten a good sell job and believed all of it.
> 
> I think the President may have mis-spoke...and he may have been taken out of context. I think that his niceness and tendency to build consensus led to an apology and more mess. If I were President, I'd say deal with it.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> I WOULD be thankful for an "ignore" button.


 :lol: :lol: :twisted: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

damemary said:


> Shame on lukelucy


Shame on Damemary


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well, I guess we understand each other.



Lukelucy said:


> Shame on Damemary


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

damemary said:


> Well, I guess we understand each other.


I like your reply.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> That is so the truth. The sun shines on the unjust just like everyone else. Glory to God!Matthew 5:45
> 
> 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust


The devil can also cite scripture for his own reasons.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ute4kp said:


> The devil can also cite scripture for his own reasons.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

ute4kp said:


> The devil can also cite scripture for his own reasons.


I agree.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

damemary said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

karverr said:


> you are so smart, you worked on an answer all night, boy I appreciate your effort. thank you so much for your work


So now we have to read KP on your time schedule?
......strumming on an old banjo.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Poor guy, I guess he has to have some fun in his life and if giving me a facetious compliment cheers him up, I don't mind. I especially liked him saying I stayed up all night to find out exactly where the Appalachians are. After spending the day in ER with my mother (everything turned out to be OK, thank goodness.) we were both pooped and slept exceedingly well.


I'm glad your mom is Ok!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> I must have missed something here. Maybe a few somethings.


Tooooo funny. I think it was an icon response to another's icons.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> Movie reviews, please. I know you'll have fun.


Whatever the movie is, this guy and I have 46 years of catching up to do and have only had lunch and some emails to do that. I'm looking forward to a pleasant evening that doesn't necessarily mean there will be any more contact. That's part of the adventure. Further appropriate updates will follow!!:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

MaidInBedlam said:


> What I know for sure is that, having mentioned I spent a large part of yesterday in an ER with my mother, FOR GOOD REASON, none of you b-----s had the common decency to say a word in sympathy. KMA, kids. None of you is worth the smallest drop of my mother's spit.


I'm just catching up, now. I hope your mom feels better!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Janeway said:


> You must be black to love Obama as you do!


Whhhhhhaaaaaattttttt !!!??


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Janeway said:


> You are one of the most hateful people on Earth to make fun of his disability.
> 
> Go pray for that baby you aborted because you could not be bothered by having a child. Get on your knees & maybe The Lord will hear your prayers!


What, what is this?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Lukelucy said:


> Karverr,
> Very perceptive. Her mother needs someone else to care for her. She could be abusive. That is not a condemnation. It happens easily under the stress of taking care of an elderly parent. However, her personality shows a severe weakness in kindness, anger and self-control.


Vile comment.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> This lends credence to my original thought. I felt the Federal website was sabotaged by the energy wasted fighting rumors and lies from the GOP.
> 
> I think ACA is much better than what we have. Adjustments will be made.
> 
> ...


Yes the republicans have done everything they can to sabotaged the ACA, like refusing the fund the implementation of it. Now the group funded by the Koch Bros is going to spend 3.5 million for adds against Obamacare. What is wrong with people that they hate a man so bad that they would rather people go without insurance than for that man to succeed and for our country to succeed. How can people have that much hate in their heart.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

NJG said:


> Yes the republicans have done everything they can to sabotaged the ACA, like refusing the fund the implementation of it. Now the group funded by the Koch Bros is going to spend 3.5 million for adds against Obamacare. What is wrong with people that they hate a man so bad that they would rather people go without insurance than for that man to succeed and for our country to succeed. How can people have that much hate in their heart.


The ACA has sabotaged itself. Stop blaming others.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> The ACA has sabotaged itself. Stop blaming others.


I call em like I see em and will not ask your permission.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Have I called republicans hypocrites before, yes I have. Well here is another one. Republican Rep Trey Radel from Florida plead guilty to possession of cocaine. The same person who voted to make food stamp recipients be drug tested before receiving food stamps. Maybe he should have to be drug tested before receiving his pay check.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> The devil can also cite scripture for his own reasons.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
I am thankful for the abilty to skim over objectionable posts.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes the republicans have done everything they can to sabotaged the ACA, like refusing the fund the implementation of it. Now the group funded by the Koch Bros is going to spend 3.5 million for adds against Obamacare. What is wrong with people that they hate a man so bad that they would rather people go without insurance than for that man to succeed and for our country to succeed. How can people have that much hate in their heart.


Not to mention the hate and disdain for the American public. 
These folks who blindly walk the same side of the street as there multi-billionaires should really step back and wonder what they have in common with those who are financially backing this negative campaign. 
I think they would decide that it is nothing.

And the next time they have a minute to stop and think wonder what these people know that they don't.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Who is Debra on Facebook? Just a person writing down numbers wanting everyone to believe her hype.:\


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

What did the governor of North Carolina say when asked why they cut early voting? He said they didn't cut early voting, the just "compacted the calendar." What?

Republicans have been saying they will continue to stand firm on their beliefs on abortion and the Latino community will come to them because the Latino community believes as they do. Wrong! Albuquerque New Mexico which has a large Latino population, just had an election for mayor that drew 75,500 voters and then an election for a ban on abortion that drew 86,940 voters and it lost.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It was an interesting comment alright. Janey never fails to amuse.

I'm not saying another thing on this subject.



ute4kp said:


> Whhhhhhaaaaaattttttt !!!??


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Don't try to make sense of it. You'll give yourself a migraine.



ute4kp said:


> What, what is this?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Yes the republicans have done everything they can to sabotaged the ACA, like refusing the fund the implementation of it. Now the group funded by the Koch Bros is going to spend 3.5 million for adds against Obamacare. What is wrong with people that they hate a man so bad that they would rather people go without insurance than for that man to succeed and for our country to succeed. How can people have that much hate in their heart.


Yes and at their own expense.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You make me laugh when you're trying not to amuse me.



Lukelucy said:


> The ACA has sabotaged itself. Stop blaming others.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Laugh when you like to. I am.



NJG said:


> I call em like I see em and will not ask your permission.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Have I called republicans hypocrites before, yes I have. Well here is another one. Republican Rep Trey Radel from Florida plead guilty to possession of cocaine. The same person who voted to make food stamp recipients be drug tested before receiving food stamps. Maybe he should have to be drug tested before receiving his pay check.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Love it!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> What did the governor of North Carolina say when asked why they cut early voting? He said they didn't cut early voting, the just "compacted the calendar." What?
> 
> Republicans have been saying they will continue to stand firm on their beliefs on abortion and the Latino community will come to them because the Latino community believes as they do. Wrong! Albuquerque New Mexico which has a large Latino population, just had an election for mayor that drew 75,500 voters and then an election for a ban on abortion that drew 86,940 voters and it lost.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: I know you're not making this up.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: I know you're not making this up.


No, I couldn't if I tried, compacted calendar!!!!!!!


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> Vile comment.


Certainly you cannot be surprised by her comment(s). Vitriolic is the best way I can describe it. Low self esteem causes some people to try to take other people to their level.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Who is Debra on Facebook? Just a person writing down numbers wanting everyone to believe her hype.:\


Debra runs this web page...

I love it when I wake up in the Morning and Barack Obama is President ILIWIWUITMABOIP


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> You are judgmental lunatics. Yes, I did put a name on it.


as you ladies have told us, she wasn't talking to you so keep your nose out of it, mind your own business. I truly have not read where anyone has requested your lunatic opinion.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> as you ladies have told us, she wasn't talking to you so keep your nose out of it, mind your own business. I truly have not read where anyone has requested your lunatic opinion.


You have that backward, I believe, the line is post in a public forum the responses can come flowing in like manna from heaven and all other directions. 
It is what it is. I am thankful for that.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

NJG said:


> Have I called republicans hypocrites before, yes I have. Well here is another one. Republican Rep Trey Radel from Florida plead guilty to possession of cocaine. The same person who voted to make food stamp recipients be drug tested before receiving food stamps. Maybe he should have to be drug tested before receiving his pay check.


I agree with you fully, drug use is not acceptable by republicans , democrat's or any other person. yes there some on both sides so lets check them all.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> I agree with you fully, drug use is not acceptable by republicans , democrat's or any other person. yes there some on both sides so lets check them all.


Yup, I am with you and while we are at it why not throw the whole US Constitution out the window. Start all over. 
Give the land over to the plutocracy.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> You have that backward, I believe, the line is post in a public forum the responses can come flowing in like manna from heaven and all other directions.
> It is what it is. I am thankful for that.


If you were intelligent enough you would see that she was in fact replying to a post I had made just like you replied to this one, she was sending me an answer,it was in no way private and all could read it, so like I said it wasn't sent to or about you so keep your nose in your own business.


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Yup, I am with you and while we are at it why not throw the whole US Constitution out the window. Start all over.
> Give the land over to the plutocracy.


 Dang, I can't even agree with you libs on one thing and you still come back at me.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

karverr said:


> If you were intelligent enough you would see that she was in fact replying to a post I had made just like you replied to this one, she was sending me an answer,it was in no way private and all could read it, so like I said it wasn't sent to or about you so keep your nose in your own business.


Well no, I will respond to any post I decide that I want to. I will ignore any post that I decide I want to. 
That will be at any time, any thread, and about any subject I want to. 
Thank you for reminding me of just how ugly Christian men can be.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> Have I called republicans hypocrites before, yes I have. Well here is another one. Republican Rep Trey Radel from Florida plead guilty to possession of cocaine. The same person who voted to make food stamp recipients be drug tested before receiving food stamps. Maybe he should have to be drug tested before receiving his pay check.


Yeah, random drug test all politicians. I bet we'd all be enlightened. Omg, I agree with karver on this. Is this the end of days? I hope not. Lol.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

ute4kp said:


> Yeah, random drug test all politicians. I bet we'd all be enlightened.


That would be an eye opener. Wonder if John Boehner does all that tanning to cover up his red nose from hitting the bottle too much.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Cindy S said:


> Certainly you cannot be surprised by her comment(s). Vitriolic is the best way I can describe it. Low self esteem causes some people to try to take other people to their level.


Mmmm, beyond belief. Jaw dropping.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

karverr said:


> as you ladies have told us, she wasn't talking to you so keep your nose out of it, mind your own business. I truly have not read where anyone has requested your lunatic opinion.


This is a public forum. Didn't you know?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

karverr said:


> If you were intelligent enough you would see that she was in fact replying to a post I had made just like you replied to this one, she was sending me an answer,it was in no way private and all could read it, so like I said it wasn't sent to or about you so keep your nose in your own business.


Ok, who can translate this.....oh never mind.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> That would be an eye opener. Wonder if John Boehner does all that tanning to cover up his red nose from hitting the bottle too much.


Bwa ha ha ha :twisted: :twisted: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> I think he's trying to match Obama. Bwa ha ha ha :twisted: :twisted: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


I wonder if anyone has looked at his eyes, maybe the browning is to hide a yellowish tinge?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> Yes the republicans have done everything they can to sabotaged the ACA, like refusing the fund the implementation of it. Now the group funded by the Koch Bros is going to spend 3.5 million for adds against Obamacare. What is wrong with people that they hate a man so bad that they would rather people go without insurance than for that man to succeed and for our country to succeed. How can people have that much hate in their heart.


Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> Have I called republicans hypocrites before, yes I have. Well here is another one. Republican Rep Trey Radel from Florida plead guilty to possession of cocaine. The same person who voted to make food stamp recipients be drug tested before receiving food stamps. Maybe he should have to be drug tested before receiving his pay check.


I heard that today and I just chuckled. Sad really, but I couldn't help chuckling. We spend soooooo much on those druggie food stamp addicts that we must test them (oh and screw their kids who are hungry because we don't have money to increase the "social program" of child protection services so they stay in the home). I wonder how much salary we have given this representative in comparison to the food stamp recipients who were caught doing drugs (not antecdotal, I saw them, but actually arrested). Of course the food stamps druggies may just be smarter than the representative...... I could actually believe that.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

damemary said:


> You are judgmental lunatics. Yes, I did put a name on it.


I read this earlier and now I can't get beonce's song "if you like it them you better put a ring on it" out of my head. Only the words are substituted to, "if you hate then you'd better put a name on it" lol. I'm just a bit silly I guess.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I wonder if anyone has looked at his eyes, maybe the browning is to hide a yellowish tinge?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Cindy S said:


> Certainly you cannot be surprised by her comment(s). Vitriolic is the best way I can describe it. Low self esteem causes some people to try to take other people to their level.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You're proving that every lunatic gets to express their opinions in an open Forum.



karverr said:


> as you ladies have told us, she wasn't talking to you so keep your nose out of it, mind your own business. I truly have not read where anyone has requested your lunatic opinion.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Anarchy rules.



jelun2 said:


> Yup, I am with you and while we are at it why not throw the whole US Constitution out the window. Start all over.
> Give the land over to the plutocracy.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


It makes no sense to me, either. They must think it makes them appear as a big force. They just look like nothing. Or maybe idiots.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> That would be an eye opener. Wonder if John Boehner does all that tanning to cover up his red nose from hitting the bottle too much.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

No comprende so we'll just talk to those who do.



ute4kp said:


> Ok, who can translate this.....oh never mind.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well put. Thank you.



Lkholcomb said:


> Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> I heard that today and I just chuckled. Sad really, but I couldn't help chuckling. We spend soooooo much on those druggie food stamp addicts that we must test them (oh and screw their kids who are hungry because we don't have money to increase the "social program" of child protection services so they stay in the home). I wonder how much salary we have given this representative in comparison to the food stamp recipients who were caught doing drugs (not antecdotal, I saw them, but actually arrested). Of course the food stamps druggies may just be smarter than the representative...... I could actually believe that.


Too easy. You don't have to be a genius, and Americans love the loophole.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I love your sillies. Everyone needs a laugh now and then to keep from doing harm. Onward.



Lkholcomb said:


> I read this earlier and now I can't get beonce's song "if you like it them you better put a ring on it" out of my head. Only the words are substituted to, "if you hate then you'd better put a name on it" lol. I'm just a bit silly I guess.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ute4kp said:


> It makes no sense to me, either. They must think it makes them appear as a big force. They just look like nothing. Or maybe idiots.


Maybe idiots? You're too kind.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> You're proving that every lunatic gets to express their opinions in an open Forum.


Please, tell us, my Empress...have you read anyone requesting his? 
It seems that now that The ACA is finally ready to be paying off for American citizens we will have to find a new topic. 
There is no longer any basis for the president haters to use the health insurance reform plan to smear him and us.

A couple of ideas that I haven't wanted to muddy others' threads with...

I keep reading thanks (well deserved) to veterans who "have fought for our freedoms". 
My question is just what conflict in the past 60 years has been to defend our freedoms?
It seems to me that we have lost way too many young people in actions that didn't really help anyone, actually destablized societies all over the world, made that system that President Eisenhower warned us of LOTS and LOTS of billions of dollars, created a whole security based industry to make more private contractors rich and to strip our constitutional freedoms from us... where have we benefitted from those actions?

Second, a woman posted a feel good piece this week about her good result from testing. 
She got whacked by others from different religions who didn't understand her way of expressing God. 
How do we better express our differences and still sound respectful?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Fascinating topics. Let us know when anyone opens a new thread.



jelun2 said:


> Please, tell us, my Empress...have you read anyone requesting his?
> It seems that now that The ACA is finally ready to be paying off for American citizens we will have to find a new topic.
> There is no longer any basis for the president haters to use the health insurance reform plan to smear him and us.
> 
> ...


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> Fascinating topics. Let us know when anyone opens a new thread.


I working on it, just need to let some of the hammer blows heal first.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'll send ice and Neosporin. Works for me.



jelun2 said:


> I working on it, just need to let some of the hammer blows heal first.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> I'll send ice and Neosporin. Works for me.


LOL, Thanks. 
Maybe a bit of Aspercreme as well?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

With coffee and chocolate?



jelun2 said:


> LOL, Thanks.
> Maybe a bit of Aspercreme as well?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Keep spreading exaggerations and rumors. Hopefully people will vote in their self-interest.



joeysomma said:


> Have you heard how much it will cost the middle class for the "fix?" The ones of the 5,000,000 that may be able to have their insurance reinstated, the cost will be 15% to 20% additional in premiums. It may not be as much as going on the exchange. Then it will only be for a year.
> 
> How many of these 5,000,000 will now be without insurance when they cannot afford the exchange prices. Then what will happen to the US economy when all of this money is going to the exchanges instead of buying products? How much more unemployment will this bring? I can see another recession.
> 
> There is little talk about the quality of health care the ones on the exchanges will receive. The access to specialists at the big health centers like the Mayo Clinic will be limited. Some have said only gold or better plans will be accepted by them.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Have you heard how much it will cost the middle class for the "fix?" The ones of the 5,000,000 that may be able to have their insurance reinstated, the cost will be 15% to 20% additional in premiums. It may not be as much as going on the exchange. Then it will only be for a year.
> 
> How many of these 5,000,000 will now be without insurance when they cannot afford the exchange prices. Then what will happen to the US economy when all of this money is going to the exchanges instead of buying products? How much more unemployment will this bring? I can see another recession.
> 
> ...


Again though, if so many people will be horribly affected and it will cost, why put the money into ads instead of preparing for the "fix"?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> With coffee and chocolate?


My latest love is Stash Lemon Ginger Tea. 
Chocolate is always great.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Again though, if so many people will be horribly affected and it will cost, why put the money into ads instead of preparing for the "fix"?


Because the ads are supported by those tax exempt "social welfare" portions of the billionaires' game to take over government?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> 40 House Republicans Back Constitutional Challenge to Obamacare
> 
> Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obamacare-Origination-Clause-appeal/2013/11/20/id/537745?ns_mail_uid=24000275&ns_mail_job=1546926_11212013&promo_code=15AD8-1#ixzz2lIGjKBOG


Repeal attempt number forty--well, I forget how many times the GOP has gone down this road. Same old same old, I'm afraid.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


The ACA *is* failing horrifically and will be nothing more than a high-risk pool, funded by the American taxpayers (you) for the very poor or those who are very medically stricken.

That is OK with me and exactly like that proposed by the Republicans. Only difference is the bungling of the roll-out, the huge waste of taxpayers' dollars for nothing, the gross amount of time spent on its creation, the Dems shutdown of government over same, the burden on all states when the subsidy for Medicare goes away, and most importantly, the broken promises (translation: LIES) of Obama.

Other than that, ObamaCare is just grand.

BTW: Obama and his weak Admin IS spending a ton of money AGAIN to promote Obamacare and it is NOT doing a bit of good. You're correct, the Dems care more about getting what they want, they won't, and nothing will get fixed. Just ~50-100 million folks losing their existing health insurance policies. The Dems and Obama have a wonderful legacy to look forward to; failure and the demise of their signature legislation. The Dems are hoping it doesn't mean their extinction.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The ACA *is* failing horrifically and will be nothing more than a high-risk pool, funded by the American taxpayers (you) for the very poor or those who are very medically stricken.
> 
> That is OK with me and exactly like that proposed by the Republicans. Only difference is the bungling of the roll-out, the huge waste of taxpayers' dollars for nothing, the gross amount of time spent on its creation, the Dems shutdown of government over same, the burden on all states when the subsidy for Medicare goes away, and most importantly, the broken promises (translation: LIES) of Obama.
> 
> ...


You are absolutely delusional. If Obamacare is a disaster, why don't the repubs just let it fail instead of making healthcare a political issue?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

alcameron said:


> You are absolutely delusional. If Obamacare is a disaster, why don't the repubs just let it fail instead of making healthcare a political issue?


Because fact really is different from fiction.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Have you heard how much it will cost the middle class for the "fix?" The ones of the 5,000,000 that may be able to have their insurance reinstated, the cost will be 15% to 20% additional in premiums. It may not be as much as going on the exchange. Then it will only be for a year.
> 
> How many of these 5,000,000 will now be without insurance when they cannot afford the exchange prices. Then what will happen to the US economy when all of this money is going to the exchanges instead of buying products? How much more unemployment will this bring? I can see another recession.
> 
> ...


Oh, Obama and the Dems made perfect sense over their debacle: to insure 15 million uninsured, eliminate the existing policies being held and PAID FOR by 200 million.

Ya, that'll work.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Again though, if so many people will be horribly affected and it will cost, why put the money into ads instead of preparing for the "fix"?


Why don't you ask the brilliant Dems, Obama and the Libs this question? They are the folks spending millions to promote Obamacare. If Obamacare, which still isn't even off the ground totally, is so fantastic, why is a "fix" even necessary?

*Not ONE* Republican voted for Obamacare in either House of Congress. So, of course, the Republicans, aren't doing anything to support its implementation.

The Republican are doing and have done everything they can to stop, repeal, and now 'fix' any part of this failure they can. Of course, Obama, threatens to veto anything they do anyway. Just like the death panels within Obamacare.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.


 :thumbup: The Dems and Obama only care about what will happen to them in the 2014 elections.

Obamacare was never about health insurance. ObamaNoCare was always about control over We the People.

The Republicans ARE allowing ObamaCare to fall flat on its huge, failured face. I'm enjoying watching it all play out.

The Dems are facing extinction; couldn't happen to a nicer group.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

I'm certain Obamacare is done.

Pretty certain Obama is done.

Dems on the run.


What a nice day! :-D


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

/


jelun2 said:


> Because fact really is different from fiction.


Here you go Debra. Put this one on [email protected] http://swampland.time.com/2013/11/19/white-house-was-warned-about-obamacare-website-problems/


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

7 million needed to PAY for enrolling on Obamacare on its implementation for it even to be viable.

NOT ONE person has paid or been able to pay on the Federal Exchange.

Maybe 27,000 have paid in state exchanges to date.

The Dems are proud of those FAILED stats and posting their failures on Facebook?

Hilarious! :XD: Thanks for the laugh CB.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> 7 million needed to PAY for enrolling on Obamacare on its implementation for it even to be viable.
> 
> NOT ONE person has paid or been able to pay on the Federal Exchange.
> 
> ...


If the repubs are SO concerned over those 5% who were having their policies dropped, why weren't they concerned throughout the past several years when health insurance companies were dropping people right and left because they were too sick to make the company profitable? You certainly can't fool me that repubs actually have concern over PEOPLE. Their motives are totally political and it's too bad your political bias blinds you.if you'd like to hear health insurance companiy's horror stories from the past (when repubs cared not one iota) I'll list some for you. You must be young, healthy, and unconcerned about people to be so ignorant about health insurance. Keep following the unchristian, sociopathic, amoral policies of Teabaggers and repubs unless you really want to see the pearly gates.
Pathetic AND delusional!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

alcameron said:


> If the repubs are SO concerned over those 5% who were having their policies dropped, why weren't they concerned throughout the past several years when health insurance companies were dropping people right and left because they were too sick to make the company profitable? You certainly can't fool me that repubs actually have concern over PEOPLE. Their motives are totally political and it's too bad your political bias blinds you.if you'd like to hear health insurance companiy's horror stories from the past (when repubs cared not one iota) I'll list some for you. You must be young, healthy, and unconcerned about people to be so ignorant about health insurance. Keep following the unchristian, sociopathic, amoral policies of Teabaggers and repubs unless you really want to see the pearly gates.
> Pathetic AND delusional!


Oh God, I am beginning to feel like Janeway


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

and *done*. The elected Dems in D.C. are scared out-of-their-tiny-little minds. They, under Harry's 'leadership,' FINALLY had a vote in the Senate (when is they last time _that_ happened?) making themselves the King-of-the-Hill.

Only problem, is the Dems are rolling down said hill and will be replaced by the 'other' party.

Oh, boy  sounds like desperation, looks like desperation, votes like desperation, is a Democrat.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Here is one of the many things I don't understand about campaigns against the ACA: they keep saying it will be a big flop and fail horrifically and they are only interested in those poor people who will have no health care. So u don't understand why they don't let it fail (which would not cost anything if ACA is just a time bomb) and instead put the money into the "fix" they will be begged to make. :roll: It is just fiscally irresponsible to spend so much time on ads and convincing people of the failure if "everybody will see how big of a failure it is now". Seems apparent to me they care more bout being "right" than about helping people with any "fix".


If they really believed it was going to fail, they would leave it alone. Since they are willing to waste millions of dollars on it, I think they are pretty sure it will work just like social security and Medicare. If on top of those two things we now have healthcare, they are really fearful they will not be able to get rid of any of it. They still want to get rid of social security and Medicare and they will if they ever gain complete control. If they can't completely get rid of them they will change them enough to make them worthless. Did anyone listen to Elizabeth Warrens senate speech yesterday?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I heard that today and I just chuckled. Sad really, but I couldn't help chuckling. We spend soooooo much on those druggie food stamp addicts that we must test them (oh and screw their kids who are hungry because we don't have money to increase the "social program" of child protection services so they stay in the home). I wonder how much salary we have given this representative in comparison to the food stamp recipients who were caught doing drugs (not antecdotal, I saw them, but actually arrested). Of course the food stamps druggies may just be smarter than the representative...... I could actually believe that.


He said he would donate his salary while he was in rehab. When he had his press conference yesterday, a reporter was trying to ask him about that vote against food stamp recipients but he was walking away and didn't answer. Hopefully when he is out of rehab someone will pursue that question. I'd like to hear how he answers that. When you made that vote, were you thinking about the cocaine you had in your pocket is what I would like to ask him.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I heard that today and I just chuckled. Sad really, but I couldn't help chuckling. We spend soooooo much on those druggie food stamp addicts that we must test them (oh and screw their kids who are hungry because we don't have money to increase the "social program" of child protection services so they stay in the home). I wonder how much salary we have given this representative in comparison to the food stamp recipients who were caught doing drugs (not antecdotal, I saw them, but actually arrested). Of course the food stamps druggies may just be smarter than the representative...... I could actually believe that.


He said he would donate his salary while he was in rehab. When he had his press conference yesterday, a reporter was trying to ask him about that vote against food stamp recipients but he was walking away and didn't answer. Hopefully when he is out of rehab someone will pursue that question. I'd like to hear how he answers that. When you made that vote, were you thinking about the cocaine you had in your pocket is what I would like to ask him. Sorry double post


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.



knitpresentgifts said:


> Why don't you ask the brilliant Dems, Obama and the Libs this question? They are the folks spending millions to promote Obamacare. If Obamacare, which still isn't even off the ground totally, is so fantastic, why is a "fix" even necessary?
> 
> *Not ONE* Republican voted for Obamacare in either House of Congress. So, of course, the Republicans, aren't doing anything to support its implementation.
> 
> The Republican are doing and have done everything they can to stop, repeal, and now 'fix' any part of this failure they can. Of course, Obama, threatens to veto anything they do anyway. Just like the death panels within Obamacare.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Grassley is on C-Span 2right now complaining about the nuclear option. What an idiot. I am writing him an email today to let him know what I think of his speech.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Cindy S wrote:
Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


So sorry for your loss Cindy. I can not even imagine the pain you must be going through. My words can change nothing, but just know that I have great respect for your son and your family.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


You and dingbat Sarah Palin need to read the ACA and find out the truth about your so called death panels.

FACT: Law Does Not Allow IPAB To Recommend Rationing Health Care

Health Care Law Explicitly States That IPAB Cannot Make "Any Recommendation To Ration Health Care." The text of the ACA confirms that IPAB cannot make "any recommendation to ration health care... or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria":

The proposal shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818, 1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost- sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria. [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, accessed 8/13/13, OpenCongress.org]

PolitiFact: IPAB "Wouldn't Make Any Health Care Decisions For Individual Americans." A PolitiFact analysis of the claim that IPAB would make the final decision on available treatments found that IPAB would make broad policy decisions, not individual recommendations. It also noted that IPAB is "forbidden from submitting 'any recommendation to ration health care'":

The health care law directs a new national board -- with 15 members who are political appointees -- to identify Medicare savings. It's forbidden from submitting "any recommendation to ration health care," as Section 3403 of the health care law states. It may not raise premiums for Medicare beneficiaries or increase deductibles, coinsurance or co-payments. The IPAB also cannot change who is eligible for Medicare, restrict benefits or make recommendations that would raise revenue.

What it can do is reduce how much the government pays health care providers for services, reduce payments to hospitals with very high rates of re-admissions or recommend innovations that cut wasteful spending. Some argue that because the IPAB can reduce the money a doctor receives, this could lead to an indirect form of rationing.

But the board wouldn't make any health care decisions for individual Americans. Instead, as PolitiFact Georgia reported, it would make broad policy decisions that affect Medicare's overall cost. [PolitiFact, 10/3/12]

Wash. Post's Glenn Kessler: The ACA "Explicitly Says That The Recommendations Cannot Lead To Rationing Of Health Care." Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler wrote that IPAB "appears aimed at doing the same thing as the House Republican Medicare plan":

The health-care law explicitly says that the recommendations cannot lead to rationing of health care. Of course, "rationing" is in the eye of beholder, and one common complaint is that rationing is not defined. The law also limits recommendations that would change benefits, modify eligibility or increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing, such as deductibles, coinsurance and co-payments.

On the surface, the IPAB appears aimed at doing the same thing as the House Republican Medicare plan -- reducing the runaway costs of Medicare, except on a faster track. (The GOP plan would not kick in until 2021, just a few years before the Medicare hospital fund begins to run dry.) [The Washington Post, 10/4/12]

PolitiFact: "Of All The Falsehoods And Distortions In The Political Discourse This Year, "Death Panels "Stood Out From The Rest." In December 2009, PolitiFact named "death panels" its 2009 "Lie of the Year":

Of all the falsehoods and distortions in the political discourse this year, one stood out from the rest.

"Death panels."

The claim set political debate afire when it was made in August, raising issues from the role of government in health care to the bounds of acceptable political discussion. In a nod to the way technology has transformed politics, the statement wasn't made in an interview or a television ad. Sarah Palin posted it on her Facebook page.

Her assertion -- that the government would set up boards to determine whether seniors and the disabled were worthy of care -- spread through newscasts, talk shows, blogs and town hall meetings. Opponents of health care legislation said it revealed the real goals of the Democratic proposals. Advocates for health reform said it showed the depths to which their opponents would sink. Still others scratched their heads and said, "Death panels? Really ?"

The editors of PolitiFact.com, the fact-checking Web site of the St. Petersburg Times , have chosen it as our inaugural "Lie of the Year." [PolitiFact,12/18/09]


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


Thank you, and I am glad your son made it home safely. Hospitals have determined for years what procedures are done at their hospitals, and who receives them. So if you have determined that that criteria meets your opinion of death panels, then the panels have been going on for years.


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

NJG said:


> You and dingbat Sarah Palin need to read the ACA and find out the truth about your so called death panels.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Thank you!!!


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

NJG said:


> Cindy S wrote:
> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.
> 
> So sorry for your loss Cindy. I can not even imagine the pain you must be going through. My words can change nothing, but just know that I have great respect for your son and your family.


Thank you


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

damemary said:


> I, for one, do not believe old policies should be reinstated no matter how much people love them and no matter what the President said in the past.
> 
> People overpaid for sub-par policies. They must have gotten a good sell job and believed all of it.
> 
> I think the President may have mis-spoke...and he may have been taken out of context. I think that his niceness and tendency to build consensus led to an apology and more mess. If I were President, I'd say deal with it.


In your infinite wisdom you know for a fact that every policy on the individual market is sub-par? Do provide proof. Obama did not misspeak. How is that done over 2 dozen times? He said what he did on purpose to sell Obamacare to the majority of the country that did not want it and still does not want it. Absolutely nothing was taken out of context. Now is the time for you to stop drinking the koolaid and return to the land of the informed.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There will always be someone who is hurt, Capitalism is not perfect, but it is better than socialism.


But why was it ok for them to be hurt before Obamacare, but now you are so upset because people are loosing their insurance? Phony concern maybe!!!!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Grassley is on C-Span 2right now complaining about the nuclear option. What an idiot. I am writing him an email today to let him know what I think of his speech.


I have an idea that the Republicans will be happy as hell that the Dems won't be able to play "pay back" when things turn around.


----------



## shayfaye (May 6, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> Thank you, and I am glad your son made it home safely. Hospitals have determined for years what procedures are done at their hospitals, and who receives them. So if you have determined that that criteria meets your opinion of death panels, then the panels have been going on for years.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Evidently these ladies have been able to receive every treatment they ever needed or wanted with their own health care. 
I am so sorry for your loss.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

FROM TODAY'S WALL STREET JOURNAL
PLEASE READ - IMPORTANT 

Please Just Go Away

Wonder Land 

Daniel Henninger: Worse Than ObamaCare

Obama's biggest failure is that he hobbled the U.S. economy.

By 
Daniel Henninger 

Nov. 20, 2013 7:25 p.m. ET

The ObamaCare train wreck is plowing through the White House in super slow-mo on screens everywhere, splintering reputations and presidential approval ratings. Audiences watch popeyed as Democrats in distress like Senators Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu and Mark Pryor decide whether to cling to the driverless train or jump toward the tall weeds. The heartless compilers of the Washington Post/ABC poll asked people to pick a head-to-head matchup now between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Mitt won. This is the most amazing spectacle of mayhem and meltdown anyone has seen in politics since Watergate.

No question, it's tough on Barack Obama. But what about the rest of us? For many Americans, the Obama leadership meltdown began five years ago.

In fall 2008, the U.S. suffered its worst financial crisis since the Depression. That wasn't Barack Obama's fault. But five years on, in the fall of 2013, the country's economy is still sick.

Unemployed middle-aged men look in the mirror and see someone who may never work again. Young married couples who should be on the way up are living in their parents' basement. Many young black men (official unemployment rate 28%; unofficial rate off the charts) have no prospect of work.

Washington these days kvetches a lot about what Healthcare.gov is doing to the Obama "legacy." Far worse than ObamaCare, though, is that the 44th president in his second term presides over a great nation that is punching so far below its weight that large swaths of its people have lost heart. 

For five years, news stories have chronicled the social and economic deterioration in America of people with no jobs or weak jobs. 

Here's a headline over a Gallup report: "In U.S. Fewer Believe 'Plenty of Opportunity' to Get Ahead." 

Two from The Wall Street Journal recently: "Parents Serving as Emergency Support for Adult Kids," and "Workers Stay Put, Curbing Jobs Engine." 

On Tuesday, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development put out a report saying the U.S. has become a threat to global recovery. The OECD ratcheted down growth estimates almost everywhere for the rest of this year. For the euro-zone nations: -0.4%; for "emerging" India it's down to 3%; South Korea: 2.7%.

As to the U.S., the OECD says growth for the rest of the year will fall back to 1.7%. That is about the average rate of U.S. economic growth for the entire Obama presidency. 

Barack Obama is not the original cause of so much economic misfortune. He didn't create an advanced U.S. economy in which the highest income returns flow to math geeks who snag jobs at Facebook FB +0.73% and Google, GOOG +1.14% while average people wonder what hit them. The shift away from traditional manufacturing began before he was organizing anyone back in Chicago. And yes, Mr. Obama has talked of the plight of "middle-class folks" from the first days of his presidency. But what has his presidency done for them? What is there to show for all the talk?

In February 2009, he got $831 billion of stimulus spending. Not even seismographs can detect the results. Every speech he outputs about "middle-class folks" offers them the same solutions: more public spending on education, on public infrastructure projects and, even now, on alternative energy. As he tirelessly repeats what remain promises, the Labor Department's monthly unemployment-rate announcement on Friday mornings has become a day of dread. 

A normal post-recession growth rate of at least 4% would have made it possible for Mr. Obama and his progressive allies to chase virtually any pie-in-the-sky policy they wanted. Instead, the U.S. has fallen far off its normal 3.3% growth rate. 

A U.S. president, faced with such devastating labor-market problems and persistently weak growth, should do anythinganythingthat will give the American workplace more lift. Instead, he's willing to entertain just one idea: more federal spending. 

You know the theory here: Spend a public dollar and you get $1.50 of economic output. It hasn't happened, but Barack Obama is gonna crank his old Keynesian Multiplier, created during the 1930s in the era of the Hupmobile, until it sputters to life. 

Ponder, though, a partial list of the public-policy decisions that have flowed steadily out of the Obama administration and directly into a job-starved U.S. economy:

The no-decision on the Keystone XL pipeline and its union jobs; the 2,000-page regulatory law draped in 2010 across the entire financial sector; the shutdown in 2010 and then the slow-walking of offshore oil drilling; siccing the EPA on the utilities industry and the National Labor Relations Board on all industry; a 2010 FCC decision to regulate Internet growth; a significant tax increase this year; support this month for jacking up the federal minimum wage to over $10, certain to smother new jobs; the Justice Department's $13 billion looting of J.P. Morgan JPM +2.14% bank; and of course Hurricane ObamaCare. 

Barack Obama has the U.S. economy on lockdown. It's the worst thing this president has done. American resilience, and elections, mean it won't stay this way forever. But for a lot of poor and middle-class folks, living with mom in the basement is getting old.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

READ THIS

#2 FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

IMPORTANT READ!

Please Just Go Away

Nicole Hopkins: ObamaCare Forced Mom Into Medicaid

My mother preferred to pay for her care rather than be on the government dole. Now she has no choice.

By 
Nicole L. Hopkins

Nov. 20, 2013 7:13 p.m. ET

My mother is not one to seek attention by complaining, so her recent woeful Facebook FB +0.83% post caught my eye: "The poor get poorer." It diverged from the more customary stream of inspirational quotes, recipes and snapshots from her tiny cottage in Pierce County, Wash.

The post continued: "I just received a notice: 'In order to comply with the new healthcare law, your current health plan will be discontinued on December 31, 2013.' Currently my premium is $276 and it is a stretch for me to cover. The new plan . . . are you ready . . . projected new rate $415.20. Now I can't afford health insurance."

The unaffordable ObamaCare-compliant plan that her insurer offered in a Sept. 26 letter is not what makes my mother's story noteworthy. Countless individually insured Americans have received such letters; many are seeing more radical increases in premiums and deductibles.

But most of these people are still being offered the chance to choose what health-care insurance they will receive, or to opt out before they are automatically enrolled in a state program. Not so my mother, Charlene Hopkins, as I soon discovered when I called after seeing her Facebook post.

Since she couldn't afford the new plan offered by her insurer, she told me she was eager to explore her new choices under the Affordable Care Act. Washington Healthplanfinder is one of the better health-exchange sites, and she was actually able to log on. She entered her personal and financial data. With efficiency uncommon to the ObamaCare process, the site quickly presented her with a health-care option.

That is not a typo: There was just one optionat the very affordable monthly rate of zero. The exchange had determined that my mother was not eligible to choose to pay for a plan, and so she was slated immediately for Medicaid. She couldn't believe it was true and held off completing the application.

"How has it come to this?" she asked in one of our several talks over the past few weeks about what was happening. When she was a working mother and I was young, she easily carried health insurance for our whole family. "How have I fallen this far?"

In 2011, she had to give up her real-estate license; as a newer agent, she did not stand to earn enough in the tough market to justify the fees to renew. She has since managed to eke out a living as a substitute para-educator in the Central Kitsap School District. "I'm not on the couch, watching TV," she said. "I'm out trying to find more work every day."

Unable to secure employer-sponsored health care, she had, until this fall, chosen to pay $276 a month for bare-bones catastrophic coverage. "I think that we should be able to take care of ourselves and to earn enough money to pay for basics, and health insurance is one of them," she told me. For two years she had paid out of pocket for that plan, but now she is being told that the plan isn't good enough for her.

The Sept. 26 letter from my mother's insurer promised that the more expensive plan "conforms with the new health care law"by covering maternity needs, newborn wellness and pediatric dental care. My mother asked: "Do I need maternity care at 52?" In addition to requiring her to pay an extra $1,677 annually, the plan would have increased her deductible by $1,500.

But she had at least been presented with an option that she could turn down, unlike on the state exchange.

The situation sounded absurd, so I asked her to walk me through her application on Washington Healthplanfinder to make sure she wasn't missing anything. Sitting in New York with my computer, I logged onto the site under her name and entered the information my mother provided over the phone. I fully expected her to realize that she had forgotten some crucial piece of information, like a decimal point in her annual income. We checked and double-checked the information, but the only option still appeared to be Medicaid. She suggested clicking on "Apply for Coverage," thinking that other options might appear.

Instead, almost mockingly, her "Eligibility Results" came back: "Congratulations, we received and reviewed your application and determined [you] will receive the health care coverage listed below: Washington Apple Health. You will receive a letter telling you which managed care plan you are enrolled with." Washington Apple Health is the mawkish rebranding of Medicaid in Washington state.

The page lacked a cancel button or any way to opt out of Medicaid. It was done; she was enrolled, and there was nothing to do but click "Next" and then to sign out.

Of course, Medicaid is not a new option for my mother; she knew that she was poor enough to qualify for cost-free health care. It was a deliberate choice on her part to pay that monthly $276 out of her own pocket. Clearly she had judged that she received a personal benefit from not being on Medicaid.

"I just don't expect anything positive out of getting free health care," she said. "I don't see why other people should have to pay for my care, whether it be through taxes or otherwise." In paying for health insurance herselfshe won't accept help from her family, eithershe was safeguarding her dignity and independence and her sense of being a fully functioning member of society.

Before ObamaCare, Medicaid was one option. Not the option. Before this, she had never been, in effect, ordered to take a handout. Now she has been forced to join the government-reliant poor, though she would prefer to contribute her two mites. The authorities behind "affordable care" had erased her right to calculate what she was willing to spend to preserve her dignityto determine what she thinks is affordable.

That little contribution can mean the difference between dignity and despair.

For the truly poor, being institutionally forced to take welfare is demoralizing. The Affordable Care Act is at risk of systematizing learned helplessness by telling individuals like my mother that they cannot afford to care for themselves in the way they could before the law was enacted. "This makes me feel poorer than ever," she said.

My mother grew up, one of six children, in a dairy-farming family in Wisconsin. "The way I was raised, taking government handouts is shameful," she said. Her siblings stayed in Wisconsin, but she set out on her own. Finding herself forced onto Medicaid is not a fate that she ever would have imagined. "I guarantee I'm the only person in my family in this situation."

I'm proud to see the spiritedness and resolve that bears my mother up even now. Such character does not draw attention to itself: Its spark only catches the eye when oppression seeks to snuff it out.

Ms. Hopkins is a writer in Brooklyn, N.Y.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

The republicans have been on tv really whining about the filibuster rules being changed. During the Bush 8 years only 5 court nominations were objected to. In Obama's first 5 years he has had 42 court nominations objected to, and the republicans are complaining about the rules change, but they brought it on themselves. They are not obstructing because they don't approve of the nominee, they are just doing it to obstruct, just because they don't want President Obama to achieve anything. 

In the last two Congressional terms, Republicans have brought 275 filibusters that Democrats have been forced to try to break. That is by far the highest number in Congressional history, and more than twice the amount in the previous two terms. The republicans have no right to pay this poor me game. They brought it on themselves.


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

shayfaye said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Evidently these ladies have been able to receive every treatment they ever needed or wanted with their own health care.
> I am so sorry for your loss.


Thank you so much.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


By your definition, the insurance companies have been death panels since the beginning of those companies. Who do you think has made life and death decisions all these years?? And guess what? They made tons of money off of denying sick people treatment.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


Did soldiers who died in Iraq die defending OUR country?


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

alcameron said:


> By your definition, the insurance companies have been death panels since the beginning of those companies. Who do you think has made life and death decisions all these years?? And guess what? They made tons of money off of denying sick people treatment.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

alcameron said:


> By your definition, the insurance companies have been death panels since the beginning of those companies. Who do you think has made life and death decisions all these years?? And guess what? They made tons of money off of denying sick people treatment.


Joey,

Read my two Wall Street Journal articles. VERY interesting!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> Thank you, and I am glad your son made it home safely. Hospitals have determined for years what procedures are done at their hospitals, and who receives them. So if you have determined that that criteria meets your opinion of death panels, then the panels have been going on for years.


Insurance has always decided what they would cover and what they wouldn't. They must have death panels too.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

We always get right down to basic philosophies of the Democratic and Republican parties. Republicans have totally disregarded the line about "the commonon good" and care only about the good of the upper class. They care nothing about the lower 90% of our citizenry. They cut money for education, health care, food stamps, police/fire departments, veterans' benefits ad infinitum so that the wealthy people and big corporations can keep their tax benefits and loopholes.Repubs want to cut Medicare and get rid of Social security. They believe the poor are always with us (and why try to do anything about them). There's more, but you get the idea.
The Democrats believe in the opposite of all the above.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The Democrats started it *during* the Bush years. They were good teachers.


Don't be silly. How many times did the democrats use the filibuster and how many times have the republicans use it?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The Democrats started it *during* the Bush years. They were good teachers.


Remember when Obama first took office and republicans said over and over, that he could do anything he wanted cause he had complete control, not true, cause he had complete control for 4 months. Did you know, for example, that a total of 375 bills that passed the Democratic-majority House have been blocked by Republicans in the Senate?

Thats THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE BILLS!

HR 12 -- Paycheck Fairness Act

H.R. 20 -- Melanie Blocker Stokes Moms Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act

H.R. 320 -- CJs Home Protection Act

H.R. 448 -- Elder Abuse Victims Act

H.R. 466 - Wounded Veteran Job Security Act

H.R. 515 - Radioactive Import Deterrence Act

H.R. 549 -- National Bombing Prevention Act

H.R. 577 - Vision Care for Kids Act

H.R. 626 - Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act

H.R. 780 - Student Internet Safety Act

H.R. 911 -- Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act

H.R. 985 -- Free Flow of Information Act

H.R. 1029 - Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act

H.R. 1110 - PHONE Act and H.R. 1258  The Truth in Caller ID Act

H.R. 1168 -- Veterans Retraining Act

H.R. 1171 - Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program Reauthorization

H.R. 1262 -- Water Quality Investment Act

H.R. 1293 -- Disabled Veterans Home Improvement and Structural Alteration Grant Increase Act of 2009

H.R. 1319 - Informed P2P User Act

H.R. 1380 -- Josh Miller HEARTS Act

H.R. 1429 -- Stop AIDS in Prison Act

ut every single one of these bills is being blocked by every single Republican in the Senate, all of whom are working in lockstep to prevent a vote.

H.R. 1469 - Child Protection Improvements Act

H.R. 1511 - Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act

H.R. 1514 - Juvenile Accountability Block Grants Program Reauthorization Act

H.R. 1580 - Electronic Waste Research and Development Act

H.R. 1585 -- FIT Kids Act

H.R. 1617 - Department of Homeland Security Component Privacy Officer Act

H.R. 1622 - Research and Development Programs for Natural Gas Vehicles

H.R. 1675 - Frank Melville Supportive Housing Investment Act of 2009

H.R. 1709 - STEM Education Coordination Act

H.R. 1722 -- Telework Improvements Act

H.R. 1727 -- Managing Arson Through Criminal History (MATCH) Act
Put simply, DEMOCRATS are passing bills to make things easier, and REPUBLICANS are refusing to even allow an up or down vote.

H.R. 1741 -- Witness Security and Protection Grant Program Act

H.R. 1796 - Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention Act

H.R. 1803 -- Veterans Business Center Act

H.R. 1807 - Educating Entrepreneurs through Todays Technology Act

H.R. 1834 - Native American Business Development Enhancement Act

H.R. 1838 - Amending Small Business Act

H.R. 1824 -- Best Buddies Empowerment for People with Intellectual Disabilities Act

H.R. 1875 -- End the Trade Deficit Act

H.R. 1879 -- National Guard Employment Protection Act

H.R. 1933 - A Child Is Missing Alert and Recovery Center Act

H.R. 2020 -- Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2009

H.R. 2093 - Clean Coastal Environment and Public Health Act

H.R. 2134 -- Western Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission Act
Once again; Democrats PASSED the following bills, and Senate Republicans prevented these bills from even coming to a vote.

H.R. 2142  Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act

H.R. 2187  21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act

H.R. 2200  Transportation Security Administration Authorization Act

H.R. 2221  Data Accountability and Trust Act

H.R. 2352  Job Creation Through Entrepreneurship Act

H.R. 2454  American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009

H.R. 2510  Absentee Ballot Track, Receive and Confirm Act

H.R. 2529  Neighborhood Preservation Act

H.R. 2554  National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers Reform Act

H.R. 2611  Authorizing the Securing the Cities Initiative of the Department of Homeland Security

H.R. 2664  Promoting Transparency in Financial Reporting Act

H.R. 2693  Oil Pollution Research and Development Program Reauthorization Act

H.R. 2749 -- Food Safety Enhancement Act

H.R. 2868  Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2009, Drinking Water System Security Act of 2009 and Wastewater Treatment Works Security Act of 2009

GOP blocks jobs bill in senate
The Senate voted 51-49 in favor of a procedural motion on the bill, which would spend $60 billion on transportation and infrastructure. However, 60 votes were required to break a GOP filibuster on the bill.

When the democrats were able to filibuster, McConnell said lets get back to the way the senate is suppose to work with an up or down vote. Oh right McConnell, but now oh no lets not do that. There is my favorite word for the republicans again, hypocrite. Thay do fit that word so well.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So!! It's politics!


It has been politics for the last 5 years and the fact that the republicans promised to obstruct everything President Obama tried to do.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


I am grateful for your son's sacrifice to our great Nation just as I am to those in my family (and any other) who also sacrificed and served.

However, I don't know how your earned your inability to comprehend that which is written in the ACA.

I don't know how to spew but seems you do.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So!! It's politics!


The change in the filibuster rule could be considered politics as well. It isn't, though, it is making sure that they can govern. You know, that job they are sent there to do.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


Sorry, Cindy S, that is a loss I cannot imagine.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> It doesn't matter how many times. If the Democrats had not used it during the Bush years, the Republicans probably would not have used it.
> 
> That's like the little boy on the playground complaining that someone had hit him, when he threw the first punch.


The big word there is probably, and it does matter how many. Do you think the filibuster just started during the bush years and the republicans didn't use it before that? The rules would not need to be changed if the republicans allowed an up or down vote on these nominations. I guarantee you if the republicans were being filibustered like this McConnell would have changed the rules a long time ago and would have included supreme court justices too, which the democrats did not do.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> The big word there is probably, and it does matter how many. Do you think the filibuster just started during the bush years and the republicans didn't use it before that? The rules would not need to be changed if the republicans allowed an up or down vote on these nominations. I guarantee you if the republicans were being filibustered like this McConnell would have changed the rules a long time ago and would have included supreme court justices too, which the democrats did not do.


The Senate rules have been changed several times. It is really not all that big a deal.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So tell us how long this particular rule was in effect? You will find it is a BIG deal.


Not all that long, really.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/01/the_history_of_filibuster_refo.html

So here's hoping someone will come along and educate joey. I can't stand to deal with anyone who can't read and then complains that people don't post data.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Almost 100 years is not that long????


Didn't you say that you taught math?

2013 - 1975 =


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I am grateful for your son's sacrifice to our great Nation just as I am to those in my family (and any other) who also sacrificed and served.
> 
> However, I don't know how your earned your inability to comprehend that which is written in the ACA.
> 
> I don't know how to spew but seems you do.


Whether you have read the entire ACA I do not know, I have. 
Death panels are a myth that looney tunes like Sarah Palin tossed out into the world to scare the hell out of people like you. It has been fact checked, try Scopes.

Thank you for expressing your empathy and then turning it around to yourself and your family. Now I will head back to knitting and forget that you, in particular, exist.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> Whether you have read the entire ACA I do not know, I have.
> Death panels are a myth that looney tunes like Sarah Palin tossed out into the world to scare the hell out of people like you. It has been fact checked, try Scopes.
> 
> Thank you for expressing your empathy and then turning it around to yourself and your family. Now I will head back to knitting and forget that you, in particular, exist.


Cindy---they don't believe Snopes. They just believe the right-wing propaganda machine that lulls people into not thinking for,themselves and voting against their own best interests. They don't learn, they follow like sheep. (Sorry sheep. You give us beautiful wool, but intellect isn't your forte. )


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The ACA *is* failing horrifically and will be nothing more than a high-risk pool, funded by the American taxpayers (you) for the very poor or those who are very medically stricken.
> 
> That is OK with me and exactly like that proposed by the Republicans. Only difference is the bungling of the roll-out, the huge waste of taxpayers' dollars for nothing, the gross amount of time spent on its creation, the Dems shutdown of government over same, the burden on all states when the subsidy for Medicare goes away, and most importantly, the broken promises (translation: LIES) of Obama.
> 
> ...


But again, logically what is the reason behind the republicans spending money on ads to convince the people it's so bad?

I can see why democrats would spend money on ads to promote it. They want to get word out on how to apply, deadlines, convince people it's a good thing, ect. That is what anybody does at the start of a new product to launch it, especially if it's going to be a nationwide product. It's called marketing. I personally haven't seen ads by the government except for a very few at the beginning of the roll out. I have seen hundreds of ads from PRIVATE insurers like Humana, Blue Cross, ect. put out to convince people that they would be the best private insurer.

But if it is just a massive bust, then why aren't republicans spending their money preparing for the fix? The ads I have seen don't advertise a fix, but are centered on convincing people not to sign up. It's even worse if, as you say, the ACA is already a massive failure.

It would be like producing ads that convince people the sky is blue. The majority of people already can see that it is blue so they need no convincing of that.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> Whether you have read the entire ACA I do not know, I have.
> Death panels are a myth that looney tunes like Sarah Palin tossed out into the world to scare the hell out of people like you. It has been fact checked, try Scopes.
> 
> Thank you for expressing your empathy and then turning it around to yourself and your family. Now I will head back to knitting and forget that you, in particular, exist.


A very wise decision.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Why don't you ask the brilliant Dems, Obama and the Libs this question? They are the folks spending millions to promote Obamacare. If Obamacare, which still isn't even off the ground totally, is so fantastic, why is a "fix" even necessary?
> 
> *Not ONE* Republican voted for Obamacare in either House of Congress. So, of course, the Republicans, aren't doing anything to support its implementation.
> 
> The Republican are doing and have done everything they can to stop, repeal, and now 'fix' any part of this failure they can. Of course, Obama, threatens to veto anything they do anyway. Just like the death panels within Obamacare.


I never said the ACA is "grand". Not even in private in my own house. I do need to request that you stop putting words in my mouth, my mouth is crowded enough with my own words.

The democrats are marketing a new product. Putting ads out and convincing people of the "wonders" of a new product is standard in marketing.

How are Republicans trying to "fix" people who have lot their insurance. What I have heard out of their mouths had been variation of, "I told you do!" any successfully married couple will tell you that concentrating on the "I told you so" is not helping the situation. For instance a wife tells her husband it is stupid to climb the ladder in the ice. He does it anyway and falls and cracks it. His wife standing over him saying "I told you so!" doesn't help the concussion he has. No instead he is carted off to the hospital and the "I told you so" is done after he will survive for 2 reasons. She is trying to take care of the fears of her kids who now are scared their dad will die and because you save the I told you's until after because it won't matter if he dies. If she were to constantly tell the kids, "I told your father and I was right!" it does nothing to help the kids. Ensuring their kids have their father (health insurance) and saving energy that need not be wasted (waiting to say I told you so) because it doesn't matter after he is gone is the logical thing to do.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: The Dems and Obama only care about what will happen to them in the 2014 elections.
> 
> Obamacare was never about health insurance. ObamaNoCare was always about control over We the People.
> 
> ...


I get it now! Obamacare is control over WE the people, just like bans on marriage to gay people and continued opposition to gay rights is control over WE the people! Wow, thanks for explaining it so I can FINALLY understand.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> There will always be someone who is hurt, Capitalism is not perfect, but it is better than socialism.


This has made me curious. I honestly can't think of one society that has stood the test of time that is capitalist. Can you show me? I would be very interested, perhaps we could learn from them.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I just heard a report, this particular rule has been in effect for 225 years. I mistakenly thought it was since 1917.
> 
> Both Obama and Biden were against this very thing when they were in the Senate.


That is because the senate was working then, it isn't now. Obama has had almost as many nominations blocked as every president of the US put together. Do you get that? Can you comprehend that? Do you really think that is alright.

One thing we have not heard today is anything from McCain and some of the other republicans. Do you suppose they know that this has been the wrong way to govern but have never had enough guts to stand up to the tea party. This way they don't have to speak up. Some of the republicans obviously don't like this because they want to stop everything, but I think some of them like this but they have been gutless to speak the truth and this is just an easy out. The thing is you can't believe a thing most of them say.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> This has made me curious. I honestly can't think of one society that has stood the test of time that is capitalist. Can you show me? I would be very interested, perhaps we could learn from them.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> That is because the senate was working then, it isn't now. Obama has had almost as many nominations blocked as every president of the US put together. Do you get that? Can you comprehend that? Do you really think that is alright.
> 
> One thing we have not heard today is anything from McCain and some of the other republicans. Do you suppose they know that this has been the wrong way to govern but have never had enough guts to stand up to the tea party. This way they don't have to speak up. Some of the republicans obviously don't like this because they want to stop everything, but I think some of them like this but they have been gutless to speak the truth and this is just an easy out. The thing is you can't believe a thing most of them say.


http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-dems-governed-by-newer-members-will-pay-heavy-price-for-nuclear-option/


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> He said he would donate his salary while he was in rehab. When he had his press conference yesterday, a reporter was trying to ask him about that vote against food stamp recipients but he was walking away and didn't answer. Hopefully when he is out of rehab someone will pursue that question. I'd like to hear how he answers that. When you made that vote, were you thinking about the cocaine you had in your pocket is what I would like to ask him.


Oh, what place will he donate it to? I find that people say this all the time but are only even mildly accountable if they state where they are donating it. Wouldn't you be interested to know as well?


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


I'm sorry about your son.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Oh, what place will he donate it to? I find that people say this all the time but are only even mildly accountable if they state where they are donating it. Wouldn't you be interested to know as well?


It would be a lot more meaningful if he determined another person to name the recipients.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


You do know that a doctor can refuse to do a surgery if they feel it would not be a good bet? For instance, I've personally seen this, a doctor can refuse to do a surgery because a patient is so obese that they have serious questions as to the patient's out one after surgery. They can refuse to do surgery on an elderly person who the surgeon feels would not have a benefit from it based of health factors. For instance if you have a patient who has heart problems, lung problems, is obese, and has a bowel issue that won't resolve unless operated on, the surgeon can tell the patient that they will not perform the surgery because they feel that with their health issues the risk of the surgery and the expected impaired healing will not be worth it.

Doctors don't like their patients dying on the operating table. If they do have a patient die on the table it needs to be reported to a regulating agency (not something done if they die on the unit or ICU). Because of the they WILL refuse to perform a surgery if they have big doubts about whether that person will make it to post op. Like I said, it happens, I've seen it. If you ask a surgeon (not a regular family doctor, or another doctor that doesn't perform surgery in the hospital) they will tell you it's true.

