GOP could care less about jobs!

[taichiliberal]

Where did you get those BS numbers?

The Congressional Budget Office

The CBO Rebuts Republican Claims About the Affordable Care Act

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf




Your number, claiming it came from the CBO... $200 billion.

There 'guesstimate'?


Your own cited source doesn't agree with you.

More on their 'guesstimate'...

The forthcoming, more-detailed estimate will also reflect changes that CBO
and JCT will make to reflect economic developments since the legislation was enacted and technical revisions to baseline projections and the previous estimate (including adjustments to reflect the passage of time and to incorporate the effects of administrative actions that have been taken to implement the laws). We cannot predict whether those changes will increase or decrease the estimated impact of H.R. 2 on federal deficits.

and a little more on their 'guesstimate'...

The projections of the bill’s budgetary impact are quite uncertain, both because CBO has not completed a detailed estimate of the effects of H.R. 2 and because assessing the effects of making broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance
systems—or of reversing scheduled changes—requires assumptions about a broad array of technical, behavioral, and economic factors. However, CBO’s staff, in consultation with outside experts, has devoted a great deal of care and effort to the analysis of health care legislation in the past few years, and the agency strives to develop estimates that are in the middle of the distribution of possible outcomes. As a result, CBO believes that its
estimates of the net budgetary effects of health care legislation have a roughly equal chance of turning out to be too high or too low.

Essentially... the report you got your number from (via a link, to a link, to the report) goes to great lengths to explain that it is a guess, and could be much higher or much lower... AND it doesn't even match the $200 billion number you claimed you got FROM it.

You might want to actually read the report itself, instead of a link, to a link, to the report, next time.

Moron.

A reality check for our neocon/teabagger posing as a conservative, from FACTCHECK.ORG:

Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota repeated a false Republican talking point about the impact of the federal health care law on jobs.

Bachmann: The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office has said that Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs. What could the president be thinking by passing a bill like this, knowing full well it will kill 800,000 jobs?

The CBO never said that. The CBO has said the law would have a "small" impact on employment, mainly by reducing the amount of labor Americans decide to supply. In other words, some workers will choose to work less, or retire earlier, because of the health care law. Their jobs wouldn't be killed.

CBO first explained its analysis in August 2010, saying the health care law would "reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply." In February testimony to Congress, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf acknowledged to Republican Rep. John Campbell that "half a percent" of the estimated workforce at the end of this decade would be equal to 800,000 workers. But again, he didn't say that those jobs would be killed. Elmendorf talked about a "reduction in the labor used."

Why would some Americans choose to work less? CBO has explained that those with low incomes would have more financial resources due to the expansion of Medicaid and subsidies to purchase health insurance. "Those additional resources will encourage some people to work fewer hours or to withdraw from the labor market," CBO said. Plus, some workers nearing retirement will retire earlier than normal because the law provides more protections for health insurance, such as limiting how much more companies can charge older persons and requiring the coverage of preexisting conditions.

The CBO did say that some companies would hire fewer low-income employees because of a requirement that businesses provide insurance or pay a penalty. Those businesses could hire part-time or seasonal employees in lieu of full-time low-wage workers. CBO didn't put a number on that. Nor did it estimate how many jobs might be added in the health care and insurance sectors because of the law's expansion of the insured.

Republicans have repeatedly twisted the CBO's, and Elmendorf's, words on this point.

GOP New Hampshire Debate | FactCheck.org

 

[taichiliberal]

Where did you get those BS numbers?

The Congressional Budget Office

The CBO Rebuts Republican Claims About the Affordable Care Act

Your link is not the Congressional Budget Office, it's a hooligan hater site that spins everything before reporting a skewed irrationale.

The FACTS used in the site are from the CBO, you dimwit. Here, FACTCHECK.ORG sets the record straight, unlike your dishonest compadre the Conservative:

Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota repeated a false Republican talking point about the impact of the federal health care law on jobs.

Bachmann: The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office has said that Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs. What could the president be thinking by passing a bill like this, knowing full well it will kill 800,000 jobs?

The CBO never said that. The CBO has said the law would have a "small" impact on employment, mainly by reducing the amount of labor Americans decide to supply. In other words, some workers will choose to work less, or retire earlier, because of the health care law. Their jobs wouldn't be killed.

CBO first explained its analysis in August 2010, saying the health care law would "reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount—roughly half a percent—primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply." In February testimony to Congress, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf acknowledged to Republican Rep. John Campbell that "half a percent" of the estimated workforce at the end of this decade would be equal to 800,000 workers. But again, he didn't say that those jobs would be killed. Elmendorf talked about a "reduction in the labor used."

Why would some Americans choose to work less? CBO has explained that those with low incomes would have more financial resources due to the expansion of Medicaid and subsidies to purchase health insurance. "Those additional resources will encourage some people to work fewer hours or to withdraw from the labor market," CBO said. Plus, some workers nearing retirement will retire earlier than normal because the law provides more protections for health insurance, such as limiting how much more companies can charge older persons and requiring the coverage of preexisting conditions.

The CBO did say that some companies would hire fewer low-income employees because of a requirement that businesses provide insurance or pay a penalty. Those businesses could hire part-time or seasonal employees in lieu of full-time low-wage workers. CBO didn't put a number on that. Nor did it estimate how many jobs might be added in the health care and insurance sectors because of the law's expansion of the insured.

