Obama Administration Gives States Extra Time on Health Exchanges

By David Morgan and Alina Selyukh | November 11, 2012

  • November 12, 2012 at 2:35 pm
    Agent says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 35
    Thumb down 13

    It is getting more obvious by the day that we are now living in two separate countries. Half the country doesn’t want Obamacare and half do. Many view the election as fraudulently won with many examples in the Blue States/Battlegrounds of voter irregularities. I expect more opposition as we approach the fiscal cliff in the early months of next year.

    • November 12, 2012 at 3:31 pm
      Libby says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 30
      Thumb down 40

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • November 12, 2012 at 5:44 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 31
        Thumb down 8

        Libby, Please explain how one Florida county had 58% more people vote than were registered to vote. If this was repeated in several more counties in that state, it is no wonder Obama carried them. By the way, in the Bush election, everytime it was recounted and held to the light, Gore kept losing more votes. With the advent of voting machines, it made the election more vulnerable to fraud. In many places, it had the box pre-checked for Obama. This is worse than Al Franken showing up in Minnesota with a car trunk full of suspicious ballots to be counted so he could win the Senate there in 2010.

        • November 13, 2012 at 6:13 pm
          nomesaneman says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 11
          Thumb down 1

          “explain how one Florida county had 58% more people vote than were registered to vote.”

          I’ve heard it was a 2-page-card ballot, and some machines erroneously counted each page as 1 vote. So, if a person only used one card instead of two, the ballot count went up by 1. If person voted both cards, ballot count incorrectly went up by 2.

          A recount seems reasonable.

          • November 13, 2012 at 6:34 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 1

            Leave it to Florida to get an election wrong. They have had 12 years to correct their voting irregularities and it is still just as screwed up as back then. How did Alan West get beat when he had a 4,000 vote lead at midnight and was behind 4,000 votes at 1:00 AM? He is trying to get a recount, but the authorities are not cooperating. The fix is in.

      • November 14, 2012 at 2:20 pm
        Mr. Smith says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 3

        I think Agent is correct. We live in 2 very separate countries. But rather then saying half want Obamacare and half don’t. I’d rather say, poor uneducated and unemployed people want it and people that work hard for a living and with good solid jobs don’t want it.
        I worked my entire life, paid my own way for school (8years), built up 2 great business, employ 67 PPL, pay for their and my family’s health care, and yes I cover over 80 percent of the cost. Now we have Obamacare, high taxes coming, and an America heading for the shitter. To sum it up, I’ll be changing coverage from high end Blue Cross to low end Aetna. My employees will have to cover a larger percent of the bill because of the taxes. I’m now looking a laying off close to 12 to 16 people. And when Obamacare roles in, I’m dropping insurance and letting all my employees go to Obamacare.

        And on a side note. It’s funny that there was more votes then registered voters, dead people somehow voted and people in jail somehow showed up at poles and voted. Not a mail in, but walked in and voted.

        Good Luck America.

        • November 15, 2012 at 9:37 am
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 2

          Mr. Smith – alot of those people that are unemployed used to work hard for a living and had a good, solid job. Through no fault of their own they are now unemployed and, yes, need healthcare. Just which new taxes are causing you to lay off 12 to 16 people in this market?

          Your comment about dropping insurance and letting your employees go on Obamacare shows just how much you value their service. I hope they all quit and go somewhere where their boss will appreciate them a lot better than you do. It will save you the trouble of having to lay them off.

    • November 13, 2012 at 8:56 am
      Captain Planet says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 30
      Thumb down 26

      Oh my, election fraud now, Agent? Bitter much? That’s about as insane as Karl Rove saying President Obama was suppressing Romney votes. No, I’m not calling you insane, Agent. But you thinking in some conspiracy with The President stealing this election is. You know what, Romney can have Florida. President Obama still kicked his arse. Face it, this new look Republican Party is a loser and unless they change their ways, they will continue no be The Washington Generals and the Dems will be The Harlem Globetrotters. Heck, even Hannity realizes it which is why his immigration opinion has “evolved”. They should call him Sean Hack-ity.

      • November 13, 2012 at 9:42 am
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 24
        Thumb down 7

        Is your new name Libby, Planet? I wasn’t directing my post to you and you didn’t answer my question anyway, preferring to gloat. St Lucie County had 58% more people vote than were registered to vote. Col Alan West was ahead by 4,000 votes in his district at midnight and about that far behind at 1:00 AM. He is having to sue for a recount. Yes, there is no doubt this was a lot of voting irregularities such as some of the Philadelphia precincts that counted 100% of their votes for Obama. That has never happened in any election in the history of the country.

      • November 13, 2012 at 11:50 am
        Captain Planet says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 11
        Thumb down 15

        0 votes = demographics. In one ward, only 12 registered Republicans this year, none of whom voted for Romney probably because, oh I don’t know, they feel Romney is out of touch with their circumstances? How about that 47% comment? By the way, in 2008, 57 divisions in Philly returned 0 votes for McCain. In 2004, 5 divisions in Philly showed 0 votes for Bush. So, yes, it’s happened, Agent. At least a few times and in recent history.

        PS-
        “Landslide” is not only a song by Fleetwood Mac which was covered by Smashing Pumpkins years later on the album, “Pisces Iscariot”. 332-206 = GObama 2012!

        • November 13, 2012 at 1:15 pm
          Captain Planet says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 12
          Thumb down 17

          I see 2 people on IJ so far feel that the truth hurts. Agent, before you put out there that “some of the Philadelphia precincts that counted 100% of their votes for Obama. That has never happened in any election in the history of the country”, you might want to fact check it. That was easy to counter. Then again, so was Romney’s campaign.

          Ba-dum-chish.

        • November 13, 2012 at 2:05 pm
          Random says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 25
          Thumb down 1

          Captain, yes Obama won the electoral college by over 100 votes, but when you look at the popular vote (which in my opinion is what really matters), the margin was about 2% (less than 3,000,000 voters). Regardless of what you may think, Obama’s victory was anything but a landslide. In fact, this was one of the closest races in our history.

          The only reason the electoral college exists is because the founding fathers knew some citizens were incapable of making intelligent voting decisions – many just did not have the ability to know the facts (due to geography, distance, etc.). Today, however, everyone has access to the same information (internet, phones, television, etc.) – thus making the electoral college obsolete.

          Now, Obama still won – we all know that. Put there are way too many people (mainly the blind follower types) who say it was landslide. That kind of thinking is what makes this country more polarized. Everyone needs to realize that this country is divided (pretty much in half) and if we all don’t start changing the way we think, we are going to be in big trouble. Compromise needs to happen (on both sides).

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:08 pm
            Libby says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 18

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:14 pm
            Random says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 20
            Thumb down 1

            Libby, it makes a huge difference if there is a landslide or not. A landslide would indicate that the majority of Americans agree on the same thing. When Americans agree on the same thing, stuff gets done.

            When the country is cut in half, you will see nothing but stalemate (which is mostly what we have seen over the past 4 years). Republicans are at fault for a lot, but so are the democrats. Obama promised to join the two parties, but has actually done more than any other president to further divide the parties.

            You are right however, to a certain extent. In Obama’s eyes, he won. He doesn’t give a flip about the margins or you. He did what he needed to do to win, even if that meant alienating half of the country.
            I will restate – until there is compromise, we will continue to see the decline of this great nation.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:17 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 13

            I see what you mean, but I really do think we all want the same things, we just don’t agree on how or who will get us there. Right now, the choice has been made and we need to unite as one voice and demand change before it’s too late. We’ve had enough of the status quo.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 3

            Random, I would argue that the electorate is not any smarter now than it was at the beginning of the nation. Young people in particular would rather bury their nose in their iphone than staay up with current events and make an intelligent decision on their leaders. We also have an entitlement society now that think the world owes them a living, would rather collect their unemployment and disability benefits than work. You said there should be compromise. The problem we face is that the left never ever compromises their position. The right is always the one who has to compromise and “reach across the aisle” and the result is what we have seen for the past 30 years, $16 Trillion in debt and borrowing $.40 of every dollar spent. The only way compromise will work is for the left to give up their wild spending ways and agree to major spending cuts, agree to major tax reform which includes a fair or flat tax with no loopholes. They don’t have to soak the rich like their plan is, just reform the tax code and the revenue will be there. This country is going off the fiscal cliff soon if the needed changes in the way government operates doesn’t happen.

          • November 13, 2012 at 3:22 pm
            Random says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 16
            Thumb down 0

            Agent, you are right. There are millions of Americans who probably shouldn’t vote because they don’t understand the issues (but still have access to the info), however this is across all states and in all areas – making the stupidity amongst Americans equal and fair (lol). So under that rationale, I still think the electoral college should be scrapped. Back in the day, educated people were concentrated in the states/cities that had universities and were generally only people with means. States with high concentrations of rural population (who did not have access to information) generally had less electoral votes.

            I do agree, the left spends too much (under the rationale that we have to spend more to save more – I’m sorry but that is a load of you know what). The only way to solve our debt problem is atrition. We need to cut the size of our government and the hundreds of (inefficient and obsolete) social programs still in place. Also, we need to legalize pot (hehe).

      • November 13, 2012 at 2:55 pm
        Bob says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 16
        Thumb down 1

        38% Democrat; 32% Republican; 30% Independent

        Turn out was higher for democrats. Independents leaned Romney, simple math. Obama won the popular vote by 50.6 to 47.8 That’s 2.6%. Whereas if independents were split 50-50 Obama should have won by 6%. Just because you had a higher turn out of voters doesn’t mean the “country” as a whole prefers Obama. They don’t. They just got scared by your guy, and they got told that in Ohio there would be a D+ 10 in favor of democrats when it came to voting. No one can predict that. There’s no reason to believe that. All they did was discourage republican voters. As my brother said “I’m not voting, Obama will win”. Enough people say that, people don’t vote.

        This means more people were for Romney than for Obama with registered voters. Obama by no means kicked Romney’s arse.

        Democrats just came out in higher numbers.

        • November 13, 2012 at 3:43 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 14
          Thumb down 1

          It is interesting Bob that Obama received 10 million fewer votes than 08 and still won. Apparently, Republicans were not as energized as we thought because they came out in much fewer numbers than expected. I live in Texas and we had a large turnout and beat Obama pretty badly, but other states didn’t hold up their end of the bargain. I don’t know what it will take to get this nations attention. Perhaps the fiscal cliff we are facing may do the trick, but we will all be far worse off when the dust clears.

          • November 13, 2012 at 3:53 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 4

            Agent:

            It’s more interesting that republicans slightly out number democrats.

            What this means, is the democrats have been bullying us so much the last few years we don’t even want to vote. They’ve scared us, and managed to rally up their own base with that same fear.

            It’s rude. Democrat tactics right now are dominating. They aren’t pure. Just because you won doesn’t mean the end justifies the means, it doesn’t mean you are the better man. And Planet’s tar he throws out with the “GoBama” sounds like a frat boy. We don’t need that in our environment.

