jump to last post 1-12 of 12 discussions (79 posts)

NOW, HOW About THAT!

  1. gmwilliams profile image82
    gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago

    President Obama won a second term!  President Obama's VICTORY means a continuance and protection of women's reproductive rights.   It means greater health reforms and more jobs in the long run.  Americans want this country to be a better one for all, not just for the few!   

    What is YOUR reaction regarding the Presidential win?  In YOUR estimation, do you think that the country will be much better with all the programs and reforms that President Obama has in mind?  How will America in 2016 be a MUCH, MUCH  better country than in 2008?   I would like to add,  it is NOT THAT MAN in the White House, it is PRESIDENT OBAMA, please show RESPECT!

    1. lorlie6 profile image87
      lorlie6posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Imagine Ryan's take on women's reproductive rights!  Disgraceful, ignorant.

    2. Repairguy47 profile image60
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Four years later where are the jobs? Four years later unemployment is higher! Four years later the deficit is 6 trillion dollars higher! Four years later GITMO is still open!

      1. KK Trainor profile image60
        KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Yes of course, but as the election exit polls showed, these idiots are still blaming Bush. So they obviously don't care about those issues, they just want to keep going in the wrong direction of free stuff for the lazy at the expense of the rest of us, whether we are wealthy or not.

        1. Repairguy47 profile image60
          Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I wonder how you blame Bush after 4 years of Obama? Six Trillion more added to the deficit more than Bush did in 8! Simply amazing.

    3. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      GM, What is that they say in "The Big Easy'  circles WHAT DAT!

  2. GNelson profile image83
    GNelsonposted 4 years ago

    I am happy Obama won.  Romney would have been another rebublican disaster.

    1. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Romney would be MORE than a Republican disaster!   He would be a Republican tsunami!   He would make Bush seem like a boy scout in comparison!

  3. Dame Scribe profile image61
    Dame Scribeposted 4 years ago

    Congratulations to President Obama from Canada smile I think it's great that he's been given the chance to continue his work and he has A LOT!! hopefully, he won't get a tonne of objections along the way, as he did from last term hmm co-operation and negotiation between R and D would be awesome to see. smile

    1. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      YES, INDEED IF THE REBUBLICANS DECIDE TO COOPERATE AND WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATS!    I'LL HOLD MY BREATH ON THAT!

    2. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "YES, INDEED IF THE REBUBLICANS DECIDE TO COOPERATE AND WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATS!    I'LL HOLD MY BREATH ON THAT!"

      You see Dame Scribe, there is the issue in a nutshell. The GOP is to give, give, give and the Dems take, take, take. That is their definition of "compromise". And he even yelled it. smile

  4. Dame Scribe profile image61
    Dame Scribeposted 4 years ago

    I know sad it was awful to see so much 'objecting' to idea's - after all, change is what makes/brings/moves a nation forward. Nobody wants to stay in old schools tongue I've made suggestions that maybe before implementing full 'national' change, maybe experiment with 'volunteer' states, to get a idea if it will work or not. I know, life isn't a science experiment lol but observing small may help provide clues where and what changes may be required. Hope I made sense tongue

    1. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      YOU made sense.   YOU always make sense and make a logical premise.  It is just so difficult oftentimes for Repubicans and Democrats to work effectively together!   Democrats are willing to work with Republicans but seldom is it vice versa!

  5. shemiahl profile image60
    shemiahlposted 4 years ago

    I honestly weren't for either one. But I am just so appalled at all the hateful comments that I've had on my facebook news feed from some of the people. It's crazy!

  6. wilderness profile image94
    wildernessposted 4 years ago

    Many will agree that Obama will promote a woman's right to legally murder small people simply because they won't accept responsibility for their actions.  I can't say I agree with that viewpoint, but many do.

    There is little doubt that Obama will continue his fight to socialize the country, taking more and more from the "have's" to give more and more to the "have not's".  It always sounds great, particularly when discussing health care, and the "have not's" are always happy to get something they haven't earned.

    There is also little doubt that he will continue to grossly overspend what the tax base produces - it again looks very good to have things and services we can't afford and the future is hidden and doesn't belong to most of us anyway.  Putting the bill onto future generations is what the "now" generation wants and the President is happy to continue that policy.