Republicans have repeatedly twisted the CBO's, and Elmendorf's, words on this point.

GOP New Hampshire Debate | FactCheck.org

 

[taichiliberal]

So on the FIRST DAY that the Congress and Senate come back from vacation, the President wants to schedule a joint session to address them on his new proposed plan for creating jobs in America ASAP.

The President submits the formal request to the Majority Speaker of the House of Representatives....and about 4 hours later is told that ANOTHER time would be more convenient due to "security arrangement" matters and the like.

Since the early 1900's when President's started making actual visits to the House to address them, NO PRESIDENT'S REQUEST HAS EVER BEEN DENIED UNTIL NOW.

Interesting that the very political party that has been wailing for months that they are waiting for the President to present a plan for jobs in America SUDDENLY can't fit the President of the USA in for a quick address.

Now if one is to believe the GOP's favorite pundit Rush Limbaugh, Speaker Boehner rejected the initial request date in order to put Obama "in his place" and not let the President have the upper hand as taking a leadership position....especially since it would coincide with the first scheduled GOP Presidential candidacy debate.

This is just another example to the American people that the GOP is NOT about the general welfare of the people, but about the corporate welfare and secured economic greed of the wealthiest 1 to 3% of the population.

No, this is another example of a White House more interested in running for reelection than it is in fixing our fiscal problems. Try not be completely naive about why Barack Obama chose that night and that time. It's quite obvious that he was trying to upstage the Republican debate. Boehner said no, as is his right as the Speaker of the House. Obama will be able to address the nation on Thursday rather than Wednesday, a delay of 24 hours for a speech that has been two and a half YEARS in coming.

You're repeating the Limbaugh lines, bunky. For 2 1/2 years the GOP has filibustered and stonewalled EVERY economic proposal put forth by the Obama administration. Then they wailed like banshees that Obama didn't have a plan. "Where's the plan, the country is in crisis"? they cried. So on the 1st day that the Congress returns from vacation, Obama requests a joint session address to give them that plan, and suddenly it can wait? For what, one of a dozen fucking candidacy debates? Are you that fucking gullible or that much of a doormat for the neocon/teabagger agenda? Despite several wars, a depression and recession...no matter how adversarial the parties were, NO speaker denied the President's request in nearly a century since the protocol started....until now. Boehner is just a tool following the "get Obama script", as his reasons were more lame than his crying jags.

What's most amusing about all of your faux outrage at the way President Obama has been treated, is that he's already furiously back pedaling on the content of this upcoming speech, putting out the word that Thursday's speech is just "part" of his jobs plan and that the rest would be coming some time in the Fall. I guess they didn't have time to get all of it done...what with the golf and going out to dinner stuff getting in the way. So he's called a Joint Session of Congress...something done under the rarest of circumstances to give us all a "partial" plan for jobs?

And who said it was "backpeddaling" besides the Limbaugh crowd, bunky? Why is it that neocon doormats like you keep trying to substitute your supposition and conjecture for what has YET to happen? And DO SOME HOMEWORK ON YOUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY, BUNKY. Joint session addresses are NOT RARE.

What's even more amusing is that on Friday you'll be back here trying to defend the pathetic excuse for a plan he DOES put forth, while parroting the new 2012 progressive mantra..."it's not our fault...they wouldn't let us get anything done..." which is laughable since the Democrats had super majorities and chose to pass the Obama stimulus instead of a plan that would have REALLY addressed long term unemployment in the country.

As you can see folks, this neocon/teabagger doormat keeps spewing all the "should be, could be, might be) blather that means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.....because the neocon/teabaggers will do ANYTHING BUT ACKNOWLEDGE THE SHEER HYPOCRISY of Boehner and crew.

 

[taichiliberal]

It’s not that the GOP couldn’t care less about jobs pre se, the issue is more of timing: republicans want Americans to go back to work when it’s politically advantageous to them, not Obama.



An intelligent, reasonable, and accurate post – consequently it will be lost on the right.



Those already exist: Congress and elections. The mechanics of government work fine, the problem is operator error.

Your response re: term limits/citizen legislature.....typical. Certain types of people are frightened of change because they feel that change will upset their little apple cart.
Yes we can elect challengers. However, we have a problem with incumbency. That goes back to my first point. People are resistant even frightful of change. And even though they are pissed at Congress they will continue to vote for the incumbent because they think if they change representatives or Senators, they will lose something.

BTW we do indeed have access to housing medical care and nutrition. Some of us just look to others to provide it to them.
We are a nation of individuals. Not a collective. We are free to choose our career path, education, etc. Problem is over the years our federal government has gone from helping the helpless to funding poor lifestyle choices. There are many people with full time jobs that have children out of wedlock, children with absentee fathers, have over spent or over extended themselves financially, have purchased homes they had no business buying, use drugs, abuse alcohol etc ad nauseum.....
No one is saying we have to behave perfectly. We all make mistakes. This is not about people taking public money for mistakes. This is about people who deliberately or willfully flout the rules of common sense or believe they are entitled to do as they wish without consequences then run to the government to bail them out of their negligence.
Here's the deal..If think people should be taken care of in the public sector, by all means feel free to take care of them.

Do you blame them?? They voted for CHANGE and look what the heck we ended up with. No, people aren't open to change often, when they take that leap and it all goes to crap do you blame them?? Term limits would do wonders for typical politics as usual.

