American Politics during the Obama Presidency

Guess What A Republican Governor Wanted It.

Arnold S.

It Works. I am Saving Money.

Yes, There are some WEB some Problems on the Total states signup. The states that refused to have their States sign up for it in the First place are the problem..

The states that that signed up for it from the start have only a few problems.

Maybe your Political Party does not want you have Health Care. Or they want you to pay more for your Health Care Insurance.

The states that are working for the people have a few problems.

Tres3 What state do you live in?

[QUOTE=Tres3;436413]I am for universal health care, but the ACA handling by Obama and his Administration is a case study in incompetence. They were running the largest start-up in history, and they did not have anyone on the team who had run a start-up, or a business. Instead they had a bunch of politicians whose priority was a fear of the GOP. With that cast of characters, implementation of a law that was over 2000 pages long was doomed to failure from the get go. We suspected that Obama was incompetent, but the ACA implementation proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Tres3.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436416]Piers Morgan is no different from Hannity or 90% of talk show hosts. They will say anything for ratings. They will sell their mothers. Every program, they will have certain sensational talking points, program for impact. Any guest that can make any headway towards thwarting that format will get interrupted repeatedly and asked questions that will not allow any context to be given. "Controversial" is the catchword for modern media, negativity is to be milked to the fullest.

So the question, does Obama lie more than any other politician? 5%, 50%?[/QUOTE]Amen brother. Its all about the ratings and the advertising dollar. The ideology "debates" and polemics are only intended to fire up the viewers. No different these days from sports talk radio.

Ed Schultz, of the Ed Show, MSBCTV asked Sean Hannity on FOX to have a discussion together.

Hannity will not have any talks with anyone that does not have his same point of view.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;436424]Ed Schultz, of the Ed Show, MSBCTV asked Sean Hannity on FOX to have a discussion together.

Hannity will not have any talks with anyone that does not have his same point of view.[/QUOTE]Not true!

Hannity has had Libertarian Penn Jillette on, who on many many issues is different (Better) than Hannity...

Libertarian is better than Republican.

[QUOTE=SilverStar;436428]Not true!

Hannity has had Libertarian Penn Jillette on, who on many many issues is different (Better) than Hannity...

Libertarian is better than Republican.[/QUOTE]Where he can control the talk flow. At any sign of the talk not going his way, a timely commercial break can always happen. And I heard Hannity when pressed by Juan Williams, kind of muttered under his breath, " I'm not Republican". Not surprisingly, Juan Williams did not jump in and press the issue, they all feed from the same trough. Yes, a very good materialistic life do this people have, and they sleep very well, too. Thank you very much.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;436422]

Yes, There are some WEB some Problems on the Total states signup. The states that refused to have their States sign up for it in the First place are the problem..

The states that that signed up for it from the start have only a few problems.

[/QUOTE]Yes, as DCCPA pointed out, good state and local governments do things much better than the federal government. Government closer to the people works better. This would include designing web sites for insurance exchanges. So why not let the states do everything? If Massachusetts wants Romneycare, it can have it. If another state wants a system where there's a truly a free market in health care, with transparency and competition in setting prices, it could try it, if some modifications were made to Medicare and Medicaid. Then maybe the best systems could be copied and spread to other states. Or people could vote with their feet, like they are now for other reasons when they leave states like New York and California and migrate to Arizona, Texas, etc.

There is an article in Sunday's paper written by Robert Reich talking about the same thing.

Originally the Democrats wanted to graft health care into Social Security and Medicare, but republicans did not want that.

They supported private health insurers.

Under Nixon in 1974 he proposed what is the same as the Affordable Car Act.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;436430]Yes, as DCCPA pointed out, good state and local governments do things much better than the federal government. Government closer to the people works better. This would include designing web sites for insurance exchanges. So why not let the states do everything? If Massachusetts wants Romneycare, it can have it. If another state wants a system where there's a truly a free market in health care, with transparency and competition in setting prices, it could try it, if some modifications were made to Medicare and Medicaid. Then maybe the best systems could be copied and spread to other states. Or people could vote with their feet, like they are now for other reasons when they leave states like New York and California and migrate to Arizona, Texas, etc.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;436431]There is an article in Sunday's paper written by Robert Reich talking about the same thing.[/QUOTE]Robert Reich is a communist.