    I expect more people to be better off in four years (increased govt. handouts will do that) and I expect more people to have jobs as well.  Probably not good ones, but welfare will make up the difference, so that will work. If the policies and attitudes our President pushes continues down the road, I expect a major financial and social meltdown in the country - we simply cannot borrow our way to prosperity without the bill coming due one day. The "haves" that find themselves supporting the country alone will simply leave for greener pastures, making the debt picture even worse and accelerating the economic collapse.

    1. KK Trainor profile image60
      KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Agreed. I love to hear liberals talk about making us more like those prosperous European countries, which are all failing and collapsing right now. It makes perfect sense doesn't it? Freedom vs. free stuff. I'm on the freedom side, don't want anything I didn't earn.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        What do you mean, failing European countries?  Just because they have to borrow from their neighbors to maintain a lifestyle they can't produce themselves doesn't mean they are failing - it means they are nice to their (current) citizens.  Passing the bill to the future, just like we are. 

        Neither liberals in general nor our President seem to understand that, but one day we will follow the Europeans into descent if we don't learn.  Of course, we can all blame Bush when we do...

    2. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Don't be such a wet blanket, wilderness. You people loss fair and square. I say if we did not make it clear as to the direction we need to go in a feudalistic arrangement between the working man and the Thurston Howell types that you seem to support would emerge and be to the disadvantage of those who have to work for a living. I hail the Obama victory and bask in the thrill of victory over the agony of defeat. Unfortunately for you, you are outnumbered and in this democracy that is the way the cookie crumbles.......

      1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
        Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Well, at least they don't have to waste their time trying to keep the president from being re-elected. Watch out though, Michelle might decide to run next. That would be a landslide!

        1. Credence2 profile image86
          Credence2posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          As for Michelle, that is a big 10-4 DBQ!
          The question is where is Karl Rove, there is probably a contract out on him let by his rightwing buddies furious about all the money he wasted.
          Is somebody gonna take him for a ride?

        2. KK Trainor profile image60
          KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Ridiculous. You obviously don't know how a lot of people feel about her.

          1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
            Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            She won't run, anyway. She is the best first lady this country has ever had. I don't care how people feel about her.

            I will never forget when the President answered criticism of her dresses, "She has the right to bare arms."

            Classic!

            1. Nicole Winter profile image60
              Nicole Winterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              That is an incredible, supportive and hilarious comment.  I don't like to get too caught up in people's appearances, (or judging their appearances, I find it catty and demeaning to their personalities,) but Michelle Obama is a really beautiful woman, inside and out.

              1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
                Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                She isn't stingy with hugs!

    3. GNelson profile image83
      GNelsonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I love people who ingnore the facts.  It was your republican Bush and his conservative policies that dug us a hole so deep it took four years to begin to see the light.  All this dispite the party of no obstruction.  We are in a new century, it is time to turn around and look foward.

      1. peeples profile image88
        peeplesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        So love how everyone ignores the fact that the mess we are in can NOT be placed on ONE president. It's not all bush or obama. This mess took longer than 12 years to make and it will take much longer to fix.  This mess was in the works long before any of us could see it. So this hole wasn't dug by Bush, it was dug by every president over the last 30 years AT LEAST including bush and obama!

  7. Drive By Quipper profile image60
    Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago

    I'm happy he won. He has given a whole generation inspiration that their dreams are accessible. Michelle Obama is the best first lady ever. She is not stingy with hugs. They keep it real.

    As far as the country is concerned, we are still deadlocked as indicated by the election results. We need to heal the divisions. I like what Bill Nelson said in Florida when he defeated Connie Mack, "He's not my enemy, he has been my opponent, and we can work together for the good of the state."

    Number one . . . tax reform . . . 10% across the board, no deductions. Now, Washington DC you know what the budget is, no borrowing. Spend it wisely. This is the only way it will work. As far as social issues – live and let live.

    1. gmwilliams profile image82
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      AMEN to that!

  8. Nicole Winter profile image60
    Nicole Winterposted 4 years ago

    I'm thrilled Obama won, I felt that the race between Obama and Romney was brutal & I'm happy to not only be able to put the race behind me, but hopefully the horrific personal attacks that came along with it.

    First, I'd like to mention that with this being Obama's last term in office, the GOP has little to lose in cooperating with him.  In the last few years we've seen a great deal of obstructionist behavior, hopefully now, it will stop and Obama can get down to the business of healing and rebuilding our great nation.