That is why I laugh at the concept if "death panels". I guess we have always had them


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> Thank you, and I am glad your son made it home safely. Hospitals have determined for years what procedures are done at their hospitals, and who receives them. So if you have determined that that criteria meets your opinion of death panels, then the panels have been going on for years.


 :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> Again though, if so many people will be horribly affected and it will cost, why put the money into ads instead of preparing for the "fix"?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Because so much has already been invested in destroying ACA? We're not giving up just because the GOP has wanted to destroy the Presidency of Barack Obama from the very beginning.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I love it too.


jelun2 said:


> My latest love is Stash Lemon Ginger Tea.
> Chocolate is always great.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Repeal attempt number forty--well, I forget how many times the GOP has gone down this road. Same old same old, I'm afraid.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: It's the GOP Energizer Bunny. Good thing there's a Democratic one too!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> You are absolutely delusional. If Obamacare is a disaster, why don't the repubs just let it fail instead of making healthcare a political issue?


They won't give up because they want what they want. And the rest of us will fight to the end. It's going to be a long, cold winter.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My heart's in this fight. Health Care is too basic a right to leave to chance.



jelun2 said:


> Because fact really is different from fiction.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ROFL.



joeysomma said:


> In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Full moon? Time will tell.



knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: The Dems and Obama only care about what will happen to them in the 2014 elections.
> 
> Obamacare was never about health insurance. ObamaNoCare was always about control over We the People.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nice portrait in your avatar.



knitpresentgifts said:


> I'm certain Obamacare is done.
> 
> Pretty certain Obama is done.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> If the repubs are SO concerned over those 5% who were having their policies dropped, why weren't they concerned throughout the past several years when health insurance companies were dropping people right and left because they were too sick to make the company profitable? You certainly can't fool me that repubs actually have concern over PEOPLE. Their motives are totally political and it's too bad your political bias blinds you.if you'd like to hear health insurance companiy's horror stories from the past (when repubs cared not one iota) I'll list some for you. You must be young, healthy, and unconcerned about people to be so ignorant about health insurance. Keep following the unchristian, sociopathic, amoral policies of Teabaggers and repubs unless you really want to see the pearly gates.
> Pathetic AND delusional!


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Nice summation Al.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Relax. You must need chocolate. Janeway is very different from you. For one thing your cartoons pertain to the discussion.



jelun2 said:


> Oh God, I am beginning to feel like Janeway


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And the end justifies the means? I don't think so.



joeysomma said:


> There will always be someone who is hurt, Capitalism is not perfect, but it is better than socialism.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Oh God, I am beginning to feel like Janeway


Finally an off-handed compliment! Thanks sorta!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> Relax. You must need chocolate. Janeway is very different from you. For one thing your cartoons pertain to the discussion.


Never!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> ROFL.


joeysomma wrote:
In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.

This one really is good for a laugh,isn't it, Empress?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Cindy---they don't believe Snopes. They just believe the right-wing propaganda machine that lulls people into not thinking for,themselves and voting against their own best interests. They don't learn, they follow like sheep. (Sorry sheep. You give us beautiful wool, but intellect isn't your forte. )


Ugly--need a cookie?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> joeysomma wrote:
> In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.
> 
> This one really is good for a laugh,isn't it, Empress?


You have copied our word of Empress--can't think of anything on your own?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> If they really believed it was going to fail, they would leave it alone. Since they are willing to waste millions of dollars on it, I think they are pretty sure it will work just like social security and Medicare. If on top of those two things we now have healthcare, they are really fearful they will not be able to get rid of any of it. They still want to get rid of social security and Medicare and they will if they ever gain complete control. If they can't completely get rid of them they will change them enough to make them worthless. Did anyone listen to Elizabeth Warrens senate speech yesterday?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

GOP shut down the government. They get the blame and if they try it again.......

Everyone deserves heath care, even the very poor and the very medically stricken.....or don't you think so?

What are you claiming that the repubs proposed? You're imagining things. No GOP plan has been introduced....just complaints about 'Obamacare.'

So much time was wasted on fighting rumors and lies that the rollout suffered. I'm even paranoid enough to wonder if GOP supervised the programmers.

The fat lady hasn't sung yet.



knitpresentgifts said:


> The ACA *is* failing horrifically and will be nothing more than a high-risk pool, funded by the American taxpayers (you) for the very poor or those who are very medically stricken.
> 
> That is OK with me and exactly like that proposed by the Republicans. Only difference is the bungling of the roll-out, the huge waste of taxpayers' dollars for nothing, the gross amount of time spent on its creation, the Dems shutdown of government over same, the burden on all states when the subsidy for Medicare goes away, and most importantly, the broken promises (translation: LIES) of Obama.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Delusional.



joeysomma said:


> In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-dems-governed-by-newer-members-will-pay-heavy-price-for-nuclear-option/


So he has the guts to say the democrats are governed by the newer democrats, but who does he think is running the republicans? The tea party, McCain, is telling telling when to jump and how high.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm so sorry for your loss, and I thank your son for his service to his country.



Cindy S said:


> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

He doesn't read either.



NJG said:


> Grassley is on C-Span 2right now complaining about the nuclear option. What an idiot. I am writing him an email today to let him know what I think of his speech.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ah, the old death panel argument. SOSO.



joeysomma said:


> So sorry to hear your son died in Iraq. I commend him for willing to give his life defending our country. I am very thankful, my son came home.
> 
> As far as the death panels. If there is anyone that decides whether a medical procedure will be performed and be paid for, is part of a death panel. In some ways Obama care is a death panel right now, since so many have lost their insurance and the replacement, if they can get it, is to expensive, or if they cannot return to the doctor or hospital they had, is making a life or death decision for an individual. Remember unintended consequences.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Absolutely true.



Cindy S said:


> Thank you, and I am glad your son made it home safely. Hospitals have determined for years what procedures are done at their hospitals, and who receives them. So if you have determined that that criteria meets your opinion of death panels, then the panels have been going on for years.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> So he has the guts to say the democrats are governed by the newer democrats, but who does he think is running the republicans? The tea party, McCain, is telling telling when to jump and how high.


He comes up with some beauts.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> You do know that a doctor can refuse to do a surgery if they feel it would not be a good bet? For instance, I've personally seen this, a doctor can refuse to do a surgery because a patient is so obese that they have serious questions as to the patient's out one after surgery. They can refuse to do surgery on an elderly person who the surgeon feels would not have a benefit from it based of health factors. For instance if you have a patient who has heart problems, lung problems, is obese, and has a bowel issue that won't resolve unless operated on, the surgeon can tell the patient that they will not perform the surgery because they feel that with their health issues the risk of the surgery and the expected impaired healing will not be worth it.
> 
> Doctors don't like their patients dying on the operating table. If they do have a patient die on the table it needs to be reported to a regulating agency (not something done if they die on the unit or ICU). Because of the they WILL refuse to perform a surgery if they have big doubts about whether that person will make it to post op. Like I said, it happens, I've seen it. If you ask a surgeon (not a regular family doctor, or another doctor that doesn't perform surgery in the hospital) they will tell you it's true.
> 
> That is why I laugh at the concept if "death panels". I guess we have always had them


Just happened to extended family of someone in my family. Has had surgery before on his heart, now has an aneurysm but the Dr said no surgery because of scar tissue. It is only a matter of time for him.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Solo,

The policies that do not meet ACA criteria are, by definition, sub-par. Other cancelled policies were cancelled by the insurance policies for their usual reasons, they feel that they can extort more money from policyholders. They have done this for many, many years without the excuse of ACA.

Personally I don't feel that President Obama deliberately lied about keeping your policy if you liked it. If you believe it, fine. I don't think it's a valid issue.

I don't take suggestions from you, but that's never stopped you before.



soloweygirl said:


> In your infinite wisdom you know for a fact that every policy on the individual market is sub-par? Do provide proof. Obama did not misspeak. How is that done over 2 dozen times? He said what he did on purpose to sell Obamacare to the majority of the country that did not want it and still does not want it. Absolutely nothing was taken out of context. Now is the time for you to stop drinking the koolaid and return to the land of the informed.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Wouldn't you think lukelucy would be adept enough to avoid double printings on extensive cut and pastes by now?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

When Chris Cuomo interviewed Cruz He asked if you did repeal Obamacare, what do you have in place to take care of those [people that would be left without insurance. His answer, that is what has to be done. So in other words, don't answer.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> The republicans have been on tv really whining about the filibuster rules being changed. During the Bush 8 years only 5 court nominations were objected to. In Obama's first 5 years he has had 42 court nominations objected to, and the republicans are complaining about the rules change, but they brought it on themselves. They are not obstructing because they don't approve of the nominee, they are just doing it to obstruct, just because they don't want President Obama to achieve anything.
> 
> In the last two Congressional terms, Republicans have brought 275 filibusters that Democrats have been forced to try to break. That is by far the highest number in Congressional history, and more than twice the amount in the previous two terms. The republicans have no right to pay this poor me game. They brought it on themselves.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Read this again. These numbers do not lie. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> We always get right down to basic philosophies of the Democratic and Republican parties. Republicans have totally disregarded the line about "the commonon good" and care only about the good of the upper class. They care nothing about the lower 90% of our citizenry. They cut money for education, health care, food stamps, police/fire departments, veterans' benefits ad infinitum so that the wealthy people and big corporations can keep their tax benefits and loopholes.Repubs want to cut Medicare and get rid of Social security. They believe the poor are always with us (and why try to do anything about them). There's more, but you get the idea.
> The Democrats believe in the opposite of all the above.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Where do you stand and why?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

HOW???? Please provide reasons instead of opinion.



joeysomma said:


> The Democrats started it *during* the Bush years. They were good teachers.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

The point is the country we were defending is not our country, but Iraq.



joeysomma said:


> Any one in the Military is defending our country. Not everyone will be going to a war zone. But everyone is doing the job they were assigned to. Everyone is important.
> 
> Is the cook on a missile cruiser less important than the helicopter pilot taking off from that cruiser to rescue Scott Grady, the pilot shot down in Bosnia? If it wouldn't be for the cook the pilot would not be able to function.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ridiculous argument.



joeysomma said:


> It doesn't matter how many times. If the Democrats had not used it during the Bush years, the Republicans probably would not have used it.
> 
> That's like the little boy on the playground complaining that someone had hit him, when he threw the first punch.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Remember when Obama first took office and republicans said over and over, that he could do anything he wanted cause he had complete control, not true, cause he had complete control for 4 months. Did you know, for example, that a total of 375 bills that passed the Democratic-majority House have been blocked by Republicans in the Senate?
> 
> Thats THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE BILLS!
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: I look forward to a GOP reply to this.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ROFL. What an intelligent well-considered reply.



joeysomma said:


> So!! It's politics!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ah, the gooney turkey must reply with a dig even in a case like this. Sorry you have to see this Cindy.



knitpresentgifts said:


> I am grateful for your son's sacrifice to our great Nation just as I am to those in my family (and any other) who also sacrificed and served.
> 
> However, I don't know how your earned your inability to comprehend that which is written in the ACA.
> 
> I don't know how to spew but seems you do.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So tell us how long this particular rule was in effect? You will find it is a BIG deal.


She doesn't know what she is talking about, again.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> The change in the filibuster rule could be considered politics as well. It isn't, though, it is making sure that they can govern. You know, that job they are sent there to do.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

damemary said:


> Ah, the gooney turkey must reply with a dig even in a case like this. Sorry you have to see this Cindy.


That's okay damemary, my mother taught me to be tolerant of others ignorance and I am pretty thick skinned.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> Whether you have read the entire ACA I do not know, I have.
> Death panels are a myth that looney tunes like Sarah Palin tossed out into the world to scare the hell out of people like you. It has been fact checked, try Scopes.
> 
> Thank you for expressing your empathy and then turning it around to yourself and your family. Now I will head back to knitting and forget that you, in particular, exist.


Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and like you.


And just exactly how did I use the death of my son for sympathy? You are beyond pathetic


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> But again, logically what is the reason behind the republicans spending money on ads to convince the people it's so bad?
> 
> I can see why democrats would spend money on ads to promote it. They want to get word out on how to apply, deadlines, convince people it's a good thing, ect. That is what anybody does at the start of a new product to launch it, especially if it's going to be a nationwide product. It's called marketing. I personally haven't seen ads by the government except for a very few at the beginning of the roll out. I have seen hundreds of ads from PRIVATE insurers like Humana, Blue Cross, ect. put out to convince people that they would be the best private insurer.
> 
> ...


You've answered your own question. Why should the Repubs do anything but sit back and watch the leaning tower fall into a heap of rubble. The Republs predicted this would happen 3 years ago, the House repealed the law 40+ times, Repubs wrote bill after bill to produce a better law, and Cruz spoke about the ACA's demise before it began for 21 hours recently on the Senate floor. Everyone tried to push him aside including some dimwit Repubs.

I haven't seen a single ad paid for by Repubs telling of why the law is bad for the public. 70% of the public already knows that. I have heards plenty of news anchors and pundits tell factual why the ACA is so destructive for America and its citizens.

The Dems are so scared of their futures they had to change laws in the Senate just to bolster their power.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I never said the ACA is "grand". Not even in private in my own house. I do need to request that you stop putting words in my mouth, my mouth is crowded enough with my own words. The democrats are marketing a new product. Putting ads out and convincing people of the "wonders" of a new product is standard in marketing.


and I never said you did either.

What a joke; there is no new product in Obama's 'fix.' Just politics - pure and simple along with the promise of 150-200+ millions to also lose their health insurance come sometime around next Oct.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> And just exactly how did I use the death of my son for sympathy? You are beyond pathetic


My mother AND father taught me to ignore ignorant people that are unteachable AND to honor my words AND respect and honor those who served and serve unconditionally. Why don't you honor your own words; I don't exist to you, remember?


----------



## karverr (Jun 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> The point is the country we were defending is not our country, but Iraq.


our military is at the call of the president, he is the commander in chief.if he wanted he could pull our troops out at any time.where ever our country sends the troops , it is still defending our country. When you serve the government is paying you so you are fighting for our country.This is not opinion it is fact so I don't know how you are going to dispute this.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Do you want to know how stupid the republicans are? At this point there are 390 federal judges appointed by a republican president and 390 appointed by a democratic president with 93 openings. There were 3 judges that the senate was trying to move along in the process and the republicans said no-filibuster. Had they just let 1 or maybe 2 of those go through, this change probably wouldn't have happened. Now President Obama can nominate all 93 if he wants, and I hope he does. In addition one of those 3 had worked in the Bush administration. What could have been wrong with her. All the republicans kept saying is he is stacking the court----with a person from the Bush Administration. See I told you they really are stupid.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> You are so right. When my oldest son completed Basic training for the Navy in 1991. The commander commented the men and women graduating from basic that day were just as important as anyone serving on the ground in Iraq, Kuwait, or on any of the ships or submarines. Not everyone can be on the front line. Those on the front line need to know there are thousands backing them.


True; except those serving today learned and know that Obama does NOT have their backs. Sad, very sad indeed.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Cindy,


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


This accusation is despicable, but I guess we shouldn't expect any better from you. This post shows a complete lack of empathy, one of the prime characteristics of repubs and Teabaggers.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> My mother AND father taught me to ignore ignorant people that are unteachable AND to honor my words AND respect and honor those who served and serve unconditionally. Why don't you honor your own words; I don't exist to you, remember?


Too bad none of what your parents taught "took".


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

[double post


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

There is one thing in particular that really worries me about the republicans. Now this didn't use to worry me, but since the tea party has been in charge, it does. If the republicans ever gain complete control of the house, senate and presidency, what would happen to our country? 
What would happen to poor people?
Without food stamps would they be able to survive? 
Education would be privatized so the wealthy would have great schools, but would the same be provided for those less fortunate? 
Social security would be privatized which would mean the end of it. They would certainly cut taxes like Bush did so that would kill the economy again and the privatized social security money would be gone.
The ACA would be gone. All those people with pre existing conditions would again be without insurance. 
If you were wealthy enough to have insurance, good for you, but otherwise I guess you just lay in the street and die. 
There would be no regulations on the big banks and they have already shown us what they would do.
There would be no regulations or anything done to save the planet. 
What war would they start first and how many of our young men would have to die.
Would they do away with the minimum wage and what would happen to the working poor if that happened?
What would happen to minorities? 
I am afraid this country would be over as we know it.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> Just happened to extended family of someone in my family. Has had surgery before on his heart, now has an aneurysm but the Dr said no surgery because of scar tissue. It is only a matter of time for him.


I'm sorry, those decisions are always so painful for the family.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> _Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean confirmed in July that Obamacares Independent Payment Advisory Board would have to become a death panel in order to cut costs, and called for the boards repeal._
> 
> Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/democrat-pull-the-plug-on-obamacare-website/#X7H93mPjOOC6EtWT.99


I want a video of what Howard Dean said please.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

You forgot bottomless pits and death squads.



joeysomma said:


> Have you heard how much it will cost the middle class for the "fix?" The ones of the 5,000,000 that may be able to have their insurance reinstated, the cost will be 15% to 20% additional in premiums. It may not be as much as going on the exchange. Then it will only be for a year.
> 
> How many of these 5,000,000 will now be without insurance when they cannot afford the exchange prices. Then what will happen to the US economy when all of this money is going to the exchanges instead of buying products? How much more unemployment will this bring? I can see another recession.
> 
> ...


 :twisted:


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You've answered your own question. Why should the Repubs do anything but sit back and watch the leaning tower fall into a heap of rubble. The Republs predicted this would happen 3 years ago, the House repealed the law 40+ times, Repubs wrote bill after bill to produce a better law, and Cruz spoke about the ACA's demise before it began for 21 hours recently on the Senate floor. Everyone tried to push him aside including some dimwit Repubs.
> 
> I haven't seen a single ad paid for by Repubs telling of why the law is bad for the public. 70% of the public already knows that. I have heards plenty of news anchors and pundits tell factual why the ACA is so destructive for America and its citizens.
> 
> The Dems are so scared of their futures they had to change laws in the Senate just to bolster their power.


My question though is why the republicans need to produce ADS CONVINCING PEOPLE IT WILL FAIL. I've seen the ads. Why are republicans wasting money on ads that are unnecessary.

And what are they doing for the "fix"? Why aren't they spending money on the fix instead of ads?

Oh yeah, I know, because they are afraid once it's up and running people will actually like the FREE MARKET (that's capitalism) exchanges.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> and I never said you did either.
> 
> What a joke; there is no new product in Obama's 'fix.' Just politics - pure and simple along with the promise of 150-200+ millions to also lose their health insurance come sometime around next Oct.


The ACA is the new product 
:roll:


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> There is one thing in particular that really worries me about the republicans. Now this didn't use to worry me, but since the tea party has been in charge, it does. If the republicans ever gain complete control of the house, senate and presidency, what would happen to our country?
> What would happen to poor people?
> Without food stamps would they be able to survive?
> Education would be privatized so the wealthy would have great schools, but would the same be provided for those less fortunate?
> ...


There would be a revolution akin to the French revolution. If someone told me Sara Palin (as an example) said, "let them eat cake". I'm not sure I could completely believe she didn't. (and yes I know there is no actual record of marie Antoinette saying that)

I'm just hoping its a not violent revolution. The poor far outnumber the rich in numbers.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> I want a video of what Howard Dean said please.


World Net Daily...LOL, the go to resource for RWNs


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Cindy S said:


> Sometimes I find it exceeding hard to understand why my son died in Iraq, defending your right to spew nonsense like death panels.


I'm so very sorry for the loss of your son and find comfort with good memories. He was the best of the best.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Charles Grassley said if the democrats went to the nuclear option, that when they got back in power the republicans would nominate another Scalia. That is funny because Scalia received 98 votes out of 100. That Grassely just isn't too smart.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Charles Grassley said if the democrats went to the nuclear option, that when they got back in power the republicans would nominate another Scalia. That is funny because Scalia received 98 votes out of 100. That Grassely just isn't too smart.


Not to mention that this is not in effect for SCOTUS nominations. 
PLUS, the Republicans will be lucky to be a party soon.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Not to mention that this is not in effect for SCOTUS nominations.
> PLUS, the Republicans will be lucky to be a party soon.


The democrats didn't include the supreme court nominations in the new rule but I would bet that the republicans would.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> The democrats didn't include the supreme court nominations in the new rule but I would bet that the republicans would.


Could be, but Grassley is an idiot so it won't be on his word.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Because so much has already been invested in destroying ACA? We're not giving up just because the GOP has wanted to destroy the Presidency of Barack Obama from the very beginning.

damemary......You hit the nail on the head with that one!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


Your comment here is nasty, nasty and nasty. Also it is nasty. How disgusting you wrote that stuff. How hypocritical you have a religious tagline. Just change it to "666" devil's spawn..


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> The democrats didn't include the supreme court nominations in the new rule but I would bet that the republicans would.


Every discussion I have heard of this has excluded SCOTUS noms. I will have to check it out tho.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

KPG thrives on NASTY! I Ignore her....she's not worth responding to......


ute4kp said:


> Your comment here is nasty, nasty and nasty. Also it is nasty. How disgusting you wrote that stuff. How hypocritical you have a religious tagline. Just change it to "666" devil's spawn..


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


Death panels."

The claim set political debate afire when it was made in August, raising issues from the role of government in health care to the bounds of acceptable political discussion. In a nod to the way technology has transformed politics, the statement wasn't made in an interview or a television ad. Sarah Palin posted it on her Facebook page.

Her assertion -- that the government would set up boards to determine whether seniors and the disabled were worthy of care -- spread through newscasts, talk shows, blogs and town hall meetings. Opponents of health care legislation said it revealed the real goals of the Democratic proposals. Advocates for health reform said it showed the depths to which their opponents would sink. Still others scratched their heads and said, "Death panels? Really ?"

The editors of PolitiFact.com, the fact-checking Web site of the St. Petersburg Times , have chosen it as our inaugural "Lie of the Year." [PolitiFact,12/18/09]


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Every discussion I have heard of this has excluded SCOTUS noms. I will have to check it out tho.


I think that is a separate rule, but they can include it if they want. The dems didn't so the repbs could filibuster a supreme court nomination, which of course they would.

I just heard Tim Kaine of Virginia say the dems asked themselves if the situation were reversed, would they be ok with being in the minority not being able to use the filibuster and the all said yes. Tim said if he found himself in that position and there was a nomination he didn't like, he would do his research and offer the information he had and if the majority said yes to nomination, then that is the way it should be. The senators who approved the nomination had been elected by the people and that is the way it should be. I think that is that thing called common sense and the republicans don't have any of it. They are just sore losers and still mad that they lost the last two elections to a black man.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

What??????



joeysomma said:


> So!! It's politics!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for the interesting link Jelun.



jelun2 said:


> Not all that long, really.
> 
> http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/01/the_history_of_filibuster_refo.html
> 
> So here's hoping someone will come along and educate joey. I can't stand to deal with anyone who can't read and then complains that people don't post data.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Didn't you say that you taught math?
> 
> 2013 - 1975 =


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

That was before they were elected President and Vice President of the United States enraging the GOP and encouraging them to shut down the government. If this sounds crazy, it's because it is crazy.



joeysomma said:


> I just heard a report, this particular rule has been in effect for 225 years. I mistakenly thought it was since 1917.
> 
> Both Obama and Biden were against this very thing when they were in the Senate.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> But again, logically what is the reason behind the republicans spending money on ads to convince the people it's so bad?
> 
> I can see why democrats would spend money on ads to promote it. They want to get word out on how to apply, deadlines, convince people it's a good thing, ect. That is what anybody does at the start of a new product to launch it, especially if it's going to be a nationwide product. It's called marketing. I personally haven't seen ads by the government except for a very few at the beginning of the roll out. I have seen hundreds of ads from PRIVATE insurers like Humana, Blue Cross, ect. put out to convince people that they would be the best private insurer.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good analogy. Thanks.



Lkholcomb said:


> I never said the ACA is "grand". Not even in private in my own house. I do need to request that you stop putting words in my mouth, my mouth is crowded enough with my own words.
> 
> The democrats are marketing a new product. Putting ads out and convincing people of the "wonders" of a new product is standard in marketing.
> 
> How are Republicans trying to "fix" people who have lot their insurance. What I have heard out of their mouths had been variation of, "I told you do!" any successfully married couple will tell you that concentrating on the "I told you so" is not helping the situation. For instance a wife tells her husband it is stupid to climb the ladder in the ice. He does it anyway and falls and cracks it. His wife standing over him saying "I told you so!" doesn't help the concussion he has. No instead he is carted off to the hospital and the "I told you so" is done after he will survive for 2 reasons. She is trying to take care of the fears of her kids who now are scared their dad will die and because you save the I told you's until after because it won't matter if he dies. If she were to constantly tell the kids, "I told your father and I was right!" it does nothing to help the kids. Ensuring their kids have their father (health insurance) and saving energy that need not be wasted (waiting to say I told you so) because it doesn't matter after he is gone is the logical thing to do.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> You do know that a doctor can refuse to do a surgery if they feel it would not be a good bet? For instance, I've personally seen this, a doctor can refuse to do a surgery because a patient is so obese that they have serious questions as to the patient's out one after surgery. They can refuse to do surgery on an elderly person who the surgeon feels would not have a benefit from it based of health factors. For instance if you have a patient who has heart problems, lung problems, is obese, and has a bowel issue that won't resolve unless operated on, the surgeon can tell the patient that they will not perform the surgery because they feel that with their health issues the risk of the surgery and the expected impaired healing will not be worth it.
> 
> Doctors don't like their patients dying on the operating table. If they do have a patient die on the table it needs to be reported to a regulating agency (not something done if they die on the unit or ICU). Because of the they WILL refuse to perform a surgery if they have big doubts about whether that person will make it to post op. Like I said, it happens, I've seen it. If you ask a surgeon (not a regular family doctor, or another doctor that doesn't perform surgery in the hospital) they will tell you it's true.
> 
> That is why I laugh at the concept if "death panels". I guess we have always had them


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Not at all.



Janeway said:


> Finally an off-handed compliment! Thanks sorta!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I almost swallowed my gum.



jelun2 said:


> joeysomma wrote:
> In case you haven't noticed. The Republicans care about the individual people. The Democrats, especially Obama, only care about their plan, ACA, no matter what the cost to the physical or financial health of the taxpayer.
> 
> This one really is good for a laugh,isn't it, Empress?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

McCain is a never-was who has sold his soul to the devil.



NJG said:


> So he has the guts to say the democrats are governed by the newer democrats, but who does he think is running the republicans? The tea party, McCain, is telling telling when to jump and how high.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

That man is a disaster.



NJG said:


> When Chris Cuomo interviewed Cruz He asked if you did repeal Obamacare, what do you have in place to take care of those [people that would be left without insurance. His answer, that is what has to be done. So in other words, don't answer.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


 :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

damemary said:


> Solo,
> 
> The policies that do not meet ACA criteria are, by definition, sub-par. Other cancelled policies were cancelled by the insurance policies for their usual reasons, they feel that they can extort more money from policyholders. They have done this for many, many years without the excuse of ACA.
> 
> ...


He LIED over and over again. If he didn't lie why repeat it 36 times? Why didn't someone tell him he was wrong after he said it so he could apologize and correct the record? Why did the like of Nancy Pelosi and her minions also keep repeating the lie?

Once is a mistake, 36 times is a deliberate lie. Or a more frightening thought, he never read the bill. Oh what a great Constitutional scholar he is. He is too arrogant to read his own piece of legislation. Not only does he lie like Pinocchio he has his strings pulled daily, like the puppet his is.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Others see it differently.



lovethelake said:


> He LIED over and over again. If he didn't lie why repeat it 36 times? Why didn't someone tell him he was wrong after he said it so he could apologize and correct the record? Why did the like of Nancy Pelosi and her minions also keep repeating the lie?
> 
> Once is a mistake, 36 times is a deliberate lie. Or a more frightening thought, he never read the bill. Oh what a great Constitutional scholar he is. He is too arrogant to read his own piece of legislation. Not only does he lie like Pinocchio he has his strings pulled daily, like the puppet his is.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> Others see it differently.


It seems pretty obvious to me that no reasonable person would "like" a insurance in name only. 
Since we are only hearing a few partisans pushing these stories, at least half of which have proven to be bogus, I would guess that most of these policy holders receiving termination notices are happy to be sprung from the ridiculous plans.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Good idea to ignore me. I understand the references of death panels which DO exist within the rules of the ACA and don't care about what YOU believe Sarah Palin 'tossed out.' I don't rely on Sarah, "Scopes" (your reference) or "Snopes" for anything nor anyone who spews and uses the death of a military member for sympathy. That is despicable and only from "people like you."


I feel physically sick. Again, you have surpassed yourself. You should be ashamed.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> I feel physically sick. Again, you have surpassed yourself. You should be ashamed.


She has no shame.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Have been listening to c-span this morning, a question answer session about the ACA, There was a lady from Texas that is helping people sign up. She said the hardest thing is telling people they don't qualify for a subsidy and since Texas didn't take the extended medicaid, they get no insurance. The one lady said she thought there were about 1 million people in Texas, uninsured. These all sound like very caring people--sure different than you hear from republicans in congress when they talk about the ACA.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Sounds like the Republican's shot themselves in the foot, and took their states with them.....Very Sad!


NJG said:


> Have been listening to c-span this morning, a question answer session about the ACA, There was a lady from Texas that is helping people sign up. She said the hardest thing is telling people they don't qualify for a subsidy and since Texas didn't take the extended medicaid, they get no insurance. The one lady said she thought there were about 1 million people in Texas, uninsured. These all sound like very caring people--sure different than you hear from republicans in congress when they talk about the ACA.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Texas is actually one of the states, as Florida is, that passed laws specifically to make it more difficult for the advisors/navigators to help people sign up. 
Reasonable people really do have to wonder what the heck is wrong with these hateful dolts.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> It seems pretty obvious to me that no reasonable person would "like" a insurance in name only.
> Since we are only hearing a few partisans pushing these stories, at least half of which have proven to be bogus, I would guess that most of these policy holders receiving termination notices are happy to be sprung from the ridiculous plans.


Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Way to many IF's in your statement. According to your scenario, this man is perfect....There is generally something wrong with everyone. And if not now, there will be some day....You aren't being realistic.....That's why it's called insurance...it guards against you having to mortgage the house when you say, get cancer, or have a heart attack....or get hit by a Mac truck...You don't just one day decide you are going to become mentally ill, it just happens. I would like to know what kind of insurance this man had that sounds like it didn't cover much of anything. I can see why it was so affordable.


soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


Because these people believe that they are covered, but if they end up in a car accident and in the hospital for a month or two, they find out they aren't covered at all. The insurance companies know what they are selling and what the benefits of those plans are. And of course everyone knows if they will need mental illness coverage, don't they. All the years I had coverage through my employer, I never one said yes or no to maternity coverage. I was never asked about it and I never picked the options I wanted or didn't want. How many single men now have maternity coverage, through their employer and have had for years?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


Why should I pay for collision insurance on my vehicle since I don't want to have a collision? Is that what your asking? 
It is pretty easy to see why you don't understand how a policy could be ridiculous. 
The policies those people were carrying were no better to the majority then throwing money down a well.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

Nussa, I praise anyone that takes it upon themselves to purchase their own health insurance. If they are responsible enough to pay a premium to an insurance company incase of loss, damage or illness they are certainly smart enough and responsible enough to choose the one that best suits Their needs. Not the needs of the government.Every citizen that was content with their policy should be left alone, not only that, they should have been Thanked for doing the right thing. Instead they get cancellation notices and told they have had really crappy plans. Also, there are alot of What if's in your post.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Sounds like the Republican's shot themselves in the foot, and took their states with them.....Very Sad!


One person also said that there are people not connected to the ACA going around house to house saying they want to sign someone up, getting their information and then using their ss numbers and such. That is one reason the people with the aca don't go house to house.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2013/November/22/capitol-hill-watch-political-posturing-aca.aspx

Boehner Signs On To 'Obamacare' After Delay, Tweet
At one point Thursday, Boehner tweeted his frustration  "Guess Ill just have to keep trying"  along with photos of himself at a computer and the error message he says he received. The House speaker has 583,000 followers on Twitter (11/21).

Politico: John Boehner Now Enrolled In Obamacare
About an hour after Speaker John Boehner's office said he couldn't sign up for Obamacare coverage on the District of Columbias exchange, his office said he's now officially enrolled. "Kept at it, and called the DC Health Link help line. They called back a few hours later, and after restarting the process on the website two more times, I just heard from DC Health Link that I have been successfully enrolled," Boehner's office wrote (Millman and Cunningham, 11/21).

CNN: Boehner Tries, Eventually Enrolls In Obamacare 
House Speaker John Boehner sat at his desk in the U.S. Capitol and attempted to enroll in Obamacare on Thursday afternoon, but was unable to log on, and called his experience "pretty frustrating." Boehner's office sent out an update that, four hours after he tried to enroll, the Speaker received an email from DC Health Link confirming he had been enrolled (Walsh, 11/21).

This is part of Kaiser Health News' Daily Report - a summary of health policy coverage from more than 300 news organizations. The full summary of the day's news can be found here and you can sign up for e-mail subscriptions to the Daily Report here. In addition, our staff of reporters and correspondents file original stories each day, which you can find on our home page.

I thought that Speaker Boehner lived in Ohio, why would he sign up in DC?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

galinipper said:


> Nussa, I praise anyone that takes it upon themselves to purchase their own health insurance. If they are responsible enough to pay a premium to an insurance company incase of loss, damage or illness they are certainly smart enough and responsible enough to choose the one that best suits Their needs. Not the needs of the government.Every citizen that was content with their policy should be left alone, not only that, they should have been Thanked for doing the right thing. Instead they get cancellation notices and told they have had really crappy plans. Also, there are alot of What if's in your post.


It is because of the what if's in your life that you get insurance that will cover those what if's. You never know when they will happen. It is because of crappy plans that people found them selves having to file bankruptcy. I know of two families that have mental illness come into their family that was not covered. One son became schizophrenic and they sure didn't expect that. Now they can finally get insurance to cover him, no longer having to deal with pre existing conditions.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


No one can know if he or she will ever need drug rehab or mental health counseling. And as for the maternity care, historically American women have paid more for their health insurance because their reproductive organs have been viewed as a pre-existing condition. Tacking this onto everyone's policy is simply an attempt to level the playing field, and I for one have no objection to paying for it even though I don't expect to have any more children. Nothing is worse than having a mother-to-be who opts out of pre-natal care because she can't afford it.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

NJG said:


> It is because of the what if's in your life that you get insurance that will cover those what if's. You never know when they will happen. It is because of crappy plans that people found them selves having to file bankruptcy. I know of two families that have mental illness come into their family that was not covered. One son became schizophrenic and they sure didn't expect that. Now they can finally get insurance to cover him, no longer having to deal with pre existing conditions.


Nussa posted that Solo had to many if's in her post, therefore the point was made that she , nussa, post was all about what if's...... but this isn't a what if post, People that like their plan should be able to keep their plan, people that like their Dr. should be able to keep their Dr.
Not all health ins policies that were cancelled were crap policies. Some medical conditions were never going to effect some of the policy holders.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> No one can know if he or she will ever need drug rehab or mental health counseling. And as for the maternity care, historically American women have paid more for their health insurance because their reproductive organs have been viewed as a pre-existing condition. Tacking this onto everyone's policy is simply an attempt to level the playing field, and I for one have no objection to paying for it even though I don't expect to have any more children. Nothing is worse than having a mother-to-be who opts out of pre-natal care because she can't afford it.


I'm with you, susanmos2000, I have been paying for maternity and ob/gyn for at least 25 years through my (former) employer's health plan and never gave it a second thought. 
How much can it possibly be per month if we all carry it? 
My quickie calculations tell me approx $.50 per year maybe sixty cents per policy holder.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So why would I *not* have collision insurance on my car? Any time the value of the car is less than the cost of the insurance. Even if you have an accident, you will never get more than the value of the car. Many cars on the road have no value other than junk (recycling) value. They are still running great.
> 
> So why would I *not* have maternity coverage on a policy? If I was a male and had a single policy on myself alone. Or if I was a woman that not longer had the needed parts.
> 
> Someone has also stated that 25% of the premiums on the exchange are to pay for the high risk (pre-existing conditions) people.


One answer: I am not a selfish -----.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I was responding to soloweygirl's what if's. That was my point. She was saying this person had insurance that was perfect for him....And I was saying only IF nothing ever happened to him. I have also known people with that type of insurance who when they ended up needing it, found out they had been paying for something that pretty much covered nothing.

IMHO, I personally am glad that someone is taking a look at the insurance companies, and seeing what they really cover in their policies. It's time they were made to provide us with the services that we pay for, not change it without notice, and raise our premiums. The insurance companies have been robbing us blind, and it's been getting steadily worse.


galinipper said:


> Nussa, I praise anyone that takes it upon themselves to purchase their own health insurance. If they are responsible enough to pay a premium to an insurance company incase of loss, damage or illness they are certainly smart enough and responsible enough to choose the one that best suits Their needs. Not the needs of the government.Every citizen that was content with their policy should be left alone, not only that, they should have been Thanked for doing the right thing. Instead they get cancellation notices and told they have had really crappy plans. Also, there are alot of What if's in your post.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Nussa said:


> Way to many IF's in your statement. According to your scenario, this man is perfect....There is generally something wrong with everyone. And if not now, there will be some day....You aren't being realistic.....That's why it's called insurance...it guards against you having to mortgage the house when you say, get cancer, or have a heart attack....or get hit by a Mac truck...You don't just one day decide you are going to become mentally ill, it just happens. I would like to know what kind of insurance this man had that sounds like it didn't cover much of anything. I can see why it was so affordable.


Wow, 2 ifs are way to many, OK. I never said he was perfect. That was your scenario. I never said he wasn't/is sick, that's you again. What he had covered in his plan before Obamacare was his decision, based on his medical history, and if he chose to not have certain options because he decided he wouldn't need them does not make his plan ridiculous or crap. Now it's not up to him what he is allowed be insured for. I'll just take it as you have no answer as to why these types of policies are considered sub-par, ridiculous or down right crap by you liberals.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I'm with you, susanmos2000, I have been paying for maternity and ob/gyn for at least 25 years through my (former) employer's health plan and never gave it a second thought.
> How much can it possibly be per month if we all carry it?
> My quickie calculations tell me approx $.50 per year maybe sixty cents per policy holder.


I don't doubt it--and it's well worth the price. The consequences of inadequate or non-existent prenatal care are well-know--even those conservatives who don't care about the suffering of these moms and their babies should realize that sickly little children cost society plenty in the end.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I don't doubt it--and it's well worth the price. The consequences of inadequate or non-existent prenatal care are well-know--even those conservatives who don't care about the suffering of these moms and their babies should realize that sickly little children cost society plenty in the end.


One of the things that truly puts my irony meter on overload is the sudden sympathy for these "catastrophic" health insurance polices is 1. there was never any concern for them prior to Obamacare initializing, and 2. where is the charge that these policy holders made poor life choices so they are just paying the price, as those living in poverty do, for those bad choices. Isn't that what being part of that small group who has no group health insurance is? It seems to me these people chose that position and now they must better themselves through whatever means available.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

galinipper said:


> Nussa posted that Solo had to many if's in her post, therefore the point was made that she , nussa, post was all about what if's...... but this isn't a what if post, People that like their plan should be able to keep their plan, people that like their Dr. should be able to keep their Dr.
> Not all health ins policies that were cancelled were crap policies. Some medical conditions were never going to effect some of the policy holders.


Changing Drs is not a new thing either. I had to change Drs twice because of ins plans. The first time I changed jobs and therefor a new ins and the second time my employer changed ins companies and I had to switch to a Dr that accepted that ins. Every Dr does not accept every insurance available. When I worked in optics we started accepting a new ins that was crap. They had so many restrictions on what a pt was covered for and so many restrictions of what glasses and lenses they could purchase that it definitely was crap insurance. It was an ordeal to get paid from the ins company also. I am sure that is something Drs look into before taking a new ins.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> One of the things that truly puts my irony meter on overload is the sudden sympathy for these "catastrophic" health insurance polices is 1. there was never any concern for them prior to Obamacare initializing, and 2. where is the charge that these policy holders made poor life choices so they are just paying the price, as those living in poverty do, for those bad choices. Isn't that what being part of that small group who has no group health insurance is? It seems to me these people chose that position and now they must better themselves through whatever means available.


Excellent point. Poor people are poor because they made bad choices and didn't get an education, blah blah blah. I agree, looks to me like these people being canceled made bad choices!!!


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Because these people believe that they are covered, but if they end up in a car accident and in the hospital for a month or two, they find out they aren't covered at all. The insurance companies know what they are selling and what the benefits of those plans are. And of course everyone knows if they will need mental illness coverage, don't they. All the years I had coverage through my employer, I never one said yes or no to maternity coverage. I was never asked about it and I never picked the options I wanted or didn't want. How many single men now have maternity coverage, through their employer and have had for years?


1. I was not talking employer based coverage, but individual.
2. You might have not said yes or no to maternity coverage, but did you actually ask why you had to have the coverage if you didn't want it? I doubt it. Same with the men that don't need it .It was included in your employee packet and that was that.
3. I sat down with an insurance agent and went over what I wanted in my coverage, since I was paying for it. I had choices and picked the best coverage for my needs and medical history. That does not make what I have a sub-par policy, nor does it make the policy not able to cover certain catastrophes either.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

galinipper said:


> Nussa posted that Solo had to many if's in her post, therefore the point was made that she , nussa, post was all about what if's...... but this isn't a what if post, People that like their plan should be able to keep their plan, people that like their Dr. should be able to keep their Dr.
> Not all health ins policies that were cancelled were crap policies. Some medical conditions were never going to effect some of the policy holders.


I hereby state that I will never be pregnant, will never need Viagra or birth control, will not smoke, will not get fat, will not consume alcohol, will not get any STDs, will never need ANY surgery, will not have clogged arteries, will not fall down skiing, will never jab myself with a knitting needle, will not fall off a chair, will never have cataracts/vision problems, will have the mental soundness of Einstein, will not get prostate cancer, will not be injured in a bar fight or sporting event, will not have heart disease or cancer, and will NOT get old.

Why in the heck would I need health insurance?


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Why should I pay for collision insurance on my vehicle since I don't want to have a collision? Is that what your asking?
> It is pretty easy to see why you don't understand how a policy could be ridiculous.
> The policies those people were carrying were no better to the majority then throwing money down a well.


You have a much better chance of getting into a collision than a man does of having a baby. I have no children at home, so why should I have to pay for pediatric care? There is no drug abuse in my immediate family and I do not do drugs or prescription drugs, so I do not feel the need to have a drug rehab option in my insurance. All 5M of those policies were not crap, and you are pretty ignorant to think they were.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> You have a much better chance of getting into a collision than a man does of having a baby. I have no children at home, so why should I have to pay for pediatric care? There is no drug abuse in my immediate family and I do not do drugs or prescription drugs, so I do not feel the need to have a drug rehab option in my insurance. All 5M of those policies were not crap, and you are pretty ignorant to think they were.


You are not paying for pediatric care, you are paying to have health insurance. That health insurance plan can or will cover any of the situations listed. 
The person having a baby this year may never have diabetes and may have be stuck paying for your morbid obesity while you pay toward her children's immunizations; which, BTW, benefit ALL of us. 
Grow up, accept it, this is what health insurance is. 
Honestly, I don't care that you don't like it. I don't like that tax payers don't contribute to abortions. Such is life.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

galinipper said:


> Nussa, I praise anyone that takes it upon themselves to purchase their own health insurance. If they are responsible enough to pay a premium to an insurance company incase of loss, damage or illness they are certainly smart enough and responsible enough to choose the one that best suits Their needs. Not the needs of the government.Every citizen that was content with their policy should be left alone, not only that, they should have been Thanked for doing the right thing. Instead they get cancellation notices and told they have had really crappy plans. Also, there are alot of What if's in your post.


Thank you. Because we have taken that responsibility, we are being pushed in front of the bus so we can pay for those that took no responsibility.We'll pay with the policy and then again when the still uninsured need medical care. And the liberals say it is not about control. Go figure.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

You Probably Didnt Hear About The Most Important Health Care News This Week
BY SY MUKHERJEE AND ANDREW BREINER	ON NOVEMBER 22, 2013 AT 11:56 AM
1,792 264 "You Probably Didnt Hear About The Most Important Health Care News This Week" Share: Share on facebook Share on google_plusone_share Share on email
On Wednesday, the new head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers released a bombshell report finding that U.S. health care spending since 2010 has increased by just 1.3 percent  the smallest cost growth over a three-year period in American history  while prices in the health care sector rose by 50-year lows, thanks in part to structural changes made by the Affordable Care Act. But most media outlets ignored that story, instead choosing to focus on ongoing glitches with the Healthcare.gov website.
According to a ThinkProgress analysis, English-language online and print media published about ten times as many pieces on the troubles with the Obamacare site than they did on the new health care spending report:

Analysts are divided on the extent to which Obamacare has influenced the remarkable slowdown in health spending since the law was passed in 2010. Most agree that it is likely due to a combination of factors, including less health care consumption in the global financial crisis wake, savings from the ACAs hospital payment reforms, increasing reliance on cheaper generic drugs, and ongoing changes in the medical industry as providers form more efficient and collaborative care models encouraged by Obamacare. It will take years before enough data is available to perform a more precise analysis of Obamacares effect on health spending.
Regardless, the record slowdown is one of the most important economic developments of the decade, and has huge ramifications for the fiscal viability of major programs like Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has already cut its projections for Medicare and Medicaids price tag in 2020 by $147 billion  a 10 percent reduction from previous estimates.
Thats significant because those health entitlements are the primary driver of U.S. debt. The CBOs dire predictions about future debt are based on the assumption that health care costs will continue spiking for the foreseeable future. But now that costs are growing more modestly, the countrys long-term budgetary outlook is improving.
Meanwhile, while Healthcare.govs rollout has indeed been disastrous, the site is slowly improving.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/11/22/2983481/media-historic-slowdown-health-spending/


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

I just now found this and HA to come straight over here to post it:



> *Vermont Approves Single-Payer Health Care: Everybody in, nobody out*
> http://www.occupydemocrats.com/vermont-makes-promise-people-video/
> The ACA provided states with federal funds to institute a Medicaid expansion. The states chose to expand the program also were able to set up their own state exchanges, which were relatively free from the problems the federal site had. Vermont decided to take it a step further by setting up their very own single payer system.
> 
> ...


I think that's fabulous.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Here's something else pretty darned fabulous:



> *You Probably Didnt Hear About The Most Important Health Care News This Week *
> link http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/11/22/2983481/media-historic-slowdown-health-spending/
> On Wednesday, the new head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers released a bombshell report finding that *U.S. health care spending since 2010 has increased by just 1.3 percent  the smallest cost growth over a three-year period in American history * while prices in the health care sector rose by 50-year lows, thanks in part to structural changes made by the Affordable Care Act. But most media outlets ignored that story, instead choosing to focus on ongoing glitches with the Healthcare.gov website. (See infographic at link)


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> I just now found this and HA to come straight over here to post it:
> 
> I think that's fabulous.


It is fabulous, now if we can only begin saying "as goes VT so goes the nation."


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

alcameron said:


> I hereby state that I will never be pregnant, will never need Viagra or birth control, will not smoke, will not get fat, will not consume alcohol, will not get any STDs, will never need ANY surgery, will not have clogged arteries, will not fall down skiing, will never jab myself with a knitting needle, will not fall off a chair, will never have cataracts/vision problems, will have the mental soundness of Einstein, will not get prostate cancer, will not be injured in a bar fight or sporting event, will not have heart disease or cancer, and will NOT get old.
> 
> Why in the heck would I need health insurance?


It appears your a Zombie , so no need to apply. Just pay the fine. Period


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Thank you. Because we have taken that responsibility, we are being pushed in front of the bus so we can pay for those that took no responsibility.We'll pay with the policy and then again when the still uninsured need medical care. And the liberals say it is not about control. Go figure.


Don't you get it that you can't predict what your health needs are going to be? I have taken great care of myself and ended up with cancer. I followed the recommended guidelines for cancer screenings, etc. and nobody in my immediate family ever had cancer. How could I possibly get cancer? 
You are in a pool of people. Maybe I paid my premiums for 30 years without any kind of health insurance needs. You just can't predict when or if your body might betray you. I have a 67-yr old friend in the hospital with pneumonia. This is the first time she's ever been in a hospital, but she paid premiums all her life. Disease doesn't always care whether you took care of your body.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> It is fabulous, now if we can only begin saying "as goes VT so goes the nation."


LOL -- so true.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

NJG said:


> Changing Drs is not a new thing either. I had to change Drs twice because of ins plans. The first time I changed jobs and therefor a new ins and the second time my employer changed ins companies and I had to switch to a Dr that accepted that ins. Every Dr does not accept every insurance available. When I worked in optics we started accepting a new ins that was crap. They had so many restrictions on what a pt was covered for and so many restrictions of what glasses and lenses they could purchase that it definitely was crap insurance. It was an ordeal to get paid from the ins company also. I am sure that is something Drs look into before taking a new ins.


I have always bought health ins. policy that included my DR. I had a choice. And I do like choices. I did not say changing Dr. was a new thing.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> 1. I was not talking employer based coverage, but individual.
> 2. You might have not said yes or no to maternity coverage, but did you actually ask why you had to have the coverage if you didn't want it? I doubt it. Same with the men that don't need it .It was included in your employee packet and that was that.
> 3. I sat down with an insurance agent and went over what I wanted in my coverage, since I was paying for it. I had choices and picked the best coverage for my needs and medical history. That does not make what I have a sub-par policy, nor does it make the policy not able to cover certain catastrophes either.


Well, good for you if you have what you want and what you need. Has your policy been cancelled?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Well, good for you if you have what you want and what you need. Has your policy been cancelled?


I am working on it as we type.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Darrell Issa is now taking his Obamacare show on the road. He is holding hearings in North Carolina starting Monday and then will go to Texas, Georgia and Arizona. Of course the people that want to testify that it is working good for them won't be allowed to. All Issa wants is the bad stories. Doesn't sound much like a hearing does it if you control who get to testify.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Sounds like he'll prob. have better coverage with ACA...... :thumbup:


soloweygirl said:


> Wow, 2 ifs are way to many, OK. I never said he was perfect. That was your scenario. I never said he wasn't/is sick, that's you again. What he had covered in his plan before Obamacare was his decision, based on his medical history, and if he chose to not have certain options because he decided he wouldn't need them does not make his plan ridiculous or crap. Now it's not up to him what he is allowed be insured for. I'll just take it as you have no answer as to why these types of policies are considered sub-par, ridiculous or down right crap by you liberals.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I hereby state that I will never be pregnant, will never need Viagra or birth control, will not smoke, will not get fat, will not consume alcohol, will not get any STDs, will never need ANY surgery, will not have clogged arteries, will not fall down skiing, will never jab myself with a knitting needle, will not fall off a chair, will never have cataracts/vision problems, will have the mental soundness of Einstein, will not get prostate cancer, will not be injured in a bar fight or sporting event, will not have heart disease or cancer, and will NOT get old.
> 
> Why in the heck would I need health insurance?


 :thumbup:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> I just now found this and HA to come straight over here to post it:
> 
> I think that's fabulous.


How will VT citizens feel when next year their taxes go up 10% and prorated each year after that as the Federal subsidy is reduced by the same amount? Wonder if they will all agree with you how fabulous that money grab is then.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Something affordable to their budget, but offering them nothing for their money? Go back to sleep solo.



soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nussa said:


> Way to many IF's in your statement. According to your scenario, this man is perfect....There is generally something wrong with everyone. And if not now, there will be some day....You aren't being realistic.....That's why it's called insurance...it guards against you having to mortgage the house when you say, get cancer, or have a heart attack....or get hit by a Mac truck...You don't just one day decide you are going to become mentally ill, it just happens. I would like to know what kind of insurance this man had that sounds like it didn't cover much of anything. I can see why it was so affordable.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Because these people believe that they are covered, but if they end up in a car accident and in the hospital for a month or two, they find out they aren't covered at all. The insurance companies know what they are selling and what the benefits of those plans are. And of course everyone knows if they will need mental illness coverage, don't they. All the years I had coverage through my employer, I never one said yes or no to maternity coverage. I was never asked about it and I never picked the options I wanted or didn't want. How many single men now have maternity coverage, through their employer and have had for years?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Why should I pay for collision insurance on my vehicle since I don't want to have a collision? Is that what your asking?
> It is pretty easy to see why you don't understand how a policy could be ridiculous.
> The policies those people were carrying were no better to the majority then throwing money down a well.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

To tie up the website?



jelun2 said:


> http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2013/November/22/capitol-hill-watch-political-posturing-aca.aspx
> 
> Boehner Signs On To 'Obamacare' After Delay, Tweet
> At one point Thursday, Boehner tweeted his frustration  "Guess Ill just have to keep trying"  along with photos of himself at a computer and the error message he says he received. The House speaker has 583,000 followers on Twitter (11/21).
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> No one can know if he or she will ever need drug rehab or mental health counseling. And as for the maternity care, historically American women have paid more for their health insurance because their reproductive organs have been viewed as a pre-existing condition. Tacking this onto everyone's policy is simply an attempt to level the playing field, and I for one have no objection to paying for it even though I don't expect to have any more children. Nothing is worse than having a mother-to-be who opts out of pre-natal care because she can't afford it.


For the deliberately dense out there, a premature baby's care is EXPENSIVE.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Excellent point. Poor people are poor because they made bad choices and didn't get an education, blah blah blah. I agree, looks to me like these people being canceled made bad choices!!!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Works for me.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> I hereby state that I will never be pregnant, will never need Viagra or birth control, will not smoke, will not get fat, will not consume alcohol, will not get any STDs, will never need ANY surgery, will not have clogged arteries, will not fall down skiing, will never jab myself with a knitting needle, will not fall off a chair, will never have cataracts/vision problems, will have the mental soundness of Einstein, will not get prostate cancer, will not be injured in a bar fight or sporting event, will not have heart disease or cancer, and will NOT get old.
> 
> Why in the heck would I need health insurance?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

damemary said:


> To tie up the website?


It seems that Mr. Boehner's home state opted OUT of the state run exchange system.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well fellow KPers, I must say thank you for serious discussion. Your examples and backup are very helpful when trying to understand the issues. To those who are only here to promote their viewpoint, I must admit I know who you are and skip your postings.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

See you around......Good knitting..... :thumbup:


damemary said:


> Well fellow KPers, I must say thank you for serious discussion. Your examples and backup are very helpful when trying to understand the issues. To those who are only here to promote their viewpoint, I must admit I know who you are and skip your postings.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> Why are these plans "ridiculous"? Aside from not meeting Obamacare's criteria, what was so ridiculous about the plans? What is ridiculous about a single male without children not wanting to be covered for maternity care or pediatric care? If he doesn't do drugs, he will not need drug rehab either. If there is no mental illness in his family, why should he pay for that if he doesn't want it? It's this very criteria that is increasing the cost for those that have received cancellations. They had something affordable before, but not now.


Oh my dear, mental illness doesn't just run in families. I know several people who had no family history but in their life they ended up with mental illness. A perfect example would be PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder). I'm not sure if you are familiar with it, or maybe only familiar with it by name, but PTSD can lead to a splintering off of other mental health issues as well. And not all PTSD comes from the military service. Regular people get it too, like those who have been raped, attempted murder, or even just mugging. Trust me when I say this (because I really should know), PTSD left untreated often becomes more severe. This can cause a person to kill another, without knowing it, because they are having a disassociative flashback. It can cause people to kill themselves because PTSD, especially the severe, is hell. Literally hell. It can often lead to people killing themselves. Some of these things are things you can't guarantee will not happen. That is why it needs to be covered. You truly don't want someone with severe PTSD with disassociative flashbacks to be unable to seek help and medication because they can't pay for it. And many, but not all, medicines for it are very expensive. If someone like that we're involuntarily admitted then they would stay until they were stablilized and then sent home. To a home again with no medication. Then they go crazy again, and back home, then crazy, again home, crazy, home, crazy, home..... I think you get the idea. In the meantime you just have to hope and pray that the person doesn't hurt themselves or anybody else.

You never know when you may have surgery and need pain meds. Let's say you were in pain before and after surgery. The doctor gave you Vicodin for that because you had broken your femur, which needed surgical correction with a pin. You are on the vicodin in total 6 months. Then you realize you can't cope without it. You start withdrawal (and withdrawal isn't physiological, it's a chemical brain issue.. Serotonin I believe). But you are back to work and need to work because you have used up all your family medical leave and vacation. It would be much easier to find someone to give you vicodin, just for a week because this week is horrible, and then you will stop. Then it happens again next week, and the next and the next. Healthy people who don't use drugs "normally" can and have gotten addicted to drugs prescribed for them for legitimate reasons. You can't plan for that.

The point of healthcare insurance is to get it just in case you might have a problem. It is and always has been a gamble, a numbers game. It amazes me that NOW people has an issue with that.

It may not be fair for a man to pay for pregnancy care, (although a man is needed to MAKE the baby, so shouldn't they need to put something in? It's not like he's being asked to push a cantaloupe out his penis or something!).

However, I don't think it would be fair for us to pay for a policy that covers: Viagra, prostate exams, circumcisions, psa blood tests, ect. Do we really want to play the, "but I won't need that because I'm a man/woman" game? I certainly wouldn't.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

galinipper said:


> Nussa posted that Solo had to many if's in her post, therefore the point was made that she , nussa, post was all about what if's...... but this isn't a what if post, People that like their plan should be able to keep their plan, people that like their Dr. should be able to keep their Dr.
> Not all health ins policies that were cancelled were crap policies. Some medical conditions were never going to effect some of the policy holders.


Every year insurance companies drop people, or cancel policies. Usually it is to force them into getting a higher priced policy. My mil got her policy dropped a year or two ago. The insurance companies may say it was because of the ACA, but telling the truth is not their strong point.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Every year insurance companies drop people, or cancel policies. Usually it is to force them into getting a higher priced policy. My mil got her policy dropped a year or two ago. The insurance companies may say it was because of the ACA, but telling the truth is not their strong point.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> Wow, 2 ifs are way to many, OK. I never said he was perfect. That was your scenario. I never said he wasn't/is sick, that's you again. What he had covered in his plan before Obamacare was his decision, based on his medical history, and if he chose to not have certain options because he decided he wouldn't need them does not make his plan ridiculous or crap. Now it's not up to him what he is allowed be insured for. I'll just take it as you have no answer as to why these types of policies are considered sub-par, ridiculous or down right crap by you liberals.