They voted for change and got a right of center guy who along with a wimpy Dem Congress/Senate capitulated way too much to the neocon/teabagger ideologues....and then there are the willfully ignorant toadies like you who deny ANY effects of 8 years of reaganomics on steriods on this country, and support the very people who outsource their jobs and get them to foot the relocation bill via taxes. We already have term limits on the President, the House and the Senate, genius.

 

[taichiliberal]

There is no hypocrisy, Einstein. No one will be helped by Obama's speech. Not one job will be created as a result of it because he will offer nothing new. This is not conjecture. This is based on his past performance and remarks on Labor Day with the union thugs. So what is one day later, or one week or one year. Commandante Zero has had 3 years to work on this problem and he's done nothing substantive other than waste money.

As you can see folks, our intellectual coward the Rabbi STILL avoids the FACTS regarding Boehner's BS, and just gives us a regurgitation of the SOS he spewed earlier that avoids the FACTS I put forth and the logic derived from them. Notice that neocon/teabagger parrots squawk the line about "he's had 3 years and done nothing", while ignoring the FACT that the GOP filibustered and stone walled EVERY SINGLE PROPOSAL BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION EVEN WHEN THEY INCORPORATED GOP IDEAS. A matter or fact and recent history that our toadie the Rabbi just can't deal with. So now the Rabbi will just bluff, bluster and stall by playing dumber than he is with a series of lies, moot points and redundant questions.....or maybe he'll get real clever and just mimic what I write and then insert my name. Let's watch.

Fucking intellectual coward, the Rabbi is.

TooshYLiberal, there is no hypocrisy. Obama's speech will not create a single job. Obama's programs have not created jobs. How do we know? Zero job creation.
The GOP could sit and hold its breath until it turned blue and the Dums could pass every single piece of legislation they wanted for 2 years. And they still have never dealt with the deficit, except to increase it. This FACT seems to elude you.
The FACT is that the Dums had supermajorities for 2 years and control of Congress for more than that and failed to pass legislation to avoid this downturn and failed to pass any legislation that would effectively end it and failed to pass any legislation that wasn't a sop to someone like their union thug buddies.
Those are teh FACTS, Tooshyliberal.
Obama is Commandante Zero: Zero jobs, Zero ideas.

Somebody clue this dumb bastard of a Rabbi in that the Dems DID NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS IN THE SENATE TO PASS ALL THEIR LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS.....PERIOD. A matter of fact, a matter of history that the willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger parrots and pundits like to deny.

And as I predicted, this fucking intellectual coward the Rabbi just regurgitates the SOS, because he can't logically or factually refute the FACTS that demonstrate the hypocrisy of Boehner and crew.

I leave this cowardly Rabbi to do exactly as I previously predicted.

 

[taichiliberal]

There is no hypocrisy, Einstein. No one will be helped by Obama's speech. Not one job will be created as a result of it because he will offer nothing new. This is not conjecture. This is based on his past performance and remarks on Labor Day with the union thugs. So what is one day later, or one week or one year. Commandante Zero has had 3 years to work on this problem and he's done nothing substantive other than waste money.

As you can see folks, our intellectual coward the Rabbi STILL avoids the FACTS regarding Boehner's BS, and just gives us a regurgitation of the SOS he spewed earlier that avoids the FACTS I put forth and the logic derived from them. Notice that neocon/teabagger parrots squawk the line about "he's had 3 years and done nothing", while ignoring the FACT that the GOP filibustered and stone walled EVERY SINGLE PROPOSAL BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION EVEN WHEN THEY INCORPORATED GOP IDEAS. A matter or fact and recent history that our toadie the Rabbi just can't deal with. So now the Rabbi will just bluff, bluster and stall by playing dumber than he is with a series of lies, moot points and redundant questions.....or maybe he'll get real clever and just mimic what I write and then insert my name. Let's watch.

Fucking intellectual coward, the Rabbi is.

I'm amazed that you're STILL trying to pretend that Barack Obama and the Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate plus control of the Oval Office...were able to pass something as partisan as Obama Care...yet SOMEHOW the Republicans blocked all of Obama's proposals on everything else. With all due respect, Tai? You guys are the victims of your own success in 2008. You won SO big that you have no leg to stand on when you try and blame Republicans for what didn't get done by this Administration.

I don't think anyone's buying it...

The only amazing thing is how neocon/teabagger doormats like YOU are either fucking ignorant or lying about how the DEMS DID NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS IN THE SENATE to break the GOP filibusters and stonewalling. Do your homework, you stupe! And then afterward try explaining to all of us again how Boehner and crew broke a century of protocal for a debate is more important than the President addressing the very issue they screamed bloody murder about for the last year. It is the 1st day they are back from vacation, ya know.

The first 3 words of your last sentence says it all.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Because all you've done is IGNORE ALL THE FACTS, repeat Fox News lies and keep trying to pass off supposition and conjecture as fact.

The GOP SOP.

 

[taichiliberal]

Yes, they did. The only conclusion is that the entire movement that elected Obama is the culprit that could care less about jobs--not the GOP.

This entire thread is an exercise in projection, that is the political tool the left most often uses to take its primary fault and ascribe it to a bystander, in this case their rival, the GOP, who definitely does care about generating jobs in this country that pay for themselves, not government guaranteed jobs given to party supporters who often care so little about the people they take salaries from they let them stand in line all day for basic government services, such as paying taxes.

It's a national scandal.