            Obama’s proof is in the pudding. I agree, when the dust clears we will be in a pickle.

            But the good part is you can expect for republicans to pick up seats in 2014. Obama’s mess up will make us have to snap far right. As much as that is going to be harsh, and I won’t like it, it will finally get us back on track.

            I say let them have their moment. This is far from over, it’s an ongoing thing.

          • November 13, 2012 at 4:00 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 9

            Actually, there are more democrats than republicans:

            Actually…”An August 2008 estimate is that 51% of registered voters, including independents, lean toward the Democratic Party and 38% lean toward the Republican Party.” The original answer below was taken from Pew Research in 2006.

            Source: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/933/a-closer-look-at-the-parties-in-2008

            “Democrats still hold a 48% to 40% lead among registered voters, and a modest lead of 47%-43% among likely voters.”

            Source: Pew Research “http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=295″

            And the Republicans are losing the minority, women, and youth’s votes. Your party will need to change some of it’s mantra in order to attract enough voters to back your candidates. You’ll need to do what I’ve been saying for a while now. Lighten up.

          • November 13, 2012 at 4:11 pm
            Random says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 0

            Libby, I did some searching around. Pewresearch is indeed a liberal leaning entity and they have been called out as being biased on numerous occasions.

            Maybe try to find an example from a conservative leaning source to balance it out. You will sound more credible if you have the other sides POV.

          • November 13, 2012 at 4:18 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 7

            I certainly don’t want to appear biased. How about Gallup?

            As of 2010[update], Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrats (tying a 22-year low), 29% as Republicans, and 38% as independents.[3] By 2011 Gallup found that Americans identifying as independents had risen to 40 percent. Gallup’s historical data show that the proportion of independents in 2011 was the largest in 60 years. This increase came at the expense of Republican identification, which dropped to 27%, while Democratic identification held steady from 2011. Nevertheless, more American independents leaned to the Republican Party when compared to the Democratic Party. Combining leaners with each party’s core identifiers, for 2011 the parties ended up tied at 45 percent.[4]

          • November 13, 2012 at 4:52 pm
            Agent says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 13
            Thumb down 17

            Bob, Studying recent history with Presidents, it is very interesting that those who won a second term got into trouble because they thought they had a mandate to do whatever they wanted. Bush signed onto all the liberal big spending legislation put forth by Pelosi & Reid, we had the housing collapse and had to do TARP to keep from falling into that financial abyss. Clinton was rocked by the Lewinsky scandal, got impeached but not removed and left Bush with a recession. Obama has led the country to the brink of financial collapse and wants to tax even more and institute the biggest job killer in history with Obamacare. With all that, he has gotten in a huge mess with Benghazi, Petraeus and the military and this will not go away even though Libby & Planet wish it would. As Clinton used to say, we should just “move on” and take care of the nations business. Well, it didn’t and Behghazi and all these scandals won’t either. I think many of the rats will desert the ship in the coming weeks and we can look forward to John Kerry as Defense Secretary. Won’t that be fun to see the military dismantled in front of our eyes.?

        • November 13, 2012 at 4:25 pm
          Bob says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 13
          Thumb down 2

          Libby:

          You just quoted polls, that did not match the 2008 election results, or the 2012 regarding independents. The credibility of that poll is therefore moot. Independents leaned republican enough to cancel what would have been a 6 point lead, down to 2.6%.

          I’m not talking polls that were trying to weigh in on “likely voeters”. Republicans have consistently outnumbered democrats since the 1995 republican revolution. It has changed to the degree, and flipped slightly after the 2008 election, but it is definitely back to a slight republican lead.

          Further:

          The republican mantra matches minority voter and women’s needs.

          On the black voter’s front the only area that doesn’t match is that republicans are “color blind” currently and want to do away with many of the preferential black treatment in schools, grants, and etc. Blacks did not vote for republicans because of money, against their beliefs. Republicans match the black voter’s social and political doctrine outside of that to the T.

          I won’t listen to vague blanket comments Libby. The plurality of blacks are against gay marriage (they are for civil unions) for the same reason as republicans: They want it to not turn into discrimination lawsuits. They want to actually keep church and state seperate. The wording is critical to avoid that headache.

          The majority of women are against third trimester partial birth abortion, as are blacks, and hispanics.

          Republicans are against third trimester abortions, public funding of abortion services, (so are democrats, before contraception that is) and match women.

          You are clearly wrong here. I don’t want to hear you labeling republicans with vague concepts anymore. It’s getting annoying. It’s why I attack you. You’re not just wrong in your beliefs, you are labeling and vendictive in the manner of which you believe them, and what you believe about us republicans.

          Democrats mandated contraceptives was wrong morally, and financially. Insurance brings down costs by taking unpaid premiums, to increase capital, to then use to pay for claims. For contraceptives, there is no unpaid premium. This is the one circumstance where you democrats are right. Having private companies fund it raises the costs. All you had to do was add the funding publicly. But because you didn’t want to go against what people want, you found a way to redefine it in their head, and not make it “public” you just made it “mandated” on the “private” companies. So now you increased the costs to buy the women’s votes.

          The republicans don’t have to do jack. We match what people believe, and we have the right methods of winning voters. We don’t buy votes (like the bail out in Ohio or contraceptives covered in health plans when it costs about $15 dollars as is).

          I should note before you go into the auto bailout, Ford did just fine with their break up. So to would have the auto companies in Ohio. But Obama said “there was no private capital available, they would have gone bankrupt and there would have been no jobs” to Ohio to win the vote.

          We don’t do that crap on the right Libby.

        • November 13, 2012 at 4:35 pm
          Bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 9
          Thumb down 1

          Libby:

          Your second Gallup post again proves my point.

          31 29 38.

          Democrats still would have had to turn out in larger numbers for a win. If those are the true numbers of “all” Americans, republicans leaning right in a 38 31 30 split resulted in a 2.6% difference in what would have been a 6% difference in a 50 50 split. Therefore, if the numbers were 31 29 38 (2 point difference between republicans and democrats rather than 7) and independents turned out at 38 instead of 30 (8 points higher) then that 2.6% lead would have turned into the following: 31 29 would have been two point lead, independents would have switched the vote by 3.4% as they did before, only this time they only would need to do away with 2 points of difference. Moreover, more independents would be in that mix. Romney would have won by 1.4% if independents stayed at 30% rather than 38%. That’s increasing republicans by 26% in the total, which would mean 26% of that 3.4 swing would be added on top: 4.284 lead for Romney. Numbers Libby.

          I’m good at them.

          • November 13, 2012 at 4:39 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 1

            That should read “that’s increasing independents by 26% of their total”.

            Which means that the effect should be 26% higher.

            A 31 29 38 split would have resulted in a Romney win. So again: Democrat turnout affected Obama’s win. Not the total amount of people who want Obama in office. Your side scared our side out of voting, and scared your side into voting.

            Just reading your comments you can see it. You didn’t even know the QE numbers, the twist numbers, and how it affected the budget. Just removing those, the stimulus, and putting the welfare/unemployment numbers back to 2008 numbers would put us at break even. That’s not a deniable fact.

            Obama doing what he did was misleading and wrong. He had the whole world thinking his spending wasn’t that bad, and it was impossible to stop. He could have broken even. Easily. He lied.

          • November 14, 2012 at 8:09 am
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 8

            I was not being vindictive. I was just stating that the Republicans are losing members because you are behind the times, just as the Catholic Church is losing members because of the same thing. You can argue it if you like, but it doesn’t change the reality.

            P.S. There are many people, including Republicans, that agree with me and have stated the same thing. Not vindictive. Just reality. You might want to take some constructive criticism instead of arguing all the time.

        • November 14, 2012 at 12:12 pm
          Bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 2

          Libby:

          It’s not constructive. And I’m not arguing. I’m telling you your vague concepts are not well thought out.

          Conservatives do match what people want on the issues. This is why they won the house senate and presidency in the 2000′s. They have moved to the center.

          The only reason we switched away was that your side lies, started a class warfare, made it seem like higher taxes and spending was the only way (see my post about spending and that Bush tax rates would pay for what we need without stimulus, twist, qe, and putting unemployment / welfare back to 2008 levels) pinned the recession on Bush, and then used fear tactics. Anyone who as a blanket comment says we need to appeal to women and minorities is not doing the research required regarding those demographics. Further: it is vindictive to say we don’t govern according to women and minorities, especially given that you have and do say that republicans are adamantly against those groups. Talking nice doesn’t change what you believe.

          The democrats won this based on fear mongering after a recession, and is republicans actually LISTEN to what you democrats say so much not only did we turn out less, many of us actually believe there is something wrong with us.

          But as you said before, republicans are hard headed and just have to be right eh?

          I’m not tolerating inaccurate comments about the right. We need an image fix. A rally up. And I’m the kid of guy who has what it takes to do it.

          Side comment: the republicans who have agreed with you were never as well versed as I am. You’re talking confused republicans making the comments you’re talking about. Then I come in with numbers, hard facts, things you yourself agreed you’ve never seen before. Which republican do you perceive is more motivated and researched?

          • November 14, 2012 at 12:51 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 4

            Well, I applaud your sense of civic duty. Get out there and change it then. If what you say is true, you shouldn’t have a hard time. But I have a feeling you have your work cut out for you.

            You yourself admit you need an image fix. That’s exactly what I have been saying. But when I say it you call me vindictive. Why?

          • November 14, 2012 at 12:57 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 3

            Libby:

            Because when you say it you are saying it as if the republicans are in need of a fix because of their actions.

            The image fix I’m referring to, is basically just stopping the lies your side puts out about us. Turns out the republicans aren’t good at being slick salesmen. When I say image fix, I mean it in a pure sense.

            When you say image fix, you mean a fix in policies, directly linked to outcomes with women and blacks.

            You’ve made it clear you actually believe that republicans are against women and blacks. You want a political action change, I want the same political action, with better imaging.

            I call you vindictive mainly because of what you believe republicans do when they are in congress.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:08 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 5

            Well, I didn’t make it up, Bob. The image came from somewhere and I’m not a one-man band singing the song. Republicans have that image, because their leadership has those ideals. They have ponitificated about abortion (anti and not just third trimester abortion – ANY abortion), gay marriage (anti), gays in the military (anti) and morality (as defined by them) and the public relates that to the Republican party. Most people don’t want government in their bedrooms or churches and don’t agree with what is being said. Therefore, there are people out there with conservative economic outlooks, registered Republican, that do not feel a part of this new fanatical, Tea Party image that has been thrust upon them. They reject it. So instead of voting, they stayed home.