They are considered sub-par because they do not cover simple basics that are needed in this world. Yes, men are not having babies from their body, but women aren't getting prostate exams either! I find it fascinating that in all your situations you state what is NOT covered. Pray tell, what does this amazingly awesome plan actually cover? Most people don't even know what their plan covers. They look at what it doesn't cover that they don't want, because gods forbid that we pay anything that might go to someone else! The horror!

But when he gets cancer, breaks a femur, ect and finds out his insurance only covers 30 hospital days for admission or doesn't cover a specific medication because it's too expensive, or covers it, but only 20% and the med is $2,000 a week, he finds out pretty damn fast. But then it is too late to change plans. Then he is stuck paying $1,980 a week for medication just to stay alive, he runs out of funds pretty fast. Then he tries getting the hospital to just perform services and send him a bill (a few places still do this,although those are getting rarer) or he just goes to the ER when it gets to bad to get emergency care and be admitted or sent home. But what will he do to get the money to pay? Nothing. What then happens is he doesn't pay the bill. Oh he may want to, but he just doesn't have the thousands of dollars to do so. Then he tried a healthcare credit card, but those have limits too. So then he ends up filing bankruptcy because there is no way out. Then the places who performed the services, the hospitals, doctors offices, the credit card company, they just don't get paid. Those bills are wiped clean. How do they compensate for the thousands of dollars in bills? They raise prices for EVERYBODY. So those who can pay are paying even more than they would have if that person had had health insurance that covered adequately.

We ARE ALREADY paying for others healthcare. You just don't "see" it because it happens in the administration buildings.

And then there is the economic factor of people declaring bankruptcy. People don't just get medical bills forgiven. They get credit car debts forgiven, car debts forgiven (but the car is repossessed), they get mortgages forgiven (unless they want to stay in it, then they make arrangements with the lender). How do you think they compensate? By, again, raising prices for everybody.

While I'm not a huge face of the ACA, they are doing this to try to put a stop to the raising of healthcare costs for everybody. They are trying to stablize the economy by reducing the number of bankruptcies in the country.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Knitry said:


> I just now found this and HA to come straight over here to post it:
> 
> I think that's fabulous.


I truly hope my state does this!


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

galinipper said:


> I have always bought health ins. policy that included my DR. I had a choice. And I do like choices. I did not say changing Dr. was a new thing.


Insurances can drop doctors and doctors can drop insurance policies. Just because you had it when you signed up doesn't mean that it will stay. I had that happen to a doctor of mine. He drop insurance.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> How will VT citizens feel when next year their taxes go up 10% and prorated each year after that as the Federal subsidy is reduced by the same amount? Wonder if they will all agree with you how fabulous that money grab is then.


I always consider this funny. I have many friends who live in Canada. They admit they have higher taxes, yet not one (even the person I knew that was a us citizen living there that was so opposed to socialized health care) would give up their health care for lower taxes. Not one!


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

damemary said:


> For the deliberately dense out there, a premature baby's care is EXPENSIVE.


Yup. And in some cases if you don't have the money your baby doesn't get it (the specific procedure). Babies that are premature can't be giving highly concentrated oxygen for a long period of time. That is why they are always bringing the concentration down to the lowest that maintains their oxygen level. But, if they drop in oxygen you need to increase it. This can cause retinopathy of the prematurity. There is a surgery tht my fix it, BUT they won't do it unless they know for sure they can be paid. It is an "elective" procedure. They won't die if they don't have it. So parents who can't afford it don't get to have their babies see. I personally saw this happen. It is just really expensive, but then so is just about anything with a premie baby.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> I always consider this funny. I have many friends who live in Canada. They admit they have higher taxes, yet not one (even the person I knew that was a us citizen living there that was so opposed to socialized health care) would give up their health care for lower taxes. Not one!


I always consider my friends who live in the US and who ALL are opposed to socialized health care and do not approve when their taxes are raised for less health care and/or no health insurance.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> While I'm not a huge face of the ACA, they are doing this to try to put a stop to the raising of healthcare costs for everybody. They are trying to stablize the economy by reducing the number of bankruptcies in the country.


Obama and his Admin are pushing the ACA to get govt control of everyone's health and with the intent to raise costs for everyone PERIOD. The result will be a further destabilized economy and family ruin and worse health care and higher costs for all.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Every year insurance companies drop people, or cancel policies. Usually it is to force them into getting a higher priced policy. My mil got her policy dropped a year or two ago. The insurance companies may say it was because of the ACA, but telling the truth is not their strong point.


We needed some health ins. changes. We don't need to hand our healthcare system over to the Government to manage. What is just as worrisome is some citizens think nothing about the Government controlling most aspects of their lives. The government's strong point revolves around lying, otherwise citizens would not be so compliant to such power grabs. We can do better than this... much better.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

galinipper said:


> We needed some health ins. changes. We don't need to hand our healthcare system over to the Government to manage. What is just as worrisome is some citizens think nothing about the Government controlling most aspects of their lives. The government's strong point revolves around lying, otherwise citizens would not be so compliant to such power grabs. We can do better than this... much better.


True

Did you notice that the ones that think Obamacare is working are Senior that are already on government health care, or ones that are getting subsidies to pay for their health care, or really sick people.....

Where are the young people that are willing to pay higher premiums to support these people? Aren't they a subgroup of the Obamacultist that voted for him and his lies? But I guess like all cultists that will have higher premiums, they are not willing to put their money where their vote went.

What about the 5 million newly uninsured that can't get on the website, what are they to do? What about the 5 million newly uninsured that are in the middle of medical treatment but are now dropped and have no insurance?

How is this an affordable healthcare system? It isn't, and that was another lie Obama said over and over again


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Obama and his Admin are pushing the ACA to get govt control of everyone's health and with the intent to raise costs for everyone PERIOD. The result will be a further destabilized economy and family ruin and worse health care and higher costs for all.


Good morning KPG, Hope you have a great day...I'm headed out to the barn, I have a couple stalls to clean. Then run errands. I seen, on the other channel, the new colors of the sashs you are making, they look great. Talk Later, Gali


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> True
> 
> Did you notice that the ones that think Obamacare is working are Senior that are already on government health care, or ones that are getting subsidies to pay for their health care, or really sick people.....
> 
> ...


Good morning Lake, If the truth would have been told in the beginning... this discussion wouldn't be happening. Talk Later, have a good week-end. Happy Spinning.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

I told gypsie who began the following thread that I would post it here as an apology for sidetracking her thread for a bit (and we have done it again). She is hoping that folks will contact Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, and ask that they stop carrying this book To Raise Up a Child.
It seems that the couple who has written this book put forward some extreme methods of child rearing and that people who have either followed the advice or twisted the advice have killed their children in several instances.

So here's the link to the thread. If you agree, then shoot off an email, please.

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-216978-5.html#4350703


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> How will VT citizens feel when next year their taxes go up 10% and prorated each year after that as the Federal subsidy is reduced by the same amount? Wonder if they will all agree with you how fabulous that money grab is then.


My guess is that the citizens of Vermont are (a) very well aware that they're going to pay a little more in taxes and (b) thrilled to be able to pool their resources with fellow Vermonters to make sure that all Vermonters have access to the healthcare they need.

BTW, the Medicaid federal subsidy is 100% for 3 years, then goes all the way down to a mere 90% -- so there'll be no additional taxes for that reason at all for at least 3 years.

And by that time, my prediction is that healthcare costs will have come down so significantly they'll not be raising taxes at all. For one thing, the profit motive is being ripped out of healthcare, as it should. That alone will result in a significant decrease in healthcare costs. Additionally, people won't have to show up in the ER for stop-gap measures that should have been handled in doctor's offices, so that will help reduce costs. And finally, people will simply be healthier and that alone will decrease the demand in general and with it healthcare costs.

It's a win/win/win/win/win -- EXCEPT for the conscience-deficient, immoral greedmongers and their supporters.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

damemary said:


> To tie up the website?


ROFL. I thought that too.

Has this been posted -- that the inoperability of the website was due at least in part to rightwing attacks on it?



> *Right Wing Cyber Attacks On ACA Website Confirmed* From Examiner.com:
> http://www.examiner.com/article/right-wing-cyber-attacks-on-healthcare-gov-website-confirmed
> Yesterday, the House Homeland Security Committee published a video on their Youtube page highlighting a portion of the committee questioning Roberta Stempfley, acting assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Securitys Office of Cyber-security and Communications, who confirmed at least 16 attacks on the Affordable Care Acts portal Healthcare.gov website in 2013.
> 
> ...


And while we're focused on rightwing sabotage, here's some more proof of their sedition and willingness to leave people suffering and dying needlessly just for their own self-serving interests:



> *G.O.P. Maps Out Waves of Attacks Over Health Law*
> WASHINGTON  The memo distributed to House Republicans this week was concise and blunt, listing talking points and marching orders: Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance. Obamacare Increases Health Care Costs. The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk. Continue Collecting Constituent Stories.
> 
> The document, the product of a series of closed-door strategy sessions that began in mid-October, is part of an increasingly organized Republican attack on the Affordable Care Act, President Obamas signature legislative initiative. Republican strategists say that over the next several months, they intend to keep Democrats on their heels through a multilayered, sequenced assault.
> ...


But, there is some more really good news. From a David Axelrod Tweet:



> We interrupt the handwringing in DC for this bulletin: health care sign ups are surging; state exchanges on target.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/402820693005316097 (The handwringing reference is to the controversy over the Senate's filibuster reform which is itself even more good news.)


Yep, Republicans are scared to death of the Affordable Care Act and well they should be: not only is it working, but it's going to help a LOT of people, and those helped -- and their children -- will never forget and be lifelong Democratic voter, probably. I don't think that's the main reason Obama did it, but it darned sure didn't hurt.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> My guess is that the citizens of Vermont are (a) very well aware that they're going to pay a little more in taxes and (b) thrilled to be able to pool their resources with fellow Vermonters to make sure that all Vermonters have access to the healthcare they need.
> 
> BTW, the Medicaid federal subsidy is 100% for 3 years, then goes all the way down to a mere 90% -- so there'll be no additional taxes for that reason at all for at least 3 years.
> 
> ...


It's funny, really, I sent my family on vacation for a week to VT this past summer. What my SIL came home with, though, was "you would really love living up there full time!", and yes, I would. The people in VT understand that one minute you're up and the next you can be down. (all that skiing, maybe)
They understand about the Godliness, or just the goodness, of taking care of each other.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I always consider this funny. I have many friends who live in Canada. They admit they have higher taxes, yet not one (even the person I knew that was a us citizen living there that was so opposed to socialized health care) would give up their health care for lower taxes. Not one!


That's so true. And if you think of it, when the "cost" is spread among millions of people -- as in the 243 million adults in the U.S. --it's equal to a just very small amount per person each year. I am GLAD to pay taxes for things like that and would prefer over paying so much of my taxes for wars and the bloated defense budget in general, so much of which goes to line Congresspeople's campaign funds.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> That's so true. And if you think of it, when the "cost" is spread among millions of people -- as in the 243 million adults in the U.S. --it's equal to a just very small amount per person each year. I am GLAD to pay taxes for things like that and would prefer over paying so much of my taxes for wars and the bloated defense budget in general, so much of which goes to line Congresspeople's campaign funds.


AYE AYE, More Health, Less War!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> Well fellow KPers, I must say thank you for serious discussion. Your examples and backup are very helpful when trying to understand the issues. To those who are only here to promote their viewpoint, I must admit I know who you are and skip your postings.


Well, bye, bye, as you only go your opinion about everything so maybe knitting is your game--good luck with frogging!


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Obama and his Admin are pushing the ACA to get govt control of everyone's health and with the intent to raise costs for everyone PERIOD. The result will be a further destabilized economy and family ruin and worse health care and higher costs for all.


That's just not true. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Healthcare costs have risen *less* over the last 3 years -- since the ACA was passed -- than any time IN OUR HISTORY. And reducing healthcare costs was an important goal of the ACA.

It's YOUR side which cares nothing about the welfare of the country if they can promote their own self-interests instead.

It's YOUR side that doesn't care about jobs and job creation, leaving it to wallow in recession.

It's YOUR side that cares nothing about people suffering and dying needlessly instead of ensuring they have access to affordable health insurance and thus healthcare.

It's YOUR side that promotes the interests of corporations -- at ANY and all costs -- over the interests of people as humans and as consumers.

It's YOUR side that wants a non-functional (note: not even as good as DYSfunctional) government so as to prevent that black man in office from achieving as much as possible. They don't care what it does to the nation or its people. They care only for their own political gain.

They are guilty of sedition:



> *The GOP Shutdown Is Sedition and Shouldn't be Forgiven *
> The behavior of the House GOP in the current showdown -- whether or not they reach some sort of deal -- makes them guilty of sedition. Whether they're indicted, arrested, and imprisoned for it, America should not forget or forgive this come election time.
> 
> Here's the why and how of it.
> ...


As for the fear of government wanting to "get control of everyone's health," get serious. What the Dems wanted to do was wrest the total control from the hands of greedmongers, for one thing. Some of us believe that our poor health, if and when it occurs, shouldn't result in glee and lip-smacking on the part of those watching our ill health fatten their profit line.

Even in Vermont, the government doesn't "control" anyone's health. The government became the single insurer, that's all. Doctors don't work for the state of Vermont, nor are hospitals and other healthcare facilities staffed and run by the government.

You're just a victim of right wing paranoia and fearmongering.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

galinipper said:


> Good morning KPG, Hope you have a great day...I'm headed out to the barn, I have a couple stalls to clean. Then run errands. I seen, on the other channel, the new colors of the sashs you are making, they look great. Talk Later, Gali


Just picked up your greeting - thanks Gali! Enjoy and choose Joy!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Knitry said:


> Yep, Republicans are scared to death of the Affordable Care Act and well they should be: not only is it working, but it's going to help a LOT of people, and those helped -- and their children -- will never forget and be lifelong Democratic voter, probably. I don't think that's the main reason Obama did it, but it darned sure didn't hurt.


I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!

So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> My guess is that the citizens of Vermont are (a) very well aware that they're going to pay a little more in taxes and (b) thrilled to be able to pool their resources with fellow Vermonters to make sure that all Vermonters have access to the healthcare they need.
> 
> BTW, the Medicaid federal subsidy is 100% for 3 years, then goes all the way down to a mere 90% -- so there'll be no additional taxes for that reason at all for at least 3 years.
> 
> ...


I'm surprised you believe the lies being fed to you. When have you ever known something the govt manages to go down in costs? We've been told the subsidies will go down, and so they shall, not just after the first three years. Besides, the IPAB, death panel, will take care of eliminating Medicare coverages just fine.

It's a lose/lose/lose for EVERYONE including you who believe the hype.

-------------

"Vermont has 626,000 residents. A $170 million exchange is $272 for every man, woman and child in the state. And this, for a state that already had fairly long track record of efforts to impose government control and sponsorship of health insurance, from Howard Deans push for community-rated health plans and Medicaid expansion in the 1990s (Dean cited Vermont as a model in his progressive-backed 2004 Presidential campaign) to a state rate-setting board established by Shumlin in 2011. This vast federal addition to a cluttered state healthcare landscape comes at a price tag that beggars belief.

And the failure of that website presents serious problems when it interacts with that landscape:

[F]or many tens of thousands of Vermonters there are real-world consequences to not being able to buy health insurance on Vermont Health Connect. Thanks to a unique monopoly feature of Vermonts Act 171 (2012), Vermonters who are thwarted by an inoperative exchange site cannot choose to continue their present coverage with their present insurer. This monopoly feature, in force in no other state, applies to currently insured individual purchasers and small business groups of up to 50 employees.

The reason for the monopoly is that Governor Shumlin and his single-payer allies are trying everything possible to lure or force people into the exchange before 2017. On that date state-run, taxpayer-financed Green Mountain Care is supposed to replace all health insurance.

This $3 billion-plus single-payer plan will be financed in large measure with a federal block grant equal to the sum of all the Obamacare tax credits paid on behalf of the people buying through Vermont Health Connect.

Now, national politics cant save Vermonters from their own self-inflicted woes, but even in the most socialist precincts of the Green Mountain State, it has to be apparent that the addition of the federal exchange is just one more colossal boondoggle taxpayers cant afford."


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Oh, boy, I need maternity benefits as thought I signed up for a parachute club, but daughter said I had joined a prostitute club. I'm scared now because I signed up for 5 jumps a week! At my age, (over 65) I must have pregnancy coverage.

Wish me luck as my first "jump" is Monday!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!
> 
> So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Knitry said:


> My guess is that the citizens of Vermont are (a) very well aware that they're going to pay a little more in taxes and (b) thrilled to be able to pool their resources with fellow Vermonters to make sure that all Vermonters have access to the healthcare they need.
> 
> BTW, the Medicaid federal subsidy is 100% for 3 years, then goes all the way down to a mere 90% -- so there'll be no additional taxes for that reason at all for at least 3 years.
> 
> ...


Your guess is wrong. I know lots of people in Vermont who despise Obama and ACA. He lied to them, too. Stop reading minds. You are sooooo wrong.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> As for the fear of government wanting to "get control of everyone's health," get serious. What the Dems wanted to do was wrest the total control from the hands of greedmongers, for one thing. Some of us believe that our poor health, if and when it occurs, shouldn't result in glee and lip-smacking on the part of those watching our ill health fatten their profit line.
> 
> Even in Vermont, the government doesn't "control" anyone's health. The government became the single insurer, that's all. Doctors don't work for the state of Vermont, nor are hospitals and other healthcare facilities staffed and run by the government.
> 
> You're just a victim of right wing paranoia and fearmongering.


I have a feeling that she is not the victim, she is the fearmongerer.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

As I scroll through the pages here, I think No one can predict the future, but I think I'll be with the same carrier for a long time.bout the Christmas projects I have to finish, not to mention start. I should be crocheting, especially because a friend saw a shawl I was making, admired it, and now I think I'll make her one for Christmas. 

There's also a bag of chocolate chips and one of peanut butter chips calling me to get in the kitchen and bake some cookies. All these sound like fun things to do. Thinking about the ACA doesn't, even though that means I'm being selfish. I've had good health insurance for 13 years with the same outfit and they make money by continuing to cover me.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Ok... KPG.....What do you plan to do about it? I don't want to hear what you THINK the Republicans are going to do about it if they get back into office. Or what the Democrats are or aren't doing right now. What are you going to do right NOW? 
In this scenario I don't want you to blaming someone or something. I want you to come up with something that will help the people, (with or without insurance) whom you are so worried about. What can you do? At this point, has any of your ranting or name calling solved the problem? 
Don't you see, that logically you will have to wait like everyone else to see what happens? You can't stop people from loosing their current insurances. You can't turn back time....So all that's left, is to wait it out and see what happens. 
You can throw at us, all your statistics and it doesn't change a thing. As I've said.....it's a waiting game for us all. 
So, if you continue to feel the need to bash the President, and anyone else who doesn't agree with you, you are doing it because you are a spiteful, person. You don't care anymore than the man on the moon what happens to this country, as long as you have a forum for your misguided anger. 
P.S. OH NO! The government is raising taxes, AND destabilizing the economy. Well that's never happened before... :roll:



knitpresentgifts said:



> Obama and his Admin are pushing the ACA to get govt control of everyone's health and with the intent to raise costs for everyone PERIOD. The result will be a further destabilized economy and family ruin and worse health care and higher costs for all.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!
> 
> So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


I'm sorry, but YOU are wrong, except (perhaps) for your daughters and yourself. BTW, have you bothered to look at the ACA for comparison? Here's a handy site: www.knittingparadise.com/edit_post.jsp?postnum=4224472

And it's helped hundreds of thousands who have signed up so far. It's also helped all those whose insurance can't be canceled because they got sick and all those who couldn't get insured because of pre-existing conditions.

I don't think you actually want me to start posting all the anecdotal evidence I run across for how WELL it's working for people -- but I sure will if I get challenged like this again. But here's just one:



> *My Parents Are 57 and 61, Both Smokers, Finally Got Through on Healthcare.gov*
> They were originally going to go with the cheapest Silver plan, but it had a $2500 deductible and $11,600 max out-of-pocket. So I suggested they check out the Gold and Platinum plans, just for comparison. They are both in pretty good health (besides their smoking habit) but my dad had to undergo an angioplasty a few years back, clogged arteries. My dad got laid off his long-term job as an HVAC salesman a couple years ago, *had been drawing unemployment and paying into a COBRA plan that cost over $500/month just for himself. My mom has been uninsured for years *since arthritis stopped her from working. (She never applied for disability.)
> 
> <snip>*They were surprised to find out they qualified for a $611 monthly tax credit. They ended up going with a Platinum plan, the premium which costs just over $647/month for the both of them. $0 deductible, and only a $3000 max out-of-pocket.* Not too bad considering their age and the fact that they admitted to being smokers on the application.
> ...


I have a bunch of these -- want more??


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

KPG,

I appreciate your wise, intelligent, informed, and caring postings. You write because you care very, very much for our country. I know this for sure.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> As I scroll through the pages here, I think No one can predict the future, but I think I'll be with the same carrier for a long time.bout the Christmas projects I have to finish, not to mention start. I should be crocheting, especially because a friend saw a shawl I was making, admired it, and now I think I'll make her one for Christmas.
> 
> There's also a bag of chocolate chips and one of peanut butter chips calling me to get in the kitchen and bake some cookies. All these sound like fun things to do. Thinking about the ACA doesn't, even though that means I'm being selfish. I've had good health insurance for 13 years with the same outfit and they make money by continuing to cover me.


So glad to see you, MIB. I was getting worried that something was very wrong. 
Nothing wrong with being selfish once in a while. 
Enjoy your good health and the insurance as well as a few cookies.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> I have a bunch of these -- want more??


I believe that she is on disability SS. So she is pulling your leg. 
She can, and certainly will, correct me if I am wrong. I am thinking Medicare and Medicaid.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Knitry said:


> Yep, Republicans are scared to death of the Affordable Care Act and well they should be: not only is it working, but it's going to help a LOT of people, and those helped -- and their children -- will never forget and be lifelong Democratic voter, probably. I don't think that's the main reason Obama did it, but it darned sure didn't hurt.


Yes the right wing keeps attacking and trying to deny healthcare to others and at the same time they continue to call themselves Christians. Just doesn't fit, does it


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!
> 
> So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


If your destiny is to protect the land do you really side with republicans and want to get rid of the regulations trying to protect the land? How do you feel about global warming?


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Well, good for you if you have what you want and what you need. Has your policy been cancelled?


Not yet, but it could happen at any time. Maybe the insurance companies are holding off on the cancellations because of the extension. Who knows.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I believe that she is on disability SS. So she is pulling your leg.
> She can, and certainly will, correct me if I am wrong. I am thinking Medicare and Medicaid.


No, again you are wrong as I pay for supplementary insurance & drug coverage. True, I do have Medicare, but I worked & paid into that so I qualify & yes, I draw my SS as doctor's put me on disability at age 56, but again I worked & paid into SS.

I elected to not have a heart/lung surgery because a lady in our support group was 28, but she did not survive & returned from Baltimore in a casket. I have lived several years with this condition without surgery.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> No, again you are wrong as I pay for supplementary insurance & drug coverage. True, I do have Medicare, but I worked & paid into that so I qualify & yes, I draw my SS as doctor's put me on disability at age 56, but again I worked & paid into SS.
> 
> I elected to not have a heart/lung surgery because a lady in our support group was 28, but she did not survive & returned from Baltimore in a casket. I have lived several years with this condition without surgery.


Sorry, I thought you were younger. It is just so hard to tell these days... all that costuming in leather.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Knitry said:


> I have a bunch of these -- want more??


All I'm going to say is I know what I know & you can still tell untruths if that is what you believe, but there will be less money in my bank account because of the increase in the cost go medical insurance.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> All I'm going to say is I know what I know & you can still tell untruths if that is what you believe, but there will be less money in my bank account because of the increase in the cost go medical insurance.


You know what they say, "you can't take it with you. "


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Sorry, I thought you were younger. It is just so hard to tell these days... all that costuming in leather.


What leather?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> What leather?


Do you actually look at any of the pictures you post?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> You know what they say, "you can't take it with you. "


Well, my DH wants travelers checks in his shirt pocket "just" in case he could use them!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Well, my DH wants travelers checks in his shirt pocket "just" in case he could use them!


Buy them way in advance.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Do you actually look at any of the pictures you post?


Of course as I select them.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Buy them way in advance.


OK


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

The Democrats have finally realized that extending the mandate until this time next year puts it just before the 2014 election. With that in mind, Obama has waved his magic pen and extended the extension until December 2014. How convenient is that? But of course, it is not political. Yeah, of course not.

The Independent Payment Advisory Board, iPAB, the new group to control costs of Medicare will be able to have its members appointed by the Senate under the nuclear option that was just passed this week. Another convenient move by this administration. This board has the power to decide how much money Medicare gets and that will depend upon who gets elected to the board.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Janeway.......Didn't you tell us that your parents left the reservation? So you haven't grown up in the traditions of your tribe. And your parents were forced to speak English, so they have lost the knowledge of their native tongue. Did you not tell us that your family was forced out of their NA religion? 
I guess what I find odd, is that you seem to have no other connection to your NA heritage, but continue to show the proud NA in the pictures you post....but you don't participate in it. It's one thing to be proud of your heritage, but I find it hypocritical that you use it as a political tool.

As for the rising cost of medical insurance...anyone who's had insurance, which my DH and I have had for the last 39 yrs, know the rates increase on a regular basses. That is not an ACA conspiracy. That's the insurance companies.



Janeway said:


> I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!
> 
> So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I always consider my friends who live in the US and who ALL are opposed to socialized health care and do not approve when their taxes are raised for less health care and/or no health insurance.


When you consider these friends of yours, do you consider helping them to pay medical bills their health plans don't cover? Prove you put your money where your mouth is and maybe (just maybe...) what you've said will mean less than zero.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

And I bet the Republicans are having a tantrum and pulling their hair out. I mean, no political party would change the rules and not tell the other party would they? Or would they????

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11015



soloweygirl said:


> The Democrats have finally realized that extending the mandate until this time next year puts it just before the 2014 election. With that in mind, Obama has waved his magic pen and extended the extension until December 2014. How convenient is that? But of course, it is not political. Yeah, of course not.
> 
> The Independent Payment Advisory Board, iPAB, the new group to control costs of Medicare will be able to have its members appointed by the Senate under the nuclear option that was just passed this week. Another convenient move by this administration. This board has the power to decide how much money Medicare gets and that will depend upon who gets elected to the board.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Janeway said:


> I'm sorry, but you are wrong! ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!
> 
> So spew your garbage elsewhere as I know the truth!


The picture you posted of the three Native Americans does indeed show impressive patriotism. What's sad is your pretence of being an NA. There was a time here on KP when you never said a thing about your heritage. Now you're the greatest NA of all NAs. Interesting change there, Janie. It's not nice to tell lies, dearie.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> No, again you are wrong as I pay for supplementary insurance & drug coverage. True, I do have Medicare, but I worked & paid into that so I qualify & yes, I draw my SS as doctor's put me on disability at age 56, but again I worked & paid into SS.


Oh, boy -- your credibility rating with me just went to zero. You are on Medicare and had the NERVE to complain that your insurance went up because of Obamacare? How dare you!!

This was your comment:


> ACA does not help anyone but makes insurance more pricey as both my daughters insurance has increased in price. Mine too!


EVERYONE who's on Medicare sees their premiums go up every single darned year -- automatically, with or without Obamacare (and that's been happening for plenty of years before Obamacare was ever even thought of).

Henceforth, I will assume ALL your arguments are precisely this weak and deceptive. But one thing for sure: you make a good Republicon, you just fit right in. None of your elected leaders care about spouting lies either.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> The Democrats have finally realized that extending the mandate until this time next year puts it just before the 2014 election. With that in mind, Obama has waved his magic pen and extended the extension until December 2014. How convenient is that? But of course, it is not political. Yeah, of course not.
> 
> The Independent Payment Advisory Board, iPAB, the new group to control costs of Medicare will be able to have its members appointed by the Senate under the nuclear option that was just passed this week. Another convenient move by this administration. This board has the power to decide how much money Medicare gets and that will depend upon who gets elected to the board.


What on earth are you talking about? The sign up deadline was extended by 6 weeks, not a year. If that's not what you're talking about, what is??

As for the IPBB -- you're in luck. If the Republicans had their way Medicare would get NO money. If Democrats get to appoint members, they will much more likely be people who support and want to see Medicare survive without cuts to benefits.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

!


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

Knitry said in response to Janeway: "Oh, boy -- your credibility rating with me just went to zero."

What took you so long to get to zero? Reading just one post by her and I dropped her to zero credibility in 2 seconds flat!!!


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitry said:


> What on earth are you talking about? The sign up deadline was extended by 6 weeks, not a year. If that's not what you're talking about, what is??
> 
> As for the IPBB -- you're in luck. If the Republicans had their way Medicare would get NO money. If Democrats get to appoint members, they will much more likely be people who support and want to see Medicare survive without cuts to benefits.


It's time for you to wake up.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Janeway said:


> No, again you are wrong as I pay for supplementary insurance & drug coverage. True, I do have Medicare, but I worked & paid into that so I qualify & yes, I draw my SS as doctor's put me on disability at age 56, but again I worked & paid into SS.
> 
> I elected to not have a heart/lung surgery because a lady in our support group was 28, but she did not survive & returned from Baltimore in a casket. I have lived several years with this condition without surgery.


I am curious, what did you do for the first 2 years you were on disability?

Medicare for a disability doesn't kick in until after 2 years (2years after the effective date, and you can't apply until you have been out of work for 5 months) for those unfamiliar with this procedure. I should know, because I am also on disability (but on my husband's health plan).

Did you utilize Medicaid before that (common among those without wealth) or did you have the reserves to pay for 2 years of medical care uninsured, or were you on a spouse's policy?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> KPG,
> 
> I appreciate your wise, intelligent, informed, and caring postings. You write because you care very, very much for our country. I know this for sure.


Hi LL, I'm not certain why you wrote this post to me, I can only assume you are supporting me against some lunatic that once again insulted me. I'm happily ignoring everything written by the lunatics that I recognize, so no worries about me (not that their insults do me harm anyway). I do appreciate your support though!

BTW: the very people you're probably speaking against are most likely the very same lunatics who all claimed months ago they ignore my posts, but I guess they all lied on those claims as well.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> KPG,
> 
> I appreciate your wise, intelligent, informed, and caring postings. You write because you care very, very much for our country. I know this for sure.


 :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> So glad to see you, MIB. I was getting worried that something was very wrong.
> Nothing wrong with being selfish once in a while.
> Enjoy your good health and the insurance as well as a few cookies.


Maybe I'll even learn to check what I post so I see I managed to delete parts of a couple of sentences.ops: I just finished a shawl (Yipeeeee!!!) for my mother for Christmas and am starting another for a friend. Tomorrow I get to wash the finished shawl and will see if it turned out exactly as planned. It looks pretty nice. I've always throught the that first washing as "blocking" when using acrylic yarns. Maybe I'll even remember to take a picture of it to post on KP.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Maybe I'll even learn to check what I post so I see I managed to delete parts of a couple of sentences.ops: I just finished a shawl (Yipeeeee!!!) for my mother for Christmas and am starting another for a friend. Tomorrow I get to wash the finished shawl and will see if it turned out exactly as planned. It looks pretty nice. I've always throught the that first washing as "blocking" when using acrylic yarns. Maybe I'll even remember to take a picture of it to post on KP.


That would be great to see. OUr value is in our knitting!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Janeway.......Didn't you tell us that your parents left the reservation? So you haven't grown up in the traditions of your tribe. And your parents were forced to speak English, so they have lost the knowledge of their native tongue. Did you not tell us that your family was forced out of their NA religion?
> I guess what I find odd, is that you seem to have no other connection to your NA heritage, but continue to show the proud NA in the pictures you post....but you don't participate in it. It's one thing to be proud of your heritage, but I find it hypocritical that you use it as a political tool.
> 
> As for the rising cost of medical insurance...anyone who's had insurance, which my DH and I have had for the last 39 yrs, know the rates increase on a regular basses. That is not an ACA conspiracy. That's the insurance companies.


All of you have made "fun" of my Native American Indian race (especially Seattle/MIB). But if I mention anything about "blacks" all of you call me a racist. You too are a racist concerning my race. Your government squashes anything the American Indians try to do, but some states do recognize our race.

Do you participate in all of the "black" rally's? If not then you are not involved in your race.

I have in the past attended Pow-wows, but I'm no longer physically able to drive into the Western states as my state does not have a reservation.

You tell me my race is "rich" from the casinos but not every tribe gets any of that money. The government taxes those Indians so there isn't much left.

Get a life & leave me alone as I am proud to be a full blooded Apache. I am the true "American" & you are a foreigner to my country.

Do some knitting & leave my race alone! My race is the true leaders of America as it is "our" land.

We also paid for our medical insurance & have "never" broken the laws of the land--not even a speeding ticket--how about you?


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> All of you have made "fun" of my Native American Indian race (especially Seattle/MIB). But if I mention anything about "blacks" all of you call me a racist. You too are a racist concerning my race. Your government squashes anything the American Indians try to do, but some states do recognize our race.
> 
> Do you participate in all of the "black" rally's? If not then you are not involved in your race.
> 
> ...


Janeway,
I so admire your heritage. Stand tall and proud!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I am curious, what did you do for the first 2 years you were on disability?
> 
> Medicare for a disability doesn't kick in until after 2 years (2years after the effective date, and you can't apply until you have been out of work for 5 months) for those unfamiliar with this procedure. I should know, because I am also on disability (but on my husband's health plan).
> 
> Did you utilize Medicaid before that (common among those without wealth) or did you have the reserves to pay for 2 years of medical care uninsured, or were you on a spouse's policy?


Again you are wrong my dear as my Medicare was immediate because of the severity of my medical condition? You should get more information before you criticize me!

I have never been on Medicaid as we were farmers who worked hard & paid to college educate our 2 daughters. One has a Masters Degree.

If you had children did you work hard & PAY to educate them? I'll bet not.

We grew our vegetables, bought hogs/cattle from farmers who had animals so we did not buy many things at the grocery. Also, there was a dairy farm where we bought milk.

My husband worked away from home when the girls started college so we had insurance that we paid. I also worked away from home. Before that time, we paid for Blue Cross insurance. Welfare how dare you imply without knowing me! Since you seem to know so much about Welfare, that is your insurance not mine!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Janeway,
> I so admire your heritage. Stand tall and proud!


Thank you as I'm starting to report those who slander because of my race.

I am proud of my heritage!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Again you are wrong my dear as my Medicare was immediate because of the severity of my medical condition? You should get more information before you criticize me!
> 
> I have never been on Medicaid as we were farmers who worked hard & paid to college educate our 2 daughters. One has a Masters Degree.
> 
> ...


I admire you, Janeway. Stand tall!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Hi LL, I'm not certain why you wrote this post to me, I can only assume you are supporting me against some lunatic that once again insulted me. I'm happily ignoring everything written by the lunatics that I recognize, so no worries about me (not that their insults do me harm anyway). I do appreciate your support though!
> 
> BTW: the very people you're probably speaking against are most likely the very same lunatics who all claimed months ago they ignore my posts, but I guess they all lied on those claims as well.


You are wise about the goings on with our country especially politics. Thank you for all of the information you provide as I watch the news (sometimes) but don't feel well enough to search for political information on the net.

I only know that Obo is ruining America so your facts are appreciated. Keep posting the facts as I do read your information.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Again you are wrong my dear as my Medicare was immediate because of the severity of my medical condition? You should get more information before you criticize me!
> 
> I have never been on Medicaid as we were farmers who worked hard & paid to college educate our 2 daughters. One has a Masters Degree.
> 
> ...


You are obviously confused about what is what, Janeway. 
And Janeway? Asking questions is not implying anything and neither is sharing information. 
You can deny the facts all you want, those of us who have seen how the system works know the process.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You are wise about the goings on with our country especially politics. Thank you for all of the information you provide as I watch the news (sometimes) but don't feel well enough to search for political information on the net.
> 
> I only know that Obo is ruining America so your facts are appreciated. Keep posting the facts as I do read your information.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> You are obviously confused about what is what, Janeway.
> And Janeway? Asking questions is not implying anything and neither is sharing information.
> You can deny the facts all you want, those of us who have seen how the system works know the process.


Again you are wrong as for severe diseases, Medicare kicks in immediately as mine did. The doctors have told me I have lived longer than most people with my condition. Look it up online then tell me again in your opinion that I'm wrong!


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Again you are wrong as for severe diseases, Medicare kicks in immediately as mine did. The doctors have told me I have lived longer than most people with my condition. Look it up online then tell me again in your opinion that I'm wrong!


Praying for you and agree we need to find a cure for this condition.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> That would be great to see. OUr value is in our knitting!


So true, Jelun. I'm struggling to finish an afghan before Christmas--it's coming out beautifully, but oh! I still have about four feet to go.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Janeway said:


> All of you have made "fun" of my Native American Indian race (especially Seattle/MIB). But if I mention anything about "blacks" all of you call me a racist. You too are a racist concerning my race. Your government squashes anything the American Indians try to do, but some states do recognize our race.
> 
> Do you participate in all of the "black" rally's? If not then you are not involved in your race.
> 
> ...


Took you long enough to admit it--your false tale regarding your "Indian princess" great-grandmother forsaking her people to marry a white man is still circulating, I notice.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Took you long enough to admit it--your false tale regarding your "Indian princess" great-grandmother forsaking her people to marry a white man is still circulating, I notice.


Not nice to be ugly to a sick person.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> That would be great to see. OUr value is in our knitting!


  It's crocheted. Is that allowed?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Not nice to be ugly to a sick person.


Sick she is, no question--but if she's well enough to dish it out then she's well enough to take some back as well.


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Sick she is, no question--but if she's well enough to dish it out then she's well enough to take some back as well.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true, Jelun. I'm struggling to finish an afghan before Christmas--it's coming out beautifully, but oh! I still have about four feet to go.


LOL, you could do what my former SIL did. She gave my mother the same cardigan for maybe 4 years in a row!


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Took you long enough to admit it--your false tale regarding your "Indian princess" great-grandmother forsaking her people to marry a white man is still circulating, I notice.


I have attended Pow Wows as well. Does that mean I am Native American?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> It's crocheted. Is that allowed?


So long as you can say it aloud it is most definitely allowed.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Janeway said:


> You are wise about the goings on with our country especially politics. Thank you for all of the information you provide as I watch the news (sometimes) but don't feel well enough to search for political information on the net.
> 
> I only know that Obo is ruining America so your facts are appreciated. Keep posting the facts as I do read your information.


Thank you Janeway. I read all your posts as well.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

theyarnlady said:


> Praying for you and agree we need to find a cure for this condition.


 :thumbup: I agree. Be well, Janeway.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Janie what is your Native American name? You told me once, seems some have a problem with your being NA. Funny I remember you and I talking about it before some even knew or have started to saying you lied. Maybe they should check out the facts before they twist the words.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> Janie what is your Native American name? You told me once, seems some have a problem with your being NA. Funny I remember you and I talking about it before some even knew or havae started to saying you lied. Maybe they should check out the facts before they twist the words.


I believe that people who call people liars are really the liars. They are projecting. So, Janeway, don't be insulted. It is them.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I believe that people who call people liars are really the liars. They are projecting. So, Janeway, don't be insulted. It is them.


Plus they need more than one alias so they can double lie.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Plus they need more than one alias so they can double lie.


Isn't that the truth. :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Plus they need more than one alias so they can double lie.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

This is meant to be for the world, but I think it also applies here. Enjoy






Sorry for the ad(s), don't know how to get rid of them


----------



## KentuckyCrafter (Oct 19, 2013)

Reading some of these posts make me sad. I've lived through the civil rights movement, I've reexamined those things that I was taught as a child and worked to eliminate sterotypes from my being. I have friends whom I could not love more if they were white. Our racial backgrounds contribute to our relationships and do not hurt them. Seeing some of these posts, hurt. They hurt the individual posting them, our communities and our nation. The race card needs to be filed away. xxxo


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

KentuckyCrafter said:


> Reading some of these posts make me sad. I've lived through the civil rights movement, I've reexamined those things that I was taught as a child and worked to eliminate sterotypes from my being. I have friends whom I could not love more if they were white. Our racial backgrounds contribute to our relationships and do not hurt them. Seeing some of these posts, hurt. They hurt the individual posting them, our communities and our nation. The race card needs to be filed away. xxxo


Sorry, racism needs to be filed away. 
Racism is real, there is no race card. If you can find a "race card" I will eat it.


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

KentuckyCrafter said:


> Reading some of these posts make me sad. I've lived through the civil rights movement, I've reexamined those things that I was taught as a child and worked to eliminate sterotypes from my being. I have friends whom I could not love more if they were white. Our racial backgrounds contribute to our relationships and do not hurt them. Seeing some of these posts, hurt. They hurt the individual posting them, our communities and our nation. The race card needs to be filed away. xxxo


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: a voice of reason!!! Thank you.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Cindy S said:


> This is meant to be for the world, but I think it also applies here. Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We are, after all, part of the world. 
The difference is that here we are forced to spend time in the same space as people we would never associate with if we could just turn around and walk away.

Make that I, I should speak for myself.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

That being said...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I loved it......
But I'm afraid there are those who would rather fight than get along. 
If you read the posts....you can pick them out......Yes, very sad..... 


Cindy S said:


> This is meant to be for the world, but I think it also applies here. Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Took you long enough to admit it--your false tale regarding your "Indian princess" great-grandmother forsaking her people to marry a white man is still circulating, I notice.


FYI, I said that at first as people such as you still discriminate against the American Native Indians. Both of my parents were full blooded Apache.

I'm starting to report the discrimination against me by all of you Lefties. So just keep on with your racist remarks.

You are discriminating against me & my race. Report!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> That being said...


How is this one?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I loved it......
> But I'm afraid there are those who would rather fight than get along.
> If you read the posts....you can pick them out......Yes, very sad.....


I don't watch such garbage so don't waste your time posting.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> This is meant to be for the world, but I think it also applies here. Enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't bother to post such garbage.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

KentuckyCrafter said:


> Reading some of these posts make me sad. I've lived through the civil rights movement, I've reexamined those things that I was taught as a child and worked to eliminate sterotypes from my being. I have friends whom I could not love more if they were white. Our racial backgrounds contribute to our relationships and do not hurt them. Seeing some of these posts, hurt. They hurt the individual posting them, our communities and our nation. The race card needs to be filed away. xxxo


Thank you for these sayings as people on here still discriminate against me so I've been reporting them to the Admin of KP. I'm full blooded Apache Indian.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Only in a good kind of way... :lol: 


Janeway said:


> How is this one?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> Janie what is your Native American name? You told me once, seems some have a problem with your being NA. Funny I remember you and I talking about it before some even knew or have started to saying you lied. Maybe they should check out the facts before they twist the words.


Little Moon Flower but I have never used it as my parents recorded my birth with an English name. My grandmother gave me that name according to her tradition.

My birth certificate was written with a lead pencil with the water marks where the doctor put the pencil in his mouth before writing. When I got a passport, I received a letter that they "never" had seen a birth certificate such as mine. It is in our safety deposit box or I would post a picture with names blocked out.

I'm really tired of all these Lefties discriminating against me & have been reporting them to the Admin of KP.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Sorry, racism needs to be filed away.
> Racism is real, there is no race card. If you can find a "race card" I will eat it.


Well, you need glasses as your friends on this thread keep saying I'm not American Native Indian. Maybe you don't read their posts.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I don't recall posting anything?


Janeway said:


> I don't watch such garbage so don't waste your time posting.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Maybe you should try not being perfect in a more humble way????


Janeway said:


> Well, you need glasses as your friends on this thread keep saying I'm not American Native Indian. Maybe you don't read their posts.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Will there ever come a time when you don't refer to those who don't believe as you do, as lefties, cohorts and lairs?


Janeway said:


> Little Moon Flower but I have never used it as my parents recorded my birth with an English name. My grandmother gave me that name according to her tradition.
> 
> My birth certificate was written with a lead pencil with the water marks where the doctor put the pencil in his mouth before writing. When I got a passport, I received a letter that they "never" had seen a birth certificate such as mine. It is in our safety deposit box or I would post a picture with names blocked out.
> 
> I'm really tired of all these Lefties discriminating against me & have been reporting them to the Admin of KP.


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

Janeway said:


> I don't watch such garbage so don't waste your time posting.


Kind of hard to judge something as garbage if you haven't watched it.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Thought I'd add some more good stories to the mix.

* Well, thank God, Hudson said, laughing. I believe Im going to be a Democrat.*

Yes, and who wouldn't????? The paragraph I put in bold had me in tears. I can't imagine anyone with an actual, beating heart of any kind not being pretty moved by the incredible balm that the ACA can be to the suffering.



> *In rural Kentucky, health-care debate takes back seat as the long-uninsured line up*
> By Stephanie McCrummen, Published: November 23
> 
> BREATHITT COUNTY, Ky.  On the campaign trail, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was still blasting the new health-care law as unsalvageable. At the White House, President Obama was still apologizing for the botched federal Web site.
> ...


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> How does the system work? I bet you know nothing. Each tribe is different. I know a *little* about the HoChunk tribe since I do taxes for some members of the tribe. So unless you are working with all Indian tribes, you can't know how it works.


WTH are you talking about?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I guess you don't know what you were talking about so forget it.


That's right, don't admit that you figured out we were talking about disability and health insurance not racism. 
I am thankful you are only in my online life.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> No surprise here:
> 
> Revealed: The Man Who Wrote Obamacare
> 
> ...


It would really be nice to see a source from the right end of the political spectrum that wasn't totally nuts. 
Jan Sarchowsky a marxist? Geez

The Dems do not need to do anything to garner 90% of the Latino vote so long as the Republicans keep acting like total tools.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Ahhh, another good one I just happened across and decided to share:



> *SUCCESS: Healthcare.gov saved me money with much better insurance*
> I just completed enrolling for healthcare insurance in the Federal Healthcare Exchange. Texas is one of the states where the governor, Rick Perry decided he would not set one up. Note Texas is the state with the highest percentage of uninsured people in the country. 25% of Texans are uninsured. If you would like to understand the plight of the uninsured in Texas (and likely around the country) check out this story, Texas Other Death Penalty.
> 
> The fact is that the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare, aka Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka PPACA, aka ACA) has and will help all Americans with their healthcare security. It will save lives till we get the courage and wisdom to implement what the rest of the industrialized world has, real universal and efficient coverage through Medicare for All (Single Payer).
> ...


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Thanks, knitry

And since it is finally good news week... 

Obamacare to save family $18,900
11/15/13 05:00 PM
facebook twitter 6 save share group 82
By Michele Richinick
In a country discouraged by last months health care rollout and corresponding widespread problems, Erin Kotecki Vest and her family are rejoicing.

Obamacare will save them almost $19,000 each year.

When the president says no family should lose their home because someone got sick, no family should go bankrupt because somebody got sick, that is us. That is absolutely us, she told msnbc.

Kotecki Vest, 38, along with her husband and two young children, have been covered under an Aetna plan for at least three years in their hometown of Los Angeles. When her husband received an insurance re-enrollment package from his employer earlier this year, the couple decided to compare other plans.

They thought they would be lucky to save even a few thousands dollars.

DIAGNOSIS

In 2010 doctors diagnosed Kotecki Vest with Lupus, an autoimmune disease where the bodys immune system becomes hyperactive and attacks healthy tissue. In the years since, she has visited doctors multiple times each week to receive what she calls simply treatment.

But the procedures go much deeper than a single treatment. Three days every other week she undergoes intravenous therapy, which lasts three to five hours each visit. And that, she said, is when everything is going well.

Additionally, she takes Rituxin, which is also administered to her intravenously every four months in two different six-hour sessions. Doctors have prescribed her Prednisone for the past three years. Complications from her diagnosis caused her to suffer from a stroke, lose her gall bladder and the majority of her colon, and undergo a hysterectomy.

Im usually at treatment because its sort of never ending. As soon as I go in one round, it starts up again the next week, said Kotecki Vest, who added that her health-insurance card is the second most used piece of plastic in her wallet after her debit card. If Im not at home, Im hooked up to an IV.

She began writing full-time for BlogHer in 2008. But her attempt to work was interrupted by surgeries and treatments before her official diagnosis.

In a minute, the hospital bills started rolling in from the very first surgeries and the very first treatments, she said. We were overwhelmed. That added to the stress exponentially in this house and in my life because all I could think about was: I have to get back to work to pay off these bills. What else can you do?

Kotecki Vest has been on permanent medical leave since the summer of 2010. Despite her familys savings, the couple decided to re-finance their mortgage before they lost their home or fell behind in paying bills.

NEW PLAN

Kotecki Vests crude estimate of $18,900 in medical savings, which she announced in a post on her personal blog, is based on her current health care and medication billsshe takes 17 prescriptions each month. Once she confirmed the calculation several times (she expects their estimate is lower than reality), she registered her familyin less than 25 minutesfor a new Blue Shield of California plan under the state-run exchange (HealthCare.gov redirected her to her states website).

It has taken a weight off of our shoulders that I cant describe, she said. I dont know how to explain to people unless you have been through a horrible illness in your family or a terrible accident that has landed one of your loved ones in the hospital, or living paycheck to paycheck.

Under the new plan, effective Jan. 1, 2014, the family will not pay deductibles, and have lower out-of-pocket maximums, co-pays, and treatment and prescription costs, she said. With Aetna, they paid deductibles, and the maximum out-of-pocket costs were $12,000 per family for in-network providers and $18,000 for out-of-network doctors.

We were drowning in medical debt, drowning. We had used up all of our savings, we had exhausted all of our family, Kotecki Vest said. I still have treatments that are ongoing. There is no end in sight for my treatments.

WHATS NEXT?

There are currently 27 federally-facilitated exchanges, 17 state-based exchanges, and seven state-federal partnership exchanges, including Washington, D.C. In California, a state-run exchange, more than 35,360 individuals have enrolled.

Health care registration numbers fell far below the 500,000 individuals the White House expected to register during the first month of the rollout. Between 40,000 and 50,000 Americans completed applications or registered for insurance plans on HealthCare.gov since Oct. 1.

Related: Health care enrollment falls short of expectations

The president on Thursday took responsibility for the problem-plagued rollout. 

The House passed Republicans answer to Obamas health care fix, allowing insurers to continue offering plans that dont meet the standards of the Affordable Care Act.

Also on Friday, the same day Koteecki Vest waited in her home for the confirmation letter she expected to receive from Blue Shield, her husband declined re-enrolling in their current plan through his employer.

Were the lucky onesand weve been through hellso I cannot imagine what others are going through or what they would go through without the Affordable Care Act, she said. We might actually be OK after all.

Explore:
Democrats, Health, Health Care, Health Care Policy, Health Care Reform, MyHealthCare and Republicans


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Sick she is, no question--but if she's well enough to dish it out then she's well enough to take some back as well.


Exactly!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Plus they need more than one alias so they can double lie.


What's up with this alias stuff?


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

ute4kp said:


> What's up with this alias stuff?


Just more lies from the country bumpkin.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Thank you as I'm starting to report those who slander because of my race.
> 
> I am proud of my heritage!


And well you should be. I'm proud of your heritage too.

But you've accused "all" here of "making fun" of your race. I don't believe anyone has -- and I'm absolutely positive I haven't because I've said NOTHING about your race. I myself am part Lakota -- a very small part (1/16), but it's something I cherish. And some of the most meaningful and sacred times of my life have been attending Pow Wows. The first was at the Pendleton Roundup many years ago, and several since here in the Southeast. At the last I attended, one of the young men asked me to dance as a way of honoring this "Grandmother." It was a wonderful experience. I so love the tradition of honoring the elderly the way our First Americans do.

However, all that said, I do want to caution you that questioning your positions, your statements, your attitudes does NOT necessarily equal slander or racism. And if I'm correct that there's been no ridicule of your race (I haven't read everything in the thread, so maybe I missed it) -- then your threat amounts to something that I don't like to see charged about people because it's so usually wrong and so usually claimed by actual racists, and that is: you're playing the race card.

And frankly that makes working for true equality much, much harder.

To make absolutely clear, I'll restate my point: not everything said to and about you that you don't like, nor every criticism, is based on or because of your race. So please be careful. And know this: if it IS stemming from racism, I'll be right alongside you on objecting and calling it out -- no matter our other political differences.

Mitakuye Oyasin


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> And well you should be. I'm proud of your heritage too.
> 
> But you've accused "all" here of "making fun" of your race. I don't believe anyone has -- and I'm absolutely positive I haven't because I've said NOTHING about your race. I myself am part Lakota -- a very small part (1/16), but it's something I cherish. And some of the most meaningful and sacred times of my life have been attending Pow Wows. The first was at the Pendleton Roundup many years ago, and several since here in the Southeast. At the last I attended, one of the young men asked me to dance as a way of honoring this "Grandmother." It was a wonderful experience. I so love the tradition of honoring the elderly the way our First Americans do.
> 
> ...


As would most of us on the left end of that stick that political stance is measured on.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> No surprise here:
> 
> Revealed: The Man Who Wrote Obamacare
> 
> ...


It's a funny thing -- were he really the author, wouldn't it appear on his firm's website? I'd sure think so. Here's what IS on his website:



> Robert Creamer has been a political organizer and strategist for four decades. He and his firm, the Strategic Consulting Group, work with many of the country's most significant issue campaigns. He was one of the major architects and organizers of the successful campaign to defeat the privatization of Social Security. He has been a consultant to the campaigns to end the war in Iraq, pass universal health care, hold Wall Street accountable, pass progressive budget priorities, and enact comprehensive immigration reform. He works with Americans United for Change where he helped coordinate the campaign to pass President Obamas landmark jobs and economic recovery legislation.
> 
> During the 2008 Presidential Election he worked for the Democratic National Committee as National Coordinator of field based rapid response to Republican candidates McCain and Palin. During his career, he has worked on hundreds of electoral campaigns at the local, state and national level. He is also an author and regular contributor to the Huffington Post. Creamer is married to Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky from Illinois. His book is titled, Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win. http://www.stratcongroup.com/publication/about.php


And his Huffington Past bio:


> Robert Creamer has been a political organizer and strategist for four decades. He and his firm, Democracy Partners, work with many of the countrys most significant issue campaigns. He was one of the major architects and organizers of the successful campaign to defeat the privatization of Social Security. He has been a consultant to the campaigns to end the war in Iraq, pass universal health care, pass Wall Street reform, change Americas budget priorities and enact comprehensive immigration reform. He has also worked on hundreds of electoral campaigns at the local, state and national level. Creamer is married to Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky from Illinois. Arianna Huffington calls his book, Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, a masters class in electoral politics. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/


Gee, is it even true he is a convicted felon??


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Knitry said:


> Gee, is it even true he is a convicted felon??


Nice catch.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> Just more lies from the country bumpkin.


I am not a liar.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I guess you don't know what you were talking about so forget it.


 :lol: :lol:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Just thought I'd post the whole story....and everyone can judge it for themselves.

Husband's bank fraud and tax evasion convictions
On March 11, 2004, Schakowsky's husband, lobbyist Robert Creamer, the executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund, was indicted in federal court on 16 counts of bank fraud involving three alleged check-kiting schemes in the mid-1990s, leading several banks to experience shortfalls of at least $2.3 million.[20] In August 2005, Creamer pleaded guilty to one count of failure to collect withholding tax, and bank fraud for writing checks with insufficient funds. All of the money was repaid. Schakowsky was not accused of any wrongdoing.[21] Schakowsky served on the organization's board during the time the crimes occurred,[22] and Schakowsky signed the IRS filings along with her husband.[23] U.S. District Judge James B. Moran noted no one suffered "out of pocket losses," and Creamer acted not out of greed but in an effort to keep his community action group going without cutting programs, though Creamer paid his own $100,000 salary with fraudulently obtained funds.[24] On April 5, 2006, Creamer was sentenced to five months in prison and 11 months of house arrest.[25] Creamer served his five-month incarceration at the Federal Correction Institute in Terre Haute, Indiana and was released on November 3, 2006.[26]

I guess he's paid his debt to society.... But I guess some people don't believe in the justice system, and condemn people for the rest of their lives.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Just thought I'd post the whole story....and everyone can judge it for themselves.
> 
> Husband's bank fraud and tax evasion convictions
> On March 11, 2004, Schakowsky's husband, lobbyist Robert Creamer, the executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund, was indicted in federal court on 16 counts of bank fraud involving three alleged check-kiting schemes in the mid-1990s, leading several banks to experience shortfalls of at least $2.3 million.[20] In August 2005, Creamer pleaded guilty to one count of failure to collect withholding tax, and bank fraud for writing checks with insufficient funds. All of the money was repaid. Schakowsky was not accused of any wrongdoing.[21] Schakowsky served on the organization's board during the time the crimes occurred,[22] and Schakowsky signed the IRS filings along with her husband.[23] U.S. District Judge James B. Moran noted no one suffered "out of pocket losses," and Creamer acted not out of greed but in an effort to keep his community action group going without cutting programs, though Creamer paid his own $100,000 salary with fraudulently obtained funds.[24] On April 5, 2006, Creamer was sentenced to five months in prison and 11 months of house arrest.[25] Creamer served his five-month incarceration at the Federal Correction Institute in Terre Haute, Indiana and was released on November 3, 2006.[26]
> ...


OH heck, there is still talk about Ted Kennedy and he is dead...


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> No, again you are wrong as I pay for supplementary insurance & drug coverage. True, I do have Medicare, but I worked & paid into that so I qualify & yes, I draw my SS as doctor's put me on disability at age 56, but again I worked & paid into SS.
> 
> I elected to not have a heart/lung surgery because a lady in our support group was 28, but she did not survive & returned from Baltimore in a casket. I have lived several years with this condition without surgery.


If you have Medicare and a supplement you have NO connection to Obamacare. If there are changes being made to your insurance such as premium increase, this is the time of year that it happens. My premium went up because I got a year older, and it happens every year.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway, the ACA has NOTHING to do with your supplement. What makes that so hard for you to understand?


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

Another good one worth listening to: http://therightscoop.com/opening-statement-from-judge-jeanine-pirro-obama-is-now-transparent/


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

momeee said:


> Another good one worth listening to: http://therightscoop.com/opening-statement-from-judge-jeanine-pirro-obama-is-now-transparent/


Yes that was a good one. I watched it. Love her!


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

country bumpkins wrote:
"Yes that was a good one. I watched it. Love her!"