What's a scandal is how neocon think tanks like the Heritage Foundation skew information to fit their narrative. However, ALL the information available shows their "projections" to be based on incorrect timelines. Observe and learn, Becki...maybe it's stop you from repeating dumb ass mantras like your last paragraph.

Health Care Bill: What Does it Mean For You? Obama to Sign Bill Tuesday - ABC News

As for what the health care bill "means" for America? One year later health care premiums have shot up substantially and the number of uninsured people has increased dramatically. And that's before the real costs of this monstrosity of a bill kick in.

Who's kicking up the bills, you willfully ignorant lout? The insurance companies! Why? Because they can't pull the immoral and illegal crap they've been getting away with for decades anymore? And where is YOUR PROOF that uninsured have increased because of Obamacare, as you insinuate above?

I'm tired of you dumb ass neocon/teabagger parrots talking a lot of half truths and pure BS as if it's true. If you can't back up what you say, don't waste my time.

 

[taichiliberal]

As for what the health care bill "means" for America? One year later health care premiums have shot up substantially and the number of uninsured people has increased dramatically. And that's before the real costs of this monstrosity of a bill kick in.

Got any links to support your claim?

As federal health reforms take effect, Aetna proposes rate cuts

You're kidding, right? The rise of premiums as a result of the mandates in Obamacare is all over the fucking news. I've seen it in my own premiums.
And if you had bothered to read your own link you would see they are talking about CT exclusively.

Prove it, you fucking intellectual coward...gives us all an example of what's all over the news.

If your premiums are up, YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY IS FUCKING YOU OVER BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PULL THEIR USUAL SHIT LIKE DUMPING YOU WHENEVER THEY FEEL LIKE IT. And hey, if you don't like the rates, you can in time switch to the federal plan.

Boehner and crew play YOU for a fool, time and again...and you're too proud and/or stupid to deal with it.

 

[taichiliberal]

You have got to love the TITLE the left has bestowed on the Obama.

Not only is he the President of the United States, but he is THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD

You think they would of spewed that for Bush???

good grief..

Good Grief....you are one amazingly IGNORANT woman, Stephanie. How old are you? I ask this because "leader of the free world" has been an un-official title bestowed to the Office of the President of the USA by the press since the Cold War days. Jeezus Stephanie, get your dopey ass down to the library and LEARN something!

Listen you little Obamabot twerp. I know the title, but it is HARDLY used when just talking ABOUT A President..What happened to WE WON GET OVER IT? Oh now the poor Obama doesn't have that super majority so he can't just WALK over the Republicans and us citizens...Now you are just a sniveling whiny bot

Actually, news commentators and reporters have used the term in print and broadcast periodically since I was a kid, you willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger doormat. That YOU have an irrational hatred for this particular President is no reason for the title not to apply, or an excuse for your ignorance. TFB, Stephanie....Boehner and crew used your dopey ass to get into office, and now display sheer hypocrisy with their faux cries of how important it is for the President to put forth a jobs plan to them. You're reflecting the BS that Limbaugh spewed EXACTLY as he wants.....wake the fuck up, Stephanie.....Obama NEVER DID have a super majority thanks to the Senate with the GOP filibusters and stone walling, nor in sheer numbers. YOU DID LOSE the 2008 election, and the ONLY reason the GOP gained the House in 2010 is because a disillusioned Dem and Progressive voting block sat on their hands in protests.

American jobs take a back seat to Bush tax cuts....that's what Boehner and company have been pushing all along. Deal with it.

 

[Stephanie]

WHOOPS, was just reading this. Now shit down and shut the hell up you sniveling bot taichi..Nobody takes you serious anyway, with your vulgar language your just plain ole stupidity.

SNIP:
It's Going To Hurt

Posted 06:40 PM ET


Medical Spending: Yet another study finds that ObamaCare is going to increase costs. And this one wasn't issued by an opponent of the Democrats' reforms. In fact, one of its authors is an ObamaCare apologist.

In an effort to determine how ObamaCare would affect Wisconsin, the state's Health Services Department commissioned Gorman Actuarial and economist Jonathan Gruber from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to assess the program.

The review was ordered up by former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, a faithful ObamaCare supporter who has claimed the law will control health care costs. He now probably wishes he hadn't asked for the analysis.

Under its "Key Findings" heading, the report says the market for individual policies "will experience premium increases as compared to pre-reform premiums."

"Prior to the application of tax subsidies, 87% of the individual market will experience an average premium increase of 41%," says the report. "The average increase for the entire individual market will be 30%."

Never mind the false promise of tax subsidies to make up for it. They'll be paid for by someone and represent a bending upward of the cost curve.


read the rest at.
It's Going To Hurt - Investors.com

 

[Oldstyle]

Your response re: term limits/citizen legislature.....typical. Certain types of people are frightened of change because they feel that change will upset their little apple cart.
Yes we can elect challengers. However, we have a problem with incumbency. That goes back to my first point. People are resistant even frightful of change. And even though they are pissed at Congress they will continue to vote for the incumbent because they think if they change representatives or Senators, they will lose something.

