Newt or Mitt VS Obama. Can either of 'em beat him?

[BC]

Gator,

You know, I tend to be a fact checker, and in this instance had to go back to his DNC speech in 08

Overall, this time around, the crowd was notably less enthusiastic as in '08, but OTOH still more enthusiastic than what i saw watching Romney's RNC speech.  I give him a very conservative C++ and optimistically a solid B.  He did not promise to do all in a first term, and although not specified in this speech, I do recall him mentioning such in prior or subsequent speeches.

Clinton indeed 'stole the show' and I did not see much difference between Obama's speech in '08 vs '12. 

What I did see however is that he has lived up to many of his '08 promises, maybe not in full, but at least progress has been made and is shown in real, tangible numbers pointing up and not down.

Although the course remains the same, it is in my opinion a logical course and one that does 'add up' and does more good than harm.

I do agree with you that he has not been able to motivate congress to do what has to be done.  The congressional stalemate is indeed his weakness.

But no fear... at least 1/4 of any first term presidency is about getting re-elected. - and Obama will get re-elected.  His course is steady and reasoned.  Like others before him, the second term is a 'go for broke' situation and I am confident he will show brass.

Watch both Romney's and Obama's acceptance speech.  Who is truly the optimist? 

I will be confident when I cast my ballot.  You on the other hand seem not quite so confident.  Almost as if you must instead of want.. That puzzles me.

[Faux Pas]

BC

I detect optimism in that post. Mostly optimism that B.O. does get re-elected. Seems you're drinking the kool-aid. One of B.O.'s campaign promises have come to fruition and that was pounded down America's throat and isn't a reality yet (Obamacare). Obama promised leadership and transparency, he has provided none instead only further division, secrecy and backdoor deals.

I'm not so optimistic no matter who wins the election. I do see Romney as the lesser of two evils. Kinda like do I stop in my tracks and get eaten by the lion or run from it through the forest until I can find a cliff to jump from. Either way, the end story isn't good. 

[GQBlues]

...Yes. It seems there are many who believe that if Obama wins again every black man in America will have their way with all the white women...

LOL. This paricular issue had come from you on more than a few occassion, Muzh. Why are so bent in trying to throw in race in these discussions? Are you still that stuck in the '70s? It seems so much more significant with you...why?

[jb]

 I was listening to Obama as he mesmerized the DNC.  I forgot to take the battery out of my bullshit detector in time … it overheated, blew up, and I had to throw it away.

[Eduard]

They were all so full of crap it was really pathetic to listen to them. However I did enjoy Clinton's speech just because of his talent to show a different perspective on things. If they stopped the convention right after Clinton spoke I think many people would start looking at reelecting BHO. But once Biden and BHO took the stage all the BS became so obvious.

[BC]

BC

I detect optimism in that post. Mostly optimism that B.O. does get re-elected. Seems you're drinking the kool-aid. One of B.O.'s campaign promises have come to fruition and that was pounded down America's throat and isn't a reality yet (Obamacare). Obama promised leadership and transparency, he has provided none instead only further division, secrecy and backdoor deals.

I'm not so optimistic no matter who wins the election. I do see Romney as the lesser of two evils. Kinda like do I stop in my tracks and get eaten by the lion or run from it through the forest until I can find a cliff to jump from. Either way, the end story isn't good. 

Funny you mentioned KoolAid... we don't get it here.  Will have to pick some up on my upcoming US visit.

IIRC some parts of RomneyObamacare are in effect. 

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/    Did you or your employer receive a rebate check from your healthcare insurer?  http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/health-insurance-rebates-is-your-check-in-the-mail/
Isn't 1.1 Billion better than nothing?

Seems even the Republican VP candidate likes KoolAid from time to time.

http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/investigations/politicsandgovernment/1693/paul_ryan_quietly_requested_obamacare_cash/

Do take the time to read the attachment..  Is he a closet socialist?

[calmissile]

I was listening to Obama as he mesmerized the DNC.  I forgot to take the battery out of my bullshit detector in time … it overheated, blew up, and I had to throw it away.

+1    LOL

[calmissile]

BC

I detect optimism in that post. Mostly optimism that B.O. does get re-elected. Seems you're drinking the kool-aid. One of B.O.'s campaign promises have come to fruition and that was pounded down America's throat and isn't a reality yet (Obamacare). Obama promised leadership and transparency, he has provided none instead only further division, secrecy and backdoor deals.

I'm not so optimistic no matter who wins the election. I do see Romney as the lesser of two evils. Kinda like do I stop in my tracks and get eaten by the lion or run from it through the forest until I can find a cliff to jump from. Either way, the end story isn't good. 

+1   Agree entirely..... the less of two evils.