[QUOTE=Jackson;436432]Robert Reich is a communist.[/QUOTE]Why don't you tell us how you really feel about Robert Reich? LOL.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=Jackson;436432]Robert Reich is a communist.[/QUOTE]Worse than that he is a Democrat. At least Communists are honest about their intentions.

Don B

It is kind of hard to do, if you live in a Democratic country.

What is Michele Bachmann?

This what she said while fielding a question about which social programs she would cut if president, the Minnesota Congresswoman said that "China provided a good example of a society without a social safety net."

Bachmann said that "Lyndon Johnson's Great Society has "not worked, and it's put us into the modern welfare state...If you look at China, they don't have food stamps."

She continued, "They save for their own retirement security, they don't have AFDC (Aid to Families With Dependent Children), they don't have the modern welfare state, and China's growing...and so what I would do is look at the programs that LBJ gave us, with The Great Society, and they'd be gone."

The fact that China's government is resolutely socialist appeared to be lost on her.

Maybe she is a commie?

[QUOTE=Jackson;436432]Robert Reich is a communist.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;436431]There is an article in Sunday's paper written by Robert Reich talking about the same thing.

Originally the Democrats wanted to graft health care into Social Security and Medicare, but republicans did not want that.

They supported private health insurers.

Under Nixon in 1974 he proposed what is the same as the Affordable Car Act.[/QUOTE]My opinion of Red Robert Reich is similar to other posters here. He's a partisan hack masquerading as an intellectual, who lies through his teeth for his party and his neo-corporatist* agenda.

HOWEVER, he has a point. Not about Republicans. Since Nixon in 1974 the Republican Party has experienced Reagan, Gingrich, and the Tea Party. It's a different animal. The majority of Republicans today wouldn't support the ACA, with or without Obama. But there is a need for radical restructuring of the health care system. If health care were grafted onto social security like it is in Singapore, so that most of health care expenditures were the responsibility of individuals and there were real competition and price transparency, I could support that. I could also support a system like what Jackson has described in Argentina, where a small part of GDP, maybe 5%, would pay for universal public health care, while private options would also be allowed. Please note that 5% of GDP would be less than what's spent in the USA on Medicare and Medicaid, but more than what's spent in Singapore for all its health care. And by almost every statistic, medical care is superior in Singapore to the USA.

This is all a pipe dream though. The vested interests, being seniors who expect to take 2 or 3 times more out of Medicare than what they spent on it, the insurance companies, and the lawyers who sue doctors and the insurance companies, will never allow the free market to exist in medicine. And, if you were to put somebody like Robert Reich in charge of health care, he would muck it up worse than it is now, like what's happening with the ACA.

*Note to Esten: This word is for you. You should cheerfully accept that you're a Neo-corporatist, just as I'm proud of my new label that you kindly provided, Neoliberal.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;436436] But there is a need for radical restructuring of the health care system. If health care were grafted onto social security like it is in Singapore, so that most of health care expenditures were the responsibility of individuals and there were real competition and price transparency, I could support that. [/QUOTE]A new viewpoint? Ala Ben Carson?

A little historical perspective from Wikipedia: The 1993 Republican alternative, introduced by Sen. John Chafee as the Health & Access Reform Bill Today Act contained an "universal coverage" requirement with a penalty for non compliance-an individual mandate as well as subsidies to be used in state based purchasing programs. Of the 43 Republican Senators from 1993, almost half-20 out of 43 supported the HEART ACT. At that time of these proposals, Republicans did not raise constitutional issues with the mandate.

So what gives? It can't be about funding? It can't be about personal liberties?

It was all about Obama. I will leave at that.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436437]A new viewpoint? Ala Ben Carson?

A little historical perspective from Wikipedia: The 1993 Republican alternative, introduced by Sen. John Chafee as the Health & Access Reform Bill Today Act contained an "universal coverage" requirement with a penalty for non compliance-an individual mandate as well as subsidies to be used in state based purchasing programs. Of the 43 Republican Senators from 1993, almost half-20 out of 43 supported the HEART ACT. At that time of these proposals, Republicans did not raise constitutional issues with the mandate.

So what gives? It can't be about funding? It can't be about personal liberties?