Yes, I do too. She is so bright, articulate, AND spot on regarding this administration.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

momeee said:


> country bumpkins wrote:
> "Yes that was a good one. I watched it. Love her!"
> 
> Yes, I do too. She is so bright, articulate, AND spot on regarding this administration.


 :thumbup:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I believe that people who call people liars are really the liars. They are projecting. So, Janeway, don't be insulted. It is them.


Sounds like typical righties. Blame someone else. Take no responsibility. I watched some of the programs about JFK this past week. One thing I remember is they said the extreme right wing had fliers going around charging JFK with treason. Hear it is 50 years later and nothing has changed!!! That just blows my mind. The republicans are still where they were 50 years ago.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Sounds like typical righties. Blame someone else. Take no responsibility. I watched some of the programs about JFK this past week. One thing I remember is they said the extreme right wing had fliers going around charging JFK with treason. Hear it is 50 years later and nothing has changed!!! That just blows my mind. The republicans are still where they were 50 years ago.


Yes indeed, nothing has changed.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

KentuckyCrafter said:


> Reading some of these posts make me sad. I've lived through the civil rights movement, I've reexamined those things that I was taught as a child and worked to eliminate sterotypes from my being. I have friends whom I could not love more if they were white. Our racial backgrounds contribute to our relationships and do not hurt them. Seeing some of these posts, hurt. They hurt the individual posting them, our communities and our nation. The race card needs to be filed away. xxxo


 I think a lot of us thought the race card was a lot closer to being filed away than it has turned out to be, all since electing a African American President. I wish too that it could be filed away.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Knitry said:


> Gee, is it even true he is a convicted felon??


This happens all the time. They post stuff from right wing blogs or Fox news and never check it out, just post it and then continue to believe it even if you post proof that it is a lie.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> This happens all the time. They post stuff from right wing blogs or Fox news and never check it out, just post it and then continue to believe it even if you post proof that it is a lie.


This one seems to be true. 
As someone else said, does he ever get credit for the time he served and for fessing up?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway, I asked you before but got no answer. As a native American you profess to "protect this sacred land." Do you then agree with the republicans about getting rid of regulations put in place to protect this land?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> This one seems to be true.
> As someone else said, does he ever get credit for the time he served and for fessing up?


Well, of course not. What would be their benefit in doing that? They like the other story better.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Well bless your heart Susan Collins, you are a typical republican. It doesn't make any difference what you really believe or what is good for the country, you have to put party first.



Sen. Susan Collins is making noises about how the nasty partisanship involved in preventing Republicans from keeping the judiciary desperately understaffed might cause her to join in filibusters of things like the Violence Against Women Act.

That's the story: Republicans are committed to obstruction and to destruction of the government's function. One tool of obstruction has been taken from them, so they're going to wield the others with more furypossibly even in cases where they think legislation like VAWA is necessary. But that's not about Democrats somehow ushering in a new age of partisanship. It's about Democrats forcing Republicans to shift tactics in the age of Republican extremism we're already living through.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

If this doesn't make you cry, nothing will.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/22/1257563/-Illinois-man-films-tornado-hitting-his-home?detail=email


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Again you are wrong my dear as my Medicare was immediate because of the severity of my medical condition? You should get more information before you criticize me!
> 
> I have never been on Medicaid as we were farmers who worked hard & paid to college educate our 2 daughters. One has a Masters Degree.
> 
> ...


Oh, my mistaken dear, I did not insult you, only asked what you did for those 2 years. As for paying for my children to go to school, we still are. They are almost 12 and almost 7. Please refrain from attempted insults until you actually know the facts. Not doing so could give the appearance of lashing out and give the appearance (wether or not it is true) of ignorance. My disability was also very severe, I was approved the very first time (as I'm sure you are aware, that is rather rare). I would have thought someone as disabled as you would not insult a fellow disabled person, knowing the struggles we go through every day. Again, I was rather mistaken.

Now I'm off to search the social security website as those people I know who are currently applying will be thrilled to have the knowledge they don't have to wait 2 years.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Again you are wrong my dear as my Medicare was immediate because of the severity of my medical condition? You should get more information before you criticize me!
> 
> I have never been on Medicaid as we were farmers who worked hard & paid to college educate our 2 daughters. One has a Masters Degree.
> 
> ...


I was so happy to hear they had removed the 2 years waiting period! I looked on the social security website because I wanted to pass that information on to others who were severely disabled (one with severe seizures, something I can commiserate with). However my hopes fell when I realized it was inaccurate. http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dapproval4.htm. Perhaps you qualified because of your advanced age and and came in under the "early retirement" requirements?

And just in case you missed it, I am on my husband's health policy. I only get disablility, not any other social plans. I was never on Medicaid at all. I never once said you were on welfare.

However if you are attempting to claim that I am on welfare because I am on disablility, I guess, by that logic, you are saying you yourself are a welfare recipient. You said it, not I. I also paid for social security while I was working and my husband also is still paying all taxes. I have never had an issue with paying into social security insurance, even those years that I needed to send a payment check in instead of receive a refund.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Well bless your heart Susan Collins, you are a typical republican. It doesn't make any difference what you really believe or what is good for the country, you have to put party first.
> 
> Sen. Susan Collins is making noises about how the nasty partisanship involved in preventing Republicans from keeping the judiciary desperately understaffed might cause her to join in filibusters of things like the Violence Against Women Act.
> 
> That's the story: Republicans are committed to obstruction and to destruction of the government's function. One tool of obstruction has been taken from them, so they're going to wield the others with more furypossibly even in cases where they think legislation like VAWA is necessary. But that's not about Democrats somehow ushering in a new age of partisanship. It's about Democrats forcing Republicans to shift tactics in the age of Republican extremism we're already living through.


Oh, she gets a little whacka doodle every once in a while just so she can convince people she is a CONservative. 
Then she remembers that that she is a Maineiac and a woman.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You were right.....it made me cry....It was horrifying.....


NJG said:


> If this doesn't make you cry, nothing will.
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/22/1257563/-Illinois-man-films-tornado-hitting-his-home?detail=email


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Nussa said:


> You were right.....it made me cry....It was horrifying.....


I will watch tomorrow, I don't feel like crying tonight.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Great insight. Thanks.



jelun2 said:


> OH heck, there is still talk about Ted Kennedy and he is dead...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> You are obviously confused about what is what, Janeway.
> And Janeway? Asking questions is not implying anything and neither is sharing information.
> You can deny the facts all you want, those of us who have seen how the system works know the process.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Sick she is, no question--but if she's well enough to dish it out then she's well enough to take some back as well.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> So long as you can say it aloud it is most definitely allowed.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> Sorry, racism needs to be filed away.
> Racism is real, there is no race card. If you can find a "race card" I will eat it.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Don't bother to post such garbage.


 :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Right back at you.



Janeway said:


> Don't bother to post such garbage.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Knitry said:


> Thought I'd add some more good stories to the mix.
> 
> * Well, thank God, Hudson said, laughing. I believe Im going to be a Democrat.*
> 
> Yes, and who wouldn't????? The paragraph I put in bold had me in tears. I can't imagine anyone with an actual, beating heart of any kind not being pretty moved by the incredible balm that the ACA can be to the suffering.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Not nice to be ugly to a sick person.


You are right. You should tell Janeway that when she insulted me over just asking questions. I never insulted her and was just trying to gain more knowledge for other who are new to disability. Yet she felt it right to call me a welfare recipient (in an insulting way) and tell me that I probably didn't even pay for my kids to go to school. In case you missed it, I am sick and disabled.

In fact Friday I found out that the doctors are trying to rule me out for a genetic disease, which can cause arthritis like symptoms (already have them @ 35), in addition to diabetes like neuropathy, and more.

That is in addition to the:

* epilepsy I already have,

migraines (regular ones),

hemiplegic migraines (just like a stroke, in fact I have been ruled out many times, and it has caused permanent damage... I had to relearn how to write, not to mention knit).

basalar artery migraines (cause my legs to suddenly fall out from under me, or to suddenly not be able to use my arms or even hold up my head).

(comparatively mild) asthma and allergies (although some can be life threatening).

Not to mention the disabling Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and extreme anxiety that I have from a rape years ago (and this has actually improved some and am still seeing a therapist for).

In addition to fibromyalgia. I could go on and on, but I wouldn't want to keep you reading for weeks. *

The reason I got active at all on any part of KP is because I could not move my shoulder. I could only hold the arm close to my body and "one finger type" on the iPad. I was unable to knit or do much of anything, so I decided to join in and meet knew people. I have met some nice people, and even though we have disagreed we are respectful to each other.

However I don't go around usually speaking out about my health care issues, not that other people can't. But are you going to give Janeway the same admonition. She was I credibly nasty and rude on a post that I was simply asking a question of her. She knew I was on disability, thus that I was sick, when she responded. I happen to enjoy giving other people help when asked, and as I let people know I'm on disability, I have people who need information for themselves or a loved one. I attempt to find the correct information, especially regarding the 24 month waiting period for Medicare. So I will ask people who are on disability, and share it, what they did during the 24 month period.

So I'm sure you will promptly be admonishing Janeway now, right? I'll await it.

If you can't find the post to which I'm referring I would be happy to repost it.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

jelun2 said:


> It would really be nice to see a source from the right end of the political spectrum that wasn't totally nuts.
> Jan Sarchowsky a marxist? Geez
> 
> The Dems do not need to do anything to garner 90% of the Latino vote so long as the Republicans keep acting like total tools.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

So good to hear. Blessings on all.



jelun2 said:


> Thanks, knitry
> 
> And since it is finally good news week...
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Many, many people on both sides of the political spectrum have re-registered themselves with new user names. Many reasons. SOSO. If it's the 'other' side, it's nefarious.



ute4kp said:


> What's up with this alias stuff?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Knitry said:


> And well you should be. I'm proud of your heritage too.
> 
> But you've accused "all" here of "making fun" of your race. I don't believe anyone has -- and I'm absolutely positive I haven't because I've said NOTHING about your race. I myself am part Lakota -- a very small part (1/16), but it's something I cherish. And some of the most meaningful and sacred times of my life have been attending Pow Wows. The first was at the Pendleton Roundup many years ago, and several since here in the Southeast. At the last I attended, one of the young men asked me to dance as a way of honoring this "Grandmother." It was a wonderful experience. I so love the tradition of honoring the elderly the way our First Americans do.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Hey dame! Did your send button get stuck???? LOL!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I felt like the aliens took over. Admin threated to deactivate my account if I did it again. Wish I knew what happened, and why Admin would presume I would do such a thing on purpose. I'm glad someone's laughing.



BrattyPatty said:


> Hey dame! Did your send button get stuck???? LOL!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> You are right. You should tell Janeway that when she insulted me over just asking questions. I never insulted her and was just trying to gain more knowledge for other who are new to disability. Yet she felt it right to call me a welfare recipient (in an insulting way) and tell me that I probably didn't even pay for my kids to go to school. In case you missed it, I am sick and disabled.
> 
> In fact Friday I found out that the doctors are trying to rule me out for a genetic disease, which can cause arthritis like symptoms (already have them @ 35), in addition to diabetes like neuropathy, and more.
> 
> ...


If there is one thing we can be pretty certain of on this forum, it is that the right will all profess to be Christians, but show the opposite. I am so sorry that you have had so many things to face at such a young age. Life definitely isn't fair. I have back issues, but I count my self lucky that that is all. I have a good friend with fibromyalgia and I know how she struggles because of it. I wish you the very best.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I am not a liar.


Hmmm, so you say.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> Sounds like typical righties. Blame someone else. Take no responsibility. I watched some of the programs about JFK this past week. One thing I remember is they said the extreme right wing had fliers going around charging JFK with treason. Hear it is 50 years later and nothing has changed!!! That just blows my mind. The republicans are still where they were 50 years ago.


Yes, it's still the same. Really creepy to see the footage.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> If this doesn't make you cry, nothing will.
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/22/1257563/-Illinois-man-films-tornado-hitting-his-home?detail=email


So glad they lived thru it. There are no words to say. So sorry for them.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

I'm so sorry you have these medical issues. I hope the Docs find answers for you.



Lkholcomb said:


> You are right. You should tell Janeway that when she insulted me over just asking questions. I never insulted her and was just trying to gain more knowledge for other who are new to disability. Yet she felt it right to call me a welfare recipient (in an insulting way) and tell me that I probably didn't even pay for my kids to go to school. In case you missed it, I am sick and disabled.
> 
> In fact Friday I found out that the doctors are trying to rule me out for a genetic disease, which can cause arthritis like symptoms (already have them @ 35), in addition to diabetes like neuropathy, and more.
> 
> ...


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

damemary said:


> I felt like the aliens took over. Admin threated to deactivate my account if I did it again. Wish I knew what happened, and why Admin would presume I would do such a thing on purpose. I'm glad someone's laughing.


Really so weird. Many people have gotten stuck send buttons.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good to know. Thanks.



ute4kp said:


> Really so weird. Many people have gotten stuck send buttons.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Janeway said:


> All of you have made "fun" of my Native American Indian race (especially Seattle/MIB). But if I mention anything about "blacks" all of you call me a racist. You too are a racist concerning my race. Your government squashes anything the American Indians try to do, but some states do recognize our race.
> 
> Do you participate in all of the "black" rally's? If not then you are not involved in your race.
> 
> ...


Janie, don't let them get to you. Hold your head up high and walk proudly. No one can demean who you are. Hugs!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Jokim said:


> Janie, don't let them get to you. Hold your head up high and walk proudly. No one can demean who you are. Hugs!


Who is the "all of you" that Janeway wrote about? I never did. I'd never against my own NA ancestors, and I have a few.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Janeway, the ACA has NOTHING to do with your supplement. What makes that so hard for you to understand?


I do understand & I don't appreciate the way you are writing to me? I'm glad I don't have to contend with anything Obo does!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

damemary said:


> Good to know. Thanks.


I see double and triple posts almost every day. In all topics. This really is so strange you received that notice.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> You are right. You should tell Janeway that when she insulted me over just asking questions. I never insulted her and was just trying to gain more knowledge for other who are new to disability. Yet she felt it right to call me a welfare recipient (in an insulting way) and tell me that I probably didn't even pay for my kids to go to school. In case you missed it, I am sick and disabled.
> 
> In fact Friday I found out that the doctors are trying to rule me out for a genetic disease, which can cause arthritis like symptoms (already have them @ 35), in addition to diabetes like neuropathy, and more.
> 
> ...


No, I did not know you were on disability as if I remember you said your DH. I'm sorry you are very ill. It is just the Lefties on here are always slamming me so guess I am just cranky. I don't enjoy being rude but you should read how write to me.

So, I'm sorry for being cranky.

Since others you know are new to disability, if it is severe, such as my condition or cancer, Medicare kicks in as soon as the paper work is finished. Others on this thread seems to "know" that I don't know what I'm talking about on any subject.

Can we have peace as I'm truly sorry for being cranky with you. Jane


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I do understand & I don't appreciate the way you are writing to me? I'm glad I don't have to contend with anything Obo does!


If you give respect, you get it back. Our president's name is not Obo. That would be a place to start.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

Janeway said:


> No, I did not know you were on disability as if I remember you said your DH. I'm sorry you are very ill. It is just the Lefties on here are always slamming me so guess I am just cranky. I don't enjoy being rude but you should read how write to me.
> 
> So, I'm sorry for being cranky.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your apology.

Can you send me a link to information about the Medicare kicking in immediately?

The social security website says it is a 24 month wait. The information I found said it was to limit the Medicare cost to those on disability just a short time. I would really be interested to see the information to pass on to others.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> If you give respect, you get it back. Our president's name is not Obo. That would be a place to start.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for your apology.
> 
> Can you send me a link to information about the Medicare kicking in immediately?
> 
> The social security website says it is a 24 month wait. The information I found said it was to limit the Medicare cost to those on disability just a short time. I would really be interested to see the information to pass on to others.


I would love to give you the information, but I don't know here to find the site. All I know is my doctor's filled out the paperwork & I was notified by SS that I would draw SS immediately & Medicare would be effective immediately.

I have lived several years with Pulmonary Hypertension as most die quickly or in few months. I was mailed a Medicare card with my SS # with part A & B. My husbands insurance partially paid for the medication. When he retired, I now have part D which is the drug coverage which I pay & a supplemental insurance but still have part A & B where Part B is deducted from my SS check.

I have a friend whose kidneys is down to 5% working & she is on kidney dialysis who got SS & Medicare immediately. She had at least 10 more working years before SS & Medicare. It is very doubtful she I'll live very long as a lot of people have strokes/heart attacks while on those machines & die.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> If you give respect, you get it back. Our president's name is not Obo. That would be a place to start.


Well, usually I'm not given respect with being called stupid/dreaming or go to bed, etc. so I'm tired of being called names.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.

I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> Thank you for your apology.
> 
> Can you send me a link to information about the Medicare kicking in immediately?
> 
> The social security website says it is a 24 month wait. The information I found said it was to limit the Medicare cost to those on disability just a short time. I would really be interested to see the information to pass on to others.


Have to take her word for it, she was there after all. It seems odd, though, since she had health insurance through her husband that there would be a hardship exemption.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.
> 
> I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy.


He fails in everything he does. Impeachment!


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

From Love the lake:"Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.

I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy."

One has to question his reasons for supporting this deal as most believe that the Iranians will never honor the terms, will go behind our back and continue to do exactly what they want, all the while with their hand out to receive billions from the prez. Again - bad decision or ulterior motive to weaken America and Israel?


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty Terms of Use
Nov 19 | 2013

Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty

From, Daily Reckoning

By, Garance Franke-Ruta, Daily Reckoning

The first time I heard Nona Willis Aronowitz talk about getting divorced to save money on health insurance I thought she couldnt really be serious. We were at Montes, an old Italian place in South Brooklyn, having dinner with a group of New York women writers in late July.

Dont do it! I urged her, certain, having watched my friends over the years, that no matter how casually she or her husband might treat the piece of paper that says they are married, getting unhitched would inevitably change their relationship as profoundly as getting hitched in the first place.

But with the arrival of the Affordable Care Acts insurance exchanges, the question for Nona and her husband Aaron Cassara moved from the realm of casual conversation to a real financial conundrum. Aged 29 and 32, respectively, they were facing tough times for their professions, a wildly expensive city, and the scary prospect that both of them could shortly be uninsured. Right now Nona only has a COBRA plan  which I can barely afford  that ends January 1, she tells me. Her last staff job ended when the media outlet she was working for laid off its whole editorial team; shes been a full-time freelancer since. Aaron, a filmmaker who works part-time and also freelances, has been uninsured since her layoff, because it would be too expensive to have him on COBRA too.

Any married couple that earns more than 400% of the federal poverty level  that is $62,040  or a family of two earns too much for subsidies under Obamacare. If youre over 400% of poverty, youre never eligible for premium support, explains Gary Claxton, director of the Health Care Marketplace Project at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

But if that same couple lived together unmarried, they could earn up to $45,960 each  $91,920 total  and still be eligible for subsidies through the exchanges in New York state, where insurance is comparatively expensive and the state exchange was set up in such a way as to not provide lower rates for younger people. (Subsidy eligibility is calculated using a complicated formula involving income in relation to the poverty line, family size, and the price of plans offered through a states marketplace.)

Nona and Aarons 2012 income was higher than the 400% mark, but not by much. In New York City, that still doesnt take you very far for two people. If their most recent months of income are in the same range, they will get no help at all with buying insurance through the exchanges if and when they apply, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation and eHealth subsidy calculators. Premiums for the two for silver-level plans came in at $9,248 for the year.

But if they applied as unmarried individuals with something like their 2012 income, one of them would get at least $3,964 in subsidies toward the purchase of a plan, or possibly even be eligible for Medicaid, thanks to their uneven individual earnings that year. And if they fall below the 400% threshold, which Nona says they might this year, they could get substantial subsidies as a couple that are still worth less than what theyd be eligible for as individuals. These gaps are the marriage penalty.

Married people who are uninsured make up just a small fraction of the uninsured, for obvious reasons: It is easier to be insured if you have two potential pathways of getting there. Only 15.4% of married people were uninsured in 2012, according to research from the Kaiser Family Foundation; the uninsurance rate for single adults living together was more than twice as high  33.4%.

That may be one reason the Obamacare subsidies are more generous to single people and one- or two-parent families with children in the house than to couples who lack children. They were designed to help single moms and struggling middle-class families with children, not married creative-class millennials in pricey cities who have not yet settled into well-paid work, or barring that, work for a single employer.

Health insurance isnt the only place where theres a marriage penalty. The federal income tax also hits married couples with similar earnings harder than couples with one main breadwinner.

In the tax code, you have a different set of tax rates for married couples that mitigates the marriage penalty to some degree, says Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who has been writing about the marriage penalty in health reform since 2010. Under Obamacare, however, there are dramatic penalties that are substantial  particularly with couples in the upper age range, he says.

What you are doing is saying  you have to pay a penalty of multiple hundreds of dollars  a substantial portion of your income  to stay married, Rector says. Its saying society is basically hostile to the institution of marriage.

Experts on the impact of marriage penalties were skeptical that many couples would consider divorce over insurance rates. Still, there is some data to suggest that marriage penalties embedded in government programs can discourage marriage among those who are benefiting from programs that favor the unmarried.

The received wisdom in public finance is that marriage per se can be financially discouraged if both members of a couple have decent earnings potential and would face a higher combined tax rate as a married couple than as a pair of singletons, explains Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. At the lower end of the income scale, if the combined earnings potential of the couple is not very promising, marriage might prevent the mom and kids from receiving as much government assistance as they can receive if the adult couple remains unmarried.

Theres no data yet on the potential size of the population potentially affected by such concerns under the Affordable Care Act, but Medicaid and other means-tested programs already created that kind of potential marriage penalty, he notes. At least half of the newly insured under ACA will be insured under Medicaid.

The great irony, Nona explains, is we wouldnt be married if it werent for a situation that happened in 2009 where he needed health insurance.

Despite its administrative beginnings, their City Hall marriage has lasted so far. Aaron was on Nonas insurance at first; later, when their job arrangements changed, she was on his. Now Nona is looking to land a full-time staff job, in hopes of once again having an employer-based plan that Aaron, too, can join.

I guarantee you that in six months I will either be divorced or I will have a full-time job, she says.

Garance Franke-Ruta

About the Source The Daily Reckoning is a free newsletter which has been published for more than 10 years by Agora Financial LLC. They accurately predicted the Internet bubble, housing bubble and credit crisis of 08. With enough notice for their readers to prepare and protect themselves. If you havent signed up for Daily Reckoning yet, we urge you to do so right here. And dont worry. Its 100% free  no credit card is required. -

See more at: http://www.doityourselfcapitalism.com/obamacares-hidden-marriage-penalty#sthash.HIRxdNxD....

@joeysoma- thanks for posting.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Yeah, maybe you'll manage to upset a bunch of people. Won't that be fun?



momeee said:


> Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty Terms of Use
> Nov 19 | 2013
> 
> Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty
> ...


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

momeee said:


> Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty Terms of Use
> Nov 19 | 2013
> 
> Obamacare's Hidden Marriage Penalty
> ...


Very interesting. Thank you for posting this.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

momeee said:


> From Love the lake:"Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.
> 
> I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy."
> 
> One has to question his reasons for supporting this deal as most believe that the Iranians will never honor the terms, will go behind our back and continue to do exactly what they want, all the while with their hand out to receive billions from the prez. Again - bad decision or ulterior motive to weaken America and Israel?


You are so spot on on this issue! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Well, usually I'm not given respect with being called stupid/dreaming or go to bed, etc. so I'm tired of being called names.


I don't call you names Jane, although you have accused me of it and I have proven you wrong. There is no need to do it to me, and you have, or to do it to our president. It adds nothing to the conversation. Please lets refrain from doing it anymore. Obama is better than Obo, cause that is disgusting. He is after all the President.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

The Marriage Tax isn't a new thing.

Will the Marriage Tax Penalty Return in 2013?

Read more: http://www.mydollarplan.com/marriage-tax-penalty/#ixzz2lgLByzb4


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.
> 
> I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy.


Oh, please tell us more. I didn't know you were in on those discussions and knew all that was talked about.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> Oh, please tell us more. I didn't know you were in on those discussions and knew all that was talked about.


Oh, of course she was there. She is omniscient.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

momeee said:


> From Love the lake:"Don't you just love how Obama bowed to the Iranians? He did not even have the fortitude to make part of his plea deal the release of three Americans held in their jails.
> 
> I guess the main reason is that he did not care enough. He did not care that a man is being held because he is Christian. It is a immoral to lessen the economic restrictions against Iran, but allow our Countrymen to be held hostage. He is even worse than Carter, with diplomacy."
> 
> One has to question his reasons for supporting this deal as most believe that the Iranians will never honor the terms, will go behind our back and continue to do exactly what they want, all the while with their hand out to receive billions from the prez. Again - bad decision or ulterior motive to weaken America and Israel?


Right, we should have pulled a "Bush" and gone to war. That is what America wants, more people killed!!! Now of course if Bush had been talking to Iran like President Obama has, the right would have thought it was the best thing ever, but since it is President Obama, it is terrible. I don't understand that way of thinking.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You needn't explain it to me. My point was....there was a marriage tax long before now......yes, Bush eliminated it in his tax cuts.....but it was apparent that was to be temporary. Now it's back, because it was intended all along to be a tax.
I'm just saying.......it's not a new thing decided by the Obama administration. Bushes tax cut had just run its course. Like most temporary tax cuts do.



joeysomma said:


> I could not find a date your article was released, as it is old news. Then if you would click on the fiscal cliff deal in progress in your article you would find the answer to any of your questions.
> 
> http://www.mydollarplan.com/fiscal-cliff-deal/
> 
> ...


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

NJG said:


> Right, we should have pulled a "Bush" and gone to war. That is what America wants, more people killed!!! Now of course if Bush had been talking to Iran like President Obama has, the right would have thought it was the best thing ever, but since it is President Obama, it is terrible. I don't understand that way of thinking.


Well at least you can say that President Bush followed up with his 'red line'. Obama can't back up that statement with Syria. So who should be shocked that he lied about Obamacare? So who should be shocked that he allowed our ambassador and three others to be murdered because he lied about a YouTube video?


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

lovethelake said:


> Well at least you can say that President Bush followed up with his 'red line'. Obama can't back up that statement with Syria. So who should be shocked that he lied about Obamacare? So who should be shocked that he allowed our ambassador and three others to be murdered because he lied about a YouTube video?


A new CNN/ORC poll said that 56% polled said Obama is not honest or trustworthy. 56% did not admire Obama, disagreed with Obama on important issues and said he does not inspire confidence. 53% said they do not see Obama as a strong and decisive leader.

Not many are shocked he lied when selling Obamacare. Sticker shock is common place with those that can get on the website. How many really believed the Benghazi attack was because of a video? That reason was so ridiculous that it was laughable, then and now. Most people know that when Obama says , in a tone of outrage, that he will get to the bottom of (list any scandal here) that it is just a lot of hot air. The only good news for Obama is that 70% of those polled said he is likable. Too bad likable doesn't lead a country.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Maybe President Obama didn't want to make the same mistake Bush did when he (misspoke?) and said that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Which caused 176,000189,000 violent deaths including 134,000 civilians. Maybe it's smarter to take time to find out what is really going on before you start a war. 
Bush doesn't have anything to worry about now. I'm sure he's getting a fine pension while he sits down in Texas painting his pretty pictures.



lovethelake said:


> Well at least you can say that President Bush followed up with his 'red line'. Obama can't back up that statement with Syria. So who should be shocked that he lied about Obamacare? So who should be shocked that he allowed our ambassador and three others to be murdered because he lied about a YouTube video?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> A new CNN/ORC poll said that 56% polled said Obama is not honest or trustworthy. 56% did not admire Obama, disagreed with Obama on important issues and said he does not inspire confidence. 53% said they do not see Obama as a strong and decisive leader.
> 
> Not many are shocked he lied when selling Obamacare. Sticker shock is common place with those that can get on the website. How many really believed the Benghazi attack was because of a video? That reason was so ridiculous that it was laughable, then and now. Most people know that when Obama says , in a tone of outrage, that he will get to the bottom of (list any scandal here) that it is just a lot of hot air. The only good news for Obama is that 70% of those polled said he is likable. Too bad likable doesn't lead a country.


All I can say is what took 56% of the people so long? Finally, folks are seeing the lies Obama told us all. Finally, the Dems are shaken to their very cores and are desperate to separate themselves from ObamaCare. How telling the Dems finally got Harry Reid to do SOMETHING since he has done nothing in the past five years; albeit it a play for power over the D.C. District Courts. Finally, the Republs look like the heroes they are since NOT ONE voted for Obamacare and EVERY SINGLE Democrat did. Finally, Americans are noticing the scam they befell them. Taking the House/Senate/WH is again in the Republs sites. Frankly, anyone should be able to win against a Democrat in the up-coming elections.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Well at least you can say that President Bush followed up with his 'red line'. Obama can't back up that statement with Syria. So who should be shocked that he lied about Obamacare? So who should be shocked that he allowed our ambassador and three others to be murdered because he lied about a YouTube video?


So you think Bush had a "red line" and that we should now be at war with Syria because they crossed a red line. Well Bushes "red line" was way different than that from President Obama. Bush and Cheney had their mind made up way before they were elected President. 4486 American lives could have been saved had that decision not been made, plus all the wounded veterans and those suffering from PTSD and all the people from Iraq that were killed including many civilians. This is all on Bush and Cheneys head. Unbelievable that people still think it was a good idea and that we should do it again. As for Syria, I have great admiration for President Obama for having the restraint he did. Sure wish Bush/Cheney had had some.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> In Bush's tax cuts, the Marriage penalty for lower income people that was mentioned is gone. I believe permanently, although I cannot find it on the internet at this time.
> 
> Obama brought back the marriage penalty for higher income people.
> Single at $200,000 and Married filing joint at $250,000.
> ...


Don't forget all the other Obama taxes. Payroll taxes went up, medical device tax, not signing up for Obamacare tax, home sale tax, capital gains tax up, Health Savings account lowered, tax tax tax tax tax. Yet we brought in a record amount of "revenue" last month, and that still is not enough


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You might find this interesting.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/4/extend-child-tax-credits-and-marriage-penalty-fixe/

You neglected to post the whole story:

Obama keeps Bush's child tax credits and marriage penalty fixes

Updated: Thursday, March 5th, 2009 | By Angie Drobnic Holan

President Obama has said he would roll back the Bush tax cuts on higher incomes, meaning $200,000 in income for singles and $250,000 for couples. But he intends to leave in place the Bush tax cuts for everyone who makes less than that.

In the case of this particular promise, the outline for Obama's 2010 budget shows he intends to keep expansions of the child tax credit, as well as adjustments that do away with a marriage penalty for couples who file jointly. These exemptions would phase out for people at higher incomes, who will see hefty rate increases under the Obama plan.

When the tax cuts were first enacted in 2001 and again in 2003, the legislation came with "sunsets," or scheduled expiration dates. Without further action, tax rates will go up for everyone in 2011; at the time it was considered a way to rein in future deficit projections. So new legislation is required to keep in place those current policies, and the budget outline indicates Obama intends to pursue that legislation.

Congress still needs approve Obama's budget, and there will likely be arguments over many things in it. But little opposition is expected to retaining the child credit expansions and marriage penalty fixes. For now, though, we're rating this promise In the Works.



joeysomma said:


> In Bush's tax cuts, the Marriage penalty for lower income people that was mentioned is gone. I believe permanently, although I cannot find it on the internet at this time.
> 
> Obama brought back the marriage penalty for higher income people.
> Single at $200,000 and Married filing joint at $250,000.
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Isn't that the fault of the WHOLE government? Are you saying no other president has ever raised taxes??? The next president, who ever it is, will do the same thing......so what? You can put blame till the end of time, but that won't change the way the government is run.



lovethelake said:


> Don't forget all the other Obama taxes. Payroll taxes went up, medical device tax, not signing up for Obamacare tax, home sale tax, capital gains tax up, Health Savings account lowered, tax tax tax tax tax. Yet we brought in a record amount of "revenue" last month, and that still is not enough


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Yes, old news, but it contradicts what you posted. And it seems yours was old news as well, as you admitted you couldn't come up with the post you found yours on.


joeysomma said:


> 2009 OLD NEWS


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Don't forget all the other Obama taxes. Payroll taxes went up, medical device tax, not signing up for Obamacare tax, home sale tax, capital gains tax up, Health Savings account lowered, tax tax tax tax tax. Yet we brought in a record amount of "revenue" last month, and that still is not enough


And look where the Bush tax cuts got us!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Isn't that the fault of the WHOLE government? Are you saying no other president has ever raised taxes??? The next president, who ever it is, will do the same thing......so what? You can put blame till the end of time, but that won't change the way the government is run.


It is the fault of those who voted for the taxes, Obamacare, was voted in by ONLY Dems. So, therefore, *the Dems are solely responsible for all the new taxes* LOL mentioned.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> It is the fault of those who voted for the taxes, Obamacare, was voted in by ONLY Dems. So, therefore, *the Dems are solely responsible for all the new taxes* LOL mentioned.


And look where the Bush tax cuts got us.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I repeat.......taxes will always go up, no matter who is president......
But only one party...the REPUBLICANS! Have ever tried to take over the government by shutting it down. (An attempted coupe really) They'll never live down that debacle.



knitpresentgifts said:


> It is the fault of those who voted for the taxes, Obamacare, was voted in by ONLY Dems. So, therefore, *the Dems are solely responsible for all the new taxes* LOL mentioned.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> Don't forget all the other Obama taxes. Payroll taxes went up, medical device tax, not signing up for Obamacare tax, home sale tax, capital gains tax up, Health Savings account lowered, tax tax tax tax tax. Yet we brought in a record amount of "revenue" last month, and that still is not enough


In fiscal 2014 federal tax revenue will exceed 3 trillion for the first time in history. Almost $30,000 for every full time worker in the country. If the elected don't do something about this extortion then the laws of economics will. And frankly folks ,we aren't getting our monies worth. This country should be booming. Your so right Lakes, it will never be enough. I could go on but to most it doesn't resignate as anything but picking on a bi-racial president when the truth is lived everyday by the working people that keep this Country going. Also I don't have time for spellcheck so do your best to understand.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> I repeat.......taxes will always go up, no matter who is president......
> But only one party...the REPUBLICANS! Have ever tried to take over the government by shutting it down. (An attempted coupe really) They'll never live down that debacle.


No they don't. History proves you wrong. Check some out - start with Clinton. BTW: The Dems controlled the stupid stunt of shutting down the govt and will pay for that in the 2014 elections IF the low-info voters stay home as history shows they usually do.

Oh, and the coup was just done by the desperate Dems under Obama's direction by changing the laws of the Senate against the laws on the books.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

The republicans love to spend the money, as they have proven many times, but when it comes time to pay the bill, then they complain and want tax cuts.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Isn't that the fault of the WHOLE government? Are you saying no other president has ever raised taxes??? The next president, who ever it is, will do the same thing......so what? You can put blame till the end of time, but that won't change the way the government is run.


History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.

The length of this recession i


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Isn't that the fault of the WHOLE government? Are you saying no other president has ever raised taxes??? The next president, who ever it is, will do the same thing......so what? You can put blame till the end of time, but that won't change the way the government is run.


History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.

The length of this recession is unprecedented, due to auto bailouts, failed green projects, the stimulus failure and so on. The Senate has failed to pass a budget in 6 years, which also leads to uncertainty.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

galinipper said:


> In fiscal 2014 federal tax revenue will exceed 3 trillion for the first time in history. Almost $30,000 for every full time worker in the country. If the elected don't do something about this extortion then the laws of economics will. And frankly folks ,we aren't getting our monies worth. This country should be booming. Your so right Lakes, it will never be enough. I could go on but to most it doesn't resignate as anything but picking on a bi-racial president when the truth is lived everyday by the working people that keep this Country going. Also I don't have time for spellcheck so do your best to understand.


Well put, Galinipper! :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.
> 
> The length of this recession is unprecedented, due to auto bailouts, failed green projects, the stimulus failure and so on. The Senate has failed to pass a budget in 6 years, which also leads to uncertainty.


Great explanation of tax cuts, Love. Private business spends money more wisely than government ever will because it's their own! :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I will take back my remark about taxes going up with every president. Bill Clinton did get our country out of debt, as did Andrew Jackson. Who both happened to be Democrats.

As for the "Stupid Stunt" as you call it, the Republicans played their cards and lost the game.

And your statement about the Democrats directing a coup.....I don't know how you can overthrow yourself..... :?:



knitpresentgifts said:


> No they don't. History proves you wrong. Check some out - start with Clinton. BTW: The Dems controlled the stupid stunt of shutting down the govt and will pay for that in the 2014 elections IF the low-info voters stay home as history shows they usually do.
> 
> Oh, and the coup was just done by the desperate Dems under Obama's direction by changing the laws of the Senate against the laws on the books.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Maybe President Obama didn't want to make the same mistake Bush did when he (misspoke?) and said that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Which caused 176,000189,000 violent deaths including 134,000 civilians. Maybe it's smarter to take time to find out what is really going on before you start a war.
> Bush doesn't have anything to worry about now. I'm sure he's getting a fine pension while he sits down in Texas painting his pretty pictures.


I am pretty darned happy that we are not going charging into another armed conflict that we cannot afford either in terms in loss of life or monetarily. 
War is the declaration of failure of diplomacy. 
It is sad to see that there are so many who don't have to go off and fight and yet they are ready for the battle weary to get back out there in another war zone where we don't belong.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> No they don't. History proves you wrong. Check some out - start with Clinton. BTW: The Dems controlled the stupid stunt of shutting down the govt and will pay for that in the 2014 elections IF the low-info voters stay home as history shows they usually do.
> 
> Oh, and the coup was just done by the desperate Dems under Obama's direction by changing the laws of the Senate against the laws on the books.


The republicans were told many times that if they didn't work with Democrats in the senate the filibuster rule would be changed. So the republicans would talk and say ok, we will do better and then go right back to their tricks. They were warned and didn't change so the rules had to. But just in case you forgot the republicans were the first ones to change the rules. This has been posted before so I know you know about it, you just choose to forget so you can blame someone else.

Here's proof positive that Republicans own this shutdown. How badly did House Republican leadership want to shut down the government? Here's how much. They used an unprecedented parliamentary procedure to block any chance that the clean continuing resolution sent to them by the Senate would reach the floor. THEY DID SO BY CHANGING HOUSE RULES.

Under normal procedure, here's how it would have worked the day it all fell down, September 30. The Senate sent over their clean CR. The House amended it with their anti-Obamacare stuff. The Senate rejected that change, and sent their resolution back. At that point, under normal procedure, any member would have been able to make a motion to bring the Senate bill to the floor. The rule that says they can do it is this:

When the stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or resolution with House or Senate amendments, a motion to dispose of any amendment shall be privileged.

That means the chambers are deadlocked and any member trying to break the deadlock would be able to do sowould have privilege to do so. Except that in this case, for this continuing resolution only, Republicans changed the rule. They did it on the night of September 30, the eve of the shutdown, in a Rules Committee meeting. The rule change said that any motion to take up the Senate bill "may be offered only by the majority Leader or his designee." Meaning only Eric Cantor or with his approval. Which wasn't going to happen.

"I've never seen this rule used. I'm not even sure they were certain we would have found it," a House Democratic aide told TPM. "This was an overabundance of caution on their part. 'We've got to find every single crack in the dam that water can get through and plug it.'"

Congressional historians agreed that it was highly unusual for the House to reserve such power solely for the leadership.

"I've never heard of anything like that before," Norm Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, told TPM.

There was no way in hell John Boehner and Eric Cantor were going to allow a clean funding bill to reach the floor the night before the shutdown. Because they knew that there were plenty of Republicans who would vote for it and it would pass.

House Democrats knew this was happening from the beginning, but unlike the Senate, the minority party in the House has very little power to do anything about abuses like this. They've been doing what they can do, trying to pass a motion to recommit every mini-funding bill the leadership brings up, to replace them with the Senate's clean resolution. But the procedure is arcane and complex and it's easy for the so-called moderate Republicans to pretend like those efforts don't exist, and to not do what they say they wantreopen government with a clean spending bill.

That makes those "moderate" Republicans as complicit in this as their leadership. The entire Republican Party owns this shutdown, completely.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> I am pretty darned happy that we are not going charging into another armed conflict that we cannot afford either in terms in loss of life or monetarily.
> War is the declaration of failure of diplomacy.
> It is sad to see that there are so many who don't have to go off and fight and yet they are ready for the battle weary to get back out there in another war zone where we don't belong.


War is the declaration of failure of diplomacy, and in Bush/Cheney it is the complete absence of any diplomacy. With them it is war first, talk later, maybe.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

I am not sure why anyone would think that corporation monies are for the officers to spend...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-20/enron-era-ruling-signals-1-6-billion-california-refunds.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kozlowski

http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/06/news/companies/ibm_insider_trading.fortune/index.htm

There are plenty more, why waste the ink?


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You are right. At one time that was the case. But after G.W. Bush was in office, everything fell apart. And yet there are those who will insist it was all President Obama's fault. Which of course it couldn't have been as he wasn't president when those decisions were made. This country is broken, and instead of both sides of the government trying to fix it, one side is trying to get control. You can't have a split government, or we'd be Iraq. 
IMHO the recession was caused by Bush during his term. But the Republicans & Democrats, who I might add have very little control over the government right now, have to get it together.

I have a great respect for President Regan. I voted for him twice. He had our country at heart. But it seems now the politicians think of the government as their own play ground, to do with as they please. Without regard for those who pay their hefty wages.

I would love for someone to come up with a fix, instead of insults. IMHO if you have nothing constructive to add to the conversions, don't participate at all. Let's help find the solution, instead of being part of the problem.

How about it? Who's willing to put personal politics aside and work on the problem? :?:



lovethelake said:


> History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.
> 
> The length of this recession is unprecedented, due to auto bailouts, failed green projects, the stimulus failure and so on. The Senate has failed to pass a budget in 6 years, which also leads to uncertainty.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Look it up!


joeysomma said:


> Out of Debt?????? I don't think so.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So Harry Reid brought the House Bill to the Senate Floor for a vote?


So John Boehner brought the senate bill to the house floor for a vote?


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

That's great to hear.....


joeysomma said:


> That Bush Tax cut is now permanent!
> 
> I found it in my National Income TAX workbook for 2013.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> I am pretty darned happy that we are not going charging into another armed conflict that we cannot afford either in terms in loss of life or monetarily.
> War is the declaration of failure of diplomacy.
> It is sad to see that there are so many who don't have to go off and fight and yet they are ready for the battle weary to get back out there in another war zone where we don't belong.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Lkholcomb said:


> :thumbup:


It irritates the living daylights out of me, we revere our military so much we want to see if we can't get a few tens of thousands more killed. WTHeck.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
> 
> Fiscal
> Year ...Year Ending..... National Debt .......Deficit
> ...


I give you kudos of credit for trying Joey! I gave up awhile ago conversing with the KP Lefties/Liberals. You cannot discuss nor debate a topic of which they know nothing about nor the history or facts of the topic at hand. They want to debate their opinions, make statements of lies, believe if they say the same thing again and aging it makes it a reality, attempt to re-write history and don't know too much about anything. When presented with facts, they change the topic. So, why bother?


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The house bill was sent to the senate and Harry Reid WOULD NOT bring it to a vote. He refused and just sent it back.


It was done over and over again, but don't confuse the poor libs with facts.

Good old Harry did not have the guts to even vote on it. My guess, he was terrified it would pass


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> It was done over and over again, but don't confuse the poor libs with facts.
> 
> Good old Harry did not have the guts to even vote on it. My guess, he was terrified it would pass


Good Ole Harry has been on vacation for the past 5+ years; he hears nothing, does nothing, is nothing but an old man who cannot create harmony or bring the parties together nor lead or negotiate or control members of his own party. Time for him to retire loooonnng ago. He's an embarrassment and the worst Senate Majority leader ever.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

This is what I found on our most recent presidents. If I'm nothing else, I'm open minded.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/nationaldebt.asp


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The house bill was sent to the senate and Harry Reid WOULD NOT bring it to a vote. He refused and just sent it back.


That often happens if he knows that Obama (or any President) wlll veto it and that there won't be enough votes to override the veto. Why waste the Senate's time??


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> This is what I found on our most recent presidents. If I'm nothing else, I'm open minded.
> 
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/nationaldebt.asp


Nussa,

Since you're so open-minded, try to consider the *facts:*

copied editorial:

The chart (you) posted, was published by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's office (now revised), has made the rounds online recently, particularly on social networking websites.

However, is this chart really telling the whole story? After all, the House of Representatives proposes and ultimately controls federal spending, not the president. So, why would Pelosi's office put out a chart based around the presidents?

Obviously, it downplays the skyrocketing debt during President Obamas term relative to other presidencies. *The chart does not even mention that at the time of publication, the president had only been in office for two years, compared to eight years for Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.* More importantly, *the chart also disguises the fact that massive spikes in debt creation usually came while Democrats controlled the House. *Heres the reality:

First chart

This chart is structured like Pelosi's chart. The major difference is that weve highlighted Congress since 1981, instead of the presidency. Of those sixteen Congresses, Democrats controlled the House nine times while Republicans controlled it seven times. *While in power, the Democrats dramatically outspent the Republicans. The 471% increase in the debt during 18 years of Democratic control is staggeringly more than the 105% increase during 14 years of Republican control.*

Consider the contrasting stories told by these two charts. Pelosi's office is telling a fairy tale that places the blame for an exploding debt squarely on Republican presidents, especially Reagan and George W. Bush.  However, *reality provides a very different account: It was Democrats controlling the House that swelled the debt. * Presidents dont hold the purse-strings of government, only the veto power. Nancy Pelosis chart is simply deceptive.

Undoubtedly, many readers will correctly argue that both percentages are far too large and that both parties are to blame for profligate spending in Washington. Its helpful to look at each individual Congress. It reveals that overspending is indeed a bipartisan problem, particularly during the last ten years.

Second chart

The stunning rise in the national debt since 2000 occurred under both Republican and Democratic leadership in the House and the presidency. Neither party can claim a spotless record with regard to deficit spending and debt creation. Still, *the degree to which the Democrats in Congress under President Obamas leadership have engaged in both of these practices is frightening. The federal government will default on its debts if the public does not force those in power to cut back spending.*

The chart put out by Nancy Pelosi's office is not only misleading in its attempt to shift away blame, it also misses the larger point. Our focus must be aimed directly at addressing the debt in a serious and lasting manner. The grassroots-generated Tea Party Budget is a realistic, significant effort to accomplish just that by cutting spending by $9.7 trillion dollars over the next ten years and balancing the budget in four years.

My words: If you calculate Obama's rate of spending, particularly in his last year or two in office, you'll soon see he has surpassed greatly all other Presidents and is the largest spending President in history. Pelosi's original chart you got from Snoopes (worthless site BTW) only shows two years of Obama as to show him in a good light. Don't you know Obama has been in office a minimum of five years!


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I give you kudos of credit for trying Joey! I gave up awhile ago conversing with the KP Lefties/Liberals. You cannot discuss nor debate a topic of which they know nothing about nor the history or facts of the topic at hand. They want to debate their opinions, make statements of lies, believe if they say the same thing again and aging it makes it a reality, attempt to re-write history and don't know too much about anything. When presented with facts, they change the topic. So, why bother?


Uhh, I think you're projecting. But no worry, it's what Republicans do. We are used to it. :mrgreen:


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

A little more ACA news:



> *Obamacare horror story debunked by Seattle Times columnist*
> Source: Raw Story
> 
> A Seattle Times columnist took a closer look at a conservative headline-making health care reform case Friday and discovered that the Rush Limbaugh narrative doesnt hold up under scrutiny.
> ...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> Uhh, I think you're projecting. But no worry, it's what Republicans do. We are used to it. :mrgreen:


Uhm, you are just in denial and ignoring the facts again. No problem, it's the only thing Democrats can do. They are used to lying and denying everything to even have a chance to be seen in a good light.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.
> 
> The length of this recession i


Clinton raised taxes. At the time, the rightwing called it "the largest tax increase in history," though I thought at the time that it was no such thing:



> The 1993 Clinton tax increase raised the top two income tax rates to 36% and 39.6%, with the top rate hitting joint returns with incomes above $250,000 ($400,000 in 2012 dollars). In addition, it removed the cap on the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, raised the corporate tax rate to 35% from 34%, increased the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, and imposed a 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/07/16/the-dangerous-myth-about-the-bill-clinton-tax-increase/


And check this out:


> *Reagan and Clinton Raised Taxes in Recessions -- And Created 40 Million Jobs *
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/reagan-and-clinton-raised_b_714155.html


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then why is anyone blaming the house for doing the same thing. But I believe the house amended the budget bill again each time it was sent back to the senate. As it turned out a lot of money and sanity would have been saved if the Senate would have passed the bill that delayed the individual mandate for a year.


That would mean that Obama would have to admit that the website was a failure. He would have to admit that he knew millions were going to lose their health insurance. That would mean that he would have to admit that 35% of the website has not been created yet. That would mean he would have to admit that it is not a secure site. That would mean he lied about not losing your insurance because of Obamacare. That would me that people would know that it would not save $2,500 a year. That would mean that maybe the American public will see him for what he is; a lying puppet that prefers to play golf than save 3 imprisoned Americans in Iranian jails.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Don't get to cocky......the chart you posted was from this man....Craig Steiner, so I don't hold much stock in it. I didn't try to hide anything from anyone. I sent the whole link, so anyone could read it and make up their own mind.

Craig Steiner is a writer and political activist from Denver, Colorado. He is a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy now active in the country.

So I'd say you're the pot calling the kettle black. Come back when you can find an objective post. Which I'm pretty sure there aren't any of...it's one or the other. No meeting in the middle.

This is what makes me open minded.
And you obviously didn't read the whole page...it tells it all, the 
good, bad and the ugly.


knitpresentgifts said:


> Nussa,
> 
> Since you're so open-minded, try to consider the *facts:*
> 
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Sorry....I'm not in the market for a purse...and since you seem so keen on figuring out the math....look this one over. It has the statistics for most of the presidents.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html



joeysomma said:


> Actually it does state the amount when Clinton left office:
> Bill Clinton:
> Took office 20 January 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion
> Left office 20 January 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion
> ...


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> It irritates the living daylights out of me, we revere our military so much we want to see if we can't get a few tens of thousands more killed. WTHeck.


Same here. I'm a pacifist, but I get so downright angry at how we treat the soldiers and their families. We are happy to send them off and leave the families needing food stamps, ect. It's despicable. Then when they come back they are just not treated correctly. How long did it take for soldiers with PTSD to get proper care? I have known people who are seriously disabled back from the war, but it took so long until they were actually granted disability classification. We don't treat these "war heroes" well at all. It's all great and good that they can get upgraded to first class and such, but that won't pay the bills when they are discharged, but not labeled 100% disabled.

I personally think that we need to focus on improving our diplomacy and strengthening that instead of focusing on building a "grander" army. I know I'm in a minority, but I don't care, I'm used to it by now, lol.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well, if it's semantics your going to drone on about.....let me rephrase it for you....Wouldn't want you to have nightmares about it......Bill Clinton left office with a debt of 37%, where as G.W. Bush had a debt of 86% when he left office. There, is that better? Is it a load off of you mind not to have to keep reminding me anymore about my incorrect statement? :thumbup: 
And of course the next president had to take over where Bush left off....As of right now....President Obama's debt % is 34. But to be fair, he has a few years left in office, so we can't make any conclusions as to how his debt term will end.



joeysomma said:


> Your statement that Bill Clinton got our country of debt was wrong. We were in debt over $5 billion dollars. That is not out of debt. That is all I wanted to say.
> 
> As far as the purse, there is not enough information to make a wise choice.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The house bill was sent to the senate and Harry Reid WOULD NOT bring it to a vote. He refused and just sent it back.


The senate twice took the defund Obamacare out and sent it back to the house. The last time the house passed it was just before midnight on Mon night and the government was to shut down at midnight and then Boehner wanted to conference. Good timing Boehner. Harry was right when he said they would not go to conference with a gun to their heads.

Washington, DC
Monday, September 30, 2013

The House passed a bill shortly before midnight that would have delayed the health care act and also requests that the House and Senate meet in a conference to work out their differences. After the 12am (ET) deadline passed this morning the White House Budget office instructed agencies to shut down.

On Monday night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stated that "we will not go to conference with a gun to our heads." He requested that the House pass a "clean" CR and then go to conference on the broader budget bills.

The fiscal year ended at midnight Monday and non-essential functions of the federal government shut down. Essential functions, such as national security and public safety, will continue to operate.

The Senate took votes on two different sets of House amendments Monday, voting each time to table the amendments, both of which would have delayed the Affordable Care Act for one year.

The Senate version of the CR is an amended version of the House bill. The House originally sent over a bill that would defund "Obamacare" and fund the government through Dec. 15. The Senate amended that bill to strip the defunding provision and fund the government through Nov. 15. The House version of the CR includes the last amendment passed on Monday afternoon, which would delay the individual mandate portion of the health care bill for one year.

The fiscal year ended at midnight Monday and the White House Budget Office directed non-essential functions of the federal government to shut down. Essential functions, such as national security and public safety, will continue to operate.

On Monday night, President Obama signed into law the bill passed by the House early Sunday morning and the Senate Monday afternoon that will continue funding for military personnel in the event of a government shut down.

The House voted early Sunday morning to pass two amendments to the continuing resolution and an additional bill that would continue to pay for military personnel in the event of a government shut down. The separate military pay bill passed 423-0.

On Friday, the Senate voted, 54-44, along party lines to approve the continuing resolution, a bill to fund the federal government past September 30th, the end of the fiscal year, after stripping out a provision that would defund the Affordable Care Act and moving the next deadline for a budget from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15.

Starting last Tuesday afternoon, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) spoke for more than 21 hours about his opposition to the ACA and why he wants to block the continuing resolution. In this latest series of votes, he voted against ending debate, and against the amended bill.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> History has shown that tax cuts improve the economy, especially in a recession. Kennedy cut taxes and Reagan cut taxes and there was a boom. Clinton continued the Reagan tax cuts.
> 
> The length of this recession i


So tell me how the Bush tax cuts improved the economy, when they actually brought it to its knees.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I will take back my remark about taxes going up with every president. Bill Clinton did get our country out of debt, as did Andrew Jackson. Who both happened to be Democrats.
> 
> As for the "Stupid Stunt" as you call it, the Republicans played their cards and lost the game.
> 
> And your statement about the Democrats directing a coup.....I don't know how you can overthrow yourself..... :?:


Sorry but where have you been as Clinton did not eliminate the national debt!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Well, if it's semantics your going to drone on about.....let me rephrase it for you....Wouldn't want you to have nightmares about it......Bill Clinton left office with a debt of 37%, where as G.W. Bush had a debt of 86% when he left office. There, is that better? Is it a load off of you mind not to have to keep reminding me anymore about my incorrect statement? :thumbup:
> And of course the next president had to take over where Bush left off....As of right now....President Obama's debt % is 34. But to be fair, he has a few years left in office, so we can't make any conclusions as to how his debt term will end.


Show me where you got your information as I believe you are dreaming.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The house bill was sent to the senate and Harry Reid WOULD NOT bring it to a vote. He refused and just sent it back.


And Boehner and Cantor changed the rules so no one but them could bring it to the floor for a vote.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> So tell me how the Bush tax cuts improved the economy, when they actually brought it to its knees.


The economy was going strong--look at all of the people who have lost their homes due to O's horrible so called leadership!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> It was done over and over again, but don't confuse the poor libs with facts.
> 
> Good old Harry did not have the guts to even vote on it. My guess, he was terrified it would pass


It was voted on twice in the senate and sent back to the house. It was Boehner that changed the rules because he knew the other people in the house didn't agree with him and could if given a chance, pass it without him.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Knitry said:


> That often happens if he knows that Obama (or any President) wlll veto it and that there won't be enough votes to override the veto. Why waste the Senate's time??


The defund Obamacare part was taken out before it was returned to the house.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Nussa,
> 
> Since you're so open-minded, try to consider the *facts:*
> 
> ...


*************************************

Well, not exactly copied, was it? 
Here is an actual copy of what Snopes.com had to say.

So, as far as raw numbers go, the chart is reasonably accurate (although our calculations produced a somewhat higher debt increase for Ronald Reagan than reported). That said, however, we have to consider how valuable these numbers are; whether by themselves they present a reasonable comparative measure of presidential fiscal responsibility. In that regard, one could find a number of aspects to take issue with: 
The chart isn't a true comparison of equals, as it includes three presidents who served two full terms (Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush), a president who served one term (George H.W. Bush), and a president who had served half a term (Obama). Obviously, the longer a president holds office the greater the opportunity for him to influence the debt, and certainly (barring a radical change in current circumstances) the increase reported for Barack Obama will be considerably higher by the time he leaves office (whether that be in 2013 or 2017).
All presidents come into office with policies and budgets that were put into place by their predecessors in the White House and Congress, and they all pass the same along to their successors when they leave office. Therefore, determining how much of the change in debt that occurs during a given president's administration is actually the result of his actions (rather than the consequence of factors over which he had little or no influence) would require a much more complex analysis than the one presented here.
Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts:
Debt held by the public approximates current federal demand on credit markets. It represents a burden on today's economy, and the interest paid on this debt represents a burden on current taxpayers. Federal borrowing from the public absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. Further, debt held by the public is the accumulation of what the federal government borrowed in the past and is reported as a liability on the balance sheet of the government's consolidated financial statements.

In contrast, debt held by government accounts (intragovernmental debt) and the interest on it represent a claim on future resources. This debt performs largely an internal accounting function. Special federal securities credited to government accounts (primarily trust funds) represent the cumulative surpluses of these accounts that have been lent to the general fund. These transactions net out on the government's consolidated financial statements. Debt issued to government accounts does not affect today's economy and does not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit market.
Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart which tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above.
All in all, this is a case of relatively accurate information which is of marginal value due to a lack of proper comparative context.

Last updated: 23 January 2012

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2013 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson. 
This material may not be reproduced without permission. 
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/nationaldebt.asp#fGmVcKPcCgJRDqwh.99


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Keep reading Janie.....you haven't caught up yet...... :roll:


Janeway said:


> Show me where you got your information as I believe you are dreaming.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Don't get to cocky......the chart you posted was from this man....Craig Steiner, so I don't hold much stock in it. I didn't try to hide anything from anyone. I sent the whole link, so anyone could read it and make up their own mind.
> 
> Craig Steiner is a writer and political activist from Denver, Colorado. He is a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy now active in the country.
> 
> ...


