Was Bill Ayers prominent in community or party leadership? Did he have resources to help Obama run? Why would Obama rely on any advice Ayers' would have to offer? Why does Ayers and the Weathermen Underground believe in using violence?|||How many friends does Obama actually have that will come out and say this is a actually good man and he will lead our country well. I think the fact that he seems to have no friends except for william ayers, reverend wright adds even more to his "mysteriousness" ways
nothing is more scary than the unknown and i think thats what you are getting with Obama since he repeately is contradicting what he previously said and denys everything.|||Ayers is quite prominent in the community. Obama has repeatedly discussed that he is not in any way someone that Obama will be getting advice from.
I guess the the Weathermen believed in violence because the whole peace marches were not getting anywhere, young men were being picked off by the draft and sent to a useless war and dying. I imagine they started feeling desperate. It was the wrong thing to do. As was going into vietnam. As was going in to Iraq.
Didn't gw make the statement that nothing you do before age 40 counts??|||As someone who followed the tactics of Saul Alinski who was a real in your face radical, Obama did not mind associating with him or calling a 60s bomber a 'good guy'
At that time former FBI agents said in 2001 that Ayers only wished he did more of the kids iof things he did before. There is no possibility a CHicago politician would not be aware of Ayers dangerous leanings. What you are seeing is the Obama strategy team willing to clean up the mess around Obama ... put some lipstick on the pig as he says
It does call into question Obama's honesty, judgment and discernment. Clearly not the stuff making for good national security|||A] he was Chicago's Citizen of the Year
B] he was [ still is ] a Professor with a Child education degree and contacts with a wealthy REPUBLICAN [ whose wife is now part of McCain's campaign ] through which Ayers and ONE HUNDRED others [ including Sen. Obama ] were given $50 MILLION dollars to develop an alternate education system/plan
|||"Why does Ayers and the Weathermen Underground believe in using violence?"
You mean, why DID they believe in using violence. They aren't doing those acts of violence now, do you really think they are still active? Name me the last domestic bombings you heard about. They performed a handful of violent acts almost 50 years ago (... 50... years). You don't hear/read/see them doing these violent acts now, do you? And the main guy is a university professor and doing many good things.
Back in the 60's, these people obviously saw it as the best means to get their feelings across. They acted like extremely passionate patriotic citizens. They probably felt deeply their country was being hurt by the government in their day.
Look at it from another perspective. You have a population of human beings in a free society. If you allow for free speech and free demonstrations, you will have them. People became opposed to something big (the vietnam war), therefore people protested. Being an organic swarm (the human population), you will have extremes occur. So if you allow regular protestors, you MUST expect there will be radicals and that more bigger/dangerous acts will occur too. It's the law of nature. If you want freedom to continue, you have to allow for unwanted extremes. That doesn't mean you ignore bombings and give people a get-out-of-jail-free card for violent acts, it just means you have to realize that it comes with the program. Otherwise we're robots.
Why isn't anyone talking about why they did those things? They were opposed to the Vietnam war and the US government pushing it and the things that the government did at home (in the states) to make it pushable.
Now, why, in current day... does this stuff matter when it comes to Obama running for president... let's see. Sure he maybe met this guy casually, they lived in the same neighbourhood and were connected through university professor circles, etc. Why is that a big deal? And why is it a big deal that Obama chooses to sidestep questioning about it? OF COURSE HE WOULD, he is running for president DUUUH, and he knows how most of the US population is, they jump on any little shred of information. How many "bad connections" does everyone have? TONS. Even McCain. Even you. Even me. Why is this a make-or-break piece of information, with regards to Obama?
It's impossible to be squeeky clean.
For me, if anything, Obama knowing Ayers... this makes me want to vote for Obama even more !!!!!!|||Well, my experience provides a rather simple answer, and since you seem to be looking for a grand conspiracy.
For Scout planning meetings, local get-out-the-vote postcard addressing, and church committee meeting the reasoning was easy: if you had a big living room or dining room (depending what we needed) you were chosen. My guess is that was the reason, if such a meeting occurred.|||Because actually Obama believes in the same ideas as Bill Ayers. Everyone needs to educate theirselves because they decide on which one to vote for. |||If any other is damaging to your campaign in any way, you will not associate with them.|||He wanted to start things off with a "BANG!"
Monday, August 29, 2011
How is Obama going to pay for any of his massive welfare programs w/o higher taxes for the middle class?
Recession, credit crisis, massive war debts, massive national debt, medicare %26amp; Social security in big trouble. And with the Recession even Big Business %26amp; the rich have less to give. Obama's universal health care program alone will be the biggest welfare program in US history.
The is no way that Obama could not tax the middle class if he wants all his new welfare programs. He has to tax them. But he sure won't tell anyone that until of course he's already in office.|||How is he going to pay? Exactly as you stated: He is GOING TO TAX THE MIDDLE CLASS! Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves.
Even if.. let's just pretend for a minute,.. even if Obama is "just going to tax business," how do you think that affects the middle class?
Well, Thompson said it best, IMO:
Now our opponents... They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax "businesses"! So unless you buy something from a "business", like groceries or clothes or gasoline ... or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small "business", don't worry ... it's not going to affect you. -Fred Thompson
|||Obama will get us out of Iraq 100 years earlier than McCain. At a billion a day, that will certainly help.|||Are you too young to remember the days of Bill Clinton. Notice currently taxes are going to war in Iraq and China is paying for it. Do you think Fascist China should take over our country since they own George Dabya's deficits.|||i 100% agree with you. neither candidate will be able to lower taxes for any class because this country is in too much debt. anyone who believes either candidate is in serious denial.|||he has a plan which i think is way better than mccain/bush|||He'll tax the people who have the big bucks, and spend money more efficiently...
...but actually, the chances of the middle class being taxed more, regardless of who is elected, is 100%. I'm being a realist here. You got to spend money to make money, and public services don't come cheap.|||Hopefully he'll cut all those welfare programs, start a new war front, hire his cronies and give them all the lucrative contracts. And if he runs out of money to give them, he'll just print more money. Who really wants a president who will try and help their own. Its feast or famine and every american for themselves. Praise be to Jesus, even though he is really brown skinned and middle eastern.|||I will first say, with all due respect, I can't understand how you would direct a question like that toward just one candidate without taking interest in what everyone would say about that. I can honestly say, without citing a source or looking at anyones budget, I'm sure there are many places where this government could trim fat. The only thing about this that really bothers me is the known connection between government and big business. It feels like there was a dfined course in the business sector to trim fat from the lowest earning positions, which I am sure saves money, but they didn't do the same thing in places that would affect higher earners. There are many unnecessary projects that lead me to believe that they're not the overall problem. It seems theres a general environment in Washington of decadence in their approach to budgeting. |||After seeing him speak 6 months ago, I'd guess he is going to snuff out US Defense programs, he will probably sell our modern weapons to eastern countries also. I am not talking about the U.S. obsolete weapons like that have been sold in the past, I am talking modern ones|||He can't. What Obama is not mentioning is that his tax plan will end up costing American taxpayers more due to the plethora of tax increases he plans to implement while cutting the basic income tax rate since he counts on uninformed taxpayers to support him without understanding the real impact of his fiscal policies. For starters, Obama plans to raise taxes on virtually all small businesses, the same businesses that employ the vast majority of middle class and lower class wage earners. These businesses have three options: cutback on wages %26amp; benefits, stop hiring new people, or raise the price of goods %26amp; services. Obama also plans to raise taxes on virtually all forms of savings and plans to place a huge tax on any capital gains made from home sales. This will virtually guarantee that young people and families starting out will have a very difficult time purchasing a first home or upgrading to a larger home. Obama's "windfall profits" tax on oil will hurt millions of everyday people who rely on the profits of these companies for their retirements since their pensions/mutual funds are based on the profits of these companies. He plans to increase the death tax, so any money that may be left to you, or that you wish to pass on to your children, will be taxed to a degree that much more than 50% of your estate will go to the federal government. The other variety of tax increases will only have one outcome: a worsening economy, and in a worsening economy, the lower you are on the economic ladder, the harder the hit will be. His policies completely go against any and all economic theory out there.|||Cutting tax loopholes, cutting spending, taxing those who don't pay any like big corporations that are stuffing their pockets instead of creating jobs, taxing the top 5%, cutting wasteful programs and I would suggest revamping the welfare system to encourage people to work and put $ into the system instead of taking advantage of it, and getting us out of that freakin war that has drained our economy, created a monstrous debt to wanted to finish Daddy Bushes job and of course oil as former alan Greenspan explained nicely.|||We'll everybody voting for Obama wants something for nothing. They don't realise that the people who think they are getting all this money are going to be the one's who are taxed the most heavily. They're going to pay for the people who don't want to works' welfare checks.|||Very good question!! The secret behind Obama's magic welfare plan is.....smoke and mirrors!!
You see--we'll pay dearly for it anyway! Obama plans to force the rich to "share" their wealth, showering the common American with some more ca$h. Well....as we commoners get richer---we'll get TAXED more for it, oh be assured there!!
Robbing Peter to pay Paul---so Paul can get Tax gouged.
Obama's universal health / welfare plan is simply socialist medical care plan given a savvy new name. It's Communism in disguise that won't make our lives any easier---and it's sure to fail.
|||Obama will raise taxes because by raising taxes he and his administration will have more political power over the American people.
Elitists like Obama believe that they know better how Americans should spend their money, and in the process realize that they can make a bundle for themselves.
This is similar to what happened and happens in Communist countries. The political bigwigs fly to their international vacation homes in private jets, while the masses live in meager apartments and go to public parks for recreation.
Ted Kennedy, John Kerry etc etc and iwannabeerichtoo Obama espouse this snake oil salesmanship to the American people.
The is no way that Obama could not tax the middle class if he wants all his new welfare programs. He has to tax them. But he sure won't tell anyone that until of course he's already in office.|||How is he going to pay? Exactly as you stated: He is GOING TO TAX THE MIDDLE CLASS! Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves.
Even if.. let's just pretend for a minute,.. even if Obama is "just going to tax business," how do you think that affects the middle class?
Well, Thompson said it best, IMO:
Now our opponents... They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax "businesses"! So unless you buy something from a "business", like groceries or clothes or gasoline ... or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small "business", don't worry ... it's not going to affect you. -Fred Thompson
|||Obama will get us out of Iraq 100 years earlier than McCain. At a billion a day, that will certainly help.|||Are you too young to remember the days of Bill Clinton. Notice currently taxes are going to war in Iraq and China is paying for it. Do you think Fascist China should take over our country since they own George Dabya's deficits.|||i 100% agree with you. neither candidate will be able to lower taxes for any class because this country is in too much debt. anyone who believes either candidate is in serious denial.|||he has a plan which i think is way better than mccain/bush|||He'll tax the people who have the big bucks, and spend money more efficiently...
...but actually, the chances of the middle class being taxed more, regardless of who is elected, is 100%. I'm being a realist here. You got to spend money to make money, and public services don't come cheap.|||Hopefully he'll cut all those welfare programs, start a new war front, hire his cronies and give them all the lucrative contracts. And if he runs out of money to give them, he'll just print more money. Who really wants a president who will try and help their own. Its feast or famine and every american for themselves. Praise be to Jesus, even though he is really brown skinned and middle eastern.|||I will first say, with all due respect, I can't understand how you would direct a question like that toward just one candidate without taking interest in what everyone would say about that. I can honestly say, without citing a source or looking at anyones budget, I'm sure there are many places where this government could trim fat. The only thing about this that really bothers me is the known connection between government and big business. It feels like there was a dfined course in the business sector to trim fat from the lowest earning positions, which I am sure saves money, but they didn't do the same thing in places that would affect higher earners. There are many unnecessary projects that lead me to believe that they're not the overall problem. It seems theres a general environment in Washington of decadence in their approach to budgeting. |||After seeing him speak 6 months ago, I'd guess he is going to snuff out US Defense programs, he will probably sell our modern weapons to eastern countries also. I am not talking about the U.S. obsolete weapons like that have been sold in the past, I am talking modern ones|||He can't. What Obama is not mentioning is that his tax plan will end up costing American taxpayers more due to the plethora of tax increases he plans to implement while cutting the basic income tax rate since he counts on uninformed taxpayers to support him without understanding the real impact of his fiscal policies. For starters, Obama plans to raise taxes on virtually all small businesses, the same businesses that employ the vast majority of middle class and lower class wage earners. These businesses have three options: cutback on wages %26amp; benefits, stop hiring new people, or raise the price of goods %26amp; services. Obama also plans to raise taxes on virtually all forms of savings and plans to place a huge tax on any capital gains made from home sales. This will virtually guarantee that young people and families starting out will have a very difficult time purchasing a first home or upgrading to a larger home. Obama's "windfall profits" tax on oil will hurt millions of everyday people who rely on the profits of these companies for their retirements since their pensions/mutual funds are based on the profits of these companies. He plans to increase the death tax, so any money that may be left to you, or that you wish to pass on to your children, will be taxed to a degree that much more than 50% of your estate will go to the federal government. The other variety of tax increases will only have one outcome: a worsening economy, and in a worsening economy, the lower you are on the economic ladder, the harder the hit will be. His policies completely go against any and all economic theory out there.|||Cutting tax loopholes, cutting spending, taxing those who don't pay any like big corporations that are stuffing their pockets instead of creating jobs, taxing the top 5%, cutting wasteful programs and I would suggest revamping the welfare system to encourage people to work and put $ into the system instead of taking advantage of it, and getting us out of that freakin war that has drained our economy, created a monstrous debt to wanted to finish Daddy Bushes job and of course oil as former alan Greenspan explained nicely.|||We'll everybody voting for Obama wants something for nothing. They don't realise that the people who think they are getting all this money are going to be the one's who are taxed the most heavily. They're going to pay for the people who don't want to works' welfare checks.|||Very good question!! The secret behind Obama's magic welfare plan is.....smoke and mirrors!!
You see--we'll pay dearly for it anyway! Obama plans to force the rich to "share" their wealth, showering the common American with some more ca$h. Well....as we commoners get richer---we'll get TAXED more for it, oh be assured there!!
Robbing Peter to pay Paul---so Paul can get Tax gouged.
Obama's universal health / welfare plan is simply socialist medical care plan given a savvy new name. It's Communism in disguise that won't make our lives any easier---and it's sure to fail.
|||Obama will raise taxes because by raising taxes he and his administration will have more political power over the American people.
Elitists like Obama believe that they know better how Americans should spend their money, and in the process realize that they can make a bundle for themselves.
This is similar to what happened and happens in Communist countries. The political bigwigs fly to their international vacation homes in private jets, while the masses live in meager apartments and go to public parks for recreation.
Ted Kennedy, John Kerry etc etc and iwannabeerichtoo Obama espouse this snake oil salesmanship to the American people.
Why does Obama deny a baby who survives an abortion any medical treatment? Is he a monster?
I read where Obama will allow for no medical treatment for a baby who survives a botched abortion. In other words, despite the abortionists best attempts to kill an unborn citizen, the baby does not die. Yet Obama would deny the surviving baby ANY medical treatment. He'd rather set the baby aside on a closet shelf and let it die.|||Yep that is Obama
That kind of stance is not Pro-Choice but Pro-Abortion.
Once that baby starts breathing on their own that is not longer the mother's body.
Those who approve of that practice are on the same level of a women who throw lives babies into dumpsters.
With 3 thumbs down I can see I have 3 people who don't want to admit the truth.
Again if the baby is outside the womb alive your choice of killing the child is now murder not "choice"
Each thumbs down shows me the number of people who don't want to face the reality of Obama's abortion stance.|||Don't believe everything you read!
|||It is the truth afraid to admit it? Savior Obama might come after you ha.
|||Well if you read it then it's totally true, why would you come to Y!A after READING it.
ya know?|||Where is the link to the story?|||Ask the attending physician that question|||The bill he voted against in the state legislature was a duplicate of an existing federal bill. It would have unnecessarily increased the size of government and was coupled with a companion bill that would have made suing the doctor for an abortion you asked for legal. It also lacked a key clause that was present in the federal bill which allowed it to exist without violating Roe V. Wade. |||how the hell to you rationalize the killing of a innocent life marina you are sick!|||yes because you see babies are not human beings entitled to protection. they are disposable... to be discarded at will. you know the founding fathers when they guaranteed the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... they were only speaking of older people... not babies. babies are just like your kitchen trash... you can choose to keep it or throw it away. |||I am so happy to see this issue brought up!!!!