It was all about Obama. I will leave at that.[/QUOTE]You're agreeing with me then? In 1993, twenty years ago, before the 1994 Gingrich Revolution and the Tea Party, a majority of Republicans in the Senate did not support something that you believe was similar to the ACA? How much would the 1993 legislation have cost the taxpayer? How much will Obamacare cost the taxpayer? So if this was popular among Republicans at the same time Hillary Clinton was pushing health care reform, how come nothing came of any of it? These are really questions, I don't know the answers.

Food for Thought.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28900[/ATTACH]

Nuf said!

[B]Hum on this BS![/B]

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436415]If you are under any employer sponsored medical plans, you can hum loudly. [/QUOTE]My former employer no longer offers the catastrophic policy I carried, except if you're under 30 years of age. (age discrimination?)

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436415] If you do not have a job, you can hum somewhat out of tune (no job), but because under poverty provisions, you can qualify for subsidized medical insurance.[/QUOTE]Yes of course we take better care of those that refuse to work than those who worked all their lives.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436415]If you are live out of the country, you can either croak or hum because ACA does not apply to you. And your financial & health condition will dictate your humming.[/QUOTE]Not completely true if like me your not out of the country for 330 day a year your not exempt. I live out of the country 8 or 9 months a year, so I will be required to buy insurance for the entire year and it will cost much more than the catastrophic policy I carried before.

You call this universal heath care, how well does it pay if you're out of network or how about out of the country?

There are ways I could lessen the impact of this such as delaying SS benefits and not taking 401k or IRA money and only showing my pension as income. I would actually qualify for a subsidy, but I don't want to delay SS and I don't want a government handout to purchase something I don't want or need to begin with.

I worked all my life (first job at age twelve) and went through some pretty lean times but I never accepted a handout and I don't plan on taking one now. So thanks to you progressives and your nannyism I will be forced to engage in civil disobedience, I will refuse to buy insurance and make sure I don't have a tax refund coming so they can't collect the penalty. Before ObamaCare I had catastrophic coverage now I'm at the mercy of the gods. Perhaps you, Obama, and Dr. Carson could say a little prayer for me next Sunday at church.

Yes Christie Won.

But what did the rest of the Tea Party do help the rest of your Republican Party?

How did they get to into the Republican party?

Were you Sleeping again?

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party[/URL]

Just like Ran Paul, I copied most of true History, that repeated itself. Not like he did not knowing truth or not.

Tell him to go back to school.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436416]Piers Morgan is no different from Hannity or 90% of talk show hosts. They will say anything for ratings. They will sell their mothers. Every program, they will have certain sensational talking points, program for impact. Any guest that can make any headway towards thwarting that format will get interrupted repeatedly and asked questions that will not allow any context to be given. "Controversial" is the catchword for modern media, negativity is to be milked to the fullest.
[/QUOTE]Finally something we can agree on, kind of, the ratings part that is, but;.

[I]”Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan, known professionally as Piers Morgan, is a British journalist, television host and former television talent competition judge currently working in the United States.”[/I]
Piers Morgan needs to worry about his own country and not ours. From what I hear the British don't want him either, that's why he's in the USA.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436416]So the question, does Obama lie more than any other politician? 5%, 50%?[/QUOTE]If I beat my wife less than you beat you wife, is it ok for me? Employees that lie to their employers or who lie on job applications should be fired.

[QUOTE=Punter127;436442]There are ways I could lessen the impact of this such as delaying SS benefits and not taking 401k or IRA money and only showing my pension as income. I would actually qualify for a subsidy, but I don't want to delay SS and I don't want a government handout to purchase something I don't want or need to begin

Perhaps you, Obama, and Dr. Carson could say a little prayer for me next Sunday at church.[/QUOTE]Step into the void. Be not afraid, for thou art with me.

As a recipient of Medicare, $100 is deducted from my SS payments every month. I still claim LA as my residence, but I am out of the country 11 months out of every year. In everyday routine health issues, the Health Coverage is totally useless for me as I cannot use it overseas unless for emergency care. In such cases, I can submit claims and be reimburse. As a I understand it, you have to prove you are on vacation, thus you cannot be out of the USA for more than 6 months (my brother's experience in London, bill was $40,000).