Cocky? ? ? This describes you & Democratic friends. Why should any of us come back when you decide as this is an open forum.

Why don't you take your own advice & leave until you find an open mind. We could find that same black kettle for you.

It is about time the right-wing took over as the current president has done "nothing" for our country.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Keep reading Janie.....you haven't caught up yet...... :roll:


I'm caught up on the ugliness the Lefties spew.

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :hunf: :thumbdown:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then why is anyone blaming the house for doing the same thing. But I believe the house amended the budget bill again each time it was sent back to the senate. As it turned out a lot of money and sanity would have been saved if the Senate would have passed the bill that delayed the individual mandate for a year.


Now you know that would never happen and you know President Obama would never sign it. What part of that is so hard for republicans to comprehend. He would never sign it. How many times did he say he would never sign it. Republicans just kept beating a dead horse to death. The senate amended the bill when it was sent to them and sent it back to the house. A lot of time and billions and billions of dollars could have been saved had the house just let it come to a vote one more time, but they changed the rules so no one else could bring it to the floor. Boehner and Cantor were scared.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

jelun2 said:


> *************************************
> 
> Well, not exactly copied, was it?
> Here is an actual copy of what Snopes.com had to say.
> ...


Snopes is wrong 98% of the time so have not believed them as the husband & wife who started this site are Democrats so they are biased!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Now you know that would never happen and you know President Obama would never sign it. What part of that is so hard for republicans to comprehend. He would never sign it. How many times did he say he would never sign it. Republicans just kept beating a dead horse to death. The senate amended the bill when it was sent to them and sent it back to the house. A lot of time and billions and billions of dollars could have been saved had the house just let it come to a vote one more time, but they changed the rules so no one else could bring it to the floor. Boehner and Cantor were scared.


You want O to run our country, but he isn't qualified!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Janeway....Be a nice grown up and go away.....I have no interest in taking to you......Go and visit with one of your friends..... :thumbup:


Janeway said:


> Cocky? ? ? This describes you & Democratic friends. Why should any of us come back when you decide as this is an open forum.
> 
> Why don't you take your own advice & leave until you find an open mind. We could find that same black kettle for you.
> 
> It is about time the right-wing took over as the current president has done "nothing" for our country.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> The economy was going strong--look at all of the people who have lost their homes due to O's horrible so called leadership!


What world are you living in. The economy tanked in 07. Last time I checked Bush was president then. The people who lost their homes were the fault of Bush's so called leadership.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Cocky? ? ? This describes you & Democratic friends. Why should any of us come back when you decide as this is an open forum.
> 
> Why don't you take your own advice & leave until you find an open mind. We could find that same black kettle for you.
> 
> It is about time the right-wing took over as the current president has done "nothing" for our country.


As long as the right wing is not willing to accept minorities and refuses to pass an immigration bill they are going no where.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Snopes is wrong 98% of the time so have not believed them as the husband & wife who started this site are Democrats so they are biased!


All wrong again Jane. This has been answered so many times that it is a waste of time to do it again.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You want O to run our country, but he isn't qualified!


He is twice as qualified as Bush ever was. In fact Bush didn't really run things. Cheney was more in control than Bush actually was. Bush was Cheneys yes man.. Bush asked Cheney to help him pick a running mate and he picked himself, bless his heart.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Snopes is wrong 98% of the time so have not believed them as the husband & wife who started this site are Democrats so they are biased!


Your pal used Snopes as a resource. I used her link to see that she was not honest enough to post all of the response they put up about the piece in question. 
Tell it to your overbright buddy.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Before they try to make a new law. Maybe they should enforce ALL the laws on the books, first.
> 
> What good will a new law do? Obama picks and chooses what he will enforce and if he doesn't like it, he just changes it.


Only 31% are for ocare now.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Don't get to cocky......the chart you posted was from this man....Craig Steiner, so I don't hold much stock in it. I didn't try to hide anything from anyone. I sent the whole link, so anyone could read it and make up their own mind.
> 
> Craig Steiner is a writer and political activist from Denver, Colorado. He is a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy now active in the country.
> 
> ...


Cocky? Nothing you said about my post is accurate. The info I posted was not as you described. I don't care from what website you posted your chart from, it was created by MoveOn.Org at Nancy Pelosi's request using her bogus #s. I didn't hide anything from you either, as I posted all that my source wrote - you didn't quote my source as usual. But call me anything you'd like since your opinion means nothing to me.

Why don't you use your head instead of proving that you cannot read a graph or perform simple percentage calculations?

Here's the facts, again, for you to make up your own mind. I retrieved the debt amount info from the Treasury site which notes the National Public Debt. In your prior post, you proved you didn't even know that Clinton left his term with a National Debt; so I don't think you should be calling color on any kettles. Since, you don't obviously understand numbers, percentages nor facts, I've calculated them all for you. This isn't from any website, these are my personal calculations.

Hopefully, you can use your open mind to attempt to comprehend the simple facts presented:

Bush began his term with a $5.716 Trillion debt, and I used 1/30/09 as the end of his term allocating to him at the end of his 8 year term a total national debt of $10.632 T.

In 8 years Bush added $4.916 T to the debt (or an 86% increase over eight years). 

Obama began his term with a 10.632 Trillion debt, and I used 1/31/13 as the end of his first 4 year term allocating to him at the end of his first 4 year term a total national debt of $16.433 T.

In 4 years Obama added $5.801 T to the debt (or a 54.6% increase over four years).

Summary: Obama has already increased the National Debt $5.8 T in *4 years* as compared to Bush increasing the debt $4.9T in *8 years. *

Keep in mind Bush finances two wars and the Medicare drug program. Obama did neither. Obama has had more revenue come into the Treasury than ever before in history and has drastically cut military spending yet still *Obama has increased the debt 118% more in 4 years over what Bush did in 8 years.*

So, exactly who is the big spender? Bush spent too much money, some was mandated, but Obama surpasses him like no other President in history. Estimates project Obama to leave the end of his 2nd term with America with a national debt of more than 20 trillion.

What do we have to show for it? A better and more robust economy, the end of wars, less dependence on foreign oil, a more prosperous nation, lower unemployment, more heath insured, better homes and lifestyles for folks? Nope! Worse results in each category. Thanks Obama (and Valerie)!

I wouldn't be touting your inaccurate percentages that you obviously have no idea how they were calculated nor what they represent.

Your lack of knowledge on this topic is exactly why I no longer get into discussions with the Libs on KP as in most cases the Libs do not understand #s or percentages yet like to post charts, quote others and post graphs they do not understand. MoveOn and Snopes are favorites of the Libs for sourcing; worthless sites to boot.

That is your prerogative to post from those sites, but proves nothing but your lack of comprehension of what you post.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Your statement that Bill Clinton got our country of debt was wrong. We were in debt over $5 billion dollars. That is not out of debt. That is all I wanted to say.
> 
> As far as the purse, there is not enough information to make a wise choice.


As I stated prior, the Libs don't do math well at all! OMG, the stupidity ...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Well, if it's semantics your going to drone on about.....let me rephrase it for you....Wouldn't want you to have nightmares about it......Bill Clinton left office with a debt of 37%, where as G.W. Bush had a debt of 86% when he left office. There, is that better? Is it a load off of you mind not to have to keep reminding me anymore about my incorrect statement? :thumbup:
> And of course the next president had to take over where Bush left off....As of right now....President Obama's debt % is 34. But to be fair, he has a few years left in office, so we can't make any conclusions as to how his debt term will end.


Nussa? Clinton's 37%, Bush's 86% and Obama's 34% *of what?* Do you have _any idea_ what the heck you are talking about? Obviously NOT.

Joey is correct, your statements are inaccurate.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Sorry but where have you been as Clinton did not eliminate the national debt!


She is completely lost.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

jelun2 said:


> Your pal used Snopes as a resource. I used her link to see that she was not honest enough to post all of the response they put up about the piece in question.
> Tell it to your overbright buddy.


Wrong again instigator. I despise Snopes, did NOT use as my resource and am honest _always._


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Nussa first found the website. Then KPG made some comments. then you copied it.


I noted that Snopes is a worthless site. WTH would I use it as a resource. The Libs are desperate and being stupid again.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

http://piratearian.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/snopes-is-not-an-authority-snopes-is-funded-by-george-soros/
SNOPES is NOT an authority. Snopes is funded by George Soros.
Posted on 15 September 2013 by The Piratearian

1 Vote

Snopes NO MORE The Self-proclaimed Debunker Of Urban Legend has been debunked

MARCH 2, 2013
Email This Page

Wowread this one! Then check out the suggested web sites!!!

Many of the emails that I have sent or forwarded that had any anti-Obama information in it were negated by Snopes. I thought that was odd. Check this out. For some time weve seen reports that Elaina Kagan was Obamas attorney fighting those pesky he isnt a citizen law suits. Lawsuits that Snopes says dont exist or at least that Kagan didnt represent Mr. Obama in those suits. Guess what  they lied! She did represent Obama.

Snopes, Soros and the Supreme Courts Kagan. Well now I guess the time has come to check out Snopes! Yall dont suppose it might not be a good time to take a second look at some of the stuff that got kicked in the ditch by Snopes, do ya?

Weve known that it was owned by a lefty couple but hadnt known it to be financed by Soros!

Snopes is heavily financed by George Soros, a big time supporter of Obama! In our search for the truth department, we find what I have suspected on many occasions. Read More

I went to Snopes to check something about the dockets of the new Supreme Court Justice. Elena Kagan, who Obama appointed, and Snopes said the email was false and there were no such dockets. So I Googled the Supreme Court, typed in Obama-Kagan, and guess what? Yep, you got it; Snopes lied! Every one of those dockets are there.

So, here is what I wrote to Snopes:

Referencing the article about Elana Kagan and Barak Obama dockets:

The information you have posted stating that there were no such cases as claimed and the examples you gave are blatantly false. I went directly to the Supreme Courts website, typed in Obama Kagan and immediately came up with all of the dockets that the article made reference to. I have long suspected that you really slant things but this was really shocking. Thank You. I hope you will be much more truthful in the future, but I doubt it.

That being said, Ill bet you didnt know this:

Kagan was representing Obama in ALL the petitions to prove his citizenship. Now she may help rule on them. Folks, this is really ugly. Chicago Politics and the beat goes on and on and on. Once again the US Senate sold us out!

Now we know why Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court. Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docket and search for Obama. She was the Solicitor General for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owed her big time. All of the requests were denied of course. They were never heard. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesnt it? The American people mean nothing any longer.

Its all about payback time for those who compromised themselves to elect someone who really has no true right to even be there.

Here are some websites of the Supreme Court Docket: You can look up some of these hearings and guess what? Elana Kagan is the attorney representing Obama!

Check out these examples:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-88


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I missed that one. Percent of what? A percent in itself means nothing.


You and I know that; she (Nussa) doesn't! 

What is it with Libs and #s or percentage anyway?

They simply cannot compute them . sigh.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

KPG.....you post from your sites, and I say they're wrong....I post from my sites, you say there wrong......So what? You can keep on looking and it can still be disputed with sites someone else finds.....
Who's the winner? There isn't one.....because this isn't an, I can find more info that you can game. What I said to Janeway, also applies to you, be a grown up.



knitpresentgifts said:


> Cocky? Nothing you said about my post is accurate. The info I posted was not as you described. I don't care from what website you posted your chart from, it was created by MoveOn.Org at Nancy Pelosi's request using her bogus #s. I didn't hide anything from you either, as I posted all that my source wrote - you didn't quote my source as usual. But call me anything you'd like since your opinion means nothing to me.
> 
> Why don't you use your head instead of proving that you cannot read a graph or perform simple percentage calculations?
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nussa said:


> This is what I found on our most recent presidents. If I'm nothing else, I'm open minded.
> 
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/nationaldebt.asp


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Signifying nothing.



knitpresentgifts said:


> Nussa,
> 
> Since you're so open-minded, try to consider the *facts:*
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Knitry said:


> Uhh, I think you're projecting. But no worry, it's what Republicans do. We are used to it. :mrgreen:


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> KPG.....you post from your sites, and I say they're wrong....I post from my sites, you say there wrong......So what? You can keep on looking and it can still be disputed with sites someone else finds.....
> Who's the winner? There isn't one.....because this isn't an, I can find more info that you can game. What I said to Janeway, also applies to you, be a grown up.


Let me say this slowly so you'll get it. 
I - did - not - post - from - a - site. 
I - used - my - own - words - and - calculations. Got it?

You cannot justify anything you posted nor explain what you read. You do not understand what the chart showed nor do you understand percentages and the national debt.

I never said the site you posted was wrong. I said you don't understand how the site you sourced fudged the numbers (Pelosi's) to their benefit by only showing 2 years of Obama's records/debt as compared to 4 or 8 year terms of all the other Presidents. An unfair or skewed comparison is meaningless and typical of Pelosi and Moveon. Numbers don't lie but you have to compare the same terms and make meaningful comparisons.

That is precisely why, I used the Treasury's facts and actual debt #s and no charts and written explanations of what the #s mean. I could chart or graph the #s but then you wouldn't believe them either so another waste of time.

Give up and grow up and take a math class or two or ten. Then, perhaps, we can have a legitimate discussion.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well, excuse me......I didn't know you worked at the White house and had access to their files......Or, did you make them up in you head......if not, they come from some where. Was it from the site I posted?

And here's what you don't get.....I know exactly what the site I used was......It was a site written by someone about the presidents statistics...I don't care what you came up with. That was the whole point....There are no credible sites....GET IT???

Let - me - say - this - slowly - 
Your - figures - mean - nothing, - you - are - the - least - credible- of - all - So - stop - wasting - my - time!!!!!!!!!



knitpresentgifts said:


> Let me say this slowly so you'll get it.
> I - did - not - post - from - a - site.
> I - used - my - own - words - and - calculations. Got it?
> 
> ...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> Well, excuse me......I didn't know you worked at the White house and had access to their files......Or, did you make them up in you head......if not, they come from some where. Was it from the site I posted?
> 
> And here's what you don't get.....I know exactly what the site I used was......It was a site written by someone about the presidents statistics...I don't care what you came up with. That was the whole point....There are no credible sites....GET IT???
> 
> ...


Tell me you are not this stupid. Did you not read the very graphs YOU posted? Did you not see that only a couple of years of Obama's numbers were compared to eight years of Reagan, Clinton, Bush, etc.?

Did you not read that I used the SAME #s that I retrieved from the Treasury's website - the actual #s which are precisely the same #s your source used. Only difference is I compared apples to apples, while your sources compared apples to elephants.

You are pretty thick not to comprehend the multiple posts where I've explained this to you in the simplest of terms.

Aren't you special to claim the sites you source and the Treasury of the United States does also not cite credible information.

I also asked you to explain your statement about the President's percentages and you cannot even explain your own comment. How stupid is that?

Why don't you go back to not communicating to me directly as you stated multiple times you would instead of wasting my precious time trying to explain anything to you, the illogical and unteachable.

If you want to play with the big gals, have a game and a brain.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

No you idiot.....I didn't.....How many times do I have to tell you that it was a way to show you that there is nothing posted on any political site that can be relied on. If I had known you were going to take it so seriously, I'd have found some cute little graph from Sesame street for you to fill in.....OMG!


knitpresentgifts said:


> Tell me you are not this stupid. Did you not read the very graphs YOU posted? Did you not see that only a couple of years of Obama's numbers were compared to eight years of Clinton, Bush, etc.?
> 
> Did you not read that I used the SAME #s that I retrieved from the Treasury's website - the actual #s which are precisely the same #s your source used. Only difference is I compared apples to apples, while your sources compared apples to elephants.
> 
> ...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> No you idiot.....I didn't.....How many times do I have to tell you that it was a way to show you that there is nothing posted on any political site that can be relied on. If I had known you were going to take it so seriously, I'd have found some cute little graph from Sesame street for you to fill in.....OMG!


No wonder you are not prosperous or well educated. Nice to know the Treasury Dept (the source we both cited) is a political site that cannot be relied upon.

You have proven repeatedly your ignorance and have resorted to the Liberal tactic of name calling and insulting since you cannot justify or confirm your assumptions. Good luck in life, you need it.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You are such a joke..... I'm sorry if your life is so miserable you have to find happiness in ridiculing others. I am not by any means ignorant, nor am I unsuccessful in life. You, I think might be a bit psychotic, and I'm beginning to think a bit of a stalker. I can think of no other reason you have chosen to take what I have posted to rant about. No matter how many times I try to explain to you what I meant by it, you just keep repeating the same rubbish..... 
Goodbye KPG.....you're starting to creep me out.... :thumbdown:



knitpresentgifts said:


> No wonder you are not prosperous or well educated. Nice to know the Treasury Dept (the source we both cited) is a political site that cannot be relied upon.
> 
> You have proven repeatedly your ignorance and have resorted to the Liberal tactic of name calling and insulting since you cannot justify or confirm your assumptions. Good luck in life, you need it.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Nussa said:


> You are such a joke..... I'm sorry if your life is so miserable you have to find happiness in ridiculing others. I am not by any means ignorant, nor am I unsuccessful in life. You, I think might be a bit psychotic, and I'm beginning to think a bit of a stalker. I can think of no other reason you have chosen to take what I have posted to rant about. No matter how many times I try to explain to you what I meant by it, you just keep repeating the same rubbish.....
> Goodbye KPG.....you're starting to creep me out.... :thumbdown:


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :!: :!: :!:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Hi Joeysomma,

Did you know that replying to someone who addresses you, often by name, repeatedly on a public website is considered stalking? I did not know that.

Further, I didn't know that the info on the Treasury Department's website is not credible nor to be considered valuable info as it is a political website.

Finally, did you know Obama's debt percentage is 34% whatever the heck that means but it will change since that President's term is not yet over?

I've learned so much from Nussa on this thread this evening. 

Did you?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Snopes is wrong 98% of the time so have not believed them as the husband & wife who started this site are Democrats so they are biased!


Back up this claim. Nevermind, I see the rest of your ravings.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

NJG said:


> As long as the right wing is not willing to accept minorities and refuses to pass an immigration bill they are going no where.


I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.

I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.

Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

lovethelake said:


> I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.
> 
> I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.
> 
> Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


Seems you misunderstand.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I would not bother with your personal calculations. I assume they will 'prove' what you wish them to 'prove.'



knitpresentgifts said:


> Let me say this slowly so you'll get it.
> I - did - not - post - from - a - site.
> I - used - my - own - words - and - calculations. Got it?
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I won't play your game.



knitpresentgifts said:


> Tell me you are not this stupid. Did you not read the very graphs YOU posted? Did you not see that only a couple of years of Obama's numbers were compared to eight years of Reagan, Clinton, Bush, etc.?
> 
> Did you not read that I used the SAME #s that I retrieved from the Treasury's website - the actual #s which are precisely the same #s your source used. Only difference is I compared apples to apples, while your sources compared apples to elephants.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nussa said:


> You are such a joke..... I'm sorry if your life is so miserable you have to find happiness in ridiculing others. I am not by any means ignorant, nor am I unsuccessful in life. You, I think might be a bit psychotic, and I'm beginning to think a bit of a stalker. I can think of no other reason you have chosen to take what I have posted to rant about. No matter how many times I try to explain to you what I meant by it, you just keep repeating the same rubbish.....
> Goodbye KPG.....you're starting to creep me out.... :thumbdown:


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

ute4kp said:


> Back up this claim. Nevermind, I see the rest of your ravings.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

lovethelake said:


> I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.
> 
> I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.
> 
> Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


 :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Obama is trying to stop children from receiving bone marrow transplants by regulation. Compensation for blood (then made into bone marrow) was determined legal in the courts. Now the Obama HSA is trying to stop this by side stepping the courts and do it through regulation.

You can email Sarah (?) Grant in charge of creating this regulation with Kathleen S.'s and Obama's blessing.

[email protected]

Subject memo: RIN 0906 AB02


1000 people die needlessly because they did not receive bone marrow transplants. This is another example of the Obamacare Death Panels........they decide who gets what and when.

Stop the Death Panels


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Hi Joeysomma,
> 
> Did you know that replying to someone who addresses you, often by name, repeatedly on a public website is considered stalking? I did not know that.
> 
> ...


You made it to easy you have to make it more difficult, you do know that don't you. Then they will understand Oh that's right you did. No wonder it is hard.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Doesn't pass the sniff test.



lovethelake said:


> Obama is trying to stop children from receiving bone marrow transplants by regulation. Compensation for blood (then made into bone marrow) was determined legal in the courts. Now the Obama HSA is trying to stop this by side stepping the courts and do it through regulation.
> 
> You can email Sarah (?) Grant in charge of creating this regulation with Kathleen S.'s and Obama's blessing.
> 
> ...


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> Doesn't pass the sniff test.


No, it doesn't. Blood donors give anonymously and may or may not receive a token fee--the logistics of bone marrow are such that it is rarely anonymous, and demand is driving the prices higher and higher: thousands of dollars, college scholarships etc etc. Where will it end?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.
> 
> I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.
> 
> Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


I agree with you LOL. That poster is a racist and LWN who can only see one (her) side of any argument.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Then a website that showed the comment was wrong. Then a website to try to prove that the first website was wrong but included information that proved the first website was right after all. Then downhill from there.
> 
> All of this for almost nothing. When the someone would not admit her original statement was inaccurate, when presented with proof.


Yes, and worse than that, she supposedly made her point again and again. What 'point' that was, even Nussa does not know!

Nor can she explain her 'point' or what Obama's 34% debt is?

Hello? :XD:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> Obama is trying to stop children from receiving bone marrow transplants by regulation. Compensation for blood (then made into bone marrow) was determined legal in the courts. Now the Obama HSA is trying to stop this by side stepping the courts and do it through regulation.
> 
> You can email Sarah (?) Grant in charge of creating this regulation with Kathleen S.'s and Obama's blessing.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: The stupidity and class redistribution never ends with Obama.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, it doesn't. Blood donors give anonymously and may or may not receive a token fee--the logistics of bone marrow are such that it is rarely anonymous, and demand is driving the prices higher and higher: thousands of dollars, college scholarships etc etc. Where will it end?


And I doubt that blood can be "(then made into bone marrow)"; if that were all it took, nobody would have to have those painful bone-marrow-donation procedures.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

theyarnlady said:


> You made it to easy you have to make it more difficult, you do know that don't you. Then they will understand Oh that's right you did. No wonder it is hard.


  Well, I do dumb it down for the Libs but apparently not enough for her to understand. I knew the insults were forthcoming as they are so predictable. Unfortunately, she still is in the dark and cannot do simple math or percentages, read a graph and thinks Obama is a light spender.

I'm obviously a stalker for answering her question. :-D What fun - as LTL often says, "More fun than a human being should be allowed to have!"


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

What gave you the impression you were human.....Not even close.......and not even smart enough to know when you've been played the fool...... But I guess that's what made you a fool......and a stalker..... And it goes on & on....... :roll:


knitpresentgifts said:


> Well, I do dumb it down for the Libs but apparently not enough for her to understand. I knew the insults were forthcoming as they are so predictable. Unfortunately, she still is in the dark and cannot do simple math or percentages, read a graph and thinks Obama is a light spender.
> 
> I'm obviously a stalker for answering her question. :-D What fun - as LTL often says, "More fun than a human being should be allowed to have!"


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Nussa said:


> No you idiot.....I didn't.....How many times do I have to tell you that it was a way to show you that there is nothing posted on any political site that can be relied on. If I had known you were going to take it so seriously, I'd have found some cute little graph from Sesame street for you to fill in.....OMG!


Nussa, why bother? You are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand what *she* is saying, let alone anybody else. This pretense of understanding economics would be funny if it weren't so boring.

And to tell you "No wonder you are not prosperous or well educated." A. Is this in your profile? and B. It seems to mix cause with effect - to defy logic.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

True.....She's obviously under some kind of mental stress as it is... :thumbup:


Poor Purl said:


> Nussa, why bother? You are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand what *she* is saying, let alone anybody else. This pretense of understanding economics would be funny if it weren't so boring.
> 
> And to tell you "No wonder you are not prosperous or well educated." A. Is this in your profile? and B. It seems to mix cause with effect - to defy logic.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

That's very interesting; thanks for pointing it out. Good thing scientists have been allowed to go back to stem cell research since Bush left office.


joeysomma said:


> There is a new method:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/bone-marrow/CA00047.html


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I agree with you LOL. That poster is a racist and LWN who can only see one (her) side of any argument.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> And I doubt that blood can be "(then made into bone marrow)"; if that were all it took, nobody would have to have those painful bone-marrow-donation procedures.


Right you are! Blood cannot be made into bone marrow - but stem cells can be taken from blood and injected to stimulate bone marrow production.

I think some people enjoy posting false info hoping to get a rise out others. There is no basis to the article that was posted.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> 1000 people die needlessly because they did not receive bone marrow transplants. This is another example of the Obamacare Death Panels


They die needlessly because they cannot find a marrow match. Maybe you would consider registering? I would but mine was damaged by chemo/radiation so I'm lucky to make any marrow.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

lovethelake said:


> I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.
> 
> I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.
> 
> Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


 And just how do you propose we secure our borders? Increased security will cost more than we are spending now. Are you ready to pay more in taxes to pay for the increased security of our borders?


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I doubt you read the article. I would think CNN is a fairly neutral source.
> 
> This was discussed on TV this morning as HHS wants to deny any kind of payment for the donor for this procedure. You are allowed payment for some types of blood, plasma, donations. HHS wants this called an organ donation.


I can understand why it would be considered an organ donation. The procedure is quite involved.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I doubt you read the article. I would think CNN is a fairly neutral source.
> 
> This was discussed on TV this morning as HHS wants to deny any kind of payment for the donor for this procedure. You are allowed payment for some types of blood, plasma, donations. HHS wants this called an organ donation.


There wasn't a link to the article about the HHS so no, I was unable to read it and didn't feel like searching for it.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I doubt you read the article. I would think CNN is a fairly neutral source.
> 
> This was discussed on TV this morning as HHS wants to deny any kind of payment for the donor for this procedure. You are allowed payment for some types of blood, plasma, donations. HHS wants this called an organ donation.


I've experienced the benefits of this procedure in my own family. Figures the Libs want to demean the help it can offer to so many and that this Admin wants to tax it or stop it.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Nussa said:


> True.....She's obviously under some kind of mental stress as it is... :thumbup:


Nooooo, that would be you.

You say something that you cannot even explain then blame others for pointing out your errors and illogical thoughts.

No one to blame but yourself for showing yourself to be a fool and not willing to learn from your mistakes.

It matters not to me.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I've experienced the benefits of this procedure in my own family. Figures the Libs want to demean the help it can offer to so many and that this Admin wants to tax it or stop it.


So Libs would not want their families to benefit from this procedure? It's the insurance companies that most likely want to tax it - it's quite expensive. The insurance companies don't say who can or cannot have the procedures - just which ones they will pay for.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

GWPlver said:


> So Libs would not want their families to benefit from this procedure? It's the insurance companies that most likely want to tax it - it's quite expensive. The insurance companies don't say who can or cannot have the procedures - just which ones they will pay for.


I didn't say Libs wouldn't want to benefit from the procedure; guess you didn't comprehend my words. I said this Admin (a Liberal one) wants to tax or stop it through regulation, just as LOL originally posted.

I gather you also don't understand the taxes and regulations Obama forced into the ACA and by the stroke of his magic pen.

The insurance companies have to follow the laws Obama and his cronies enforce. Not the ones on the books, just the ones Obama requires to be enforced.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Nussa, why bother? You are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand what *she* is saying, let alone anybody else. This pretense of understanding economics would be funny if it weren't so boring.


Economics! My God, Nussa cannot understand percentages and simple math or read a graph. Forget about economics. Now that is truly laughable! :XD:


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Nussa, why bother? You are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand what *she* is saying, let alone anybody else. This pretense of understanding economics would be funny if it weren't so boring.
> 
> And to tell you "No wonder you are not prosperous or well educated." A. Is this in your profile? and B. It seems to mix cause with effect - to defy logic.


Amen! No reason to respond to them anymore - they take things out of context.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> The link was only about the procedure. HHS decision is very current (today) news.


Okay - thanks - I will check it out.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

All right - I read the article. It deals with banning compensation for bone marrow donation. Apparently, in the past, people donating for altruistic reasons wasn't happening enough - which is quite sad actually. People don't receive compensation for donating blood but I digress.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

And in other news today:

"Pope Francis called for renewal of the Roman Catholic Church and attacked unfettered capitalism as "a new tyranny," urging global leaders to fight poverty and growing inequality in the first major work he has authored alone as pontiff.

The 84-page document, known as an apostolic exhortation, amounted to an official platform for his papacy, building on views he has aired in sermons and remarks since he became the first non-European pontiff in 1,300 years in March.

In it, Francis went further than previous comments criticizing the global economic system, attacking the "idolatry of money" and beseeching politicians to guarantee all citizens "dignified work, education and healthcare."

Go Pope Francis - and I'm not even Catholic.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

GWPlver said:


> And in other news today:
> 
> "Pope Francis called for renewal of the Roman Catholic Church and attacked unfettered capitalism as "a new tyranny," urging global leaders to fight poverty and growing inequality in the first major work he has authored alone as pontiff.
> 
> ...


A wonderful gesture of the season might be for him to free up some of those billions in assets the church holds and help, hmmmm, sexual abuse victims? 
Families who continue to have more children even when they cannot afford to because of constraints on birth control and abortion, would that be fitting?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I find that to be a racist statement that has no bases other than to enflame people.
> 
> I did not know that all illegal immigrants were minorities, I just thought they were illegally in our country. Not passing an Obamacultist bill is smart not racist.
> 
> Secure the borders, then talk about immigration reform.


Excuse me, but it was the republicans, after loosing the last presidential election said they needed to change how they reached out to minorities and they sure haven't done that. I didn't say anything about illegal immigrants. I said minorities as a general term to include all those people who are excluded from the republican party and tend to vote demacratic, and you knew exactly what I meant. You just have to twist things around to somehow slam me. Grow up. You sound like a child, throwing a tantrum. Your comment about "Obmacultist" makes you the racist, as usual. Why can't you comment on my statement as an adult so there could be a conversation. No, you have to be nasty and mean spirited.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> Doesn't pass the sniff test.


I agree. They always state things as they wish them to be instead of how they actually are, so I will just move on.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I agree with you LOL. That poster is a racist and LWN who can only see one (her) side of any argument.


There you go, talking about yourself again.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> And just how do you propose we secure our borders? Increased security will cost more than we are spending now. Are you ready to pay more in taxes to pay for the increased security of our borders?


No, they want to build the fence and then stand there and shoot them as they come over. Wonder who will pick the crops after the fence is built.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Don't worry about it KPG. It's okay that you didn't understand where I was going.... Please don't trouble your brain about it anymore...I'm afraid you'll have an aneurysm.... :thumbup:


knitpresentgifts said:


> Nooooo, that would be you.
> 
> You say something that you cannot even explain then blame others for pointing out your errors and illogical thoughts.
> 
> ...


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> As I stated prior, the Libs don't do math well at all! OMG, the stupidity ...


You are correct with your evaluation of the "lefties" on this thread.

All they ever say to me is telling me to leave or get off your oxygen cord & go to bed.

So here is a picture for the Lefties:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Don't worry about it KPG. It's okay that you didn't understand where I was going.... Please don't trouble your brain about it anymore...I'm afraid you'll have an aneurysm.... :thumbup:


What an ugly reply! Shame on you!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> No, they want to build the fence and then stand there and shoot them as they come over. Wonder who will pick the crops after the fence is built.


Get real as in my city the illegals do not work (some men do a little work for cash), They collect Welfare, get free or reduced rent, free hospitalization from all of the babies they are having, but of course they don't know the father! Then they get food stamps & some of the illegals were on TV saying their amount of food stamps had been reduced so they hit the food pantries. Th food pantries are wanting donations of any food items as they are at an all time low on food.

It has been on our news how Kroger has a large van where they pick up the illegals from the down Mexican council & take them to the Welfare office.

I won't ever purchase anything from Kroger again.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Janeway....Be a nice grown up and go away.....I have no interest in taking to you......Go and visit with one of your friends..... :thumbup:[/quote
> 
> You re the one who is acting childish so you be extra nice & go away..I don't care if you don't want to talk to me as that would make me happy!
> 
> Why don't you go to your site & "try" to carry on a conversation with them--not!


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Now you know that would never happen and you know President Obama would never sign it. What part of that is so hard for republicans to comprehend. He would never sign it. How many times did he say he would never sign it. Republicans just kept beating a dead horse to death. The senate amended the bill when it was sent to them and sent it back to the house. A lot of time and billions and billions of dollars could have been saved had the house just let it come to a vote one more time, but they changed the rules so no one else could bring it to the floor. Boehner and Cantor were scared.


Billions and billions of dollars could have been saved if Obama was not so insistent on not signing the bill. The funding/defunding argument over Obamacare could have been taken up at a later date. This way, the shutdown would never have happened and the government would have been funded, minus Obamacare. It would have saved Obama a lot of the current trouble he is in now as well. Obama could have utilized that time to enact the delay for the individual mandate and could have had the ability to stay ahead of what followed. But no, being spiteful and so against the Republicans brought on the current scenario.

To add more "mature" behavior to Harry Reid's card, he had the Nuclear Option passed as retaliation for the shutdown. Doing this after he said in 2008 that passing the Nuclear Option would destroy the country.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> What world are you living in. The economy tanked in 07. Last time I checked Bush was president then. The people who lost their homes were the fault of Bush's so called leadership.


No, the people who lost their homes lost them because of the legislation Clinton signed into law. Not to mention that they should have known there was no way they could have afforded those homes to begin with.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> He is twice as qualified as Bush ever was. In fact Bush didn't really run things. Cheney was more in control than Bush actually was. Bush was Cheneys yes man.. Bush asked Cheney to help him pick a running mate and he picked himself, bless his heart.


Obama is Valerie Jarrett's yes man and that makes him unqualified to run this country.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

When you receive Saint of the year, then you can talk to me....
Leave me alone!!!!


Janeway said:


> What an ugly reply! Shame on you!


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Nussa said:


> What gave you the impression you were human.....Not even close.......and not even smart enough to know when you've been played the fool...... But I guess that's what made you a fool......and a stalker..... And it goes on & on....... :roll:


Now is the time for you to go away and grow up. Take your own advice.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

If you have no interest in talking to me....why do you keep commenting on what I say??? Can't stay away can you? It's like you're Obsessed with me....I wouldn't call that stable in any way......Again...Just don't talk to me or comment about me, and we needn't have anything to do with each other again.....I will make it a challenge....bet you stay away.... 


Janeway said:


> Nussa said:
> 
> 
> > Janeway....Be a nice grown up and go away.....I have no interest in taking to you......Go and visit with one of your friends..... :thumbup:[/quote
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I'm not the one who's continuing the conversations.....you and your friends are....Did you notice how I called them your friends, not cronies, or cohorts or any of the other names that have been used on others here who don't agree with you? That's the grown up thing to do..... :thumbup:


soloweygirl said:


> Now is the time for you to go away and grow up. Take your own advice.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> No, they want to build the fence and then stand there and shoot them as they come over. Wonder who will pick the crops after the fence is built.


There are millions of Americans currently out of work.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Nussa said:
 

> I'm not the one who's continuing the conversations.....you and your friends are....Did you notice how I called them your friends, not cronies, or cohorts or any of the other names that have been used on others here who don't agree with you? That's the grown up thing to do..... :thumbup:


FYI, by continuing to post you are continuing the conversation. That does not make you a grown up.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Get real as in my city the illegals do not work (some men do a little work for cash), They collect Welfare, get free or reduced rent, free hospitalization from all of the babies they are having, but of course they don't know the father! Then they get food stamps & some of the illegals were on TV saying their amount of food stamps had been reduced so they hit the food pantries. Th food pantries are wanting donations of any food items as they are at an all time low on food.
> 
> It has been on our news how Kroger has a large van where they pick up the illegals from the down Mexican council & take them to the Welfare office.
> 
> I won't ever purchase anything from Kroger again.


Myths and facts about immigration to the United States. This is why immigration reform is necessary. As far as your Kroeger story, I found nothing so I consider it a believe it or not. I did find an article about a welfare housing project in Tacoma that people said was built for immigrants and welfare recipients, the same old story about they were getting everything free. Two people supposedly from some newspaper drove around through the neighborhood talking about all the free stuff being given away. There was supposedly a lot of Chinese and Korean people living there. But it was all false, all lies. Why, who benefits from this kind of crap. The only thing I can figure out is, Obama haters, will do anything to destroy him. Sure hope we all don't go down because of it.

Most of the complaints made by anti-immigration activists regarding the status of illegal immigrants from Mexico to the United States are based on exaggeration, misconception, myths and outright lies. As with most things, many of the complaints are real for a very small number of illegal immigrants, but by and large, they do not apply to most of the illegal immigration into this country.

Further, those who oppose illegal immigration tend to focus their rhetoric on emotional issues, such as claims that illegal immigrants are "taking our jobs" and "threatening our security;" but the evidence they provide in favor of these claims is very scanty, and they only seem to have one "solution" of the problem, viz., "kick the ******** out," which if there were no other objections to it would cause major damage to the U.S. economy.

The myths
[edit] Illegal immigrants dont pay taxes

All immigrants pay taxes whether they are illegal or not. They pay them in the form of property tax - directly if they own a home, or indirectly if they rent; sales tax on all the goods they buy, and income tax at Federal, State and local level.
Since illegal immigrants often have fake or stolen documents, including fake and stolen Social Security numbers, the money they pay into the system is money that will never be withdrawn. The amount in question is evidenced by the Social Security Administrations suspense file (taxes that cannot be matched to workers names and Social Security numbers), which grew $20 billion between 1990 and 1998.[1][2]
Still, the true owners of the Social Security numbers are often targeted by the IRS for failure to pay taxes, resulting in real victimization of legal residents.[3]

[edit] Legal immigrants come here to get "welfare"

Immigrants come to work and to reunite with family members.
Immigrant labor-force participation is consistently higher than native-born, and immigrant workers make up a larger share of the U.S. labor force (12.4%) than they do the U.S. population (11.5%). Moreover, the ratio between immigrant use of public benefits and the amount of taxes they pay is consistently favorable to the U.S., unless the study was undertaken by an anti-immigrant group. In one estimate, immigrants earn about $240 billion a year, pay about $90 billion a year in taxes, and use about $5 billion in public benefits. In another cut of the data, immigrant tax payments total $20 to $30 billion more than the amount of government services they use.[4]
Since the welfare reform of 1996, when limits were implemented cutting off benefits to two years consecutively or five years cumulatively, this is a bogus accusation.
To immigrate into the US, you must have a sponsor (generally the family member, such as the spouse, bringing you into the country) who will testify that he or she has enough money to support you, if you are unable to support yourself, or if you lose your job. This agreement means that within the first 5 years of living in the US, you cannot take welfare. Your family member will be assessed a penalty if you demand it.

[edit] Immigrants send all their money back to their home countries

In addition to the consumer spending of immigrant households, immigrants and their businesses contribute $162 billion in tax revenue to U.S. federal, state, and local governments. While it is true that immigrants remit billions of dollars a year to their home countries, this is one of the most targeted and effective forms of direct foreign investment.[5]
Also, if you are going to complain that immigrants send money back to their home countries, you have to also raise a stink that very often, the rich offshore their money in foreign banks.

[edit] Immigrants take jobs and opportunity away from Americans

The largest wave of immigration to the U.S. since the early 1900s coincided with the lowest national unemployment rate and fastest economic growth. Immigrant entrepreneurs create jobs for U.S. and foreign workers, and foreign-born students allow many U.S. graduate programs to keep their doors open. While there has been no comprehensive study done of immigrant-owned businesses, we have countless examples: in Silicon Valley, companies begun by Chinese and Indian immigrants generated more than $19.5 billion in sales and nearly 73,000 jobs in 2000.[6]
Illegal immigrants, as well as legal immigrants with little job skills or language skills often take the work seen by most Americans as "beneath them." Janitorial services, crop pickers and garbage collectors need workers, and they do not find them from high-school-educated, English-speaking citizens. As a demonstration of this fact, in Georgia, a 2011 crackdown on illegal immigrants caused many to be deported and more to flee the state. This caused a shortage of labor on the state's farms, indicating that illegal immigrants in that state do not compete very much with Americans for jobs.

[edit] Immigrants are a drain on the U.S. economy

During the 1990s, half of all new workers were foreign-born, filling gaps left by native-born workers in both the high- and low-skill ends of the spectrum.

Immigrants fill jobs in key sectors, start their own businesses, and contribute to a thriving economy. The net benefit of immigration to the U.S. is nearly $10 billion annually. As Alan Greenspan points out, 70% of immigrants arrive in prime working age.[7]

Due to welfare reform, legal immigrants are severely restricted from accessing public benefits, and illegal immigrants are even further precluded from anything other than emergency services. Anti-immigrant groups skew these figures by including programs used by U.S. citizen children of immigrants in their definition of immigrant welfare use, among other tactics. transplanted into our workforce and will contribute $500 billion toward our social security system over the next 20 years.

[edit] Immigrants dont want to learn English or become Americans

Within ten years of arrival, more than 75% of immigrants speak English well; moreover, demand for English classes at the adult level far exceeds supply. Greater than 33% of immigrants are naturalized citizens; given increased immigration in the 1990s, this figure will rise as more legal permanent residents become eligible for naturalization in the coming years. The number of immigrants naturalizing spiked sharply after two events: enactment of immigration and welfare reform laws in 1996, and the terrorist attacks in 2001.[8]

[edit] Todays immigrants are different than those of 100 years ago
NYT ad 1854 including "No Irish Need Apply"

In the sense that they are coming to America from different parts of the world that is true. However, the percentage of the U.S. population that is foreign-born now stands at 11.5%; in the early 20th century it was approximately 15%. Similar to accusations about todays immigrants, those of 100 years ago initially often settled in mono-ethnic neighborhoods, spoke their native languages, and built up newspapers and businesses that catered to their fellow émigrés. They also experienced the same types of discrimination that todays immigrants face, and integrated within American culture at a similar rate. If we view history objectively, we remember that every new wave of immigrants has been met with suspicion and doubt and yet, ultimately, every past wave of immigrants has been vindicated and saluted.[9]

[edit] Most immigrants cross the border illegally

Around 75% have legal permanent (immigrant) visas; of the 25% that are here illegally, 40% overstayed temporary (nonimmigrant) visas.[10]
Prior to modern immigration laws, and even prior to the existence of the United States, Europeans came to the continent without any paperwork whatsoever.

[edit] Weak U.S. border enforcement has led to high levels of illegal immigration

From 1986 to 1998, the Border Patrols budget increased sixfold and the number of agents stationed on our southwest border doubled to 8,500. The Border Patrol also toughened its enforcement strategy, heavily fortifying typical urban entry points and pushing migrants into dangerous desert areas, in hopes of deterring crossings. Instead, the illegal immigrant population doubled in that period, to 8 million - despite the legalization of nearly 3 million immigrants after the enactment of the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986. Insufficient legal avenues for immigrants to enter the U.S., compared with the number of jobs available to them, have created this current conundrum.[11]

[edit] The war on terrorism can be won through immigration restrictions

No security expert since September 11, 2001 has said that restrictive immigration measures would have prevented the terrorist attacksinstead, the key is good use of good intelligence. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were here on legal tourist or student visas (but some did overstay on those). Since 9/11, the myriad of measures targeting immigrants in the name of national security have netted no terrorism prosecutions. In fact, several of these measures could have the opposite effect and actually make us less safe, as targeted communities of immigrants are afraid to come forward with information.[12]

[edit] Illegal immigrants are the source of many communicable diseases

Anti-immigrant advocates including Lou Dobbs have claimed that Mexican border-crossers are the source of a rampant increase in leprosy. CDC and Department for Health and Human Services statistics do not bear this myth out.[13]

[edit] Illegal immigrants cause crime

Whilst a common cry of the anti immigration brigade - and the font of endless anecdotal "evidence" - the facts[14][15] don't support this.

[edit] The government is not enforcing existing immigration laws

By September 2011, Barack Obama has exceeded the number of removals from the United States during the entire Bush Administration.[16] Simply put, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for the government to round up and deport every illegal immigrant. The agency responsible for doing so, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has limited resources (finances, officers, jail spaces etc.) and must prioritize how they are spent (as well as figuring out how to spend resources on enforcing US Customs laws).[17] Simply put, a migrant farm laborer's family probably is not as high on ICE's priority list for deportation as as a major drug trafficker might be. Furthermore, aliens involved in deportation proceedings are entitled to due process regardless of their status in the United States.[18]

[edit] Problems that arise when blanket deportation is attempted

It's fair to assume that industries that are largely dependent on the hard work of illegal immigrants would collapse, or at least suffer a major setback.
The cost of the program would be massive; law enforcement would need a huge amount of extra resources and manpower to put deportation into practice, and the courts (y'know, due process and all that) would also have a shortage of money and labor.
Many children of immigrants are natural-born US citizens. Hence, blanket deportation of illegal immigrants would necessarily entail expelling many US citizens as well.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Read this!

The Next ObamaCare Mirage

The new line is that the health-care law will save money. That's also not true.

By 
Thomas Miller And 

Abby McCloskey 


Nov. 25, 2013 6:58 p.m. ET

Supporters of President Obama are working overtime to backtrack from his promise that "If you like your health-care insurance, you can keep it. Period." While the president has conceded that this statement was inaccurate, the administration doesn't seem to have learned its lesson. The damage control plan is to spread another falsehood about the Affordable Care Act.

The claim this time is that the health-care "cost curve is bending, and the ACA is a significant part of the reason." That was what David Cutler an influential Harvard economist and senior health-care adviser in Mr. Obama's 2008 presidential campaignwrote in a Washington Post WPO +0.44% op-ed on Nov. 10.

The president jumped on this theme in his press conference on Nov. 14. "I'm not going to walk away from something that has helped the cost of health care grow at its slowest rate in 50 years," he said. On Wednesday, the White House Council of Economic Advisers published a report claiming that "the ACA is contributing to the recent slow growth in health care prices and spending."

These assertions border on nonsense. 

National spending on health care is projected to reach a record $2.9 trillion in 2013, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This is more than 25% above pre-recession spending levels in 2007. Health-care expenditures per capita and as a percentage of GDP are also at record highs, expected to top out this year at $9,216 and 18% respectively. 

The only apparent bright spot is that the average annual rate of health-care spending increases has slowed. Over the past three years, growth in health-care spending averaged 3.9% year-over-year, considerably slower than the historical average. 

However, annual health-spending growth rates began to decline a decade ago. In 2002, health-care spending grew by nearly 10% in a single year. The growth rate dropped to 7.1% in 2004, 6.2% in 2007, and bottomed out at 3.9% in 2009the worst year of the Great Recession, where it has stayed ever since. ObamaCare was enacted in 2010.

CMS and the Congressional Budget Office attribute the general slowdown in health-care spending increases over the past decade to a variety of factors, including increased cost sharing in private health plans and a slower rate of introduction of new health technology. An Urban Institute analysis points to how the mix of health-care payers has shifted over the past decade toward lower-paying government programs providing a greater share of coverage (particularly Medicaid). 

Still, the recession is recognized by objective analysts as the single largest driver of slowed health-care spending in recent years. Many who lost their jobs lost their health insurance. Tight on cash, they opted out of surgery, hospital visits and prescriptions. 

Changes in health-spending growth rates traditionally lag about two years behind changes in national economic growth. In September 2013, CMS reported that the depth and severity of the recession was more substantial than expected and revised its spending estimates downward accordingly. 

In other words, champions of ObamaCare have little to crow about, once one recognizes that the persistently weak economic recovery has overlapped with the law.

And in the future? According to health-care actuaries at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, health-care spending will begin spiraling upward again starting next year, as the Affordable Care Act takes full effect. It will reach $5 trillion in 2022, or 20% of GDP, or $14,664 per capita. By 2022, ObamaCare alone is projected to increase cumulative health spending by roughly $621 billion, according to CMS.

In his 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama promised that his health-care reform plan would save a typical family $2,500 in annual premiums by the end of his first term. This was Mr. Cutler's prediction, and it was based on projected rapid returns from larger federal investments in health-information technology, new reinsurance subsidies for high-cost workers, and savings on administrative costs for health insurance. 

Those cost savings haven't materialized. Mr. Cutler maintains they will, mostly through other untested reforms, and the White House Council of Economic Advisers report points to potential savings from fledgling Accountable Care Organizations, lower Medicare reimbursements, value-based payments and hospital readmission penalties. To be sure, some of these programs have and may result in small savings, but they had little effect on savings claimed from 2010 to 2013. For example, even the president's Council of Economic Advisers hedges that some of the claimed savings from reduced hospital readmission rates "may not be entirely attributable to the ACA payment incentives." 

CMS actuaries find that any positive effects of the ObamaCare delivery system experiments on the cost of health care "remain highly speculative." When they compare their September 2013 projections with earlier estimates in April 2010, these actuaries find that the law would increase national health spending higher than previously expected by an additional $27 billion in 2019 alone.

To argue that the Affordable Care Act has been and will be a key driver of slower health-care spending is irreconcilable with the most basic facts about such spending over the last decade, as well as with the judgment of the executive branch's own team of actuaries responsible for health-care accounting and future projections. 

Mr. Miller is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former senior health economist on the Joint Economic Committee. Ms. McCloskey is program director of economic policy at the American Enterprise Institute.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> There are millions of Americans currently out of work.


And will those millions work in the fields?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Billions and billions of dollars could have been saved if Obama was not so insistent on not signing the bill. The funding/defunding argument over Obamacare could have been taken up at a later date. This way, the shutdown would never have happened and the government would have been funded, minus Obamacare. It would have saved Obama a lot of the current trouble he is in now as well. Obama could have utilized that time to enact the delay for the individual mandate and could have had the ability to stay ahead of what followed. But no, being spiteful and so against the Republicans brought on the current scenario.
> 
> To add more "mature" behavior to Harry Reid's card, he had the Nuclear Option passed as retaliation for the shutdown. Doing this after he said in 2008 that passing the Nuclear Option would destroy the country.


What are you talking about, taken up at a later date! Boehner would NEVER have let it come to the floor. The republicans are the ones being spiteful. They shut down the government because they didn't want healthcare reform, the same reform that they use to be in favor of. Harry tried many times to settle things without the nuclear option, but each time after a short while, the republicans would go back on their word and do the same old stuff. A president should be able to make appointments and get them confirmed. Besides you think it is wrong for Harry Reid to stand up for Democrats, but Boehner changed the rules in the house so no one else could bring up the bill other than himself or Cantor. Do you think that was ok?


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Obama is trying to stop children from receiving bone marrow transplants by regulation. Compensation for blood (then made into bone marrow) was determined legal in the courts. Now the Obama HSA is trying to stop this by side stepping the courts and do it through regulation.
> 
> You can email Sarah (?) Grant in charge of creating this regulation with Kathleen S.'s and Obama's blessing.
> 
> ...


How 'bout some links and sources for claims like this? I did a quick Google search and found nothing. Sooooo, cough it up, please.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I wanted to share this with my friends on KP. It is so wonderful...

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/national/danny-6-year-old-teased-band-of-elementary-schoolmates-rally-around-boy-to-stop-teasing


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> And just how do you propose we secure our borders? Increased security will cost more than we are spending now. Are you ready to pay more in taxes to pay for the increased security of our borders?


Not only that, but our immingration from the "troublesome" border, the one on the south that lets Brown people in, is now at a NEGATIVE RATE. People are emigrating back to Mexico instead of coming here.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I doubt you read the article. I would think CNN is a fairly neutral source.
> 
> This was discussed on TV this morning as HHS wants to deny any kind of payment for the donor for this procedure. You are allowed payment for some types of blood, plasma, donations. HHS wants this called an organ donation.


NOW it makes sense, and I understand it perfectly.

We as a nation do NOT want to get into a position where it's lucrative to sell our own organs (or the organs taken away from us) -- and while blood isn't an organ, if it's a bigger deal than mere Blood Drive, then the donor shouldn't "profit" from it.

I've seen videos where impoverished and desperate people -- not in this country, thankfully -- were offering one of their kidneys on the black market, and it's not pretty at all. It's barbaric.


----------



## Janet Cooke (Aug 14, 2013)

NJG said:


> And will those millions work in the fields?


Or as domestics or dishwashers in restaurants... or getting carted from state to state as construction workers and then not being paid. People leave their homes because they are desperate, just as we would. 
They are human just as most of us are. They are doing the best they can.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Get real as in my city the illegals do not work (some men do a little work for cash), They collect Welfare, get free or reduced rent, free hospitalization from all of the babies they are having, but of course they don't know the father! Then they get food stamps & some of the illegals were on TV saying their amount of food stamps had been reduced so they hit the food pantries. Th food pantries are wanting donations of any food items as they are at an all time low on food.
> 
> It has been on our news how Kroger has a large van where they pick up the illegals from the down Mexican council & take them to the Welfare office.
> 
> I won't ever purchase anything from Kroger again.


That's not TOO racist a rant, no. Not at all.

:sarcasm:


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Obama is Valerie Jarrett's yes man and that makes him unqualified to run this country.


Oh, is Valerie Jarrett your new boogeyman?

How funny. And paranoid as all get out. What rightwing nut dreamed that up??


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

damemary said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


 :twisted: :twisted: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Myths and facts about immigration to the United States.
> 
> snip


NJG -- do you have a link for that awesome info in immigrants? Please?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> There is a new method:
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/bone-marrow/CA00047.html


Interesting strides with stem cells.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> And will those millions work in the fields?


http://insideman.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/11/morgan-spurlock-struggles-to-meet-orange-tub-quota/

I recently watched a program. They do a lot of work for low wages. It was Morgan Spurlock's show about migrant farmers.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I wanted to share this with my friends on KP. It is so wonderful...
> 
> http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/national/danny-6-year-old-teased-band-of-elementary-schoolmates-rally-around-boy-to-stop-teasing


That was awesome.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Knitry said:


> NJG -- do you have a link for that awesome info in immigrants? Please?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Myths_and_facts_about_immigration_to_the_United_States


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Nussa said:


> True.....She's obviously under some kind of mental stress as it is... :thumbup:


That's for sure. And Janeway thinks that when I criticize her I'm making racist remarks about Native Americans. I have never done anything like that in my entire life, let alone here on KP. Janie just doesn't understand that she can be criticized in a very pointed way that entirely leaves out anything about her heritage. I do not understand that at all, but will probably be reported to Admin for what I've just said.

Let me add, I probably know more about American history from 1740-1840 than she does. Oh, and what Janie doesn't mention is that the greatest cause of the death among NAs on the East Coast of the US was caused by the germs Europeans brought with them that the NAs had no resistance to.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> If they would not get food stamps, Medicaid, housing, obamaphones, etc. for sitting home and doing nothing, They will work in the fields. They will work if they want to eat. It is the government's fault for making so many lazy do-nothing people.
> 
> I have done my share of physical work when I was younger. I was happy to be making some money.[/quote
> 
> Its a Reaganphone.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Eric Cantor & GOP Leaders Plot to Sabotage US Economy is Secret Meeting.

FACT 1. In Robert Draper's book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives" Draper wrote that on inauguration night, 2009, during a four hour, "invitation only" meeting with GOP Hate-Propaganda Minister, Frank Luntz, the below listed Senior GOP Law Writers literally plotted to sabotage, undermine and destroy America's Economy.

FACT 2: Draper wrote the guest list included:

The Guest List:

Frank Luntz - GOP Minister of Propaganda
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R).

Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich - Failed GOP candidate for President

I'd like to know:
1) Why are media outlets continuing to interview these GOP Leaders who literally plotted, in secret, to undermine the United States?
2) Why are no media outlets demanding each one of these GOP leaders explain their involvement of plotting to undermine the US Economy?

FACT 3: Newt Gingrich confirms meeting took place in an interview with Al Sharpton's Politics Nation on June 12, 2012

NEWT: The first is, it was an important meeting and I was glad and honored to be part of it ... I said to Callista when we left the wall -- because we were at the Capitol for the inaugural. As we left, I said, you know, if he sticks to the kind of moderation and bipartisanship he`s been describing, he will split the Republican Party. He`ll govern like Eisenhower and he`ll get reelected. Now this is -- this is the inaugural day.

FACT 4: Two months after Paul Ryan's covert meeting where they plotted to sabotage the US Economy, in March 2009, Rep. Pete Sessions said Republicans should follow the model of the Taliban in its battles against President Obama.

"Taliban Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban. Insurgency is the way they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- is an example of how you go about to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that Insurgency may be required when [dealing with] the other side"

~Rep Pete Sessions, March 2009 to National Journal

Rep Pete Sessions went on to say:

"If they [democrats] do not give us those options or opportunities then we will then become Insurgency ... I think Insurgency is a mindset and an attitude that we're going to have to search for and find ways to get our message out and to be prepared to see things for what they are, rather than trying to do something about them"

FACT 5: Also, at the January 20, 2009 meeting they plotted to suddenly stop supporting any Stimulus Legislation, even though, they all supported Bush/Cheney Stimulus legislation.

At the meeting, Rep Kevin McCarthy said,
"We've gotta challenge them on every single bill."

"Show united and unyielding opposition to the presidents economic policies."

FACT 6: Remember, these same Republican members of Congress supported the very Bush/Cheney policies that caused America to teeter on the brink of the 2nd Great Depression and caused the 2007 US Economic Meltdown.

Here's how they all voted:
-- "Yes" to Bush/Cheney January 2008 Stimulus
-- "Yes" to Bush/Cheney bailing out Bear Stern
-- "Yes" to Bush/Cheney bailing out AIG
-- "Yes" to Bush/Cheney TARP (sept 2008)
-- "Yes" to Bush/Cheney TARP (oct 2008)

And these same Republican members of Congress:

Supported Bush/Cheney keeping cost of two wars out of the Budget.

Supported Bush/Cheney spending $4Trillion while giving Top 1% Tax Cuts; ignoring the fact that taxes pay for wars.

Not only did these Senior members of Congress plot to destroy the American Economy more than it already was destroyed? They actually carried out their mission:

Every one of these Senior members of Congress have threatened Government Shutdown over things like:

- Funding planned parenthood,

- Raising the Debt Ceiling which, in-and-of-itself, would cause US Economic turmoil.

FACT 7: During the Debt Ceiling negotiations, Eric Cantor and Sen. Jon Kyl abruptly walked out of negotiations and refused to renew discussions with Democrats. As a result, America's credit rating was lowered which put a smile on Republican's faces.

