Re-elect President Obama

296 replies [Last post]
Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Wedge and AtHomeGym, we have a US census every

10 years and the State of Georgia owns the largest University System in the State. If the State of Georgia doesn’t have enough health care providers to satisfy the demand don’t blame it on the health insurance law.

Perhaps our state and local politicians should use census data for more than drawing safe voting districts, eh?

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Gort, it is not that simple

The issue with supply going forward will be that students will not be motivated to take on the work load and the debt/financial outlays for a profession that looks to be increasingly less profitable. Very few students are motivated by a medical altruism to serve with little pay. Also, I think the census as currently performed is way beyond a consitutionally madated scope. I am probably in the minority on that one, and you probably do not care for constitutionality if it limits the scope, power, and reach of the national government.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Wedge, I agree with you, it isn’t simple.

I don’t agree that young people can’t be recruited for needed fields in the medical profession. We give student athletes scholarships, why can’t similar incentives be put in place to remove the obstacles for young people that do want to enter a needed medical field?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Right

Let's give all those upstanding Occupy folks scholarships in medicine and get them off the streets. ;-)

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, not a bad idea

but the Occupy people are builder’s not medical service providers. Have you noticed that everywhere they go they build those tent cities? They're worst than a heard of beavers.

I say put them to work on TDK Blvd. When its finished it will take me less time to get to work in the morning. 8 - ) Going home too.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
Gort, no matter how you slice it

you cannot get around the fact that most students are not smart enough and motivated enough to perform the grind to become a doctor. So we will be left with the inevitable-dumbing down of the profession. MCAT will have to be less hard, organic chemistry will have to be open book-because doctors are going to be able to do open book research right? There is money and scholarships available under the current system, the problem is there is not enough qualified students to enter medical school.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Wedge, the standards are already corrupted

by the large number of foreign trained physicians that practice medicine in the US.

Is your argument to maintain such high standards that we don’t have enough US trained physicians to provide health care service to all that need it?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Wedge - Talent

I know, we broached that issue as well as the cost of medical R&D in other posts. Some just can't grasp those concepts.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Hey Cy,

you check your other email lately?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Hey Gym

Hang on a minute.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
...and most never will Cy.

Those like Gort think moving to a Socialist form of Nanny State where the Government "cares" for us is the way to go.

Amazing that in America, a Country built by rugged individualism that allows these people to have the life they now live actually want what Russia or Venezuela has, one of the lowest standards of living in the free World.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
S.Linsey you say socialist

I keep hearing it but don't see where the US is moving in the direction of Socialism. Why do you keep saying we are?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
T-Man, S.Lindsey likes to use words like ‘socialist’

because he would rather ‘red bait’ than argue a position or answer a direct question he finds inconvenient.

From his last post you can see how he lives in a dream world were ‘rugged individualist’ roamed the wide prairies, (like bison,) to create this great nation. Somehow he forgets the part about “free government land” that was being handed out and made all that ‘rugged individualism’ possible. 8 - )

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Gort I will make my argument anyday

You and those like you disagree and think that wins the argument. I will tell you like I told sniffy over and over... Disagreeing does not make you right..

BTW.. If the shoe fits there gort. You are the one after all that wants Government control over your life and health. What is Socialism if it is not the Governments control of Production and Property and what better way to achieve that goal then controlling ones access to Healthcare?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, actually I’m trying to make you present an argument,

not stop you from making one.

You say socialism is “Governments control of Production and Property.” Medicare, (even if did include everyone,) does not deliver medical services. Medical services are delivered by they private sector, is this not so?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Gort I have made it over and over

much like sniffle you simply disagree and say I have not.

Why don't you present an argument FOR Single Payer? That would be a change. Then we can tear your assessments down disagree with you and run off and claim victory.

You say Medicare does not deliver Medical services.. Well, you are right...BUT... they PAY FOR THEM don't they? If the bureaucracy of Government concludes that a treatment and/or Mediciene is just too expensive then they can and have DENIED thus they affect the delivery of Medical care.

"According to AMA’s National Health Insurance Report Card, Medicare denies 6.85 percent of its claims, higher than any private insurer (Aetna was second, denying 6.80 percent of its claims), and more than double any private insurer’s average."

Now here is my question to you.. What would happen if the Government took over paying for EVERYBODY as under your dream of Single Payer? The Government is already going broke Gort. Where would the money come from? Higher taxes?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, finally, I got you to say it,

“Medicare doesn’t deliver medical services.” That means Medicare doesn’t meet your definition of socialism. “,..the Governments control of Production and Property.” Medicare is not socialized medicine.

