Printable View
[QUOTE=Toymann;426211]My favourite story was how the university closed its UNION printing shop. I WONDER WHY? Did your union handlers drive the salaries so high that it was cheaper to outsource?[/QUOTE]The real villains are Hewlett Packard and Al Gore. Hewlett Packard invented the desktop laser printer. Al Gore invented the internet. As a result of their inventions the printing business suffered mightily. It wasn't the union-busting Republicans that did it.
[QUOTE=Sidney; 426201]Subject: IMPORTANT MEDICARE CHANGE FOR OCTOBER 2012.
Please just watch this one.
Thanks.
Everyone should watch this video and send it on to everyone you know. It affects every one of us in America. Get it out to as many people as you can.[/QUOTE]Your last sentence had the tell-tale sign of a chain email that you probably didn't write. Sure enough, I plug it into google and find the sentence and the video. Sure enough, it's right wing spam directing to right wing propaganda and conspiracy theories.
You probably didn't even notice you just contradicted yourself. Your doctor says a Medicare benefit is being discontinued October 15 (false) , while the video says or implies Obama cleverly delayed this until after the election so seniors wouldn't notice (false).
Right wing misinformation tripping over itself.... gotta love it !
Sidney, you should research these things more thoroughly. No Medicare benefits are being cut. The health care reform law is cutting subsidies to Medicare Advantage which have been doing little more than pad insurance company profits. The new health law restructures government payments to Medicare Advantage plans to keep it more in line with that of traditional Medicare. Obama is actually acting like a Conservative here, cutting wasteful spending. The new law also extends Medicare solvency by almost a decade and ends the prescription drug 'donut hole' --- both good things for seniors.
[b][i]
Myth 7: The healthcare reform law cuts Medicare benefits.
Reality: No guaranteed Medicare benefits are cut by this law. An experiment started
in 1997 created Medicare Advantage, a privatized form of Medicare, with the hope of saving
money. It turns out that the federal government pays 14% more for this private form of
Medicare than for government provided Medicare so this new law cuts these subsidies.
Seniors will still be able to choose between getting their benefits from traditional Medicare or
a Medicare Advantage plan, but the government will stop wasting billions of dollars by
overpaying Medicare Advantage plans.
[/i][/b]
Sarah Palin has a new jingle to keep herself relevant: 'Free Stuff or Freedom'
What a total whackjob. Doesn't she realize this is exactly the empty, nonsensical, false rhetoric that is hurting her party, not helping it? I'm sure it really impresses the independent voters.
[QUOTE=Sidney;426217]1956=construction laborer. 1957= car dealer handyman. 1958= furnace cleaner. $14 an hour = WOW![/QUOTE]You would have to be in your 70's. And you're with a 19 year old Haitian. Then there's hope for my retirement years too. You're my hero Sidney!
[QUOTE=Tiny12;426234]You would have to be in your 70's. And you're with a 19 year old Haitian. Then there's hope for my retirement years too. You're my hero Sidney![/QUOTE]Money does talk! Anyway, kudos for the effort.
You would have to be in your 70's. And you're with a 19 year old Haitian. Then there's hope for my retirement years too. You're my hero Sidney!
[QUOTE=Tiny12;426234]You would have to be in your 70's. And you're with a 19 year old Haitian. Then there's hope for my retirement years too. You're my hero Sidney![/QUOTE]Thank You Tiny12!
Went to the movies today. In Key west we have a 4 theater cinema. 3 films had no lines. The fourth film had arround the block lines. A film called 2016. People leaving the theater looked like they had been hit over the head with a sledgehammer. Dazed. Astonished. Believe me, this movie is a must see.
[QUOTE=El Alamo;426242]Went to the movies today. In Key west we have a 4 theater cinema. 3 films had no lines. The fourth film had arround the block lines. A film called 2016. People leaving the theater looked like they had been hit over the head with a sledgehammer. Dazed. Astonished. Believe me, this movie is a must see.[/QUOTE]I haven't seen the movie, yet.