FACT 8: Meanwhile, the 2009 Sabotage the U.S. Economy covert meeting members, Senators: Jim DeMint, Jon Kyl, Tom Coburn, John Ensign, and Bob Corker have:

- Filibustered more Bills (over 300) than any Congress combined in US History. 
- Voted NO on every single piece of Legislation brought to the Floor including:
NO on Al Franken's Anti-Rape Amendment,
NO on Lilly Ledbetter,
NO on Fair Pay Act,
NO on Anti-Outsourcing Bill (2010)

FACT 9: The House members who attended the 2009 Sabotage America meeting have been busy rejecting legislation that helps victims of natural disaster.

Representatives: Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, Rep. Pete Sessions, Jeb Hensarling, Pete Hoekstra and Dan Lungren have voted NO on every single piece of Legislation including:

NO on increasing FEMA during natural disasters.
FACT 10: Paul Ryan and these other same failed Congressmen have been on tv constantly chanting the lie that they were guilty of ... the lie that "President Obama's policies undermine the US Economy."

FACT 11: Other Legislation used to sabotage US Economy

Paul Ryan and the Republicans in Congress refused to negotiate or even discuss passing President Obama's American Jobs Act that independent economists claim would create 1.3 million new jobs.
Gawd forbid Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan or Kevin McCarthy support an actual Bill that would put people to work building needed infrastructure and provide funds to pay to rehire hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public service workers that have been laid off in droves by cash-starved states.

FACT 12: Paul Ryan and Republicans blocked President Obama's 2012 Anti-Outsourcing Bill - which is a Bill to discourage the outsourcing of American jobs. Naturally, journalists in India celebrated GOP efforts to undermine American Workers.

FACT 13: The Washington Post reported that Republicans have made it clear that the Federal Reserve would face fierce Republican criticism if it takes further actions to stimulate the economy before the election. The Washington Post wrote that,

Republicans... have expressed deep concern about measures taken by the Fed to support the economy -- and could be doubly upset if new efforts goose the stock market and are perceived to work in favor of President Obama's re-election.

Bottom Line: The media has failed ... completely failed ... to acknowledge and report that on January 20, 2009, before President Obama ever took a seat behind the desk of the Oval Office, Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy & other GOP Leaders literally plotted to sabotage the U.S Economy by obstructing 'the People's' work.

The People should be told the facts about that 4 hour covert meeting so the next time they know the GOP motives when they hear the GOP leaders bitch & moan & spew their BS propaganda -- talking points.

On January 20, 2009, House GOP Leaders & GOP Senators became Traitors against America. It will truly be a god-damn shame if voters are not told of what GOP Leaders did at that 4 hour covert meeting on January 20, 2009. All voters should see the depth the GOP will go in order to screw the American workers and f'ck over America in general.

P.S. In considering whether or not these GOP leaders who plotted to undermine America were "Traitors" I looked up the definition and decided -- yes -- in my view the GOP Leaders who met in a secret meeting to plot to undermine the United States are Traitors whose subversive actions were plotted to intentionally weaken the power of the United States.

Under Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Reaganphones were land lines.


OMG, were cell phones available then????


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I wanted to share this with my friends on KP. It is so wonderful...
> 
> http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/national/danny-6-year-old-teased-band-of-elementary-schoolmates-rally-around-boy-to-stop-teasing


I had seen that on Fox for the past few days. The little guy was suppose to be on the show today, but got stuck in traffic and should be on tomorrow.

I was so moved by the little man that was sobbing over helping his friend and saying they were a band of brothers. WOW their parents must be so proud of their courage and determination


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Knitry said:


> How 'bout some links and sources for claims like this? I did a quick Google search and found nothing. Sooooo, cough it up, please.


Cough it up? Tacky and shows a lack of doing your own research. Check out Fox, they make it easy for you

Hope Obamacare covers your cough


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Cough it up? Tacky and shows a lack of doing your own research. Check out Fox, they make it easy for you
> 
> Hope Obamacare covers your cough


Felt pity for you, so I did your research for you

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2868537393001/mother-fights-government-over-bone-marrow-ban/


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> Reaganphones were land lines.


Reagan started the cell phone program.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> If you have no interest in talking to me....why do you keep commenting on what I say??? Can't stay away can you? It's like you're Obsessed with me....I wouldn't call that stable in any way......Again...Just don't talk to me or comment about me, and we needn't have anything to do with each other again.....I will make it a challenge....bet you stay away....


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

This is great!


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

> *The good Obamacare news bubbles up*
> 
> Last summer Ellen Holzman and Meredith Vezina, a married gay couple in San Diego County, got kicked off their long-term Kaiser health plan, for which they'd been paying more than $1,300 a month. The cause wasn't the Affordable Care Act, as far as they knew. They'd been living outside Kaiser's service area, and the health plan had decided to tighten its rules. <...> Through Covered California, the state's individual insurance marketplace, they've found a plan through Sharp Healthcare that will cover them both for a total premium of $142 a month, after a government subsidy based on their income. They'll have a higher deductible than Kaiser's but lower co-pays. But their possible savings will be impressive. <...>
> 
> ...


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Reaganphones were land lines.


But cell phones mean that people will get any call for an interview for jobs they've applied for. If they don't need to sit home, that means they can be out applying for more jobs while they with the call.


----------



## medusa (Nov 20, 2012)

GWPlver said:


> And in other news today:
> 
> "Pope Francis called for renewal of the Roman Catholic Church and attacked unfettered capitalism as "a new tyranny," urging global leaders to fight poverty and growing inequality in the first major work he has authored alone as pontiff.
> 
> ...


Nor am I, but I admire him greatly! Thanks for posting this. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Kathleen Sebelius continues to want her Death Panels by regulation and circumventing the courts. She is personally going after Doreen Gummoe's court victory by changing the wording in HHS regulations. She wants to consider blood an organ, so people can't get compensated for donating blood to be made into bone marrow so that it can be transplanted to save a life. 

So she despise people willing to spend days donating blood to save a life in addition to children needing a lung transplant with Cystic Fibrosis. 

Death Panels are with us now. Where is the outrage?


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

medusa said:


> Nor am I, but I admire him greatly! Thanks for posting this. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


The Pope is a gift from God. Too bad Obama does not admire him. The US Embassy is to be closed in Vatican City to save 1.4 million dollars a year. Vatican City is a sovereign country, so removing the embassy is a slap in that country's face. But the billions given to bankrupt 'green companies' is more important than respecting Vatican City. This is another attack by Obama on Catholics. He is angry that the Church is fighting HSS and this is a way for him to get even. So spiteful


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Kathleen Sebelius continues to want her Death Panels by regulation and circumventing the courts. She is personally going after Doreen Gummoe's court victory by changing the wording in HHS regulations. She wants to consider blood an organ, so people can't get compensated for donating blood to be made into bone marrow so that it can be transplanted to save a life.
> 
> So she despise people willing to spend days donating blood to save a life in addition to children needing a lung transplant with Cystic Fibrosis.
> 
> Death Panels are with us now. Where is the outrage?


http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2013/11/25/federal-regulation-could-re-define-the-word-organ-jeopardize-bone-marrow-donations/2/

Why can a man sell his sperm or a woman sell her eggs, but a person can not receive $3,000 for donating blood to help with housing or donating the money to a charity of their choice? So one could conclude that cutting a woman open and getting money to harvest her eggs is less invasive that donating blood? So one could conclude that harvesting a woman's eggs is less invasive than a vaginal ultrasound.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> They do receive payment for plasma. Part of the blood.


That is true Joey. I have a friend who donates plasma but I don't know how much they actually receive.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I do not know who started it, but it was for a land line for people who could not afford one. There were no cell phones when Reagan was President. The first portable phones were car phones, or bag phones. I bought a bag phone for my daughter when she started College in 1995. since she had to drive 30 miles one way to attend college. The bag phones used the cigarette lighter for power. I first purchased a cell phone in 1998.


And do you remember how big those bag phones were? Not to mention how much one call cost? I disliked carrying that darn thing when I was on call at my building. Thank goodness for the new cell phones.


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> The Pope is a gift from God. Too bad Obama does not admire him. The US Embassy is to be closed in Vatican City to save 1.4 million dollars a year. Vatican City is a sovereign country, so removing the embassy is a slap in that country's face. But the billions given to bankrupt 'green companies' is more important than respecting Vatican City. This is another attack by Obama on Catholics. He is angry that the Church is fighting HSS and this is a way for him to get even. So spiteful


And you were told this by....????


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

We already discussed this and it's not a death panel. Good grief!!


----------



## GWPlver (Mar 15, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2013/11/25/federal-regulation-could-re-define-the-word-organ-jeopardize-bone-marrow-donations/2/
> 
> Why can a man sell his sperm or a woman sell her eggs, but a person can not receive $3,000 for donating blood to help with housing or donating the money to a charity of their choice? So one could conclude that cutting a woman open and getting money to harvest her eggs is less invasive that donating blood? So one could conclude that harvesting a woman's eggs is less invasive than a vaginal ultrasound.


Oh good lord - what did you drink today that got you on such a roll!! You are going to have a stroke. Chill out!


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3093807/posts Vatican City and US Embassy


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

GWPlver said:


> We already discussed this and it's not a death panel. Good grief!!


Look up IPAB - the nickname used is Death Panel. Good grief you must have missed the entire discussion and facts since it exists.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Look up IPAB - the nickname used is Death Panel. Good grief you must have missed the entire discussion and facts since it exists.


I think it is the name death panel that scares them. What you should know is a body of 15 persons who know nothing about you will determine if you are allowed to have medical proceeders or not to give certain meds or allow one to pass from this earth.

I heard last night that Britian has the same proceedures. They have a committee that decides what or what not is allowed to be done with medical preceedures. That is why there is a waiting period as they have to apporve or disappove what will be done.

I do not want any one to tell me what I can and can't have done. That is my freedom to choose what I want.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> I think it is the name death panel that scares them. What you should know is a body of 15 persons who know nothing about you will determine if you are allowed to have medical proceeders or not to give certain meds or allow one to pass from this earth.
> 
> I heard last night that Britian has the same proceedures. They have a committee that decides what or what not is allowed to be done with medical preceedures. That is why there is a waiting period as they have to apporve or disappove what will be done.
> 
> I do not want any one to tell me what I can and can't have done. That is my freedom to choose what I want.


I continue to pray that Obamacare ends - That it does not exist any more.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I continue to pray that Obamacare ends - That it does not exist any more.


Me too!


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Me too!


me three.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Not so funny. I believe they were ready to get Osama 2 or 3 times and Valerie Jarrett told Obama to not do it. The last time Seal Team 6 was on its way before Obama could say no.
> 
> Almost all Obama's decisions go through Valerie Jarrett.
> 
> ...


That's simply bizarre. I'm not gong to dignify it with any further response, not even to debunk it.

But I do have to say -- increasingly I wonder whether these ringtwing nutjob pundits and analysts are KNOWINGLY lying to you folks about such things, or if they really are that sick.

It's probably some of both.

My one prayer is that their loyal followers on the right SOMEDAY wake up and realize the extent to which they've been used and abused and ... to repeat myself, lied to. It will take their breath away and cause a run on tar and feathers.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> About six years ago, my friends son received $20 each time he donated plasma.


When I was younger and healtheir I donated plasma and platelets every four weeks for a few years. I received no money, nor did I want to. It was just an accident that I had platelets that could be used, and it was a way to give back to our health service.


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

lovethelake wrote:

"The Pope is a gift from God. Too bad Obama does not admire him. The US Embassy is to be closed in Vatican City to save 1.4 million dollars a year. Vatican City is a sovereign country, so removing the embassy is a slap in that country's face. But the billions given to bankrupt 'green companies' is more important than respecting Vatican City. This is another attack by Obama on Catholics. He is angry that the Church is fighting HSS and this is a way for him to get even. So spiteful".

What about the billions of $$ that he gave and is still giving to our enemies? Most recent to Iran where we'll likely get nothing in return - except trouble. Not even mentioning the good that those billions could do in the USA...


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> When I was younger and healtheir I donated plasma and platelets every four weeks for a few years. I received no money, nor did I want to. It was just an accident that I had platelets that could be used, and it was a way to give back to our health service.


When my Dh got hurt in his accident. The guys from the Railroad donated blood for him. That helped build the bank back. I was very grateful. He had to have 32 pints. But that was before the scanning and he got HepC from the unfiltered blood. Before anyone says it. I know he didn't get the blood straight from his friends. They just donated.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Cough it up? Tacky and shows a lack of doing your own research. Check out Fox, they make it easy for you
> 
> Hope Obamacare covers your cough


Nuh-huh. Here's how it works everywhere else on the internet where discussions like this take place:

YOU make a claim, YOU provide the proof or validation if asked. And if you want to be considered credible, it's best to provide the documentation WHEN you're make the claim. If you can't -- or won't -- back your claim up with documentation, you don't really have a claim, you merely have a wild rumor, or a fantasy, or another one of Fox's lies, or the product of your own fevered imagination.

Yeah, right. What Fox makes easy for you is your deluded self-deception and your screwed-and-used status.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Felt pity for you, so I did your research for you
> 
> http://video.foxnews.com/v/2868537393001/mother-fights-government-over-bone-marrow-ban/


No, dear, as I just explained, it's not pity for me, it's YOUR responsibility to back-up your claims.

It wasn't so hard, was it?? THANK YOU.

That said, I watched the video. And I have to say, if bone marrow can be extracted from the blood now -- we all give blood (or many do) for free -- I see absolutely NO reason why there should be ANY compensation for donors. I'm not at all sure Mrs. Wakefield's complaint is about the government. Why not put it on whoever's not willing to use the freely donated blood?


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

Knitry said:


> Nuh-huh. Here's how it works everywhere else on the internet where discussions like this take place:
> 
> YOU make a claim, YOU provide the proof or validation if asked. And if you want to be considered credible, it's best to provide the documentation WHEN you're make the claim. If you can't -- or won't -- back your claim up with documentation, you don't really have a claim, you merely have a wild rumor, or a fantasy, or another one of Fox's lies, or the product of your own fevered imagination.
> 
> Yeah, right. What Fox makes easy for you is your deluded self-deception and your screwed-and-used status.


When one makes a statement, that the other doesn't agree with, and gives their source, the source is attacked along with the poster. I'm not here to make the posting rules, to each his own, but I for one won't give my source, won't cut and paste, won't send you off to a blog. Frankly I won't lead the horse to water because I don't care if he or she drinks. I'm glad you have been to "everywhere" on the internet though.


----------



## galinipper (Apr 30, 2013)

Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving Ladies, Gali


----------



## Cindy S (Oct 20, 2013)

A tad off topic, just wanted to wish everyone a happy and safe Thanksgiving (if you are in the U.S.A.)!!!! And a happy day of knitting or crocheting to everyone else!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

galinipper said:


> Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving Ladies, Gali


 :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> A tad off topic, just wanted to wish everyone a happy and safe Thanksgiving (if you are in the U.S.A.)!!!! And a happy day of knitting or crocheting to everyone else!


 :thumbup:


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

galinipper said:


> When one makes a statement, that the other doesn't agree with, and gives their source, the source is attacked along with the poster. I'm not here to make the posting rules, to each his own, but I for one won't give my source, won't cut and paste, won't send you off to a blog. Frankly I won't lead the horse to water because I don't care if he or she drinks. I'm glad you have been to "everywhere" on the internet though.


I agree. And I would love to see where it is written that sources must be given. Just another excuse by the Obamacultists for side stepping the facts by mudding the waters with extraneous arrogant sidebars. And did you notice that if someone disagrees with anything the Obamacultists that they accuse them of using mind altering substances? I guess they should stop projecting. Wonder if Obamacare will cover their pre-existing mental disabilities?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Does this sound like someone else we know?


Just the republicans that were at the meeting and the rest of the tea party. All those that are trying to sabotage our president.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> Kathleen Sebelius continues to want her Death Panels by regulation and circumventing the courts. She is personally going after Doreen Gummoe's court victory by changing the wording in HHS regulations. She wants to consider blood an organ, so people can't get compensated for donating blood to be made into bone marrow so that it can be transplanted to save a life.
> 
> So she despise people willing to spend days donating blood to save a life in addition to children needing a lung transplant with Cystic Fibrosis.
> 
> Death Panels are with us now. Where is the outrage?


There is no outrage because death panels have been debunked so many times that it is now laughable when someone brings it up. You and Sarah Palin make quite a pair. You both have something wrong with your brain function to believe death panels.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> That's simply bizarre. I'm not gong to dignify it with any further response, not even to debunk it.
> 
> But I do have to say -- increasingly I wonder whether these ringtwing nutjob pundits and analysts are KNOWINGLY lying to you folks about such things, or if they really are that sick.
> 
> ...


My goodness, whatever will you do when MSNBC and The Daily Kos are extinct? They are very close now you know. Who will lie to you then and pray tell, where will you get any news?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> Nuh-huh. Here's how it works everywhere else on the internet where discussions like this take place:
> 
> YOU make a claim, YOU provide the proof or validation if asked. And if you want to be considered credible, it's best to provide the documentation WHEN you're make the claim. If you can't -- or won't -- back your claim up with documentation, you don't really have a claim, you merely have a wild rumor, or a fantasy, or another one of Fox's lies, or the product of your own fevered imagination.
> 
> Yeah, right. What Fox makes easy for you is your deluded self-deception and your screwed-and-used status.


Oh, goody! I'll await your proof and validations of these, your claims:



Knitry said:


> But I do have to say -- increasingly I wonder whether these ringtwing nutjob pundits and analysts are KNOWINGLY lying to you folks about such things, or if they really are that sick.
> 
> My one prayer is that their loyal followers on the right SOMEDAY wake up and realize the extent to which they've been used and abused and ... to repeat myself, lied to. It will take their breath away and cause a run on tar and feathers.


On second thought, I'll just be secure in the knowledge that YOUR claims are just wild rumors, fantasy and more of your lies from your fevered imagination.

In other words, nothing you say is credible. Good to know - thank you kindly for your concise explanation!

Happy Hanukkah and Thanksgiving.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

galinipper said:


> When one makes a statement, that the other doesn't agree with, and gives their source, the source is attacked along with the poster. I'm not here to make the posting rules, to each his own, but I for one won't give my source, won't cut and paste, won't send you off to a blog. Frankly I won't lead the horse to water because I don't care if he or she drinks. I'm glad you have been to "everywhere" on the internet though.


 :XD: Well done, gali.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> The Pope is a gift from God. Too bad Obama does not admire him. The US Embassy is to be closed in Vatican City to save 1.4 million dollars a year. Vatican City is a sovereign country, so removing the embassy is a slap in that country's face. But the billions given to bankrupt 'green companies' is more important than respecting Vatican City. This is another attack by Obama on Catholics. He is angry that the Church is fighting HSS and this is a way for him to get even. So spiteful


Don't get your undies in a bunch. It will still be there, only at a different location. Isn't it republicans who are always saying cut spending, cut spending and now when they do, you complain about that too. You are just impossible to please. Sounds like the state dept made the decision, but you just love to blame the president for anything you can. How pathetic.

(RNS) The United States will move its Vatican embassy into a building on the compound of the larger American Embassy to Italy, a shift that has drawn criticism from former U.S. envoys.

Security and cost savings were behind the move, as the State Department estimates it will save $1.4 million a year by moving from the current building.

It will not downsize any embassy personnel, a State Department official told reporters Monday (Nov. 25). At the time, the official did not have total budget information of both embassies at hand. The U.S. Embassy to the Holy See has seven U.S. diplomatic personnel, and the U.S. Embassy to Italy has 63 diplomatic personnel.

The relocated embassy will be 0.1 miles closer to the Vatican, putting the distance at about 1.9 miles between the two.

Former U.S. Ambassador James Nicholson called the move a massive downgrade in U.S.-Vatican ties, turning the Vatican embassy into a stepchild of the embassy to Italy, in an interview with the National Catholic Reporter.

Former U.S. representatives to the Vatican  Francis Rooney, Mary Ann Glendon, Raymond Flynn, Thomas Melady  also objected.

In the past, the Vatican has insisted that countries maintain embassies to the Holy See and to Rome in separate locations, but it hasnt protested the U.S. relocation. The State Department official said that while the embassies will be located on the same compound, the Vatican embassy will have separate entrances.

The Vatican is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome. It is the smallest internationally recognized independent state in the world.

The safety of embassies have been a concern since the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya. The U.S. has multiple embassies in places such as Brussels and Vienna.

The official residence for the ambassador to the Holy See will not change.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

galinipper said:


> Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving Ladies, Gali


Back atcha!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> I continue to pray that Obamacare ends - That it does not exist any more.


Praying for people to go without insurance, now that takes a lot of guts I would say. What did these people do to you, that you want them to suffer?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> me three.


Why would you pray for other people to suffer?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Me too!


Why do you pray for other people to be without insurance. What benefit is that to you?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> I continue to pray that Obamacare ends - That it does not exist any more.


I think your pray will be answered as Obamacare is a complete failure all on its own. No one, including the Repubs, have to do a thing but watch it dissolve and become meaningless and an empty and broken promise on its own accord.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> On second thought, I'll just be secure in the knowledge that YOUR claims are just wild rumors, fantasy and more of your lies from your fevered imagination.
> 
> In other words, nothing you say is credible. Good to know - thank you kindly for your concise explanation!
> 
> Happy Hanukkah and Thanksgiving.


I see you still don't understand the meaning of the word "opinion."


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I think your pray will be answered as Obamacare is a complete failure all on its own. No one, including the Repubs, have to do a thing but watch it dissolve and become meaningless and an empty and broken promise on its own accord.


So many people are suffering because of it. Our country as a whole is suffering. The suffering needs to end.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

NJG said:


> Why do you pray for other people to be without insurance. What benefit is that to you?


They're scared they might have to pay one more cent in taxes. The operative word to describe this woman and her friends is "selfish." They love to keep the poor poor and laud the wealthy elite class for their "rugged individualism" and success. I think these "Christians" have it backwards.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> So many people are suffering because of it. Our country as a whole is suffering. The suffering needs to end.


LL, what about all the people suffering because they can't afford a doctor?
I see nothing ever changes. 
"Yay" for tha "haves" and the hell with the "have nots."

Pathetic.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> My goodness, whatever will you do when MSNBC and The Daily Kos are extinct? They are very close now you know. Who will lie to you then and pray tell, where will you get any news?


In your dreams maybe. Why do you makeup stuff like that. Do you think it gives you an advantage over someone else to lie? Why don't you grow up. You are not a child or the playground anymore.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. Hebrews 13:16 For God so loved the world, He gave his only son so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16

Words to live by.....You are a hypocrite. You post them, but you obviously don't live by them.....

You are pathetic.



knitpresentgifts said:


> I think your pray will be answered as Obamacare is a complete failure all on its own. No one, including the Repubs, have to do a thing but watch it dissolve and become meaningless and an empty and broken promise on its own accord.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

alcameron said:


> They're scared they might have to pay one more cent in taxes. The operative word to describe this woman and her friends is "selfish." They love to keep the poor poor and laud the wealthy elite class for their "rugged individualism" and success. I think these "Christians" have it backwards.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

galinipper said:


> When one makes a statement, that the other doesn't agree with, and gives their source, the source is attacked along with the poster. I'm not here to make the posting rules, to each his own, but I for one won't give my source, won't cut and paste, won't send you off to a blog. Frankly I won't lead the horse to water because I don't care if he or she drinks. I'm glad you have been to "everywhere" on the internet though.


Yes, that's one reason sources are expected: some sources aren't worth looking at, such as Fox News (as a rule). They're KNOWN to be not credible, and so of curse they will be attacked.

If you won't give your source, won't cut and paste, won't in fact ALLOW us to examine the "source" for your pronouncements, then you and your side risk any credibility you might have. If that doesn't bother you, I suppose it shouldn't bother me either. Just don't be surprised when people are convinced you're spouting lies and other nonsense. If you're unwilling to have your source(s) examined, I'd say it's a 99% certainty iy's because you're neither sure nor proud of them and are unwilling to subject them to scrutiny.

Like I said, if that doesn't bother you, it oughtn't bother me either, which is not the same thing as saying I'll let any outrageous, unsupported assertions go unchallenged. I won't.

And that reminds me of something else I've been thinking about. I've seen those of us posting from the left referred to as "liars" by some on the right. We are not. If any of you on the right want to continue that refrain, you're going to need to support those assertions with hard factual, objective documentation. WE ARE NOT LIARS. Period.

And frankly, I think those of us on the left need to be real careful about calling our debating partners liars (and other personal insults). I think for the most part they are deluded and deceived, even if all too willingly. And I intend to try to better monitor my own posts in that regard.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Just remembered why I stay away from this thread. Didn't take long to see that the right wing populace is nuts, blind, selfish, and phony. I wish I could be a fly on the wall when they recite their Thanksgiving grace.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I agree. And I would love to see where it is written that sources must be given. *Just another excuse by the Obamacultists for side stepping the facts* by mudding the waters with extraneous arrogant sidebars. And did you notice that if someone disagrees with anything the Obamacultists that they accuse them of using mind altering substances? I guess they should stop projecting. Wonder if Obamacare will cover their pre-existing mental disabilities?


Lovey, that doesn't even pass the common sense test.

How, exactly, does one "sidestep the facts" by requesting documentation for others' spurious pronouncements? Quite the opposite -- requesting documentation is an APPEAL to ensure facts, truth, and reality are dominant.

Sheesh.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitry said:


> Yes, that's one reason sources are expected: some sources aren't worth looking at, such as Fox News (as a rule). They're KNOWN to be not credible, and so of curse they will be attacked.
> 
> If you won't give your source, won't cut and paste, won't in fact ALLOW us to examine the "source" for your pronouncements, then you and your side risk any credibility you might have. If that doesn't bother you, I suppose it shouldn't bother me either. Just don't be surprised when people are convinced you're spouting lies and other nonsense. If you're unwilling to have your source(s) examined, I'd say it's a 99% certainty iy's because you're neither sure nor proud of them and are unwilling to subject them to scrutiny.
> 
> ...


Been there. Done that. Doesn't work or gain respect.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This is what to expect from Obamacare
> 
> Boston Hospital Rips Custody from Parents of 15 Year Old Over Diagnosis Dispute
> 
> snip


Don't look now but that's what you can expect from for-profit-healthcare insurance companies. Obamacare has nothing to do with it. That kind of stuff happened well before Obama was even thought of, let alone elected. And without single payer, it's likely to continue to happen with or without Obamacare.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I believe KPG has a god complex....... So sad......

A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of their error or failure, even in the face of complex or intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks, or may regard their personal opinions as unquestionably correct. The individual may disregard the rules of society and require special consideration or privileges. :evil:



NJG said:


> In your dreams maybe. Why do you makeup stuff like that. Do you think it gives you an advantage over someone else to lie? Why don't you grow up. You are not a child or the playground anymore.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> I think it is the name death panel that scares them. What you should know is a body of 15 persons who know nothing about you will determine if you are allowed to have medical proceeders or not to give certain meds or allow one to pass from this earth.
> 
> I heard last night that Britian has the same proceedures. They have a committee that decides what or what not is allowed to be done with medical preceedures. That is why there is a waiting period as they have to apporve or disappove what will be done.
> 
> I do not want any one to tell me what I can and can't have done. That is my freedom to choose what I want.


Fiction.

The government isn't making decisions about anyone's individual healthcare. Your insurance companies are. As has been the case for decades now.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> But cell phones mean that people will get any call for an interview for jobs they've applied for. If they don't need to sit home, that means they can be out applying for more jobs while they with the call.


That reason looks great on paper, but in real life - it's not always the case.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

lovethelake said:


> Kathleen Sebelius continues to want her Death Panels by regulation and circumventing the courts. She is personally going after Doreen Gummoe's court victory by changing the wording in HHS regulations. She wants to consider blood an organ, so people can't get compensated for donating blood to be made into bone marrow so that it can be transplanted to save a life.
> 
> So she despise people willing to spend days donating blood to save a life in addition to children needing a lung transplant with Cystic Fibrosis.
> 
> Death Panels are with us now. Where is the outrage?


There will be no outrage as long as the death panels' existence is being denied.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

GWPlver said:


> And do you remember how big those bag phones were? Not to mention how much one call cost? I disliked carrying that darn thing when I was on call at my building. Thank goodness for the new cell phones.


The size of a cell phone sure has come full circle. No so much in it's bulk, but it's size. They went from bag phones to phones the size of a credit card to the tablet type phones in demand today due to the technology they are capable of. It's an interesting evolution of convenience.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

theyarnlady said:


> I think it is the name death panel that scares them. What you should know is a body of 15 persons who know nothing about you will determine if you are allowed to have medical proceeders or not to give certain meds or allow one to pass from this earth.
> 
> I heard last night that Britian has the same proceedures. They have a committee that decides what or what not is allowed to be done with medical preceedures. That is why there is a waiting period as they have to apporve or disappove what will be done.
> 
> I do not want any one to tell me what I can and can't have done. That is my freedom to choose what I want.


Here is something to think about. If no one is seated on the IPAB board - if Obama and the Senate can't agree whom to appoint, all of IPAB's powers will fall on the HHS Secretary, the one and only Kathleen Sebelius. This was no doubt the reason Obama will not call for her resignation. She does what Obama wants. If the IPAB is packed with Democratic appointees, they will be able to run Medicare programs and consequently the whole healthcare sector without much, if any, oversight by Congress. This could also be the reason Harry Reid did the 180 on the Nuclear Option. Frightening possibilities ahead.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Praying for people to go without insurance, now that takes a lot of guts I would say. What did these people do to you, that you want them to suffer?


Not all without insurance are without it because they cannot afford the insurance. There is a sizable number of that population that just do not WANT to buy health insurance. This sector of the population will always be without.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Not all without insurance are without it because they cannot afford the insurance. There is a sizable number of that population that just do not WANT to buy health insurance. This sector of the population will always be without.


Yes, they want you and me (the taxpayer) to pay for their emergency room care when the opportunity arises.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitry said:


> Yes, that's one reason sources are expected: some sources aren't worth looking at, such as Fox News (as a rule). They're KNOWN to be not credible, and so of curse they will be attacked.
> 
> If you won't give your source, won't cut and paste, won't in fact ALLOW us to examine the "source" for your pronouncements, then you and your side risk any credibility you might have. If that doesn't bother you, I suppose it shouldn't bother me either. Just don't be surprised when people are convinced you're spouting lies and other nonsense. If you're unwilling to have your source(s) examined, I'd say it's a 99% certainty iy's because you're neither sure nor proud of them and are unwilling to subject them to scrutiny.
> 
> ...


Be very careful using "Period." after a statement. The last time Obama did, his whole pet project came crashing down on him. You are repeating the liberal propaganda, which does contain lies. Face it, all politicians lie to get what they want and if you are using that tactic then you, too, are lying.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You mean like the Republican's did when they tried to shut down our country? Sounds like tit for tat to me. (TFT An agent using this strategy will first cooperate, then subsequently replicate an opponent's previous action. If the opponent previously was cooperative, the agent is cooperative. If not, the agent is not.)
Seems all is fair in love and war......



soloweygirl said:


> Here is something to think about. If no one is seated on the IPAB board - if Obama and the Senate can't agree whom to appoint, all of IPAB's powers will fall on the HHS Secretary, the one and only Kathleen Sebelius. This was no doubt the reason Obama will not call for her resignation. She does what Obama wants. If the IPAB is packed with Democratic appointees, they will be able to run Medicare programs and consequently the whole healthcare sector without much, if any, oversight by Congress. This could also be the reason Harry Reid did the 180 on the Nuclear Option. Frightening possibilities ahead.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> me three.


Me four! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> The Pope is a gift from God. Too bad Obama does not admire him. The US Embassy is to be closed in Vatican City to save 1.4 million dollars a year. Vatican City is a sovereign country, so removing the embassy is a slap in that country's face. But the billions given to bankrupt 'green companies' is more important than respecting Vatican City. This is another attack by Obama on Catholics. He is angry that the Church is fighting HSS and this is a way for him to get even. So spiteful


Very true LTL as I'm not Catholic, but I admire the pope & watch him when he is on TV.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. Hebrews 13:16 For God so loved the world, He gave his only son so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16
> 
> Words to live by.....You are a hypocrite. You post them, but you obviously don't live by them.....
> 
> You are pathetic.


Well, if you are such a good Christian as you say, then "why" are you calling her a hypocrite

Do not neglect to do good. . . . . .! :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Just remembered why I stay away from this thread. Didn't take long to see that the right wing populace is nuts, blind, selfish, and phony. I wish I could be a fly on the wall when they recite their Thanksgiving grace.


Need a cookie? Such bad words to describe me!

Jump on a plane as we are serving Thanksgiving at noon then you could hear my prayer.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I believe KPG has a god complex....... So sad......
> 
> A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of their error or failure, even in the face of complex or intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks, or may regard their personal opinions as unquestionably correct. The individual may disregard the rules of society and require special consideration or privileges. :evil:


You are judging KPG? You are so hypocritical that you only know how to slam & bully!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well,.....I haven't professed to being such a good Christian. I'm not the one pretending to be so saintly. I don't have biblical quotes under my posts.....And then turn around and be nasty and mean to those who don't believe as I do. Seems pretty hypocritical to me.... :thumbup:



Janeway said:


> Well, if you are such a good Christian as you say, then "why" are you calling her a hypocrite
> 
> Do not neglect to do good. . . . . .! :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Where are the bullies????
Look in the mirror.

Me thinks she doth protest to much......



Janeway said:


> You are judging KPG? You are so hypocritical that you only know how to slam & bully!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Knitry said:


> Lovey, that doesn't even pass the common sense test.
> 
> How, exactly, does one "sidestep the facts" by requesting documentation for others' spurious pronouncements? Quite the opposite -- requesting documentation is an APPEAL to ensure facts, truth, and reality are dominant.
> 
> Sheesh.


Well, you sidestep the facts that are given you.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> There is no outrage because death panels have been debunked so many times that it is now laughable when someone brings it up. You and Sarah Palin make quite a pair. You both have something wrong with your brain function to believe death panels.


Sorry, but you are wrong! I don't have an ounce of respect for Obo! Don't tell me he is my president, but he never have been mine & won't ever !

It is not nice to keep saying there is something wrong with KPG's brain! You don't want to know what I think of your & other lefties! It is not good!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Don't get your undies in a bunch. It will still be there, only at a different location. Isn't it republicans who are always saying cut spending, cut spending and now when they do, you complain about that too. You are just impossible to please. Sounds like the state dept made the decision, but you just love to blame the president for anything you can. How pathetic.
> 
> (RNS) The United States will move its Vatican embassy into a building on the compound of the larger American Embassy to Italy, a shift that has drawn criticism from former U.S. envoys.
> 
> ...


This is just for you!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I think your pray will be answered as Obamacare is a complete failure all on its own. No one, including the Repubs, have to do a thing but watch it dissolve and become meaningless and an empty and broken promise on its own accord.


Here is what appeared in our town.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

alcameron said:


> They're scared they might have to pay one more cent in taxes. The operative word to describe this woman and her friends is "selfish." They love to keep the poor poor and laud the wealthy elite class for their "rugged individualism" and success. I think these "Christians" have it backwards.


Need a cookie? Judge not or you shall be judged!


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Well, you sidestep the facts that are given you.


Did I sidestep "facts"? Or ignore "rightwing lies"?

Please point out to me exactly what you're referring to. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

GWPlver said:


> Oh good lord - what did you drink today that got you on such a roll!! You are going to have a stroke. Chill out!


GWPlver, this is not nice! Can't you say anything without slamming & criticize?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

galinipper said:


> Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving Ladies, Gali


Thank you for your kind words. Happy Thanksgiving to you dear lady!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Cindy S said:


> A tad off topic, just wanted to wish everyone a happy and safe Thanksgiving (if you are in the U.S.A.)!!!! And a happy day of knitting or crocheting to everyone else!


Thank you. Here is my knitting motto.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Just the republicans that were at the meeting and the rest of the tea party. All those that are trying to sabotage our president.


Yes, I am!


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

Yes the deer is right. No wonder the left wants gun control, wouldn't want to shoot the truth


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

alcameron said:


> LL, what about all the people suffering because they can't afford a doctor?
> I see nothing ever changes.
> "Yay" for tha "haves" and the hell with the "have nots."
> 
> Pathetic.


Boy, you sure do twist things around. That is pathetic.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

lovethelake said:


> Yes the deer is right. No wonder the left wants gun control, wouldn't want to shoot the truth


 :XD: Happy Thanksgiving Lovethelake!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> Boy, you sure do twist things around. That is pathetic.


She sure does.

To date, for every one person who signed up for Obamacare (the majority signed up for free Medicaid) 50 people have lost the health insurance they used to have AND pay for. This is what I call pathetic.

Why doesn't the LWNs want everyone, not just the very poor, to have health insurance ESPECIALLY when most PAID for the insurance coverage they had? Beyond reason or logic 

Oh, so, again tonight, Obama broke the law and made another delay/extension to the ACA law without the approval of Congress. Like no one would notice . who is pathetic and desperate now? He had to run to Hollywood to try to find someone, anyone, who supports his ridiculous law.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> She sure does.
> 
> To date, for every one person who signed up for Obamacare (the majority signed up for free Medicaid) 50 people have lost the health insurance they used to have AND pay for. This is what I call pathetic.
> 
> Why doesn't the LWNs want everyone, not just the very poor, to have health insurance ESPECIALLY when most PAID for the insurance coverage they had? Beyond reason or logic ...


It is sickening when they say that "we don't care about people". We have our views because we do care. I have not seen such limited vision in my entire life as with the libs. Any lib that I have known has been on the dole. Gimmies. Now, THAT is pathetic.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> It is sickening when they say that "we don't care about people". We have our views because we do care. I have not seen such limited vision in my entire life as with the libs. Any lib that I have known has been on the dole. Gimmies. Now, THAT is pathetic.


  and the beat goes on, until the American taxpayers run out of money (nearly there) and then, and only then, will the 'entitled' begin to use their heads and realize they are enslaved to the govt who brought them down.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> She sure does.
> 
> To date, for every one person who signed up for Obamacare (the majority signed up for free Medicaid) 50 people have lost the health insurance they used to have AND pay for. This is what I call pathetic.
> 
> snip


I seriously doubt your numbers. In truth, only 0.6% of insured will be canceled:



> Our analysis shows how, under the ACA, only 0.6 percent of Americans under age 65 will be at risk of losing their current individual market plan and will not be income-eligible for financial assistance that will make their new insurance plan more affordable.
> 
> Even among this 0.6 percent, some have insurers who will not or cannot cancel their plans. Others will decide that they are better off with higher-value plans in the new insurance marketplaces.
> 
> Much more: http://www.familiesusa.org/ACA-individual-market/


This info was picked up by several other news outlets including CNBC (not exactly a liberal outpost).

And oh -- Health insurance is something people pay for month-to-month, so if you paid all the way through last month, you wouldn't be covered past any grace period your policy may have unless this month's premium is paid. So that "THEY PAID FOR IT" means next to nothing. What they paid for -- risk protection against _potential_ harm -- has already been consumed with the end of the last month for which the premium was paid (plus any grace period).


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Here is something for everyone to read. I saw this on Facebook today.

http://the-wopr.newsvine.com/_news/2013/09/19/20572264-church-members-mistreat-homeless-man-in-church-unaware-it-is-their-pastor-in-disguise


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitry said:


> This info was picked up by several other news outlets including CNBC (not exactly a liberal outpost).
> 
> And oh -- Health insurance is something people pay for month-to-month, so if you paid all the way through last month, you wouldn't be covered past any grace period your policy may have unless this month's premium is paid. So that "THEY PAID FOR IT" means next to nothing. What they paid for -- risk protection against _potential_ harm -- has already been consumed with the end of the last month for which the premium was paid (plus any grace period).


I don't know what you're smoking because my numbers are factual. Also, I and most folks I know pay their health insurance premiums quarterly in ADVANCE, not in arrears. I think you watch and listen to too many Liberal pundits and game shows. One more thing, PAYING for your insurance is a good thing, rather than having the taxpayers pay for it for you. Have some pride and take responsible for yourself; means EVERYTHING, not nothing.

You're wrong on all points but that is your prerogative.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Lkholcomb said:


> But cell phones mean that people will get any call for an interview for jobs they've applied for. If they don't need to sit home, that means they can be out applying for more jobs while they with the call.


Good point. Having a cell phone would make it possible to fit in more job hunting, and if that means it's liklier someone will find a job faster, the cell phone is a good investment. maybe cell phones should be a part of unemployment benefits, with the return of the phone required within 6 months of employment, to give the recipient time to get one of his/her own.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Love the Lake says the Pope is a gift from God. Well here is what the pope thinks of your republican trickle down economics. What amazes me is how republicans can be so thrilled when they hear something negative about Obamacare. We see that every day on this forum. They hear or read something, never check out if it is true or not, just post and then are as happy as can be to say "I told you so." Do we ever see any concern for those less fortunate. No, what we hear is they should have gotten an education, I helped myself, and then they brag about how smart they are. Do you think, maybe, if the republicans had passed President Obama's jobs bill, that there might be more jobs for the unemployed. Of course that would help President Obama be more successful, and like I said you take so much pleasure in other peoples failures, that you even pray for the ACA to fail. 


VATICAN CITY, Nov. 27 (UPI) -- "Trickle-down economics" doesn't help society's poor as promised, but does create an "idolatry of money" that is leading to "a new tyranny," Pope Francis said.

"Some people continue to defend trickle-down theories, which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world," Francis said in an 84-page formal pronouncement known as an apostolic exhortation, outlining the vision for his papacy.

"This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system," he said.

"Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting," Francis said in the 48,000-word non-doctrinal exhortation, whose formal authority is lower than that of a papal encyclical but higher than that of an ecclesiastical letter.

The document can be found at tinyurl.com/UPI-Apostolic-Exhortation.

The excluded are equal as humans to everyone else, and each person has an inherent responsibility to help those whose lives are "stunted for lack of opportunity," he said.

"How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?" he asked.

"This is a case of exclusion," he said.

"Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving?" he asked.

"This is a case of inequality," he said.

Francis blamed exclusion and inequality on what he observed as a veneration of money.

"The worship of the ancient golden calf has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose," he said.

Ideologies that "defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace" have created a time when governments no longer exercise their responsibility to protect the common good, he said.

"A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules," he said.

He said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.

"I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor!" he said. "It is vital that government leaders and financial leaders take heed and broaden their horizons, working to ensure that all citizens have dignified work, education and healthcare."

He also called on followers of the church to leave the safety of their houses of worship and move to the vulnerability of life in the trenches.

"I prefer a church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security," he said.

Francis, elected pope March 13 following the February resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, called for "broader opportunities for a more incisive female presence in the church," but said the ordination of women as priests was "not a question open to discussion."

Women's roles can increase "in the various other settings where important decisions are made," he said.

In his exhortation, titled "Evangelii Gaudium," or "The Joy of the Gospel," Francis also called for "a new phase of evangelization, one marked by enthusiasm and vitality."

The renewed and restored pastoral evangelism, he said, will require the church to "abandon the complacent attitude that says: 'We have always done it this way,'" to find novel, "bold and creative" ways to speak to the faithful and to add meaning to the church.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Unfortunately there are more people in this world like the 9,993 who wouldn't give that man the time of day, then the 3 who said hello to the man......there are many of us who should feel shame.... 

Thank you for that post NJG. Maybe others will read it and see the light.



NJG said:


> Here is something for everyone to read. I saw this on Facebook today.
> 
> http://the-wopr.newsvine.com/_news/2013/09/19/20572264-church-members-mistreat-homeless-man-in-church-unaware-it-is-their-pastor-in-disguise


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

NJG said:


> Love the Lake says the Pope is a gift from God. Well here is what the pope thinks of your republican trickle down economics. What amazes me is how republicans can be so thrilled when they hear something negative about Obamacare. We see that every day on this forum. They hear or read something, never check out if it is true or not, just post and then are as happy as can be to say "I told you so." Do we ever see any concern for those less fortunate. No, what we hear is they should have gotten an education, I helped myself, and then they brag about how smart they are. Do you think, maybe, if the republicans had passed President Obama's jobs bill, that there might be more jobs for the unemployed. Of course that would help President Obama be more successful, and like I said you take so much pleasure in other peoples failures, that you even pray for the ACA to fail.
> 
> VATICAN CITY, Nov. 27 (UPI) -- "Trickle-down economics" doesn't help society's poor as promised, but does create an "idolatry of money" that is leading to "a new tyranny," Pope Francis said.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup:


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So I provided websites to back up my statement. If you think it's a bunch of bunk, you find a website that says Valerie Jarrett is not involved with Obama's decisions.


Bravo!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

GWPlver said:


> And do you remember how big those bag phones were? Not to mention how much one call cost? I disliked carrying that darn thing when I was on call at my building. Thank goodness for the new cell phones.


I had one, too. Gee they were annoying. The bag phone was annoying..


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

NJG said:


> Here is something for everyone to read. I saw this on Facebook today.
> 
> http://the-wopr.newsvine.com/_news/2013/09/19/20572264-church-members-mistreat-homeless-man-in-church-unaware-it-is-their-pastor-in-disguise


Sadly, that is so true. Talk to everyone because if you do not speak to someone you may miss out on meeting a wonderful friend. Me, I talk to so many interesting and wonderful people. Make eye contact and smile, say hello. Sometimes you may be the only person that the other person has spoken to all day.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

GWPlver said:


> Oh good lord - what did you drink today that got you on such a roll!! You are going to have a stroke. Chill out!


So far, far out there. Egad!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Bravo!


Ditto BRAVO!!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Truly the gift of life.


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Nussa said:


> Well,.....I haven't professed to being such a good Christian. I'm not the one pretending to be so saintly. I don't have biblical quotes under my posts.....And then turn around and be nasty and mean to those who don't believe as I do. Seems pretty hypocritical to me.... :thumbup:


The :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Sorry, but you are wrong! I don't have an ounce of respect for Obo! Don't tell me he is my president, but he never have been mine & won't ever !
> 
> It is not nice to keep saying there is something wrong with KPG's brain! You don't want to know what I think of your & other lefties! It is not good!


Can we have more whine.?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

Janeway said:


> GWPlver, this is not nice! Can't you say anything without slamming & criticize?


Is this for real or for laughs?


----------



## ute4kp (Nov 6, 2012)

NJG said:


> Here is something for everyone to read. I saw this on Facebook today.
> 
> http://the-wopr.newsvine.com/_news/2013/09/19/20572264-church-members-mistreat-homeless-man-in-church-unaware-it-is-their-pastor-in-disguise


They better keep crying for being so rotten.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> She sure does.
> 
> To date, for every one person who signed up for Obamacare (the majority signed up for free Medicaid) 50 people have lost the health insurance they used to have AND pay for. This is what I call pathetic.
> 
> ...


It's great to be President!! You need a life, KPG. If all you can do is sit all day on your rump in front of your computer and pee and moan about the White House, then something is missing in your life.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

I don't think she sits in front of the computer all day. she is to busy. I notice that she only comes on for a time maybe an half an hour then is gone. 

What she post is her side of how she feels. There are two sides to every story. 

Again please do not tell me that all I am worried about is paying more taxes for Obama Care. 

I am not cruel to people who need help. You will never know how I help my fellow man or woman. I have said before that that is between God and myself. Why because he said todo good and not to brag to others what good you have done.

Obama Care is dragging this country down and it is not looking good. Thats how I feel and I know you don't feel the same way , but I do care about my fellowman and women and I would be glad to pay more taxes if I knew that the poor and I do mean poor would be help. But from what I have seen read and heard it is not going to help any one.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

ute4kp said:


> Can we have more whine.?


Sure! Anything for a friend!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> I don't think she sits in front of the computer all day. she is to busy. I notice that she only comes on for a time maybe an half an hour then is gone.
> 
> What she post is her side of how she feels. There are two sides to every story.
> 
> ...


Well it is hard for your tax money to go to feed the poor when your fellow republicans are cutting food stamps, but it is going to someone, as you was hoping. It is going to millionaire farmers, like those in congress as farm subsidies. It is going to big oil companies as oil subsidies. Is that what you were thinking of when you say helping the poor ? That is where your fellow republicans in congress want it to go.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

NJG said:


> Love the Lake says the Pope is a gift from God. Well here is what the pope thinks of your republican trickle down economics. What amazes me is how republicans can be so thrilled when they hear something negative about Obamacare. We see that every day on this forum. They hear or read something, never check out if it is true or not, just post and then are as happy as can be to say "I told you so." Do we ever see any concern for those less fortunate. No, what we hear is they should have gotten an education, I helped myself, and then they brag about how smart they are. Do you think, maybe, if the republicans had passed President Obama's jobs bill, that there might be more jobs for the unemployed. Of course that would help President Obama be more successful, and like I said you take so much pleasure in other peoples failures, that you even pray for the ACA to fail.
> 
> VATICAN CITY, Nov. 27 (UPI) -- "Trickle-down economics" doesn't help society's poor as promised, but does create an "idolatry of money" that is leading to "a new tyranny," Pope Francis said.
> 
> ...


I am by no means catholic, but u really am loving this pope!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I am by no means catholic, but u really am loving this pope!


I agree.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

My you have a blessed Thanksgiving, and put the hate away for a day. I am a women just like you just because I do not agree with you. Does not mean I do not care what is happening.

Also I am an independant not a repb. or a Dem. I vote for the person not the party.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Yes, they want you and me (the taxpayer) to pay for their emergency room care when the opportunity arises.


Yes, of course, it would be easier and much cheaper to sweep them out of the gutters after they die instead of paying for those pesky ER visits.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You say ACA is dragging this country down. Now, were you this outraged when G.W. Bush started a war, on a bald faced lie? A BALD FACED LIE, that killed so many of our military men and woman? He knew the whole time it was a lie. He just wanted to be President of a war. He was no better than a warmonger. (A sovereign or political leader or activist who encourages or advocates aggression or warfare toward other nations or groups.) Just look at the mess and years of debt he's left us in. He passed that debt onto the next president who will probably have no choice but to pass it on to the one after that. And all you can do is whine about medical insurance. And you haven't even given it a fair chance yet. That's a far cry from a war. Maybe you need to get your priority's straight.



theyarnlady said:


> I don't think she sits in front of the computer all day. she is to busy. I notice that she only comes on for a time maybe an half an hour then is gone.
> 
> What she post is her side of how she feels. There are two sides to every story.
> 
> ...


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Nussa I am not going to go there with you. I am not going to argue with you.

You think your way and I will think mine. We do not agree but I am not going there again.

If you want facts or have facts to post will share. 
But am not going into it any more.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You are right.......we needn't agree.... I'll just believe that what Bush did to this country was a travesty, and you can believe that what President Obama is trying to do for the people is wrong. But of course we don't know that yet, as it's only been in operation for not quite 2 months.

These are the most unbiased facts I could find about G.W. Bush lying about the Iraq war.

http://hnn.us/article/1506



theyarnlady said:


> Nussa I am not going to go there with you. I am not going to argue with you.
> 
> You think your way and I will think mine. We do not agree but I am not going there again.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I think not....... http://hnn.us/article/1506


joeysomma said:


> Where did you get the Kool Aid? The weapons were in Iraq. Intel reported they were there. There were chemical weapons there in 1990-91 in the first war. Did you watch the satellite pictures of the truck convoys going to Syria, before they were attacked? Where do you think Syria got the chemical weapons they used on their people earlier in this year? Our military found the locations where the chemical weapons had been stashed and places where they had been made.
> 
> He did not go to war without the approval of Congress. Any lies have been the ones told by the libs, to degrade President Bush.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Boy....you do live in a fantasy land don't you?


joeysomma said:


> Where did you get the Kool Aid? The weapons were in Iraq. Intel reported they were there. There were chemical weapons there in 1990-91 in the first war. Did you watch the satellite pictures of the truck convoys going to Syria, before they were attacked? Where do you think Syria got the chemical weapons they used on their people earlier in this year? Our military found the locations where the chemical weapons had been stashed and places where they had been made.
> 
> He did not go to war without the approval of Congress. Any lies have been the ones told by the libs, to degrade President Bush.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

NJG said:


> Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
> The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


How dare you say that. How dare you, you don't know me or any of us to know what is in our hearts.

You should have a good look at yourself and the words you post. You are so full of hate you can't even post any thing but hate.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
> The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


I have never, ever said I prayed for anyone to lose their health insurance. You will have to prove that one on me. You can question all you want. I don't want obamacare but not anyone to lose their insurance. That is a spin .


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I have never, ever said I prayed for anyone to lose their health insurance. You will have to prove that one on me. You can question all you want. I don't want obamacare but not anyone to lose their insurance. That is a spin .


It's not a spin CB it an out and out lie and she knows it.

If you can not prove something you resort to name calling.

But to me if that is all she can do is call names and lie, then I wonder what she thinks of herself?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Where did you get the Kool Aid? The weapons were in Iraq. Intel reported they were there. There were chemical weapons there in 1990-91 in the first war. Did you watch the satellite pictures of the truck convoys going to Syria, before they were attacked? Where do you think Syria got the chemical weapons they used on their people earlier in this year? Our military found the locations where the chemical weapons had been stashed and places where they had been made.
> 
> He did not go to war without the approval of Congress. Any lies have been the ones told by the libs, to degrade President Bush.


You evidently didn't watch Hubris, because it told how the buildup to the war was handled by Bush, Cheney and Rusmfeld, and mostly by Cheney and Rumsfeld. Some of the people involved were on the documentary to give their version of what happened and what was said. They showed some of Rumsfelds notes he made about how to start the war. Watch it and them talk about your wonderful Bush administration. I dare you.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> It's not a spin CB it an out and out lie and she knows it.
> 
> If you can not prove something you resort to name calling.
> 
> But to me if that is all she can do is call names and lie, then I wonder what she thinks of herself?


We tried to tell them a year ago that ocare wasn't going to work. Now that they see what a liar o is they have to call us names and say we are the saying things we didn't say. I guess liars like liars. And stand up for them plus blame everyone but themselves for the problems that was created by them. It is all Bush's fault, all the repubs fault, all the Christians fault that o is a fat out failure! That is what they are saying to us Yarnie. Amen.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I have never, ever said I prayed for anyone to lose their health insurance. You will have to prove that one on me. You can question all you want. I don't want obamacare but not anyone to lose their insurance. That is a spin .


Well if you pray for Obamacare to fail, that is what you will get. All the people with pre existing conditions, children and adults , will be without insurance. The people who have not had enough money to buy insurance before, but now because of a subsidy can buy insurance, will loose it. The republicans in the house have voted 48 times to repeal Obamacare and they have nothing to replace it. Chris Cuomo recently interviewed Ted Cruse and asked him why they want to repeal it with nothing in place to replace it. His answer was, "that is what we have to do," which means he actually had no answer and that was the best he could do. I guess the message is be careful what you wish for or be careful what you pray for.
It is not a lie, Lukelucy said she prayed for it to fail and you said me too, yarnie said me three and Jane said me four. Looks to me like you were all praying for Obamacare to fail and that means a lot of people have no insurance.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Well if you pray for Obamacare to fail, that is what you will get. All the people with pre existing conditions, children and adults , will be without insurance. The people who have not had enough money to buy insurance before, but now because of a subsidy can buy insurance, will loose it. The republicans in the house have voted 48 times to repeal Obamacare and they have nothing to replace it. Chris Cuomo recently interviewed Ted Cruse and asked him why they want to repeal it with nothing in place to replace it. His answer was, "that is what we have to do." I guess the message is be careful what you wish for or be careful what you pray for.


It has already failed without my prayers. I am just praying it on out.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

How can it have failed? It hasn't even existed long enough to fail. It just sounds like sour grapes to me. Are you afraid you'll be struck dead if you even tried to pray that it might work for the sake of the people who really want and need it? How can you and those others be so close minded? 
All the naysayers have done is belittle it, put up nasty posters, and badmouth anyone who doesn't agree with them. It's been horrible, I've never seen so much hate in all my life. At times it makes me feel physically sick..(Don't bother with the put downs guys, you'll just be showing your hateful nature). And those are the people you want to associate yourself with? And "Praying it on out," is praying it fails. Putting an AMEN on that is sacrilegious... shame on all of you.... :thumbdown: 


Country Bumpkins said:


> It has already failed without my prayers. I am just praying it on out.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> It has already failed without my prayers. I am just praying it on out.


And now you are trying to back track, but too late, it doesn't change what you said.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> We tried to tell them a year ago that ocare wasn't going to work. Now that they see what a liar o is they have to call us names and say we are the saying things we didn't say. I guess liars like liars. And stand up for them plus blame everyone but themselves for the problems that was created by them. It is all Bush's fault, all the repubs fault, all the Christians fault that o is a fat out failure! That is what they are saying to us Yarnie. Amen.


Yes liars must like liars and you sure do stand up for each other, especially when you say me too, and me three, and me four.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Nussa said:


> How can it have failed? It hasn't even existed long enough to fail. It just sounds like sour grapes to me. Are you afraid you'll be struck dead if you even tried to pray that it might work for the sake of the people who really want and need it? How can you and and those others be so close minded?
> All the naysayers have done is belittle it, put up nasty posters, and badmouth anyone who doesn't agree with them. It's been horrible, I've never seen so much hate in all my life. At times it makes me feel physically sick..(Don't bother with the put downs guys, you'll just be showing you hateful nature). And those are the people you want to associate yourself with? And "Praying it on out," is praying it fails. Putting an AMEN on that is sacrilegious... shame on all of you.... :thumbdown:


So true, Nussa. One of the righties (KPG?) was yapping earlier that the only folks who have signed up for insurance were the folks who would be covered by Medicare--in other words, folks who have had no insurance up until now: the poor, those with pre-existing conditions, pregnant women, infants, children. My God, what kind of people would be PRAYING for these folks to be stripped of their new coverage? Are there real human hearts beating within their breasts?


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Yes liars must like liars and you sure do stand up for each other, especially when you say me too, and me three, and me four.


I don't want obamacare. I don't want anyone losing their insurance. People are getting canceled. I don't want anyone canceled. It is not working. People can not keep the care they want. No one is winning. Everyone is losing.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> I don't think she sits in front of the computer all day. she is to busy. I notice that she only comes on for a time maybe an half an hour then is gone.
> 
> What she post is her side of how she feels. There are two sides to every story.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

theyarnlady said:


> How dare you say that. How dare you, you don't know me or any of us to know what is in our hearts.
> 
> You should have a good look at yourself and the words you post. You are so full of hate you can't even post any thing but hate.


 :thumbup:


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't want obamacare. I don't want anyone losing their insurance. People are getting canceled. I don't want anyone canceled. It is not working. People can not keep the care they want. No one is winning. Everyone is losing.