Private insurance companies deny claims so I don’t think there is a bit of difference between corporate and public bureaucracies.

It may very well be true that Medicare denies a large share of claims but you have to remember the Medicare, we have now, was not designed to pay for everything; it’s augmented by some type of ‘Medigap’ private insurance, is it not?

Besides, what does the claim denials really mean, the charges should have be made with the private issuer instead, is Medicare just being a good steward of their funds, or is the AMA just grousing for the sake of their membership?

What would single payer medical insurance do for the US? Simply put, the larger the risk pool, the smaller the cost per unit. The lower the cost per unit the more people can be insured for the same amount of money. Who pays for it? The same people who pay for it now, through premiums.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
In-correct Gort

your assumptions that I think Medicare is Socialism not withstanding Medicare is Government assistance not Government Control. Once Single payer becomes the norm Government controls the Healthcare decisions of everyone.

Now show me in the Constitution where either is allowed?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
S.Lindsey, my first assumption was you can’t debate anything

without ‘red baiting’ any issue you disagrees with.

I was certainly right about that. See you in the funny papers.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
It's a shame your education did not include

American exceptionalism in Government studies and not Liberal studies.

You would see when your Freedoms are being eroded by the very Government you so love and support.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Tman since you asked a question I will answer

Socialism is defined as Government control over Business and Property. The "Re-Distribution", if you will, of wealth. The Control over ones lives and being taken "care" of by the State.

Now look at this definition and look at our Government.
1. Is the Government controlling business, owning business and forcing business to secede its sovereignty to the Government? GM? GE? Chrysler? Banking Industry?

2. Has not our Government been moving towards Re-Distribution of wealth by taxing the productive class at a higher rate then other citizens? The Progressive Tax structure? Is this not re-distributive wealth?

3. Has our Government not taken over the Healthcare industry all to better care for you and help you live your lives?

You see TMAN it is not just President Obama which has pushed us this way. It has been going on since Wilson.

Government has 18 and only 18 areas in which it can exert it force on it's people.

Show me in the Constitution where healthcare is one of them. Single Payer is Government control over your property...your body. Government control is Socialism

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
S.Lindsey reality is here on earth

Let's start with #1 of your post. The gov't stepped in to save these companies from going bankrupt. That's it that's all. How many companies are there in the US? How many are owned by the gov't to make it a socialist system?

#2 Taxes have been a part of this country since the beginning. The current tax structure as you know is a hot topic which is why we are not in socialist country. The division of the people allows for the current tax code to continue. Teas may I say.

#3 My Healthcare is through the company I work for. What law will prevent this from being the same in the future?

Lindsey if we drink your Kool-aid then we should be building an ARK because it's sprinkling outside.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Tman reality really?
T-Man wrote:

Let's start with #1 of your post. The gov't stepped in to save these companies from going bankrupt. That's it that's all. How many companies are there in the US? How many are owned by the gov't to make it a socialist system?

Who owns GM? Who fired the CEO of GM? Show me in the Constitution where Government is allowed to pick winners and losers? Did Government help all Businesses that went Bankrupt? NO? Why not?

#2 Taxes have been a part of this country since the beginning. The current tax structure as you know is a hot topic which is why we are not in socialist country. The division of the people allows for the current tax code to continue. Teas may I say. Wealth re-distribution is one on the main tenets of Socialism. Do all Americans pay Fed Taxes? Why not? Why do we tax the most production at higher rates? Why is this Government going after the Wealthy to pay their "FAIR" share?

#3 My Healthcare is through the company I work for. What law will prevent this from being the same in the future?
Do you know how much YOUR Healthcare cost your employer? Moving to Single -Payer will signal to most employers including yours that they no longer need to provide you with this benefit. Most likely they will drop the coverage.. "So when it takes effect in 2014, the law will give employers a choice: Continue to offer increasingly expensive health coverage, or pay a relatively small fine, save a lot of money, and let employees buy their own subsidized coverage on the exchange. The incentive seems pretty clear."

Lindsey if we drink your Kool-aid then we should be building an ARK because it's sprinkling outside.

That's reality Tman not some liberal Socialist utopia.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
S Lindsey the sky is falling
Quote:

Who owns GM? Who fired the CEO of GM? Show me in the Constitution where Government is allowed to pick winners and losers? Did Government help all Businesses that went Bankrupt? NO? Why not?