BTW we do indeed have access to housing medical care and nutrition. Some of us just look to others to provide it to them.
We are a nation of individuals. Not a collective. We are free to choose our career path, education, etc. Problem is over the years our federal government has gone from helping the helpless to funding poor lifestyle choices. There are many people with full time jobs that have children out of wedlock, children with absentee fathers, have over spent or over extended themselves financially, have purchased homes they had no business buying, use drugs, abuse alcohol etc ad nauseum.....
No one is saying we have to behave perfectly. We all make mistakes. This is not about people taking public money for mistakes. This is about people who deliberately or willfully flout the rules of common sense or believe they are entitled to do as they wish without consequences then run to the government to bail them out of their negligence.
Here's the deal..If think people should be taken care of in the public sector, by all means feel free to take care of them.

Do you blame them?? They voted for CHANGE and look what the heck we ended up with. No, people aren't open to change often, when they take that leap and it all goes to crap do you blame them?? Term limits would do wonders for typical politics as usual.

They voted for change and got a right of center guy who along with a wimpy Dem Congress/Senate capitulated way too much to the neocon/teabagger ideologues....and then there are the willfully ignorant toadies like you who deny ANY effects of 8 years of reaganomics on steriods on this country, and support the very people who outsource their jobs and get them to foot the relocation bill via taxes. We already have term limits on the President, the House and the Senate, genius.

Barack Obama is a "right of center guy"? Wow, that's an amazing take on things since he was rated as one of the Senate's most liberal members before he became President. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't your "Mr. Right of Center" trying to pass Cap & Trade and Card Check? Didn't he screw the holders of GM stock in order to give a sweetheart deal to the UAW? Isn't he the guy who shut down all offshore drilling after the Deep Horizon spill? Isn't he the guy that had the ATF sell assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels so he could score points on gun control? Isn't he the guy whose "stimulus" went to keep Public Sector workers employed while letting the Private Sector workers twist in the wind? Isn't he the guy whose Justice Department didn't charge Black Panthers standing at a polling station with weapons with voter intimidation? Isn't he the guy who gave 535 million of our tax dollars to a "greens jobs" company that went bankrupt and laid off it's workforce...while at the same time his Justice Department is raiding Gibson guitars, a company that HIRED 500 people last year (and it didn't cost us a dime!) and trying to shut them down over some obscure foreign law?

Is THAT the "Right of Center" guy you're referring to?

 

[Stephanie]

Good Grief....you are one amazingly IGNORANT woman, Stephanie. How old are you? I ask this because "leader of the free world" has been an un-official title bestowed to the Office of the President of the USA by the press since the Cold War days. Jeezus Stephanie, get your dopey ass down to the library and LEARN something!

Listen you little Obamabot twerp. I know the title, but it is HARDLY used when just talking ABOUT A President..What happened to WE WON GET OVER IT? Oh now the poor Obama doesn't have that super majority so he can't just WALK over the Republicans and us citizens...Now you are just a sniveling whiny bot

Actually, news commentators and reporters have used the term in print and broadcast periodically since I was a kid, you willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger doormat. That YOU have an irrational hatred for this particular President is no reason for the title not to apply, or an excuse for your ignorance. TFB, Stephanie....Boehner and crew used your dopey ass to get into office, and now display sheer hypocrisy with their faux cries of how important it is for the President to put forth a jobs plan to them. You're reflecting the BS that Limbaugh spewed EXACTLY as he wants.....wake the fuck up, Stephanie.....Obama NEVER DID have a super majority thanks to the Senate with the GOP filibusters and stone walling, nor in sheer numbers. YOU DID LOSE the 2008 election, and the ONLY reason the GOP gained the House in 2010 is because a disillusioned Dem and Progressive voting block sat on their hands in protests.
American jobs take a back seat to Bush tax cuts....that's what Boehner and company have been pushing all along. Deal with it.

man oh man, you must HAVE to live in the twilight zone just to get through the let down your HERO is losing, the people can't stand him, his comrades in arms administration, or his ugly vulgar foot stomping cult followers. I hope you all will be able to survive the STROM coming your way. You think 2010 was something, HANG ON BABY. REAL hope and change is a coming.. Obama DOWN to 39% approval rating in LESS than three years. Now that is HISTORIC.

 

[taichiliberal]

WHOOPS, was just reading this. Now shit down and shut the hell up you sniveling bot taichi..Nobody takes you serious anyway, with your vulgar language your just plain ole stupidity.

SNIP:
It's Going To Hurt

Posted 06:40 PM ET


Medical Spending: Yet another study finds that ObamaCare is going to increase costs. And this one wasn't issued by an opponent of the Democrats' reforms. In fact, one of its authors is an ObamaCare apologist.

In an effort to determine how ObamaCare would affect Wisconsin, the state's Health Services Department commissioned Gorman Actuarial and economist Jonathan Gruber from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to assess the program.

The review was ordered up by former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, a faithful ObamaCare supporter who has claimed the law will control health care costs. He now probably wishes he hadn't asked for the analysis.

Under its "Key Findings" heading, the report says the market for individual policies "will experience premium increases as compared to pre-reform premiums."

"Prior to the application of tax subsidies, 87% of the individual market will experience an average premium increase of 41%," says the report. "The average increase for the entire individual market will be 30%."

Never mind the false promise of tax subsidies to make up for it. They'll be paid for by someone and represent a bending upward of the cost curve.


read the rest at.
It's Going To Hurt - Investors.com

So you had to hunt for an EDITORIAL that fit in with your belief system, ehh Stephanie? Pity that Gruber isn't consistent with the narrative presented by your editorial

Jonathan Gruber, professor of economics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology who was paid by the Obama administration for health care analysis work, says consumers "have to decide is it worth the trade off." Are the better benefits worth the higher cost? But he doesn’t believe high rate increases can be attributed to changes in the law. "These increases are basically coming from the cost of medical care."