 :thumbup: and the remaining Libs posting on this thread are too stupid to understand why it is a failure and that millions more people will have no health insurance; millions upon millions more than ever before. Exactly the intent and plan of the Obama Administration!

So, on this day of Thanksgiving I'll say another thing I am so grateful for. The truth and facts have proven and shown Obamacare to be the epic failure it is. That is precisely why the "regular Libs" who have carried on in the two Obamacare threads are mainly not posting. They recognize there is no viable evidence or even spin they can use against the facts and truth that the signature legislation of President Obama and the most anticipated agenda of the Progressive movement is on the precipice of self-destruction.

_Thank God._ Like the ACA, this thread can now fade into the sunset.


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

NJG said:


> Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
> The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


I have never read anything from them that says they want to have people lose their health insurance. I don't see them wanting people dropped from their insurance plans. But maybe they meant when people are dropped by their insurance plans and get sticker shock from Obamacare it only proves what a debacle Obamacare is for many people and they understand why most Americans are opposed to it (especially the young healthy people). Not that they want people dropped or have their premiums skyrocket, but that is what is happening


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't want obamacare. I don't want anyone losing their insurance. People are getting canceled. I don't want anyone canceled. It is not working.  People can not keep the care they want. No one is winning. Everyone is losing.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It's hard not to be impressed.



Lkholcomb said:


> I am by no means catholic, but u really am loving this pope!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I guess they do prefer this alternative. Of course.



MaidInBedlam said:


> Yes, of course, it would be easier and much cheaper to sweep them out of the gutters after they die instead of paying for those pesky ER visits.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nussa said:


> You say ACA is dragging this country down. Now, were you this outraged when G.W. Bush started a war, on a bald faced lie? A BALD FACED LIE, that killed so many of our military men and woman? He knew the whole time it was a lie. He just wanted to be President of a war. He was no better than a warmonger. (A sovereign or political leader or activist who encourages or advocates aggression or warfare toward other nations or groups.) Just look at the mess and years of debt he's left us in. He passed that debt onto the next president who will probably have no choice but to pass it on to the one after that. And all you can do is whine about medical insurance. And you haven't even given it a fair chance yet. That's a far cry from a war. Maybe you need to get your priority's straight.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

NJG said:


> Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
> The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> My you have a blessed Thanksgiving, and put the hate away for a day. I am a women just like you just because I do not agree with you. Does not mean I do not care what is happening.
> 
> Also I am an independant not a repb. or a Dem. I vote for the person not the party.


I too am an independent, and vote for the person. Just seems as of late the republicans have very few worth voting for and there ideals are lacking.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Where did you get the Kool Aid? The weapons were in Iraq. Intel reported they were there. There were chemical weapons there in 1990-91 in the first war. Did you watch the satellite pictures of the truck convoys going to Syria, before they were attacked? Where do you think Syria got the chemical weapons they used on their people earlier in this year? Our military found the locations where the chemical weapons had been stashed and places where they had been made.
> 
> He did not go to war without the approval of Congress. Any lies have been the ones told by the libs, to degrade President Bush.


He got approval from congress by lying to them. When Hillary gave her approval, she said war only as a last resort. Well because of the lies they told, war was not a last resort. It was based on a lie.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> How dare you say that. How dare you, you don't know me or any of us to know what is in our hearts.
> 
> You should have a good look at yourself and the words you post. You are so full of hate you can't even post any thing but hate.


You said it. Lukelucy said she prayed for Obamacare to fail and you said me too. Why not say something, like I pray for it to be a success even though I don't believe it will. That would be a Christian thing to say. However, that is not what you said or meant.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't want obamacare. I don't want anyone losing their insurance. People are getting canceled. I don't want anyone canceled. It is not working. People can not keep the care they want. No one is winning. Everyone is losing.


Yes and the fact that you pray for that to happen is disgusting, but when you pray for failure, people without insurance is what you get.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> I guess they do prefer this alternative. Of course.


Of course they do. Really, when the righties gloat about the ACA "failing" I imagine them standing around watching and cheering as folks who've been stripped of their new coverage are wheeled out of the hospitals in their beds and dumped on the street. This is what they want to see happen, and it shocks me to the core.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

NJG said:


> Yes and the fact that you pray for that to happen is disgusting, but when you pray for failure, people without insurance is what you get.


Happy Thanksgiving. Hope you have a Blessed Day.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I have never read anything from them that says they want to have people lose their health insurance. I don't see them wanting people dropped from their insurance plans. But maybe they meant when people are dropped by their insurance plans and get sticker shock from Obamacare it only proves what a debacle Obamacare is for many people and they understand why most Americans are opposed to it (especially the young healthy people). Not that they want people dropped or have their premiums skyrocket, but that is what is happening


Lukelucy, you were the first one to say you pray for Obamacare to fail and then they followed along and said me too. Lets hope you don't get what you pray for as that would be bad for so many people.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Happy Thanksgiving. Hope you have a Blessed Day.


Happy Thanksgiving to you too. O hope everyone enjoys their day and their family.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

NJG said:


> Lukelucy, you were the first one to say you pray for Obamacare to fail and then they followed along and said me too. Lets hope you don't get what you pray for as that would be bad for so many people.


It will be good for everyone.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bush relied on Intel from other countries as well as his own. He reacted to advise given.
> 
> Now Obama is another story. Obama knew he was telling a lie when he said "If you like your health insurance you can keep it, etc." He repeated it again and again for 3 years. He lied for 3 years and he is still lying as his plan is a one payer system to control the health care system for all Americans. He has said it would take time get people to accept it and he would need to do it in steps. It has started.


Yes, it obviously is going to take some time for folks like you to accept the fact that poor children should receive subsidized coverage rather than go without medical care. It doesn't speak well for the rightie mentality that this is so, but one can't dismiss the conservatives viewpoints expressed in this thread.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bush relied on Intel from other countries as well as his own. He reacted to advise given.
> 
> Now Obama is another story. Obama knew he was telling a lie when he said "If you like your health insurance you can keep it, etc." He repeated it again and again for 3 years. He lied for 3 years and he is still lying as his plan is a one payer system to control the health care system for all Americans. He has said it would take time get people to accept it and he would need to do it in steps. It has started.


Obama has failed in everything he has done.


----------



## theyarnlady (Feb 25, 2011)

NJG said:


> You said it. Lukelucy said she prayed for Obamacare to fail and you said me too. Why not say something, like I pray for it to be a success even though I don't believe it will. That would be a Christian thing to say. However, that is not what you said or meant.


yes I did but Obama care is not going to help anyone. It has already cost the lost of insurance to those who are paying for their own insurance. They now have no coverage. If more people who can not get on Web site and do not sign up the poor will get nothing either. Why because of the way this law is set up. 
There were better ways that this could of been done. To lie and say you can keep your own doctors keep your own insurance. To find out he is giving passes to all except the individual person's who can pay for their own but now have to go to the exchange that they do not want.

Not praying that the poor are hurt, Just the Obama care. There has to be a better way to help all this law is a mess that is the bottom line. It is hurting everyone not just the poor.

It does not mean I am praying for the poor to have nothing in the way of health care. It doesn't mean I do not want to be tax to death for something that is not working.
It most of all does not mean I am not a Christian.

Since this all began with the Presidents election I have been called a racist, a teaparty ?*%! a Right wing nut, unchristian, ect. 
I want a different law that serves all the people not a pick and choose law, not to hard to understand unless you want to continue the name calling thinking it is cute, and that I will change my mind if you harsh enough.

We have different thoughts about this mess, we do not have to agree. But it is a mess and it is effect this whole nation. Unless you are not seeing this and have blinders on that is the way I see it.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

NJG said:


> I too am an independent, and vote for the person. Just seems as of late the republicans have very few worth voting for and there ideals are lacking.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You're wrong again! All that blathering on for nothing .....Happy Thanksgiving...... :thumbup:


knitpresentgifts said:


> :thumbup: and the remaining Libs posting on this thread are too stupid to understand why it is a failure and that millions more people will have no health insurance; millions upon millions more than ever before. Exactly the intent and plan of the Obama Administration!
> 
> So, on this day of Thanksgiving I'll say another thing I am so grateful for. The truth and facts have proven and shown Obamacare to be the epic failure it is. That is precisely why the "regular Libs" who have carried on in the two Obamacare threads are mainly not posting. They recognize there is no viable evidence or even spin they can use against the facts and truth that the signature legislation of President Obama and the most anticipated agenda of the Progressive movement is on the precipice of self-destruction.
> 
> _Thank God._ Like the ACA, this thread can now fade into the sunset.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Not true.....He ran for President TWICE and won TWICE.....
I guess you were mistaken about that....check your facts......
Happy Thanksgiving.....:thumbup:



Lukelucy said:


> Obama has failed in everything he has done.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> yes I did but Obama care is not going to help anyone. It has already cost the lost of insurance to those who are paying for their own insurance. They now have no coverage. If more people who can not get on Web site and do not sign up the poor will get nothing either. Why because of the way this law is set up.
> There were better ways that this could of been done. To lie and say you can keep your own doctors keep your own insurance. To find out he is giving passes to all except the individual person's who can pay for their own but now have to go to the exchange that they do not want.
> 
> Not praying that the poor are hurt, Just the Obama care. There has to be a better way to help all this law is a mess that is the bottom line. It is hurting everyone not just the poor.
> ...


Yarnlady,

How they twist the truth. Obamacare hurts everyone.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

This is for all those conservative Catholics (and others) here who continually rationalize their beliefs about poverty, health care, inequality. 

A few words from Pope Francis about the economy

On this day of family and feasting, I thought I would turn my column over to the CEO of one of the largest organizations in the world: Pope Francis of the 1.2 billion-member Catholic Church.

This week, the pope issued an apostolic exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium, which had much to say about the world economy and some of the ways it's working - or rather not working - from his point of view.

"It is not the task of the Pope to offer a detailed and complete analysis of contemporary reality," he writes, "but I do exhort all the communities to an 'ever watchful scrutiny of the signs of the times' " (a phrase taken from a 1964 encyclical letter by Pope Paul VI).

Here are some of Pope Francis' observations from a section titled Crisis of Communal Commitment:

"52. In our time humanity is experiencing a turning-point in its history, as we can see from the advances being made in so many fields. We can only praise the steps being taken to improve people's welfare in areas such as health care, education and communications. At the same time we have to remember that the majority of our contemporaries are barely living from day to day, with dire consequences. ...

"This epochal change has been set in motion by the enormous qualitative, quantitative, rapid and cumulative advances occurring in the sciences and in technology, and by their instant application in different areas of nature and of life. We are in an age of knowledge and information, which has led to new and often anonymous kinds of power.

"53. Just as the commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say 'thou shalt not' to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. ...

"Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.

"54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories, which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.

"56. While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ideologies, which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. ... To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which have taken on worldwide dimensions.

"57. With this in mind, I encourage financial experts and political leaders to ponder the words of one of the sages of antiquity: 'Not to share one's wealth with the poor is to steal from them and to take away their livelihood. It is not our own goods which we hold, but theirs.'

"58. A financial reform open to such ethical considerations would require a vigorous change of approach on the part of political leaders. I urge them to face this challenge with determination and an eye to the future, while not ignoring, of course, the specifics of each case. Money must serve, not rule! The Pope loves everyone, rich and poor alike, but he is obliged in the name of Christ to remind all that the rich must help, respect and promote the poor. I exhort you to generous solidarity and a return of economics and finance to an ethical approach which favors human beings.

Andrew S. Ross is a San Francisco Chronicle columnist. E-mail: [email protected] Twitter: @andrewsross


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

NJG said:


> Praying for people to go without insurance, now that takes a lot of guts I would say. What did these people do to you, that you want them to suffer?


I especially like the obviously deep Christian feeling this person expresses. If only we had more people liekt is, out country could become a 3rd world nation. NOT.:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Give it time...... :thumbup:


joeysomma said:


> There are very few children that do not have access to basic medical care. There are the Medicaid programs and CHIPs programs in each state. There are also organizations like the Shriners and St Jude's that have hospitals for specialized care that are free for children.
> 
> How many children are without medical care? What numbers can you cite to prove your point? website? Are the parents of the children you refer to capable of seeking medical care for their children?
> 
> Obamacare does *not* provide medical care! It is nothing more than a piece of paper. The actual care comes from the doctor or hospital that will accept the information on that piece of paper for payment for that medical care.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

NJG said:


> Praying for people to go without insurance, now that takes a lot of guts I would say. What did these people do to you, that you want them to suffer?


I especially like the obviously deep Christian feeling this person expresses. If only we had more people liekt is, out country could become a 3rd world nation. NOT.:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There are very few children that do not have access to basic medical care. There are the Medicaid programs and CHIPs programs in each state. There are also organizations like the Shriners and St Jude's that have hospitals for specialized care that are free for children.
> 
> How many children are without medical care? What numbers can you cite to prove your point? website? Are the parents of the children you refer to capable of seeking medical care for their children?
> 
> Obamacare does *not* provide medical care! It is nothing more than a piece of paper. The actual care comes from the doctor or hospital that will accept the information on that piece of paper for payment for that medical care.


You have made the statement before that Obamacare is nothing more than a piece of paper. Your insurance card is nothing more than a piece of paper. I don't get it. That piece of paper allows you access to a doctor or clinic.
I think you underestimate the number of people in the US who do not have access to medical care. Some of live in our insulated little worlds not noticing those less fortunate.

http://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/care1.asp


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Your insurance card is about the same as the piece of paper. The Doctor or hospital relies on the promise made by that insurance company to make the payments. Most current insurance cards are known and accepted by all area hospitals and clinics.
> 
> The Obamacare policies are very restrictive as to doctors and hospitals they will pay. For many the only policy available will be accepted by doctors and hospitals at a great distance. Not very practical.
> 
> A friend in her fifties has been on the federal site. There are only 2 plans available to her. For either plan the hospital and doctors are 80 miles away. The closest hospital, a top notch one, is less than 15 miles away. Does this make sense?


No, it does not make sense, but it happens all the time with no help from Obamacare. Several years ago in my city the teachers, police and firemen, and city workers could not use the local hospital because their insurance company and the hospital could not come to terms. Nothing to do with Obamacare. It happens frequently.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> It is sickening when they say that "we don't care about people". We have our views because we do care. I have not seen such limited vision in my entire life as with the libs. Any lib that I have known has been on the dole. Gimmies. Now, THAT is pathetic.


And how many "libs" did you actually know?? Let me assure you that there may even be some "right-wingers" "on the dole." Guess what? Some of us actually work for a living!!! And what about corporations? They're tops in the "gimme" attitude. They want the gov't to cater to them, give them tax breaks, and keep all the loopholes in the tax laws. Now who's the bigger "gimmes?"


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

IMPO, If the Republican's hadn't dug in their heels and fought ACA every step of the way, they could have been part of the soulution instead of part of the problem. The businesses you speak of may have had a stronger ACA to deal with. The Republican's could have given ACA a chance to succeed. But they seemed perfectly happy to throw everyone under the bus, just so they could say......"We told you so,".....Just out of spite. The Republican party needs to elect someone with a heart. I'm an independent voter, and right now, all I see in the Republican party is evil. They are letting themselves be taken over by the Tea Party.



joeysomma said:


> How many of the individuals (of either political persuasion) on the dole are giving back to society or are they just takers. Have any of these provided a job for anyone other than the social workers, etc. That are paid by the taxpayers. At least the corporations are providing jobs. They could provide more if they could depend on the rules the government makes. Most corporations need 5 or more years to plan for an expansion so than can expand and provide more jobs.
> 
> Just announced today. The information on Obamacare for small businesses will not be available until next November. It was supposed to be ready now. Now, how can these small businesses plan for 2015. If they will not know the cost of insurance until 2 months before it needs to start, how can they employ anyone else if they do not know the cost of hiring that person.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> Pope Francis said he prayed for political leaders with a social conscience.
> The republicans on this forum, like Yarnie, Lukelucy and Country Bumpkins pray for people to loose their health insurance and they profess to be Christians. I guess I have to question that.


You certainly are oozing your brand of BS from every pore today aren't you? Yarnie, LL and CB have done nothing of the kind.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Your insurance card is about the same as the piece of paper. The Doctor or hospital relies on the promise made by that insurance company to make the payments. Most current insurance cards are known and accepted by all area hospitals and clinics.
> 
> The Obamacare policies are very restrictive as to doctors and hospitals they will pay. For many the only policy available will be accepted by doctors and hospitals at a great distance. Not very practical.
> 
> A friend in her fifties has been on the federal site. There are only 2 plans available to her. For either plan the hospital and doctors are 80 miles away. The closest hospital, a top notch one, is less than 15 miles away. Does this make sense?


Woe is me. People are so hurt by Obamacare. Obama needs to be impeached and Obamacare needs to end. The torture must end.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Oh....you poor tortured thing.... 
Have a Happy Thanksgiving! :thumbup:


Lukelucy said:


> Woe is me. People are so hurt by Obamacare. Obama needs to be impeached and Obamacare needs to end. The torture must end.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are forgetting, the Republicans were not given a voice in the ACA. Every amendment to the bill put up by the Republicans was voted down. This is the Democrats Baby all the way. The Republicans had no responsibility in any of it. All of the problems fully belong to the Democrats.


The Republicans tried to make the USA and Dems listen. Dems ignored the sane truth.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> She has an individual policy. There are no restrictions on where she goes or who she sees. If you have a plan through an employer. You either take what they provide or get your own. It is your choice. She has no choice. Either she buys insurance that does little good at a very high price or goes without. I think she will go without.


I think a lot of people will end up going without. There seems to be no way to get those without insurance, but can pay for it, to sign up. This is the base for Obamacare. These people would rather pay the penalty/tax than actually pay for a policy. It is a hard sell for this portion of the population and knowing that they have been lied to for years isn't going to make it easier. Then you get the segment of the population that just doesn't care. The majority of the country didn't want Obamacare before it was passed, right after it was passed and even less want it now. That says it all.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are forgetting, the Republicans were not given a voice in the ACA. Every amendment to the bill put up by the Republicans was voted down. This is the Democrats Baby all the way. The Republicans had no responsibility in any of it. All of the problems fully belong to the Democrats.


What are you saying? Obamacare was a product of Republicans----Mitt Romney and the Heritage Foundation provided the model. It didn't become "evil" until the Democrats and Obama made it into law. It's just what the Heritage Foundation recommended. Still left in place are all the insurance companies and their thriving businesses. I thought repubs liked private business opportunities. The insurance companies are still the source of your healthcare plans. Private enterprise in action.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Right now, and since President Obama has been in office, I have seen no sane truth with the Republicans. I have seen utter desperation. They just don't know how to get along. They don't want to be a government as a whole, they want to be the government of the Republicans. That's what scares me. They are trying to take over the country. I don't want to be a one party country. I want there to be a party of the people country. And right now we can't rely on the Republican's as it seems they are being led by radicals. IMHO.


Lukelucy said:


> The Republicans tried to make the USA and Dems listen. Dems ignored the sane truth.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> I think a lot of people will end up going without. There seems to be no way to get those without insurance, but can pay for it, to sign up. This is the base for Obamacare. These people would rather pay the penalty/tax than actually pay for a policy. It is a hard sell for this portion of the population and knowing that they have been lied to for years isn't going to make it easier. Then you get the segment of the population that just doesn't care. The majority of the country didn't want Obamacare before it was passed, right after it was passed and even less want it now. That says it all.


You need to start listening to the stories from people who are able to get health insurance for the first time in years. Listen to NPR. They have daily stories about "regular" people and their experiences with trying to get insurance.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. I have to finish my preparations.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Happy Thanksgiving to you too.....alcameron! Hope you get stuffed.......LOL.


alcameron said:


> Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. I have to finish my preparations.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There are very few children that do not have access to basic medical care. There are the Medicaid programs and CHIPs programs in each state. There are also organizations like the Shriners and St Jude's that have hospitals for specialized care that are free for children.
> 
> How many children are without medical care? What numbers can you cite to prove your point? website? Are the parents of the children you refer to capable of seeking medical care for their children?


"Few" is a relative term. Personally, I think any child uncovered by insurance is too much. Here are some facts and figures for you:

*Health Insurance Coverage of Children 0-18 by State* (ranges from 3 - 19% of the population of children)

*Number and Percentage of Uninsured Children in Each State*(similar numbers)
http://www.childrensdefense.org/policy-priorities/childrens-health/uninsured-children/uninsured-children-state.html
http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/children-0-18/


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> It will be good for everyone.


Please explain to me how a child who has had cancer and looses their insurance is a good thing.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Yarnlady,
> 
> How they twist the truth. Obamacare hurts everyone.


Lukelucy, there is simply NO objective (factual) support for a claim like that. None. Obamacare "hurts" very, very few and has already helped millions, especially:

* children to age 26 now on their parents' insurance policies instead of uninsured

* children and adults who were denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions but now CANNOT be denied

* people who became ill and were vulnerable to having their insurance canceled because of it

* thousands, soon to be millions, of people who had NO health insurance, some of them for years. Some of them died waiting for this.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

alcameron said:
 

> No, it does not make sense, but it happens all the time with no help from Obamacare. Several years ago in my city the teachers, police and firemen, and city workers could not use the local hospital because their insurance company and the hospital could not come to terms. Nothing to do with Obamacare. It happens frequently.


Exactly. People are complaining about things that the insurance companies are doing, things that are NOT the ACAs's failures.

They're forgetting that the ACA does NOT make government their new insurer (though they want to pretend it is) -- insurance companies are their insurers (unless they're eligible for Medicaid), and the ACA isn't responsible for these cancellations (instead of changing the policies to meet ACA's higher standards).


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are forgetting, the Republicans were not given a voice in the ACA. Every amendment to the bill put up by the Republicans was voted down. This is the Democrats Baby all the way. The Republicans had no responsibility in any of it. All of the problems fully belong to the Democrats.


And all the glory -- and there will be plenty of glory. That's why Republicans feel they have to fight the ACA so hard, undermine and sabotage it if at all possible. It will create generations of grateful voters.

And as for voting down Republican amendments, Republicans have to learn the fine art of compromise. For them, compromise means 'be reasonable: do it my way," or it means nothing.

And then there are all those times when they refuse to take yes for an answer -- Obama or the Dems in Congress give in and they still won't cooperate. Harry Reid got sick of it the other day and lowered the hammer -- ONE of the hammers. The other one might fall if the Republicans can't learn to play nice just a little bit. COMPROMISE, that's how the Senate and House work.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bush relied on Intel from other countries as well as his own. He reacted to advise given.


That's actually not true. The TRUE intel from other countries supported the truth, not the lie. Some of us went absolutely berserk trying to get the mainstream media to listen and report the problems with the "official story" being told at the time.

For one thing, Saddam's son-in-law who had been high up in his administration (forget his exact position, but it was one in which he would have KNOWN the truth) had defected and told us with absolute certainty that Saddam had NO WMD, that they'd all been destroyed.

You may not even know -- again, it wasn't widely reported at the time -- that Iraq had agreed to inspections, etc.

The mainstream media covered for the administration and beat the drums for war. It was grotesque, and very, very painful for those of us who knew the truth but could NOT get any traction on media coverage of it.

Heck, some of the lies you could just listen to the liars and know in your heart they were lying -- Colin Powell at the U.N., Condi Rice on a number of occasions, that blustery ole bully George Bush, and others. Eventually I could even see Cheney's lies too, though he was a far more accomplished liar than most.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I don't know what you're smoking because my numbers are factual. Also, I and most folks I know pay their health insurance premiums quarterly in ADVANCE, not in arrears. I think you watch and listen to too many Liberal pundits and game shows. One more thing, PAYING for your insurance is a good thing, rather than having the taxpayers pay for it for you. Have some pride and take responsible for yourself; means EVERYTHING, not nothing.
> 
> You're wrong on all points but that is your prerogative.


Okay, you are actually RIGHT. But it's a mere difference of degree -- quarterly payments are for 3 months, not one, but the point and process is the same otherwise, just with a different timeline.

Do you realize that the vast majority of those who do not pay for their insurance (e.g., Medicaid recipients) are in poverty? Most are also elderly, children, or disabled. Your judgment and your 'advice" for them to have more pride and "take responsibility" for themselves are hurtful and frankly cruel.

Would you share NOTHING of your bounty to benefit those -- poor children, the elderly, the disabled? -- who barely have enough for food and so are not in a position to pay for health insurance? Many ARE working -- they're called "the working poor." The working poor can be found as Wal-Mart employees, fast food employees, low-wage jobs of all kinds.

There's an old saying: "To whom much is given, much is expected." We are simply not here to live only for ourselves, to hoard our wealth and look down on those who, for whatever reasons, don't have as much as we do. Another old saying goes:

"There but for the grace of God go I."

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> So I provided websites to back up my statement. If you think it's a bunch of bunk, *you find a website that says Valerie Jarrett is not involved with Obama's decisions.*


Ahhhh, and the goalpost shifts. You didn't say she is "involved' with Obama's decisions. You said, in so many words, that she was for all practical puroses the boss. BIG DIFFERENCE.

No, I doubt I can find a website that says she doesn't advise Obama.

Tell you what, when you come up with a credible mainstream version of that story, let me know. In the meantime, I'm sorry that your sources are ... junk.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> More fraud in enrolling people in Obamacare. Acorn with a new name doing the same stuff.
> 
> Sting Exposes Potential Crimes by ObamaCare Operatives
> 
> http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/17044-sting-exposes-potential-crimes-by-obamacare-operatives


Is this another Breitbart protege like James O'Keefe??

Old news, but relevant nonetheless: 
James O'Keefe To Pay $100K Settlement To Former ACORN Employee 
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/07/report-james-okeefe-to-pay-100k-settlement-to-f/192958


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

From an ER Doctor, some examples of what happens to the uninsured:



> Sitting in the exam room is John. He is 48 years old, a married father of two girls. He was the breadwinner until he lost his job at a call center, and is currently looking for work. His wife Lauren works part time as a teachers assistant. They have no health insurance currently, and are trying to get on the Medicaid rolls. John is not thrilled to be in the ER, but went at Laurens urging he has been having occasional shortness of breath and nausea, especially with exertion, and its getting her worried. He feels fine right now, but with their extended family visiting for the holiday, she wanted to make sure he was alright. He resisted for a week, but finally relented.
> 
> John doesnt have known medical problems, and his symptoms are fairly vague: no chest pain, no physical exam findings. The provider team obtains blood tests, an EKG, a chest x-ray  and everything comes back normal. Since he feels fine after a few more blood tests over the next four hours, the physician on duty says that he can go home. with the strong recommendation that he get a cardiac evaluation as an outpatient. It could be a coronary artery blockage, the doctor tells them. In the modern U.S. healthcare system, there is no way a guy like John gets admitted to the hospital for evaluation. And without coverage, John cant get to a specialist or undergo expensive outpatient cardiac testing, so he and his wife wait, and hope for the best. Once he gets back in the workforce, they reassure themselves, they will get him to a doctor.
> 
> ...


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> yes I did but Obama care is not going to help anyone. It has already cost the lost of insurance to those who are paying for their own insurance. They now have no coverage. If more people who can not get on Web site and do not sign up the poor will get nothing either. Why because of the way this law is set up.
> There were better ways that this could of been done. To lie and say you can keep your own doctors keep your own insurance. To find out he is giving passes to all except the individual person's who can pay for their own but now have to go to the exchange that they do not want.
> 
> Not praying that the poor are hurt, Just the Obama care. There has to be a better way to help all this law is a mess that is the bottom line. It is hurting everyone not just the poor.
> ...


But the thing is, Obamacare has already helped many many people. I know you don't listen to the good stories, only the negative ones, but there are many people that now have insurance who have not had it for years. You say you want a different law that serves all the people. Well who in the republican party has that law ready to take affect? All they say is repeal, but they have nothing to replace it with. What did they do before President Obama was elected to help all those uninsured people? The answer is nothing. Hillary Clinton tried to do something with healthcare when President Clinton was in office and they fought her every step of the way. You can not pray to get rid of Obamacare without hurting people, because the republicans have nothing to replace it. 
Evidently you and I have a different idea of what a Christian is. I believe a Christian person would pray for our President to succeed because that means our country succeeds. A Christian person would pray for Obamacare to succeed for everyone and would pray for the republicans in congress to back our President instead of trying to destroy him, because you know that they really hate him. It is the absolute worse treatment any president has ever received. Why? When I ask that question I always hear something like I don't like his policies. Well I didn't like Bush's policies either, especially since he lied us into a war that we should have never been in, but the democrats during the Bush 8 years did not treat him that way. Do you think what they are doing to President Obama is correct? Was it correct to use the filibuster to stop everything, even nominations of judges that President Obama has every right to appoint. Republicans have said well, democrats used the filibuster too, but the republicans have use it a record breaking number of times. Was that correct? 
If the republicans want a different healthcare law they need to come up with something. All they have wanted to do is repeal. All they have wanted to do since day 1 is make him fail and there is so much of that on this forum. Everyone from the right seems to really hate him, and I mean really hate, and believes everything he does is wrong. All the venom does is make the people on the left more determined to not "blink" like Cruse said the republicans were not going to do. I have not been one that called people names, although I have been accused of it. I guess this has gone on long enough and I hope you can answer the questions I asked.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> There are very few children that do not have access to basic medical care. There are the Medicaid programs and CHIPs programs in each state. There are also organizations like the Shriners and St Jude's that have hospitals for specialized care that are free for children.
> 
> How many children are without medical care? What numbers can you cite to prove your point? website? Are the parents of the children you refer to capable of seeking medical care for their children?
> 
> Obamacare does *not* provide medical care! It is nothing more than a piece of paper. The actual care comes from the doctor or hospital that will accept the information on that piece of paper for payment for that medical care.


Children with pre existing conditions whose parents may make too much for them to qualify for medicaid need Obamacare. The republicans and the big insurance companies have done nothing for them.
Do you not believe that parents would rather provide the things that their children need rather then always always having to beg for someone to provide it? Do you think maybe that is just another area where you tend to separate yourself from "those people" and just assume that the free care they can get if they try and if they know the right place to ask for it, that that is good enough for them? Do you think maybe your world is quite a distance away from those children that don't have adequate medical care, so that maybe you don't really know about all those children?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Your insurance card is about the same as the piece of paper. The Doctor or hospital relies on the promise made by that insurance company to make the payments. Most current insurance cards are known and accepted by all area hospitals and clinics.
> 
> The Obamacare policies are very restrictive as to doctors and hospitals they will pay. For many the only policy available will be accepted by doctors and hospitals at a great distance. Not very practical.
> 
> A friend in her fifties has been on the federal site. There are only 2 plans available to her. For either plan the hospital and doctors are 80 miles away. The closest hospital, a top notch one, is less than 15 miles away. Does this make sense?


What state does she live in?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitry said:


> "Few" is a relative term. Personally, I think any child uncovered by insurance is too much. Here are some facts and figures for you:
> 
> *Health Insurance Coverage of Children 0-18 by State* (ranges from 3 - 19% of the population of children)
> 
> ...


In the state of Texas alone there are 825,000 children without medical insurance, and therefore lacking preventive and needed medical care. That number is down from 1.2 million in 2010.
Remember I said that is in the state of Texas alone.
Thanks for the links, Knitry.  That is too many kids in my book.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> She has an individual policy. There are no restrictions on where she goes or who she sees. If you have a plan through an employer. You either take what they provide or get your own. It is your choice. She has no choice. Either she buys insurance that does little good at a very high price or goes without. I think she will go without.


Well, then she has a choice, which some people don't have. For some reason some people really enjoy playing poor me. The people on Hannity's show one night to complain about Obamacare had not even tried to find out if it would help them. The reporter then found out that at least in the one case I remember, they could get a better plan at less cost than the one they had. They just wanted to complain and play poor me.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. I have to finish my preparations.


Happy Thanksgiving, Empress Al!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Nussa said:


> IMPO, If the Republican's hadn't dug in their heels and fought ACA every step of the way, they could have been part of the soulution instead of part of the problem. The businesses you speak of may have had a stronger ACA to deal with. The Republican's could have given ACA a chance to succeed. But they seemed perfectly happy to throw everyone under the bus, just so they could say......"We told you so,".....Just out of spite. The Republican party needs to elect someone with a heart. I'm an independent voter, and right now, all I see in the Republican party is evil. They are letting themselves be taken over by the Tea Party.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Thank you for the individual state chart, very informative..... :thumbup:


Knitry said:


> "Few" is a relative term. Personally, I think any child uncovered by insurance is too much. Here are some facts and figures for you:
> 
> *Health Insurance Coverage of Children 0-18 by State* (ranges from 3 - 19% of the population of children)
> 
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You hit the nail on the head with that truthful explination Knitry.... :thumbup:


Knitry said:


> And all the glory -- and there will be plenty of glory. That's why Republicans feel they have to fight the ACA so hard, undermine and sabotage it if at all possible. It will create generations of grateful voters.
> 
> And as for voting down Republican amendments, Republicans have to learn the fine art of compromise. For them, compromise means 'be reasonable: do it my way," or it means nothing.
> 
> And then there are all those times when they refuse to take yes for an answer -- Obama or the Dems in Congress give in and they still won't cooperate. Harry Reid got sick of it the other day and lowered the hammer -- ONE of the hammers. The other one might fall if the Republicans can't learn to play nice just a little bit. COMPROMISE, that's how the Senate and House work.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Thank you for the individual state chart, very informative..... :thumbup:


There are a lot more than a "few", right Nussa?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Yes liars must like liars and you sure do stand up for each other, especially when you say me too, and me three, and me four.


Not nice to my friends..you are a bully!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Not nice to my friends..you are a bully!


Oh, Janie, give it a rest. It's Thanksgiving, afterall. Play nice with the others.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

NJG said:


> Well, then she has a choice, which some people don't have. For some reason some people really enjoy playing poor me. The people on Hannity's show one night to complain about Obamacare had not even tried to find out if it would help them. The reporter then found out that at least in the one case I remember, they could get a better plan at less cost than the one they had. They just wanted to complain and play poor me.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: I saw that one NJG. That couple were repeating only the rhetoric that they had heard. I believe he went on to prove that 2 more couples fell in the same category.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

That one's getting old Janeway....you'd better find a new site for finding your nasty put down posters. :roll:


Janeway said:


> Not nice to my friends..you are a bully!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> In the state of Texas alone there are 825,000 children without medical insurance, and therefore lacking preventive and needed medical care. That number is down from 1.2 million in 2010.
> Remember I said that is in the state of Texas alone.
> Thanks for the links, Knitry.  That is too many kids in my book.


Those children have lazy parents!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Compromise? Obama: "My way or the highway."
> 
> It is so sad that we cannot believe anything Obama says.


Obama, not compromise? He allowed the Bush tax cuts to continue, which I wish he hadn't. He only had control of congress for 4 months and the rest of the time he has tried to compromise, because he is able to do nothing without the republicans help. But the same word comes to mind again. HATE!!! Some of the republicans in congress are very very hateful, non Christian people. Other than the 4 months during his 1st year how has he said my way or the highway?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Those children have lazy parents!


Those children have very poor parents. They live in poverty. I heard the hispanic population in Texas will do anything as far as work goes to feed their children. But there isn't always work available. To call them lazy is cruel.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> You say ACA is dragging this country down. Now, were you this outraged when G.W. Bush started a war, on a bald faced lie? A BALD FACED LIE, that killed so many of our military men and woman? He knew the whole time it was a lie. He just wanted to be President of a war. He was no better than a warmonger. (A sovereign or political leader or activist who encourages or advocates aggression or warfare toward other nations or groups.) Just look at the mess and years of debt he's left us in. He passed that debt onto the next president who will probably have no choice but to pass it on to the one after that. And all you can do is whine about medical insurance. And you haven't even given it a fair chance yet. That's a far cry from a war. Maybe you need to get your priority's straight.


Not nice what you said about my friend.. Well Obo drew a red line then backed down so he is a wimp!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Have you been hitting the firewater again, Janeway? Your attitude is very ugly tonight. Your friends have fingers and can type for themselves.

PS your pictures are rehashes and not at all funny.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

theyarnlady said:


> Nussa I am not going to go there with you. I am not going to argue with you.
> 
> You think your way and I will think mine. We do not agree but I am not going there again.
> 
> ...


Yarnie, she is just a bully who tries to say that everyone is stupid so don't give her any time.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Here's one for you Janeway....my nasty, bully of a niece posted it....she's always posting bulling posters..Opps.....looks like my poster usurped yours...... :wink:


Janeway said:


> Not nice to my friends..you are a bully!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Here's one for you Janeway....my nasty, bully of a niece posted it....she's always posting bulling posters..


That is just perfect, Nussa!! :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Go to bed Janie, you are way too cranky tonight.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Have you been hitting the firewater again, Janeway? Your attitude is very ugly tonight. Your friends have fingers and can type for themselves.
> 
> PS your pictures are rehashes and not at all funny.


Oh, you have returned to be nasty!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Oh, Janie, give it a rest. It's Thanksgiving, afterall. Play nice with the others.


Well, you aren't playing nice as usual.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Go to bed Janie, you are way too cranky tonight.


Why don't you take your own advice & go to bed?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

No, Janie.I have returned to have fun conversation which you are totally incapable of. You accuse everyone of being a bully, but you are the only one here tonight doing the namecalling and bullying. Practice what you preach.



Janeway said:


> Oh, you have returned to be nasty!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Those children have lazy parents!


By that statement Jane, you do nothing to increase the likeability of the republican party. You just increase what a lot of people have said about republicans looking down their noses at "those people." You assume something you know nothing about. I also believe you make crazy statements like that in hopes that someone will call you names and then you can play poor me. You seem to love to do that.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

How was your Thanksgiving, NJG? We had a very nice one with my husband's family. We ate at noon then went to the Place of Hope shelter and helped serve up turkey dinners. The looks of total dejection on the faces of some of the recipients were heartbreaking. Too many kids this year.
But some local entertainment came and played Christmas songs and the atmosphere changed completely.
Even "those" people can sing and enjoy what little they have.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You're good people BP..... :thumbup:


BrattyPatty said:


> How was your Thanksgiving, NJG? We had a very nice one with my husband's family. We ate at noon then went to the Place of Hope shelter and helped serve up turkey dinners. The looks of total dejection on the faces of some of the recipients were heartbreaking. Too many kids this year.
> But some local entertainment came and played Christmas songs and the atmosphere changed completely.
> Even "those" people can sing and enjoy what little they have.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Those children have very poor parents. They live in poverty. I heard the hispanic population in Texas will do anything as far as work goes to feed their children. But there isn't always work available. To call them lazy is cruel.


I wonder if they are a citizen. Sure, let's insure noncitizens, too.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Oh-oh.....according to lukelucy's...new rule....non citizens don't get to eat on Thanksgiving!!!!


Lukelucy said:


> I wonder if they are a citizen. Sure, let's insure noncitizens, too.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> How was your Thanksgiving, NJG? We had a very nice one with my husband's family. We ate at noon then went to the Place of Hope shelter and helped serve up turkey dinners. The looks of total dejection on the faces of some of the recipients were heartbreaking. Too many kids this year.
> But some local entertainment came and played Christmas songs and the atmosphere changed completely.
> Even "those" people can sing and enjoy what little they have.


I had a wonderful time. Both daughters and son-in-law and grand kids went to visit my elderly cousin first and took him some of his favorite foods. His health is not good, {COPD} so we always try to help with mail, taking garbage out and assorted other things he needs done. His breathing was not good today and that affects his ability to talk too. Then my oldest daughter and I went to my niece's for dinner and my other daughter and family went to her in laws. I have two of the greatest nieces and they are also two of the funniest girls I know. Them together with my daughter made for a hilarious and fun day. These two girls have had some struggles. They didn't complete high school, but have both gone back and gotten their GED, both married, and have and are raising wonderful children. The oldest just home from the Navy has found a good job related to the technical training he received in the Navy. His brother has graduated from college and is now working. The other nieces children are 5 and 14 and in school and I am so proud of them. 
One of the things that surprised everyone today was the one boy who has recently graduated from college loves to hunt and fish. He always says he doesn't want a girlfriend because they cost too much money. Well we found out today he has been spending a lot of time talking to a certain girl, that also likes to hunt and fish. She had a picture posted on Facebook with a deer she shot. I think my mother may have been right, when she said "there is a lid for every kettle." I think he was waiting for just such a young lady.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> September 30, 2013.


If you are talking about the ACA, it is a law, passed by congress and approved by the supreme court. I think republicans need to accept it and stop trying to sabotage the president. It has been the republicans choice to not compromise with him. Have they passed a jobs bill? no Have they passed a farm bill? no Have they passed immigration reform? no I don't think I need to go one, but there is quite a list. of their obstruction. They have done nothing except vote to repeal the ACA. That is not much of an accomplishment.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Not you, NJG. The person you were renarking on.


MaidInBedlam said:


> I especially like the obviously deep Christian feeling this person expresses. If only we had more people like this, our country could become a 3rd world nation. NOT.:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf:


----------



## Knitish (Feb 8, 2011)

L-I-B-E-R-T-Y => LIBERAL. Enjoy! Maybe why you do not live under a king. No healthcare for americans, does this mean we all just die why corporations and the global elites put at least $32Trillions away offshore and claim they cannot do their share to help those that support them? And you are on their side?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

NJG said:


> Love the Lake says the Pope is a gift from God. Well here is what the pope thinks of your republican trickle down economics. What amazes me is how republicans can be so thrilled when they hear something negative about Obamacare. We see that every day on this forum. They hear or read something, never check out if it is true or not, just post and then are as happy as can be to say "I told you so." Do we ever see any concern for those less fortunate. No, what we hear is they should have gotten an education, I helped myself, and then they brag about how smart they are. Do you think, maybe, if the republicans had passed President Obama's jobs bill, that there might be more jobs for the unemployed. Of course that would help President Obama be more successful, and like I said you take so much pleasure in other peoples failures, that you even pray for the ACA to fail.
> 
> VATICAN CITY, Nov. 27 (UPI) -- "Trickle-down economics" doesn't help society's poor as promised, but does create an "idolatry of money" that is leading to "a new tyranny," Pope Francis said.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: 
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: 
This should be read, reread, tucked into the brain and heart, and thought about long and hard.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
PLEASE READ!

William Galston: An Executive Without Energy

Responsibility for the mismanaged ObamaCare rollout lies in the Oval Office.

By 
William A. Galston 

Nov. 26, 2013 7:13 p.m. ET

On Jan. 28, 1986, over the objections of engineers who described a high probability of catastrophic failure, senior NASA managers authorized the launch of the Challenger. The shuttle exploded 73 seconds into its flight.

In the last week of September 2013, a "pre-flight checklist" indicated that 41 of the 91 Healthcare.gov functions for which a key contractor was responsible were not working. Another checklist prepared a week later showed serious, and in five cases critical, defects in functions previously categorized as working. Nonetheless, the website was launched on Oct. 1 and failed almost immediately.

These episodes have a common feature: In both, the pressure to meet deadlines overrode evidence that screamed for delay. But there is a key difference. President Reagan memorably eulogized those who died when the Challenger disintegrated, but he bore no responsibility for the disaster. The Affordable Care Act, by contrast, is President Obama's signature legislative achievement, and the trail of responsibility for its botched rollout ends at the Oval Office.

Over the past century, we have come to see the presidency as the principal source of the legislative agenda that Congress considers, and we tend to regard the enactment of the president's program as the key test of his efficacy. In the process, we have played down the importance of presidential management. The travails of the Affordable Care Act have reminded us that this understanding of the presidency is distortedand reflects a neglectful reading of the Constitution.

Alexander Hamilton, in defending the presidency that the proposed Constitution would establish, remarked that "the true test of a good government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration." The Federalist's co-author famously saw "energy in the executive" as a leading characteristic of good government, in large part because such energy is "essential to the steady administration of the laws." Section 3 of Article II of the Constitution states: The president "shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed." The occupant of the office is rightly (and revealingly) called the chief executive.

In the early days of the Republic and for much of its history, executing and administering the law mostly involved enforcement. With the rise of the administrative state, a step prior to enforcement became essential. This involved translating Congress's will into terms specific enough to be workable and providing the means of administration. The chief executive's role expanded correspondingly to include ultimate responsibility for regulations and for the administrative activities of an increasingly complex executive branch beyond the White House.

No president, of course, can possibly do all this directly. As chief executive, his core task is to establish managerial arrangements that transmit his priorities to subordinates and ensure the flow of accurate and timely information up the chain of command, all the way to him if necessary. 

Every experienced manager knows that, left to its own devices, the system will not always behave this way. The agents acting on the president's behalf may have their own priorities and may not deem it in their interest to share information with superiors, especially if the news is bad. So the president must lean against these perverse tendencies, not only by demanding regular and detailed progress reports but also by establishing a zone of safety and encouragement for truth-tellers. The president's subordinates at every level must be on notice that candor will be rewarded and the failure to transmit vital information will be punished.

In recent weeks, it has become clear that President Obama failed to institute such arrangements. He rejected excellent advice from many quarters to appoint an overall project manager, reporting directly to the White House, who was a skilled executive with experience implementing complex information systems. The day-to-day links between the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services frayed, and responsibility for the website shifted four times before ending up in the hands of a midlevel bureaucrat at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services who lacked the authority to crack heads and break logjams. Although there were dozens of contractors, there was no prime contractor, a role for which CMS was ill-suited but filled by default. 

Making matters worse was a tension between politics and administration. The emerging narrative suggests that key regulatory decisions were delayed to avoid giving Republicans potent lines of attack before the 2012 election. Technology experts contend that crucial parameters were specified too late to permit adequate design and testing, and they are incredulous that testing of the overall system did not begin until just weeks before the launch.

The American people are losing what little confidence they retained in the capacity of the national government to act effectively, and the president's standing as a competent manager of his own government has eroded badly. Unless President Obama can restore confidence in the government and in his leadership, the people may well hold the rest of his ambitious agenda at arm's length.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> If you study socialism and the principles you will fast find that communism does not fit the bill. Anybody can call themselves anything, but it does mean they really ARE that. A person can call themselves non-racists, republican, democrat, independent, ect but that does not mean they actually aspire to those principles.* And Nazism definitely does not fit the socialism description (and it would be rather funny if both communism and nazism were both socialists since they both hated each other with a passion)*. The description for socialism is readily available and the description of what those governments actually put into practice is readily available. If you compare they are not the same.


I just wanted to emphasize this whole post because it is so factually accurate.

And add this: Not only did the Nazis and the Communists hate each other, but after WWII the U.S. "imported" a lot of Nazis into our own intelligence apparatus (the newly minted CIA) precisely because of their hatred for and experience searching for and fighting the Communists. For further information, google "Operation Mockingbird."

See, the U.S. had a lot of pro-Hitler, pro-Nazi, pro-fascist sympathizers among our industrialists. Henry Ford, for one, but there were many others. Some of our U.S. companies did good business with the Nazis. I think it was IBM who supplied the Nazis with the ability to tabulate their millions of holocaust victims, for example. The Bush family also benefited greatly (Brown Brothers Harriman, for which Prescott Bush was a director), until their company was seized because of the Trading with the Enemies Act, though (unfortunately), later returned to them. Prescott Bush became a U.S. Senator, his son became a CIA agent and later President.

I wandered off-topic a bit, but just in case anyone is interested in more info: *How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power* http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Those children have lazy parents!


Others have said it, but it definitely bears repeating:

That's not just cruel and heartless (are you seriously not ashamed to say that aloud?) but overwhelmingly inaccurate besides.

*In the U.S. 49.7 Million Are Now Poor, and 80% of the Total Population Is Near Poverty*

(You think they're ALL lazy? You think that parents of 875,000 kids in Texas alone are all LAZY? It's sick for you to think it and worse for you to say it aloud -- as bad as if you'd used the N word or some other racial slur. It's sick because apparently your sense of self, your self-esteem is so bad that you have to tell yourself such lies JUST TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT YOURSELF. It's sick because the only thing I know of that could make you so lacking in compassion for your fellow citizens is really poor emotional and psychological health. It's sick to so willingly believe the lies of your political leaders -- people who call themselves Christian to boot! -- against all objective evidence to the contrary so as to believe this in any way, let alone repeat it to others. My GOD! It doesn't even pass the smell test: Your conservative leaders have done everything to keep the economy from growing jobs so they can complain about the lack of jobs, but then want to blame those who can't find all the non-existent jobs for _their_ LAZINESS? Unbelievable.)



> *In the U.S. 49.7 Million Are Now Poor, and 80% of the Total Population Is Near Poverty*
> If you live in the United States, there is a good chance that you are now living in poverty or near poverty. Nearly 50 million Americans, (49.7 Million), are living below the poverty line, with 80% of the entire U.S. population living near poverty or below it.
> 
> That near poverty statistic is perhaps more startling than the 50 million Americans below the poverty line, because it translates to a full 80% of the population struggling with joblessness, near-poverty or reliance on government assistance to help make ends meet.
> ...


I'm sorry but I'm simply outraged.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

More on poverty-- and Republican hypocrisy and cruelty:



> *The Republicans Food Stamp Fraud: Its Not About Austerity *
> ...The economy melts down because of something a bunch of crooked bankers do. The people at the bottom quarter of the economy, whove been getting jobbed for 30 years anyway and who always suffer the most in a downturn, start getting laid off in huge numbers. They have children to feed. Probably with no small amount of shame, they go in and sign up for food stamps.
> And what do they get? Lectures about being lazy. You may have seen the now-infamous video of *Tennessee Congressman Steve Fincher, who told a crowd over the summer that the Bible says If you dont work, you dont eat. This while Fincher, a cotton farmer, has enjoyed $3.5 million in federal farm subsidies. This years House bill ends direct payments to farmers whether they grow any crops or notexcept for one kind: cotton farmers. *
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> How many of the individuals (of either political persuasion) on the dole are giving back to society or are they just takers. Have any of these provided a job for anyone other than the social workers, etc. That are paid by the taxpayers. At least the corporations are providing jobs. They could provide more if they could depend on the rules the government makes. *Most corporations need 5 or more years to plan for an expansion so than can expand and provide more jobs.*


Nonsense. All of it.

Let me ask you this: just what are you doing to give back to society??

Here's some more on poverty for all the heartless conservatives who think those on foodstamps are just lazy:



> In the wake of welfare reform and the financial crisis, the idea that the safety net is becoming a hammock, as Paul Ryan put it, is more preposterous than ever. Among nondisabled parents, for example, *the majority of food stamp recipients are either working or recently out of work. Before the cuts, they received enough to spend less than $1.50 per meal.* These people are not living large.
> 
> *It seems that to be a contemporary Republican, one must simultaneously believe two things: that Obama has immiserated the country and driven unemployment to intolerable levels, and that the poor have it easy and there are plenty of jobs out there for the taking.*
> 
> http://www.thenation.com/article/177032/gops-poverty-denialism#


But hey, logic and common sense aren't contemporary Republican virtues these days, are they? And the ones who are working are working at Wal-Mart, fast food joints, and other low-wage retail and service jobs as a rule. We taxpayers subsidize Wal-Mart wages to the tune of -- well, here, have a look yourselves:



> *Are American Taxpayers Subsidizing Wal-Mart's Low Wages? *
> http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-06-03/are-american-taxpayers-subsidizing-walmarts-low-wages
> 
> California taxpayers are spending $86 million a year providing healthcare and other public assistance to the states 44,000 Wal-Mart employees, according to a new study by UC Berkeleys Institute for Industrial Relations.
> ...


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitry said:


> I'm sorry but I'm simply outraged.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitry
Excellent posts, but "they" won't bother to read the truth. They've been lied to for so long by the right-wing "news" media that they can no longer discern fact from fiction. Is easy to believe stuff that coincides with personal bias and uncomfortable to believe facts.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Knitry
> Excellent posts, but "they" won't bother to read the truth. They've been lied to for so long by the right-wing "news" media that they can no longer discern fact from fiction. Is easy to believe stuff that coincides with personal bias and uncomfortable to believe facts.


I know. I just can't help myself.

:-(


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You're right alcameron, it's almost like a cult with some of these people......I'm sure if they had the ability, they would strike dead the President and anyone who sides with him.


alcameron said:


> Knitry
> Excellent posts, but "they" won't bother to read the truth. They've been lied to for so long by the right-wing "news" media that they can no longer discern fact from fiction. Is easy to believe stuff that coincides with personal bias and uncomfortable to believe facts.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

The republicans complain about the poor being lazy and being takers. Don't raise the minimum wage cause that will kill jobs. Well if you raised the minimum wage where do you think that money would go? It would be spent of course and strengthen our economy. It would not be stashed in off shore banks as the so called job creators do.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

NJG said:


> The republicans complain about the poor being lazy and being takers. Don't raise the minimum wage cause that will kill jobs. Well if you raised the minimum wage where do you think that money would go? It would be spent of course and strengthen our economy. It would not be stashed in off shore banks as the so called job creators do.


But you make too much sense!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Nussa said:


> You're right alcameron, it's almost like a cult with some of these people......I'm sure if they had the ability, they would strike dead the President and anyone who sides with him.


No exaggeration, Nussa. On March 21 Lukelucy had this to say:

"They bombed Israel while Obama is there. Too bad they missed him."

Shocking beyond belief.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well, that does sound just like something she would say....I wonder what makes her such a loathsome person? Her life must be miserable, to be so angry she would wish death on someone...... :thumbdown:


susanmos2000 said:


> No exaggeration, Nussa. On March 21 Lukelucy had this to say:
> 
> "They bombed Israel while Obama is there. Too bad they missed him."
> 
> Shocking beyond belief.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Well, that does sound just like something she would say....I wonder what makes her such a loathsome person? Her life must be miserable, to be so angry she would wish death on someone...... :thumbdown:


I know--goodness knows I don't care for most GOP politicians, but I can't imagine wishing such a thing on them. It's almost impossible to believe that these righties consider themselves Christians.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

alcameron said:


> You need to start listening to the stories from people who are able to get health insurance for the first time in years. Listen to NPR. They have daily stories about "regular" people and their experiences with trying to get insurance.


This means what? For every story of someone getting insurance, there is a story of someone that either loses theirs or has to pay double what they paid before. Still the bottom line is that the majority of We the People, did not/do not want Obamacare.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitry said:


> And all the glory -- and there will be plenty of glory. That's why Republicans feel they have to fight the ACA so hard, undermine and sabotage it if at all possible. It will create generations of grateful voters.
> 
> And as for voting down Republican amendments, Republicans have to learn the fine art of compromise. For them, compromise means 'be reasonable: do it my way," or it means nothing.
> 
> And then there are all those times when they refuse to take yes for an answer -- Obama or the Dems in Congress give in and they still won't cooperate. Harry Reid got sick of it the other day and lowered the hammer -- ONE of the hammers. The other one might fall if the Republicans can't learn to play nice just a little bit. COMPROMISE, that's how the Senate and House work.


Explain how Harry Reid COMPROMISES when he refuses to bring a bill passed by the House to the floor of the Senate for discussion, let alone a vote. Explain how Obama COMPROMISES when he says he will veto any bill from the House. Neither of these actions fit the description of compromise. Both parties are not willing to compromise which is the reason nothing is getting done in Congress and their approval rating is in the toilet. Our elected officials need to stop being selfish and immature and start to do the work they were elected to do for us. If they won't then starting in 2014, they should be replaced by those that will.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitry said:


> Do you realize that the vast majority of those who do not pay for their insurance (e.g., Medicaid recipients) are in poverty? Most are also elderly, children, or disabled. Your judgment and your 'advice" for them to have more pride and "take responsibility" for themselves are hurtful and frankly cruel.


KPG and others have never said that the elderly, children or the disabled that cannot care for themselves should not receive help. That is you (collective) spinning their words.



knitry said:


> Would you share NOTHING of your bounty to benefit those -- poor children, the elderly, the disabled? -- who barely have enough for food and so are not in a position to pay for health insurance? Many ARE working -- they're called "the working poor." The working poor can be found as Wal-Mart employees, fast food employees, low-wage jobs of all kinds.


The "working poor" are another matter. They are in low skill jobs mainly from decisions they have made in their lives, right or wrong most probably did the best they could with what they were dealt. However, that doesn't mean they have/had to stay in that position. There are a number of people on these threads that don't think the working poor can learn anything from their low-skill job, and feel they should receive every benefit offered. I say they are wrong. It's up to the worker to learn on the job, prove they want something better for themselves and take the necessary action to make that happen. Even WalMart and McDonalds provide that for their associates that have a successful attitude. They want their employees to succeed in life, whether they stay with WalMart or McDonalds or not. If the unskilled/low skilled worker doesn't improve their skills, they will remain the working poor.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No exaggeration, Nussa. On March 21 Lukelucy had this to say:
> 
> "They bombed Israel while Obama is there. Too bad they missed him."
> 
> Shocking beyond belief.


I think they say all those despicable things so they can make everyone angry at them and then they sit back and play poor me, you called me names. I know plenty of people who are republicans and they are not nasty people, they are good friends of mine, but this bunch on here leave a lot to be desired.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Explain how Harry Reid COMPROMISES when he refuses to bring a bill passed by the House to the floor of the Senate for discussion, let alone a vote. Explain how Obama COMPROMISES when he says he will veto any bill from the House. Neither of these actions fit the description of compromise. Both parties are not willing to compromise which is the reason nothing is getting done in Congress and their approval rating is in the toilet. Our elected officials need to stop being selfish and immature and start to do the work they were elected to do for us. If they won't then starting in 2014, they should be replaced by those that will.


The same way Boehner compromises when the house republicans vote 48 times to repeal the ACA when he knows President Obama would never sign it even if it did get through the senate, which it won't. President Obama has said he will veto any bill to repeal the ACA. Why don't the house bring immigration reform to the floor or a jobs bill? Because the republicans are obstructionist and will do anything to make the president fail regardless of what it does to our country. The filibuster rules had to be changed in the senate so that republicans could no longer stop ever nomination the President made.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> The "working poor" are another matter. They are in low skill jobs mainly from decisions they have made in their lives, right or wrong most probably did the best they could with what they were dealt. However, that doesn't mean they have/had to stay in that position. There are a number of people on these threads that don't think the working poor can learn anything from their low-skill job, and feel they should receive every benefit offered. I say they are wrong. It's up to the worker to learn on the job, prove they want something better for themselves and take the necessary action to make that happen. Even WalMart and McDonalds provide that for their associates that have a successful attitude. They want their employees to succeed in life, whether they stay with WalMart or McDonalds or not. If the unskilled/low skilled worker doesn't improve their skills, they will remain the working poor.