How many companies are there in the US? How many are owned by our Gov't? Build the ARK it's sprinkling.

Quote:

Do all Americans pay Fed Taxes?

tax those who have not and you get not. The wealthy & big business do not pay their fair share in % compared to the average joe (Bush tax cuts)

Quote:

Moving to Single

must have missed this when this law was passed. When did congress approve a single payer system?

Pinch yourself maybe you will find you are on earth.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
This is your answer but..but...but... Bush

Really?

Government taking over one business is one business to many. Remember an alcoholics journey begins with one drink.. A drug addict trail started with one joint.

Pay not get alot.. Those that pay the most get the least... Those that pay the least get the most from Government. Is this the "Fairness" that President Obama speaks of?

btw-President Obama wants Single-Payer. Government control of Healthcare is moving us in that direction. The Individual mandate is geared towards that direction...

Wake up and smell the coffee there tman.

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
S Lindsey

How many companies will the Gov't take over this year?. To repeat what Ninja said it will be the year 8000 at the rate the Gov't is going witnh these take overs. You think they may ramp it up a bit?

I will just let you sit in your conner and fear everyone is out to get you.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Super Slindsey To The Rescue

Regale us please, please, pretty please, Super Slindsey with your plan to single-handedly save us from socialism like you saved us from the Occupy Protesters up in Atlanta!

Since the evil government has been injecting the population with socialism since Wilson, at the rate we are going, the whole of the USA will be socialist by around the year 8000!

But by then, we will all be living on Kolob, so it won't matter!

How's Jared doing?

I still don't think the Falcons can stop the Giants' front four--we will see in about 3 hours.

Bigfoot, be assured that I am up working early this AM, on SUNDAY, pulling that socialist wagon loaded with government retirees! Your peanut butter is on the way--chunky or creamy? I'll leave it in the mailbox this time as your Chihuahua tried to bite me on my last delivery! Did those Depends fit, or do you need a larger size?

T-Man
T-Man's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/16/2006
Ninja need to follow your scope

You were right about the Texans vs CinCi. You maybe right about the Falcons we will see.

The Steelers are the team to watch.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Not here to save you Ninja I believe in personal responcibility

Saving you is your problem.. If you need saving I would suggest your local Church or maybe the Salvation Army.

As for me, you are on your own.

I can take care of myself.

Noticed neither you nor Tman have taken my challenge of showing me where in the Constitution any of this is stated as a function/power of Government.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Slindsey and the Constitution

Slindsey, I believe that such stuff falls under the part where it says 'promote the general welfare.' Under our system of government,the Supreme Court decides what is constitutional or not, not you! Read it, love it, live it!

What kind of satisfaction do you get out of railing against socialism all the time? Don't you ever watch football like all good and true Americans do?

I say the Broncos will come close to beating the Steelers today because Big Ben is only at about 50%!

Tebow will protect the ball like baby Moses in the reed basket today! No turnovers! Gonna be close I say!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Ahh yes the "Good and Plenty" clause in the Constitution

You do know that the General Welfare clause is spelled out in the 18 Enumerated powers don't you? No? Well yes they are.

Now show me in the 18 Enumerated powers of Government does Healthcare, Business take overs and tarp fall into.

You know President Obama had it right when he said that "generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."

At least he was right about that one.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Slindsey and Good And Plenty

Like I said, the Supreme Court gets to decide what actions are in agreement or not in agreement with the enumerated powers, not you our your fellow half-way house bunk mates! Did you take your Lithium today? Why in the world do you think blogging each and every day on whether or not certain actions by the government fall within the scope of enumerated powers will make your life or anybody else's life one iota better? You may as well also take up the Mac vs. Windows debate while you are at it! How about Coke vs. Pepsi! Dogs are better pets that cats? The toilet paper hangs OVER the roll, not UNDER!

God Save the Queen! Bishop to B7, checkmate!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Uh no they do not Ninja

the Supreme's do not interpret the Constitution they are supposed to rule ONLY if a law is Constitutional or not.

Why don't you read it before you say it?

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Slindsey Have You Suffered A Major

head injury? How can the Supreme Court rule on whether something is Constitutional or not if they don't interpret it? That makes no sense whatsoever. You must be spending too much time riding around with PTCO in his Malibu with the leaky exhaust pipes! The Supreme Court has been ruling/interpreting the Constitution since Marbury vs. Madison, and they will continue to do so until we all Hie to Kolob, or until the USA becomes a totally socialist nation in about 8,000 years!