The Truth About Health Insurance Premiums | FactCheck.org


Wisconsin Health Services Secretary Dennis Smith thinks that number will be higher, even though there's a penalty for employers not offering insurance. He says, "Employer covered insurance has been eroding nationally. Employees themselves may believe they are better off with going to the exchange with very generous tax subsidies."

Subsidies will be available to those at 400 percent of the federal poverty level, amounting to 89,000 dollars for a family of four. Smith says he's concerned Wisconsin's insurance market could become less competitive under federal reform.

Robert Kraig, director of Wisconsin Citizen Action, agrees there will be a shakeup in the market, but he says it will positive. The report says the number of uninsured will decrease 65 percent because of the coverage mandate and federal subsidies.

"A lot more people will be covered and they'll have a guarantee of access to coverage, which you lack now," he says.

Even with reform, the report predicts 180,000 people in Wisconsin will still be uninsured, including State Headlines From Wisconsin Public Radio, August 26 | Ashland Current


And then, there is this:

Fact Sheet on Health Care Reform in Wisconsin

Consumer Publications - Fact Sheet on Health Care Reform in Wisconsin


So when looking at all the information, it's not the "end-of-the-world" as your editorial would make out, Stephanie.

Like I said, Boehner and crew are playing you for a sucker...and you let him. Oh, and spare me the faux offense about "vulgarity", as you have NO problem with the attitudes and language from your like minded compadres. And if you didn't care about what I wrote, you wouldn't be putting time and effort into the responses, Stephanie....unless you've got a schizoid thing going on here.

 

[taichiliberal]

Listen you little Obamabot twerp. I know the title, but it is HARDLY used when just talking ABOUT A President..What happened to WE WON GET OVER IT? Oh now the poor Obama doesn't have that super majority so he can't just WALK over the Republicans and us citizens...Now you are just a sniveling whiny bot

Actually, news commentators and reporters have used the term in print and broadcast periodically since I was a kid, you willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger doormat. That YOU have an irrational hatred for this particular President is no reason for the title not to apply, or an excuse for your ignorance. TFB, Stephanie....Boehner and crew used your dopey ass to get into office, and now display sheer hypocrisy with their faux cries of how important it is for the President to put forth a jobs plan to them. You're reflecting the BS that Limbaugh spewed EXACTLY as he wants.....wake the fuck up, Stephanie.....Obama NEVER DID have a super majority thanks to the Senate with the GOP filibusters and stone walling, nor in sheer numbers. YOU DID LOSE the 2008 election, and the ONLY reason the GOP gained the House in 2010 is because a disillusioned Dem and Progressive voting block sat on their hands in protests.
American jobs take a back seat to Bush tax cuts....that's what Boehner and company have been pushing all along. Deal with it.

man oh man, you must HAVE to live in the twilight zone just to get through the let down your HERO is losing, the people can't stand him, his comrades in arms administration, or his ugly vulgar foot stomping cult followers. I hope you all will be able to survive the STROM coming your way. You think 2010 was something, HANG ON BABY. REAL hope and change is a coming.. Obama DOWN to 39% approval rating in LESS than three years. Now that is HISTORIC.

I love it when you willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger doormats try to condescend to someone with your sheer ignorance of recent history.

Show us the documentation where the Dem party had a lock on the Senate vote before the 2010 vote, Stephanie. If you can't, that means your previous assertions was WRONG. But God forbid you admit such....that's the "strength" of doormats like YOU Stephanie...proud ignorance.

Bottom line: YOU can't deal with the FACTS regardings Boehner's and crew hypocritical BS....they aren't about jobs, and they don't give a damn what Obama says. It's the Limbaugh narrative, as I originally said...and doormats like YOU Stephanie just drape yourselves over the chair with a smile on your face. Keep denying reality, Stephanie....it's about all you're good for. Carry on.

 

[taichiliberal]

Do you blame them?? They voted for CHANGE and look what the heck we ended up with. No, people aren't open to change often, when they take that leap and it all goes to crap do you blame them?? Term limits would do wonders for typical politics as usual.

They voted for change and got a right of center guy who along with a wimpy Dem Congress/Senate capitulated way too much to the neocon/teabagger ideologues....and then there are the willfully ignorant toadies like you who deny ANY effects of 8 years of reaganomics on steriods on this country, and support the very people who outsource their jobs and get them to foot the relocation bill via taxes. We already have term limits on the President, the House and the Senate, genius.