            Now you can argue with me until the cows come home, but many in your same party agree with what I have said. I don’t care it you change it or not. It just means more votes for my guy.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:43 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 2

            Libby:

            Don’t ask don’t tell: Passed by Clinton and republicans. It was not against gays in the military, it was against open practice. It was intended to protect those in the military from their beliefs. I do believe your side had similar issues with prayer in schools. You say potato I say po[taa][oh]. Gay issues the republicans are against the government having a say in certain matters like oh say mandating that schools teach that being gay is perfectly ok. Side comment: Have you looked up the number of gays who engage in open relationships? It’s darn near 50%. There is a morality issue. Many people don’t want to be around that. Now I’m not saying regulate it with the government, I’m saying the government has no right to tell me I have to agree with gay lifestyles, and so does everyone in school, etc. The repulicans are for civil unions and equal right. That’s what the gays should get. Nothing more. No preferential treatment or force on other to accept their way of life. If I can’t pray in school, you can’t teach my daughter in school that being gay is perfectly ok.

            Republicans have not passed federal law against any abortion, not even during Bush. Your comment there is not true. State wise they have. Federally, they have not. And in the states they do this, they do this with a majority of people agreeing. Go to California if you want a state that won’t do this.

            Further to the point: Considering how many adverse affects we have seen with birth controls of various types, I would say regulating abortion is a necessity. You people on the left tend to think it’s harm free.

            Nearly every birth control has an adverse affect. I’m talking even birth control, I’m not even talking the adverse affects of post getting pregnant pills etc. Some methods screw up not only you, but the baby and the baby still lives. How many kids are born after a failed abortion only to live messed up for life? Depo: Weight gain. Estrogen based products: Actually affect your attractions and your mood. There are actually studies that say you should stop birth control before getting married to make sure that if you get off birth control you still are attracted to your lover. The rings, I won’t even go into those. Republicans are against that tar.

            You’ve heard extreme right say what you’re talking about. And I’ve heard extreme left say things you wouldn’t believe.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:59 pm
            Libby says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 16
            Thumb down 5

            Bob:

            The question is freedom of choice. Nobody is mandating use of contraceptives. They are saying if you would like to use them you are free to use them and they will be covered by your insurance plan. I’m sorry you don’t want to be around gays, but they have just as much right to be in public as anyone else. If you don’t like to see, go somewhere else. If you and your church do not believe in performing same sex marriage, then don’t. But it shouldn’t be against the law. You say civil union and they want marriage. They should be entitled, legally, to be married if that is their choice. Nobody says your church has to perform them. Don’t ask don’t tell was insulting. You can serve your country and even die for them, but you are not free to be openly gay while doing it. Just who are you protecting with that garbage? Sensitive Republican ears? And if I can’t teach your kid about gays, you can’t teach mine about creationism. Are you afraid your kid will have questions about gays you can’t answer? Or maybe that they will catch it? Just what is all the fear about?

            I want freedom and equality, not fear and censoring.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:29 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            The intention of don’t ask don’t tell was to avoid issues. Military men fight. Military men tend to be masculine, whether democrat or not. They didn’t want your beliefs, affecting the outcome of a soldier’s career. It is better to not let people know who could harm you with that knowledge. Tell me what position you enjoy best with your husband Libby. Is it relevant at all? No. Could it affect how your superior thinks of you? Yes. Besides I will remphasize: Clinton passed that law. A liberal you agree with.

            Moving forward: Contraceptives being forced to be funded in a way that raises costs is wrong. I don’t care about being force to use them. I care about being forced to cover them at a higher cost. I said in my post you cowards on the left wouldn’t make them publicly funded BECAUSE

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:34 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            You knew that people were against it being public. So you found a work around to do the same thing people don’t agree with. It’s sleazy.

            Moving on to gays: I’m sorry that you feel that people who sleep around and are against monogamous relationships, and date like celebrities are good for your children. Tell me, how would you like for your child to be around snoop dawg from age 5, and not only that to be told that Snoop Dawg’s sexual habits are completely normal, and should be encouraged as a form of expression? This is my belief. I’m not for restricting gays. I’m against forcing people to agree with them, which is what they are attempting with schools. It’s wrong Libby.

            Moving on: Civil unions is marriage. And if you’re not forcing churches to marry, why use the word marriage? They get everything a marriage gets. All the same rights. If equal rights isn’t enough for them, they want to force acceptance. I’m sorry, they don’t get that. We aren’t going to use force. They get the same rights. Nothing more nothing less. The only reason they want the word “marriage” is that they want to sue for discrimination, and use force regarding disrcimination. The legal difference in marriage and civil unions is to make sure that you can’t sue a church. So are you or are you not against forcing churches to marry? You just said you are against it. Then civil unions is the way to go.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:37 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            Who says gay men are not masculine? Ever see the Village People or Rock Hudson? They are very masculine. Don’t ask don’t tell was a compromise by Clinton because he wasn’t going to push the issue. Before don’t ask don’t tell you would be drummed out of the service for being gay. To lose your career over your sexuality is just wrong. It’s not about positions in bed or sex at all. It’s about being free to be the person you are. Who are you to tell them they have to shut up and go back in the closet?

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:43 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            Ok let me break don’t ask don’t tell down for you:

            Have you handled sexual harassment or discrimination lawsuits?

            How do they start? You are in this field Libby. Use your knowledge.

            They start like this: Bill found out I was gay. He’s a christian. He didn’t promote me because I was gay and he’s a christian.

            Now let’s say that you have a married gay couple in the military.

            Bill doesn’t promote Jon. Jon says that Bill knew about his marriage, and that Bill was a Christian who was against gay marriage. What happens Libby?

            Discrimination lawsuits typically go to insurance, then settle. I am serious here, ARE YOU AN AGENT OR NOT? Do you have any experience in your field?

            Now let’s say that you have don’t ask don’t tell. No one is allowed to know if anyone is gay.

            What do you ensure? NO ONE is discriminated against, and no one can claim that them being gay resulted in anything happening.

            Don’t ask don’t tell was efficient. The marriage aspect is bluntly risky as hell. We don’t need to have lawsuits going all over when a couple says “oh, that church can’t sell cookies because selling cookies is a private fund and therefore if they sell cookies at their marriage for funds for the honey moon they are discriminating against gays because they are no longer operating strictly as a church!”.

            That is why the word marriage is avoided. Do you think I just made that up? NO. The true scenario was the vending machine scenario at a public wedding. Washington nearly passed a law for gay marriage with that wording a few years back. They later passed a law fixing the wording, thank God for republicans fixing that mess in advance. Were it not for them, your moronic liberal left would have caused countless lawsuits.

            We need this efficient. Civil Unions, Don’t ask don’t tell, are good things.

            Gay marriage, and repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, result in bad things.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:45 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            LIBBY:

            STOP SEEING WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE AND PAY ATTENTION.

            WHY DID I MAKE THE MASCULINE COMMENT? MILITARY MEN FIGHT. THEY ARE MASCULINE. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A MILITARY GUY FIGHTS A GAY GUY AND THE GAY GUY SAYS IT WAS BECAUSE HE WAS GAY???

            MOREOVER, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE GAY GUY GETS UP AND IT REALLY IS BECAUSE HE IS GAY AND THAT GOT PASSEED AROUND?

            Jesus christ! That was NOT appropriate. Don’t you dare going saying that crap, implying that I’m labeling gays. I have NEVER made a comment like what you just suggested I did and you know DAMN WELL I never would.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:46 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            “people who sleep around and are against monogamous relationships, and date like celebrities”? That’s what you think of gay people? I know plenty of heterosexual people that fit that definition perfectly. Because you are of a different sexual orientation doesn’t mean you have any more sex than anyone else. I have gay friends that have been together for over 30 years. That’s monogamous, pal.

            Have you ever considered that gays want marriage because they, too, believe in God and want that as part of one of the biggest days of their lives? Why would you deprive them of that? Because they can’t believe in God as well as you do because they’re gay?

            That’s so wrong. On so many levels. There is room in this world for everyone and tolerance goes a long way towards living a Christian lifestyle. Your beliefs are not anywhere near those that Christ taught.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:55 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            Bob:

            You did make the comment. It’s in black and white.

            As far as don’t ask don’t tell and discrimination, that’s a bunch of hogwash. The US government has immunity from prosecution. They don’t have EPLI insurance. They don’t need EPLI insurance.

            Same thing goes for someone getting beat up in the military. It happens all the time.

            As far as suing a church that won’t marry you, my ex-husband’s Catholic church wouldn’t marry us because I am not Catholic. I didn’t sue them, wouldn’t have even thought to sue them. I’m sure there would be plenty of churches that would agree to marry a gay couple, so they won’t need to sue you or your narrow-minded church. Who’d want to get married amongst a bunch of haters, anyway?

            You’ve shown me how you feel about gays and it’s dispicible.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:59 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            I made the comment, that MILITARY MEN ARE MASCULINE.

            Clearly gay men are in the military. Thus, I never applied masculine behaviors based on sexual orientation. I find it dispicable that you would make that link.

            Moving forward: Discrimination has to be because of race, (now gender) or religion. Catholics have freedom of religion. True. However, the example I listed is how most weddings go. And the suits already happened in Canada.

            My “beliefs” on gays are not despicable. The numbers vary, but a people who are ok with having sex with multiple partners in a relationship, 50% of them at the least, are not people I want around my daughter.

            It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact. And I find it despicable you would put your children around that. In fact, I find projecting the “I’m open minded, everyone else is judgemental” at any cost, no matter the morality and the affect, and the detriment to your child, and not standing up for morality, to be disgusting. I find it to be something that deprives one of any differences from that of an animal.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:06 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            ” I know plenty of heterosexual people that fit that definition perfectly. Because you are of a different sexual orientation doesn’t mean you have any more sex than anyone else. I have gay friends that have been together for over 30 years. That’s monogamous, pal”

            So you know one person. The number of 50% is at the minimum. Pal. Let’s talk with numbers and not emotions. They fit the bill of the image, and I’m not going into that being something that we endorse in schools as being ok. I don’t care about outside of schools. My daughter can befriend a gay person all she wants. So can I. But schools? ABSOLUTELY cannot teach it’s acceptable.

            “Have you ever considered that gays want marriage because they, too, believe in God and want that as part of one of the biggest days of their lives? Why would you deprive them of that? Because they can’t believe in God as well as you do because they’re gay?”

            So then, considering I stated that the reason we want “civil unions” it to avoid forcing churches to perform marriages, you are aware that civil unions, would still have a marriage ceremony at a church of their choice correct? Or did you just admit you want to force all churches to marry gays? That is wrong. On so many levels. We already established that you believe churches wouldn’t be forced to marry with the marriage version.

            Now, like the typical sleazy democrat you admit, well that’s what they all want isn’t it fair? Inch by inch is how you work, to gain power in ways you shouldn’ have. We aren’t using force. And if you can’t get that through your head, how dare you label republicans as the ones doing the assault. You want to use force and it’s ok for you in some special scenario? I think not.

            They are getting civil unions. They are getting equal rights. Whichever church wants to marry them can with civil unions. The only difference in the word marriage is that it will start discrimination suits. That’s wrong. They get civil unions, nothing more nothing less, or we risk harming a balance.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:11 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            Final note: “people don’t sue the government”.

            Let me finally reply with my “hahahahahaha” comment.

            You believe that someone would not file a suit against their superior in the government? You think it’s not possible?