Go to You Tube. Look up the video of the IL nurse who speaks out. I don't have the address handy, maybe someone out there does.
You're talking about murder, here! And apparently he doesn't have a problem with it because he voted against legislation that would require these unfortunate babies be given medical treatment!
EDIT: We're not talking about first trimester abortions. This is about later term abortions which the baby SURVIVES. Do you think it doesn't happen? Pull your heads out of the sand, people! He REFUSED to support a law REQUIRING medical treatment for these babies. That's an informed level of responsibility, to say, "Nope, not gonna go there..."
NOTHER EDIT: Here's the YouTube link:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VldbYjmbFzo
AMEN SNICKER!|||more dirty propaganda fill lies... why do you think we're all stupid?|||As far as I can tell, he doesn't.
Please give a link to your source.|||The main reason for this is because i suspect that Obama was a botched abortion and wishes he was dead...|||If there are really instances where a baby lives through and abortion then i have no doubt it's the "physician's" sick dimented way of torturing another being for his own self indulgence, since one should know well enough how to make sure the procedure is done correctly. Abortions shouldn't be done they way they are, just give them a shot like they do with dogs then pull it out or something, put personally abortions tear a womans (you know what) up too |||Lets assume that at least someone out there does agree with this scenario. I have no idea if Mr. Obama things this or not.
Obviously most of you have never witnessed an abortion. It is not a pretty sight. There are many ways of doing it.
One way is to suck the child out piece by piece. So you see little arms legs and eyes come thru the tube.
Another is to Go in and "scrape" it out piece by piece.
Another is to inject saline into the moms uterus and the child burns to death and the mom expells it.
Want me to go on?
When you watch a tiny little fetus in the womb there is no way that you can tell me they do not feel pain. They try to get away from anything that does not feel like mom. They suck their little thumbs. They wiggle and squirm around.
So don't come in here telling these people that these little things should be killed because the mother wants it dead. There are way to many people out there putting everything they have into wanting a child for it to even be an option.
Don't do the deed if you can't deal with the consequences. Don't tell me that you were so overcome with passion that you could not stop and use and condom or that you don't like the "feel" of one. That is crap. The little child doesn't like the feel of what you will do to it either.|||If the mother wants the baby dead, Obama will stand by her.|||It wouldn't live except in your hypothetical world, while Palin actually cut funding for special needs children and unwed mothers.
Just care until it is born, is that the Republican way?|||Wrong. Obama isn't a doctor.
That is a medical decision, not a legislative one.
I know personally of one instance and have read of others in the news where doctors failed to offer treatment to babies born prematurely (not aborted) because of their small size and lack of development. Fortunately for my niece, a nurse procured treatment for her and she just graduated from college. So don't go laying the blame on the people in Congress for that one.
BTW, there's no such thing as an "unborn citizen". Check the constitution.|||Obama supports the woman's right to choose. He doesn't support murdering babies you fool.
That kind of stance is not Pro-Choice but Pro-Abortion.
Once that baby starts breathing on their own that is not longer the mother's body.
Those who approve of that practice are on the same level of a women who throw lives babies into dumpsters.
With 3 thumbs down I can see I have 3 people who don't want to admit the truth.
Again if the baby is outside the womb alive your choice of killing the child is now murder not "choice"
Each thumbs down shows me the number of people who don't want to face the reality of Obama's abortion stance.|||Don't believe everything you read!
Report Abuse
|||It is the truth afraid to admit it? Savior Obama might come after you ha.
Report Abuse
|||Well if you read it then it's totally true, why would you come to Y!A after READING it.
ya know?|||Where is the link to the story?|||Ask the attending physician that question|||The bill he voted against in the state legislature was a duplicate of an existing federal bill. It would have unnecessarily increased the size of government and was coupled with a companion bill that would have made suing the doctor for an abortion you asked for legal. It also lacked a key clause that was present in the federal bill which allowed it to exist without violating Roe V. Wade. |||how the hell to you rationalize the killing of a innocent life marina you are sick!|||yes because you see babies are not human beings entitled to protection. they are disposable... to be discarded at will. you know the founding fathers when they guaranteed the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... they were only speaking of older people... not babies. babies are just like your kitchen trash... you can choose to keep it or throw it away. |||I am so happy to see this issue brought up!!!!
Go to You Tube. Look up the video of the IL nurse who speaks out. I don't have the address handy, maybe someone out there does.
You're talking about murder, here! And apparently he doesn't have a problem with it because he voted against legislation that would require these unfortunate babies be given medical treatment!
EDIT: We're not talking about first trimester abortions. This is about later term abortions which the baby SURVIVES. Do you think it doesn't happen? Pull your heads out of the sand, people! He REFUSED to support a law REQUIRING medical treatment for these babies. That's an informed level of responsibility, to say, "Nope, not gonna go there..."
NOTHER EDIT: Here's the YouTube link:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VldbYjmbFzo
AMEN SNICKER!|||more dirty propaganda fill lies... why do you think we're all stupid?|||As far as I can tell, he doesn't.
Please give a link to your source.|||The main reason for this is because i suspect that Obama was a botched abortion and wishes he was dead...|||If there are really instances where a baby lives through and abortion then i have no doubt it's the "physician's" sick dimented way of torturing another being for his own self indulgence, since one should know well enough how to make sure the procedure is done correctly. Abortions shouldn't be done they way they are, just give them a shot like they do with dogs then pull it out or something, put personally abortions tear a womans (you know what) up too |||Lets assume that at least someone out there does agree with this scenario. I have no idea if Mr. Obama things this or not.
Obviously most of you have never witnessed an abortion. It is not a pretty sight. There are many ways of doing it.
One way is to suck the child out piece by piece. So you see little arms legs and eyes come thru the tube.
Another is to Go in and "scrape" it out piece by piece.
Another is to inject saline into the moms uterus and the child burns to death and the mom expells it.
Want me to go on?
When you watch a tiny little fetus in the womb there is no way that you can tell me they do not feel pain. They try to get away from anything that does not feel like mom. They suck their little thumbs. They wiggle and squirm around.
So don't come in here telling these people that these little things should be killed because the mother wants it dead. There are way to many people out there putting everything they have into wanting a child for it to even be an option.
Don't do the deed if you can't deal with the consequences. Don't tell me that you were so overcome with passion that you could not stop and use and condom or that you don't like the "feel" of one. That is crap. The little child doesn't like the feel of what you will do to it either.|||If the mother wants the baby dead, Obama will stand by her.|||It wouldn't live except in your hypothetical world, while Palin actually cut funding for special needs children and unwed mothers.
Just care until it is born, is that the Republican way?|||Wrong. Obama isn't a doctor.
That is a medical decision, not a legislative one.
I know personally of one instance and have read of others in the news where doctors failed to offer treatment to babies born prematurely (not aborted) because of their small size and lack of development. Fortunately for my niece, a nurse procured treatment for her and she just graduated from college. So don't go laying the blame on the people in Congress for that one.
BTW, there's no such thing as an "unborn citizen". Check the constitution.|||Obama supports the woman's right to choose. He doesn't support murdering babies you fool.
How did Obama manage to get his political opponants kicked off the Illinois state senate ballot in 1996?
Somehow Barack Obama was able to get three people booted from the ballot, allowing Obama to run for the job unopposed.|||One of them was a long-time community friendly African-American woman who had represented that district for a long time
He used brute force legal tactics and challenged all the petitions and signatures.
He literally found every way possible to help him win,|||By playing "Hardball".|||Yes at the last minute he contested the validity of enough signatures for his opponents nomination to get them knocked of the ballot.|||dirty politics....he was a community organizer trying to get out the vote, and in the end, only allowed people to have one choice.....him...does that sound like a change candidate to you?|||He challenged the signatures required to be on the ballot and neither of them had the required amount of legal signatures to get in the race. I don't think exposing the fact that your competion is not within the rules can be considered brut force, or dirty politics. Just seems like good politics to me if you can't collect th signatures needed you probably should not be in office.|||lol he took off respectable people and if you look at what was said by his campaign they said they were "possibly corrupt" LOL hilarious i think Anderson Cooper lost alot of respect for him|||It's Chicago politics.|||Obama vs. Ryan
As a result of the GOP and Democratic primaries, Democrat Barack Obama was pitted against Republican Jack Ryan.
Ryan trailed Obama in early polls, with Obama opening up a 22-point lead[6] after the media reported that Ryan had assigned Justin Warfel, a Ryan campaign worker, to track Obama's appearances.[7] The tactic backfired when many people, including Ryan's supporters, criticized this activity. Ryan's spokesman apologized, and promised that Warfel would give Obama more space. Obama acknowledged that it is standard practice to film an opponent in public, and Obama said he was satisfied with Ryan's decision to have Warfel back off.[7]
As the campaign progressed, the lawsuit brought by the Chicago Tribune to open child custody files from Ryan's divorce was still continuing. Barack Obama's backers emailed reporters about the divorce controversy, but refrained from on-the-record commentary about the divorce files.[8] On March 29, 2004, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Schnider ruled that several of the Ryans' divorce records should be opened to the public, and ruled that a court-appointed referee would later decide which custody files should remain sealed to protect the interests of Ryan's young child.[9] A few days later, on April 2, 2004, Barack Obama changed his position about the Ryans' soon-to-be-released divorce records, and called on Democrats to not inject them into the campaign.[8]
On June 22, 2004, after receiving the report from the court-appointed referee, the judge released the files that were deemed consistent with the interests of Ryan's young child. In those files, Jeri Ryan alleged that Jack Ryan had taken her to sex clubs in several cities, intending for them to have sex in public.[10][11] The decision to release the files generated much controversy because it went against both parents' direct request, and because it reversed the earlier decision to seal the papers in the best interest of the child. Jim Oberweis, Ryan's defeated GOP opponent, commented that "these are allegations made in a divorce hearing, and we all know people tend to say things that aren't necessarily true in divorce proceedings when there is money involved and custody of children involved."[10]
Although their sensational nature made the revelations fodder for tabloid and television programs specializing in such stories, the files were also newsworthy because of questions about whether Ryan had accurately described the documents to GOP party leaders. Prior to release of the documents, Ryan had told leading Republicans that five percent of the divorce file could cause problems for his campaign.[12] But after the documents were released, GOP officials including state GOP Chair Judy Baar Topinka said they felt Ryan had misleadingly indicated the divorce records would not be embarrassing.[13] That charge of dishonesty led to intensifying calls for Ryan's withdrawal, though Topinka said after the June 25 withdrawal that Ryan's "decision was a personal one" and that the state GOP had not pressured Ryan to drop out.[14] Ryan's campaign ended less than a week after the custody records were opened, and Ryan officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004. Obama was left without an opponent.
[edit] Obama vs. Keyes
Keyes, a conservative Republican from Maryland, faced an uphill battle. First, Keyes had few ties to Illinois political leaders. Second, during the time when Obama had no opponent, he had campaigned throughout the more conservative downstate regions to build up name recognition. Third, Keyes was seen as a carpetbagger, only establishing legal residency in Calumet City, Illinois days before running. The Chicago Tribune in an editorial, stated that "Mr. Keyes may have noticed a large body of water as he flew into O'Hare. That is called Lake Michigan."[15]
Obama ran the most successful Senate campaign for a non-incumbent in 2004, and was so far ahead in polls that he soon began to campaign outside of Illinois in support of other Democratic candidates. He gave large sums of campaign funds to other candidates and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and sent many of his volunteers to work on other races, including that of now-Congresswoman Melissa Bean who defeated then-Congressman Phil Crane in that year's election. Obama and Keyes differed on many issues including school vouchers and tax cuts, both of which Keyes supported and Obama opposed.[16]|||He played hard ball, Chicago style.
Like Truman said, if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.|||By contesting the signatures for his opponents. From the actual signature themselves of the eligibility of the people collecting the signatures. If the person collecting the signatures was not registered all signatures that person collected did not count or if the signature was in print instead of cursive it was thrown out. His opponents fell short of the required signatures to run.|||The same way his supporters on Y/A get questions critical of B. Hussein Obama removed. He wined, cried, played the race card, and whined some more!|||I actually live in Illinois and I can tell you real easy.
Chicago and East St Louis.
Chicago runs Illinois practically and whatever they want they get. For anyone in Illinois to counter Chicago, literally all of the state South of Springfield has to unite against him
Hence East St Louis
Considering it is about 15 minutes from St Louis Missouri, essentially same principle applies. And it doesnt help matters any that for the last three elections They had to be investigated for Voter fraud.
So if Obama had any connections to these two cities as he so obviously does. Yeah realll easy to get dirt on others and get them out.
He used brute force legal tactics and challenged all the petitions and signatures.
He literally found every way possible to help him win,|||By playing "Hardball".|||Yes at the last minute he contested the validity of enough signatures for his opponents nomination to get them knocked of the ballot.|||dirty politics....he was a community organizer trying to get out the vote, and in the end, only allowed people to have one choice.....him...does that sound like a change candidate to you?|||He challenged the signatures required to be on the ballot and neither of them had the required amount of legal signatures to get in the race. I don't think exposing the fact that your competion is not within the rules can be considered brut force, or dirty politics. Just seems like good politics to me if you can't collect th signatures needed you probably should not be in office.|||lol he took off respectable people and if you look at what was said by his campaign they said they were "possibly corrupt" LOL hilarious i think Anderson Cooper lost alot of respect for him|||It's Chicago politics.|||Obama vs. Ryan
As a result of the GOP and Democratic primaries, Democrat Barack Obama was pitted against Republican Jack Ryan.
Ryan trailed Obama in early polls, with Obama opening up a 22-point lead[6] after the media reported that Ryan had assigned Justin Warfel, a Ryan campaign worker, to track Obama's appearances.[7] The tactic backfired when many people, including Ryan's supporters, criticized this activity. Ryan's spokesman apologized, and promised that Warfel would give Obama more space. Obama acknowledged that it is standard practice to film an opponent in public, and Obama said he was satisfied with Ryan's decision to have Warfel back off.[7]
As the campaign progressed, the lawsuit brought by the Chicago Tribune to open child custody files from Ryan's divorce was still continuing. Barack Obama's backers emailed reporters about the divorce controversy, but refrained from on-the-record commentary about the divorce files.[8] On March 29, 2004, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Schnider ruled that several of the Ryans' divorce records should be opened to the public, and ruled that a court-appointed referee would later decide which custody files should remain sealed to protect the interests of Ryan's young child.[9] A few days later, on April 2, 2004, Barack Obama changed his position about the Ryans' soon-to-be-released divorce records, and called on Democrats to not inject them into the campaign.[8]
On June 22, 2004, after receiving the report from the court-appointed referee, the judge released the files that were deemed consistent with the interests of Ryan's young child. In those files, Jeri Ryan alleged that Jack Ryan had taken her to sex clubs in several cities, intending for them to have sex in public.[10][11] The decision to release the files generated much controversy because it went against both parents' direct request, and because it reversed the earlier decision to seal the papers in the best interest of the child. Jim Oberweis, Ryan's defeated GOP opponent, commented that "these are allegations made in a divorce hearing, and we all know people tend to say things that aren't necessarily true in divorce proceedings when there is money involved and custody of children involved."[10]
Although their sensational nature made the revelations fodder for tabloid and television programs specializing in such stories, the files were also newsworthy because of questions about whether Ryan had accurately described the documents to GOP party leaders. Prior to release of the documents, Ryan had told leading Republicans that five percent of the divorce file could cause problems for his campaign.[12] But after the documents were released, GOP officials including state GOP Chair Judy Baar Topinka said they felt Ryan had misleadingly indicated the divorce records would not be embarrassing.[13] That charge of dishonesty led to intensifying calls for Ryan's withdrawal, though Topinka said after the June 25 withdrawal that Ryan's "decision was a personal one" and that the state GOP had not pressured Ryan to drop out.[14] Ryan's campaign ended less than a week after the custody records were opened, and Ryan officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004. Obama was left without an opponent.