[GQBlues]

Funny you mentioned KoolAid... we don't get it here.  Will have to pick some up on my upcoming US visit.

IIRC some parts of RomneyObamacare are in effect. 

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/    Did you or your employer receive a rebate check from your healthcare insurer?  http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/health-insurance-rebates-is-your-check-in-the-mail/
Isn't 1.1 Billion better than nothing?

Seems even the Republican VP candidate likes KoolAid from time to time.

http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/investigations/politicsandgovernment/1693/paul_ryan_quietly_requested_obamacare_cash/

Do take the time to read the attachment..  Is he a closet socialist?

I, for one, thinks you not only have ample cases of Kool-Aid chillin' in the fridge, you've been bathing yourself with it, too BC. This is the problem with leftist folks, especially those who have serious identity problems.

When the Obamacare law becomes effective, it generally replaces previously established federal health and human services programs. To say Paul Ryan is a hypocrite for requesting funding for his community's health center is just plain silly. Appropriation of funds delegated for such requests are available whether it is from previously established federal programs or like programs from Obamacare which presided over them. To make this look as though Ryan is being seedy, wholly omitting the merit of him requesting funding for a district's health center in the same stroke, is symptomatic of Kool-Aid consumption and a fine example of the leftist media campaign.

Didn't you notice that the media reporting this in the manner you've consumed it are from the leftist medium?

I'll give you a good example of the transformation between previously established federal programs to The Affordable Care Act.

The Ryan White Care Act

Now read an excerpt in the service care provider's webpage for Ryan White's Care Act transition:

Update:

The health reform law passed in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”), has implications for the Ryan White Program.

Starting in 2014 thousands of Ryan White patients who previously received care and treatment through the Ryan White program will begin to receive coverage through other programs created under the ACA. A majority will become part of the new Medicaid expansion; another portion are likely to gain coverage through the State Insurance Exchanges and the new state Pre-Existing Condition Plans (PCIPs). Because Ryan White is a “payer of last resort” program, those patients who will have access to the new programs must use them first.

However, since the states will have significant flexibility in establishing the new programs, it is possible that some former Ryan White patients may end up with insufficient benefits, inadequate access to medications, or possibly even less than adequate access to care. They may also see new or increased co-pays, deductibles, or other cost-sharing. It is possible that the Ryan White Program may be able to aid in supplementing some of these areas.

Ryan White providers and clinics will likely help transitioning into these new systems, and ensuring inclusion in the new networks of care. Providers need to pay attention to the requirements and opportunities in their state to be included in the billing networks, referral networks, and care networks for their state’s Exchanges and state Medicaid program. 

Most of the provisions of the ACA do not take effect until 2014, and their overall effects of ACA implementation will not become clear until sometime after that. The Ryan White Program as a whole will likely see many changes. Some of these may include the types of patients accessing services, to what services are provided, how those services wrap around the new systems.

However, it seems as though there will ultimately be a significant need for the Ryan White safety net after 2014....

http://aahivm.org/ryanwhite

I mean no offense when I say this...now that you've gotten yourself out of the US borders, you ought to also do so with it's politics.

[BC]

I, for one, thinks you not only have ample cases of Kool-Aid chillin' in the fridge, you've been bathing yourself with it, too BC. This is the problem with leftist folks, especially those who have serious identity problems.

GQ,

why is it that the only one selling KoolAid is you.  Have I ever tried to sell it to you?

When the Obamacare law becomes effective, it generally replaces previously established federal health and human services programs. To say Paul Ryan is a hypocrite for requesting funding for his community's health center is just plain silly. Appropriation of funds delegated for such requests are available whether it is from previously established federal programs or like programs from Obamacare which presided over them. To make this look as though Ryan is being seedy, wholly omitting the merit of him requesting funding for a district's health center in the same stroke, is symptomatic of Kool-Aid consumption and a fine example of the leftist media campaign.

Didn't you notice that the media reporting this in the manner you've consumed it are from the leftist medium?

I don't rely on one media, I look at several before deciding.  When I read, I try to stay politically 'blind' until I have seen both sides of the coin.

I'll give you a good example of the transformation between previously established federal programs to The Affordable Care Act.

The Ryan White Care Act

Now read an excerpt in the service care provider's webpage for Ryan White's Care Act transition:

Update:

The health reform law passed in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”), has implications for the Ryan White Program.

Starting in 2014 thousands of Ryan White patients who previously received care and treatment through the Ryan White program will begin to receive coverage through other programs created under the ACA. A majority will become part of the new Medicaid expansion; another portion are likely to gain coverage through the State Insurance Exchanges and the new state Pre-Existing Condition Plans (PCIPs). Because Ryan White is a “payer of last resort” program, those patients who will have access to the new programs must use them first.