            You’re lying to yourself. Also: Municipalities do require insurance. Or do you not work in that field? The government does have exposures. Usually they find a way of making the risk external. In this case, I doubt very much they would be able.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:14 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 2

            If it’s just a word, let them have it. And I am not sleazy. Some of the people I mention are men that I have worked for. They run around on their wives and high five about it like it’s some kind of victory. That’s disgusting.

            I know more than just TWO gay people that have been monogamous for years, so enough said about that. Equating homosexuality to immorality is wrong and there are no statistics proving it.

            And the Republicans don’t need to use force because the deck is already stacked in their favor. To change the status quo you have to ruffle some feathers. And that’s being done all over. More and more states have legalized gay marriage and I’m all for it.

            And your daughter can learn about gays out on playground just like I did. That’s fine by me. Just don’t be cramming creationism down my kids throat and we’ll get along just fine.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:18 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            I write alot of municipality business and they carry insurance because while they have immunity, it is usually capped at a limit depending on the type of claim. For a fatality in some states you can sue for up to $250,000 but no more. For property damage in some areas the limit is $500. So it varies by statute. But they do have immunity for the most part against large judgements.

            Any other questions you have about insurance that I could clear up for you? I’ve only been doing this for 33 years.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:31 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            Only it’s not just a word. It will result in churches to undergo force.

            Moving to municipalities: Governments do have liabilities, and can be sued. Schools can be sued. Schools have been sued.

            Moving on to more important matters: You will never cure biased people. I just ran by what I said about the military to a guy at work (ex military, recent though) he’s 26. People were beat up all the time, because military guys are not moderates. They tend to be beer drinking fighting extremists in their youth. More than a few gay guys were beaten up.

            Disregarding the law: Sometimes, it’s better to leave it unknown. It would affect promotions if your superior knew.

            Next of all: Have you ever asked that gay couple if they have sex with other people? There is a difference between monogamy, and allowing your partner to have sex with other people. Monogamy involves the amount of relationships you are in, not the amount of people you sleep with.

            Numbers estimate that 1 in 4 marriages end in cheating. That is not 50%. That numbers is the low end. Gays are ok with sleeping with people in their relationships as the median norm.

        • November 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm
          Agent says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 18

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • November 14, 2012 at 12:44 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 0

            Agent,

            What I think you are missing is that democrat voters usually are not for Keynesian economics.

            They just don’t see what the democrats are doing as Keynesian currently. They see it as “emergency” actions that would not “ordinarily” be done.

            Some are for the Keynesian economics. But there are a lot that aren’t as well.

            A lot of them also vote democrat due to the perception that those politicians help the poor.

            Well intentioned, just misplaced trust.

  • November 12, 2012 at 3:14 pm
    Dave in KY says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 28
    Thumb down 3

    Large central government and central planning always works best, just look at history. How this country was founded on the opposite principles is unbelievable. All who came here in the past always wanted to change this country into what they were fleeing, right?

    • November 12, 2012 at 4:38 pm
      Tired of it all says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 32
      Thumb down 1

      Good point Dave. I have always seen how a bloated do nothing federal government is the answer to all of our nations problems. Department of homeland security comes to mind. The size of this department just continues to grow but for some reason at least here in AZ the border is still wide open.

    • November 12, 2012 at 4:51 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 30
      Thumb down 6

      Dave, Our founding fathers were afraid of a big central government because they had studied history and saw how bad it was, hence the design of ours was for a limited Federal Government with checks and balances. Our Constitution means little now and we have an Executive Branch who thinks it is more equal than the other two. Subjugation of the people by a big controlling Federal Government and ruling by Executive fiat is going to cause big trouble. At some point in the next several months, something really bad is going to happen. The Mayan calendar may be more accurate than many think.

      • November 13, 2012 at 1:54 pm
        Libby says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 18

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • November 13, 2012 at 2:33 pm
          Dave in KY says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 14
          Thumb down 2

          This is not a choice between big business and big federal government. It’s a choice between big federal government and states and individual rights. I think the founding fathers had everything covered when the enumerated powers in the constitution set limits on the federal government. Just what is the ultimate goal of the left? Is it truly to hand over all power to the politicians in DC? I have yet to get a sensible answer to this.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:35 pm
            Libby says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 13

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:41 pm
            Libby says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 14

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • November 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 17
          Thumb down 3

          Libby, It is funny that I don’t see Bill Gates and Warren Buffet doing 68 new regulations each day, shutting down coal mines and plants in several states, planning to institute numerous new taxes in the coming year that will hurt all Americans, not expanding or developing energy that would make us independent from foreign sources who gouge us at every turn. The moral decay in this country is quite amazing. Even our top military leaders are not immune and we have a crisis of leadership.

          • November 13, 2012 at 3:24 pm
            Libby says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 15

            You’re not supposed to be able to see the Koch Bros in the background with their PAC’s pushing coal legislation through or leaning on the government for energy subsidies. That’s the whole point, Agent. They are back behind the curtain quietly running the country hoping you continue to be distracted and pay no attention to them.

            Is everyone so blind they can’t see what’s going on in front of your very nose?

    • November 14, 2012 at 12:56 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 12

      Bob, what you are missing is that Democratic voters are voting for more and more give a ways. There aren’t many Reagan Democrats anymore who vote for fiscal responsibility. The party of Truman does not exist anymore. It has morphed into the Progressive Party who believes we can spend our way to prosperity. They are busy arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it is sinking. They have many like Libby & Planet who follow like Lemmings going over the cliff and have no clue how this economy works and how bad it is going to get in the coming months.

      • November 14, 2012 at 1:03 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 1

        Agent –

        I get that. But I actually think Libby and Planet as well as people like them actually are for fiscal responsibility. They just aren’t connecting the dots as to what our problems actually are and how to get to that point.

        I do think that people on unemployment would have voted for Obama. That’s 45,000,0000 out of about 315,000,000. It is a large number and is an issue. But I’m thinking only a quarter of them vote at best. So maybe 1 in 4 democrats vote entitlements. I agree it happens, I even said to another poster that it was clear that entitlement voters definitely vote democrat.

        However, this does not make all democrats entitlement voters.

        This is like that ice cream comment I made a joke about.

  • November 13, 2012 at 1:38 pm
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 0

    Has anyone seen anythng on pricing and or plan design for OBama Care? If so, please post link.

  • November 13, 2012 at 1:42 pm
    AJ says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 20
    Thumb down 16

    Total economic failure is the only way out when you really look at it. No matter what the conserv side decides to cave into and give away, the democrats will always give away that plus a free unicorn. Stick a fork in the US, the fat lady has sung…and it was a transvestite.

    • November 13, 2012 at 1:57 pm
      Captain Planet says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 17

      Oh no, not a transvestite, one of the Republican Boogymen. Quick, hide your children or they, too, might turn into one. It’s like looking at Medusa only instead of turning to stone, they’ll decide they want to dress like the other gender and perhaps add and remove parts.

      • November 13, 2012 at 1:59 pm
        Libby says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 12
        Thumb down 16

        I have never seen a fat transvestite. They usually take pretty good care of themselves.

        • November 13, 2012 at 2:46 pm
          FFA says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 15
          Thumb down 3

          I’ve never seen a transvestite. My Suburban Middle Class Republican Catholic up bringing must have sheltered me from that.
          I dont really care to see one either.
          Where do you come up with this crap anyways?

          Show me a plan design. Show me premiums instead of this dribble that gets posted. I, personally, need information.

          Now, I am done with my lunch break and going back to WORK.

          • November 13, 2012 at 2:55 pm
            Libby says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 13

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • November 13, 2012 at 2:41 pm
    HereWeAre says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 22
    Thumb down 0

    I think we should just cut to the chase. Somebody should inform McDonnell/Cucinelli that 1)It appears that Obamacare will go fully into effect on January 1, 2014 and because of that either 2)The Federal Government will get the majority of the business over the internet or 3)The state can do everything it can to keep agents involved in the process. We all know that most consumers aren’t going to be able to make the informed choices necessary that us agents have helped folks make for the last century. We understand deductibles, copays, networks and loopholes and can explain these to the customer, unlike any website. Here we are. Let’s get real and do it real quick or get squashed in the Federal Landslide.

    • November 13, 2012 at 4:04 pm
      Libby says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 11
      Thumb down 10

      That’s right. You can either steer the ship or go down with it. Take the initiative and get involved, now!

    • November 13, 2012 at 4:24 pm
      Agent says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 12
      Thumb down 8

      Here, If voters cannot make an informed decision on voting for their leader, they won’t be able to make an informed healthcare decision on an exchange website. They won’t know what they are buying and how it will affect them if they have a claim. Agents will be cut out of the loop and companies will have to take all the PreX’s so they will require a lot of subsidies from HHS to stay in business. We are not counting on doing any health business with the new reality. I think the Group business will go away and people will have to go to the exchange for coverage which is exactly what this administration wanted in the first place.

      • November 13, 2012 at 6:44 pm
        FFA says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 12
        Thumb down 0

        From what I got from this AZ trip, Self Funded plans are the way to go starting at 15 employees.
        Exepmt from OBama Care. Cheaper the traditional health care. Better plan designs. All the perks of the Union Insurance without Govt Intrusion. And we, the agents get to name our commission %% as oppose to being told what we get. Working for 5 – 10% as opposed to $8.00 per head. May be a profitable LOB again.

        • November 14, 2012 at 8:18 am
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 8
          Thumb down 5

          15 employees? You’d better hope they are all young and healthy. That seems like an awful low number to be self-funded.

          • November 15, 2012 at 10:20 am
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            I thought so too. I dont know much of anything about self funded plans. I have heard the magical # was at 50 employees. But the people I was with were from IL so, maybe 15 will work.
            As we all know, IL is a complete and total mess.

            Jess JR is still MIA. Last he was known to be was Mayo Clinic – not to far from the Canadian border. HMMMMMM. Last week, there was a report on the news that he had a plea deal worked out that included Jail Time.

  • November 13, 2012 at 3:39 pm
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 0

    If they are just going to use the same plan design as ICHIP and eliminate the 12 month Pre X waiting peroid, we are in deep S#$@.

    Check out the pricing on that and then we will understand what OBama thinks is affordable.

    • November 13, 2012 at 3:43 pm
      Libby says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 8

      I don’t know what they are going to do. Doubt they do yet, either.

      • November 13, 2012 at 6:49 pm
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 0

        You just nailed my biggest objection / concern right on the head.
        We know what the Cobra Give A Way did. What is this going to do???
        Them ICHIP Premiums are out of this world high.

    • November 13, 2012 at 5:56 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 0

      Sorry about your Bears Sunday night. Looked like the wind got taken out of their sails after Cutler was injured. The Texans did play a good game and are legitimate contenders this year unlike the sorry Cowboys who jumped offside 6 times against the hopeless Eagles who are toast now. Two of the worst teams in football for sure.

      I see that Jesse Jackson has been MIA since June, has been indicted for campaign fraud and still won 65% of the vote. Must be another example of the Chicago way.