[edit] Obama vs. Keyes
Keyes, a conservative Republican from Maryland, faced an uphill battle. First, Keyes had few ties to Illinois political leaders. Second, during the time when Obama had no opponent, he had campaigned throughout the more conservative downstate regions to build up name recognition. Third, Keyes was seen as a carpetbagger, only establishing legal residency in Calumet City, Illinois days before running. The Chicago Tribune in an editorial, stated that "Mr. Keyes may have noticed a large body of water as he flew into O'Hare. That is called Lake Michigan."[15]
Obama ran the most successful Senate campaign for a non-incumbent in 2004, and was so far ahead in polls that he soon began to campaign outside of Illinois in support of other Democratic candidates. He gave large sums of campaign funds to other candidates and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and sent many of his volunteers to work on other races, including that of now-Congresswoman Melissa Bean who defeated then-Congressman Phil Crane in that year's election. Obama and Keyes differed on many issues including school vouchers and tax cuts, both of which Keyes supported and Obama opposed.[16]|||He played hard ball, Chicago style.
Like Truman said, if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.|||By contesting the signatures for his opponents. From the actual signature themselves of the eligibility of the people collecting the signatures. If the person collecting the signatures was not registered all signatures that person collected did not count or if the signature was in print instead of cursive it was thrown out. His opponents fell short of the required signatures to run.|||The same way his supporters on Y/A get questions critical of B. Hussein Obama removed. He wined, cried, played the race card, and whined some more!|||I actually live in Illinois and I can tell you real easy.
Chicago and East St Louis.
Chicago runs Illinois practically and whatever they want they get. For anyone in Illinois to counter Chicago, literally all of the state South of Springfield has to unite against him
Hence East St Louis
Considering it is about 15 minutes from St Louis Missouri, essentially same principle applies. And it doesnt help matters any that for the last three elections They had to be investigated for Voter fraud.
So if Obama had any connections to these two cities as he so obviously does. Yeah realll easy to get dirt on others and get them out.
How can Obama argue with a straight face that health care reform is essential to economic recovery?
Using better-than-expected jobs numbers to press his top domestic priority, President Barack Obama is arguing that overhauling the health care system is essential to the country's economic well-being.
Republicans countered that the high unemployment rate 鈥?9.4 percent in July 鈥?shows how families and businesses are struggling and that Obama's reliance on a large government role in expanding health coverage is the wrong approach.|||B/c his teleprompter hides the true Obama|||Quite simple (not that the opponents of the plans like simple).
Currently, we have an employer based health care system. Health care costs are increasing each year raising expenses on American Business.
Most of our competitors have national health insurance. Furthermore, most of our competitors (instead of a corporate income tax) have a sales tax that does not apply to exports. That means that foreign corporations who export products to this country don't pay a dime for their workers to get better health care than we get while our corporations have health care costs equivalent to about 25% of payroll (a percent that goes up every year.)
Yes, health care reform is essential to the ability of our companies to compete which is why Associated Industries (the lobbying group for industrial companies) want some form of health care reform to pass.|||Although the government is presenting this plan as a option, they are forseeing the majority of working Americans to switch or businesses to drop Health Care. Thus force the private sector out of business and government believe they can run an effective health care cheaper.
But business will freed from the health cost on there books and be able to compete with foriegn companies who don't have health care on the books .
Those are the theory we are to believe. Even though government can't run social security with out going bankrupt, nor medicare nor run the VA well.|||Very simply. Despite a campaign of misinformation by some, well-respected people from both parties have spoken about the pressing need for major health care reform due to increasing costs. In fact, a bipartisan health care plan has been prepared (link below) by 3 former US Senators:
1) Howard Baker (R-TN)- Pres.Reagan's Chief of Staff and former Senate Majority Leader
2) Bob Dole (R-KS)- former Senate Majority Leader and 1996 Republican nominee for President
3) Tom Daschle (D-SD)- former Senate Majority Leader
In the meantime, here are 2 simple facts about our current health care system worth pondering:
1) Total cost of all health care in 2008 was $2.4 trillion
2) This cost is expected to increase to $4.3 trillion by 2016, based on current growth rates, if nothing changes.|||What is more essential is to limit the capital gains tax for an extended time. Nobody is saying there shouldn't be health care reform. Why isn't there tort reform. Malpractice suit that end with exorbitant cash awards have the most to do with health care costs. Anyone with a genuine interest in controlling health care cost would start there but you notice Obama and the Democrats start somewhere else. When you have an anti business attitude you shouldn't be surprised when you have no business. That s what is wrong with the economy.|||If he passes this bill it will destroy our economy. How many Mexican nationals will cross our border if they are included in this coverage. That's what this administration wants, and they will get it if they can. This bill should be posted for everyone to see before it gets to the desk to be signed. At least a week. Put it on the television for all to see just like The Obama channel they had during the elections.|||[obamawtf.blogspot.com] he has so much practice lying and keeping a straight face, that it is natural for him now. go to that site and read. it is frightening. there is 158+ lies that he's been caught in and the lies debunked with who caught him %26amp; sources. many of them were busted by his own people. hillary was huge in busting him on a lot of them. [freeourhealthcarenow.com]|||Look at what these people say, then you will see for your self.
http://perotcharts.com/2008/05/healthcar鈥?/a>
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2鈥?/a>
http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/31/oecd-go鈥?/a>|||he indeed was counting on a government ran industry of health care providers. The hand of government in health care woo hoo. so more doctors nurses, porters, food preparers, bed pan cleaners etc.
more government control of your life. yay.|||Since medical expenses are the largest drain on the treasury and many corporation's coffers, the quicker we can get them under control, the better off it will be for the government in particular and the economy as a whole.|||How can any of you "Christian Conservatives" NOT argue for Health Care Reform? Because unless you are an Armageddonite who wants the Christians hated by all so they will be persecuted you are supposed to care for others.|||Unless this country can rein in health care cost, most will find themselves with out insurance and in bankruptcy court. This is how it is necessary for economic growth and well-being.|||He Always does that, before it was the stimulus that was essential for economic recovery. It's his lawyer talk.|||Because it shows that he truly doesn't have a clue as to what to do or how to do it.|||That dweeb I just read that phony baloney.
Obama says many ridicules things with a straight face.
Many Obots parrot him.|||What you and the republicans argue don't make sense, The president is correct.|||the puppet just reads the q cards he has no idea what he is saying|||He is trying to threaten the folks. I don't think it is working not when we all know so many elections/house and Senate seats coming up for vote|||He is a liar. He has a lot of practice.|||BLARG|||Because it's true?|||People who rely on the government to solve every problem are sheep wo cannot work and venture for themselves. Rather, they want to be spoon-fed everything, from the moment they are born, till the moment they die- "Cradle to Grave."
Having the government jump-in whenever there is a crisis sets a bad precedent. America was founded on freedom and liberty. People fled England at the time because the government, at the time headed by a king, was too powerful and was infringing upon the people's civil liberties. If we summon the government to help us for everything, it will become almost as powerful as a monarchy. Do we want that? Is that what the founding fathers wanted? I think not.
It is time we as Americans take responsibility. Stop blaming corporate America, in matter of fact, the government is lying when it says corporate America is to blame; the blame should be on the government.
50% of the reason, according to The Washington Post, for high insurance rates in America is because of medical technology. I don't know about you, but I enjoy knowing that healthcare in America is the most sophisticated in the world. I sure as hell would not enjoy medicine practices performed today like they did in the 1960's. IF you want low healthcare costs, go down to Africa or somewhere. There, if you are gravely ill, they put you on a bed and give you water. That costs very little. But if you want a well-educated, renowned doctor to perform thoruough tests and treat you to the best of his/her ability, the costs will be high. You don't go shopping for Mercedes expecting to pay $5,000, just like you don't pay little for high-end treatment in America.
Another reason for the high costs of healthcare in America is because of personal diet. America is one of the unhealthiest countries on the planet. The reason being poor dieting. With the busy lifestyles Americans live, people resort to eating fast-food because it's cheap and easy, as opposed to making a healthy meal, which takes time to prepare. Americans also take up bad habits, such as smoking, which negatively affect one's health. Poor treatment of one's body result in higher health insurance costs. More demand of healthcare equates to higher costs. It's simple Economics 101.
Americans need to take responsibility. Don't scapegoat insurance companies because the talking heads told you to do so on the news. Do some self-evaluation. Look inward, rather than outward for someone to blame. By doing so, you will be made aware that the government is not the solution. Sometimes, it's even the problem.|||Out-of-control health care costs negatively impact the labor market. Recent research from the University of California and Harvard University found that higher health care costs have a direct effect on employment prospects through a trickle-down effect in which employers save money by hiring fewer workers and offering more part-time positions. In fact, researchers found that a 20 percent increase in health insurance premiums reduces a given worker's probability of being employed by 3.2 percent and increases the likelihood that a worker is employed only in a part-time position--where health benefits are very uncommon--by 1.9 percent. With the official unemployment rate expected to hit double-digits when new jobs numbers are released tomorrow, we can't afford to have any additional deterioration of the labor market.
The more that people have to pay-out-of-pocket for health insurance, the less money they have to spend elsewhere. Traditionally, the economy emerges from recessions on the back of a boost in consumer spending. But such a bump is unlikely in this recession for a variety of reasons, including the fact that out-of-pocket health care costs have been rising inexorably for workers and families (see chart below for an overview of how different income brackets have seen more and more of their income go to health care costs and premiums).
The point here is that it's a lot more difficult to stimulate consumer spending when the cost of necessities like health insurance eat away at more and more of household incomes.
Inefficient, over-expensive health care makes it more difficult for employers to provide generous compensation packages to employed workers. Health benefits make up the largest share of employee compensation besides wages and salaries, and when times get tough they become one of the most burdensome aspects of employee compensation. For example, in the 2008 Kaiser Survey of Health Benefits, a large share of firms reported that they planned to offload more health care costs onto employees (see below). This is a dangerous course of action given the fact that--as showed above--people are already spending more and more for their insurance.
Further, the cost of employer health care plans are likely to rise, on average, to 45.5 percent of income and wages for families and 21.7 percent for individuals by 2016. The costs of health care also rises faster for smaller firms that pay their workers less: according to the Employment Cost Index, health insurance costs relative to payroll increased 34 percent between 1996 and 2005 and that the increase was largest for businesses paying low wages. That's not good news for economically vulnerable Americans.
For all of these reasons, health care reform is just as much an issue of freeing up economic resources to help stimulate recovery as it is about medical issues or health policy.
Republicans countered that the high unemployment rate 鈥?9.4 percent in July 鈥?shows how families and businesses are struggling and that Obama's reliance on a large government role in expanding health coverage is the wrong approach.|||B/c his teleprompter hides the true Obama|||Quite simple (not that the opponents of the plans like simple).
Currently, we have an employer based health care system. Health care costs are increasing each year raising expenses on American Business.
Most of our competitors have national health insurance. Furthermore, most of our competitors (instead of a corporate income tax) have a sales tax that does not apply to exports. That means that foreign corporations who export products to this country don't pay a dime for their workers to get better health care than we get while our corporations have health care costs equivalent to about 25% of payroll (a percent that goes up every year.)
Yes, health care reform is essential to the ability of our companies to compete which is why Associated Industries (the lobbying group for industrial companies) want some form of health care reform to pass.|||Although the government is presenting this plan as a option, they are forseeing the majority of working Americans to switch or businesses to drop Health Care. Thus force the private sector out of business and government believe they can run an effective health care cheaper.
But business will freed from the health cost on there books and be able to compete with foriegn companies who don't have health care on the books .
Those are the theory we are to believe. Even though government can't run social security with out going bankrupt, nor medicare nor run the VA well.|||Very simply. Despite a campaign of misinformation by some, well-respected people from both parties have spoken about the pressing need for major health care reform due to increasing costs. In fact, a bipartisan health care plan has been prepared (link below) by 3 former US Senators:
1) Howard Baker (R-TN)- Pres.Reagan's Chief of Staff and former Senate Majority Leader
2) Bob Dole (R-KS)- former Senate Majority Leader and 1996 Republican nominee for President
3) Tom Daschle (D-SD)- former Senate Majority Leader
In the meantime, here are 2 simple facts about our current health care system worth pondering:
1) Total cost of all health care in 2008 was $2.4 trillion
2) This cost is expected to increase to $4.3 trillion by 2016, based on current growth rates, if nothing changes.|||What is more essential is to limit the capital gains tax for an extended time. Nobody is saying there shouldn't be health care reform. Why isn't there tort reform. Malpractice suit that end with exorbitant cash awards have the most to do with health care costs. Anyone with a genuine interest in controlling health care cost would start there but you notice Obama and the Democrats start somewhere else. When you have an anti business attitude you shouldn't be surprised when you have no business. That s what is wrong with the economy.|||If he passes this bill it will destroy our economy. How many Mexican nationals will cross our border if they are included in this coverage. That's what this administration wants, and they will get it if they can. This bill should be posted for everyone to see before it gets to the desk to be signed. At least a week. Put it on the television for all to see just like The Obama channel they had during the elections.|||[obamawtf.blogspot.com] he has so much practice lying and keeping a straight face, that it is natural for him now. go to that site and read. it is frightening. there is 158+ lies that he's been caught in and the lies debunked with who caught him %26amp; sources. many of them were busted by his own people. hillary was huge in busting him on a lot of them. [freeourhealthcarenow.com]|||Look at what these people say, then you will see for your self.
http://perotcharts.com/2008/05/healthcar鈥?/a>
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2鈥?/a>
http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/31/oecd-go鈥?/a>|||he indeed was counting on a government ran industry of health care providers. The hand of government in health care woo hoo. so more doctors nurses, porters, food preparers, bed pan cleaners etc.
more government control of your life. yay.|||Since medical expenses are the largest drain on the treasury and many corporation's coffers, the quicker we can get them under control, the better off it will be for the government in particular and the economy as a whole.|||How can any of you "Christian Conservatives" NOT argue for Health Care Reform? Because unless you are an Armageddonite who wants the Christians hated by all so they will be persecuted you are supposed to care for others.|||Unless this country can rein in health care cost, most will find themselves with out insurance and in bankruptcy court. This is how it is necessary for economic growth and well-being.|||He Always does that, before it was the stimulus that was essential for economic recovery. It's his lawyer talk.|||Because it shows that he truly doesn't have a clue as to what to do or how to do it.|||That dweeb I just read that phony baloney.
Obama says many ridicules things with a straight face.
Many Obots parrot him.|||What you and the republicans argue don't make sense, The president is correct.|||the puppet just reads the q cards he has no idea what he is saying|||He is trying to threaten the folks. I don't think it is working not when we all know so many elections/house and Senate seats coming up for vote|||He is a liar. He has a lot of practice.|||BLARG|||Because it's true?|||People who rely on the government to solve every problem are sheep wo cannot work and venture for themselves. Rather, they want to be spoon-fed everything, from the moment they are born, till the moment they die- "Cradle to Grave."
Having the government jump-in whenever there is a crisis sets a bad precedent. America was founded on freedom and liberty. People fled England at the time because the government, at the time headed by a king, was too powerful and was infringing upon the people's civil liberties. If we summon the government to help us for everything, it will become almost as powerful as a monarchy. Do we want that? Is that what the founding fathers wanted? I think not.
It is time we as Americans take responsibility. Stop blaming corporate America, in matter of fact, the government is lying when it says corporate America is to blame; the blame should be on the government.
50% of the reason, according to The Washington Post, for high insurance rates in America is because of medical technology. I don't know about you, but I enjoy knowing that healthcare in America is the most sophisticated in the world. I sure as hell would not enjoy medicine practices performed today like they did in the 1960's. IF you want low healthcare costs, go down to Africa or somewhere. There, if you are gravely ill, they put you on a bed and give you water. That costs very little. But if you want a well-educated, renowned doctor to perform thoruough tests and treat you to the best of his/her ability, the costs will be high. You don't go shopping for Mercedes expecting to pay $5,000, just like you don't pay little for high-end treatment in America.
Another reason for the high costs of healthcare in America is because of personal diet. America is one of the unhealthiest countries on the planet. The reason being poor dieting. With the busy lifestyles Americans live, people resort to eating fast-food because it's cheap and easy, as opposed to making a healthy meal, which takes time to prepare. Americans also take up bad habits, such as smoking, which negatively affect one's health. Poor treatment of one's body result in higher health insurance costs. More demand of healthcare equates to higher costs. It's simple Economics 101.
Americans need to take responsibility. Don't scapegoat insurance companies because the talking heads told you to do so on the news. Do some self-evaluation. Look inward, rather than outward for someone to blame. By doing so, you will be made aware that the government is not the solution. Sometimes, it's even the problem.|||Out-of-control health care costs negatively impact the labor market. Recent research from the University of California and Harvard University found that higher health care costs have a direct effect on employment prospects through a trickle-down effect in which employers save money by hiring fewer workers and offering more part-time positions. In fact, researchers found that a 20 percent increase in health insurance premiums reduces a given worker's probability of being employed by 3.2 percent and increases the likelihood that a worker is employed only in a part-time position--where health benefits are very uncommon--by 1.9 percent. With the official unemployment rate expected to hit double-digits when new jobs numbers are released tomorrow, we can't afford to have any additional deterioration of the labor market.