The White Horse is Coming!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Ninja you need to read a little

Check my facts.

http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/supreme-court-and-constitutio...

"The Constitution limits the Court to dealing with "Cases" and "Controversies." John Jay, the first Chief Justice, clarified this restraint early in the Court's history by declining to advise President George Washington on the constitutional implications of a proposed foreign policy decision. The Court does not give advisory opinions; rather, its function is limited only to deciding specific cases."

The Courts are limited to deciding rather a Law in Constitutional not to interpret the Constitution. They have a limited scope of view narrow in focus on Constitutional issues only.

They are not to look to International laws nor make up what they think it means..

Ninja just because they have been doing it still does not make it proper under our system of Government.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Slindsey: The Rave Continues

The last time I checked the facts, the Supreme Court was hearing and ruling on the Constitutionality of cases that have already been ruled on by District Courts? What do you THINK they are doing? Do you think THINK they are ruling on video replay challenges in the NFL? Anyway, tell me how your incessant blogging here about how the GOVERNMENT IS CONTROLLING OUR LIVES changes anything ONE IOTA? YOU HAVE NO POWER to affect the Supreme Court, Congress, the President, inflation, or much of anything else for that matter--Get Real!

See, I told you that the Broncos had a chance against the Steelers!

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Cyclist, when it comes to Social Security, reducing benefits

is a lot different than what is being proposed by the GOP. The GOP wants to end the program. For that reason I trust the Democratic Party to make the decision on Social Security. (If we are living longer I’m not against raising the SS age but once again that is not what the GOP is suggesting.)

We’ve had thirty years of ‘supply side ecomomics’. During that time, the middle class got smaller and the working poor got larger. Almost half of working families don’t make enough money to pay income tax. The GOP solution is to reduce their income further by raising their taxes.

I understand there is more than one way to ‘skin a cat’ but to me, the GOP is indifferent to the casualties their policies would cause.

Let me reassure you of something. The ‘single payer medical insurance’ idea does not come from Chairman Mao’s, “Little Red Book.” It comes from Corporate America. I’ve worked for two major corporations in my business career and in both cases they were self insured. They pay insurance companies to administer the program but the corporation pays the insurance companies. Medical providers don’t know the difference.

We’ve always had full disclosure on our pay and benefits in our company so I know from experience our premiums are well, well, below what I would have to pay if I had to go it alone. The size of our risk pool is not that large compared to state or a country either.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Can

Can you give us a link to the GOP platform that proposes the ending of SS?

Or a link to a site that has given you this impression?

Corporations would just love to off the costs of healthcare to the government. At least in the short run they would pay less in most cases and improve their short term results. WE will end up as Americans with another underfunded bankrupted social scheme. Remember that corporate managers get rewards for the next quarter results.

Why do you suppose corporations pay for any healthcare costs? What would make them do this?

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, you know I like to read my own tealeaf’s

and come to my own conclusions. Just think of me as Howard Roark and defending Social Security and Medicare is my Fountainhead! Besides, I could never convince you, now can I? 8 - )

As far as Corporations go, I have no illusions that the money used to pay my medical benefits comes from my salary. I also know how much cheaper my medical benefits are compared to buying off the open market.

Do I know why Corporations do it? I know why the company I work for does it. They do it to provide a competitive compensation package.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Medicare

Being blessed with good health in your younger years possibly makes one forget that if one is fortunate enough to live past 65, no matter how much one has saved, the cost of health care can be devastating. Below, an interesting article on GOP health care proposal:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/04/the-gop-health-care-...

The rhetoric has clouded the substance of this issue IMO

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Good quote, DM. Right on

You said ".......no matter how much one has saved, the cost of health care can be devastating"
So very true. True for any individual or family. But also true for government. Why is the "devastating" cost of health care any different for government than it is for an average family. After all government only gets the money from some other and younger family to pay for your health care and mine. It is not like there is any alternative funding other than taxation. So if it is "devastating" for government, why aren't serious adjustments and corrections needed there? Just because government can delay the problem by ignoring it and borrowing from your kids and grandkids doesn't make it less of a problem.

Some of the radical solutions would have been applied years ago if the spineless politicians were held accountable then.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
RWM

Why is health care so darn expensive! Because we don't question the cost - just how to pay for it.