      • November 13, 2012 at 6:36 pm
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 0

        That guy that popped Cutler in the head should be suspended for as long as Cutler is out. Should have stuck with Bush as tail back. Pounded straight ahead as opposed to Forte who like to cut.

        Jesse Jr is also being investigated as the one trying to buy the senate seat. Oh, and he is in a mental institution right now. He is working out a plea deal that includes losing his seat – which from what I understand he will be able to hand over to is wife and jail time.

        There was another one under indictment for Bribary, was kicked out of Springfield and still won re election.

        Yes. Business as usual in Chicago.

        • November 14, 2012 at 10:16 am
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 0

          I thought Jesse Jr had a girlfriend on the side as well. Giving his wife his seat in Congress???? Is that an offering for peace in the family? I am sure his Momma & Daddy are real proud of him. I have always thought he was right in the middle of the Senate seat sale with Blago and if the tapes ever came out, Dead Fish has his grubby hands on that one as well along with others.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:28 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            Daddy fathered another child out of wed lock when he ws counseling Billy boy and the Monica thing. Hypocrite he is.
            Jr dropped out of sight yesterday and it hit the news that his wife is now under investigation for mis use of campaign funds.

          • November 14, 2012 at 5:37 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Wow FFA, what fine leaders come out of the great state of Illinois. I guess his wife was doing a little redecorating on her own with campaign funds. They may have to have another election up there and elect an equally corrupt politician to fill the seat. What was the name of that guy that temporarily was in the office after the Blago scandal came to light? I am sure he is available unless he is now in jail for something else.

          • November 15, 2012 at 10:10 am
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            The Comptroller from Dixon that embezzeled $53M is set to be sentenced. The sale of the assets she aquired from the embezzeled funds will not cover that price tag.

  • November 13, 2012 at 4:21 pm
    D says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 11
    Thumb down 12

    GOP govenor’s delaying compliance to score political points with their shrinking base, at the expense of people without coverage? A sign of our times. The latest elections shows that the majority of Americans are becoming more and more disaffected by the GOP.

    • November 13, 2012 at 5:02 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 11
      Thumb down 1

      Actually D, the voters are disaffected with politicians in general and that is why we had 15 million less voters in this election. It is a goverment thing, not just a GOP thing. I will agree that the Republican Party bosses made a strategic mistake in their strategy. They were playing nice guys and thinking economic issues would swing it over while Democrats conducted the nastiest campaign in history. The nasty’s won this one, but this little honeymoon will not last long when everyone sees what is coming down around the first of the year.

      • November 14, 2012 at 9:01 am
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 6

        “Actually D, the voters are disaffected with politicians in general and that is why we had 15 million less voters in this election. It is a goverment thing, not just a GOP thing. I will agree that the Republican Party bosses made a strategic mistake in their strategy. They were playing nice guys and thinking economic issues would swing it over while Democrats conducted the nastiest campaign in history. The nasty’s won this one, but this little honeymoon will not last long when everyone sees what is coming down around the first of the year,”

        says the guy who told us Romney was going to win in a landslide and there would be a referendum on President Obama.

        • November 14, 2012 at 12:17 pm
          Bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 2

          Says the guy who puts up such lop sided liberal left concepts that not even politifact agrees with him.

  • November 13, 2012 at 5:21 pm
    Dave in KY says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 0

    If you support Obamacare, then what’s next. We are about to find out now that Obamacare is here to stay. It is irrefutable that it is the goal of the modern day democrats to cut out the middleman (and replace the middleman with government) as was proven by student loans. No reason to think they feel any different about personal lines or commercial insurance, or perhaps the auto industry…etc. No doubt there are problems with every industry sector that the smart people in Washington DC can fix. Those who think Obamacare is a victory for the common man are truly in for a lot more than they bargained for. God help our future generations, it is our fault. Enough said. Good luck all.

    • November 14, 2012 at 8:14 am
      Libby says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 7

      Man you Republicans are melodramatic. Geesh!

    • November 14, 2012 at 9:55 am
      Captain Planet says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 6

      About to find out? Didn’t we already know the PPACA is here to stay? I don’t know about all of your points, but I would say it cannot be denied Democrats want a public option on the table. As far as ridding the US of an insurance market, that’s nut-wing talk. Don’t buy into that. That notion isn’t even close to being true. Capitalism strived during the first 4 years of President Obama’s administration. Corporate profits never higher. Stock market bounced back and then some. Like the PPACA, Capitalism is here to stay as well. And, it should. I like Capitalism. I just don’t like the trickle-down aspect of it. Mainly because, money keeps trickling up. I’m sick of buying yachts for those that already have yachts and elevators for cars because the cars are too lazy to take the stairs. The playing field needs to be evened out. You can feel free to call that whatever you want.

      • November 14, 2012 at 9:58 am
        Libby says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 6

        My poor car has to walk up 3 flights of stairs at least 3 times a day!

      • November 14, 2012 at 12:20 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 1

        Highest corporate profits and still poor job growth?

        Man, sign me up for your guy!

        You realize what happened is they laid off people to restructure, and less employees translates to more profits, so that they can hire again when they need to?

        • November 14, 2012 at 12:55 pm
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 4

          That doesn’t even make any sense, Bob. They laid off people to have more money so they could hire in the future?? Well, it’s the future now and where’s the money? Not being used to create jobs, I’ll tell you that much. But corporations have their profits, by golly. Some things have to remain the same.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:11 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 2

            Libby:

            You clearly don’t get economics.

            During a down turn, as has always happened, corporations lay people off. This is why CEO’s and the rich do not get affected by recessions as much as the middle class. Does that ring bells for you?

            They do this to attempt to build more profits with less expenses. When they have enough to re-invest, but also because the middle class isn’t spending as much. They don’t need to have as much employees and or product, demand is down during a recession, but they want equal profits so they trim employees and production and costs, in order to keep equal profit ratios. Then when the middle class picks back up into buying, they increase their output and hire again.

            Also: This isn’t remaining the same. If they are more profitable than the Bush years, and the unemployment rate is several points higher, and millions more are out of work, there is something that is worse. They are getting greedier during a democrat president? That’s the only possibility with what you believe about economics.

            The possibility with what I know about economics is that the down turn is still in affect. We aren’t over this recession.

          • November 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 1

            Bob, Libby has admitted to me in prior posts that Economics is not her strong suit. The Liberal mind just cannot understand the basics. I recommend that everyone google The Laffer Curve and watch the video. It proves that raising taxes actually decrease revenue to the government. It peaks at about 33% and declines drastically after that. When rates decline, more taxpayers are created by business and actual revenues to the government increase as they did with Reagan when he lowered marginal rates. This is too much for Libby & Planet to absorb so they automatically discard it and go on their merry way.

          • November 14, 2012 at 2:32 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 6

            Quit insulting my intelligence, Agent. I’m getting sick of it. You don’t have to be an Economics major to understand math. And when did I ever say I was for increasing taxes? I think I said I am against loopholes for the rich and the way the current tax code is skewed in favor of the wealthy.

          • November 14, 2012 at 2:39 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 1

            Actually Libby, Bob insulted your intelligence as well, only in a different style. If I were you, I would google The Laffer Curve and learn something from a top economist.

          • November 14, 2012 at 2:50 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 5

            When Bob insults me I have no problem telling him to knock it off. But I was talking to you, Agent. So knock it off.

            What I said has nothing to do with the Laffer curve and everything about trying to even out the tax code so that it doesn’t “curve” more sharply in favor of the wealthy than for the majority. A fair tax for all.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:17 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            Its being stashed for staying power when time get tuff for them. Its called a savings account.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:19 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            Passing a tax increase specifically for the sake of evening out the playing field at the expense of the economy is not a wise move. It’s class warefare.

            Further: The tax system is fair. The rich do pay their fair share.

            The average middle class american pays a 10% federal effective rate. They pay 6.6% (normally, they currently pay 4.4) social security tax, and they pay 1.65 medicare. That’s 17.65% The only other tax they pay is local taxes, which is primarily property. However, for owning property they write off the interest and the property tax and mortgage insurance. For me, that write off pays for the property tax.

            Total effective tax rate for the wealthy currently is currently plenty fair. Most of the wealthy pay that same rate.

            Capital gains rates remaining low resulted in higher corporate revenues and invesmtent revenues toward the 2007 time period. The revenues nearly tripled. That was not fake, we had this debate before and you said it was because of a bubble.

            Raising the capital gains rates, especially the dividends from 15% to a 39.6 top rate with an additional couple points from medicare is a larger change than the fiscal cliff, which even democrats are saying will harm GDP by a minimum of .5%. Now remember what I said before? Compounded growth of even 1% difference during the Carter and Reagan era would have resulted in a GDP half what it was during Clinton. And you want those higher tax rates…Why?

            To get those darned rich who already pay their fair share?

            Ludicrious.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:24 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            Also, stating that you are not intelligent in economics is not an insult.

            I’m sure there are many areas you have not studied, and I have not studied. I do not know how to pave a road. I don’t know the mixture that goes into it. I could not design a speaker to save my life.

            Side comment: Do you consider retarded people to be worse people then? If it’s an insult to not know something, you must really have something against those who know much less than you.

            This is a side comment to what I said before: It’s a sin to be uneducated to a democrat.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:27 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            I mistyped. I meant to say most the wealthy pay that same rate or higher.

            You want to target 1% of 1% who don’t, to collect less than $10 billion annual revenues.

            Those $10 billion revenues as I pointed out before, would be outpaced by the harm.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:32 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            First of all, I am not advocating tax increases. Can I make that any clearer? I’m advocating eliminating many of the loopholes that are used only by the wealthy to lower their net tax rate, so in essence they do not pay their fair share.

            As far as your side note, Agent has used my lack of an economics background as an insult against me and continues to do so. I know an insult when I hear one. I admitted I’m not an economist. That is not a weakness, as Agent likes to insinuate. And it doesn’t mean I don’t understand theories or math.

            As far as your comment about the “retarded”, I will not respond to the use of such a derogatory term or the snide remark.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:52 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            I did not use a derogatory word. I used it in the form of which it applies. You liberals have to get over the “I say when something is derogatory” line.

            The snide remark made perfect sense. If your intelligence is questioned it must be bad, or an insult. What about people who actually DO have a low intelligence?

            I use retarded as an extreme example. For those people, you democrats act extremely condescending, acting as if you need to protect them (as you did above). For people who aren’t retarded, just uneducated by choice, you insult the hell out of them. Don’t deny that you do.

            You didn’t reply because you are like other democrats: You weigh yourself in many areas that don’t matter, such as intelligence and education. I speak from personal experience here. Democrat family: Education was everything. Every family I have seen in WA is the same way. Judgemental based on intelligence. Republicans are the only people who don’t do that.

            Some do, but most don’t.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:56 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            So you’re not for tax increases, just increasing the dividend tax rate from 15% to 36.9%. Gotcha. Typical on the left.