The more that people have to pay-out-of-pocket for health insurance, the less money they have to spend elsewhere. Traditionally, the economy emerges from recessions on the back of a boost in consumer spending. But such a bump is unlikely in this recession for a variety of reasons, including the fact that out-of-pocket health care costs have been rising inexorably for workers and families (see chart below for an overview of how different income brackets have seen more and more of their income go to health care costs and premiums).
The point here is that it's a lot more difficult to stimulate consumer spending when the cost of necessities like health insurance eat away at more and more of household incomes.
Inefficient, over-expensive health care makes it more difficult for employers to provide generous compensation packages to employed workers. Health benefits make up the largest share of employee compensation besides wages and salaries, and when times get tough they become one of the most burdensome aspects of employee compensation. For example, in the 2008 Kaiser Survey of Health Benefits, a large share of firms reported that they planned to offload more health care costs onto employees (see below). This is a dangerous course of action given the fact that--as showed above--people are already spending more and more for their insurance.
Further, the cost of employer health care plans are likely to rise, on average, to 45.5 percent of income and wages for families and 21.7 percent for individuals by 2016. The costs of health care also rises faster for smaller firms that pay their workers less: according to the Employment Cost Index, health insurance costs relative to payroll increased 34 percent between 1996 and 2005 and that the increase was largest for businesses paying low wages. That's not good news for economically vulnerable Americans.
For all of these reasons, health care reform is just as much an issue of freeing up economic resources to help stimulate recovery as it is about medical issues or health policy.
How does Obama plan to get us out of the democrat eco crisis by costing US jobs?
By raising taxes on businesses, Obama will cause some companies to move overseas and others to cut jobs. With far fewer jobs in the country and more unemployment, there will be less money going to the treasury and an even bigger deficit after Obama increases gov't spending. Except in government, there will not be growth just decline.|||Every single time taxes are raised it brings in LESS tax revenue. That is history, not some "right wing" propaganda. He will bury our economy.|||Well, in the first place, there is no actual evidence that ANY Us business has ever moved overseas as a result of taxes. The propaganda of the neoconservatives isn't evidence.Name an example.
Second, one way to REDUCE the loss of jobs overseas is to do wht Obama proposes--put a stop to the neoconservative policy of using taxpayer money to subsidize companies that outsource jobs.
Third, the neocons insist on giving tax breaks to large businesses, claiming it will "create jobs." It hasn't produced job growth--ever. That's not how the process of growth in a capitalist economy works. New job growth comes from small and medium sized businesses--the ones Obama wants to REDUCE taxes on.
Fourth, new gob growth is linked to increased business revenues. When you cut taxes on the middle class (as Obama proposes) who do 90% of the spending in America, you get more spending--hence higher business revenues, and so create jobs.
What does McCain want to do? Give tax breaks to the likes of AIG and Lehman! Like they are going to create any jobs? Those companies--and the rest of the big companies the neocons worship--have already cost taxpayers too much money and too many jobs. If THEY decided to leave, good riddance. But what's the neocon answer? They want to just keep giving these incompetents MORE money in the form of tax cuts!
Forget it. We need to tax these big companies to the hilt and use the money to support small businesses that will create REAL jobs and economic growth.|||He doesn't plan on increasing taxes on any businesses, except those that send work over seas. He plans on leaving alone all large companies (not giving them tax breaks or credits) and decreasing taxes on all small businesses that makes less than 250,000 per year. This is about 95% of all small businesses. so by taxing those shipping jobs over seas, this will actualy increase our economic stability. |||They're already moving overseas! Our country is bankrupt and our dollar is on it's way to becoming a footnote in history. What we need to do to stop it is start giving our money real value again... and we do that by.... raising taxes!|||Over 95% of businessess will see no tax increase. Also his aggressive approach to alternative energy research will actually create a huge employment growth, estimated at 2 million jobs alone.|||Think what you like about who caused the economic crisis, and what Obama's tax proposals are. But as the polls are reflecting right now, more than half the voters don't think we just need a better Republican to solve our problems.|||By reversing the G O P mantra of trickle down
and STOP rewarding companies with tax breaks that out source and send jobs out of USA
Give the tax breaks to companies that are dedicated to seeing American workers prosper|||Obama only cares about one job...the job he's trying to get.|||He will completely tank the US. That is how.
Second, one way to REDUCE the loss of jobs overseas is to do wht Obama proposes--put a stop to the neoconservative policy of using taxpayer money to subsidize companies that outsource jobs.
Third, the neocons insist on giving tax breaks to large businesses, claiming it will "create jobs." It hasn't produced job growth--ever. That's not how the process of growth in a capitalist economy works. New job growth comes from small and medium sized businesses--the ones Obama wants to REDUCE taxes on.
Fourth, new gob growth is linked to increased business revenues. When you cut taxes on the middle class (as Obama proposes) who do 90% of the spending in America, you get more spending--hence higher business revenues, and so create jobs.
What does McCain want to do? Give tax breaks to the likes of AIG and Lehman! Like they are going to create any jobs? Those companies--and the rest of the big companies the neocons worship--have already cost taxpayers too much money and too many jobs. If THEY decided to leave, good riddance. But what's the neocon answer? They want to just keep giving these incompetents MORE money in the form of tax cuts!
Forget it. We need to tax these big companies to the hilt and use the money to support small businesses that will create REAL jobs and economic growth.|||He doesn't plan on increasing taxes on any businesses, except those that send work over seas. He plans on leaving alone all large companies (not giving them tax breaks or credits) and decreasing taxes on all small businesses that makes less than 250,000 per year. This is about 95% of all small businesses. so by taxing those shipping jobs over seas, this will actualy increase our economic stability. |||They're already moving overseas! Our country is bankrupt and our dollar is on it's way to becoming a footnote in history. What we need to do to stop it is start giving our money real value again... and we do that by.... raising taxes!|||Over 95% of businessess will see no tax increase. Also his aggressive approach to alternative energy research will actually create a huge employment growth, estimated at 2 million jobs alone.|||Think what you like about who caused the economic crisis, and what Obama's tax proposals are. But as the polls are reflecting right now, more than half the voters don't think we just need a better Republican to solve our problems.|||By reversing the G O P mantra of trickle down
and STOP rewarding companies with tax breaks that out source and send jobs out of USA
Give the tax breaks to companies that are dedicated to seeing American workers prosper|||Obama only cares about one job...the job he's trying to get.|||He will completely tank the US. That is how.
When does Obama and the Dems start taking responsibility for the failier of America?
Blaming the Bush administration for Obama's spending and Obama's poor choices isn't cutting it anymore.|||President Obama inherited a mess - a foreign policy mess, an economics mess and a business community unregulated and out of control. He's doing well and he deserves your support. You might benefit from a more historical review and one less party-oriented.|||when will you start taking responsibility for the failure or America? After all, America is made up of people like you.|||I refuse to take responsibility for any failiers anywhere.|||Do you take responsibility for not being able to spell?
Give him more time!|||What is a failier?
When will idiots like you start taking responsibility and learn to read and write at an adult level?|||Never. Democrats have destroyed our economy through forced regulations on our banking industry. They forced the banks to provide loans in all neighborhoods at the same rate reguardless of down payment and payment history. When the banks made it clear that they would be in violation of federal regulations due to taking on this higher risk at the same reward (interest rate received) Democrat Clinton told them not to worry he'll have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy them. This increased the amount of people that could get loans and therefore increased demand changing the supply/demand curve and due to higher demand than what was available in the current market prices went up. Due to increasing value the bad loans didn't matter because they could be refinanced or foreclosed on and someone else was waiting there to buy it at the inflated price. The Republicans tried on 12 separate occasions the change this rediculous system and the Democrats blocked them every time. Democrats want America to fail so they can say they are helping the people by implementing their Socialist/Communist agendas. The Democrat Party's program is to steal from Paul to pay Pedro and Peter and therefore win elections by 2/3rds of the vote. Look at how they have dumbed down our educational system. Look at how they blocked social security reform, knowing it would go bankrupt soon. Look at how they are pouring our money into bankrupt companies. Look at how they have blocked for years our country's ability to produce it's own electricity and oil. That is the core issue of hurting our US auto industry. Democrats don't take responsibility for what they destroy. They state a lie as many times as they can and know the media will report it as the truth. It's horrible.|||He meant failure you idiots.|||I'm sorry, I don't normally pick on spelling, but since 'failure' is the main word in this question, I believe it should be spelled correctly. No politician will ever take responsibility for their failures.|||capitalism as a whole is to blame|||They will still blame others - even in 2011 they will still blame others - self-introspection is not their strong suit.|||Right after the Republicans own up to the last 8 years.kind of expensive isn't it cleaning up after the last 8 years of Failed policy's|||NEVER...they never wil, they will continue to blame others|||Did you say "take responsibility" in the same breath as the word Dem? Wow I've never seen this before. The most repeated phrase in the Obama administration whenever someone points to their failed socialist agenda is "we inherited this from the Bush administration".
Funny - You never heard Reagan say this while he was handling the Carter recession or Bush with the Clinton recession.
I guess the slogan "The buck stops here" is a capitalist term Obama doesn't subscribe to.|||Obama and the Democrats might be to blame for some American failures.
But your failure at spelling is all your fault.|||While the Chosen One is in office, the communist led media will give
Obama an "A" on any thing that goes right. If it goes wrong they will blame it on Bush and give Bush an "F"|||Actually, a lot of Democrats voted *for* president Bush's programs, so they are already to blame.
The fact is that you have to blame people by their actions, not simply because there is an election and suddenly someone is in office.
Bush was handed a slow down and made it into a recession by doing nothing.
Reagan purposely created a recession to get rid of Carters' inflation and high interest rates.
The financial panic was caused by deregulation and the lack of monitoring mainly by the Bush Administration, although deregulation did not start with him.
In the current case, the recession was caused by high oil prices of the Bush administration, and has lasted a long time. Spending too much money does not cause recession, but it may cause inflation. - and that will be Obama's fault.|||Obama and the Dems do not know how to take responsibility. They only know how to point their fingers and cry: Bush did it. Pathetic!|||When did Bush and Cheney ever accept and responsibility for the failures of the past eight years?|||Not cutting it anymore with whom? You?
You're irrelevant.|||Gee, maybe it's because Rep's will not stand up and be accountable for their illegal action.
We are a nation of laws, unless your saying that Rep's should be above the Constitution.|||What's a "failier?"
I hope Jimmy J's answer is not deleted. It's completely true.|||Unfortunately, we are still seeing the effects of the Bush Administration, which I am still a Bush fan. However, dems as a whole must take responsibility for their actions now. The senate has been a Democratic majority for enough time to take responsibility for their actions. Bush couldn't have done anything on his own for the last year of his term, even if he wanted to, because Congress had a say in what was being done. The whole blaming the Bush Adminitstration thing is an excuse, and honestly, I think there will always be some excuse.
Give him more time!|||What is a failier?
When will idiots like you start taking responsibility and learn to read and write at an adult level?|||Never. Democrats have destroyed our economy through forced regulations on our banking industry. They forced the banks to provide loans in all neighborhoods at the same rate reguardless of down payment and payment history. When the banks made it clear that they would be in violation of federal regulations due to taking on this higher risk at the same reward (interest rate received) Democrat Clinton told them not to worry he'll have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy them. This increased the amount of people that could get loans and therefore increased demand changing the supply/demand curve and due to higher demand than what was available in the current market prices went up. Due to increasing value the bad loans didn't matter because they could be refinanced or foreclosed on and someone else was waiting there to buy it at the inflated price. The Republicans tried on 12 separate occasions the change this rediculous system and the Democrats blocked them every time. Democrats want America to fail so they can say they are helping the people by implementing their Socialist/Communist agendas. The Democrat Party's program is to steal from Paul to pay Pedro and Peter and therefore win elections by 2/3rds of the vote. Look at how they have dumbed down our educational system. Look at how they blocked social security reform, knowing it would go bankrupt soon. Look at how they are pouring our money into bankrupt companies. Look at how they have blocked for years our country's ability to produce it's own electricity and oil. That is the core issue of hurting our US auto industry. Democrats don't take responsibility for what they destroy. They state a lie as many times as they can and know the media will report it as the truth. It's horrible.|||He meant failure you idiots.|||I'm sorry, I don't normally pick on spelling, but since 'failure' is the main word in this question, I believe it should be spelled correctly. No politician will ever take responsibility for their failures.|||capitalism as a whole is to blame|||They will still blame others - even in 2011 they will still blame others - self-introspection is not their strong suit.|||Right after the Republicans own up to the last 8 years.kind of expensive isn't it cleaning up after the last 8 years of Failed policy's|||NEVER...they never wil, they will continue to blame others|||Did you say "take responsibility" in the same breath as the word Dem? Wow I've never seen this before. The most repeated phrase in the Obama administration whenever someone points to their failed socialist agenda is "we inherited this from the Bush administration".
Funny - You never heard Reagan say this while he was handling the Carter recession or Bush with the Clinton recession.
I guess the slogan "The buck stops here" is a capitalist term Obama doesn't subscribe to.|||Obama and the Democrats might be to blame for some American failures.
But your failure at spelling is all your fault.|||While the Chosen One is in office, the communist led media will give
Obama an "A" on any thing that goes right. If it goes wrong they will blame it on Bush and give Bush an "F"|||Actually, a lot of Democrats voted *for* president Bush's programs, so they are already to blame.
The fact is that you have to blame people by their actions, not simply because there is an election and suddenly someone is in office.
Bush was handed a slow down and made it into a recession by doing nothing.
Reagan purposely created a recession to get rid of Carters' inflation and high interest rates.
The financial panic was caused by deregulation and the lack of monitoring mainly by the Bush Administration, although deregulation did not start with him.
In the current case, the recession was caused by high oil prices of the Bush administration, and has lasted a long time. Spending too much money does not cause recession, but it may cause inflation. - and that will be Obama's fault.|||Obama and the Dems do not know how to take responsibility. They only know how to point their fingers and cry: Bush did it. Pathetic!|||When did Bush and Cheney ever accept and responsibility for the failures of the past eight years?|||Not cutting it anymore with whom? You?
You're irrelevant.|||Gee, maybe it's because Rep's will not stand up and be accountable for their illegal action.
We are a nation of laws, unless your saying that Rep's should be above the Constitution.|||What's a "failier?"
I hope Jimmy J's answer is not deleted. It's completely true.|||Unfortunately, we are still seeing the effects of the Bush Administration, which I am still a Bush fan. However, dems as a whole must take responsibility for their actions now. The senate has been a Democratic majority for enough time to take responsibility for their actions. Bush couldn't have done anything on his own for the last year of his term, even if he wanted to, because Congress had a say in what was being done. The whole blaming the Bush Adminitstration thing is an excuse, and honestly, I think there will always be some excuse.
How has Obama and the democrats managed to bring so much division to our country?
We were told by the main stream media how wonderful things would be under Obama,his charm and charisma would unite the nation.Less than two years into his term he has divided the country more than George Bush and two wars did,the complete opposite of what the media told us would happen,how could they have been so wrong about Obama?|||The citizens are rife w/ discontent because gov continues to add to the spiraling deficit. GW started it, Obama is not addressing this. Most intelligent beings know that some day, gov will have to make adjustments ... we can't go on indefinitely operating in the red.
GW had the lowest approval rating in history and I suspect correctivity in your observation because Americans were mostly in unison against him.
Now let's take a realistic look at the numbers. GW still had 18% support despite the lowest approval rating in history. This means that 18% of Americans that voted for him are too stubborn to admit they voted for a mistake. Their views are obviously skewed. These same 18% will tend to be anti dem no matter what dem prez is in office. They are extemist and I suspect little intelligence in their opinion.
Obama is at 51% ... plus that 18% that have no will to view Obama w/ an open mind and Obama looks pretty good.
My personal opinion will be reserved pending how he addresses the deficit (if he even does).
I didn't vote for Obama (I'm 3rd party advocate). My conscience is clear. I would have voted AGAINST GW had voting regulations allowed me to do this.|||How could they be so wrong about Obama? It's because most Americans are too lazy and distracted by their latest electronics to get their own facts. Instead, they believe what they hear from Obama and the liberal media and they hope for change without any clue of what that means.