    I'd like to paraphrase one of the last lines in Obama's acceptance speech: "We are all Americans."

    Truly, think about what that means to you, personally, our rights, our freedom, our ingenuity... these are traits, qualities and characteristics of American life, which are admired world wide.

    Many of you have blasted the so-called "Obama-care" term.  This is the same health care system that was pushed by Romney in his state.  Many of you would have voted for him, despite the fact that this was his policy, his baby, so to speak.  (Minus of course, the right to Women's Care.  Let's make sure that birth control isn't as readily available to those who need to use it most, and let's certainly not allow those same women the opportunity to improve their own lives and the lives of their unborn or already born children by barring access to safe, legally allowed abortions.)

    Let me ask you this: With the costs piled on by insurance companies & pharmaceutical companies, (which have truly grown out of proportion and epically failed the nation through their greed,) what would you have Obama do?

    Every human being in this great nation of ours deserves access to medical care.  The pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies have had their chance to REFORM themselves and have failed.

    That said, the first four years of his presidency this was Obama's great shining moment, (other than bailing out the auto industry, signing American Recovery and Investment Act, finally finding and destroying Bin Laden, an extension of revisions in the Alternative Minimum Tax, repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, creating the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform... the list goes on and on,) I have great hope for the next four years, hope that would have been dashed and died had Romney / Ryan been elected.  Because, yes, being a woman, my rights are first and foremost on my mind.  I'm selfish that way.  (And in the way that my daughter's rights are first and foremost on my mind, as well.)

    Lastly, I'd like to make a personal plea, a shout-out to those of you, (you know who you are,) who have defiled and defamed one of the most incredible First Ladies this nation has had the honor of serving us, as we have had the honor of her guidance.  Stop.  Just, stop.  No one wants to hear anymore about how much her clothes cost, how she is a man in disguise or how she's tacky or lacks class.  Michelle Obama is a phenomenal mother, a guiding light to our Commander-in-Chief, and one of the most dignified women I have ever seen on television.  Her story, of how she worked her way up through this world, is a true inspiration to women, children and Americans everywhere.

  9. kathleenkat profile image82
    kathleenkatposted 4 years ago

    gmwilliams, to be honest, I am surprised you are an Obama supporter. But whatever!

    I wasn't too terribly thrilled, however, the alternative wasn't that great, either. I was not surprised he won, though I am a little sad only 50% of people who voted, voted for him. And not even half the country bothered to vote. That isn't a lot of support; wish we had someone with a higher margin in regards to popular vote.

  10. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    How about that, is right!!
    My number one emotion is RELIEF.
    The consequences across the board of a Romney/Ryan administration were just too Orwellian to contemplate.

    America -- the rising America, the real America, the relevant America -- has spoken.
    Loudly.

    We will no doubt continue to be called "takers" by the so-called "makers."
    I am not on welfare. I am not on Social Security or Medicare. I don't get food stamps.
    But I am happy to embrace the label of "taker" if that means the 50+ percent of the country that re-elected President Obama.
    You guys can keep spewing that term at us if it MAKES you feel batter.
    Like Obamacare, we'll happily embrace the label.
    We "Takers" sure did TAKE your party to the cleaners.
    smile

    1. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      MM, you honestly believe that anyone who could afford health insurance would CHOOSE to go without it? You, who I believe is the one who said on another forum about being unable to obtain health insurance  for your husband and now could? Who sat there without health insurance due to pre-existing conditions and worried about it? You believe that someone who was in a position to afford it, would choose not to have it? And you believe that now taxing those people is going to help them?

      1. kathleenkat profile image82
        kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        A lot of young people choose to go without it, simply to save money, but then again you're talking about being able to afford it...so who knows. Maybe if they purchased less CDs and beer they could afford it, but who knows? I know it is an unecessary expense for many, what with $3000 deductibles/year, I'd rather just pay to go to the dentist and the doctor once. Hah.

        Also, I met a chiropractor that did not buy health insurance because he thought that MD's were full of crap, and as long as you keep your spine aligned, you won't get sick. Well, he seemed healthy to me. Wonder where he is now; knowing he needs to buy insurance for himself and his one employee now. Wonder if that person will get a paycut to subsidize the costs.