            You’re not for tax increases, just for increasing the top rate to 36.9 percent on the top rate, which will affect the economy, is a tax increase, and won’t result in a better outcome, just to get more dollars from them. It’s not a tax increase if it’s on the rich, it doesn’t affect the economy if it hits only the rich right?

            You know who doesn’t take advantage of loopholes? The primary hard working rich. Raising the rates affects guess who libby? The people who aren’t using loop holes. You’re basically hitting the guy who worked his whole life to make $300,000 a year, are hurting the economy, and aren’t even making a dent in the deficit.

            You’re for the tax increases. Don’t go trying to say you’re not.

            If you aren’t, then vote republican.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:58 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            Are you kidding me? Intelligence is not important to wealthy, white Americans (ie. Republicans)? Is that why they send their kids to ivy league schools and donate millions of dollars to get a wing or building named after them? Is that why they feel it important to tell everyone they have a degree in this or that or went to this school or that school? As if it makes them better than someone else? Don’t talk to me about this. I was raised in a Republican home and education was everything. Unfortunately, I was on my own at 17 and had to support myself so I wasn’t fortunate enough to go to college. That doesn’t make me uneducated or unintelligent. Just unpedigreed.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:02 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            I’m not for tax increases and I’m not against tax increases. At some point in time both make sense, but since I’m not an economist I’ll leave that in the hands of the guy I elected.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            The tax increases will never make sense.

            But moving forward:

            Labeling much? What percent of the populatio is wealthy? 1%.

            Not all are republicans, contrary to your belief.

            When we are talking about MAINSTREAM republicans don’t give a flying %@%@ about the education or intelligence matters. When we are talking MAINSTREAM the democrats do. This is why college attendees have a 66% liberal leaning.

            Don’t feed me cliches. You know I will pick them apart. Quit with your obsession and envy over the rich. And definitely quit labeling republicans.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            Libby:

            But while we are on rich people who are democrats:

            Warren Buffet
            Bill Gates

            I rest my case. The guy who is at times the wealthiest man in the world is a democrat.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:13 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            Well, your definition of wealthy and mine are 2 different things, Bob. And I know not all wealthy people are Republicans, but there is not doubt they are the majority. And if you’re allowed to label Democrats then I’m allowed to label Republicans.

          • November 14, 2012 at 5:12 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Libby, If corporations didn’t make a profit, you wouldn’t have a job. If my agency didn’t turn a profit, I would have to cut expenses and lay someone off. I have yet to see any of those 18 tax cuts your President said he gave to Small Business. I didn’t get a piece of the last Stimulus either to create jobs. I guess I should have been one of those Green companies and I could have gotten some government money and gone belly up the next year and could have come out smelling like a rose.

          • November 15, 2012 at 8:24 am
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Agent, for a grown man you are the biggest whiner of all time. Get over it! Try to be positive and things will look better, I promise. You must be the biggest bummer to live with.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:22 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            Everytime I have “labeled” one particular thing, I have a number.

            Stop acting like a kid again. It’s not the same.

            You just made a lable and you don’t even have the numbers. Moreover: You labeled the 99% of republicans based on the 1% of the wealthy. I’m sorry, you don’t get to do that.

            It’s not an accurate comment, at all, methodology wise. You don’t get to say “oh you guys label so I can do it too!”.

            Again: The source of all evil, you did it so I can too!

            Whereas when I reply to you, I say things like “I expect for you to call me out when I’m in the wrong or over the top. That’s what she is here for”. I don’t defend my wrong doings, or things that are bad for people.

            You do. Insistently. It’s the root of evil and you have to get over it.

            Further: When Bush won in 2004 you whined. You still whined about it in 2012. You must be the biggest whiner of all time whining for that full 8 years as opposed to less than 8 days of whining by Agent.

          • November 15, 2012 at 2:29 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            I’ll say it again, Bob. Your definition of wealthy and mine are 2 different things. I am not talking about just the 1%ers. Anyone that makes over $2M a year is wealthy. Not just the obscenely rich of the 1%.

            And yes, I whined about George Bush. But Agent whines about everything. The sky is falling and doomsday is tomorrow as far as he’s concerned. My ex-husband was like that and believe me it makes someone very hard to live with.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:54 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            And I will say it again: No matter how you define the rich, it still is 1% of the population, and therefore you are labeling 99% of all republicans based on the 1% of rich republicans.

            The definition of the word rich is not where you are wrong in your statement for making it. You’re wrong morally for labeling 99% of republicans based on the wealthiest 1%.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:01 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            Bob: You’re right. I have been labeling Republicans and I usually don’t like labeling anybody.

            But when I say Republican, I am talking about the people in the forefront of the party. Those in Washington that speak for your side. Those are the only people I have to judge the ideals of the party.

            So let me clarify that I do not intend to label an entire group of people based on the actions of a few. That is bigoted and I don’t want to do that. What I will label is the rhetoric I hear from those of your persuasion and in the media.

          • November 16, 2012 at 11:47 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            Well then, what I was talking about was mainstream democrats.

            You came back by stating “are you kidding?” regarding wealthy in ivy league schools.

            You were not talking about the people in the fore front of our party.

            And because you are bigoted, you are justifying things in your head, and are losing track of this conversation.

            My statement, and I stand by it, is that democrats tend to focus on intelligence. Republicans do not, as much.

  • November 13, 2012 at 7:01 pm
    Center Point says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 6

    Dear all, things change. Period. Obamacare will change some of the ways we currently do business the same way computers changed the way we did busienes with typewriters and carbon paper and copies in triplicate.

    We will adjust; we always have — but not all will. Those that do will survive, those that don’t will collect medicare — not until age 67 if the GOP has their way.

  • November 13, 2012 at 8:02 pm
    Bob says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 11
    Thumb down 1

    You really don’t know much about Medicare and your analogies are poor. You talked about modernization of process in a way that measurably increases performance. Obamacare has measures showing it will raise costs and will not be able to raise benefits.

    Limiting investments for private insurance companies will lower their capital building capabilities.

    More importantly: the age will have to be raised to 67 regardless of republicans. Raising taxes will not collect enough revenue. A 95% top rate brought in 20% so did a 36.9. How do your surmise we get the revenues, raise taxes to 100%?

    Even 1% off of GDP over our history would have left us at less than half our current GDP. You would rather raise taxes than increase GDP output? Taxes are year to year, growth is compounded. This is why revenues don’t increase in the long run with tax increases.

    Also: Obama talked about raising the age to 67 during the debt deal. Did the republicans make him do that, just like they somehow made him pass the bush tax cuts with a democrat super majority as you suggested before?

    Your info is not credible.

    • November 14, 2012 at 10:05 am
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 1

      Bob, The Health Insurance private market as we have known it is gone. All of the major markets are on board now and will become the official shills of the government writing business through the exchanges. They know they will not go out of business paying all the PreX claims because HHS will always subsidize the losses. They won’t have to pay agents commissions for producing business because they will just write online in the near future. Remember the article a few weeks ago where they were concerned about the possible Romney victory which would have upset the applecart? The big losers now are agents who have depended on Individual & Group Health for their livlihood. They will have to find a new career or sell P & C.

      • November 14, 2012 at 10:40 am
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 9

        Oh Agent, just pull yourself up by your bootstraps.

        • November 14, 2012 at 11:24 am
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 9
          Thumb down 1

          Aren’t you the arrogant one Planet? I don’t have to pull myself up from the bootstraps. I have had a successful business for a long time and I am a survivor. I am not choosing to put my time and effort into selling Health Insurance because I know what is around the corner. I feel sorry for some of my fellow agents who have a lot invested in this because they are going to lose out.

          • November 14, 2012 at 11:48 am
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 7

            No, not arrogant, just trying to be funny and using a right wing buzzword. Say, I have to ask, did you sign the petition?

          • November 14, 2012 at 12:23 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 1

            Captain: Yes, completely arrogant. It’s not a bad thing. You get things into a frat party type of allegiance and arrogantly follow suit. Next question, move along

      • November 14, 2012 at 3:32 pm
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 0

        Run the ICHIP Premiums. See what your in for. I have a different defination of Affordable then does OBAma and those who support OBama Care. My definition does not include a hugh jump in price nor a jump in taxxes.

    • November 14, 2012 at 1:11 pm
      Center Point says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 5

      Bob, C’mon, admit it — you are predisposed to automatically dislike anything I say because you want it the way that it has always been. As if that model was working well.

      • November 14, 2012 at 1:14 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 0

        Center:

        When you make a talking point with facts that are in the reality I will agree with you.

        I just told Agent he’s wrong about entitlements. We however agree on many other things.

        I told Celitica she was right about Obama focusing on Afghanistan and doing a troop surge, when a republican tried to state Obama geared off from the war on terror.

        Specifics Center. I’m good at them. Not vague comments. My facts actually had details. Can you honestly say say even one of your comments had as much numbers as mine typically do?

        • November 14, 2012 at 1:17 pm
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 4

          He said things change and people will adapt and survive. What kind of details should he supply to support that statement?

          I know change is hard for people, but honestly Obamacare is not the end of the world. Why is everyone so excited about it? It hasn’t even begun yet!

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:20 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            I never once made comment on that section of his comment.

            I made very specific replies, none had to do with that.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:25 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            To review in total:

            He compared moving from a typewritter to a computer to this change.

            The typewritter was literally less efficient in process. Limiting investments for insurance capital limits the process of building capital. They aren’t compareable. Obama care limited process. It did not expand it.

            Moving on to the 67 comment he made: He said if republicans have their way that age will be 67. I pointed out that age will be 67 no matter what, and to quit blaming republicans.

            It was a post designed to say “hey republicans, things change, get over it, oh and by the way if you had your way we wouldn’t get medicare”.

            He may not have said that word for word, but it was clearly what he meant.

            As a republican, you might imagine how I call that “bullshit”.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:27 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 5

            I’m sure carriers will find other ways to increase their capital. Like I said, some things never change.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:31 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            I’m sure they won’t be able to grow investments as much without as much to invest.

            But regardless, even if they did, that’s a limit of process. Therefore we are now talking a QWERTY typewritter versus the other arrangement of typewritter.

            We aren’t talking an evolution of process which removes restriction. We are talking a shift of process due to restriction.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:34 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 6

            Well, whatever you call it it means healthcare for everyone and I’m all for it.

          • November 14, 2012 at 1:48 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            No. It doesn’t translate to healthcare for everyone. We already have that. This bill does not result in more people receiving care. We have mandates that you treat a patient. We have private, public (medicare) and medicaid. People get care currently. Don’t lie and say they don’t.

            It translates to forcing people into buying health insurance. That’s all.

            We had been over this before and I showed this bill did nothing to affect the amount of care people receive, except for women with well visits, and eliminating co pays to insurance companies. That’s not a huge difference at all. Millions of men will be paying for your better care, and will not be getting better care. We will see if those well visits have a positive result, but it definitely will not result in more care.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:44 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            So you missed the law that treatment has to be given regardless of ability to pay, put in place by Reagan? Not even Planet missed that, nor democrats. It’s why they thought Obamacare would reduce costs, because people wouldn’t get “free coverage”.