Barack Obama is a "right of center guy"? Wow, that's an amazing take on things since he was rated as one of the Senate's most liberal members before he became President. Really? Who "rated" him as such? Proof, please. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't your "Mr. Right of Center" trying to pass Cap & Trade and Card Check? Along with pushing for more nuke plants, offshore drilling (before the Mobil spill)? Bet you can't sell that to the Didn't he screw the holders of GM stock in order to give a sweetheart deal to the UAW? Really? Because last time I checked he SAVED GM's ass with the bailout. And the UAW didn't make the decisions to put out gas guzzlers...that's management, bunky! Isn't he the guy who shut down all offshore drilling after the Deep Horizon spill? Oh, so common sense safety reviews and assessments during a disaster is now strictly a liberal thing? And didn't he just give the go-ahead for more exploration? Isn't he the guy that had the ATF sell assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels so he could score points on gun control? NO, that was the ATF bureaucracy....which is now under investigation by the JD. The President does not run daily ops for the ATF, don't cha know. Isn't he the guy whose "stimulus" went to keep Public Sector workers employed while letting the Private Sector workers twist in the wind? WTF are you babbling about? Banks, car industry got bailed out and no one is going to jail. Isn't he the guy whose Justice Department didn't charge Black Panthers standing at a polling station with weapons with voter intimidation? Because the investigation showed it was two idiots with claiming they're the New Black Panthers, which has no real standing, and they "intimidated" no one, and the subsequent arrests and release by local cops was justified. Essentially, a no big deal expect for Fox News humping on the "get Obama" train. Isn't he the guy who gave 535 million of our tax dollars to a "greens jobs" company that went bankrupt and laid off it's workforce As opposed to Really? Proof please...because his continued bailout of the criminal banksters doesn't seem to phase you ...while at the same time his Justice Department is raiding Gibson guitars, a company that HIRED 500 people last year (and it didn't cost us a dime!) and trying to shut them down over some obscure foreign law? They got nailed with a trade violation....happens all the time, it's just that ANYTHING negative is exaggerated under Obama. Do your homework and you'll see similar crap under the Bush family, Clinton and Reagan. Deal with it.
Is THAT the "Right of Center" guy you're referring to?

Yep, because YOU left out his positions on the death penalty, wiretaps, his support of the DC repeal of it's handgun ban.....hardly stuff of the diehard liberal.

Now that we've settled that, when are you going to just acknowledge the hypocrisy of Boehner and crew regarding the request date for a joint session address?

 

[Oldstyle]

They voted for change and got a right of center guy who along with a wimpy Dem Congress/Senate capitulated way too much to the neocon/teabagger ideologues....and then there are the willfully ignorant toadies like you who deny ANY effects of 8 years of reaganomics on steriods on this country, and support the very people who outsource their jobs and get them to foot the relocation bill via taxes. We already have term limits on the President, the House and the Senate, genius.

Barack Obama is a "right of center guy"? Wow, that's an amazing take on things since he was rated as one of the Senate's most liberal members before he became President. Really? Who "rated" him as such? Proof, please. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't your "Mr. Right of Center" trying to pass Cap & Trade and Card Check? Along with pushing for more nuke plants, offshore drilling (before the Mobil spill)? Bet you can't sell that to the Didn't he screw the holders of GM stock in order to give a sweetheart deal to the UAW? Really? Because last time I checked he SAVED GM's ass with the bailout. And the UAW didn't make the decisions to put out gas guzzlers...that's management, bunky! Isn't he the guy who shut down all offshore drilling after the Deep Horizon spill? Oh, so common sense safety reviews and assessments during a disaster is now strictly a liberal thing? And didn't he just give the go-ahead for more exploration? Isn't he the guy that had the ATF sell assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels so he could score points on gun control? NO, that was the ATF bureaucracy....which is now under investigation by the JD. The President does not run daily ops for the ATF, don't cha know. Isn't he the guy whose "stimulus" went to keep Public Sector workers employed while letting the Private Sector workers twist in the wind? WTF are you babbling about? Banks, car industry got bailed out and no one is going to jail. Isn't he the guy whose Justice Department didn't charge Black Panthers standing at a polling station with weapons with voter intimidation? Because the investigation showed it was two idiots with claiming they're the New Black Panthers, which has no real standing, and they "intimidated" no one, and the subsequent arrests and release by local cops was justified. Essentially, a no big deal expect for Fox News humping on the "get Obama" train. Isn't he the guy who gave 535 million of our tax dollars to a "greens jobs" company that went bankrupt and laid off it's workforce As opposed to Really? Proof please...because his continued bailout of the criminal banksters doesn't seem to phase you ...while at the same time his Justice Department is raiding Gibson guitars, a company that HIRED 500 people last year (and it didn't cost us a dime!) and trying to shut them down over some obscure foreign law? They got nailed with a trade violation....happens all the time, it's just that ANYTHING negative is exaggerated under Obama. Do your homework and you'll see similar crap under the Bush family, Clinton and Reagan. Deal with it.
Is THAT the "Right of Center" guy you're referring to?

Yep, because YOU left out his positions on the death penalty, wiretaps, his support of the DC repeal of it's handgun ban.....hardly stuff of the diehard liberal.

Now that we've settled that, when are you going to just acknowledge the hypocrisy of Boehner and crew regarding the request date for a joint session address?

"Hypocrisy"? Because he nipped Obama's childish attempt to preempt the Republican debate in the bud? Sorry but I don't see hypocrisy in that. What I did see was Obama trying to play hardball politics and getting his skinny little butt handed to him by someone who played it better.

Just one more example of why this guy isn't up for the job he has...

 

[The Rabbi]

Got any links to support your claim?

As federal health reforms take effect, Aetna proposes rate cuts

You're kidding, right? The rise of premiums as a result of the mandates in Obamacare is all over the fucking news. I've seen it in my own premiums.
And if you had bothered to read your own link you would see they are talking about CT exclusively.

Prove it, you fucking intellectual coward...gives us all an example of what's all over the news.

If your premiums are up, YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY IS FUCKING YOU OVER BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PULL THEIR USUAL SHIT LIKE DUMPING YOU WHENEVER THEY FEEL LIKE IT. And hey, if you don't like the rates, you can in time switch to the federal plan.