I do see my doctor whenever I'm in town, my medications are covered by my insurance. In general, I have been paying out of pocket for physician visits & lab tests in Bangkok. I also covered my own optical & dental expenses. No, no, no! Massages are not covered! Far from wealthy, I am lucky to be able to afford my health care & massage expenses so far. My latest tests showed that I am in good health, so I am one lucky SOB. Hope you are, too.

So step into the Promised Land. Rejoice! And be exceedingly glad, for great is thy reward.

[QUOTE=Punter127;436442]There are ways I could lessen the impact of this such as delaying SS benefits and not taking 401k or IRA money and only showing my pension as income. I would actually qualify for a subsidy, but I don't want to delay SS and I don't want a government handout to purchase something I don't want or need to begin with.

I worked all my life (first job at age twelve) and went through some pretty lean times but I never accepted a handout and I don't plan on taking one now. So thanks to you progressives and your nannyism I will be forced to engage in civil disobedience, I will refuse to buy insurance and make sure I don't have a tax refund coming so they can't collect the penalty. Before ObamaCare I had catastrophic coverage now I'm at the mercy of the gods. Perhaps you, Obama, and Dr. Carson could say a little prayer for me next Sunday at church.[/QUOTE]No insurance is your decision, you take your own risks. Don't ask others to pray for the decisions you make, especially when you're eligible for a tax credit but refuse out of pride. People with lower incomes accept paying lower tax rates, accept standard deductions and other provisions that lower their tax burden. The ACA tax credit should be no different.

Prior to the ACA, people were benefiting from a system that discriminated against other people with preexisting conditions. A system that changes that needs more revenue. If you think the hardship of some people paying more for insurance outweighs the hardship of those with preexisting conditions, you can try to change the law. Good luck.

[QUOTE=Esten;436446]...especially when you're eligible for a tax credit but refuse out of pride. People with lower incomes accept paying lower tax rates, accept standard deductions and other provisions that lower their tax burden. The ACA tax credit should be no different.[/QUOTE]Bullshit. Except for government employees, anyone that takes ANY money from the government should be ashamed of themselves for being a parasitic leech.

Stop preaching government dependency!

[QUOTE]Prior to the ACA, people were benefiting from a system that discriminated against other people with preexisting conditions.[/QUOTE]More bullshit hyperbole.

Are you being "[I]discriminated against[/I]" when a property insurance company declines to sell you fire insurance today to retroactively cover your house that burned down yesterday?

Are you being "[I]discriminated against[/I]" when an auto insurance company declines to sell you an auto accident policy today to retroactively cover you for your accident last week?

Are you being "[I]discriminated against[/I]" when a life insurance company declines to sell you a life insurance policy today to pay benefits for your loved one who died last month?

It's not discrimination, it's business, and by your rules they'd be out of business.

Thanks,

Jax

Remember when Nancy Pelosi said "[I]We have to pass it, to find out what's in it.[/I]"

A physician called into a radio show and said: "[I]that's the definition of a stool sample.[/I]"

That pretty well sums it up, and I believe we should have universal healthcare. Unfortunately, ACA is not the answer.

Tres3.

[QUOTE=Jackson;436448]Are you being "[I]discriminated against[/I]" when an auto insurance company declines to sell you an auto accident policy today to retroactively cover you for your accident yesterday?Jax[/QUOTE]I get your point. But it has been known for people to have bought car insurance for years with good record & no claims, then have a couple of accidents / tickets within a short period, to have their insurance rates go up or outright cancelled.

Also, we are talking about health care, not cars or houses. Otherwise, Punter127 wouldn't feel so naked in the wilderness.

So my state opted for its own exchange and like the feds' exchange, it has been down a lot and has a lot of bugs. Nevertheless, after four tries I was able to sign up for insurance (I've been retired for 18 months now so my COBRA expired last month). But, the system that was supposed to verify my SS# was not working so I have to do two things that are kind of impossible:

1) Fax a copy of my SS card, which who the fuck has one of those these days, and SSA won't send you one either.

2) Show evidence of my 2014 income, which how the fuck do I know what that will be? I mean, I do know, because it will be the precise amount designed to exploit the system to my own best advantage, but how do I prove I am going to sell X amount of stock at some why date during 2014 to produce Z amount of (federally tax-free) capital gain? They want a letter from your employer or some shit and if I had an employer it would piss him or her off to have to write some jive ass letter. They don't even tell you to whom it should be addressed. IRS? Insurance company? Obama? I wrote 'them a letter explaining the difference between my '12 and '13 income and telling them my best guess as to what income I would show for 2014 so we will see what happens. I faxed it today and left hard copy for my agent to mail because I figure the fax will get mis-filed somewhere.