            So you missed that those who are poor or old have programs through the government?

            Where are these people outside the norm that aren’t getting care? When adjusting our life expectancy for un natural deaths our life expectancy is the highest in the world and our living habits are the worst. Life expectancy is everyone, not just the rich. Where are these people then, in the life expectancy? 15% of the population not getting care would result in a dip.

            It is a lie to say they aren’t getting care. They aren’t getting insurance. There is a difference. And you need to learn it.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:48 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            Not everyone qualifies for free care, Bob. You need to learn that. If you are working, but making over a certain amount, you do not qualify. People must be treated in the event of a trauma or accident, but that doesn’t mean they don’t get billed. And what about that lump you find or headache you can’t get rid of? That’s not emergency care and they can turn you away. Again, you are in la la land if you think everyone is getting the care they need in the event of sickness or disease. They aren’t!

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:01 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            I care that they get treatment. The bill is irrelavent to me.

            To the lump comment:

            We treat more people for cancer here, then get treated in other countries. You claim “oh boo hoo someone didn’t get covered due to monies!! ZOMG MONIES!!!”. But then you ignore how many people do get treatment.

            I hate to sound heartless but I do not care if someone gets declined due to money, as long as that number is lower than the amount who would get declined in a government system, or the replacement system.

            And when it comes to healthcare: Our system does, for a fact, have more people treated, with better outcomes, for the top 5 leading cancers.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:06 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 5

            You don’t mean to sound heartless? Then why do you? And what does that statement even mean? “I do not care if someone gets declined due to money, as long as that number is lower than the amount who would get declined in a government system, or the replacement system.” The number ISN’T lower, that’s my point. There will be more people with access to care and preventative care, as well, which will cut down on expenses when they wait until it is an emergency situation. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That’s Risk Management 101.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:15 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            The number will not be affected. I will enjoy quoting it to you when this goes into full affect.

            Countries in Europe do a public private universal system as well. And less people are treated for cancer there than here. Primarily due to the cost of providing those “early spotting” high cost MRI’s etc. They have less MRI machines (as a result of plans similar to ours) they have less capital (ergo less MRI machines) in the health market, and they have less people treated.

            But repeat the same here and it won’t happen right libby?

            I won’t debate with you on what ifs any longer. I’ll just give you the numbers in 2016.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:20 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 5

            OK you do that, Bob. But our system is not like their system. We still have insurance carriers providing coverage with built-in incentives to control costs. Everyone knows catching something early is less costly in the loss run. That is why preventative care has been at $0 deductible for so many years. So we’ll wait until 2016 and see how it all shakes out.

        • November 14, 2012 at 1:50 pm
          Center Point says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 14
          Thumb down 8

          Bob, not everything is about the numbers. Some things are just the right things to do. Providing basic health care in America is one of those right things to do.

          If you want to call it an entitlement, go ahead. But as the greatest nation on earth, it should not even be a point of contention. It should just be available to all.

          • November 14, 2012 at 2:03 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 7

            Saying everyone does not receive care is not a lie, Bob. There are thousands of people out there, uninsured, that can not seek treatment for illness and disease. You are in la la land if you think otherwise. I’m happy as an American to say my country is going to make healthcare a priority for it’s citizens. That’s the way it should be. People above profits.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:31 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 1

            Center:

            I never called it an entitlement.

            We aren’t providing basic health care. We are providing insurance, supposedly. There is a difference.

            In that requiring people to buy insurance, we are raising costs. So we aren’t benefiting the people we forced to buy insurance.

            In that also, the people who can’t afford insurance, will get the same medicare/medicaid/free treatment if they can’t afford it.

            Don’t talk cliche concepts to me. It is about numbers. And the president’s healthcare numbers do not result in better healthcare. At all. It does result in higher costs. Which harms the middle class.

            To me, everything is about what is best for everyone.

            Don’t talk to me with cliche lines. Get your head on straight, and learn how the world works son.

      • November 14, 2012 at 1:19 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 0

        Center:

        I should also note: I have never once pressed “dislike” to anyone’s posts on here if you’re referring to that.

        I just don’t do it.

        But moreover:

        I think it’s important to know the things I put in response to your post. Rather than replying with “you just disagree with everything I say” why don’t you just make better researched comments?

        Is what I said about Obama considering a 67 age increase during the debt deal inaccurate?

        Am I wrong about the revenues?

        Am I wrong about the GDP?

        Compounded growth gets the economy difference to be huge even with a 1% difference annually. It’s a true statement. This is why focusing on year to year Revenues / GDP numbers is not the way to focus on long term gains. Is that an inaccurate comment?

        • November 14, 2012 at 1:57 pm
          Center Point says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 6

          Bob, Obama is forced to consider age 67 for Medicare because of the GOP — you know it and I know it. And it’s probably one of the key reasons the GOP lost Florida.

          As for revenues and GDP, who knows what the “real” number is. You can quote all the numbers you want, but at the end of the day, it is the idealogy that drives results at the voting booth and not the numbers.

          If we need to rob from Peter to pay Paul, I say let’s decrease the apparent fun and games budget from the military and spend the money on making health care more affordable by controlling the higher costs that are making it so unaffordable.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:35 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 1

            Center:

            Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

            He is not forced to consider it due to the gop. He’s forced to consider it because we cannot afford it, and revenues will never surpass 20% of GDP even with a 95% rate.

            You just mentioned affordability. Funny thing: CBO rates the healthcare costs rising. Whereas the republican plan was rated at a 9% decrease.

            Forcing people to buy higher cost coverage isn’t a fix I want.

            Republicans don’t result in medicare costing more. They don’t result in revenues not going above 20% of GDP, and they certainly don’t result in lower GDP outputs as a result of tax increases.

            Blame them all you want in talking points. You don’t have a clue as to what you’re talking about. The tax increases on the fiscal cliff are CBO projected to affect the GDP by .5% and it’s not just the lower tax rates that do that, it’s also the higher.

            Even a difference of 1% over 20 years compounded would have done away with almost half of Clinton’s GDP. That’s not the route to take.

            It does not work.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:39 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 1

            Wrong Center. There are as many nut jobs out there today as there were 10 years ago. 5 years ago the FBI came into the office right next to me and cleaned it out. The occupant had not been there for months, but when my land lord sent me in there, there was a single computer town on and working.

            Do not cut military. Cut Foreign Aide. Cut Washington. Make them go on Obama care. Make OBama fly a regular plane. Limit his travel.

            Call it paranoid if you want, but you done know what its like until you see it happen next door.

          • November 14, 2012 at 3:42 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 2

            Don’t understand your FBI story, FFA. What were they doing next door and why did they leave a computer?

          • November 14, 2012 at 5:48 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            Libby, the guy that occupied the office next door spoke in Arabic. You could hear him talking through the walls. He had all kinds of Al Jazier stuff in there along with info on some hotel in Columbia.
            He was a wanted man by the FBI hiding in my building. Leaving the computer tower running and not showing his face for months raised the red flag. Was obvious to me that something was running through the tower. I called the FBI and they swarmed the place. Asking all kinds of questions showing his picture asking if that was the guy. A week latter, he called the land lord wanting to know the where a bouts of his stuff he left behind.
            Got the feeling there was some kind of terror activity going on being this close to FERMI LAB and ARGON Nat Lab,
            I am of the opinion that he was planning something.
            My point being – dont cut military spending.

          • November 16, 2012 at 11:25 am
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Because of the GOP??? Really??? When I was in High School – I am now 50 – my economics tacher pointed out the issue with the baby boomers getting to retirement age and SS / Medicare being broke because the Baby Boomer were not reproducing at the rate of their generation.

            This has been brewing for 35 + years. All govt officials that agreed to raid the surplus in Ss & Medicare are to blame. Not just GOP, but dems too. Everyone that we have ever elected that agreed to raid the funds no matter what position they were elected to deserves the blame.

        • November 14, 2012 at 4:25 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 1

          Bob, I don’t think the left can spin their way out of reality on Obamacare. They think they are picking up 30 million more in the system. The country already has a shortage of doctors (63,000) at last count. Many more doctors will leave the profession in the near future. Can we say “rationed care”? If Medicare is robbed of $716 Billion to fund Obamacare, does that mean seniors will be denied care? I think so. The overall quality of care will go down dramatically and even if seniors can find a doctor to treat them, these people will be denied if they need a serious operation.

          • November 14, 2012 at 4:28 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 6

            We’ll see Agent, we’ll see.

      • November 15, 2012 at 2:14 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        Center and Libby:

        For you two:

        http://intelligentuspolitics.com/cbo-scores-republican-health-care-plan-more-effective-less-costly-than-obamacare-or-pelosicare-tastes-great-and-less-filling/

        The CBO rated plan that actually lowers premiums, covers pre existing conditions, and doesn’t force a mandate.

        This is the most up to date republican plan.

        I ask you the same: Why force a mandate, when we can lower premiums for everyone, cover pre existing conditions, as well as lower costs?

        • November 15, 2012 at 3:01 pm
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 2

          That’s hard to believe, but my question is what are they doing going over that plan now??? Shouldn’t they be looking at the plan that is actually in place and making recommendations on that one? This was just a colossal waste of time and money.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:51 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            BINGO! YOU GOT IT!

            I’m excited. You finally said what we have been saying. This is a colossal waste of time and money.

            Why are they looking at that now? Because I don’t know, going for the status quo just because it’s how washington works, and then making it worse and saying that is the new status quo, is not the way to change the status quo.

            He’s wasting 10% of health insurance premium costs for hundreds of millions of Americans. Now what happens when we reach the cut off where people can’t afford a 10% increase? Now more people will be on public assistance, with worse coverage.

            The reason we are talking about it now is because it is important, and it’s the right thing to do.

    • November 14, 2012 at 4:54 pm
      Center Point says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 8

      Bob, since you like numbers so much, chew on this: The next four years will go by faster for me than it will for you.

      • November 15, 2012 at 2:16 pm
        Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 0

        Center:

        I very much doubt that. Obama is already making the case that if the Bush tax cuts expire it’s part of a Fiscal Cliff.

        Tired old policies eh? Obama must really be against those Bush tax cuts. Those harmful Bush tax cuts, that if repealed will result in a .5% contraction in our GDP growth. If tax hikes in a recession affect .5% of GDP, they would affect it in the absence of a recession.

        Don’t say it’s the spending going down that makes them believe we will shrink in size. Canada cut taxes and cut spending in the 90′s. Most economies do. They out grew us. They had surpluses in excess of ours. We raised taxes.

        Please come back when you are educated in these issues on how the economy works rather than trying to be involved in something you don’t understand. At all.

        • November 15, 2012 at 3:39 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 0

          Bob, Don’t expect Center or any of his left leaning friends to understand economics or what makes a country grow or contract. They don’t understand that the way to grow is create more taxpayers who pay taxes instead of raising everyones marginal rates which makes the economy contract because companies lay off people when their tax bill rises. Cutting spending on the monolithic wasteful government while passing real tax reform, cutting the loopholes out will make this economy take off, but I don’t expect we will see that given the lack of wisdom at the federal level. Has anyone noticed what the Stock Market has been telling us since the election?