For those who voted for this - shame on you!|||Obama talks a good talk, but people now understand that he is way left and a Socialist.
He says one thing, then they go and do whatever socialist thing they want to anyway.
And we see it, and so do the idiots who voted for him out of Bush-hate and white guilt.|||I think Limbaugh , Hannity, Beck, O'Rielly, and palin are the main reason the country is divided, They tell people to hate Obama and all black people and mexicans and all Arabs and Muslims. They are hate mongers.|||The division is already there, Obama didn't bring it. The divide between the Republicans and the Democrats has grown and like the issue of slavery, will one day breakdown to another Civil War.|||Liberals don't care about facts, honesty, the truth. They want power. Liberals want government to run everything.|||They do it the same way Republicans did for 8 consecutive years.|||He learned it by watching Bush. Alright ? He learned it by watching Bush.|||Bush created it - and having a black guy in office is making it worse - although it makes no sense since their policies are the same|||that was their plan. divide and conquer. we are now subject to a dictator and his cronies.|||It's only because all the racists are so hateful!|||No one knew there were so many closet racists.|||O hates America wants to "change" it, now we know what he has in mind, how else could it happen|||Love is blind.
GW had the lowest approval rating in history and I suspect correctivity in your observation because Americans were mostly in unison against him.
Now let's take a realistic look at the numbers. GW still had 18% support despite the lowest approval rating in history. This means that 18% of Americans that voted for him are too stubborn to admit they voted for a mistake. Their views are obviously skewed. These same 18% will tend to be anti dem no matter what dem prez is in office. They are extemist and I suspect little intelligence in their opinion.
Obama is at 51% ... plus that 18% that have no will to view Obama w/ an open mind and Obama looks pretty good.
My personal opinion will be reserved pending how he addresses the deficit (if he even does).
I didn't vote for Obama (I'm 3rd party advocate). My conscience is clear. I would have voted AGAINST GW had voting regulations allowed me to do this.|||How could they be so wrong about Obama? It's because most Americans are too lazy and distracted by their latest electronics to get their own facts. Instead, they believe what they hear from Obama and the liberal media and they hope for change without any clue of what that means.
For those who voted for this - shame on you!|||Obama talks a good talk, but people now understand that he is way left and a Socialist.
He says one thing, then they go and do whatever socialist thing they want to anyway.
And we see it, and so do the idiots who voted for him out of Bush-hate and white guilt.|||I think Limbaugh , Hannity, Beck, O'Rielly, and palin are the main reason the country is divided, They tell people to hate Obama and all black people and mexicans and all Arabs and Muslims. They are hate mongers.|||The division is already there, Obama didn't bring it. The divide between the Republicans and the Democrats has grown and like the issue of slavery, will one day breakdown to another Civil War.|||Liberals don't care about facts, honesty, the truth. They want power. Liberals want government to run everything.|||They do it the same way Republicans did for 8 consecutive years.|||He learned it by watching Bush. Alright ? He learned it by watching Bush.|||Bush created it - and having a black guy in office is making it worse - although it makes no sense since their policies are the same|||that was their plan. divide and conquer. we are now subject to a dictator and his cronies.|||It's only because all the racists are so hateful!|||No one knew there were so many closet racists.|||O hates America wants to "change" it, now we know what he has in mind, how else could it happen|||Love is blind.
What did Obama authorize to be offered in the plea bargain with the underwear bomber?
Did he double the count of virgins waiting for the underwear boy in the afterlife?
What did Obama offer this attempted murderer of about 300 people in return for some gibberish to make it look like Obama's civilian terror trials work.|||He is a very weak president like Carter. He worries too much about terrorist rights and not enough about US citizens. Plea bargaining is so stupid. Next he will be paying them for Information.|||A civil service position in his administration. His kind of guy.|||Prove it!!!|||Susie you are assuming again and you know what they say about people who assume...
LOL|||No plea bargain. They brought his family to the US to visit and they persuaded him to start talking.
What did Obama offer this attempted murderer of about 300 people in return for some gibberish to make it look like Obama's civilian terror trials work.|||He is a very weak president like Carter. He worries too much about terrorist rights and not enough about US citizens. Plea bargaining is so stupid. Next he will be paying them for Information.|||A civil service position in his administration. His kind of guy.|||Prove it!!!|||Susie you are assuming again and you know what they say about people who assume...
LOL|||No plea bargain. They brought his family to the US to visit and they persuaded him to start talking.
Why does Obama think the same lib tax & spend ideas that have bankrupted every blue state work on a fed level?
In what way will Obama put tax and spend liberalism successfully into practice that blue states who've used it and failed haven't ? Does Obama have some special technique ? Thanks in advance for your answers. God bless.|||It's the same old Democratic story. Spend and spend some more. That's all they can do. No wonder they never win elections every 20 or so years.
Don't worry, the next GOP President is just around the corner.|||Do you guys even know what you are talking about? Cause it sure as hell doesn't sound like it.
|||Where did you get that idea? Republicans are all about tax and spend. Last time a democrat was in office he ushered in Pay As We Go, which ended up saving trillions of dollars that the Republicans quickly spent and left us with a huge amount of debt. Obama would like to go back to Pay As We Go, but the Bush Administration left such a huge deficit.|||If that were the case then GWB turned liberal in 2007 when his administration started to funnel billions into AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If that weren't bad enough GWB passed the $700 billion TARP in 2008 to give those corporations more money. Where in the heck are we going to get the money to pay the bill? Right now we are selling notes and bonds to China to raise cash. China wants to see an interest in its investment and wants the dollar to strengthen, thus hurting our export trades. Oh, excuse me, let's go back to cliches, yes those tax and spend liberals are going about it all wrong.|||You mean those blue states that have great education and where all of the money is generated??? When is the last time you took a vacation to Alabama??? Why are Mississippi's schools always dead last??? Why are so many people in poverty in red states where they don't "tax and spend"???|||Not taxing was the problem in California.
Due to the Republicans don't tax, borrow and spend WAY more!!!|||How many Blue states are bankrupt besides California?|||bankrupted? No proof, no validity.
Just like socialism, you Republicans don't know what the word means.|||yeah red states are hurting too, see florida|||Wow. No red states are in trouble? I must be living in an alternate universe. My bad.|||do you have a chromosome disorder?
Don't worry, the next GOP President is just around the corner.|||Do you guys even know what you are talking about? Cause it sure as hell doesn't sound like it.
Report Abuse
|||Where did you get that idea? Republicans are all about tax and spend. Last time a democrat was in office he ushered in Pay As We Go, which ended up saving trillions of dollars that the Republicans quickly spent and left us with a huge amount of debt. Obama would like to go back to Pay As We Go, but the Bush Administration left such a huge deficit.|||If that were the case then GWB turned liberal in 2007 when his administration started to funnel billions into AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If that weren't bad enough GWB passed the $700 billion TARP in 2008 to give those corporations more money. Where in the heck are we going to get the money to pay the bill? Right now we are selling notes and bonds to China to raise cash. China wants to see an interest in its investment and wants the dollar to strengthen, thus hurting our export trades. Oh, excuse me, let's go back to cliches, yes those tax and spend liberals are going about it all wrong.|||You mean those blue states that have great education and where all of the money is generated??? When is the last time you took a vacation to Alabama??? Why are Mississippi's schools always dead last??? Why are so many people in poverty in red states where they don't "tax and spend"???|||Not taxing was the problem in California.
Due to the Republicans don't tax, borrow and spend WAY more!!!|||How many Blue states are bankrupt besides California?|||bankrupted? No proof, no validity.
Just like socialism, you Republicans don't know what the word means.|||yeah red states are hurting too, see florida|||Wow. No red states are in trouble? I must be living in an alternate universe. My bad.|||do you have a chromosome disorder?
How did Obama listening to his secretary of defense recommendations turn into Obama loves Russia?
I did the boring work of reading about the missile defense system changes. Sounds like the troops want a "mobile" defense system so the enemy don`t not know where the defenses are. Republicans want to keep the rigid system standing there with our chest puffed out saying make my day. Is Obama saving us from another republican star wars project?|||odds are... obamas a ******
so w/e he's doing is probly wrong and hes probly gonna end up needing a welfare check to bail him out|||Oh cmon...You know he loves those commies!|||common enemy is Iran
so w/e he's doing is probly wrong and hes probly gonna end up needing a welfare check to bail him out|||Oh cmon...You know he loves those commies!|||common enemy is Iran
How will Obama MAKE the rich pay the additional taxes?
He says he wants to take out loopholes%26gt;%26gt;%26gt;does anybody know what loopholes specifically? I know some rich people...they are already planning on how to move more money overseas if Obama gets elected....and planning to lay off employees. How is Obama going to make the rich do anything? They did not get rich because they are stupid. Good example is Hollywood, whom are his greatest supporters...but they are not worried about his tax hikes because they have smart accountants that transfer their money to Swiss Accounts.||| Obama says he's not going to raise taxes for 95% of Americans, but the other 5% that will see a tax increase (the wealthy) already pay close to 60% of ALL the taxes to our Government.
Bar Stool Economics
Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Obama's spread the wealth plan will not work.|||that sad this was america 1776-2009 my God how did this happen
|||Well, he wants CEO's to make less, and not give tax breaks to corporations. This is extremely the wroing decision. Heres why...corporations already pay 35 percent taxes, so taxing more would send them overseas. If you cut CEO's pay, there wont be none. WHen you are a CEO, you make so much because there is a chance you can lose everything . For example, if a company goes bankrupt, a CEO's assests are taken with the bankruptcy, therefore thats why they make so much. Hope this helps!!|||He want's to close the loopholes. He want's to stop letting overseas businesses who have moved out of the U.S. from doing business here again.
Obama is way out of line here. He is just flat wrong that he thinks this will help the economy. Businesses I know will have to lay off all their employees. Not so much because of the tax hike, but more because they can't afford to buy health insurance for all their employees. Many of the business owners I know can't even afford health insurance for themselves. How the heck are they going to provide health coverage at $500 a month PER EMPLOYEE if they can't even afford it for themselves. Obama is a total idiot. Our country is in real trouble if he gets elected. I wouldn't worry so much about moving your business out of the country. It's moving my FAMILY out of the country that i'm considering.|||Just like Biden said, if Obama gets elected there will be international crisis. Blind idiots are thinking Obama will change something, he won't. He will make it much worse. Worse than that, the media will cover it up, until it EXPLODES! Then I'm sure he will blame it on Bush..|||He can't.
Yes there are socialist type government programs that have been and are being used now. The thing is that this that taxes people have paid have always gone to government programs not as a direct handout to people that are apparently excited to get free money "from the government" (which will actually be from those who have worked hard). This has never been done so far as I know at the scale that Obama wants. Taxation should be a percentage that is equal across the board. The rich and high middle class should not be punished for their success because of jealousy on the part of those who do not have as much. The rich are rich for a reason, they have worked hard and were smart about their investments. They can choose to leave the country if they want. The rich don't have to put up with such taxation, all they have to do is move themselves and their companies out of the country. Which will mean more outsourced jobs that will disappear hear in America. That will mean that the these welfare "taxes" will be put on those in the hundred thousand dollar incomes (more than 200 thousand and less than 1 million). These are mainly people like doctors, lawyers, small business owners. Many of the small business owners will either have to cut jobs or close their businesses if they can't pay the taxes properly. If the super rich leave then the middle class disappears and become the "rich".
I hate to think what the founding fathers would say about Americans even considering this type of thing, they themselves didn't want to be taxed unfairly. Why then should we make those that are successful have to pay while those that do nothing get a free ride. Hard work has always been the way to do well and will always be the way, because someone will have to work hard to pay these "taxes" to give away to those who choose not to go further than where they are. Without the ''rich" to "tax" you won't have this free money.
In the past people in general would not have just taken something they did not work for. During the great depression people where given jobs by the government so the would feel they earned the money they got, instead of just being given it. People used to have a lot more pride.
Bar Stool Economics
Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Obama's spread the wealth plan will not work.|||that sad this was america 1776-2009 my God how did this happen
Report Abuse
|||Well, he wants CEO's to make less, and not give tax breaks to corporations. This is extremely the wroing decision. Heres why...corporations already pay 35 percent taxes, so taxing more would send them overseas. If you cut CEO's pay, there wont be none. WHen you are a CEO, you make so much because there is a chance you can lose everything . For example, if a company goes bankrupt, a CEO's assests are taken with the bankruptcy, therefore thats why they make so much. Hope this helps!!|||He want's to close the loopholes. He want's to stop letting overseas businesses who have moved out of the U.S. from doing business here again.
Obama is way out of line here. He is just flat wrong that he thinks this will help the economy. Businesses I know will have to lay off all their employees. Not so much because of the tax hike, but more because they can't afford to buy health insurance for all their employees. Many of the business owners I know can't even afford health insurance for themselves. How the heck are they going to provide health coverage at $500 a month PER EMPLOYEE if they can't even afford it for themselves. Obama is a total idiot. Our country is in real trouble if he gets elected. I wouldn't worry so much about moving your business out of the country. It's moving my FAMILY out of the country that i'm considering.|||Just like Biden said, if Obama gets elected there will be international crisis. Blind idiots are thinking Obama will change something, he won't. He will make it much worse. Worse than that, the media will cover it up, until it EXPLODES! Then I'm sure he will blame it on Bush..|||He can't.
Yes there are socialist type government programs that have been and are being used now. The thing is that this that taxes people have paid have always gone to government programs not as a direct handout to people that are apparently excited to get free money "from the government" (which will actually be from those who have worked hard). This has never been done so far as I know at the scale that Obama wants. Taxation should be a percentage that is equal across the board. The rich and high middle class should not be punished for their success because of jealousy on the part of those who do not have as much. The rich are rich for a reason, they have worked hard and were smart about their investments. They can choose to leave the country if they want. The rich don't have to put up with such taxation, all they have to do is move themselves and their companies out of the country. Which will mean more outsourced jobs that will disappear hear in America. That will mean that the these welfare "taxes" will be put on those in the hundred thousand dollar incomes (more than 200 thousand and less than 1 million). These are mainly people like doctors, lawyers, small business owners. Many of the small business owners will either have to cut jobs or close their businesses if they can't pay the taxes properly. If the super rich leave then the middle class disappears and become the "rich".
I hate to think what the founding fathers would say about Americans even considering this type of thing, they themselves didn't want to be taxed unfairly. Why then should we make those that are successful have to pay while those that do nothing get a free ride. Hard work has always been the way to do well and will always be the way, because someone will have to work hard to pay these "taxes" to give away to those who choose not to go further than where they are. Without the ''rich" to "tax" you won't have this free money.
In the past people in general would not have just taken something they did not work for. During the great depression people where given jobs by the government so the would feel they earned the money they got, instead of just being given it. People used to have a lot more pride.
How does Obama convince people that the nasty odors of manure and a garbage scow is that of a flower bouquet?
Mr. Obama has the uncanny ability to persuade people to cast off any common sense that they may have in order to follow him. He is absolutely brilliant. What personality type does Mr. Obama have? Is there a Pied Piper Syndrome listed in the medical community?|||Like the character said in the film American Beauty, "Never underestimate the power of denial". It's easier for many Americans to believe his BS rather than to think critically for themselves regarding how far this country has slipped from it's founding principles.
Our citizens want easy answers, and Nobama offers them freely, often with no substance. Look at the latest example with the "cash for clunkers" program. Sounds good, but then the EPA changes the rules to disqualify more than 100 makes/models. Now we hear that the program will be cancelled because there isn't enough money.
There sure was enough money when BILLIONS and BILLIONS were being doled out to fat cat corporations. But citizens come last in line. Get used to it fellow Americans......|||Or maybe I actually like it.
He's not deceiving me. I like the policies he is pushing. I like cap'n'trade, I like health care reform proposals (although they could go a lot farther in my opinion), I like what is happening with Gitmo.
One man's manure is another man's fertilizer. Y'Know?|||Obama is certainly not smart. Look at all the trouble he causes when he talks without a teleprompter. It is the teleprompter that is smart.
Makes you want to know who is pulling his strings. There is the great manipulator.|||Absolutely. Anyone that would agree with him obviously has no common sense. It should be clear to everyone that the only smart ideas are - yours.|||People are brain dead sheep who need someone to read them fairy tales.