However, since the states will have significant flexibility in establishing the new programs, it is possible that some former Ryan White patients may end up with insufficient benefits, inadequate access to medications, or possibly even less than adequate access to care. They may also see new or increased co-pays, deductibles, or other cost-sharing. It is possible that the Ryan White Program may be able to aid in supplementing some of these areas.

Ryan White providers and clinics will likely help transitioning into these new systems, and ensuring inclusion in the new networks of care. Providers need to pay attention to the requirements and opportunities in their state to be included in the billing networks, referral networks, and care networks for their state’s Exchanges and state Medicaid program. 

Most of the provisions of the ACA do not take effect until 2014, and their overall effects of ACA implementation will not become clear until sometime after that. The Ryan White Program as a whole will likely see many changes. Some of these may include the types of patients accessing services, to what services are provided, how those services wrap around the new systems.

However, it seems as though there will ultimately be a significant need for the Ryan White safety net after 2014....

http://aahivm.org/ryanwhite

Laws are not perfect.  Upon implementation any holes will start showing and patches are made.

Some are even addressed in advance. 

In 2009, Congress passed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act,[7] which was signed by President Obama on October 30, 2009.[8] This bill extends the Ryan White Care Act for an additional four years.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_White_Care_Act

If a loophole remains, I don't think Obama would hesitate to extend the Act even longer.

I do sense that the straws are being grasped in your discourse.

I mean no offense when I say this...now that you've gotten yourself out of the US borders, you ought to also do so with it's politics.

Ok so now you believe that millions of USC's overseas should be disenfranchised?   .... or just those that are unwilling to accept your views?  The ability to see a forest instead of a tree is quite valuable and the 'core' of my little consulting and service business.  I can't tell you how many times I have been invited to work directly in the offices of the companies I work for. I have always refused as it would only force me to wear blinders.  My refusal has assured almost two decades of business aside from a bit more sunny weather, good food and quality time with family.

My unique viewpoint has allowed me to enjoy a 'RomneyObamacare' type environment for many decades.  Sadly, many USC's simply can't doff the blinders and don't 'get it' .  That's quite ok though, more do than don't and I understand that you can't win them all.

One lesson learned over the years is that when one prefaces as you did in your statement above it is simply a PC way to state the opposite..    I would much rather you just told me to take a hike.  I do however applaud the substance in your response (not a preface), as it gives me something I can objectively look at and respond to with facts that adds to discourse instead of subtracting.

Thanks.

[Gator]

Those three examples may bore you but I've seen people almost come to blows when
these three are mentioned AND NOT int the same sentence.
 

I suggest that those people need to find a life. 


 

I just read somewhere that from Jan. 20, 2001, to Jan. 20, 2009, the DJIA fell by 25 percent, the Standard & Poor's 500 index fell by 39 percent, and the NASDAQ index fell by 47 percent.
 
By contrast, during the years of Obama's administration (Jan. 20, 2009, through Aug. 30, 2012), the Dow Jones
Industrial Average has risen by 60 percent, the S&P 500 has gone up by 74 percent, and the NASDAQ index is up by 112 percent.
 
 
 
Well, I believe that Wall Street would disagree with you based on the
above numbers.

Actually, the rise in the DJIA under Obama's presidency is even more dramatic.   The DJIA on March 9, 2009 hit an intraday low of 6,470, the lowest mark in 12 years.  And that could not be blamed on Obama as he had been in office only 6-7 weeks.  Yesterday the DJIA closed at 13,307 (106% increase in 3 1/2 years).
 
The "fat cat bankers on Wall Street" (Obama's language) are smart when it comes to money.  Based on political contributions it seems that they recognize the correlation between Obama bailouts and a rise in the stock prices of their companies.
 

 

Yep, we need to reelect Obama sop that my stock investments will double again.  (tongue in cheek)
 

 

Ah yes, Tip O'Neil. What a classy gentleman. I don't think I ever heard him say that his primary goal was to make Reagan a one term President.

 
Tip would probably say such if  he and Reagan had not made a deal at the beginning of Reagan's presidency.
 

Also, I believe the Democrats in those days were NEVER referred to as the Party
of NO.

The Party of No was an interesting turn of events.  Do you have a reliable reference to how this started, particularly what was not done that could have mended fences early?  For sure fiscal conservatives were not interested in stimulus and bailout plans considering the national debt issue.  And they were correct.  For sure Obama intended to create Obamacare, save auto unions, pump money into programs of questionable cost-effectiveness, etc.

 

It seems there are many who believe that if Obama wins again every black man in America will have their way with all the white women.

Muzh, that is a weird post and it makes no sense.
 