Back in 2008, one of the people whom I hold in the absolute highest regard and someone I have known to be conservative for decades, informed me that he intended to vote for Obama. This is a very well-educated and intelligent individual (the former does not guarantee the latter), who had always voted Republican (not as a party devotee, often just as the "lesser of two evils"). Some time after Obama was elected (early '09) , this person attended a party that I held at my house. We were on the patio enjoying a drink and the onset of Spring, when I pressed for the logic behind his vote. While he didn't come right out and say it, the message that I discerned was that it was based upon "white guilt" and fatigue from the constant anti-Bush propaganda (I. E. The main stream media). However, he became agitated and acted shocked, when I flatly stated that (IMO) Obama is a Marxist. In fact, he tried to challenge me on it and I gave him the precise underpinnings of my position and a litany of examples of Obama's words and actions that supported my conclusion. He, like so many others, didn't want to even consider the possibility that America had elected a Marxist, who did not have the same objective for America as we do. While he was willing to acknowledge that he didn't agree with all, or even many, of Obama's policies, that was as far as he would go. Since then, we have discussed the subject a few times.
I spoke with him a couple of days ago and he told me that he had gone to see 2016 and was profoundly touched by the content. He continued to "defend" Obama by saying that he didn't think that Obama's formative experiences were indicative of what an Obama second term would look like. I said "You don't need to look at anything older than three and a half years. His first term is indicative of the base line (because 2nd termers don't have to worry about reelection) for his second term. It will only get more extreme."
He thought about it for a second and said "you are absolutely correct."
I think that the fact that content of "2016" comes from such a reasonable and well-respected individual (D'Souza) and that there is no way that I got to him (tongue in cheek) , helped him to see the truth that I had been speaking for so long.
If that movie. Which is a blockbuster and is being intentionally ignored by the main stream media (it's the second biggest political documentary in history; although the first place film was not a documentary (IMO, since it was devoid of factual material) can bring an 'independent' (no, I don't think D'Souza is completely objective (no one is)) confirmation to those who don't want to believe that they elected someone who does not have America's best interest at heart, I am all for it.
We are watching 'live' the fruit of Obama's apologist foreign policy and his direct and naive community organizing in communities like the middle east (Egypt and Libya).
I read an article, yesterday, that stated that based upon White House records, Obama spent only 412 hours in official meetings on national security and the economy, during his term in office. I put in just under 400 hours on a consulting project, just last month.
I plucked this out of Ben Shapiro's column (published yesterday 9/11) :
Speaking of Osama Bin Laden:
[quote=]He spelled out his goals in three documents: a 1996 fatwa titled, 'Declaration of War Against The Americans Occupying The Land of the Two Holy Places'; a 2002 'Letter to America'; and a 2004 video.
In these manifestos, he declared his willingness to die, of course. His goals included:
'Terrorizing' Americans;
Demoralizing US troops;
Weakening and destruction of Israel;
Unification of Muslims throughout the Middle East via 'democratic' establishment of Shariah law in 'governments of our countries which act as your agents';
Destroying the US economy, especially the banking system, with special attention to the creation of massive deficits – a 'bleed until bankruptcy plan';
Destruction of American industrial capacity in the name of global warming;
Destruction of the rich, 'who hold sway in their political parties, and fund their election campaigns with their gifts';
Closing Guantanamo;
'Pack your luggage and get out of our lands. '
Eleven years later, Bin Laden seems to have kept most of his campaign promises.[/QUOTE]It is amazing to see how Obama's objectives and the fruits of his actions and policies are in concert with, and helped to facilitate, numbers 2-9 (no, I am not going to say that he's terrorizing Americans, at least not in the violent interpretation of terrorism).