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:43 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            I’m all for cutting spending and getting rid of loopholes. But the Republicans want to cut the wrong things, like PBS and Planned Parenthood, and will only get rid of the loopholes that don’t favor the wealthy. That’s the problem.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:44 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Agent:

            Agreed on the methodology.

            The stock market is being pinned on republicans due to the fiscal cliff. He’s not even 2 weeks post election and he’s already campaigning for a democrat congress.

            He spoke of “revenege” before the election. Maybe he was preparing to walk of the fiscal cliff, then blame republicans and have the public get “revenge” on them.

            This guy is polarized. The fiscal cliff is from a result of not getting spending cuts. To get the type of spending cuts we needed all he needed to do was put unemployment and welfare back to 2008 levels, end stimulus, and end QE as well as twist. Those would have done it. Yet the left always says “what spending cuts! You have to be talking about medicare and social security!”.

            I’ve done the math. I showed it in another post. Removing QE 1 QE 2, stimulus one, the payroll tax decrease, removing the spending for the unemployment and welfare, would eliminate almost all of our deficits.

            That is what the republicans want, along with the continuation of the tax cuts, because the continuation of those cuts as I put above, would pay for that level of spending.

            Democrats right now are just putting out lies, false images, and no one is putting the in their place. When a guy blames a 1 trillion dollar deficit on someone else, as well as 2.6 trillion in QE spending, I call that being irresponsible, as well as false blame.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:47 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            The primary parts they want cut is stimulus spending, QE, twist, end the spending sprees, and put unemployment / welfare back to 2008 levels.

            They aren’t going to cut the deficit in half by cutting planned parenthood.

            But your liberal left sites pretend there is nothing else to cut. Cutting 2.6 trillion in QE spending would have been 400 billion a year alone.

            Cutting the $120 billion per year pay roll tax cut would be $520 billion.

            Reverting the unemployment and welfare numbers back to 2008 leveles would deduct what I put earlier.

            These are responsible ways of spending, and would put us at break even, even with our current tax rates. Increasing the tax rates isn’t necessary. Spending as we are isn’t necessary.

            Obama is doing this in a way that will destroy us. You need to look up the numbers.

          • November 15, 2012 at 3:55 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            We have QE for a reason, though. Are you saying it didn’t work and we shouldn’t have done it?

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:34 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Bob, we can’t pin our hopes on this administration looking at themselves and all their fancy spending programs to cut what needs to be cut. This monster we have for a government will never want to cut itself. Remember when this President said in his first term that he would go over the budget with a fine tooth comb line by line and cut the deficit in half? He called all his Department heads in and told them to find cuts in their budget. They came up with $100 million in annual cuts. Hmm! Forgive me if my math is off, but we are running a $1.4 Trillion annual deficit. $100 million won’t pay the interest on the debt for a day or two.

          • November 15, 2012 at 4:41 pm
            Bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Libby:

            QE didn’t work. QE increased food and gas costs. This is not an opinion. Recessions do not cause costs to go up. Throughout history they cause costs to go down. This one though, food costs are up, energy costs are up, gas costs are up.

            After a dip, the recovery in every recession world wide that had no stimulus spending increased at rates of employment double that of our current rate. QE did not work.

            Printing money does not work.

            QE will never result in a 2.6 trillion increase in the GDP, will never result in us getting 2.6 trillion in revenues to pay for itself, it would take 20 years to pay that off. QE 2.6 trillion resulting in an average of only about 150,000 jobs per month for 4 years is also not acceptable in costs. 7.2 million jobs would be 360,000 per job. If each job was brining in $3,500 in taxes (that’s how much a $40,000 job would bring in) it would take ONE HUNDRED years to pay off the debt per job. Math Libby. I’m good at it. All you have to do is divide out 7.2 million from 2.6 trillion, then you divide that by $3,500. And that’s assuming we used all tax numbers (federal, medicare, social security) revenues to pay for it.

            We could have whethered the recession 4 years and been fine, even if what you believe with QE is accurate regarding it working (which it isn’t.)

  • November 14, 2012 at 3:43 pm
    FFA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 0

    Has the mis fortune of watching a Drug Task force kick in the door 5 down from me with weapons drawn while I was standing there playing with 7 kids under the age of 8. This happened earlier this year. And I live in a middle class neighbor hood.

    • November 14, 2012 at 4:34 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 0

      FFA, Drugs are pervasive everywhere in this country and even middle class neighborhoods are not exempt. We had a raid on a middle class neighborhood recently here and they were cooking meth in the bathroom. Desperate people do desperate things for money. One of my bank accounts had a mortgage on a nice home and a fire happened. Turned out that the guy was growing Marijuana in the house and all the lamps caused a short and burned the house down. That ought to be an interesting adjustment on the loss. The Mortgagees rights have to be protected but I bet the customer doesn’t get anything but a jail sentence.

      • November 14, 2012 at 5:52 pm
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 0

        I was shocked they would come in guns drawn with out so much as a cop at the end of the block stopping traffice especially with all the kids hanging on the side walk with in stray bullet range.

        BTW, been told by Claims that if a meth lab goes boom and blows up the house, they still pay.

        • November 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 0

          The Mortgagee will certainly get paid, but I am not sure about the insured if they were doing illegal activity that resulted in the loss. I wouldn’t want to be an adjustor dealing with that issue.

          • November 15, 2012 at 8:13 am
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            I don’t recall a marijuana or meth exclusion on a homeowners policy. They may still go to jail, but the insurance will pay.

      • November 15, 2012 at 10:23 am
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        Heroin, Crack & Coke are big in this town. Home less is becoming a major issue too.

  • November 15, 2012 at 10:29 am
    FFA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 1

    Caught something on face book yesterday. The person that posted it was advocating a boycot of the business listed. The article listed over 50 major national employers that were planning on cutting full timers down to under 30 hours a week so as to not be subject to OBama Care.

    There are eye popping – staggering numbers of people about to become under employed.

    Looks like OBama is going to end up being known as the Job Killer. Name should be changed to oBamaDontCare. Of course, what do you expect from an IL politician?

    • November 15, 2012 at 11:02 am
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 1

      FFA, You remember the trouble last summer that Chick Fil A had because of their stance on marriage and the left were going to boycott them. Oops! The regular folks flocked to them to provide support for their position and they had a big increase in sales. Now, several companies, many of them large franchise operations like Papa John’s Pizza, the corporation that owns Applebees, Olive Garder etc have announced cutbacks and decreases in hours to avoid the Obamacare nightmare and they are being attacked as well. The poor employees who were working 40 hours will now be under 30. How will they make it? Many small businesses will not offer benefits at all so employees will have to shift for themselves. I know Planet & Libby will disagree, but Obamacare is the most effective job killer ever passed by Congress, all in the name of doing government sponsored Healthcare. The new jobs report is also telling. 435,000 new job seekers after a few months of manufactured reports to make the administration look good prior to the election. I wonder if they will lower the unemployment rate to 7% this time. It is all made up anyway to fit the agenda.

    • November 15, 2012 at 6:04 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      439,000 new unemployed this week. I wonder if the rate will fall to 7% and the administration can crow about that as a sign of progress that the economy is coming around now. The true unemployment/underemployment rate is closer to 20% now. That is depression right around the corner and the media is more concerned about a General’s indescretions. Someone is wagging the dog.

      • November 16, 2012 at 11:16 am
        FFA says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 0

        This guy is getting hammered and will most likely lose his position / job if not the respect he has accumulated. Clinton does it and – oh well. He got a B$#@ J*& from an intern.

        In my opinion, this should be left between him, his wife and his maker. Just cause he dipped his wick dont mean he cant do his job. Can you imaging if everyone – Man, woman,gay, lez – what ever – that had an affair got fired for that?

        • November 16, 2012 at 11:25 am
          Libby says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 2

          I totally agree with you FFA. Adultery is not something I agree with, but it’s none of our business. Why they are making such a big deal about it is beyond me. Slow day in the news, I guess.

        • November 16, 2012 at 11:57 am
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 1

          FFA, Petraeus testified this morning that the CIA did call it an Al Quida Terrorist attack and the line was left off by the White House. What I don’t understand is why he followed the party line and blamed the video 3 days after the attack. Was he afraid of being exposed on his indiscretions and hoped the administration wouldn’t throw him under the bus? This man lied for his leader and now he is paying a terrible price of his career and reputation. We have very bad people in charge right now. Their political agenda is far more important to them than the security of the country. I smell Valerie Jarrett in all of this. The more they lie, they just keep painting themselves into the corner. What a tragedy that we have 4 people dead, nothing was done to save them and they lie because of the agenda. I hope Petraeus throws them under the bus as he is now before the Senate committee. It is going to come out and it may just lead to the top of the food chain.

          • November 16, 2012 at 12:32 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Agent, I think your lack of understanding is due to the fact that…wait for it…you can’t handle the truth!

          • November 16, 2012 at 12:52 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            Agent – just what were they trying to hide? That they didn’t do enough to provide security in Libya? I think that has already been established. While it is a shame, it is hardly a crime and not an impeachible offense. The more you jump up and down about it the sillier you look. They f-ed up. Hopefully they’ll learn from it. Now it’s time to move on to more pressing issues. Like the end of the world that is right around the corner – according to you.

          • November 16, 2012 at 3:25 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Stay tuned Planet & Libby. The truth will come out and whoever is responsible will have to fall on their sword and go to jail. This administration is culpable and responsible for 4 Americans dying. This is serious stuff and you blowing it off will not make it go away. It is interesting Libby that you used Slick Willie’s favorite term. We should just “move on” to more pressing issues.

          • November 16, 2012 at 3:33 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            What are they going to jail for, Agent??? What crime has been comitted??? As I like to say, give me a break.

      • November 16, 2012 at 4:08 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 0

        FFA, We need to revise the new unemployed up from 439,000 to 457,000 when we add the 18,000 from Hostess Bakeries that just lost their job because of the unions demands. Good going unions. Thanks for ruining yet another company providing private sector jobs.

  • November 16, 2012 at 3:05 pm
    pv1 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 3

    regarding some remarks about voter fraud being done in the blue states. Jim Hightower in his column of several weeks ago said that shortly after the 2008 election year that Mitt Romney gave Tag,his son, $10,000,000 dollars and his Aunt and Uncle an undisclosed amount of money to start a corporation named H.I.G. Inc. It ultimely bought out the company that manufactures the electronic voting machines in Iowa, Ohio, and Illinois. So much for the Democrates commiting voting fraud in those blue states. My question is why would a politian want to own a voting machine company and is that not just a little bid of a conflict of interest situation. Also now another Romney has a corporation like “Bain Capitol” to springboard himself to millions while screwing middle class working people and outsourcing jobs overseas again.

    Just a thought.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features