        1. Josak profile image61
          Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The thing is though those people were not really uninsured they were relying on free healthcare because if they got ill we would not just let them die, they were getting free very basic coverage for nothing even though they could afford it, time for them to take on the appropriate responsibility.

          1. profile image0
            SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Josak, such hypocrisy.

            Those on welfare on not takers! They need it! Stop picking on the poor! you cry.

            But, when it is pointed out that those without health insurance truly cannot afford it, they are simply choosing to let the government pay the bill.

            smh

            1. Josak profile image61
              Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              No that is precisely the point, the people who truly can't afford it will get free healthcare, the people who can with some minor sacrifices (as determined by expert analysis) will now buy it, I fully support giving it to people who can't afford it but not to people who won't buy it.

              no hypocrisy at all.

              1. profile image0
                SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                The Medicaid expansion (the only free health insurance being offered) only covers just under $13,000 a year for an individual. By the Law, you are expected to afford 8% of your income for health insurance. BTW, that isn't even a straight 8% because before they figure that 8%, they include any end of year tax break being offered for your income bracket. This is not a voucher, or a paid up front break, you do not get it until the end of the year. Let's say you make $14,000. You get a tax break at the end of the year based on your income of say, $500 (just to keep it lower than actual). That means you are expected to cover your 8% (that is $1140) plus that $500, which makes the total $1640. Yes, you will get that $500 back at the end of the year, however, you are supposed to now be able to afford a monthly payout of $136 a month on an income of $1166, on your own. Meaning your are expected to live on $1000 a month. That is the numbers and probably worse than that because that $500 figure is expected to be higher. An end of year tax break does not help you meet that bill each month. Do you really think that person can afford health insurance?

                1. KK Trainor profile image60
                  KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  That's going to hurt. Wonder how many people will have to cut back on groceries to afford insurance. I'd rather eat than go to the doctor for 'free'.

                2. kathleenkat profile image82
                  kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  If what you're saying is true, I don't like it one bit.

                  I already pay at least 15% of my income towards taxes. I get some back at the end of the year (this is the last year I can claim ANY college and get additional money back). Are you saying I have to afford to pay for any money I get back on my taxes, plus my already 15%, plus an additional 8%? I'm sorry but I don't like the idea of paying 23% of my income. I don't make that much. I make more than 13k, but not enough more for me to not get hurt by the government sucking 1/4th my income.

                  http://taxbrackets2012.com/

                  1. profile image0
                    SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    No not in taxes. You are expected to be able to afford a payment equal to 8% of your income plus whatever the amount of any tax break being offered to pay for health insurance for your income bracket. They consider that being able to afford insurance, which means you will not be granted an exemption. So you either cough up 8% of your income, plus the tax break, or you will get hit with that penalty tax at the end of the year for not having insurance.

                  2. KK Trainor profile image60
                    KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Here is some good info from the medical community. It breaks it down pretty well.

                    http://blogs.webmd.com/health-insurance … costs.html

            2. Drive By Quipper profile image60
              Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not on welfare. I have no insurance. I went to the emergency room about two years ago with a dislocated,  fractured jaw. They saw me, did an x-ray and gave me a few samples of Tylenol with codeine. The hospital worked out small payments to get their $1,200. I never got the prescription for oxycodone filled, and no one would work anything out for orthoscopic surgery.

              My jaw is still sore, and pops when I eat. I guess I am jacking it here, though.

              1. KK Trainor profile image60
                KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I suppose we should congratulate you for paying a bill that you owed. But many do not pay them, and the cost is eventually passed onto the rest of us through higher premiums. This is exactly what Obamacare will do, thus higher 'taxes' on those of us who work and pay the bills that we owe.

                1. KK Trainor profile image60
                  KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  By the way, my jaw still pops from a very expensive, fully paid for through insurance, jaw surgery back in 1987. So don't feel too bad about not seeing that surgeon.

                  1. kathleenkat profile image82
                    kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Hey, you! Look into chiropractic care, too...

                  2. Drive By Quipper profile image60
                    Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Ha ha ha! I feel better, now. We will have to do lunch sometime and beat out a rythm.

                2. Josak profile image61
                  Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  No that is precisely what Obamacare avoids, it ensures that people who can pay for coverage and in full implementation has a price freeze (healthcare inflation allowed) and a percentage of coverage spent on care requirement so that the prices CAN'T go up.