There's a story in today's New York Times about Mitt Romney. There's a picture of him from 1966 at Stanford University involved in a counter demonstration against the anti-war protesters. He's holding a picket sign for the pro-Vietnam war group. According to the story 4 years later he's flipflopped his position on the war, and seems to think it was a bad idea. The flipflopper starting early on, like 40 years ago.
[QUOTE=BayBoy;426262]There's a story in today's New York Times about Mitt Romney. There's a picture of him from 1966 at Stanford University involved in a counter demonstration against the anti-war protesters. He's holding a picket sign for the pro-Vietnam war group. According to the story 4 years later he's flipflopped his position on the war, and seems to think it was a bad idea. The flipflopper starting early on, like 40 years ago.[/QUOTE]Obama "evolves", but everybody else "flip-flops".
The last few weeks have not been good for Romney.
In an effort to be more aggressive, what does he do? He pounces on the attacks in Libya and Egypt, speaking before getting all the facts and making false statements. He said Obama sympathized with the attackers, a complete lie. He said our first response should be outrage, but he confused a statement from the US embassy in Cairo before the attacks (to cool things down) with the official US statement following the attacks. Further, perhaps it never occurred to him that the safety of American citizens should be the very first concern. Sec. of State Clinton laid it out very well this morning, but Romney had to put his foot in his mouth first, before she spoke. If you're going to make a political football out of something like this, you have to get it right. He's embarrassing himself and damaging his own campaign with such antics.
Mitt Romney Response To Libya, Egypt Attacks Called 'Irresponsible, ' 'Craven, ' 'Ham-Handed'
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/12/mitt-romney-libya-egypt-media-reactions_n_1877266.html[/url]
Mitt Romney's opportunistic, incoherent attack
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/mitt-romneys-opportunistic-incoherent-attack/2012/09/12/cebfb3b8-fce8-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html[/url]
Our position would be much better if would follow Obama's example and bow down to muslim extremists. Also, we would be in a better position if we had followed Obama's advice and doubled down, no tripled down on the 1. 5 billion dollars of taxpayer money Obama sent to his misunderstood terrorist brothers. And just for good measure, we should round up these terrorists and invite them to state dinners at the White house. Whoops, Obama has already done that.
You can credit Obama, he has somebodies best interests at heart. unfortuneately Obama does not have the best interests of americans at heart. Obama is more concerned about the welfare of his muslim brothers than he is of america, who, by the way, Obama seems to despise.
I don't think Obama will be too upset when he gets his butt kicked out of the White house. It will allow Obama to chase his main calling. Being head terrorist of the Muslim Brotherhood.
I don't think Reagan would be expanding our national debt by sending billions of taxpayer dollars to muslim extremists and inviting these muslim extremists to chow down at White house dinners.
Yes, Obama seems to be doing great things in foreign affairs, provided you belong to his Muslim Bortherhood.
[QUOTE=El Alamo; 426276]Our position would be much better if would follow Obama's example and bow down to muslim extremists. Also, we would be in a better position if we had followed Obama's advice and doubled down, no tripled down on the 1. 5 billion dollars of taxpayer money Obama sent to his misunderstood terrorist brothers. And just for good measure, we should round up these terrorists and invite them to state dinners at the White house. Whoops, Obama has already done that.
You can credit Obama, he has somebodies best interests at heart. Unfortuneately Obama does not have the best interests of american at heart. Obama is more concerned about the welfare of his muslim brothers than he is of america, who, by the way, Obama seems to despise.
I don't think Obama will be too upset when he gets his butt kicked out of the White house. It will allow Obama to chase his main calling. Being head terrorist of the Muslim Brotherhood.
I don't think Reagan would be expanding our national debt by sending billions of taxpayer dollars to muslim extremists and inviting these muslim extremists to chow down at White house dinners.
Yes, Obama seems to be doing great things in foreign affairs, provided you belong to his Muslim Bortherhood.[/QUOTE]Nice article! Straight from the National Enquirer.