I also had to do a couple of things that were easy enough but which were not supposed to be necessary because they had "integrated systems": fax a copy of my passport to prove my citizenship, and fax my 2012 tax return. Supposedly the exchange will compile all this and somehow notify the insurer, who will eventually allegedly contact me.

I got a Silver plan and chose a high co-pay for office visits and meds in exchange for a $1450 annual out-of-pocket max. The cost to me will be $219 a month. Is that cheap? I don't know but it won't do me a hell of a lot of good for at least four months since I won't be in the US. For ex-pats, almost any US insurance will be "catastrophic coverage" in that you have to go back to the US to get coverage and you'd only do that for something serious.

So for guys like Punter who are considering civil disobedience, I offer the following:

There are numerous exemptions from the penalty for not being insured. The one I like best is Hardship Exemption #3: "You received a shut-off notice from a utility company." So don't pay your garbage bill for a while, get the shut off notice, pay the garbage bill, lather, rinse, repeat. I also like Hardship Exemption #8, "You had medical expenses you couldn't pay in the last 24 months." Umm well yeah I had no insurance so I could not pay my medical bills so now I don't have to get insurance. Hmm.

One thing I could get pissed off about if I felt like it would be that now men and women pay the same rate, but all policies must cover maternity care, but no men require maternity care. So men are paying for women's maternity care, whether men have children or not. Oh well. I paid to educate other people's children my whole working life so now those who are still working can subsidize my health insurance premium, so that my premium can subsidize others' procreation costs.

I'll try to pass on most of my $373 monthly subsidy to some hookers to kind of even things out.

[QUOTE=Esten;436446]No insurance is your decision, you take your own risks. Don't ask others to pray for the decisions you make, especially when you're eligible for a tax credit but refuse out of pride.[/QUOTE]Stop acting like a fucking moron, I would have to manipulate my income to qualify for any amount of subsidy. I'm not about to lower my standard of living in order to get a handout.

Obama said "If you like your healthcare plan, you'll be able to keep your healthcare plan, period." Well I liked my plan but Obama has reneged on his promise. And now the lying bastard wants to force me to buy a plan that cost nearly twice what I was paying, and it's a plan I don't want and it doesn't fit my needs.

I can buy health insurance outside the United States that will cover me anyplace in the world, the only restriction is it will only give me catastrophic coverage in the USA and only for 30 days at a time. Will Obamacare cover me outside the USA?

[QUOTE=Esten;436446]People with lower incomes accept paying lower tax rates, accept standard deductions and other provisions that lower their tax burden. The ACA tax credit should be no different.[/QUOTE]Wrong, the key words here are tax burden, deduction and tax rates are used to calculate [B]my tax burden[/B] and we are talking about [B]my tax dollars,[/B] how much tax [B]I have to pay.[/B] With ObamaCare you are using other peoples money to subsidize the purchase of health care insurance, in other words you are taking money from one person / group to pay for the health insurance of another. It's apples and oranges.

[QUOTE=Esten;436446]Prior to the ACA, people were benefiting from a system that discriminated against other people with preexisting conditions. A system that changes that needs more revenue. If you think the hardship of some people paying more for insurance outweighs the hardship of those with preexisting conditions, you can try to change the law. Good luck.[/QUOTE]Now we have a system that discriminates against people over the age of 30, but I suppose government sponsored discrimination is OK. Do you think it's OK for a person to wait until they have a health problem to buy insurance, that's exactly what a lot of folks with preexisting conditions did or tried to do, and I suspect now many will pay the penalty until they become ill and then they will buy insurance because they can't be turned down.