Obama makes the sheep of this world (99% of people) feel calm.
They put all their faith into the idiot.|||If he did not have the ability to lie and manipulate people, he would not be a politician.|||An intelligent personality type. I don't smell manure or a garbage scow, I live in reality.*|||It's similar to the power used by Rush Limbaugh, without the drug abuse.|||compared to the stench of right wing politics, any odor smells pretty good. He is brilliant, you are not. Get a clue!
Our citizens want easy answers, and Nobama offers them freely, often with no substance. Look at the latest example with the "cash for clunkers" program. Sounds good, but then the EPA changes the rules to disqualify more than 100 makes/models. Now we hear that the program will be cancelled because there isn't enough money.
There sure was enough money when BILLIONS and BILLIONS were being doled out to fat cat corporations. But citizens come last in line. Get used to it fellow Americans......|||Or maybe I actually like it.
He's not deceiving me. I like the policies he is pushing. I like cap'n'trade, I like health care reform proposals (although they could go a lot farther in my opinion), I like what is happening with Gitmo.
One man's manure is another man's fertilizer. Y'Know?|||Obama is certainly not smart. Look at all the trouble he causes when he talks without a teleprompter. It is the teleprompter that is smart.
Makes you want to know who is pulling his strings. There is the great manipulator.|||Absolutely. Anyone that would agree with him obviously has no common sense. It should be clear to everyone that the only smart ideas are - yours.|||People are brain dead sheep who need someone to read them fairy tales.
Obama makes the sheep of this world (99% of people) feel calm.
They put all their faith into the idiot.|||If he did not have the ability to lie and manipulate people, he would not be a politician.|||An intelligent personality type. I don't smell manure or a garbage scow, I live in reality.*|||It's similar to the power used by Rush Limbaugh, without the drug abuse.|||compared to the stench of right wing politics, any odor smells pretty good. He is brilliant, you are not. Get a clue!
How would Obama handle the terrorist extremist if elected?
Obama is weak on Israel and the Jewish hardliners are very wary of him and for good reason. How does Obama plam to handle the extremists/terrorist problem?|||He would ask to have a sit down meeting with them, lol.|||Well, he talked like a war hawk in terms of going after the big one (Osama) in Pakistan, which Bush-McCain seem unwilling to do given the alliances they have with extremist Muslim nations such as Pakistan %26amp; Saudi Arabia. Regarding Isarael -- how does the concurance of all media supported candidates (including Obama) in supporting Israel with billions in yearly aid have anything to do with terrorism? Do you mean will Obam do anthing different in regards to continued support of Israeli terrorism?!?|||no, he's socialist. he wants to give health care away which riases taxes, which then cuts the millitary.
obama, dosn't know crap about america. his paster taught against america. he also hasn't really said much about what he plans do do if he's elected. there are other suspicious things about him, too. he just seems like bad news too me.|||Why should we worry what Israel thinks. They are terrorist themselves. They sunk the U.S.S. Liberty which they claim was a mistake but when survivors were interviewed they said they were flying the American flag high and that the Israeli's ignored it. Israeli spy ring in the US. They are like the little brother in school starting up with all the kids then runs to the big brother for protection.|||He would help them.
He won't allow the USA to get our own resources, so we are giving OUR money to the terrorists he adores.
He will open the borders to allow them to freely invade us.
He will coddle the terrorists of iran, chavez etc and bow down to them because he is a wimp.
obama is WRONG for the USA!|||He would treat Muslims and Jews as equals. This would isolate extreamists on all sides.
By the way if he hated America maybe he wouldn't be running for president of America.|||Who gives a s**t.Hopefully leave it to themselves to deal with and worry about his own country for once.I doubt that will happen though...|||he'd figure, if you can't beat them join them.|||How the CIA trains terrorists and uses them as pretexts
What is the USA doing in IRAQ?
The most important thing that is happening in Iraq is that America takes Iraq's oil reserves. Bin Laden - the executor for plans of the CIA - provided necessary pretexts for the USA to attack and put the plans in practice. Also at present Bin Laden - coordinated to the plans of the CIA - bomb attacks US solders and innocent people. The plans provide a false insecurity in Iraq. So other countries - like Japan, China and the European Union - can't enter Iraq and invest capital.
Nowadays oil is rising in price and the USA, decades ago, had realized that the growth of different industries in developing countries will make too much demand for oil and it will be too expensive. Also America realized that having control upon oil reserves of the world will make the USA continue being the number one superpower in the world and so, collaborating with the UK, made plans for the Middle East.
Constituting the religious government in Iran and then the war of attrition between Iran and Iraq aiming economical destruction of the two countries was the first phase of the plans and when Iran ran out of breath, immediately the war was stopped because no part of Iran should have been owned by Iraq.
Then Saddam, invoked by the USA, attacked Kuwait and the USA used it as pretext for attacking Iraq and then sanctions of the Security Council against Iraq were imposed on innocent people.
Before entering Iraq, the USA made poverty in Iraq and it was so intense that the United Nations did "The Oil-for-Food Program." That is to say they were getting oil and giving food to people who were dying of hunger. The sanctions against Iraq killed 500,000 children because needed medicines didn't get.
Why did the USA make poverty in Iraq? Because the USA had to go Iraq and continue executing plans and there shouldn't have occurred any resistance from the Iraqi people. And at present, the Iraqi people are busy to daily living and all the insecurities are born by groups that are Islamic outwardly, but are directed by the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) and the CIA. They fight against the USA outwardly, but execute plans of the CIA in actual truth.
When most of Iraq's oil reserves will be finishing, then it will be Iran's turn for the USA to enter Iran and take its oil and other -Iran is full of different mines like copper and uranium - reserves. Mullahs ruling Iran have the duty of making necessary pretexts. This is the scenario of Iran's ruling mullahs:
From olden times fascist governments of the world did not live long and Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini tried to create fascist governments that live a long life. They drew people out to streets. People were doing demonstrations and had mottos but in actual truth, the mottos were in favor of the governments. People were voting, but they could only vote to the candidates who were elected by the governments. They led minds of people with popular organizations. The governments were democratic outwardly, but fascistic in actual truth.
The Mullah regime in Iran is an advanced type of that governments designed by the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) and the CIA. All ways of destruction of the government are blocked. For example there is Sepah Pasdaran to prevent military coup d鈥櫭﹖at. There is the Council of Guardians of the Constitution to stop the Parliament. And they have the Basij Forces to suppress opponent demonstrations of the people. The government is anti USA outwardly but it's a strong fort that is controlled by levers grabbed by the USA and the UK in actual truth and no rival of the USA can penetrate it. If the USA himself does not destroy the government, that lives more than 100 years.
The agenda of the Mullah regime includes:
1- Continuing the programs of nuclear energy and atomic bomb.
2- Insulting to the USA and burning the United States Flag.
3- Protecting terrorist groups in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine.
4- Insulting to Israel and struggling to eliminate the country.
5- Committing every kind of crimes.
In brief, Iran's ruling mullahs have the duty of complete destruction of Iran's international esteem and they cause Iran to be hated by all people of the world.
The USA causes Iran to be hated because it will be Iran's turn after Iraq and performing plans in Iran is determined while nobody in the world will be asking: "Why do you do that?"
Iran's government is determined to provide such a poverty in Iran that when the USA enters Iran, people can't resist at all and they should be grateful of saving them from the Mullahs.
Also ordered by the USA, Mullahs have filled Iran with different weapons and when the USA enters Iran, there should happen such a great fire cracking that the USA pretends it was very very hard to capture Iran and involved very high expenses so the USA should get Iran's oil for a long time in turn for the hard work.
If we do a survey on Iran's oil sale we notice that Iran has a small percent of the quota on OPEC and oil sale is very less than what it was selling during the reign of the Shah of Iran and Iran's oil is a reserve for the USA.
Imagine after ten years when oil will be over two thousand dollars a barrel and then China with expensive oil, but the USA with cheap oil -50 dollars a barrel-, will manage their industries. Which one of them will produce cheaper products? That's the way the USA tries to remain the number one superpower in the world.
About a century ago the UK was the first grade colonizer of the world. But it didn't last long. After the Second World War the USA that had changed into a powerful country, began competing against the UK for colonies and so happened the nationalization of the oil industry in Iran when Mosaddeg was the prime minister and the Suez Canal when Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser was the president and...
The UK noticed that the rival was very strong and could do nothing except compromising. Then Churchill told that they should divide the cake -the world- with the USA. And the two countries changed into allies and began developing plans for different countries for 50 years later, 100 years later, and even 200 years later.
Penetrating religious groups in Islamic countries and exciting them against the USA and equipping them with arms was one of the plans.
The USA wanted to make illegal remarks and plunder sources of the world. So the SIS and the CIA produced terrorist groups and the "terrorist" term, made them commit crimes, and incited worldwide hate and panic. It was for fighting against terrorists outwardly but plundering sources of the world. Terrorists are pretexts for putting evil plans in practice.
Basically Moslem is a lazy person who does not have the patience for reading history books and knowing what the USA has done with Moslems. And if he does that, he will find what the UK has done with Moslems.
Moslem likes reading his prayers for entering the paradise and if he is very smart, he is smart in earning money. A religious group -Islamic-, tends to make peace because the teachings of Islam are so. A Moslem never finds motives in himself for toiling, making capital, going other countries, buying weapons, and being a terrorist in other countries.
If religious groups change into anti USA, armed, and very violent groups, it's a change that is produced by the influence of the SIS and the CIA for using the religious groups as pretexts for what they want to do.
If Islamic groups fight against Israel, it's because Jews in America are a constant pest to the USA and the USA, making the country -Israel- for them and producing war in the country, made the Jews spend a lot of energy and capital in Israel. So the USA prevented the Jews from getting bigger than what they are and stopped them from intervening in internal affairs of the USA. Long term plan of the USA for Jews is transferring them to Israel.
Right now the USA is developing a lot of violent and armed religious groups in Islamic countries and it has a lot of evil plans for the future of the world. Unfortunately the SIS and the CIA invoke religious groups to destroy historical monuments because it cauese worldwide hate and wrath against them.
Question: Bin Laden, Khamenei, or other leaders of religious and violent groups, do they know that they are executors for evil plans of the SIS and the CIA?
The answer is NO. The SIS and the CIA send some qualified persons in the groups. Islam doesn't have a lot of things for humans at the present time and religious individuals are unaware persons and their brains look like empty bowls. So the officials of the SIS and the CIA can act like theoricians. They have faith classes, interpret and justify whatever they want and place them in the brains using Islamic methods. They introduce the US as "the Great Satan." And express fighting, Jihad, and Shahadat -Struggle and Martyrdom in Islam- as the only way of getting a prosper in the future world. Then they arm humans and use them like robots. The robots are even ready to suicide. They also seal the brains so that any other information can't enter the brains. For sealing the brains they tell: "Shahid Imam told that if you were somewhere that they were speaking contrary to your religion and your beliefs, desert them and don't dispute against them because the Satan is lying in ambush and waiting for a chance to mislead believers toward perversion".
And in the end, which parts of the US government makes secret plans for the future?
Apparently most of Senators of the USA don't know about the secret plans and sometimes approve some bills that are contrary to the long term and secret plans. But the CIA is one of the actors of the plans.
How does the CIA change the Presidents' minds and make them conforme|||he'd nuke,nuke,nuke, Iran.
obama, dosn't know crap about america. his paster taught against america. he also hasn't really said much about what he plans do do if he's elected. there are other suspicious things about him, too. he just seems like bad news too me.|||Why should we worry what Israel thinks. They are terrorist themselves. They sunk the U.S.S. Liberty which they claim was a mistake but when survivors were interviewed they said they were flying the American flag high and that the Israeli's ignored it. Israeli spy ring in the US. They are like the little brother in school starting up with all the kids then runs to the big brother for protection.|||He would help them.
He won't allow the USA to get our own resources, so we are giving OUR money to the terrorists he adores.
He will open the borders to allow them to freely invade us.
He will coddle the terrorists of iran, chavez etc and bow down to them because he is a wimp.
obama is WRONG for the USA!|||He would treat Muslims and Jews as equals. This would isolate extreamists on all sides.
By the way if he hated America maybe he wouldn't be running for president of America.|||Who gives a s**t.Hopefully leave it to themselves to deal with and worry about his own country for once.I doubt that will happen though...|||he'd figure, if you can't beat them join them.|||How the CIA trains terrorists and uses them as pretexts
What is the USA doing in IRAQ?
The most important thing that is happening in Iraq is that America takes Iraq's oil reserves. Bin Laden - the executor for plans of the CIA - provided necessary pretexts for the USA to attack and put the plans in practice. Also at present Bin Laden - coordinated to the plans of the CIA - bomb attacks US solders and innocent people. The plans provide a false insecurity in Iraq. So other countries - like Japan, China and the European Union - can't enter Iraq and invest capital.
Nowadays oil is rising in price and the USA, decades ago, had realized that the growth of different industries in developing countries will make too much demand for oil and it will be too expensive. Also America realized that having control upon oil reserves of the world will make the USA continue being the number one superpower in the world and so, collaborating with the UK, made plans for the Middle East.
Constituting the religious government in Iran and then the war of attrition between Iran and Iraq aiming economical destruction of the two countries was the first phase of the plans and when Iran ran out of breath, immediately the war was stopped because no part of Iran should have been owned by Iraq.
Then Saddam, invoked by the USA, attacked Kuwait and the USA used it as pretext for attacking Iraq and then sanctions of the Security Council against Iraq were imposed on innocent people.
Before entering Iraq, the USA made poverty in Iraq and it was so intense that the United Nations did "The Oil-for-Food Program." That is to say they were getting oil and giving food to people who were dying of hunger. The sanctions against Iraq killed 500,000 children because needed medicines didn't get.
Why did the USA make poverty in Iraq? Because the USA had to go Iraq and continue executing plans and there shouldn't have occurred any resistance from the Iraqi people. And at present, the Iraqi people are busy to daily living and all the insecurities are born by groups that are Islamic outwardly, but are directed by the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) and the CIA. They fight against the USA outwardly, but execute plans of the CIA in actual truth.
When most of Iraq's oil reserves will be finishing, then it will be Iran's turn for the USA to enter Iran and take its oil and other -Iran is full of different mines like copper and uranium - reserves. Mullahs ruling Iran have the duty of making necessary pretexts. This is the scenario of Iran's ruling mullahs:
From olden times fascist governments of the world did not live long and Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini tried to create fascist governments that live a long life. They drew people out to streets. People were doing demonstrations and had mottos but in actual truth, the mottos were in favor of the governments. People were voting, but they could only vote to the candidates who were elected by the governments. They led minds of people with popular organizations. The governments were democratic outwardly, but fascistic in actual truth.
The Mullah regime in Iran is an advanced type of that governments designed by the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) and the CIA. All ways of destruction of the government are blocked. For example there is Sepah Pasdaran to prevent military coup d鈥櫭﹖at. There is the Council of Guardians of the Constitution to stop the Parliament. And they have the Basij Forces to suppress opponent demonstrations of the people. The government is anti USA outwardly but it's a strong fort that is controlled by levers grabbed by the USA and the UK in actual truth and no rival of the USA can penetrate it. If the USA himself does not destroy the government, that lives more than 100 years.
The agenda of the Mullah regime includes:
1- Continuing the programs of nuclear energy and atomic bomb.
2- Insulting to the USA and burning the United States Flag.
3- Protecting terrorist groups in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine.
4- Insulting to Israel and struggling to eliminate the country.
5- Committing every kind of crimes.
In brief, Iran's ruling mullahs have the duty of complete destruction of Iran's international esteem and they cause Iran to be hated by all people of the world.
The USA causes Iran to be hated because it will be Iran's turn after Iraq and performing plans in Iran is determined while nobody in the world will be asking: "Why do you do that?"
Iran's government is determined to provide such a poverty in Iran that when the USA enters Iran, people can't resist at all and they should be grateful of saving them from the Mullahs.
Also ordered by the USA, Mullahs have filled Iran with different weapons and when the USA enters Iran, there should happen such a great fire cracking that the USA pretends it was very very hard to capture Iran and involved very high expenses so the USA should get Iran's oil for a long time in turn for the hard work.
If we do a survey on Iran's oil sale we notice that Iran has a small percent of the quota on OPEC and oil sale is very less than what it was selling during the reign of the Shah of Iran and Iran's oil is a reserve for the USA.