                  1. KK Trainor profile image60
                    KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    You are fooling yourself Josak; you must know that the cost of those unpaid bills is passed on to everyone else. There is no law saying that insurance rates cannot increase. It only says that rates have to be the same for everyone. Which means that they will get their money from all of us to make up for the costs they never received from patients and for those unhealthy people who they must insure. Common sense.

                3. Drive By Quipper profile image60
                  Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  That's fine with me. I don't mind giving my neighbor a hand. The American church should be helping more, but they are too busy paying for TV time to preach the prosperity doctrine and sell trinkets.

              2. kathleenkat profile image82
                kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Do you have TMJ?

                My chiropractor has been treated me for that for $40 a visit. Look into that. Sometimes muscular therapy is a safer alternative to surgery, and I can personally attest that it DOES work.

                Look into it. Way less than surgery!

                1. Drive By Quipper profile image60
                  Drive By Quipperposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Thanks! I will. I know a chiropractor who is a board certified neurologist (MD). I bet she will even work out a trade.

          2. kathleenkat profile image82
            kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            And then they got a bill in the mail, and paid for it.


            Hmm.. I think we're talking about two different groups of people, here. I'm talking about people who don't want to pay for healthcare PLUS an outrageous deductible. I am talking about young, generally healthy people, who maybe go to the dentist or the doctor once per year. With the deductible, they would be paying the $300 for the visit, anyway, so they may as well not make the monthly payments towards it. That's why they don't have it. I know many people who do this (and won't be able to anymore, come January, and I think that's wrong); they don't buy healthcare, but they DO pay their bills.

            1. Josak profile image61
              Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Nope massive numbers of those bills were never paid or even more commonly were sold to debt recovery and retrieved like 50% to 60%

              1. kathleenkat profile image82
                kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                And creating jobs for debt collectors smile

                And how could you possibly know how many bills were paid? People who pay their bills don't get noticed. It's the people that don't pay them that bring attention. The hospitals don't care who pays them, as long as they get paid, and their books get balanced.

                1. Josak profile image61
                  Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Financial records I looked it up more than a year ago recovery was about 60% of cost.

                  Debt collectors is a zero sum job, it creates no wealth for the country an the cost of lack of recovery makes whatever stimulus their income would provide entirely irrelevant.

                  1. kathleenkat profile image82
                    kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I wasn't disputing the cost of debt collecting, I was disputing your statement of how most people without insurance don't pay the bills.



                    And I'm pretty sure debt collectors get paid.

      2. Mighty Mom profile image90
        Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't spend any time thinking about people who can afford health insurance and refuse to carry it.
        They are irrelevant.

        1. profile image0
          SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The people milking the system for welfare, food stamps and cash are just as irrelevant then. You do realize that many, and yes, it is not this piddling little number you like to believe, have never worked a day in their life, and never intend to either.
          I see you completely ignored the question though. You really believe that an individual making only $13,000 a year can afford health insurance? Because the only insurance being offered for free is Medicaid and that is where it caps off. Must be nice in your little bubble.

  11. Dame Scribe profile image61
    Dame Scribeposted 4 years ago

    Hmm, about the meds and pharmaceuticals. What if gov't regulations allowed 'new' ones to start up? who regulates that market? if there are more 'providers' - wouldn't that bring prices down due to the competition? tongue when you shop for groceries, don't you find yourself looking for a alternative, when the prices seems ridiculously high? just a thought.

  12. Dame Scribe profile image61
    Dame Scribeposted 4 years ago

    You'd think that with US population of 312.8 M (312,780,968) people, if they paid $5/month would be - dang calculator can't add that number lol but appears to be lots lol point being, you'd think that would be more than enough for everybody to have health coverage.

    1. KK Trainor profile image60
      KK Trainorposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      We are already paying for our own insurance. So we should pay more for people who don't want, in many cases, to pay for their own? Sounds pretty much like a liberal idea to me. And it will be reality soon enough...

    2. profile image0
      SassySue1963posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Well, first off not all those people are adults. Secondly, only 50% (around) actually pay any taxes at all, let alone any additional $5 a month. Which is why it doesn't work.
      You know, with that $800 billion however, we could have given every household (not individual) making less than $20,000, $1 million of their own. With the stipulation that they could not draw from the government cash drawer again in their life time.

 
working