WATCHING GEORGIA BULLDOGS - THEY'VE HAD A GREAT FIRST HALF!!

OOPS! MICHIGAN JUST SCORED!!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Georgia Football!

You can't have a weak heart watching Georgia football - it's a tie and overtime!!

We lost!! UNBELIEVABLE

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Well Mom

Without Boykin, one of those who drug FCHS down with a 3.9 GPA, they wouldn't have even been in it.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Boykin

A FCHS grad? Makes ya proud!! No losers on either team. Great football!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Boykin/Batman

AJC has an excellent article on this FCHS grad!! Congratulations to the parents, staff, and community for producing an outstanding football player who entered college with a 3.9 average!! (Or possibly maintained that average in college) He's going on to be another graduate from Fayette County schools that we are so proud of!!

The Citizen: Can we have a special article on this graduate - and others. It is inspiring to all when we hear about how our graduates are doing in their college/after high school experiences

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
DM-Health Care Cost
Quote:

Why is health care so darn expensive! Because we don't question the cost - just how to pay for it.

You hit the nail on the head DM. A friend of mine was just in the hospital. His bill of over $25K dropped to about $6K after insurance stepped in. Insurance didn't pay $19K they just negotiated the bill down. If someone without insurance had received this bill they would just be trying to figure out a way to pay $25K. How can the difference between an insured patient and one without insurance be so much? Why does the government allow this? A procedure should cost a set amount no matter who the patient is.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
I guess the AMA

is just too big to question. Sad.

wildcat
wildcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/12/2006
Why does the govt allow this?

Because bills have to be paid. If you can't get the money from A, then you charge B more. There, done. A set amount for a procedure sounds like a good idea.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Set amount

for procedures and only a certain percent of 'overcharge' for hospital supplies. A question. Will this be seen as government interference with private enterprise? I think 25 cents for a band-aid is highway robbery. . . .and IMO the American people are being robbed! Reasonable payment for service is expected!

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Bigfoot. I have to commend you.

Not here long and you've learned to fit right in with the average republican blogger (and I use "average" intentionally.) Where to start...

Thanks to the democrats the payroll tax holiday was extended to Feb 29th? Who controls the House? Dems don't even have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Partisan parsing I do detect.

Next you list cuts to social programs and federal employee compensation. For fun, let's contextualize. Obama will run against Romneycare Romney. Has he proposed fewer or MORE cuts to social programs than our president? Come to think about it, hasn't your party made an industry out of demagoguing government and government employees? And you are laughably going to bring up no cost of living increase to federal employees, while the caricatures running for the GOP nomination are competing for who can cut the most govt agencies; agencies that employ government employees. You know Bigfoot : "The millions of middle class Americans(family, friends, neighbors, etc.)."

Yes, Obama is a better option if you don't want a 100% pay cut when the GOP guy eliminates your whole department to finance their yet unpaid for Lindsey Lohan tax cuts.
Guess we all have "brain farts" don't we?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
And what Govt. Agencies has the GOP announced would be cut?

Since I have not seen a list or heard mention of a single AGENCY facing the GOP ax, I'll just assume for now one does not exist, that is of course you can produce one.
You sure you thinking about the right party? Data I found which dates back to Jimmy Carter shows NO DEMOCRAT & only 1 Republican (George H.W. Bush) has increased the civillian federal employee workforce. So it would appear that if I were civillian Federal employee, my job appears to be more secure under the GOP then the Democrats. As a matter of fact, Bill Clinton alone reduced the civilian federal workforce to pre-1980 numbers.
BTW, things like Corporation of Public Broadcasting, National Public Radio, & National Endowment for the Arts are not government agencies. They get some of their funding from the Government but that's about of their government connection.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GOP POSSIBLE CUTS

Didn't Perry make it pretty clear that he had three in mind? (He could only remember two.)

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Bigfoot. I question your information sources.

If you have heard no talk of killing the Federal Reserve, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection AGENCY, and then some. It has been a major part of most Republican primary debates. Where is your news filtered that you are full of anti-Obama stats, yet miss the whacky ideas of the alternatives?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
information

Last time I looked, Rick Perry does not speak for the 'Republican Party' (as a whole) but rather is speaking for himself. In every election, someone will flot the idea of revamping the government in some way. It has been suggested on both sides and at this point in the election, it is nothing more then someone's whacky idea.
As for these facts I stated earlier today, they come from a neighbor who happens to work for the Federal Government and brought them to my attention during a neighborhood party. I confirmed them before entering them on this site.