[GQBlues]

GQ,

why is it that the only one selling KoolAid is you.  Have I ever tried to sell it to you?

Me and Kool-Aid are like oil and water. Fire and rain...So no. No selling around my neck of the woods.

I don't rely on one media, I look at several before deciding.  When I read, I try to stay politically 'blind' until I have seen both sides of the coin.

Of course. I noted this much from you from your previous declaration...

...What I did see however is that he has lived up to many of his '08 promises, maybe not in full, but at least progress has been made and is shown in real, tangible numbers pointing up and not down....

Gitmo for starters. Now he's even giving away known insurgents who openly professed destruction of the US back to the Talibans in the name of 'peace' (Research it). Then at the same time bomb citizens of Pakistan and Yemen despite the absence of a war declaration.

Whatever happend the promise of stopping the Big Brother program? Heightened it? No...you don't say...

Let's see...did you fact check the truth behind the '4.5 million jobs created in the private sector* as declared by Emanuel, Clinton, Castro, The shopping Mom, Biden, and the O himself?

Did you actually believe it when they held Obama responsible for stopping the war in Iraq? He voted 'no' for Bush's SURGE, which as far as I'm concerned was what stopped the war exactly as planned according to the submitted time table?

Did you actually believe pumping billions into GM, GMAC (Ally) was to save the Automaker?

Were you moved by the show of masses in the convention? I was too...I've never seen that many Union members holding placards all in one place except when their bosses hold their customary strikes demanding higher pay i.e. higher Union premiums.

Did you fact check how the manufacturing sector had been raised and will soon end the trend of 'outsourcing'?

Did you also note the absence of the parade of coffins in this year's election in the manner it aired ad nauseum in 2008? I was curious because there are more fatalities under Obama in 3.5 years than it was during Bush's 7 year watch despite being 'engaged' on 2 fronts.

Did you notice Van Jones during the convention? he's looking pretty zippy these days, man. Silly me. I thought he's barred from the White House since his 'resignation'.

Laws are not perfect.  Upon implementation any holes will start showing and patches are made.

Oh yeah. The Union is one HUGE freakin' hole the US taxpayers are now officially, automatically and eternally going to be responsible for.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/pursuit-of-happiness/obamacare-and-the-unions/







Small 2004/2008 campaign investment really paid major capital returns, man.

A Reader's Digest  overview of the Pros and Cons of Obamacare:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/healthcarereform/f/What-Is-Obama-Care.htm

Some are even addressed in advance. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_White_Care_Act

If a loophole remains, I don't think Obama would hesitate to extend the Act even longer.

I do sense that the straws are being grasped in your discourse.

You read it but still didn't understand it. Re-authorization doesn't, didn't, shouldn't behold Obama. Bush did it (even modernized it by adding in HIV infected patients and not only AIDS patients). Obama's re-authorization of 2009 was traditionally been done so by previous presidents. So no. No benevolent forsight by your Almighty.

Ok so now you believe that millions of USC's overseas should be disenfranchised?

No. Just the few who are 'OUT OF TOUCH'.

  .... or just those that are unwilling to accept your views?

If you haven't yet noticed, it isn't a question of 'views'. Never has been. Information are out there and it is incumbent upon us Americans to sift through them and decide.

The ability to see a forest instead of a tree is quite valuable and the 'core' of my little consulting and service business.  I can't tell you how many times I have been invited to work directly in the offices of the companies I work for. I have always refused as it would only force me to wear blinders.  My refusal has assured almost two decades of business aside from a bit more sunny weather, good food and quality time with family.

Surprised! There's no monopoly of good life. Everyone has them BC in case you've cocooned yourself too much and actually donned the proverbial blinders you've been flashing yourself.

My unique viewpoint has allowed me to enjoy a 'RomneyObamacare' type environment for many decades.  Sadly, many USC's simply can't doff the blinders and don't 'get it' .  That's quite ok though, more do than don't and I understand that you can't win them all.

Yeah...and I do hope soon folks like you CAN UNDERSTAND different strokes for different folks.

One lesson learned over the years is that when one prefaces as you did in your statement above it is simply a PC way to state the opposite..    I would much rather you just told me to take a hike.  I do however applaud the substance in your response (not a preface), as it gives me something I can objectively look at and respond to with facts that adds to discourse instead of subtracting.

Thanks.

The thought of posting what I did may come across as crass to you, hence prefaced it. I had hoped for a higher chance than 50/50 you'd understand the message since I gave you enough credit, in addition to your repeated statement about being an objective bloke, but maybe we were BOTH wrong this time.


p.s. Did you know department:

The Democrats had been blocking the proposition for the Voter ID Cards for this year's election. They're contending it is unconstitutional. LOL. Did you know no one was allowed in the DNC without proper ID and affiliation credits? What was the DNC? A 'private' function?