Imagine after ten years when oil will be over two thousand dollars a barrel and then China with expensive oil, but the USA with cheap oil -50 dollars a barrel-, will manage their industries. Which one of them will produce cheaper products? That's the way the USA tries to remain the number one superpower in the world.
About a century ago the UK was the first grade colonizer of the world. But it didn't last long. After the Second World War the USA that had changed into a powerful country, began competing against the UK for colonies and so happened the nationalization of the oil industry in Iran when Mosaddeg was the prime minister and the Suez Canal when Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser was the president and...
The UK noticed that the rival was very strong and could do nothing except compromising. Then Churchill told that they should divide the cake -the world- with the USA. And the two countries changed into allies and began developing plans for different countries for 50 years later, 100 years later, and even 200 years later.
Penetrating religious groups in Islamic countries and exciting them against the USA and equipping them with arms was one of the plans.
The USA wanted to make illegal remarks and plunder sources of the world. So the SIS and the CIA produced terrorist groups and the "terrorist" term, made them commit crimes, and incited worldwide hate and panic. It was for fighting against terrorists outwardly but plundering sources of the world. Terrorists are pretexts for putting evil plans in practice.
Basically Moslem is a lazy person who does not have the patience for reading history books and knowing what the USA has done with Moslems. And if he does that, he will find what the UK has done with Moslems.
Moslem likes reading his prayers for entering the paradise and if he is very smart, he is smart in earning money. A religious group -Islamic-, tends to make peace because the teachings of Islam are so. A Moslem never finds motives in himself for toiling, making capital, going other countries, buying weapons, and being a terrorist in other countries.
If religious groups change into anti USA, armed, and very violent groups, it's a change that is produced by the influence of the SIS and the CIA for using the religious groups as pretexts for what they want to do.
If Islamic groups fight against Israel, it's because Jews in America are a constant pest to the USA and the USA, making the country -Israel- for them and producing war in the country, made the Jews spend a lot of energy and capital in Israel. So the USA prevented the Jews from getting bigger than what they are and stopped them from intervening in internal affairs of the USA. Long term plan of the USA for Jews is transferring them to Israel.
Right now the USA is developing a lot of violent and armed religious groups in Islamic countries and it has a lot of evil plans for the future of the world. Unfortunately the SIS and the CIA invoke religious groups to destroy historical monuments because it cauese worldwide hate and wrath against them.
Question: Bin Laden, Khamenei, or other leaders of religious and violent groups, do they know that they are executors for evil plans of the SIS and the CIA?
The answer is NO. The SIS and the CIA send some qualified persons in the groups. Islam doesn't have a lot of things for humans at the present time and religious individuals are unaware persons and their brains look like empty bowls. So the officials of the SIS and the CIA can act like theoricians. They have faith classes, interpret and justify whatever they want and place them in the brains using Islamic methods. They introduce the US as "the Great Satan." And express fighting, Jihad, and Shahadat -Struggle and Martyrdom in Islam- as the only way of getting a prosper in the future world. Then they arm humans and use them like robots. The robots are even ready to suicide. They also seal the brains so that any other information can't enter the brains. For sealing the brains they tell: "Shahid Imam told that if you were somewhere that they were speaking contrary to your religion and your beliefs, desert them and don't dispute against them because the Satan is lying in ambush and waiting for a chance to mislead believers toward perversion".
And in the end, which parts of the US government makes secret plans for the future?
Apparently most of Senators of the USA don't know about the secret plans and sometimes approve some bills that are contrary to the long term and secret plans. But the CIA is one of the actors of the plans.
How does the CIA change the Presidents' minds and make them conforme|||he'd nuke,nuke,nuke, Iran.
If President Obama lets up off the Socialism Agenda will very small companies have a chance to grow?
I'm investing in penny stocks right now in hopes that I can build some wealth in the future. LOL Sad but true. Anyway, is the Socialism pursued by President Obama limiting very small businesses from expanding and becoming successful in the future? In other words is President Obama preventing me from seeing dough in my penny stock investments?|||his social agenda is good for everyone including business. if the people are taken care of and healthy they will do better at work|||you are sick little man
|||"President Obama has offered community banks a deal: If they鈥檒l increase their lending to small businesses, he鈥檒l give them cheap capital to do it."
"Under the president鈥檚 plan, banks with less than $1 billion in assets will be able to get new capital from the U.S. Treasury Department鈥檚 Troubled Asset Relief Program at a 3 percent dividend rate. That鈥檚 a significant savings compared with the 5 percent rate now available to banks that tap TARP."
I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY SOCIALIST PROGRAMS LIKE THAT BEFORE.|||No. Without the bailout funds which conservatives frequently attribute to a socialist agenda, many banks won't be able to offer small businesses the credit they need, forcing many small businesses to close.|||Well, it is the conservatives who are arguing now that we can't have a public option because it will save small businesses money.|||Obama is so far right he can't even see socialism.|||No, the small businesses would not get BIG GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS to make up for Wal-Mart coming into town.|||Your ASSumption (The President of The united States has a Socialistic agenda) is flawed.|||Socialism doesn't have any "investments"...|||The socialist agenda is right wing bullshit.|||Our Problem is that We are too Primitive to work for the Good of Mankind
instead we work for paper or electronic blips.
Report Abuse
|||"President Obama has offered community banks a deal: If they鈥檒l increase their lending to small businesses, he鈥檒l give them cheap capital to do it."
"Under the president鈥檚 plan, banks with less than $1 billion in assets will be able to get new capital from the U.S. Treasury Department鈥檚 Troubled Asset Relief Program at a 3 percent dividend rate. That鈥檚 a significant savings compared with the 5 percent rate now available to banks that tap TARP."
I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY SOCIALIST PROGRAMS LIKE THAT BEFORE.|||No. Without the bailout funds which conservatives frequently attribute to a socialist agenda, many banks won't be able to offer small businesses the credit they need, forcing many small businesses to close.|||Well, it is the conservatives who are arguing now that we can't have a public option because it will save small businesses money.|||Obama is so far right he can't even see socialism.|||No, the small businesses would not get BIG GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS to make up for Wal-Mart coming into town.|||Your ASSumption (The President of The united States has a Socialistic agenda) is flawed.|||Socialism doesn't have any "investments"...|||The socialist agenda is right wing bullshit.|||Our Problem is that We are too Primitive to work for the Good of Mankind
instead we work for paper or electronic blips.
When does Obama and the Dems start taking responsibility for the failure of America?
Let's face it he hasn't done just about anything since he's been in office but cause more mess. I actually voted for him thinking that he would "change" america but i am losing hope. Also, Blaming the Bush administration for Obama's spending and Obama's poor choices isn't cutting it anymore.|||He also talks way too much on TV and is getting boring.|||They are doing everything! Doesn't anyone see how desperate they are getting. Really fact checking SNL, really no body fact tracks them when a Republican is made fun of. But they are freaking out that their idol is losing his vibe. All he does is spend and do none of his promises. The 9 months excuse doesn't cut it and blame Bush doesn't work either. The Republicans are rumored to be more favoritable in 2010 like the Dems were in 2006. Think the governor race in NJ and Virginia, states that vote Obama and then vote for a Republican governor. Irony right?|||If you support one of the two major parties, you will constantly be disappointed. That's the name of the game. The parties disagree on all the superficial issues and make the public think that they have a real choice.
It's a fake choice.
Both parties largely agree on all the core issues like the US interventionist foreign policy, increasing spending, and enlarging the federal government to intrude more into our daily lives.
So, my answer to you is that Obama will never "take responsibility" for the failure of anything. What you'll see for the rest of your lifetime is democrats blaming republicans for all of America's woes, and vice versa. So, just like we had republicans in office for 8 years, until the public got fed up with republicans making the government suck, and then the democrats won, we'll see the same thing with Obama. After 8 years (maybe 12) we'll get sick of democrats making the government suck, so we'll elect replublicans again.
Why can't we learn? BOTH of the major parties make government suck. Think outside of the box. Don't waste your vote. Vote for a third party candidate.|||Your missing the boat, Jimmy. President Obama and the Democrats and even some Republicans are working hard for the Conservatives to join in and help to make sure America does not fail. The word you need to use is United. Why can't you bunch of Hooligans build up our Government instead of tearing it down ? United We Should Stand. But oh No, your kind of People continue on and on. What isn't cutting it any more is the Negative Propaganda that you guys use against our President and Country. It is people like you who continue to chew on the Azz of our President. Stop , Look and Listen. It is nasty whats going on. If anyone is to blame it is you. Even Foreign Countries can see the light. They think it's terrible too.|||no politicians is going to admit they are to blame for anything - it will always be someone else's fault... we were promised transparency, less PAC involvement and improved jobs and economic growth. Sure it has only been 9 months and I realize it takes time to make actual changes but instead of seeing job growth, we have seen more job cuts, borderline inflation, more PAC involvement and the same old song and dance when it comes to transparency.
get rid of all sitting politicians and start over|||"Historically in every recovery, because the president rightly did inherit a recession. But historically, the lagging indicator always deals with employment." --Sean Hannity, 1/15/04,
explaining how job losses lag in the recovery from the recession Bush inherited three years after Bush took office.
"You know, I was campaigning in Chicago and somebody asked me, is there ever any time where the budget might have to go into deficit? I said only if we were at war or had a national emergency or were in recession. Little did I realize we'd get the trifecta." 鈥擯resident George W. Bush, Charlotte, North Carolina, Feb. 27, 2002|||Huh? He stopped the worst economic slide since the Great Depression, he's about to pass health insurance, he's passed *lots* of useful legislation and he's turned around our relations with the world and won the Nobel Peace Prize as a consequence. Iran is making overtures about its nuclear program, too early to tell, but . . . give the man a chance! He's been in office only 9 months and you can't make huge changes overnight, no economist believed or believes that the economy is going to be back to normal in less than several years.|||You knew the answer before you asked. And some have stated it correctly - no politician ever takes blame for his/her own failures. Obama is no different.
What makes him especially contemptable however, is his continued insistance on taking credit for things he HASN'T done (end the recession, create or save jobs, etc.).|||Yes he should have got the worst recession in seventy years sorted out by now, and after nine months as well, what an idiot!!
FYI Bush at his last press conference after eight years in office blamed the previous administration for the state of the economy!!!
So Obama has still got 7 years 3 months to do the same thing? I don't think he is that dumb do you?|||The economy is recovering after a near fall into depression, the Iraq war is nearing an end, we are not beating the war drum with Iran and N Korea...and the world is actually looking at us with renewed respect.
Yeah, no change at all, and it's only been 9 months.
Obama is not Jesus, and people need to quit expecting miracles.|||Hey! Liberals may be a dime a dozen, but Conservatives are cheaper! LOLz. Also, it's always the Dem. that fixes it. America think we are fine. Some dumb a$$ republican comes in under the stupid America vote(about 57%) and he screws it up! Now we are begging for another Dem. Republicans can be Prez. But you never here of a good piece of elephant. :)|||IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER BLAME OBAMA - IN 9 MONTHS HOW COULD HE OF STARTED 2 WARS AND STARTED A RECESSION THE BEGAN IN THE END OF 2007 - HE NEVER SAID HE WAS GOING TO SNAP HIS FINGERS AND EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE OK - CHANGE COMES FROM WORKING AT IT YOU IMPATIENT IDIOT - YOU WANT OBAMA TO CHANGE YOUR DIAPER TOO|||cause more mess than creating 2 useless wars, destroying economy and causing the world to hate america?
come on, you cons, be proud of your bush's legacy.
we will take the blame when we deserve it.|||I agree Obama has taken the reigns of government and repeated the same old mistakes. Unless he can change from the old democrat policies that failed and try to learn socialist or leftwing politics that work.|||Wake up jimmy.
The economy is recovering.
The damage Bush did has bottomed out.|||No
That makes no sense. If President Obama is doing nothing then how can America be failing?|||He'll take responsibility when he is long dead and gone|||Whenever the blame Bush routine stops working.|||becuz once he stepped into office ppl though the world was gonna change....relax n let go of the hype!!! No one can change America that fast....he's got almost 3 more years left...let him do him|||When we get out of Bush's wars.
When it became apparent that Iraq wasn't going to be easy, confidence in the country plummeted. Or didn't you notice?|||What planet have you been on for the last eight years? Sure as hell hasn't been Earth!|||We're all to blame for the failure of America but you're right. Obama and his congregation need to pull their heads out of their a**es and admit Socialism might hurt us more than out of control hyper capitalism.|||I just don't see them doing it any time soon. He has been quite a disappointment.
It's a fake choice.
Both parties largely agree on all the core issues like the US interventionist foreign policy, increasing spending, and enlarging the federal government to intrude more into our daily lives.
So, my answer to you is that Obama will never "take responsibility" for the failure of anything. What you'll see for the rest of your lifetime is democrats blaming republicans for all of America's woes, and vice versa. So, just like we had republicans in office for 8 years, until the public got fed up with republicans making the government suck, and then the democrats won, we'll see the same thing with Obama. After 8 years (maybe 12) we'll get sick of democrats making the government suck, so we'll elect replublicans again.
Why can't we learn? BOTH of the major parties make government suck. Think outside of the box. Don't waste your vote. Vote for a third party candidate.|||Your missing the boat, Jimmy. President Obama and the Democrats and even some Republicans are working hard for the Conservatives to join in and help to make sure America does not fail. The word you need to use is United. Why can't you bunch of Hooligans build up our Government instead of tearing it down ? United We Should Stand. But oh No, your kind of People continue on and on. What isn't cutting it any more is the Negative Propaganda that you guys use against our President and Country. It is people like you who continue to chew on the Azz of our President. Stop , Look and Listen. It is nasty whats going on. If anyone is to blame it is you. Even Foreign Countries can see the light. They think it's terrible too.|||no politicians is going to admit they are to blame for anything - it will always be someone else's fault... we were promised transparency, less PAC involvement and improved jobs and economic growth. Sure it has only been 9 months and I realize it takes time to make actual changes but instead of seeing job growth, we have seen more job cuts, borderline inflation, more PAC involvement and the same old song and dance when it comes to transparency.
get rid of all sitting politicians and start over|||"Historically in every recovery, because the president rightly did inherit a recession. But historically, the lagging indicator always deals with employment." --Sean Hannity, 1/15/04,
explaining how job losses lag in the recovery from the recession Bush inherited three years after Bush took office.
"You know, I was campaigning in Chicago and somebody asked me, is there ever any time where the budget might have to go into deficit? I said only if we were at war or had a national emergency or were in recession. Little did I realize we'd get the trifecta." 鈥擯resident George W. Bush, Charlotte, North Carolina, Feb. 27, 2002|||Huh? He stopped the worst economic slide since the Great Depression, he's about to pass health insurance, he's passed *lots* of useful legislation and he's turned around our relations with the world and won the Nobel Peace Prize as a consequence. Iran is making overtures about its nuclear program, too early to tell, but . . . give the man a chance! He's been in office only 9 months and you can't make huge changes overnight, no economist believed or believes that the economy is going to be back to normal in less than several years.|||You knew the answer before you asked. And some have stated it correctly - no politician ever takes blame for his/her own failures. Obama is no different.
What makes him especially contemptable however, is his continued insistance on taking credit for things he HASN'T done (end the recession, create or save jobs, etc.).|||Yes he should have got the worst recession in seventy years sorted out by now, and after nine months as well, what an idiot!!
FYI Bush at his last press conference after eight years in office blamed the previous administration for the state of the economy!!!
So Obama has still got 7 years 3 months to do the same thing? I don't think he is that dumb do you?|||The economy is recovering after a near fall into depression, the Iraq war is nearing an end, we are not beating the war drum with Iran and N Korea...and the world is actually looking at us with renewed respect.
Yeah, no change at all, and it's only been 9 months.
Obama is not Jesus, and people need to quit expecting miracles.|||Hey! Liberals may be a dime a dozen, but Conservatives are cheaper! LOLz. Also, it's always the Dem. that fixes it. America think we are fine. Some dumb a$$ republican comes in under the stupid America vote(about 57%) and he screws it up! Now we are begging for another Dem. Republicans can be Prez. But you never here of a good piece of elephant. :)|||IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER BLAME OBAMA - IN 9 MONTHS HOW COULD HE OF STARTED 2 WARS AND STARTED A RECESSION THE BEGAN IN THE END OF 2007 - HE NEVER SAID HE WAS GOING TO SNAP HIS FINGERS AND EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE OK - CHANGE COMES FROM WORKING AT IT YOU IMPATIENT IDIOT - YOU WANT OBAMA TO CHANGE YOUR DIAPER TOO|||cause more mess than creating 2 useless wars, destroying economy and causing the world to hate america?
come on, you cons, be proud of your bush's legacy.
we will take the blame when we deserve it.|||I agree Obama has taken the reigns of government and repeated the same old mistakes. Unless he can change from the old democrat policies that failed and try to learn socialist or leftwing politics that work.|||Wake up jimmy.