The Obamacare nightmare is clearly a government overreach and I will wholeheartedly support those who try to change this unfair and discriminatory law.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;436452]So for guys like Punter who are considering civil disobedience, I offer the following:

There are numerous exemptions from the penalty for not being insured. The one I like best is Hardship Exemption #3: "You received a shut-off notice from a utility company." So don't pay your garbage bill for a while, get the shut off notice, pay the garbage bill, lather, rinse, repeat. I also like Hardship Exemption #8, "You had medical expenses you couldn't pay in the last 24 months." Umm well yeah I had no insurance so I could not pay my medical bills so now I don't have to get insurance. Hmm.
[/QUOTE]I think you know me well enough to know I'm not a hardship case and I'm never going to pretend to be something I'm not, and I will never not pay my debts.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436451] Otherwise, Punter127 wouldn't feel so naked in the wilderness.[/QUOTE]Since I'm in Indonesia jungle is probably a better word than wilderness, but either way I don't feel naked, I feel violated.

The bottom line is I will not buy Obamacare insurance and if the government want to impose a penalty on me they will have to come and take it, I will not send it to them.

[QUOTE=Punter127;436453]Since I'm in Indonesia jungle is probably a better word than wilderness, but either way I don't feel naked, I feel violated..[/QUOTE]When you go down to Starbucks or McDonalds on the next trail past the waterfalls. You don't want to get violated by the local ladyboys from Kuta.

[QUOTE=Punter127;436453] I would have to manipulate my income to qualify for any amount of subsidy. I'm not about to lower my standard of living in order to get a handout.[/QUOTE]The key is to manipulate your income [B]without[/B] lowering your standard of living. The Roth IRA is probably the best vehicle for that but annuities can work nicely as well. People ready for retirement before 65 can also follow a strategy of selling their least appreciated assets first. This is just taking advantage of the existing tax laws; it's tax avoidance and not tax evasion. It's not any more of a "handout" than the mortgage interest deduction, which shifts housing costs from one set of residents to another.

"Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.

Judge Learned Hand, Helvering v. Gregory, 69 F .2 d 809,810-11 (2 d Cir. 1934).

[QUOTE=Punter127;436453]...but I suppose government sponsored discrimination is OK.[/QUOTE]Yes, and they call it "Affirmative Action".

It's been said many times, you can't cure stupid. I would add one more thing, you can't cure fiscal irresponsibility but it doesn't stop the Democrats / Progressives from trying.

No matter how stupid you are or fiscally irresponsible you are the Democrats want to "take care of you" but with other people's money.

It's not the government's job to take my money to pay for someone to lay on their ass and not work.

It's not the government's job to take my money to pay to feed someone else.

It's not the government's job to take my money to pay for some one else's healthcare.

You don't work you don't eat and you don't get a handout from Uncle Sugar.

If I CHOSE to donate for any of the above, that is one thing but to have the Government force me to pay for a bunch of lazy loafers is another. Perhaps we would not have so many "needy" if we did not make being needy so attractive! Shut down the Federal Plantation!

Leave these tasks to the local charities and / or states. Let the peoples of the several states decide just how generous they wish to be.

That's right WT69 Esten Black Shirt. Let'm suffer, let'm starve, let'm die.

You might just find a great majority of our "needy" might disappear if a little tough love were applied. "I'm doing this for your own good".

The guys are going to start creating jobs soon.

Remember those ones that are getting big tax breaks to create jobs.

Ops, forgive me I must be on the wrong planet.

Well maybe if you got the federal alphabet soup of agencies off everyone's back that might happen. As long as Obama keeps pushing the country left there is no incentive for business to expand.

I guarantee you paying people NOT TO WORK is not the answer.

Almost every individual and business can and does reduce their tax burden via lower tax rates where eligible, deductions, credits, loopholes, etc. If doing this makes you a parasite, then there are a lot of parasites in the country. From the very poorest to the very richest. Some of you may know that in the Small Business Jobs Act, Obama raised the deduction for small business start up expenses from $5000 to $10000. Is the small business owner a parasite for taking advantage of this deduction? Is a middle class worker a parasite for taking a child tax credit? Do these tax laws promote "government dependency"?

No, the answer is we value small business and children enough to support them through the tax code. And so it is with healthcare. We value access to good healthcare enough that we will use the tax code to help make healthcare affordable to all Americans. Some people complain about subsidizing other people, like it's something new. We've been doing that for awhile, case in point Medicaid. These social programs are widely popular. Even in Texas, most people support providing financial assistance to uninsured and low income Americans to help them purchase healthcare coverage.