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Bigfoot. Rick Perry, Romneycare Romney, Ron cut em all Paul

Michelle Bachmann, and those other guys I see on the debate stage absolutely represent the GOP. Who else do you see leading your party? Donald Trump?

How ironic would it be if your neighbor worked for a federal agency that was eliminated by president Newt or Paul or Romney. That would be karma X 10.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
rerun

We just seem to keep keep repeating ourselves at this point so I this topic is dead!

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Bigfoot: You are very well trained in the art

Of combat: In your position, I would choose the same course :-D.

Happy New Year to you and yours big guy!

Kevin K.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
just hate repeating the same stuff

Fact: History has shown that when Democrats are in the White House, the civilian federal workforce typically decreases.
Fact: History has shown that when Republicans are in the White House, the civilian federal workforce typically increases.
Fact: These are suggestions from a small handful of candidates at very early stage in the election and hold no merit.
The only reason I can see for your last post is because you have no way to argue with the facts I have stated. As I said, we seem to be going back and forth at this point. My facts against your conjecture..

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Facts/Statistics

What we're interested in NOW is what is happening and what is being offered :

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/02/22/federal-workforce-continues-to-grow-...

Let's look at employment under Hoover (R); under FDR (D); under Truman(D); under Eisenhower (R) - etc., etc., etc. Believe me, the threat of reducing government workers (police, fire, postal, etc.) is what we're hearing from more than just a 'few' R candidates. The Independents are listening also. Actually, it all depends on where we are economcically in November this year as to who will win the election. IMO

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
except

Your article is almost a year old so I'm not sure if I would agree that it has any bearing on today. It also neglected to tell you that if enacted the number of civilian federal employees would still be 12000 less than fiscal 2010. What that article failed to take into consideration was the attrition rate. Yes, Obama has brought on 144,000 new civilian federal employees but how many have left? We know it's at least 12000 more.
I believe Republicans have also suggested cutting the civilian federal workforce through attrition and not by laying people office. I'm sure that you would agree there is a big difference in the two.
The US Postal Service is not taken into consideration when talking about civilian federal employees as they operate outside the norm. While it is not a "independent" corporation owned by the US Government it still is not looked upon as technically being part of the US Government.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
BF & the Postal Svc

I would differ with your cmt about the Postal Svc "not looked upon as technically part of the US Govt." Actually, the Postal Svc is the only Fed Dept specifically authorized in the Constitution (Article 1,Sect 8, Clause 7) that gave Congress the authority to estalish Post Offices and Post Roads." Employees participate in the Fed Employee Health Benefit Program and the Thrift Savings Plan. While they do not receive tax dollars, they are most surely a duly authorized part of the Govt. Not to mention, the nation's second largest employer (next to Walmart). And before you ask, No, I am NOT a retired postal employee!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
correction

I stand corrected on the description of the USPS.
However, I will challenge you on one thing and that is the USPS is not the nation's second largest employer but rather the nation's second largest 'civilian' employer. The US Government's civilian workforce is larger then both of of the USPS and Wal-Mart combined. While USPS may enjoy some of the luxuries afforded to Government employees, for some reason they are not considered to be 'FEDERAL' employees.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
A question

Are our military considered 'government' employees? Do we have a volunteer force?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
No & yes

No, The Armed forces are not considered as 'civilian' Government Employees.
Yes, Our military is considered to be a volunteer and that's only because we no longer have the draft.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
bigfoot!

Thanks for the answer. Now how are civilian employees who work for the military labeled?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
DM

As I understand it, 'civilian' employee's for the military are employed by the Department of Defense and would fall under the Civilian Federal Workforce.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Bigfoot!

Thanks!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Bigfoot!

The date of the article - although the information and research is possibly a year old.

Quote:

February 22, 2011 at 2:05 pm

Oops - that is almost a year ago!!! Oh well.