The economy is recovering.
The damage Bush did has bottomed out.|||No
That makes no sense. If President Obama is doing nothing then how can America be failing?|||He'll take responsibility when he is long dead and gone|||Whenever the blame Bush routine stops working.|||becuz once he stepped into office ppl though the world was gonna change....relax n let go of the hype!!! No one can change America that fast....he's got almost 3 more years left...let him do him|||When we get out of Bush's wars.
When it became apparent that Iraq wasn't going to be easy, confidence in the country plummeted. Or didn't you notice?|||What planet have you been on for the last eight years? Sure as hell hasn't been Earth!|||We're all to blame for the failure of America but you're right. Obama and his congregation need to pull their heads out of their a**es and admit Socialism might hurt us more than out of control hyper capitalism.|||I just don't see them doing it any time soon. He has been quite a disappointment.
Bush and Obama have same withdrawal plan, How is that Change?
They both want to withdraw combat troops. According to the Washington Post article that was printed yesterday in Newsday that is only one third of our troops there. This does not figure in Security Contractors.
So out of 150,000 troops in Iraq both Bush and Obama are only planning on withdrawing 50,000. ( Obama on his website calls for withdrawing Combat troops, he makes no mention of the others) How is this change?|||Obama is no different from Bush. They both are inexperienced.|||Y'all are right, obama is different from bush. obama is a spineless coward who is too afraid to fight. He says he was against the war in the 1st place, a war, may I remind you, that was started over protecting our country . Obama isn't going to help, he's going to hurt!
|||he hates america
|||Obama has been talking about withdrawl from Iraq %26amp; ending the war since the beginning, even when bush wanted to increase troops. People are just now sarting to cetch on to Obama's plan %26amp; realising that we need to withdrawl from iraq because violence is down %26amp; there is no need for us there. Bush only started talking about withdrawl after the iraq leaders said that they wanted a time table for our troops to leave wich was like 3 weeks ago. Obama is going to end the Iraq war %26amp; has had his plan for years, where as bush is just following his idea. %26amp; now even McCain is talking about withdrawl when he was previously totally against it! Saying that it would mean defeat if we left Iraq. He will withdrawl all troops gradually. Bush formerly had no withdrawl plan.
AND TO THE DUDE ABOVE ME..OBAMA IS EVERYBIT DIFFERENT FROM BUSH! HE IS AN INTELLEGENT %26amp; ARTICULATE MAN %26amp; HE KNOWS HOW TO INPROVE AMERICA %26amp; HEAL IT FROM THE DAMAGE BUSH HAS CAUSED. PEOPLE WANT CHANGE IN THE ECONOMY, IRAQ %26amp; ENERY %26amp; BARACK OBAMA IS THE CANDIDATE WHO WILL BRING ABOUT THAT CHANGE!! OBAMA HAS REAL SOLLUTIONS FOR REAL PROBLEMS IN AMERICA. IF U WANT MORE OF THE SAME VOTE MCCAIN!!!|||Bush initiated the war without taking in what anyone else including the public, the United Nations, and individuals with much more experience in previous wars had to say.
Obama will be left with cleaning up the mess that Bush initiated.
That's one difference.
So out of 150,000 troops in Iraq both Bush and Obama are only planning on withdrawing 50,000. ( Obama on his website calls for withdrawing Combat troops, he makes no mention of the others) How is this change?|||Obama is no different from Bush. They both are inexperienced.|||Y'all are right, obama is different from bush. obama is a spineless coward who is too afraid to fight. He says he was against the war in the 1st place, a war, may I remind you, that was started over protecting our country . Obama isn't going to help, he's going to hurt!
Report Abuse
|||he hates america
Report Abuse
|||Obama has been talking about withdrawl from Iraq %26amp; ending the war since the beginning, even when bush wanted to increase troops. People are just now sarting to cetch on to Obama's plan %26amp; realising that we need to withdrawl from iraq because violence is down %26amp; there is no need for us there. Bush only started talking about withdrawl after the iraq leaders said that they wanted a time table for our troops to leave wich was like 3 weeks ago. Obama is going to end the Iraq war %26amp; has had his plan for years, where as bush is just following his idea. %26amp; now even McCain is talking about withdrawl when he was previously totally against it! Saying that it would mean defeat if we left Iraq. He will withdrawl all troops gradually. Bush formerly had no withdrawl plan.
AND TO THE DUDE ABOVE ME..OBAMA IS EVERYBIT DIFFERENT FROM BUSH! HE IS AN INTELLEGENT %26amp; ARTICULATE MAN %26amp; HE KNOWS HOW TO INPROVE AMERICA %26amp; HEAL IT FROM THE DAMAGE BUSH HAS CAUSED. PEOPLE WANT CHANGE IN THE ECONOMY, IRAQ %26amp; ENERY %26amp; BARACK OBAMA IS THE CANDIDATE WHO WILL BRING ABOUT THAT CHANGE!! OBAMA HAS REAL SOLLUTIONS FOR REAL PROBLEMS IN AMERICA. IF U WANT MORE OF THE SAME VOTE MCCAIN!!!|||Bush initiated the war without taking in what anyone else including the public, the United Nations, and individuals with much more experience in previous wars had to say.
Obama will be left with cleaning up the mess that Bush initiated.
That's one difference.
How is Obama a liberal if he pursues the same policies as Ronald Reagan?
Obama care is basically a rehashing of a Heritage Foundation plan the Republicans offered to counter HillaryCare. Obama's record clearly paints him as a mainstream Republican from the 80s. Yet this is socialism now?|||Because he's a black man... duh!|||Your premise is incorrect (not that I agree with the Heritage Foundation at all). I believe in free markets and an individuals RIGHT NOT to want health care insurance or coverage.
Direct from the heritage Foundation:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports鈥?/a>
Beyond the unprecedented mandates, new taxes, massive entitlement expansion, unworkable and costly insurance provisions, and its failure to control costs,[2] the new law concentrates enormous power in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It creates a giant network for the federal micromanagement of health plans, benefits, insurance markets, and unprecedented intervention into the details of health care financing and the delivery of medical care.[3]
The early result is a veritable flood of controversial rules and regulations, administrative decisions, and guidelines directly affecting the lives of millions of Americans. This regulatory regime, administered by unelected bureaucrats, is even more onerous because of the fundamental flaws of the hastily enacted legislation itself, including undefined provisions and unrealistic timeliness. Those with the knowledge, access, and influence with the Administration are more likely to obtain exemptions than those who are not so fortunate. The new law allows the HHS Secretary to apply the provisions of the law and to enforce it as she sees fit, thus granting the Secretary the right to determine winners and losers.
Getting Health Care Reform Back on Track
There are many policy options Congress should consider, after repeal of PPACA, to begin moving the system in the right direction and put the country on the right path toward market-based health care change that gives people better choices and allows them to take account of the price and value of health care. For example, Congress should:
* Provide individual tax relief for all persons purchasing private health insurance, regardless of where they work;
* Eliminate barriers to individuals purchasing health care coverage that best suits their personal needs across state lines;
* Allow employers to convert their health care compensation from a defined benefit package to a defined contribution system;
* Promote new group purchasing arrangements based on individual membership organizations and various associations, including union, fraternal, ethnic, and religiously based groups;
* Improve consumer-directed health options (such as health savings accounts, health reimbursement arrangements, and flexible spending accounts) that encourage greater transparency and consumer control over health care decisions;
* Extend rational pre-existing condition protections in the non-group health insurance markets for those with continuous creditable coverage, thus rewarding responsible persons who buy and maintain coverage;
* Set up a fair competitive bidding process to determine government payment in traditional Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage programs;
* Review Medicare rules and regulations and eliminate those that unduly burden doctors and patients, such as the restriction preventing doctors and patients to contract privately for medical services outside of the traditional Medicare program;
* Encourage the states to set up mechanisms such as high-risk pools and risk transfer models that help lessen the problems of individuals who are difficult to insure;
* Expand states鈥?ability to develop consumer-based reforms that enable states to customize solutions for their citizens;
* Strengthen premium assistance in Medicaid to enable young families to obtain private health insurance coverage;
* Improve patient-centered health care models for those on Medicaid;
* Increase federal and state efforts to combat fraud and abuse in Medicaid, including tightening eligibility loopholes in Medicaid for long-term-care services;
* Encourage personal savings and the development of a robust private insurance market for long-term-care needs;
* Make the ban on taxpayer-funded abortion permanent and government-wide and extend a similar permanent policy to ensure protection of the right of conscience among medical providers and personnel; and
* Stop new tax increases and promote tax cuts that would expand private insurance coverage and grow the economy.|||Hillarycare was in the 80s? Or are you just trying to squeeze Reagan and HillaryCare into the same sentence?
Obama's stated that this is only a stepping-stone to a public option. I believe him. Like most terrorists, you just have to listen to what they say they're go to do to figure out what they're going to do.|||He's a liberal because he wants to reach into my pocket so somebody else can have have health care for "free". Anyone who wants to do the same will be deemed a liberal. I worked and managed my a## off to pay for my own health care free from any government assistance or insurance company and now I'm going to be punished for being responsible.|||So, did Ronald Reagan, for example, interfere with the operation of the courts in a bankruptcy proceeding? Did he sue states for endeavoring to enforce federal law? Did he extort money from a corporation in the Oval Office? Did he try to raise income tax rates during a recession? I really don't see the comparison.|||Washington's premier liberal lobbying group is the Americans for Democratic Action, and ADA's approval rating of Obama in 2005 (for his votes in the Senate) was 100%; the next year they gave him 95%. That's liberal.|||Reagan was a man who understood our system of government and embraced it. He lived within its means and he had respect for, had the respect of, and loved all who he served as President. Obama is the complete opposite of all of that.|||No one that loved Reagan loves Obama. They are two different men with two entirely different agendas.
But if you insist on making such a argument.....good luck to you.....I do not think you will find a soul that will buy it however. (IE. a waste of your time).|||the irony in this question....
you mention obamacare and being the same policies as Reagan when Reagan had warned against government health care.|||Obama is a self-described liberal. He's proud of the label even though most liberals are running away from him and the liberal agenda.|||You are kidding aren't you?
Tax and spend, tax and spend. They even came out yesterday saying they need to spend more.
Taking over businesses is not what Reagan was about.|||only in the us is president obama considered "left-wing", in any other country he would be !centre-right"!|||Obama is nothing like Reagan, clearly he is a liberal. His voting record as Senator put him squarely on the outer fringe.|||Liberal? I thought he was a fascist communist Muslim Kenyan member of the Taliban... the Tea Enthusiasts told me so...|||Hussian Care is not a rehashing of anything the Heritage Foundation
Hussain care is communism|||and you know Obamacare is the same as a bill the republicans were planning had they got in|||What? You obviously smoke pot.|||If his name was Bill Smith he wouldn't be a socialist.|||you have no idea what you are talking about
Direct from the heritage Foundation:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports鈥?/a>
Beyond the unprecedented mandates, new taxes, massive entitlement expansion, unworkable and costly insurance provisions, and its failure to control costs,[2] the new law concentrates enormous power in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It creates a giant network for the federal micromanagement of health plans, benefits, insurance markets, and unprecedented intervention into the details of health care financing and the delivery of medical care.[3]
The early result is a veritable flood of controversial rules and regulations, administrative decisions, and guidelines directly affecting the lives of millions of Americans. This regulatory regime, administered by unelected bureaucrats, is even more onerous because of the fundamental flaws of the hastily enacted legislation itself, including undefined provisions and unrealistic timeliness. Those with the knowledge, access, and influence with the Administration are more likely to obtain exemptions than those who are not so fortunate. The new law allows the HHS Secretary to apply the provisions of the law and to enforce it as she sees fit, thus granting the Secretary the right to determine winners and losers.
Getting Health Care Reform Back on Track
There are many policy options Congress should consider, after repeal of PPACA, to begin moving the system in the right direction and put the country on the right path toward market-based health care change that gives people better choices and allows them to take account of the price and value of health care. For example, Congress should:
* Provide individual tax relief for all persons purchasing private health insurance, regardless of where they work;
* Eliminate barriers to individuals purchasing health care coverage that best suits their personal needs across state lines;
* Allow employers to convert their health care compensation from a defined benefit package to a defined contribution system;
* Promote new group purchasing arrangements based on individual membership organizations and various associations, including union, fraternal, ethnic, and religiously based groups;
* Improve consumer-directed health options (such as health savings accounts, health reimbursement arrangements, and flexible spending accounts) that encourage greater transparency and consumer control over health care decisions;
* Extend rational pre-existing condition protections in the non-group health insurance markets for those with continuous creditable coverage, thus rewarding responsible persons who buy and maintain coverage;
* Set up a fair competitive bidding process to determine government payment in traditional Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage programs;
* Review Medicare rules and regulations and eliminate those that unduly burden doctors and patients, such as the restriction preventing doctors and patients to contract privately for medical services outside of the traditional Medicare program;
* Encourage the states to set up mechanisms such as high-risk pools and risk transfer models that help lessen the problems of individuals who are difficult to insure;
* Expand states鈥?ability to develop consumer-based reforms that enable states to customize solutions for their citizens;
* Strengthen premium assistance in Medicaid to enable young families to obtain private health insurance coverage;
* Improve patient-centered health care models for those on Medicaid;
* Increase federal and state efforts to combat fraud and abuse in Medicaid, including tightening eligibility loopholes in Medicaid for long-term-care services;
* Encourage personal savings and the development of a robust private insurance market for long-term-care needs;
* Make the ban on taxpayer-funded abortion permanent and government-wide and extend a similar permanent policy to ensure protection of the right of conscience among medical providers and personnel; and
* Stop new tax increases and promote tax cuts that would expand private insurance coverage and grow the economy.|||Hillarycare was in the 80s? Or are you just trying to squeeze Reagan and HillaryCare into the same sentence?
Obama's stated that this is only a stepping-stone to a public option. I believe him. Like most terrorists, you just have to listen to what they say they're go to do to figure out what they're going to do.|||He's a liberal because he wants to reach into my pocket so somebody else can have have health care for "free". Anyone who wants to do the same will be deemed a liberal. I worked and managed my a## off to pay for my own health care free from any government assistance or insurance company and now I'm going to be punished for being responsible.|||So, did Ronald Reagan, for example, interfere with the operation of the courts in a bankruptcy proceeding? Did he sue states for endeavoring to enforce federal law? Did he extort money from a corporation in the Oval Office? Did he try to raise income tax rates during a recession? I really don't see the comparison.|||Washington's premier liberal lobbying group is the Americans for Democratic Action, and ADA's approval rating of Obama in 2005 (for his votes in the Senate) was 100%; the next year they gave him 95%. That's liberal.|||Reagan was a man who understood our system of government and embraced it. He lived within its means and he had respect for, had the respect of, and loved all who he served as President. Obama is the complete opposite of all of that.|||No one that loved Reagan loves Obama. They are two different men with two entirely different agendas.
But if you insist on making such a argument.....good luck to you.....I do not think you will find a soul that will buy it however. (IE. a waste of your time).|||the irony in this question....
you mention obamacare and being the same policies as Reagan when Reagan had warned against government health care.|||Obama is a self-described liberal. He's proud of the label even though most liberals are running away from him and the liberal agenda.|||You are kidding aren't you?
Tax and spend, tax and spend. They even came out yesterday saying they need to spend more.
Taking over businesses is not what Reagan was about.|||only in the us is president obama considered "left-wing", in any other country he would be !centre-right"!|||Obama is nothing like Reagan, clearly he is a liberal. His voting record as Senator put him squarely on the outer fringe.|||Liberal? I thought he was a fascist communist Muslim Kenyan member of the Taliban... the Tea Enthusiasts told me so...|||Hussian Care is not a rehashing of anything the Heritage Foundation
Hussain care is communism|||and you know Obamacare is the same as a bill the republicans were planning had they got in|||What? You obviously smoke pot.|||If his name was Bill Smith he wouldn't be a socialist.|||you have no idea what you are talking about
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)