[URL]http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/documents/uttt-201310-summary-3.pdf[/URL]

It is the abysmal failure of the private sector to address unmet healthcare needs of millions of Americans with low incomes and preexisting conditions, that has led to government involvement. Just one of many areas where the government is a force for good. Jackson has one valid point, the insurance companies could be out of business if they had to cover everybody. That's why the only answer is for the government to step in and create a new set of rules. Even Republicans recognized this, when they promoted the concept of the individual mandate in the 80's, the 90's and the 2000's.

[QUOTE=BlackShirt;436454]When you go down to Starbucks or McDonalds on the next trail past the waterfalls. You don't want to get violated by the local ladyboys from Kuta.[/QUOTE]I don't support Starbucks for several reason one being I think they're very overpriced for a bad cup of coffee, but the main reason is the way they groveled to progressive gun control freaks a few months ago. McDonalds is equally disliked and always a last choice.

As for the ladyboys that you seem to love talking about,(?) the rumor is that some guy called "Reverend BS" gathered them all up and took them to Bangkok for free universal health care, but that's just a rumor, and I don't think he really got them all...LOL.

[B]Run Ben Run?[/B]

"Only once before, during the Civil War, were Americans as divided as they are today.

Can Dr. Ben Carson become President, will he run?

Will Dr. Carson be the one to end the rancor, the distrust, the divide that has been crassly exploited by the leftwing progressives who control the Democratic Party? Will he unite us as one great nation? Will democrats support him or will racism spring up from the roots of the democrat party again?

Here is a sample of what Dr. Carson is saying.

-Obamacare. Repeal it! Replace it with a free market health savings account.

-National Debt. Cut government spending by 10% each year, across the board, until the budget is balanced!

-Taxes. Make it flat and make sure that everyone has skin in the game. Everyone pays.

-Abortion. End it now! It is barbaric.

-Illegal Immigration. Listen to the American people, secure our borders. End it.

-Redistribution of Income. Stop it. It's un-American.

-Welfare. It not only encourages self-destructive behavior, it is a trap. Replace it with a [URL]truly.com[/URL]passionate, free market approach that enables those on welfare to gain prosperity through employment and entrepreneurship.

-Judges. Appoint judges committed to the US Constitution.

-Political Correctness. It is dangerous. It hinders progress and divides our nation.

-Right to Keep & Bear Arms. It's a vital part of the our Bill of Rights! End of story!

-Democrats and Republicans. Both have been part of the problem. America first!

They have an online petition to draft Dr. Carson, does anybody think he can win?

[URL]http://www.runbenrun.org/petition_newt2012_2013_11_7[/URL]

[QUOTE=Punter127;436473][B]Run Ben Run?[/B]

"Only once before, during the Civil War, were Americans as divided as they are today.

Can Dr. Ben Carson become President, will he run?

Will Dr. Carson be the one to end the rancor, the distrust, the divide that has been crassly exploited by the leftwing progressives who control the Democratic Party? Will he unite us as one great nation? Will democrats support him or will racism spring up from the roots of the democrat party again?

Here is a sample of what Dr. Carson is saying.

-Obamacare. Repeal it! Replace it with a free market health savings account.

-National Debt. Cut government spending by 10% each year, across the board, until the budget is balanced!

-Taxes. Make it flat and make sure that everyone has skin in the game. Everyone pays.

-Abortion. End it now! It is barbaric.

-Illegal Immigration. Listen to the American people, secure our borders. End it.

-Redistribution of Income. Stop it. It's un-American.

-Welfare. It not only encourages self-destructive behavior, it is a trap. Replace it with a [URL]truly.com[/URL]passionate, free market approach that enables those on welfare to gain prosperity through employment and entrepreneurship.

-Judges. Appoint judges committed to the US Constitution.

-Political Correctness. It is dangerous. It hinders progress and divides our nation.

-Right to Keep & Bear Arms. It's a vital part of the our Bill of Rights! End of story!

-Democrats and Republicans. Both have been part of the problem. America first!

They have an online petition to draft Dr. Carson, does anybody think he can win?