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
So, Bigfoot. Based on your "facts". The GOPers are lying through

Their teeth. And Obama should somehow be worried about defeat from guys blatantly lying about their desires to close govt agencies? Okay. If that works for you, go withthat argument. I wish you luck making your case that we shouldn't take republican candidates at their word.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
everybody lies

And Obama has never told a lie? . Democrats don't lie? Let us not forget that the last Democrat to sit in the White House was impeached for lying.
I never said anyone was blatantly lying but instead said that right now these are ideas, no different then what Democrats (including your beloved Barrack Obama) have done in the past. During a campaign, everyone (both sides) talks about all the changes they propose to make our country better and not all of them are carried out.
If I follow your way of thinking, I can easily make the case that Obama has blatantly lied as well (there are a number of promises he has made during his campaign which he has not kept) and I should have no reason to trust him either. As I have said before, I voted for Obama in 2008 and very well might vote for him again in 2012 but by no means is Barrack Obama a saint nor should he be treated as one. In the end, one politician is no better than another.
Let's elect Mickey Mouse in 2012, I don't believe he has told a lie (need to double-check this one)..

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Galant effort bigfoot.

Your guys are making promises they don't plan to keep. Might as well re-elect Obama, yeah?

Cheers.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
fact?

I never said they are making promises they do not intend to try and keep. I consider some of the ideas to be a little 'whacky' but then again I have not sat down and reviewed them close enough to see if they make sense or not. Today these are ideas but in a year or three, they may not prove necessary. Unlike yourself who appears to have a crystal ball, I have no idea what someone is going to actually do if they are elected. I might also remind you that closing Departments is not as easy as issuing an executive order. It does require some help from the 535 people down the street from the White House.
Might as well re-elect Obama? My question then as to be Why re-elect Obama? He had his crack at turning things around and has not done to good a job so why not give the job to someone else? You like your football down here so how long would you tolerate a coach who continues to deliver a losing record? I'm not sure if America can handle another 4 years with a losing record.
Isn't the world suppose to end in 2012 according to Mayans and Nostradumass? Why not vote Republican? everyone knows that Democrats aren't allowed in Heaven ;-)

Joe Kawfi
Joe Kawfi's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/20/2009
Obama is a miserable failure

Declining unemploymnet rates - Funny how the Democrats define "declining" as people that have given up. The real unemployment rate is closer to 18-20% - Democrats only count those that have not given up yet. How convenient.

Stable stock market - Are you kidding? It's like a bad roller coaster ride.

Saving the automobile industry? How, with the cash-for-clunker FAILURE or by handing over money that belonged to investors over to his SEIU union buddies?

Seal team 6 got Bin Laden - Not Barry O'Bumbles. The intelligence gathering that eventually resulted in bin Ladens death started a long time before Obama was president.

Health Care Reform - You mean the reform that was jammed down America's throat because Nancy Pelosi stated that they would have to "pass it in order to find out what was in it" as a majority of Americans want it repealed because they understand that it nothing but a blind attempt at government takeover of healthcare. You mean that one?

Tax cuts - You mean the one that robs an already doomed Social Security of more funds just so Obama can say he cut taxes? I have news for you boy, SS wasn't designed to be a tax, the grubberment was supposed to hold that money in an account so that Americans that paid into it could draw on it in retirement. The grubberment turned it into their own personal piggy bank and have depleted the funds. All Obama has done is hastened it's demise.

You left out a few things -

Sent a budget to congress that was voted down 0-97. He can't even pass a budget. What type of leadership is that?

Solyndra - giving money to a company that he knew was on bad financial footing.

Fast & Furious Debacle - Holders impeachment is imminent.

4 million dollar vacations instead of meeting with congress.

The Libya debacle

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Joe - LOL
Quote:

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

Yes, we get the point - but you continue to go 'on and on'. Sigh.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Lion, by the time the GOP debates

and primaries are finished, the spread will probably be wider than that.

Faux News will be the GOP’s only friend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8sRTWySo4A&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Catchy tune on this video, eh?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Gort

Yup! LOL

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
I wouldn't be getting inaugural tux pressed just yet.

At this time in 1979, Jimmy Carter had a 29 point lead over Ronald Reagan and look what happened there.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The Hostage Situation

When you're able, visit the Carter Museum. It gives a different perspective to that whole incident. . . .and sheds some light on the importance of the world stage to the US elections. No ball gowns or tuxes yet. It's going to be an interesting year!!

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Might do that

I've been to the Nixon and Reagan libraries on a couple of different occasions so it might be interesting to see how the Carter museum portrays Jimmy.