[SANDRO43]

Then at the same time bomb citizens of Pakistan and Yemen despite the absence of a war declaration.

IINM, declarations of war became quite unfashionable after WWII .

Korea, Viet Nam, the Falklands, the Gulf I and II, Jugoslavia, Afghanistan, etc. etc. - all dispensed with such polite but outdated formalities .   

[GQBlues]

IINM, declarations of war became quite unfashionable after WWII .

Korea, Viet Nam, the Falklands, the Gulf I and II, Jugoslavia, Afghanistan, etc. etc. - all dispensed with such polite but outdated formalities .   

The US congress did in fact 'empowered' the president to war against Afghanistan and Iraq (i.e. War on Terror). Post-Vietnam, an act was passed to by-pass any war declaration so long as a congressional empowerment is given - IINM - in the form of congressional resolutions. The purpose to declare war in the US was to officially serve notice to its citizens by bodies of government, as opposed to an individual i.e. president, that pending strife and burden is soon to befall upon the nation.

Yeah, you can call it (war declarations) unfashionable to some degree..but serving public notice is still to be adhered to. (silly if you think how many covert operations takes place in the world today).

The creation of the silly United Nations, with all it's silly political posturing, also allows for military incursions and commitment under its silly resolutions sans congressional empowerment. Sarajevo (u/ NATO ~ not too sure about this), Desert Storm, etc...

None of the above happened to the bombings in Yemen and Pakistan were doing today.

Let me add...the inception of the Nuclear age also greatly questioned the protocol of declarations of war, but nuclear war is hardly an issue with Yemen and/or Pakistan.

[The Natural]

For the ones who think both Obama and Romney will be bad news for the US people (except Wall Street, Pentagon and the like), I suggest listen to the analysis of historian and economist Webster Tarpley, here:




[size=78%]http://tarpley.net/world-crisis-radio/[/size]

[SANDRO43]

The US congress did in fact 'empower' the president to war against Afghanistan and Iraq (i.e. War on Terror).

Pursuant to Article One, Section Eight of your Constitution: "Congress shall have power to ... declare War".

Post-Vietnam, an act was passed to by-pass any war declaration so long as a congressional empowerment is given - IINM - in the form of congressional resolutions.

After Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in January 1971 and President Richard Nixon continued to wage war in Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution (Pub.L. 93-148) over the veto of Nixon in an attempt to rein in some of the president's claimed powers. Today, Congress recognizes no claimed power of the president to wage war outside of the War Powers Resolution.

The purpose to declare war in the US was to officially serve notice to its citizens by bodies of government, as opposed to an individual i.e. president, that pending strife and burden is soon to befall upon the nation.

A limited interpretation, IMHO.

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another

Quotes from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

I'd say its primary purpose is to inform that a nation is about to start 'legitimately' to kill people, destroy property and occupy territory of another nation, with possible internal consequences like the draft, martial law, rationing, curfew, etc. etc.

[BC]

GQ,

I answered your post pretty much point for point.  Now it seems you need to expand beyond the scope of the original discourse.  If you research, I responded to many of these points upthread.  I'll chip in again here in short form.

So, to the new meat of your post being thrown into the colosseum.

Gitmo for starters. Now he's even giving away known insurgents who openly professed destruction of the US back to the Talibans in the name of 'peace' (Research it). Then at the same time bomb citizens of Pakistan and Yemen despite the absence of a war declaration.

Yes I was disappointed closing Gitmo did not happen and have mentioned this before.  I continue to be confident that there will be a right time and right place for getting it done. Whether or not to bring the remaining 'combatants' to the US for trial under federal law was a bargaining chip in the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill.  In other words the political process at work.  A compromise if you will.  It's not like he did not try.  It's all here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guant%C3%A1namo_Bay_detention_camp

As to attacks in Pakistan and Yemen, unconventional measures are needed to fight terrorists.  The war on al-Qaeda / terrorism was declared long ago.  Formal or informal the policy seems to be working with few complaints.  If it works, there is little need to fix it.

Whatever happend the promise of stopping the Big Brother program? Heightened it? No...you don't say...

The Patriot Act was signed into law in 2001.  As senator he said he would vote to repeal it.  As candidate for the Presidency IIRC he said he would revisit it to make sure would be properly used.  The Act  contained several provisions that are in conflict with the Constitution and  would need to be reauthorized on a periodic basis.  Obviously Obama felt these provisions were needed another 4 years.  I do hope they will not be needed longer than that, but not being privy to much of what goes on behind the scenes I simply have to trust his decision. 

Let's see...did you fact check the truth behind the '4.5 million jobs created in the private sector* as declared by Emanuel, Clinton, Castro, The shopping Mom, Biden, and the O himself?