Boehner and crew play YOU for a fool, time and again...and you're too proud and/or stupid to deal with it.

You are an ignorant twit, aren't you?
health insurance premiums rise - Google Search

 

[The Rabbi]

WHOOPS, was just reading this. Now shit down and shut the hell up you sniveling bot taichi..Nobody takes you serious anyway, with your vulgar language your just plain ole stupidity.

SNIP:
It's Going To Hurt

Posted 06:40 PM ET


Medical Spending: Yet another study finds that ObamaCare is going to increase costs. And this one wasn't issued by an opponent of the Democrats' reforms. In fact, one of its authors is an ObamaCare apologist.

In an effort to determine how ObamaCare would affect Wisconsin, the state's Health Services Department commissioned Gorman Actuarial and economist Jonathan Gruber from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to assess the program.

The review was ordered up by former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, a faithful ObamaCare supporter who has claimed the law will control health care costs. He now probably wishes he hadn't asked for the analysis.

Under its "Key Findings" heading, the report says the market for individual policies "will experience premium increases as compared to pre-reform premiums."

"Prior to the application of tax subsidies, 87% of the individual market will experience an average premium increase of 41%," says the report. "The average increase for the entire individual market will be 30%."

Never mind the false promise of tax subsidies to make up for it. They'll be paid for by someone and represent a bending upward of the cost curve.


read the rest at.
It's Going To Hurt - Investors.com

So you had to hunt for an EDITORIAL that fit in with your belief system, ehh Stephanie? Pity that Gruber isn't consistent with the narrative presented by your editorial

Jonathan Gruber, professor of economics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology who was paid by the Obama administration for health care analysis work, says consumers "have to decide is it worth the trade off." Are the better benefits worth the higher cost? But he doesn’t believe high rate increases can be attributed to changes in the law. "These increases are basically coming from the cost of medical care."

The Truth About Health Insurance Premiums | FactCheck.org


Wisconsin Health Services Secretary Dennis Smith thinks that number will be higher, even though there's a penalty for employers not offering insurance. He says, "Employer covered insurance has been eroding nationally. Employees themselves may believe they are better off with going to the exchange with very generous tax subsidies."

Subsidies will be available to those at 400 percent of the federal poverty level, amounting to 89,000 dollars for a family of four. Smith says he's concerned Wisconsin's insurance market could become less competitive under federal reform.

Robert Kraig, director of Wisconsin Citizen Action, agrees there will be a shakeup in the market, but he says it will positive. The report says the number of uninsured will decrease 65 percent because of the coverage mandate and federal subsidies.

"A lot more people will be covered and they'll have a guarantee of access to coverage, which you lack now," he says.

Even with reform, the report predicts 180,000 people in Wisconsin will still be uninsured, including State Headlines From Wisconsin Public Radio, August 26 | Ashland Current


And then, there is this:

Fact Sheet on Health Care Reform in Wisconsin

Consumer Publications - Fact Sheet on Health Care Reform in Wisconsin


So when looking at all the information, it's not the "end-of-the-world" as your editorial would make out, Stephanie.

Like I said, Boehner and crew are playing you for a sucker...and you let him. Oh, and spare me the faux offense about "vulgarity", as you have NO problem with the attitudes and language from your like minded compadres. And if you didn't care about what I wrote, you wouldn't be putting time and effort into the responses, Stephanie....unless you've got a schizoid thing going on here.

You are one dumb son of a bitch. Did you actually read the stuff you posted? The only one getting played here is you for believing crap even the administration doesn't believe, and isn't true.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

So on the FIRST DAY that the Congress and Senate come back from vacation, the President wants to schedule a joint session to address them on his new proposed plan for creating jobs in America ASAP.

The President submits the formal request to the Majority Speaker of the House of Representatives....and about 4 hours later is told that ANOTHER time would be more convenient due to "security arrangement" matters and the like.

Since the early 1900's when President's started making actual visits to the House to address them, NO PRESIDENT'S REQUEST HAS EVER BEEN DENIED UNTIL NOW.

Interesting that the very political party that has been wailing for months that they are waiting for the President to present a plan for jobs in America SUDDENLY can't fit the President of the USA in for a quick address.

Now if one is to believe the GOP's favorite pundit Rush Limbaugh, Speaker Boehner rejected the initial request date in order to put Obama "in his place" and not let the President have the upper hand as taking a leadership position....especially since it would coincide with the first scheduled GOP Presidential candidacy debate.

This is just another example to the American people that the GOP is NOT about the general welfare of the people, but about the corporate welfare and secured economic greed of the wealthiest 1 to 3% of the population.

Oh please. Obama and his crew knew damned well there was a GOP presidential campaing debate scheduled LONG in advance of his suggestion to speak before a joint session of Congress.
Can you give a good solid reason why the Congress and the American people would want to through a 45 minute campaign speech under the guise of doing something no one in government can do which is force the private sector to hire people with nothing of substance.
Obama may as well use his time a bit better and go out to try to save his political base.
He's not going to get anywhere if he intends on introducing another federal spending plan.
It's not going to happen.

And there you have it!!!!!!
Campaigning means infinitely more to the GOP than jobs!!!!!!!!!!!!

If Obama and the Democrats were so concerned about jobs, why did the economy take a back seat for MONTHS to Obamacare? Where was the "priority" then? Democrats were more concerned over party politics than middle class families trying to keep their homes. Let the political games of the left begin.