[URL]http://www.runbenrun.org/petition_newt2012_2013_11_7[/URL][/QUOTE]Bubba why would the racist, lazy, socialist left leaning loonies keep this guy from running? I know he claims to be unaffiliated but that's clearly a conservative platform. Will the Republicans allow a black, unaffiliated, uncontrollable person to run for president? I'm not saying I agree nor disagree with any of his points (in fact I agree with some and disagree with others) but it's not the Democrats that would keep him from running.

Sorry if I missed your point.

[B]Stop trying to read between the lines, and ignoring question marks.[/B]

[QUOTE=DaddyRulz;436474]Bubba why would the racist, lazy, socialist left leaning loonies keep this guy from running? I know he claims to be unaffiliated but that's clearly a conservative platform. Will the Republicans allow a black, unaffiliated, uncontrollable person to run for president? I'm not saying I agree nor disagree with any of his points (in fact I agree with some and disagree with others) but it's not the Democrats that would keep him from running.

Sorry if I missed your point.[/QUOTE]I wasn't trying to make a point per se, I was pointing out his stance on some issues and asking if he could win and who would support him. I was also exposing the fact that there is a movement to draft him as the Republican nominee. The Republicans would have no choice but to let him run if he wins the nomination.

I didn't say anything about anybody keeping him from running, nor did I say I supported him or agreed with him, Bubba!

Furthermore not all conservatives are Republicans, as matter of fact I believe there was once a creature called a conservative Democrat. (perhaps extinct now?) But if there are any conservatives left in the democrat party would racism stop them from supporting Dr. Carson? I assume you do know of the racist roots of the Democrat Party?

I wasn't trying to read between the lines Hoss, I was just asking a question. I must have misunderstood you. I thought you were putting this guy forward as somebody you liked yourself. Yeah I know that 200 years ago essentially the Democrats were the Republicans and vise versa.

[QUOTE=Punter127;436475][B]Stop trying to read between the lines, and ignoring question marks.[/B]

I wasn't trying to make a point per se, I was pointing out his stance on some issues and asking if he could win and who would support him. I was also exposing the fact that there is a movement to draft him as the Republican nominee. The Republicans would have no choice but to let him run if he wins the nomination.

I didn't say anything about anybody keeping him from running, nor did I say I supported him or agreed with him, Bubba!

Furthermore not all conservatives are Republicans, as matter of fact I believe there was once a creature called a conservative Democrat. (perhaps extinct now?) But if there are any conservatives left in the democrat party would racism stop them from supporting Dr. Carson? I assume you do know of the racist roots of the Democrat Party?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=DaddyRulz;436476]I wasn't trying to read between the lines Hoss, I was just asking a question. I must have misunderstood you. I thought you were putting this guy forward as somebody you liked yourself. [/QUOTE]I do like the guy, I like the fact that he's from outside the main stream. I don't agree with everything he says and I don't know that I would vote for him.

[QUOTE=DaddyRulz;436476]Yeah I know that 200 years ago essentially the Democrats were the Republicans and vise versa.[/QUOTE]Did they teach you that in government school?

Look I'm not affiliated with either party, I think they both suck, and I certainly don't like defending the Republican party, but the "Democratic Party, which was formally organized in 1831, became the pro-slavery party.

Would you have us believe that at some point all racist Democrats suddenly rushed into the Republican Party?

After all the Democratic Party was behind slavery, the KKK, and Jim Crow laws. It was also the party of George Wallace, Bull Connor, and how about Sen Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the KKK. It has ALWAYS been a racist party. What did the Republican party ever do that can compare to that? You can run but you can't hide from history.

[QUOTE]The Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. Democrats have been running black communities for the past 50+ years, and the socialist policies of the Democrats have turned those communities into economic and social wastelands.

Democrats first used brutality and discriminatory laws to stop blacks from voting for Republicans. Democrats now use deception and government handouts to keep blacks from voting for Republicans. In his book, “Dreams From My Father,” President Barack Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as “plantation politics.”[/QUOTE]There has been no switch of racism from one party to the other, that just BS!

Daddy do you want me to go on, do you really want to have this discussion?

CNN's Benghazi report was wrong in part.

The solider that said he climbed the wall, killed a terrorist, etc. Lied. He was his beach house and could not get into city.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;436479]CNN's Benghazi report was wrong in part.

The solider that said he climbed the wall, killed a terrorist, etc. Lied. He was his beach house and could not get into city.[/QUOTE]I bet it was part of the Republican's "War on Women"!