I guess you are relying on info such as this one http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/fact-check-have-45-million-new-jobs-been-created-under-obama

It is interesting that the blame is placed on those leaving the workforce but does nto mention that the baby boomers are retiring at a rate of 10.000 per day, instead mentioning those going on disability.  There are many ways one can read the statistics.  All leading economic indicators are pointing upwards so I can only interpret that the trend is up and not down since the recession ended.

Did you actually believe it when they held Obama responsible for stopping the war in Iraq? He voted 'no' for Bush's SURGE, which as far as I'm concerned was what stopped the war exactly as planned according to the submitted time table?

I call such discourse 'Watch' picking, but think it is safe to say that despite opposition, he made sure the timelines were respected in addition to setting a timeline for the war in Afghanistan to wind down

Did you actually believe pumping billions into GM, GMAC (Ally) was to save the Automaker?

I think the Treasury is on the hook for a remaining 13 Billion or so.  Their stock is unfortunately still down.  I hope it picks up and taxpayers get a little profit out of it all.

Were you moved by the show of masses in the convention? I was too...I've never seen that many Union members holding placards all in one place except when their bosses hold their customary strikes demanding higher pay i.e. higher Union premiums.

Considering collective bargaining, I am a bit at odds with that practice.  It is however a process that should be allowed to take place.  Some companies rise above all this though by keeping employees very happy, with even participation (stock options). I hope that trend continues and eventually grows to take over the place of unions.  For the short time I was an employee in Germany I felt a bit stifled by being offered 'tariff' wages.  It is however a decent tool to level the playing field a bit if done correctly.  I don't think that is the case in the US.

Did you fact check how the manufacturing sector had been raised and will soon end the trend of 'outsourcing'?

Give me a few specifics please.  I do think that exchange rates ( a low dollar value ) will help out, but I wonder if it can be maintained.  The 'offshore ethic' is quite powerful but with time and innovation I think the US can get back into the manufacturing businesses that exceed domestic demand and can push up exports even more.

Did you also note the absence of the parade of coffins in this year's election in the manner it aired ad nauseum in 2008? I was curious because there are more fatalities under Obama in 3.5 years than it was during Bush's 7 year watch despite being 'engaged' on 2 fronts.

http://icasualties.org/

Draw  your own conclusions.  If you are talking Afghanistan casualties, you are right, but overall?  When the 'war' shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan it is logical that casualties followed.  The statistics are remarkably similar.

Again if you rely on sites like http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/1043 you see only a part of the picture, the proverbial 'tree' instead of forest.

Did you notice Van Jones during the convention? he's looking pretty zippy these days, man. Silly me. I thought he's barred from the White House since his 'resignation'.

Ok he bought a ticket like many others.. did he speak? Maybe he bought a ticket to the RNC?  whoopie doo.....

Oh yeah. The Union is one HUGE freakin' hole the US taxpayers are now officially, automatically and eternally going to be responsible for.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/pursuit-of-happiness/obamacare-and-the-unions/







Small 2004/2008 campaign investment really paid major capital returns, man.

A Reader's Digest  overview of the Pros and Cons of Obamacare:

http://useconomy.about.com/od/healthcarereform/f/What-Is-Obama-Care.htm

Healthcare has been discussed upthread quite enough.  Refer to my posts on the subject.  Bottom line, there is no reason in the world why one of the very very few industrialized nations on this planet has to pay a third, to half as much as the industrialized countries that have some form of universal healthcare coverage... none.

You read it but still didn't understand it. Re-authorization doesn't, didn't, shouldn't behold Obama. Bush did it (even modernized it by adding in HIV infected patients and not only AIDS patients). Obama's re-authorization of 2009 was traditionally been done so by previous presidents. So no. No benevolent forsight by your Almighty.

You said it was a problem.  I showed you it wasn't... so what's the deal here? now again 'Who's Watch' wormhole effect?

No. Just the few who are 'OUT OF TOUCH'.

Out of touch with what... the world?

If you haven't yet noticed, it isn't a question of 'views'. Never has been. Information are out there and it is incumbent upon us Americans to sift through them and decide.

Surprised! There's no monopoly of good life. Everyone has them BC in case you've cocooned yourself too much and actually donned the proverbial blinders you've been flashing yourself.

Yeah...and I do hope soon folks like you CAN UNDERSTAND different strokes for different folks.

The thought of posting what I did may come across as crass to you, hence prefaced it. I had hoped for a higher chance than 50/50 you'd understand the message since I gave you enough credit, in addition to your repeated statement about being an objective bloke, but maybe we were BOTH wrong this time.


p.s. Did you know department:

The Democrats had been blocking the proposition for the Voter ID Cards for this year's election. They're contending it is unconstitutional. LOL. Did you know no one was allowed in the DNC without proper ID and affiliation credits? What was the DNC? A 'private' function?