Lion -> was just reading a USA Today from last week and noticed mention of a USA Today/Gallup poll which had just been conducted and Obama's lead was only 2% in that one. Could not find from Fox News around that time but my guess if they had one it would have Obama trailing by 7%. Polls are absolutely meaningless at this point.
Every administration (republican and democrat) is guilty of spinning the same line of crap every year about how unemployment is going down while come February/March time frame the numbers are skewed (increase) due to the seasonal help being laid off. Let us not forget that those numbers also do not take into account the poor bastards who are no longer eligible for unemployment.
While OBL was killed on Obama's watch, Obama was not present for the raid nor should he get any credit. OBL was a wanted criminal for something like 15 years (He was placed on the FBI's most wanted list when Slick Willie was in office) and the only people who deserve credit are those who were actually there and took down the scumbag.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Bigfoot, the mission to kill OBL would not have happened

if President Obama didn’t authorize it.

If the mission to kill OBL went sour I’m absolutely sure President Obama would have shouldered the blame for the mission’s failure by his political adversaries.

In spite of the political risk to his administration, President Obama authorized the mission anyway. The mission was a success and another campaign promise was kept.

No credit, c’mon?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
You really believe that?

Authorization is more of a courtesy then anything and is the same courtesy extended to any high ranking official.
Had this mission failed, all you would have heard about is a mission on a suspected OBL compound and how OBL had just managed to escape. You would never have heard the Presidents name mentioned once but since the mission was successful, Obama can go on TV and tell the world what a wonderful job he is doing because he authorized the mission. in simple terms, B.S.
I've said before that I voted for Obama in 2008 and very well may vote for him again. I'll given any politician credit when I thin it rightfully but I refuse to give someone credit just because he was president . The only people who rightfully deserve credit belongs to those who actually put there life on the line that day and no one else and that includes Obama.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Bigfoot, I sure do. As the old saw goes,

success has many fathers; failure would have been President Obama’s alone. If President Obama wanted to play it safe he wouldn’t have approved the mission.

I’m a little surprised you consider a US military operation inside another sovereign country, with nuclear capabilities, such a routine matter you consider it a mere courtesy. Do you really believe that?

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Big foot. You're kidding, right?

When we think of who waged the war to bring OBL to justice, do we think of some general or SEAL Team leader? No. We immediately think George Bush. Remember? The Bring it on guy? Perhaps you're not too familiar with military Command structure. Nothing. And I mean NOTHING happens without Commander consent. The Commander in Chief is currently President Obama. History will forever record OBL as having been killed under President Obama's command. The only BS would be trying to minimize that fact.

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
just as I said.

History will record OBL as being killed under Obama's presidency. That's all history should record about his involvement. I am giving the same amount of credit to Obama as I give to George W. for taking down Saddam Hussein. Had this mission failed, you would have never heard a thing about it. It would have been just another failed mission on a suspected compound.
If you guys want to give Obama all the credit for this take down, go ahead as it is no skin off my nose. I personally do not believe he deserves the praise you are giving him for it but I commend you all for sticking to your guns.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
Figboot and Churchill

Figboot, I guess Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin should get no credit for stopping the Nazis? They just happened to be the leaders at that time.

You not a 49er fan are you?

bigfoot
bigfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/20/2011
Undie Guy

I wouldn't give any of them credit for a specific battle that took place. It might also be hard to give credit to Roosevelt for stopping the Nazi as he was already dead and Truman was in office? Might want to double check your facts next time ;-)
If you want to build a monument to Obama for killing OBL, go ahead as it doesn't bother me one way or the other.
How about moving on to something else as this issue is getting rather boring (just like New Years Eve at Harry Reid's house)
I have had no allegiance to any team since 1994 when the Lambs headed east and the Traiders went back to Oakland. After Georgia passed and Al Davis finally checked out, I thought one of them might return to the southland but it is beginning to look as if L.A could end up with the Chargers or Vikings or Jaguars. YAWN!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Bigfoot!

NOW WE CERTAINLY AGREE HERE!! LOL!

Quote:

and the Traiders went back to Oakland

kevink
kevink's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/07/2011
Bigfoot. What you actually said was:

"Obama was not present for the raid nor should he get any credit." That's a very, shall we say, interesting opinion for someone with no skin in the game. And using historical reference, yours will be a tuff opinion to defend.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Quote: If the mission to kill
Quote:

If the mission to kill OBL went sour I’m absolutely sure President Obama would have shouldered the blame for the mission’s failure by his political adversaries

Absolutely. We watched the video of those who were responsible for the authorization of this event. The concern for the safety of the Seals was evident. All citizens should be grateful for all involved - and not use it as a negative against anyone who participated in the planning and implementation of this event.