The working poor will remain the working poor as long as they don't receive a living wage. They can't even afford to buy food let alone try to further their education. There will always be Walmart and McDonalds and people working there. Not everyone nor could everyone be the executive stashing their money off shore. All the people should be able to work for a living wage. Why do the tax payers have to subsidize all those workers when companies like WalMart are making record profits? 
The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The income inequality is this country has gotten so much worse. Do you really thing this is good for our country?


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> This means what? For every story of someone getting insurance, there is a story of someone that either loses theirs or has to pay double what they paid before. Still the bottom line is that the majority of We the People, did not/do not want Obamacare.


More people are being hurt by Obamacare than not. Our rights are being taken away. That hurts everyone. There are still people not insured. It is a huge disaster. Wake up!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> This means what? For every story of someone getting insurance, there is a story of someone that either loses theirs or has to pay double what they paid before. Still the bottom line is that the majority of We the People, did not/do not want Obamacare.


Hmmm . . . .We the People elected Obama a second time. We the People (Congress) passed the ACA. We the People need health insurance. My point was that some people are listening ONLY to stories about people losing their current insurance. Not all of We the People need to sign up for Obamacare. I don't believe that We the People are harmed by Obamacare. And, for what it's worth, I bet even the Pope agrees with me.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> More people are being hurt by Obamacare than not. Our rights are being taken away. That hurts everyone. There are still people not insured. It is a huge disaster. Wake up!


Tell me two ways I am hurt by Obamacare. How are you hurt by Obamacare? Which of my rights and your rights are being taken away?
Yes, the ACA rollout was a big flop. Why shouldn't We the People work to see that it's fixed?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Eric Cantor is talking about trying again to stop workers from receiving overtime pay. It was tried this in 03 and of course it failed. He puts some fancy names on it like family flex time, cause instead of overtime pay he thinks people should get extra time off. Of course this will benefit the employer. 
Any way the republicans can screw over the little guy, they sure like to do it, don't they. I remember the optical business being busy at back to school time and the overtime money was used to get my kids back to school. Guess I could have had time off to just stay home and worry about how I was going to do that. IT was signed into law in 1938 by President Roosevelt.

Since Eric Cantor has not given anyone in the media a copy of his proposed Bill, all they can do is look back at the 2003 Republican Bill that would end the Federal Law requiring workers get actual money in exchange for extra hours worked.

One of the many problems with the 2003 Bill was that the Bill did not actually "require" employers to give their hourly workers the "family flex time" when the worker wanted to use it:

Requires the employer to permit use of comp-time accrued under such an option program within a reasonable time after the employee's request if such use does not unduly disrupt the employer's operations.

Now republicans try to convince me that this isn't a proposal to keep more money in the employers pocket.


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

Medicaid Growth Could Aggravate Doctor Shortage
Emily Berl for The New York Times
By ABBY GOODNOUGH

SAN DIEGO  Dr. Ted Mazer is one of the few ear, nose and throat specialists in this region who treat low-income people on Medicaid, so many of his patients travel long distances to see him.

Contribute to Our Reporting
The Times would like to hear from Americans who have begun to sign up for health care under the Affordable Care Act.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/29/us/lack-of-doctors-may-worsen-as-millions-join-medicaid-rolls.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20131129

There is a graphic which has a breakdown by states of Pct. of doctors accepting new Medicaid patients
in 2011, and whether state is expanding Medicaid, as of Nov. 22

The lobby of Dr. Hector Floress office in East Los Angeles, where more than a third of his practices 26,000 patients are now on Medicaid. But now, as Californias Medicaid program is preparing for a major expansion under President Obamas health care law, Dr. Mazer says he cannot accept additional patients under the government insurance program for a simple reason: It does not pay enough. Its a bad situation that is likely to be made worse, he said. His view is shared by many doctors around the country.

Medicaid for years has struggled with a shortage of doctors willing to accept its low reimbursement rates and red tape, forcing many patients to wait for care, particularly from specialists like Dr. Mazer. Yet in just five weeks, millions of additional Americans will be covered by the program, many of them older people with an array of health problems. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that nine million people will gain coverage through Medicaid next year alone. In many of the 26 states expanding the program, the newly eligible have been flocking to sign up.

Community clinics, which typically provide primary but not specialty care, have expanded and hired more medical staff members to meet the anticipated wave of new patients. And managed-care companies are recruiting doctors, nurse practitioners and other professionals into their networks, sometimes offering higher pay if they improve care while keeping costs down. But it is far from clear that the demand can be met, experts say.

In California, with the nations largest Medicaid population, many doctors say they are already overwhelmed and are unable to take on more low-income patients. Dr. Hector Flores, a primary care doctor in East Los Angeles whose practice has 26,000 patients, more than a third of whom are on Medicaid, said he could accommodate an additional 1,000 Medicaid patients at most.

There could easily be 10,000 patients looking for us, and were just not going to be able to serve them, said Dr. Flores, who is also the chairman of the family medicine department at White Memorial Medical Center in Los Angeles. 
California officials say they are confident that access will not be an issue. But the state is expecting to add as many as two million people to its Medicaid rolls over the next two years  far more than any other state. They will be joining more than seven million people who are already in the program here. One million of the newly eligible will probably be enrolled by July 2014, said Mari Cantwell, an official with the states Department of Health Care Services.

On top of that, only about 57 percent of doctors in California accept new Medicaid patients, according to a study published last year in the journal Health Affairs  the second-lowest rate in the nation after New Jersey. Payment rates for Medicaid, known in California as Medi-Cal, are also low here compared with most states, and are being cut by an additional 10 percent in some cases just as the expansion begins.

The symbolism is horrible, said Lisa Folberg, a vice president of the California Medical Association. 
The health care law seeks to diminish any access problem by allowing for a two-year increase in the Medicaid payment rate for primary care doctors, set to expire at the end of 2014. 
The average increase is 73 percent, bringing Medicaid rates to the level of Medicare rates for these doctors.

But states have been slow to put the pay increase into effect, experts say, and because of the delay and the fact that the increase is temporary, fewer doctors than hoped have joined the ranks of those accepting Medicaid patients. Theres been a lot of confusion and a really slow rollout, Ms. Folberg said, which unfortunately mitigated some of the positive effects.

Adding to the expansion of the Medicaid rolls is a phenomenon that experts are calling the woodwork effect, in which people who had been eligible for Medicaid even before the Affordable Care Act are enrolling now because they have learned about the program through publicity about the new law. As a result, Medicaid rolls are growing even in states like Florida and Texas that are not expanding the program under the law.

Managed-care companies that serve the Medicaid population here through contracts with the state are still hustling to recruit more doctors and other providers to treat the new enrollees.

Molina Healthcare, which provides coverage to Medicaid patients in California and nine other states, has hired more than 2,000 people over the last year, said Dr. J. Mario Molina, the companys chief executive. They include not just doctors, he said, but nurses, case managers and call center workers to help new Medicaid enrollees who may be confused about where to go or what to do or how to access health care.

Dr. Molina said the temporary rate increase for primary care doctors had helped his company recruit them to its networks. Recruiting specialists has been harder, he said, adding, Rheumatology is difficult; neurosurgery is difficult; orthopedic surgery is difficult.

Ms. Cantwell of the Department of Health Care Services said federal and state rules assured geographic and timely access for Medicaid patients, and the state closely monitors managed-care plan networks to make sure they include enough doctors. In California, she said, some 600,000 of the people entering Medicaid in January have already been assigned primary care doctors through an interim health care program for low-income residents that will end next month. 
She also said that since the expansion population will be older on average than current adult Medicaid beneficiaries  until now, most adults who qualified were pregnant women or parents of young children  the state had decided to pay doctors a rate somewhere in between that for our regular adult population and our disabled adult population for their care.

Dr. Paul Urrea, an ophthalmologist in Monterey Park, said he was skeptical of blue-sky scenarios suggesting that all new enrollees would have access to care. Having been in the trenches with Medi-Cal patients who have serious eye problems, he said, I can tell you its very, very hard to get them in to see those specialists.

Dr. Urrea said that when he recently tried to refer a Medicaid patient with a cornea infection to another eye specialist, he was initially informed that the specialist could not see the patient until February. And this is a potentially blinding condition, he added.

Dr. Mazer, who leads a committee of the California Medical Association that grapples with Medicaid issues, said the managed-care plans he contracts with keep on sending us patients, and right now Im scheduled four weeks out. 
Oresta Johnson, 59, who sees Dr. Mazer through the states interim health care program for low-income residents but will switch to Medicaid in January, said she had faced excessively long waits to see specialists who could treat her degenerative joint disease. Dr. Mazer is monitoring her thyroid gland, she said, and she is hoping she will not have a problem getting back in to see him next spring, when she may need a biopsy.

I understand theres a lot of people who need help, she said. But am I not going to be able to see who I need to see?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Michele Bachmann is not only against raising the minimum wage, she is against having one at all. She once said  if we took away the minimum wage  we could  virtually wipe out unemployment  because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level. 

And naturally Ted Cruz agrees. Ted Cruz thinks its a good thing that when his Cuban father came to America he was paid fifty cents an hour to work as a dishwasher. 


I wonder what people would get paid if they completely took away the minimum wage? Then imagine how many people would be on food stamps and need housing and medical care, but boy the corporations would have more money in their pockets and that is the point.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> More people are being hurt by Obamacare than not. Our rights are being taken away. That hurts everyone. There are still people not insured. It is a huge disaster. Wake up!


Henny Penny, is that you??


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Tell me two ways I am hurt by Obamacare. How are you hurt by Obamacare? Which of my rights and your rights are being taken away?


As far as I'm concerned, the ACA has been a huge success. My husband and I have been stuck for years with the heavily subsidized but still expensive Blue Cross his company offers--now we have the option of taking that subsidy in a lump sum and buying whatever insurance we like. It's going to be Kaiser for us--no "personal touch", no bells and whistles--just good solid inexpensive insurance that's more than adequate for us in this stage of our lives.
I've gone on the California marketplace a dozen times to enroll and select a plan--no problems with logging on or clicking my way through the site. The only problem I've encountered is having to provide proof of citizenship for my native-born son (my foreign-born non-citizen husband was approved on the spot. Go figure). I tried to submit an electronic copy of my son's birth certificate around eleven one day. Wouldn't go through until I chose an off-hour and submitted it again. Success.

Hooray for the ACA!


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> Explain how Harry Reid COMPROMISES when he refuses to bring a bill passed by the House to the floor of the Senate for discussion, let alone a vote. Explain how Obama COMPROMISES when he says he will veto any bill from the House. Neither of these actions fit the description of compromise.


No, you're right those are not compromise points -- those are decision points. The COMPROMISE needs to come earlier, in negotiations before a bill is brought to the floor and while being passed. Reid's refusal to bring bills to the floor that don't have a chance of passing is a good time- and money-saving measure. Why waste precious resources? Why just give Republicans face time on the camera and in the Congressional Record??

And let's be clear -- Boehner is actually far worse than Reid about bringing bills to the floor. He refuses to bring bills he knows WILL pass with at least some bi-partisan support. That's wrong, and both undemocratic and un-American.

Let's be clear about something else. If those who are "demanding" things are not acting in good faith, they're not going to get their demands met. They can't dictat terms and expect "compromise" -- their very actions are the opposite of compromise. This was amply demonstrated by the whole government shut down scenario. But they haven't learned.

Again, their definition of compromise is: Be reasonable; do it my way.

You know, I can't figure out for the life of me what they heck they think they're doing. They've done as much as possible to alienate every single voting demographic except for two: the obscenely rich (and wannabes), and those poor fools like those who inhabit this board who are their blind, deaf and dumb followers who'll believe anything, any propaganda Fox News wants to throw out there. So many of the lies, as I've tried to point out, don't even pass the common sense test, but they're eager consumers nonetheless.

There is absolutely no way the GOP can continue to win national elections acting like this. And given the nasty (but totally expected) fallout from some of their state-level over-the-top antics, they'll start losing at the state level too. Just watch North Carolina, for example, and Texas with super star Wendy Davis running for Governor.



> Both parties are not willing to compromise which is the reason nothing is getting done in Congress and their approval rating is in the toilet. Our elected officials need to stop being selfish and immature and start to do the work they were elected to do for us. If they won't then starting in 2014, they should be replaced by those that will.


No, it's not both parties, but that little lie (do _you_ really believe it??) is a very convenient camouflage for the guilty (aka: your side), isn't it?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Lukelucy said:


> More people are being hurt by Obamacare than not. Our rights are being taken away. That hurts everyone. There are still people not insured. It is a huge disaster. Wake up!


The Repubs and any intelligent and informed person knew three years ago Obama was incompetent as a leader and President and also predicted Obamacare was a horrible law for our Nation.

Today, those facts are proving to be true and the Repubs look like geniuses. Those Dems Congress members who now understand Obamacare is a complete failure but followed their party in lock-step and voted for the law (ALL Dems did in both Houses) are now beginning to separate themselves from the President to save their seats in the 2014 elections. (Except, of course, for Pelosi and the nit-wit Dems who won't face an election or be primaried or care about America.)

Too late.

Obamacare and they will fail.

Looks like the Senate and WH will have a turn over of parties.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The Repubs and any intelligent and informed person knew three years ago Obama was incompetent as a leader and President and also predicted Obamacare was a horrible law for our Nation.
> 
> Today, those facts are proving to be true and the Repubs look like geniuses. snip
> 
> ...


Yeah? And then whadya dream?? :snicker:


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The Repubs and any intelligent and informed person knew three years ago Obama was incompetent as a leader and President and also predicted Obamacare was a horrible law for our Nation.
> 
> Today, those facts are proving to be true and the Repubs look like geniuses. Those Dems Congress members who now understand Obamacare is a complete failure but followed their party in lock-step and voted for the law (ALL Dems did in both Houses) are now beginning to separate themselves from the President to save their seats in the 2014 elections. (Except, of course, for Pelosi and the nit-wit Dems who won't face an election or be primaried or care about America.)
> 
> ...


There you go again, blah, blah, blah, etc.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Hmmm . . . .We the People elected Obama a second time. We the People (Congress) passed the ACA. We the People need health insurance. My point was that some people are listening ONLY to stories about people losing their current insurance. Not all of We the People need to sign up for Obamacare. I don't believe that We the People are harmed by Obamacare. And, for what it's worth, I bet even the Pope agrees with me.


ACA barely passed. Went through by a very small margin. Give it a vote today and it would not go through!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well, it's like any of the "We the people," laws that have been passed. I know a lot of people who hate wearing their seat belts.....but it's the law. People aren't to be driving when their drunk....because that's the law. Yet the stupid ones still do. Some people don't want to buy, car insurance, they'd rather spend their money on something else,.....but it's the law. What it boils down to is, IT'S THE LAW! You have no choice but to follow the law....whether you like it or not. You can belly ache all you want....but you can't disobey the law, without repercussions.



soloweygirl said:


> This means what? For every story of someone getting insurance, there is a story of someone that either loses theirs or has to pay double what they paid before. Still the bottom line is that the majority of We the People, did not/do not want Obamacare.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Not after the stunt the Republican/Tea party tried to pull...You don't try to shut down our country and expect people to be racing to the polls to vote you in....IMO.


knitpresentgifts said:


> The Repubs and any intelligent and informed person knew three years ago Obama was incompetent as a leader and President and also predicted Obamacare was a horrible law for our Nation.
> 
> Today, those facts are proving to be true and the Repubs look like geniuses. Those Dems Congress members who now understand Obamacare is a complete failure but followed their party in lock-step and voted for the law (ALL Dems did in both Houses) are now beginning to separate themselves from the President to save their seats in the 2014 elections. (Except, of course, for Pelosi and the nit-wit Dems who won't face an election or be primaried or care about America.)
> 
> ...


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

I guess barely passed, was good enough for congress and the Supreme Court.......so it's good enough for me. I don't think there will be a re-vote any time soon.


Lukelucy said:


> ACA barely passed. Went through by a very small margin. Give it a vote today and it would not go through!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Nussa said:


> I guess barely passed, was good enough for congress and the Supreme Court.......so it's good enough for me. I don't think there will be a re-vote any time soon.


No re-vote. But there will be changes on top of more changes. It will morph into something else or go away.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Those children have very poor parents. They live in poverty. I heard the hispanic population in Texas will do anything as far as work goes to feed their children. But there isn't always work available. To call them lazy is cruel.


Probably 99% of those Hispanics are illegal--why don't they go back home? The states cannot support them anymore but they still keep coming across the border & have "Killed" border guards in order to get here illegally. I don't want to hear that they think they are having a rough time in any state as they have flooded the Welfare system.

There is lots of stealing around here & an elderly couple was killed by an illegal Mexican because they wouldn't give him their car as he saw it from the street & wanted it free so he killed then & took the car, but was caught with the knife with blood still showing on it.

I don't feel sorry for them.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> No re-vote. But there will be changes on top of more changes. It will morph into something else or go away.


Yup, I'll bet you are as sure of that as you were Romney was going to win. As my mother use to say, "don't count your chickens before they are hatched."


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

NJG said:


> Michele Bachmann is not only against raising the minimum wage, she is against having one at all. She once said  if we took away the minimum wage  we could  virtually wipe out unemployment  because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.
> 
> And naturally Ted Cruz agrees. Ted Cruz thinks its a good thing that when his Cuban father came to America he was paid fifty cents an hour to work as a dishwasher.
> 
> I wonder what people would get paid if they completely took away the minimum wage? Then imagine how many people would be on food stamps and need housing and medical care, but boy the corporations would have more money in their pockets and that is the point.


Two bright shining stars of the GOP or TP--Bachmann and Cruz.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> As far as I'm concerned, the ACA has been a huge success. My husband and I have been stuck for years with the heavily subsidized but still expensive Blue Cross his company offers--now we have the option of taking that subsidy in a lump sum and buying whatever insurance we like. It's going to be Kaiser for us--no "personal touch", no bells and whistles--just good solid inexpensive insurance that's more than adequate for us in this stage of our lives.
> I've gone on the California marketplace a dozen times to enroll and select a plan--no problems with logging on or clicking my way through the site. The only problem I've encountered is having to provide proof of citizenship for my native-born son (my foreign-born non-citizen husband was approved on the spot. Go figure). I tried to submit an electronic copy of my son's birth certificate around eleven one day. Wouldn't go through until I chose an off-hour and submitted it again. Success.
> 
> Hooray for the ACA!


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitry said:


> No, it's not both parties, but that little lie (do _you_ really believe it??) is a very convenient camouflage for the guilty (aka: your side), isn't it?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Probably 99% of those Hispanics are illegal--why don't they go back home? The states cannot support them anymore but they still keep coming across the border & have "Killed" border guards in order to get here illegally. I don't want to hear that they think they are having a rough time in any state as they have flooded the Welfare system.
> 
> There is lots of stealing around here & an elderly couple was killed by an illegal Mexican because they wouldn't give him their car as he saw it from the street & wanted it free so he killed then & took the car, but was caught with the knife with blood still showing on it.
> 
> I don't feel sorry for them.


Janeway,

You are so right. There are so many Hispanics that are illegal. I know someone on the border who is a prison guard. He says the jails are full of them. Not because they are illegal. It is because they commit so many crimes.

Obama probably wants to support them with his Obamacare. Help the world!!! And destroy the USA.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

BOO for ACA!!!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Well, it's like any of the "We the people," laws that have been passed. I know a lot of people who hate wearing their seat belts.....but it's the law. People aren't to be driving when their drunk....because that's the law. Yet the stupid ones still do. Some people don't want to buy, car insurance, they'd rather spend their money on something else,.....but it's the law. What it boils down to is, IT'S THE LAW! You have no choice but to follow the law....whether you like it or not. You can belly ache all you want....but you can't disobey the law, without repercussions.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well, you can always hope....... 


Lukelucy said:


> No re-vote. But there will be changes on top of more changes. It will morph into something else or go away.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Here's one for you Janeway....my nasty, bully of a niece posted it....she's always posting bulling posters..Opps.....looks like my poster usurped yours...... :wink:


This one fits you!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Have you been hitting the firewater again, Janeway? Your attitude is very ugly tonight. Your friends have fingers and can type for themselves.
> 
> PS your pictures are rehashes and not at all funny.


Mo, but you are slamming me about firewater because of my Indian Race!

Racist!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Lukelucy......How is it you hate President Obama so much, but always seem to think you might know what he probably, possibly, supposedly is thinking??? HUH?


Lukelucy said:


> Janeway,
> 
> You are so right. There are so many Hispanics that are illegal. I know someone on the border who is a prison guard. He says the jails are full of them. Not because they are illegal. It is because they commit so many crimes.
> 
> Obama probably wants to support them with his Obamacare. Help the world!!! And destroy the USA.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Go to bed Janie, you are way too cranky tonight.


You go to bed as you are not nice!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Probably 99% of those Hispanics are illegal--why don't they go back home? The states cannot support them anymore but they still keep coming across the border & have "Killed" border guards in order to get here illegally. I don't want to hear that they think they are having a rough time in any state as they have flooded the Welfare system.
> 
> There is lots of stealing around here & an elderly couple was killed by an illegal Mexican because they wouldn't give him their car as he saw it from the street & wanted it free so he killed then & took the car, but was caught with the knife with blood still showing on it.
> 
> I don't feel sorry for them.


This is from CBS News a year ago.

28 percent, of the foreign-born population in the U.S. consists of illegal immigrants, virtually unchanged since 2009 and roughly equal to the level of 2005. An additional 12.2 million foreign-born people, 31 percent, are legal permanent residents with green cards. And 15.1 million, or 37 percent, are naturalized U.S. citizens.

I would never expect you to feel sorry for anyone Jane. You are not the type to have empathy for others.

Boy that stealing cars and killing people. Caucasians don't do that do they, and I'll bet Native Americans don't either. Drats, it's just those Hispanics.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Janeway said:


> This one fits you!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> This one fits you!


The thing is Jane, it fits you better than it does anybody else.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> This is from CBS News a year ago.
> 
> 28 percent, of the foreign-born population in the U.S. consists of illegal immigrants, virtually unchanged since 2009 and roughly equal to the level of 2005. An additional 12.2 million foreign-born people, 31 percent, are legal permanent residents with green cards. And 15.1 million, or 37 percent, are naturalized U.S. citizens.
> 
> ...


No, you were talking about Hispanics so I responded to your words. No, I don't feel sorry for "lazy" people!


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> No, you were talking about Hispanics so I responded to your words. No, I don't feel sorry for "lazy" people!


Actually you responded to Patty, not me. You get confused so easily, you better just slow down and think before you speak. That must be why you have accused me of calling you names when I didn't. Never did get an apology for that, but then I guess that is because you are never sorry for anything you say or do. No empathy at all.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Nussa said:


> Lukelucy......How is it you hate President Obama so much, but always seem to think you might know what he probably, possibly, supposedly is thinking??? HUH?


NUSSA,

What "he probably..." was said in sarcasm. Sorry you did not pick that up.


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Probably 99% of those Hispanics are illegal--why don't they go back home? The states cannot support them anymore but they still keep coming across the border ....


No, as usual your working premise is completely wrong. (One of these days you may begin go get it: THEY ARE LYING TO YOU. Doesn't it bother you, not even a little?)

So, no, in the fact-based universe, they don't keep coming:

*Net Migration from Mexico Falls to Zeroand Perhaps Less*
...the net migration flow from Mexico to the United States has stopped and may have reversed, according to a new analysis of government data from both countries by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/

Google scores again.  (I do wish people would check out some of their pet biases first before posting them.)

Edited to add some more FACTS about immigrants:



> ../*most social welfare programs bar illegal immigrants from receiving benefits and require proof of immigration status.* That includes food stamps, as well as cash welfare assistance, Medicaid, and even the new health care law.
> 
> It's true that some children of illegal immigrants qualify for benefits if they were born in the United States and are citizens. (Critics derisively call them "anchor babies.")
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitry (Dec 18, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Mo, but you are slamming me about firewater because of my Indian Race!
> 
> Racist!


If you are indeed Native American -- and there's apparently some dispute or confusion about that -- then that would be an inappropriate comment to/about you.

If you have not been honest -- or clear -- about your own heritage, I would see this as sarcasm. If BP is not sure about the veracity of your claims, the comment might be sarcasm reflecting on the confusion itself.

MY preference would be for this kind of remark to be avoided. Because of the confusion, I personally don't feel I can be as definitive about confronting it, but I am also not at all comfortable with it.


----------



## Lkholcomb (Aug 25, 2013)

I think what a lot of people don't take into consideration with the "hispanics" in the US is that the US has, as a territory, Puerto Rico. They are natural born US citizens and can freely travel to the US continent. I have worked with many Hispanics and many came from Puerto Rico. They are not immigrants. I also live in a place with a large group of migrant workers. They are by no means all illegal, or dare I say, even mostly illegal.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Posted accidentally.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

After going away for a while, I am amazed that this is still going on. Is there anything left to say? I am full of admiration for those of you who manage to keep your temper in the face of such hostility and stupidity. I bottled out (a bit of English English there), but power to your fingers. You have the patience to carry on banging your heads against very thick walls.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Yes, I am!


The deer picture is yet another example of the fact that you can't disagree with anyone without jumping to the most disgusting insult you can imagine. History tells us the Native Americans you claim to be descended from had a greater sense of decency and honor than you have. I suggest you stop talking nonsense here and spend some time at the library.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

The day you put your hate a way will be a very cold day in a very hot place. You're no independent. You just parpot ehat you think your "friends" will like.


theyarnlady said:


> My you have a blessed Thanksgiving, and put the hate away for a day. I am a women just like you just because I do not agree with you. Does not mean I do not care what is happening.
> 
> Also I am an independant not a repb. or a Dem. I vote for the person not the party.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The deer picture is yet another example of the fact that you can't disagree with anyone without jumping to the most disgusting insult you can imagine. History tells us the Native Americans you claim to be descended from had a greater sense of decency and honor than you have.


They certainly do. It's difficult to believe that anyone could have so little self-respect that they felt it necessary to lie about his or her ethnicity. It's a very sad comedown IMHO.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

NJG, the louder some people shout out that they're Christians, the less like it is that they are. To pray that Obamacare will fail is to condemn people who can't get health insureance to death, sooner or later. Whenever someone here makes a big deal about being a Christian, you can be sure that person is nowhere near being a Christian.


NJG said:


> You said it. Lukelucy said she prayed for Obamacare to fail and you said me too. Why not say something, like I pray for it to be a success even though I don't believe it will. That would be a Christian thing to say. However, that is not what you said or meant.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Well of course it was said in sarcasm....Duh. Back atchya!........


Lukelucy said:


> NUSSA,
> 
> What "he probably..." was said in sarcasm. Sorry you did not pick that up.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

Yep.....just like I said......It's the Law.....no matter how it got there...and until found to be otherwise.......its the LAW.



joeysomma said:



> You are forgetting the Supreme Court only gave one decision. The penalty is really a tax and then it is legal. They have not made any more decisions on the ACA.
> 
> They have accepted another case regarding religious freedom and contraceptives. Then there is another case in the court system. Since the penalty for not having insurance is a tax, the ACA bill *had* to start in the House, and it started in the Senate, therefore illegal.
> 
> It is only the law until these cases have been decided by the Supreme Court. There may be other cases that I am not aware of.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Of course they do. Really, when the righties gloat about the ACA "failing" I imagine them standing around watching and cheering as folks who've been stripped of their new coverage are wheeled out of the hospitals in their beds and dumped on the street. This is what they want to see happen, and it shocks me to the core.


How nice to find a post from you. It seems like it's been a while, And, as always, you have something creatively pertinent to say.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

If Janeway is a Native American, right now she is doing her heritage no justice with her childish attitude.


MaidInBedlam said:


> The deer picture is yet another example of the fact that you can't disagree with anyone without jumping to the most disgusting insult you can imagine. History tells us the Native Americans you claim to be descended from had a greater sense of decency and honor than you have. I suggest you stop talking nonsense here and spend some time at the library.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Thank you so much, alcameron. The words of the Pope that you quote contain huge challenges to societies that are deeply committed to capitalism at the price of those who cannot, for many reasons, amass capital and, hence, power.

I look at our country and wonder how we can retain our individual successes and rise to the challenges Pope Francis I has asked of us. He isn't just speaking to his flock. He isn't just speaking to Catholics. Some form of sharing is being asked of all of us who live comfortably. I don't think the Pope is asking all successful people to divest themselves of all they possess. This is very encouraging. I feel the Pope is urging all those who have wealth to share that wealth, and it doesn't seem to me that he is asking the sucessful to give up all they have achieved.

My father served in WWII, in the CBI. He saw one of his compatriots torn to death by a starving mob in New Dehli when that man had emptied his packa dn hsi pockects of all he had to give. This is a horrific example of what ecoomic equality can lead to, but we must never forget that the consequenses of our reluctance to give what we possess can have terrible consequences.

Charities abound, and yet they don't seem to ever work themselves out of their jobs.


alcameron said:


> This is for all those conservative Catholics (and others) here who continually rationalize their beliefs about poverty, health care, inequality.
> 
> A few words from Pope Francis about the economy
> 
> ...


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> NJG, the louder some people shout out that they're Christians, the less like it is that they are. To pray that Obamacare will fail is to condemn people who can't get health insureance to death, sooner or later. Whenever someone here makes a big deal about being a Christian, you can be sure that person is nowhere near being a Christian.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

11 Ways Barack Obama is Way Worse Than George W. Bush

1. Spending
Both were profligate spenders. While Bush had Medicare Part D, and largely unfunded wars, President Obama has doubled down with an $812 stimulus package and ObamaCare  which has been taxing us without providing benefits. Obama signed onto the 2009 budget exploding spending, which he only slightly scaled back. While Ws average yearly deficit was $250.7 billion, President Obamas has been $1.273 trillion, and he has racked up over $6 trillion in national debt. Yet Obama once called Bushs debt irresponsible." Now, about job creation.

2. Job Creation 
Both had recessions to deal with. W. came into office with a recession after the dotcom bubble burst and then 9/11 hit. However, he was able to generate 52 straight months of job growth, before a housing market collapse. Obamas average unemployment has been 8.8% (Bushs was 5.27%), labor force participation rate is at the lowest since Oct. 1978 at 63.4%, without the benefit of much job growth - the country has netted 270,000 jobs since 2009, and the majority of Obamas job creation has been temp & part-time jobs. No hype, no contest. Okay, lets talk about war

3. War
While Ws invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan had bipartisan backing, and with prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi having stated their beliefs that Iraq had wmds, Obama feels he has the authority to send troops to potentially die for the country without Congressional representation. Joe Biden said W. should be impeached if he unilaterally took the U.S. to war with Iran, but the Nobel Peace Prize winning president may do it twice with Libya and Syria, while racking up 74% of the U.S. fatalities in Afghanistan. What about civil liberties?

4. Civil Liberties
The Patriot Act was opposed by Democrats and many Independents, Libertarians and libertarian-leaning Republicans, even in the aftermath of 9/11. Obama warned about the Patriot Act as a Senator in 2005, but signed onto it twice as president, without major alterations  by autopen. On Guantanamo Bay, he promised he would shut it down in his first year in office, but it remains open. And as far as domestic spying, the Bush-era breaches of Constitutional protections cant touch Obamas brazenly lawless NSA programs like PRISM. How about corruption?

5. Corruption
While the main bone of contention for Democrats that Bush was corrupt was the refrain of Haliburton and no-bid contracts, President Obama too hired Haliburton subsidiary KBR with a no-bid contract worth $568 million. Additionally, the mantra No Blood for Oil proved to be an ill-founded concern when post-liberation Iraq was opened up for oil contracts. President Obama passed a massive healthcare package, like Bush, but exempted many unions and friendly corporations, not to mention politicians like himself. Obvious green energy kickbacks for party supporters include Solyndra, BrightSource, and NRG Energy. The stimulus package was rife with pet projects and pork. This leads into scandals

6. Scandals
The most egregious scandal of the Bush era was Abu Ghraib, which ran as a headline on the New York Times frontpage 47 times. Fast & Furious has drawn allusions to similar programs under Bush; however, the gunwalking under Obama led to untracked assault rifles falling into the hands of drug cartels, which promptly used them to murder hundreds of Mexicans and border patrol agent Brian Terry. Benghazi, seen as an unacceptable scandal by many, is where a US ambassador was murdered with no serious rescue operation ordered until much later... after stand down orders halted rescue protocols. The IRS profiling of conservative groups, and the NSAs illegal surveillance programs, are also scandals that are not perceived to be phony to the majority of the informed public, as polled. Now, lets look at a key campaign promise

7. Lobbyists
Lobbyists were said to be a main problem in Bush-era by the Obama administration, and Obama promised to put an end to it upon his arrival to Washington. Yet he continued hiring lobbyists and even secretly met with them off-the-record. Additionally, members of Obamas economic team were plucked from Wall Street, and particularly, from Goldman Sachs, like Treasury Chief of Staff Mark Patterson, after the financial titan lucratively backed his first election. As for another big deal that makes Bush seem like a piker

8. Whistleblowers
Whistleblowers have been suppressed more under Obama than under any other president. The current Commander-in-Chief has gone after multiple whistleblowers in the NSA, including Edward Snowden. Witnesses to Benghazi have been hidden from public questioning, and the #2 man in Libya Gregory Hicks was ostensibly demoted for even talking to Republican Congress members about what happened. The administration has unleashed the DOJ on the ATF, journalists at the AP, and Fox News reporter James Rosen. Back to the economy

9. Economic Inequality
Economic inequality has worsened under Obama. As Emmanuel Saez found, under Bush from 2002 to 2007, the top 1% of earners captured 65% of all income growth. Under Obama from 2009-2010, the top 1% captured 93% of all income growth in the country. It could be posed that this widening disparity is a reflection of regulatory barriers to small business growth being erected in the private sector, the tax write-offs and loopholes for corporations that still persist (including in green energy), and the flood of easy money that is channeled to Wall Street, but erodes the value of the dollar on Main Street. Need I say more? So this leads naturally to GDP growth

10. GDP Growth
George W. Bushs real GDP or economic growth was a subpar 1.67% (the historical average from 1980-2000 was 3.405%), but President Obama is the worst post-WWII president in such terms at 1.075%. In fact, in the last quarter of 2012, the economy Obama helps set policy for experienced negative GDP growth of 0.1%, also known as contraction. This year, the Obama reworked the formula the government uses to come up with GDP growth numbers by adding Hollywood movies and other intellectual property sources to the equation. Finally

11. Race Relations
Race relations seem to be getting worse under President Obama, contrary to expectations upon the election of Americas first black president. While there are no sound reasons to believe George W. Bushs policies were substantively racist  it seemed a foregone conclusion that relations would improve under Obama. However, only 10% polled by Rasmussen believe race relations are improving. President Obama may share Kings dream, but as far as his record goes, it is too often being judged by the color of his skin, and not by the character of its content. 
http://www.ijreview.com/


----------



## momeee (Mar 22, 2011)

Ratings Disaster: MSNBC & CNN Bleed Numbers so Badly, Time to Call a Paramedic
Kyle Becker On November 29, 2013

The ratings are in  and you three fans of MSNBC are going to be extremely disappointed. As for you airport managers, you might want to look into cutting CNN 24/7, your trapped customers are not happy about a news network as popular as the TSA.

Newsbusters reported that CNN and MSNBC have lost nearly half their total viewers since last November (and their numbers are even worse in the key demo of 25-54 year olds):
Data released Tuesday show CNN shedding 48 percent of total viewers since last November and MSNBC dropping 45 percent.

The numbers were even worse in the all important demographic of people aged 25 to 54 as CNNs ratings dropped 59 percent and MSNBCs 52 percent. [...]
However, Fox News didnt see close to these losses. In total day, FNC is only down 18 percent since last November and 30 percent in the demo.

Just maybe these networks viewers are not pleased with the shocked, shocked I tell you! demeanor of these deceptive news outlets after revelations about all of the ObamaCare lies, such as: keep your doctor, keep your plan, death panels, no premium increases, wont add a dime to the deficit not to mention Obama promised not to raise taxes on the middle class.

Every single one of these confabulations was called out years ago in New Media and people were told specifically why they could not be true. Its not because people are mean that they called them out, its just that they know better. Obviously, a lot of MSNBC and CNN viewers did not.
http://www.ijreview.com/


----------



## lovethelake (Apr 6, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Tell me two ways I am hurt by Obamacare. How are you hurt by Obamacare? Which of my rights and your rights are being taken away?
> Yes, the ACA rollout was a big flop. Why shouldn't We the People work to see that it's fixed?


I will tell you how Obamacare has harmed me. My premium went up 20%. My prescription drug policy was changed to a different company and my prescription drugs will be more expensive. My Religious Rights have been violated by forcing me to pay for (non emergency) medications and procedures that violate my religious conscience.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> How nice to find a post from you. It seems like it's been a while, And, as always, you have something creatively pertinent to say.


Yes, it does seem like it's been a while. Still, Aw is right--things don't change much around here. As far as the righties are concerned, stupidity and hate are still the order of the day.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I will tell you how Obamacare has harmed me. My premium went up 20%. My prescription drug policy was changed to a different company and my prescription drugs will be more expensive. My Religious Rights have been violated by forcing me to pay for (non emergency) medications and procedures that violate my religious conscience.


Then change your insurance--you now have that option. My premiums have gone down because I was able to switch from Blue Cross to Kaiser, thanks to the ACA.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> This is from CBS News a year ago.
> 
> 28 percent, of the foreign-born population in the U.S. consists of illegal immigrants, virtually unchanged since 2009 and roughly equal to the level of 2005. An additional 12.2 million foreign-born people, 31 percent, are legal permanent residents with green cards. And 15.1 million, or 37 percent, are naturalized U.S. citizens.
> 
> ...


I noticed you did not mention Blacks as in my city, at a Thanksgiving dinner, 2 people were stabbed & one shot. At another gathering, three B teens was shot. A black lady was just talking to another woman, when a B. man walked up to her & shot her 2 X's in the chest--she is fighting for her life! Pray for her recovery as she has 2 children under the age of 5 years.

Police shot & killed a White man while trying to serve a warrant when he pulled a gun on the police.

I have not heard about any ANI's being in trouble, but it doesn't mean that they were not involved in violence.

All races have problems at one time or another with people being killed.

I do feel empathy for people, but 100% of the time on this thread! all you can do is slam me. I'm tired of that fact just because you cannot change my political party!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, it does seem like it's been a while. Still, Aw is right--things don't change much around here. As far as the righties are concerned, stupidity and hate are still the order of the day.


Not nice what you are saying about me as I could say the same about all of the Lefties on this thread!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Thank you so much, alcameron. The words of the Pope that you quote contain huge challenges to societies that are deeply committed to capitalism at the price of those who cannot, for many reasons, amass capital and, hence, power.
> 
> I look at our country and wonder how we can retain our individual successes and rise to the challenges Pope Francis I has asked of us. He isn't just speaking to his flock. He isn't just speaking to Catholics. Some form of sharing is being asked of all of us who live comfortably. I don't think the Pope is asking all successful people to divest themselves of all they possess. This is very encouraging. I feel the Pope is urging all those who have wealth to share that wealth, and it doesn't seem to me that he is asking the sucessful to give up all they have achieved.
> 
> ...


You are a Racist about the New Delhi Indians!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I noticed you did not mention Blacks as in my city, at a Thanksgiving dinner, 2 people were stabbed & one shot. At another gathering, three B teens was shot. A black lady was just talking to another woman, when a B. man walked up to her & shot her 2 X's in the chest--she is fighting for her life! Pray for her recovery as she has 2 children under the age of 5 years.
> 
> Police shot & killed a White man while trying to serve a warrant when he pulled a gun on the police.
> 
> ...


Janeway,

They are cruel people. You are a very kind person. Don't let them get to you.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

momeee said:


> Ratings Disaster: MSNBC & CNN Bleed Numbers so Badly, Time to Call a Paramedic
> Kyle Becker On November 29, 2013
> 
> The ratings are in  and you three fans of MSNBC are going to be extremely disappointed. As for you airport managers, you might want to look into cutting CNN 24/7, your trapped customers are not happy about a news network as popular as the TSA.
> ...


I mentioned this days ago as it was my assumption and was told I got it wrong.

Ya right! I hope these supposed 'news' talking heads on MSNBC don't lose their employer-based health insurance when they lose their jobs next November. It'll never happen because they said so, right?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Actually you responded to Patty, not me. You get confused so easily, you better just slow down and think before you speak. That must be why you have accused me of calling you names when I didn't. Never did get an apology for that, but then I guess that is because you are never sorry for anything you say or do. No empathy at all.


Well, guess you are blind as I did apologize but you evidently did not read it!

Don't say I don't have empathy as you continue to say bad things to me. Where is my apology?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Janeway,
> 
> They are cruel people. You are a very kind person. Don't let them get to you.


Thank you Lucy, hugs to you & hope you are over that bug that made you feel horrible!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Well, guess you are blind as I did apologize but you evidently did not read it!
> 
> Don't say I don't have empathy as you continue to say bad things to me. Where is my apology?


Janeway, They are angry people who turn the tables and make it look like they are innocent and others are the guilty ones. That is not true. Yes, we have written in anger, but it was in defense. They are always abusive.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Thank you Lucy, hugs to you & hope you are over that bug that made you feel horrible!


Janeway,

Almost over it. Tired. Very tired.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I mentioned this days ago as it was my assumption and was told I got it wrong.
> 
> Ya right! I hope these supposed 'news' talking heads on MSNBC don't lose their employer-based health insurance when they lose their jobs next November. It'll never happen because they said so, right?


Never mind those Lefties as they wouldn't know the truth if it took away their livelihood!

This is for the Lefties!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Janeway,
> 
> Almost over it. Tired. Very tired.


Glad to hear you are better so rest & maybe you will feel better soon.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Janeway, They are angry people who turn the tables and make it look like they are innocent and others are the guilty ones. That is not true. Yes, we have written in anger, but it was in defense. They are always abusive.


I know Lucy, but they don't even read when I said they accused me of not apologizing.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Not nice what you are saying about me as I could say the same about all of the Lefties on this thread!


Actually Janie, I'm beginning to understand why you tried to cover up your Native American heritage when you joined the site. Given all the bigoted and racist things the conservatives say here about African-Americans and Latinos, you had every right to expect that they would slam you as well.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Glad to hear you are better so rest & maybe you will feel better soon.


Thank you, Janeway.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Actually Janie, I'm beginning to understand why you tried to cover up your Native American heritage when you joined the site. Given all the bigoted and racist things the conservatives say here about African-Americans and Latinos, you had every right to expect that they would slam you as well.


Can't you be civil for just once?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

NJG said:


> Actually you responded to Patty, not me. You get confused so easily, you better just slow down and think before you speak. That must be why you have accused me of calling you names when I didn't. Never did get an apology for that, but then I guess that is because you are never sorry for anything you say or do. No empathy at all.


All of you Lefties are the same so it does not matter who gets the reply.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

I don't believe your source for a minute--just ask the border patrols as they are still arriving daily! Get your facts right my dear!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Knitry said:


> If you are indeed Native American -- and there's apparently some dispute or confusion about that -- then that would be an inappropriate comment to/about you.
> 
> If you have not been honest -- or clear -- about your own heritage, I would see this as sarcasm. If BP is not sure about the veracity of your claims, the comment might be sarcasm reflecting on the confusion itself.
> 
> MY preference would be for this kind of remark to be avoided. Because of the confusion, I personally don't feel I can be as definitive about confronting it, but I am also not at all comfortable with it.


I don't care if "any" of you Lefties on this thread believe me or not! I could collect a monthly check from the government & am thinking seriously about applying as I am full blooded Apache so eat your heart out!


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I don't believe your source for a minute--just ask the border patrols as they are still arriving daily! Get your facts right my dear!


They sure are, Janeway. Lots and lots of them.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Lkholcomb said:


> I think what a lot of people don't take into consideration with the "hispanics" in the US is that the US has, as a territory, Puerto Rico. They are natural born US citizens and can freely travel to the US continent. I have worked with many Hispanics and many came from Puerto Rico. They are not immigrants. I also live in a place with a large group of migrant workers. They are by no means all illegal, or dare I say, even mostly illegal.


Those who came across the border from Mexico are all illegal except their children that they are having like rabbits--as fast as they can have them & of course there isn't a husband so they collect Welfare.

I know about Puerto Rico as they are completely different from the Mexico people!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The deer picture is yet another example of the fact that you can't disagree with anyone without jumping to the most disgusting insult you can imagine. History tells us the Native Americans you claim to be descended from had a greater sense of decency and honor than you have. I suggest you stop talking nonsense here and spend some time at the library.


Your words are absolutely untrue! You are a bully concerning my race. You, the most disgusting Lefty accuse people of the very things you do constantly.

Eat your heart out as we were here first & will always be among the people so get used to it--leave me alone.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Those who came across the border from Mexico are all illegal except their children that they are having like rabbits--as fast as they can have them & of course there isn't a husband so they collect Welfare.
> 
> I know about Puerto Rico as they are completely different from the Mexico people!


Talk about bigotry and hate--you set the standard, Janeway. I'd say 'Shame on you'--but of course conservatives have no shame where racism is concerned.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> After going away for a while, I am amazed that this is still going on. Is there anything left to say? I am full of admiration for those of you who manage to keep your temper in the face of such hostility and stupidity. I bottled out (a bit of English English there), but power to your fingers. You have the patience to carry on banging your heads against very thick walls.


No one is "banging" my head against very thick walls. As I have said many, many times, our politics are "none" of your business so take care of your "own" country! So bud out!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Actually Janie, I'm beginning to understand why you tried to cover up your Native American heritage when you joined the site. Given all the bigoted and racist things the conservatives say here about African-Americans and Latinos, you had every right to expect that they would slam you as well.


Yes, Susan, my children were discriminated against in school, but they both graduated in the top 5 of their school of around 4,000 student with youngest daughter graduating with dual valedictorian with another student who went on to medical school. It took some time in school for the students to respect my girls. They made better grades than most students. They played musical instruments & was in the marching band. They also played the violin, piano & d #1 played the organ music in church.

When we first bought our farm, people said "do you know who bought the farm next to you--it is a bunch of Indians! After a few years, the neighbors saw how hard we worked & began to include us in the neighborhood gatherings.

Thank you for your kindness.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Lukelucy said:


> Can't you be civil for just once?


Might be best to direct your question to Janeway, my dear. Are comments about certain groups of people having children "like rabbits--as fast as they can have them & of course there isn't a husband so they collect Welfare" an example of conservative Christian civility?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> NJG, the louder some people shout out that they're Christians, the less like it is that they are. To pray that Obamacare will fail is to condemn people who can't get health insureance to death, sooner or later. Whenever someone here makes a big deal about being a Christian, you can be sure that person is nowhere near being a Christian.


Judge not or you shall be judged! Our Lord God will judge us not you!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> The day you put your hate a way will be a very cold day in a very hot place. You're no independent. You just parpot ehat you think your "friends" will like.


You are the one who constantly slams people so hang it up as you are not worth Yarnie's fingernails that she cuts! Grow-up!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Janeway said:


> No one is "banging" my head against very thick walls. As I have said many, many times, our politics are "none" of your business so take care of your "own" country! So bud out!


Janeway, you are forgetting that this is an open and international forum, anyone, anywhere can, and do contribute. American politics have international ramifications. And NO, I am not being a racist. I am NOT commenting on or slamming you because of your racial background. I am taking you to task for your continual nasty comments. You are always telling other posters that "they are the most hated and hatedul person on this site". You can dish the dirt but cannot take it when someone responds in kind. Your continual whine that other posters are only slamming you because of your ethnic background is pure rubbish.

Stop being nasty; stop being disrespectful, especially towards your President and stop the continual whining. If you wish other posters to show you respect, then you must show respect. Stop your own racial abuse of others. Your comments regarding Hispanics and Afro Americans can only be termed racial vilification.

In other words, practice what you preach. Growing up and showing a little maturity would also help.

I am now sitting back awaiting your usual tirade of abuse that you hurl at others who hold different views to you.

Oh yes, I nearly forgot. You will also post that you will complain to Admin and have me kicked off the site. Is that not what you usually post?

Just remember: as I said this is an international forum. Your posts are doing the American people a disservice. Others are judging the American people by your outbursts.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Might be best to direct your question to Janeway, my dear. Are comments about certain groups of people having children "like rabbits--as fast as they can have them & of course there isn't a husband so they collect Welfare" an example of conservative Christian civility?


Yes, what I said is the truth! Because they know they won't be deported because of the babies who are American citizens.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

First......you obviously don't live anywhere near a reservation, nor must you have any in your state. In my state there are a plethora of reservations. They're in every corner of the state. And not a day goes by when there isn't a shooting, stabbing, rape, or some other violent act being committed there. By tribal law, the state isn't allowed to interfere in the way the NA community is being run. But believe me....the state is called in a lot because the reservations don't have the manpower to deal with there own rampant crime. So what race is committing a crime in your area depends on where you come from. Down south it might be more Hispanics committing crimes. Anywhere else, it's a melting pot of criminals.

And Janeway......the term is "BUTT OUT!" Not bud out....Just thought I'd help you in the proper use of your euphemism, as you have used it incorrectly on more than one occasion. :thumbup:



Janeway said:


> No one is "banging" my head against very thick walls. As I have said many, many times, our politics are "none" of your business so take care of your "own" country! So bud out!


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

So Janeway.....throwing babies our into the streets now are you??? Shame! 


Janeway said:


> Yes, what I said is the truth! Because they know they won't be deported because of the babies who are American citizens.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> They certainly do. It's difficult to believe that anyone could have so little self-respect that they felt it necessary to lie about his or her ethnicity. It's a very sad comedown IMHO.


Well, Susan, make up your mind as one minute you are slamming me because of my race--then you have empathy for me. So don't be shy, which one do you believe.

Seattle is always more hateful than the rest of you Lefties put together!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> If Janeway is a Native American, right now she is doing her heritage no justice with her childish attitude.


Stop slamming me about my race as I will report you to Admin as I'm sick of all you Lefties about the way you condemn my race!

Knit something as here are the directions what part of the lamb you should select from!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Nussa said:


> So Janeway.....throwing babies our into the streets now are you??? Shame!


Get real! You are becoming a second to Seattle (MIB) with being so hateful!

Knit something! Look at the parts of the lamb to select what you will make.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

You already did that.....& I'm still here..... :lol: 
And you really must get some new posters....you've used the same ones two and three times already......No imagination.... :roll:


Janeway said:


> Stop slamming me about my race as I will report you to Admin as I'm sick of all you Lefties about the way you condemn my race!
> 
> Knit something as here are the directions what part of the lamb you should select from!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Well, Susan, make up your mind as one minute you are slamming me because of my race--then you have empathy for me. So don't be shy, which one do you believe.
> 
> Seattle is always more hateful than the rest of you Lefties put together!


Sorry, dear--it's not your race I have a problem with. I don't doubt that you, as a Native American, have experienced much racism and bigotry in your lifetime. But that doesn't excuse the deplorable things you say about African-Americans and Latinos--such things are unacceptable and show that you've learned nothing over the years about treating others with tolerance and respect.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

A fox smells his own hole first....... (In the being hateful department)

Which means:

A fox smells his own hole (first) OR A fox smells its own lair first OR A fox smells its own stink first. (оne knows where they belong, and knows when they make a mistake)

Used to mean that if a person is accusing you of say, cheating, it's most likely because they've already done it or are thinking about it.



Janeway said:


> Get real! You are becoming a second to Seattle (MIB) with being so hateful!
> 
> Knit something! Look at the parts of the lamb to select what you will make.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

lovethelake said:


> I will tell you how Obamacare has harmed me. My premium went up 20%. My prescription drug policy was changed to a different company and my prescription drugs will be more expensive. My Religious Rights have been violated by forcing me to pay for (non emergency) medications and procedures that violate my religious conscience.


The premium of my supplement went up too. It does it every year at this time because I get a year older. The first supplement I had didn't do that, but they had a higher premium to start with. I changed my prescription insurance to a different company because my other one wouldn't allow me to increase the dosage of one medication that I needed. I found another one that has a little higher premium, but I pay less for the prescriptions so I come out money ahead. Shop around, don't just sit and complain. What religious conscience? They way you talk to people on here and your lack of empathy for others tells me there is nothing religious about you. I think you need to find another excuse.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

NJG said:


> The premium of my supplement went up too. It does it every year at this time because I get a year older. The first supplement I had didn't do that, but they had a higher premium to start with. I changed my prescription insurance to a different company because my other one wouldn't allow me to increase the dosage of one medication that I needed. I found another one that has a little higher premium, but I pay less for the prescriptions so I come out money ahead. Shop around, don't just sit and complain.


So true, NJG. It seems incredible to me that folks will camp out in front the stores on Thanksgiving to score a great deal on flat screen TVs--but they'd rather let their insurance companies fleece them than do a little comparison shopping.


----------



## Nussa (Jul 7, 2011)

AMEN! :thumbup:


EveMCooke said:


> Janeway, you are forgetting that this is an open and international forum, anyone, anywhere can, and do contribute. American politics have international ramifications. And NO, I am not being a racist. I am NOT commenting on or slamming you because of your racial background. I am taking you to task for your continual nasty comments. You are always telling other posters that "they are the most hated and hatedul person on this site". You can dish the dirt but cannot take it when someone responds in kind. Your continual whine that other posters are only slamming you because of your ethnic background is pure rubbish.
> 
> Stop being nasty; stop being disrespectful, especially towards your President and stop the continual whining. If you wish other posters to show you respect, then you must show respect. Stop your own racial abuse of others. Your comments regarding Hispanics and Afro Americans can only be termed racial vilification.
> 
> ...


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> *Obamacare is the death panel.*
> 
> Obamacare is Killing a Mother with Multiple Sclerosis


Yeah yeah. Post carefully culled horror stories rather than your own experiences. How many folks here have had their insurance cancelled? How many have been unable to access the website? Anyone?


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> I noticed you did not mention Blacks as in my city, at a Thanksgiving dinner, 2 people were stabbed & one shot. At another gathering, three B teens was shot. A black lady was just talking to another woman, when a B. man walked up to her & shot her 2 X's in the chest--she is fighting for her life! Pray for her recovery as she has 2 children under the age of 5 years.
> 
> Police shot & killed a White man while trying to serve a warrant when he pulled a gun on the police.
> 
> ...


That was my point Jane, all races have problems with violence. As far as empathy you say you have, I don't believe I ever see it. People on the right always profess such Christian values, but then say such terrible things so I don't believe there are such great Christian values. As I have said before, whatever you give, that is what you get back. No, I do not want to change your political party. You definitely are a republican because of the things I mentioned in this post. You would be a poor fit in the democratic party.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> You are a Racist about the New Delhi Indians!


This comment is what I was talking about Jane. There was a story told about something that happened in New Delhi and you jump from that to your comment. That was totally out of line and then you act like you are being so mistreated. Wake up, do you really want to live the rest of your life that way. You can't be a very happy person.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Well, guess you are blind as I did apologize but you evidently did not read it!
> 
> Don't say I don't have empathy as you continue to say bad things to me. Where is my apology?


Show me your apology. If I missed it, I will definitely apologize right away.


----------



## NJG (Dec 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Those who came across the border from Mexico are all illegal except their children that they are having like rabbits--as fast as they can have them & of course there isn't a husband so they collect Welfare.
> 
> I know about Puerto Rico as they are completely different from the Mexico people!


There is that lack of empathy I was talking about. Group them all together, they are all illegal, having babies like rabbits, and no husbands. I don't know where you get your intelligence Jane, that you know all that, but I just have to ask, where's your proof?


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> *Cancer Patient Who Spoke Out After Losing His Insurance Because of Obamacare Now Being Audited By The IRS*
> 
> Bill Elliot was a cancer patient who lost his insurance due to ObamaCare and couldnt pay the expensive new premiums. He was talking about paying the ObamaCare fine, going without health insurance and letting nature take its course.
> 
> ...


Thank you for posting this very interesting piece of information. :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

NJG said:


> The working poor will remain the working poor as long as they don't receive a living wage. They can't even afford to buy food let alone try to further their education. There will always be Walmart and McDonalds and people working there. Not everyone nor could everyone be the executive stashing their money off shore. All the people should be able to work for a living wage. Why do the tax payers have to subsidize all those workers when companies like WalMart are making record profits?
> The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The income inequality is this country has gotten so much worse. Do you really thing this is good for our country?


A higher minimum wage will do nothing for the unemployed. Raising the minimum wage is inadequate for the larger challenge of reducing poverty. It doesn't do anything to get workers into more skilled positions or administrative jobs, which will actually pay the higher wages and provide benefits. It is only a short term 
"fix" which will show up in higher prices to cover employer's costs. It will ultimately keep them in the exact place they are now.

More effort should be put into bringing back the good paying jobs (manufacturing) and not into fighting over increasing pay for entry level positions and part time work. This is not good for our country.


----------



## Lukelucy (Nov 19, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yeah yeah. Post carefully culled horror stories rather than your own experiences. How many folks here have had their insurance cancelled? How many have been unable to access the website? Anyone?


Don't you care that this is happening to people? Don't you care about them?


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Hmmm . . . .We the People elected Obama a second time. We the People (Congress) passed the ACA. We the People need health insurance. My point was that some people are listening ONLY to stories about people losing their current insurance. Not all of We the People need to sign up for Obamacare. I don't believe that We the People are harmed by Obamacare. And, for what it's worth, I bet even the Pope agrees with me.


We the People (Congress) passed the ACA. That is not true. Only the Democrats passed the ACA, so it wasn't really We the People.

Those that are losing their coverage wouldn't agree with that. They are not the affluent. They are the middle class and small business owners, that took responsibility for their health care and it's costs without government aid and paid for that coverage with AFTER-TAX DOLLARS. Before Obamacare, individuals could make the trade off between costs and benefits in their plans for themselves. They decided what they could afford to pay based on their income, needs and desires in a plan. They can't do that now. E-Health reported that individual premiums must be 47% higher then the old average to find the new categories in the individual market.

Obamacare is limited to essentially 4 plans, leaving little room for innovation or policy choice to suit customer preferences. New mandates and rules raise costs so insurers must offer less costly networks of doctors, hospitals and other providers in their Obamacare products. Insurers then restrict care and patient choice of physicians in exchange for discounted reimbursement rates, like Medicaid does. Restrictions and reductions mean patients face the prospect of waiting months for appointments and driving farther to clinics and hospitals. This will hurt people.


----------



## admin (Jan 12, 2011)

This is an automated notice.

This topic was split up because it reached high page count.
Please feel free to continue the conversation in the new topic that was automatically created here:

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-219335-1.html

Sorry for any inconvenience.


----------