I am getting ready for a trip next week, so will just cut it short a bit.  Have some whine with your cheese.  Pick one point, any point and I'll continue discourse, but broadening doesn't help much at all to drill down into the realm of substance... If you can't relate, go ahead and obfuscate.

[Gator]

For the ones who think both Obama and Romney will be bad news for the US people (except Wall Street, Pentagon and the like), I suggest listen to the analysis of historian and economist Webster Tarpley...

Did you listen to the whole broadcast?  I started it because I am interested in various opinions.  And I stopped it upon discovering 1) it is an hour in length and 2) Tarpley was formerly associated with the US Labor Party. 

[BC]

Did you listen to the whole broadcast?  I started it because I am interested in various opinions.  And I stopped it upon discovering 1) it is an hour in length and 2) Tarpley was formerly associated with the US Labor Party.

It took me about 5 mins to pull the plug on this one.  Opin abounds on all sides.. I'd rather drill down than listen to drivel from either side.

[Gator]

It is interesting that the blame is placed on those leaving the workforce but does nto mention that the baby boomers are retiring at a rate of 10.000 per day, instead mentioning those going on disability. 

Having many baby boomers as friends who have been involuntarily RIFed (Reduction in Force), I assure you that most of the 10,000 per day would prefer to keep working.  They feel that they do not have sufficient assets to fund retirement.  It happens so frequently that some supervisors do not have time to meet with the RIFed employees and instead do it over the phone.
 
 

There are many ways one can read the statistics.  All leading economic indicators are pointing upwards so I can only interpret that the trend is up and not down since the recession ended.

The jobs report last Thursday was dismal suggesting that the Fed will do QE III.  The fact that the Fed believes QEIII can be done without inflation says much about the situation.     From the somewhat liberal leaning CNN:
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/09/07/worse-off-in-2011/?iid=HP_LN
 

Bottom line, there is no reason in the world why one of the very very few industrialized nations on this planet has to pay a third, to half as much as the industrialized countries that have some form of universal healthcare coverage... none.

I don't pay much attention to the healthcare debate.  If I understand your post, you question why the US pays so much.  I agree we pay too much.  Healthcare needs reform.   Instead of helping, Obamacare is exacerbating.

Pick one point, any point and I'll continue discourse, but broadening doesn't help much at all to drill down into the realm of substance...

Good point. I suggest jobs, jobs, jobs.  The election should be about jobs, jobs, jobs.  Both candidates should explain in detail their plan for generating more jobs.   Obama's plan seems to center on more stimulus and other band aids.  Romney's plan seems more intrinsic.  I want more details from both candidates with enough time for independent analysis before the election..

[Gator]

It took me about 5 mins to pull the plug on this one.  Opin abounds on all sides.. I'd rather drill down than listen to drivel from either side.

Maybe Natural will provide a summary; however, he is busy enjoying la dolce vita with his woman in Ukraine.  If I were him I would not take the time to clarify a political point.

[TheTraveler]

What did I just say?  If you don't believe me, listen to this 4-minute interview of many DNC delegates.   
 
To be fair Schiff said on CNBC that only 50% of the interviewed delegates favored banning corporate profits.  Only 50%?!?!?!  Do these people not realize where most of the nation's jobs come from, and what motivates corporations to create jobs?  These are educated people too.  This speaks volumes much about the decline of America.
 

schiff's video cracked me up... hearing all those union reps railing against 'corporate profits'!
 
and what would happen if all the profits were capped from the companies whose stocks are held in their union pension portfolios?
 
they'd all be working into their 70's just like the rest of us.  hahaha!!!
 

[The Natural]

Did you listen to the whole broadcast?  I started it because I am interested in various opinions.  And I stopped it upon discovering 1) it is an hour in length and 2) Tarpley was formerly associated with the US Labor Party.

Yes, I listened to the whole broadcast as I do every time Tarpley release his once a week radio programme. If one is really interested in hearing alternate analysis from the prestitutes on mainstream outlets, I think one would make time for it. After all, these are serious times, wouldn't you agree?

Maybe Natural will provide a summary; however, he is busy enjoying la dolce vita with his woman in Ukraine.  If I were him I would not take the time to clarify a political point.

Oh, I'll make time, just for you my friend  My girl is busy in the kitchen now.


Well, Tarpley wrote two books before Obama was elected where he warned about him, so he's no fan of Obama to put it mildly. He talks much now about Romney as Obama is like the devil you know and Romney is the devil you will know. He often these days talk about Romney being a bishop in the Mormon church where his loyalty lies and how the Mormon religion is anti-American and highly racist. Too bad people won't listen to him just because he's not mainstream, viewed as labour or socialist or anything like that, because you might learn a lot from history as well, listening to him. Tarpley say he's a follower of the New Deal of the Rooseveldt administration.


Well, about what will happen, to put it in very short terms, he say that you will get austerity with the both of them. With Obama you will get a reduction in living standard by 10-15%, or death by a thousand cuts. With Romney you will get a reduction of 25-30% which may or may not result in public revolt. They both serve Wall Street interests.


Tarpley talks about a lot of things and also have excellent analyses of what's going on in Europe and the middle-east. He speaks several languages and is in my opinion a genious. I was a Ron Paul supporter as you may remember. That was until Webster Tarpley went on the Alex Jones Show and explained how his program Restore America will result in, not only austerity, but outright genocide by hunger of millions of Americans. Alex Jones went crazy over this, wouldn't listen because he had invested so much faith in Ron Paul. He was of course intellectually destroyed by Tarpley's analyses.


Why be so set in your ways that you don't want to even listen to someone just because that person may be associated to some code words you don't like? I mean, I'm a normal person and I'd much rather ordinary people be bailed out via work programs than bailing out the parasites on Wall street. wouldn't you? I'm certainly not so cold-hearted as to support such criminals.

[GQBlues]

Pursuant to Article One, Section Eight of your Constitution: "Congress shall have power to ... declare War".

Not sure what the uptake is on this Sandro but the US congress empowered (authorized) the Bush for Iraq and Afghanistan (War on Terror), thus in essence they reserved and exercised their constitutional duty accordingly.
 

A limited interpretation, IMHO.Quotes from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

I'd say its primary purpose is to inform that a nation is about to start 'legitimately' to kill people, destroy property and occupy territory of another nation, with possible internal consequences like the draft, martial law, rationing, curfew, etc. etc.

Chalk it up to old age. I used to be able to retain things I've read with much more clarity and absolution. Puberty and women have had a definite effect on that but oh well. We all have priorities...

[GQBlues]

GQ,

I answered your post pretty much point for point.  Now it seems you need to expand beyond the scope of the original discourse.  If you research, I responded to many of these points upthread.  I'll chip in again here in short form...

::::: ::::::

BC-

Few are as annoyingly redundant as a door knob, certainly being a Democrat is one of them ~ which I'm not, but that's life ~ so let me summarize my response to you in a more efficient and sweeping manner.

1. Promises: Considering the points mentioned were major campaign points for our DC clown, where you see 'promises kept' despite the obvious, I see a royal snow job. Makes little wonder now how Berlusconi held office in the first place.

2. Economy: *Two dozen steps backward, one small step forward* is apparently 'positive progress for you, so let's agree to disagree.

3. OUT OF TOUCH: This is just plain silly to even discuss. Where I see peers, colleagues, friends, associates, known acquiantances, etc...get major cut in pay, getting laid-off, forced retire, companies closing shop, etc...you 'read' news report of progress; where I live in a day-to-day events ground zero (our city is broke, as do many other in California/nationally due largely to Union payroll and pension plans ), you get to 'read' news source to suit your palette ~ I say again, you're out of touch. That's not a bad thing nor an insult. That's just a how things are. I grew up in Santa Monica/Marina del Rey but had been living on the hillside suburbia for a few years now, and guess what, every time we trek over to those beachside haven, I/we note things are changing a bit. I've been 'out-of-touch' to these areas that once were, and still do, 'close to my heart and life, for the very simply reason I no longer live there.

Now, given an opportunity to select their politicians simply by virtue of Googled online articles coupled with my arrogant opinion of myself ~ despite the obvious reality I've been away so long and obviously -out-of-touch, yeah man...It's Kool-Aid time.

4. Ryan White Act: It was given as an example to show transitions of programs through inceptions/accommodations from the old to the new laws in case you've forgotten. It was done to show how silly people can get when they start demonizing Paul Ryan's action simply because they read it on a Googled online article from wherever they are, like Italy for instance, and act as though they somehow know what's good for 'our' country.

Yes, no one denies Obama inherited a tough situation when he came to office. But you know $700+ billion TARP money, $400 Billion Omnibus, $20 Billion S-CHIP, the doozy $800 Billion Stim Bill plus a slew of other dandy candies....one would think our state today should at least be in pretty darn good place now, no?

Oh wait, that's right my bad....millions and millions do in fact feel that way. After all, if nothing else I take solace and consolation to the fact that Democrats, the Union and the social leeching folks are people, too.

I do agree with you about one thing. The economy, unfortunately for America, is and should be front and center in this year's election. All others is nothing more than media/campaign distraction.